a whole lot of good getting in touch with radio people does. Same thing yesterday; I pull into Loblaws, sit and wait for the end of mvt. 3 of the Sinfonia Concertante (they always seem to recycle the same recordings and I was quite sure that this was Vengerov again) and sure enough, as I shook my fist in haughty rage, "That was Maxim Vengerov leading the pack in Mozart's yadda yadda yadda."
I give up.
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Saturday, November 3, 2007
Radio
Just a quickie then I'm off to watch Hot Fuzz.
So the other day I finally snapped and sent a snarky email off to a local radio station which shall remain nameless, but rhymes with Shlassical Shlinety Shix Shoint Shree. They keep labelling themselves "The NEW Classical blahblahblah" but in actual fact, they're recycling all the same old tunes and habits as ever. They were recently acquired by a local tv and radio mogul and, I suppose that with the reduction in Classical programming on CBC radio's part, I had high hopes for a shift in programming and general thinking. Silly, stupid me.
What finally cheesed me off irreparably was that, in the car a few days back, I heard part of the Sinfonia Concertante (the Mozart, the one with violin and viola soloists---this is relevant) and sat there, waiting to hear who was playing, when I could've been in the grocery store. The movement ended and lo, "That was Mozart's Sinfonia Concertante, performed by Maxim Vengerov." BEAUTIFUL.
That was it; I'd had it. I was sick of tuning in and hearing Strauss waltzes, Eine Kleine Nachtmusik and the bloody first movement of the bloody Moonlight Sonata repeatedly, but to add insult to injury, the implication that there was only a violin soloist in the Mozart? And the failure to mention the violist?
Bah.
I think I got particularly uppity because it was most likely an acquaintance of mine playing, the significant other of a good friend living in England. Also, I play the viola and to imply that there is no viola solo part...well, crap.
So I finally wrote in.
It is completely contrary to my nature to write letters of complaint, but man, did that chap my ass.
The end.
So the other day I finally snapped and sent a snarky email off to a local radio station which shall remain nameless, but rhymes with Shlassical Shlinety Shix Shoint Shree. They keep labelling themselves "The NEW Classical blahblahblah" but in actual fact, they're recycling all the same old tunes and habits as ever. They were recently acquired by a local tv and radio mogul and, I suppose that with the reduction in Classical programming on CBC radio's part, I had high hopes for a shift in programming and general thinking. Silly, stupid me.
What finally cheesed me off irreparably was that, in the car a few days back, I heard part of the Sinfonia Concertante (the Mozart, the one with violin and viola soloists---this is relevant) and sat there, waiting to hear who was playing, when I could've been in the grocery store. The movement ended and lo, "That was Mozart's Sinfonia Concertante, performed by Maxim Vengerov." BEAUTIFUL.
That was it; I'd had it. I was sick of tuning in and hearing Strauss waltzes, Eine Kleine Nachtmusik and the bloody first movement of the bloody Moonlight Sonata repeatedly, but to add insult to injury, the implication that there was only a violin soloist in the Mozart? And the failure to mention the violist?
Bah.
I think I got particularly uppity because it was most likely an acquaintance of mine playing, the significant other of a good friend living in England. Also, I play the viola and to imply that there is no viola solo part...well, crap.
So I finally wrote in.
It is completely contrary to my nature to write letters of complaint, but man, did that chap my ass.
The end.
Thursday, November 1, 2007
November
I dunno about this National Blog Posting Month thing, seeing as I'm not entirely sure how committed I am to the upkeep of this puppy in the first place. But at the very least I'll think about it. If everyone's posting daily blogs for a month, who the hell will read them?
I changed the background colour today, having realized that funky white font on black causes me hallucinogenic episodes.
Had a meeting today with the bulk of the quartet and a couple of very helpful women who have a lot of experience with fundraising and organizations that are not-for-profit. I'm adverse to the idea of going that route (not the fundraising; the profit thing) because of all the extraneous work involved. Of course, if one wants to raise funds, trying to convince someone to give you money without hope of a tax receipt is a Sisyphian task, I'm sure. But I'm not certain that any quartets are non-profit and I have a real feeling that there's a reason for that.
I read an article a few years back on the difference between funding of arts organizations in Canada and in the U.S., and until recently, if not still, a big difference was that donations in the States were tax-deductible if made to an arts organization. Okay, I just looked it up. You can donate to the National Endowment for the Arts, and there's a group called "Fractured Atlas" to whom one can donate. They spread their funds to artists to keep them working. Both are, naturally, U.S. organizations, and there are many more with similar mission statements.
Here's the thing: in Canada, we can apply for grants. And those are terrifically limited, particularly if one is NOT a not-for-profit. So forget about operating funds and the like; basically if you're in a string quartet, you have to find other ways to make ends meet. There's a reason that most successful quartets function through residences and teaching situations, or name themselves after major corporations. I'm still hoping that we'll end up being the Tampax Quartet.
I don't begrudge anyone the lack of funding; I understand that being in a quartet's much like saying "I'm gonna be a pop star;" it's rare that one can make a go of it. Most string players, at some point or other, want to play chamber music. Many would kill for an opportunity to get paid JUST to play chamber music. I mean that literally; I'm pretty sure I know some violinists who have killed people. So I'm never surprised at the lack of work and funds and the concert series, particularly the high-profile ones, who offer very little in the way of remuneration, knowing that any half-witted musician will happily jump at the chance to perform in a great festival or venue. I'm not sure about everyone else, but I typically lose income every time I play a concert. However I'm bloody lucky; as I've mentioned I play and play and that's all I do for a living, and somehow it works.
I do wish that things worked a little differently here; I wish that donations to independent arts organizations, particularly ones that would love to be able to put on educational concerts, were tax-deductible. I think it would seriously help out the somewhat dwindling Classical music scene in this land.
Maybe tomorrow I'll write about the email I recently sent to a local radio station, speaking of the music scene...
I changed the background colour today, having realized that funky white font on black causes me hallucinogenic episodes.
Had a meeting today with the bulk of the quartet and a couple of very helpful women who have a lot of experience with fundraising and organizations that are not-for-profit. I'm adverse to the idea of going that route (not the fundraising; the profit thing) because of all the extraneous work involved. Of course, if one wants to raise funds, trying to convince someone to give you money without hope of a tax receipt is a Sisyphian task, I'm sure. But I'm not certain that any quartets are non-profit and I have a real feeling that there's a reason for that.
I read an article a few years back on the difference between funding of arts organizations in Canada and in the U.S., and until recently, if not still, a big difference was that donations in the States were tax-deductible if made to an arts organization. Okay, I just looked it up. You can donate to the National Endowment for the Arts, and there's a group called "Fractured Atlas" to whom one can donate. They spread their funds to artists to keep them working. Both are, naturally, U.S. organizations, and there are many more with similar mission statements.
Here's the thing: in Canada, we can apply for grants. And those are terrifically limited, particularly if one is NOT a not-for-profit. So forget about operating funds and the like; basically if you're in a string quartet, you have to find other ways to make ends meet. There's a reason that most successful quartets function through residences and teaching situations, or name themselves after major corporations. I'm still hoping that we'll end up being the Tampax Quartet.
I don't begrudge anyone the lack of funding; I understand that being in a quartet's much like saying "I'm gonna be a pop star;" it's rare that one can make a go of it. Most string players, at some point or other, want to play chamber music. Many would kill for an opportunity to get paid JUST to play chamber music. I mean that literally; I'm pretty sure I know some violinists who have killed people. So I'm never surprised at the lack of work and funds and the concert series, particularly the high-profile ones, who offer very little in the way of remuneration, knowing that any half-witted musician will happily jump at the chance to perform in a great festival or venue. I'm not sure about everyone else, but I typically lose income every time I play a concert. However I'm bloody lucky; as I've mentioned I play and play and that's all I do for a living, and somehow it works.
I do wish that things worked a little differently here; I wish that donations to independent arts organizations, particularly ones that would love to be able to put on educational concerts, were tax-deductible. I think it would seriously help out the somewhat dwindling Classical music scene in this land.
Maybe tomorrow I'll write about the email I recently sent to a local radio station, speaking of the music scene...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
