Friday, February 06, 2015

Next Question: Who's in the Running?

Well, your guesses are as good as mine, and guesses they are. Will Robin (@seatedovation) has a running list:
  • Matthias Pintscher (on the Bernstein->Boulez theory)
  • Gaffigan
  • Bychkov
  • van Zweden
  • Morlot
  • Valcuha
  • Mena 
  • Honeck
  • Robertson
My candidates:
  • Susanna Malkki
  • Vladimir Jurowski
Anne Midgette mentions Malkki and Simone Young, also Sakari Oramo. And James Conlon!

Mentioned elsewhere to general nodding of heads: Heras-Casado.

Considered not in the running: Nelsons, Dudamel, Nezet-Seguin, all comparatively recently appointed to their jobs.

Unlikely to be interested: Runnicles.

What about the older generation? Any chance of a couple of years from Dutoit, Jansons, etc? My thought is probably not, though who knows.

I'll continue to update this posting with my own and others' speculation and candidates.


CK Dexter Haven said...

- I'd consider Deneve, but not sure he's had the same exposure in NY that he's had in LA, SF, and Boston.

- I think Conlon isn't a bad choice, especially considering he's a native New Yorker, but I just don't see him wanting to run an orchestra full-time instead of an opera house. He seems happier to dabble in the orchestral repertoire.

- Just for completeness sake, consider putting Salonen and Rattle on the list just because they are theoretically available? . . . though if I were a betting man (and I am), I'd put good money on the fact that they'll take themselves out of the running

- I freakin' got nothing productive done today. This development isn't the only, or even primary reason, but it sure the hell didn't help.

Lisa Hirsch said...

Conlon has the ongoing gig in Chicago and also...maybe Cincinnati? Am I nuts? He does a lot of guest conducting and has ranged from solid to totally inspired at SFS, more on the inspired side than not. I keep thinking he might want the glory being MD at a major orchestra, especially since LAO's programming is so off and on.

Yeah, I agree that Salonen and Rattle will take themselves out of the running. Salonen says he doesn't want a full-time job, Rattle is considered the front-runner for the LSO. I can't see either of them wanting a short-term job, and really, the NYPO Board should not appoint someone to be a placeholder for a few years, unless, maybe, they can get someone truly legendary, like Haitinck. Or Pierre Bou...oh, wait. :)

I'm going to start doing some analysis. I think that Morlot is in a position to do great things with Seattle, an orchestra that desperately needs someone like him owing to Schwarz's overlong tenure there. So my bet is that he might not want the NYPO job.

Productivity: haha. Well, once I killed the Twitter tab and started to work I got a lot done drafting a new document.

Daniel Wolf said...

I will only mention three conductors whose work I've seen first hand and in some depth. Iván Fischer would be a good fit for New York, musically and culture-politically, bringing a breadth to both areas that is more than overdue in New York. Jonathan Nott, long in Bamberg, is well worth considering, a fine musician with a bright public persona. But if the NYPO wanted to try something daring, I'd suggest a look at Sebastian Weigle, who has made the Frankfurt Opera and Museum Orchestra into a spectacular band. He has a great rapport with players (he is a hornist) but his repertoire is perhaps too focused on Romantic and early Modern German music, and I'm not certain that he has burning ambitions to concentrate on work outside the opera house.

John Marcher said...

I wouldn't rule Salonen out, and he was the first person who came to mind when I heard about this.

Malkki would be a great choice, as would Heras-Casado. Robertson is an interesting one, as would Gaffigan, but does the latter have a high enough profile in the U.S.?

Conlon? I just don't see THAT particular New York job for him, but eventually the one I'd like to see him in will open up, and I think he's biding his time in L.A. until then.

I don't think Morlot is going anywhere for awhile- from what I read via Tom May, what he's doing in Seattle is just starting to bear some real fruit.

Lisa Hirsch said...

Fischer would certainly be an interesting choice. He's old world enough for the conservative audience but broad enough to be interesting to the adventurous.

Nott and Weigle are not well-known in the States, but neither was Gilbert (I was surprised by his appointment, in part because I'd heard him several times in SF).

Gaffigan has a high profile in SF because he was MTT's associate conductor here. Elsewhere he has been guesting a fair amount. I think he is very much a dark horse. Morlot, I agree, is going to stick around Seattle, where he can do some long-overdue orchestra building, but inherited a great hall and enthusiastic audience and donors.

Levine will leave the Met only in a box and Conlon is 64, not that much younger than Levine.

musicologyman said...

Mälkki is slated to begin her tenure as chief conductor in Helskinki in 2016. The question is, does she want two simultaneous music directorships, one of which is with an American orchestra (and all its attendant fund-raising responsibilities)? Nevertheless, she would be a great choice.

I'd be surprised if Pintscher were chosen. AFAIK, he's not really made a name for himself outside of the 20th- and 21st-century repertory.

And as long as we're mentioning conductors who are veteran leaders of the Ensemble InterContemporain, I think Nott and Robertson would be great choices. Problem is, as someone pointed out before, he's not very well known in the U.S. Meanwhile, Robertson repeatedly bears the charge of being rather uncharismatic, and, I'm afraid that that might hurt him with the board of the NYPO.

Bychkov can be very good, but I'm under the impression that his programming is rather routine. Likewise with Honeck.

Weigle and Young might also be good choices, but neither is well known in NY. I'm also under the impression that Young's time at the Met (in the early-to-mid-90s, I believe) didn't go so well.

Jurowski would be a coup. I still wonder, though, why he didn't succeed Eschenbach in Philly: he was clearly the front-runner for a long time. Probably the Nézét-Seguin appointment was sealed when his mentor, Dutoit, filled in as chief conductor after Eschenbach. Yet had the orchestra decided earlier ...