Stephen Cleobury to Retire from King's

[PeterboroughDiapason]

There's certainly an appointment as of last week, and the name is getting around a bit as they always do, but until there's an official announcement from Oxford it would be inappropriate to identify the appointee here, I think.

Peterborough loses another DOM to Oxford!

http://www.chch.ox.ac.uk/news/cathedral/new-organist-christ-church

[DracoM]

Crumbs.

[Alison]

Well done Steven Grahl.

[DracoM]

Huge promo, huge shoes to fill. Wish him all the very, very best!

[mopsus]

Think it's out there now - suffice to say here, one establishment has had a pretty raw deal recently in finding real talent and it slipping away erelong.

This says something about Peterborough's ability to attract some of the best people. But it doesn't retain them. The recent and ongoing financial woes there won't help. And somehow Peterborough ought to be a rather nicer place than it actually is. It was probably once a pleasant small Cathedral city, but it went through a rapid post-war expansion, to attract industries that have since packed up and left, leaving the place (in my opinion!) rather characterless. I'm not that surprised that Directors of Music start looking to move on not long after arriving there.

[mopsus]

Andrew Reid, Christopher Gower and Stanley Vann all did good stints at Peterborough. I think the rapid recent turnover has more to do with the impressive qualities and ambitions of personnel rather than the place itself. Granted that ongoing financial concerns might worry some potential candidates.

I've been visiting Peterborough occasionally since the 1980's and feel that it (the place, not the Cathedral or choir) has gone downhill noticeably since about the millennium. This is of course not unconnected to the Cathedral's financial problems; there isn't the local wealth around to attract generous donations, nor does it get very much in the way of tourism.

[Vox Humana]

This says something about Peterborough's ability to attract some of the best people. But it doesn't retain them. The recent and ongoing financial woes there won't help. And somehow Peterborough ought to be a rather nicer place than it actually is. It was probably once a pleasant small Cathedral city, but it went through a rapid post-war expansion, to attract industries that have since packed up and left, leaving the place (in my opinion!) rather characterless. I'm not that surprised that Directors of Music start looking to move on not long after arriving there.

There again, how many cathedrals are there in the land where a top organist/DoM with half a chance would look at the New College job and think, "Nah."?

[Byrdsong]

Agreed. I seem to recall the CCC Oxford post was advertised at between £60 and £70k. pa plus other benefits (such as a Final Salary pension scheme). There probably isn't free accommodation but the value of that to cathedral organists may be balanced out in the heads of many of them by the eventual worry about buying somewhere for retirement.
I wouldn't be surprised if the total annual financial 'package' enjoyed by the organists/DoMs of the 'Big 5' jobs in Oxbridge was about double that in a typical provincial English cathedral.
I appreciate that the Oxford posts seem to come with some academic responsibilities too......but the terms are short.

[Miles Coverdale]

I appreciate that the Oxford posts seem to come with some academic responsibilities too......but the terms are short.

Not at Christ Church they're not, they're more or less the same as at any other cathedral. As a choral scholar there, I didn't mind that at all, as there were a few weeks after the end of each college term when the place was pretty quiet and you could get some work done.

[Byrdsong]

Yes I realise that -I meant that in relation to academic teaching duties the terms are short. I should have expressed myself more clearly-and before anyone else writes in to protest that 'normal' academics spend a huge amount of time outside term doing research, I realise that too!

[choralmike]

I've been visiting Peterborough occasionally since the 1980's and feel that it (the place, not the Cathedral or choir) has gone downhill noticeably since about the millennium. This is of course not unconnected to the Cathedral's financial problems; there isn't the local wealth around to attract generous donations, nor does it get very much in the way of tourism.

I was at a 'Sixteen' concert there a couple of years back and decided to take a few photos during the interval. Just as I'd finished I was tapped on the shoulders by what must have been one of the Cathedral's officials (although he didn't say who he was). "You're not allowed to take photos in here without a permit, and we're not issuing permits at the moment!" he said. I wasn't aware of the permit thing, but the man was so gruff and rude in his approach that I'm unlikely to return.

[oddoneout]

I was at a 'Sixteen' concert there a couple of years back and decided to take a few photos during the interval. Just as I'd finished I was tapped on the shoulders by what must have been one of the Cathedral's officials (although he didn't say who he was). "You're not allowed to take photos in here without a permit, and we're not issuing permits at the moment!" he said. I wasn't aware of the permit thing, but the man was so gruff and rude in his approach that I'm unlikely to return.

It wasn't the best way for the person concerned to handle the matter, but then again either checking the photography policy beforehand or asking someone would have prevented the difficulty?

[underthecountertenor]

It wasn't the best way for the person concerned to handle the matter, but then again either checking the photography policy beforehand or asking someone would have prevented the difficulty?

Call me old-fashioned, but I would not presume that a cathedral had a photography policy unless it was clearly drawn to my attention in the building. I don't know how clear the indications are at Peterborough (or how clear they would have been to a concert-goer), but I don't think there's an automatic onus on the would-be photographer to check the policy beforehand or ask someone.
And the 'and we're not issuing permits at the moment' bit is absurd, even if politely delivered.

Edit: I've now looked at the Peterborough Cathedral website, which has a busy slideshow that made me feel a bit seasick whilst looking at the links on the homepage. The photography policy is to be found under 'visiting time and entry' - not the most obvious place. If they're going to make a big thing about it (3 quid a permit), they should perhaps flag it up a bit more clearly.

[underthecountertenor]

[Sorry for my contribution to this thread going very off-piste!]

[Wolsey]

This subject is governed by law. Images of individuals, whether in still photographs or moving film images, will often be caught by the definition of personal data in the Data Protection Act 1998. In many cases, consent from the individuals will need to be obtained in order to process, i.e. capture and use, the images fairly and lawfully.