One reader called it a “ruthless character assassination.”
She was speaking of music critic Elaine Guregian’s review of the Akron Symphony’s season opening concert Sept. 20. How bad was it? To this critic’s ears, the piano soloist shamelessly bullied his way through the performance and the music director lacked the basic understanding of how to shape the composition.
As the headline indicated, this was one concert to forget.
But, as they often do, several readers came to the orchestra’s defense. To them, the Akron Symphony Orchestra is an important cultural institution that should be supported and promoted, not criticized.
Not only that, the review had to be wrong because the audience appeared to enjoy the performance. As the first reader said, Guregian “failed to admit there was a standing ovation.” Another reader cited “standing ovations and three curtain calls.”
Even though standing O’s appear to have been devalued in recent years — when has any orchestra’s performance not received one? — this does bring up an interesting point. Many readers expect an entertainment review to reflect the audience’s overall experience instead of the technical aspects of the performance.
That’s what Akron reader Bill Melver explained in his e-mail:
“Although Ms. Guregian may be absolutely on the money with respect to her technical criticisms of the performance, she also needs to wake up to the times and the changing environment that surrounds us. She needs to analyze the changing audience who are attending these concerts and begin to develop an appreciation for what the Akron Symphony brings and adds to our community.”
Melver is the business manager for Akron Life & Leisure Magazine, a monthly magazine that focuses entirely on success stories. He continued: “We think people like to read about pleasant, happy and good things.”
What I’m hearing Melver say is that, like a concert in the park, an orchestra review should focus on the audience’s experience and not on the performance. Happy fans jumping to their feet at last note should count for more than whether the pianist used a “battering ram” on Prokofiev, as the Guregian review mentioned.
In addition, I hear him saying that the Akron Beacon Journal has a responsibility to the community to promote its cultural institutions — to “celebrate Akron.” “If I were a newcomer to this town and read (the review) for the first time, what motivation would cause me to ever even go to Akron Symphony?”
The answer? Probably none, especially if that newcomer expects a high-quality performance after shelling out up to $35 per seat. The Beacon Journal does hold the Akron Symphony to high standards, though not nearly as high as it does for the Cleveland Orchestra. The paper continues to believe that the orchestra has a responsibility to aspire to excellence.
If it wants to charge major league prices for tickets, it shouldn’t expect to deliver minor league performances and not be called on it. Readers deserve honest reviews from the music critic, not flattering boosterism.
The Beacon Journal has a long tradition of excellent music critics, journalists with enough knowledge and experience to either praise or criticize as the performance dictates. When the orchestra sinks below its usual standard, it is the critic’s job to point it out.
As for “celebrating Akron,” there are lots of agencies, organizations and publications that exist to promote the city and its institutions, without questioning or evaluating. That’s why many of them exist.
However, that’s simply not the role of the daily newspaper, which is to praise when deserved, question when warranted and criticize when needed.
A newspaper also informs, which is why Guregian previewed the Akron Symphony before its first concert, including the full schedule of the orchestra’s 2003-04 season, a guide to musical terms and an interview with the music director.
Melver concluded, “Please consider the audience, the readership, the final end result, and how the Beacon possesses the power to influence the community.”
That’s sound advice. A newspaper should never lose sight of its power to influence. Nor can it neglect its responsibility to offer criticism when a performance is poorly executed.
