I think I've found the source of the "comment links are not changing color if you've previously clicked on them"
style.min.css
needs to have an addition:
a:visited{color:red}
(or some other color). It seems that otherwise links, whether visited or not, get whatever color is inherited. Just tried with a local copy of the OW main page, and it works.
That's absolutely beautiful, russell. I don't know if you've posted it before, but IMO you could post it every new year's day. By the end, I was truly emotional.
Is there a cadre of old school (R)’s ready and able to turn the GOP around in 2008? I don’t see it. I don’t know how they would do it.
Is there a cadre of old school Republicans? I'm sure there is. Willing to turn the GOP around? That, too. Able? I beg leave to doubt it. Like russell, I don't see how anyone could.
The closest I can picture is explicitly splitting the party (with the old school guys willing to abandon the name, which I expect them to hate). But that would leave them with too small a base to compete effectively. They would do better to wait for the Democrats to fission, and join one of the pieces. But that's not a turn-around.
Trump’s increasingly-insane inanity will make any Bush-style Republican very attractive in 2028
Attractive, but likely not to the current base of the (R) party.
Is there a cadre of old school (R)'s ready and able to turn the GOP around in 2008? I don't see it. I don't know how they would do it.
I'm also not sure the (D)'s will go for someone who leads with "we're gonna go after all of the Trump era malefactors". Too divisive!! Can't have that!!
My epiphany of the last year (or 10 years) is how durable the paranoid style continues to be. Drive a stake through it's heart, it just keeps coming back for more.
I don't watch TV news so I don't know how far the regression has gone, but CBS, aka Pravda West, has had the opposite of an epiphany.
The msm let themselves get used by Republicans to promote slanders, lies, fake investigations, all kinds of bullshit until part way through Trump's first term when they finally figures out that they needed to be more than a megaphone. An epiphany! They needed to actually do their jobs.
CBS is collaborating by spreading Republican lies. The coverage consists of extensive repetitions of Republican false allegations, followed by a brief partial rebuttal, followed by horse race coverage of how the false allegations might affect Walz. At no point to they explain that the Biden admin already did a massive investigation and achieved around 50 indictments. A viewer would come away with the impression that Minn had done nothing about the fraud, that DHS deserved all the credit and that opps! a Republican blogger was mistaken about the Somali day care centers. Not one word said about the devastating flood of hate now directed at those centers.
And, of course, not one word about the organized hate campaign now underway by Republicans against all Somalis.
"through an Overton lens, Trump’s increasingly-insane inanity will make any Bush-style Republican very attractive in 2028. a white man who isn’t a psychotic narcissist will be soberly declared, by once-again-endorsement-friendly editorials everywhere, to be the kind of stable genius we all need. the press will wet themselves in bliss at the idea of the GOP returning to a normal balance."
This is my fear. And I don't think the Republicans under that hypothetical person will be different in substance than they are not. In degree, yes. Substance, no. And the substance will be gerrymandering, election rigging, tax cuts for the rich and screw everyone else, pro-corporate power and anti-public interest legislation, and more Federalist SOciety ideologues in judgeships as they go full steam ahead on the plant to turn the US into a one-party oligarchy and only looks like a representative democracy.
One thing I've noticed in myself is that I'm far less bothered by the dwindling number of vocal tRump supporters I see, be they IRL or on social media. They aren't the threat they used to be, at least as I perceive them. I almost pity them now, like they're clinging to a dying mythology. My meaner impulse is to laugh at them.
I know that's not the most enlightening thing to write on the subject, but it's my own subjective synthesis of everything I'm seeing. It feels different than it used to.
through an Overton lens, Trump's increasingly-insane inanity will make any Bush-style Republican very attractive in 2028. a white man who isn't a psychotic narcissist will be soberly declared, by once-again-endorsement-friendly editorials everywhere, to be the kind of stable genius we all need. the press will wet themselves in bliss at the idea of the GOP returning to a normal balance.
the Dem base will have picked someone who promises to litigate all the Trump era scandals that the press is currently ignoring. the country will not be interested.
I'm getting to the end of The Reich's Orchestra, (I'm going to wait until after New Year's to check out the documentary link novakant sent me, as you get a 12 day trial, so I want to have some free time to listen to as much as I can) but one 'bright' spot is this
Hartmann recognised the orchestra’s post-war ethical dilemma: the Berlin Philharmonic was to an exceptional extent cherished, groomed and protected by the Nazi regime. That the Berlin Philharmonic was, at the same time, not a Nazi orchestra, by spirit, constitution, or membership, was also true. The Berlin Philharmonic, however, did not have to be a Nazi orchestra to serve its purpose to the regime—in fact, it was desirable that it not be. And the regime went to great lengths to protect and promote the exceptionality of its prized musical asset.
The current crew doesn't understand quality and ability, and everything is subsumed under fealty to Trump, and that absence of taste should make things go incrementally faster.
Vance is a pail of lukewarm dog vomit and naked ambition. I don’t think he can hold any of it together for long.
What still terrifies me, though, is what comes after. I’m not convinced that the US Constitution can keep this place running with just another patch.
I completely agree on Vance. To hold their current coalition together post-Trump, they would need a figure who, among other things, is a showman like Trump is. Vance not only isn't, he not even vaguely close. And while there are doubtless would-be demagogues out there, there isn't one who seems likely to be the necessary unifying figure.
I see how the US and its Constitution could continue (with some modifications/Amendments, but recognizably a continuation). What my imagination is not adequate for is envisioning a path from here to there.
The Christianist nationalists can get pushed back into their former condition of minimal relevance. Just one more group of wierdos in a country which has long had a plethora of them. That's not the real challenge.
While other countries manage just fine with multiple parties, the US seems to favor a two party norm. The parties don't have to agree on much policy-wise, just be willing to accept that the majority of voters will sometimes favor one and other times the other. (That's a big piece of what is driving the Republicans into irrelevance: the voters overall like pieceful transfers of power. )
A third party can arise, but in a relatively short time it will either replace one of the two major parties or join the ranks of the essentially irrelevant minor parties (think Greens or American Independence Party). How does that happen? It's difficult to say, since there are only a couple of examples:
circa 1830 (partly as fallout from their stance on the War of 1812) the Federalists fell into irrelevance, and the Republicans (usually referred to, these days, as the "Democratic Republicans" for clarity) split into the Democrats and the Whigs,
In the 1850s (over the issue of slavery) the Whigs got displaced by the Republicans.
I doubt that the current Republican Party is salvageable. But will a new party arise (probably including many ex-Republicans, like the Whigs in the early Republican Party)? I'm not seeing any sign of that, at least not yet. Or will the Democrats split, and on what basis? I'm not seeing any glimmers of that either. There are places (e.g. California) where the Republicans have embraced irrelevance for decades, but the Democrats here are still divided by individual personalities, rather than by anything resembling groups.
As I say, I can see something of where we could get to, but not how to get there.
On the other hand, where else we might go is not obvious either. The mechanics are clear -- the Constitution provides for piecemeal amendment or complete replacement. But what would get hammered out in a Constitutional Convention, should we go that route? And how would it be able to satisfy the majority required to ratify the new one? "Prediction is difficult, especially about the future."
I think MTG's response to Trump's comments at the Kirk Memorial are telling. It's not the nail in the MAGA coffin, but it may signal an inflection point for a lot of people as they start looking to shift their allegiance. I'm reminded of "The Awakening Conscience" by William Holman Hunt:
I expect that for a great many of the christian nationalist MAGA faithful we are going to see them start to think that The Ancient Orange One is King Saul, tormented by spirits, prone to fits, and abandoned by God, and see them turn instead to the Sofaphiliac as King David. Couchie has received Erica Kirk's anointment and has the trust of Sharkey's Hobbits. He Who Slumbers may not see out his term if the Project 2025 wing think they can Amendment 25 him and cut their losses.
If they do decide to go that way, good luck on keeping that lightning in the bottle. Vance is a pail of lukewarm dog vomit and naked ambition. I don't think he can hold any of it together for long.
What still terrifies me, though, is what comes after. I'm not convinced that the US Constitution can keep this place running with just another patch. This is a really risky and consequential moment and I don't think the cultists are done yet.
I do also think his instability/mental deterioration is becoming more apparent. Not to mention some ideological splintering within MAGA, like the Shapiro - Tucker Carlson row, and the Marjorie Taylor Green defection, and Trump's response to that, and the murder of the Reiners. Although why anybody would be surprised at the latter, given one of his first reactions to 9/11 was to crow about his building now being the tallest in NYC, is anyone's guess.
I'd like to think his comments at the Zelensky press conference about how Putin wants the best for Ukraine, and wants Ukraine to do well, and Zelensky's facial expression, may have cut through with some sane and politically engaged right wingers, as well as the fact that Trump had phone calls with Putin both before and after the Zelensky meeting, but I guess that's an idle hope. People sane enough to see it, and with enough political influence to do anything about it, still seem in vanishingly short supply.
I'd say the biggest epiphantic sign is that the cultists, while they don't appear to be leaving the faith, are much less willing to flaunt it. The signs and banners and hats are far less in evidence than they a year ago, or during his first term. Might it be that they are, perhaps not entirely consciously, preparing themselves to bury their past?
P.S. I'm not sure the lack of turnover in Trump's cabinet reflects any concern about getting replacements approved. That would require a firmer grasp of reality than we see elsewhere. Instead, I think it reflects the fact that they are all shameless toadies who constantly tell him how wonderful he is, and feed him fantasies about how successfully they are doing what he wants. As opposed to last term, where there was a lot of turnover from people telling him No . . . and failing to lie about what was actually going on.
There were lots of disparaging comments, during the first term, about the so-called "adults in the room." Mostly reflecting the view that they didn't seem to be stopping him from creating one mess after another. Having now seen what happens without them, it's pretty apparent that a lot of restraint was, in fact, happening. It seems like some apoligies are in order. Not that I expect to see any.
lj, you might be interested in this (free reg. required):
https://www.digitalconcerthall.com/en/film/108
The “Reichsorchester”
In 2007, the Berliner Philharmoniker celebrated their 125th anniversary. Film director Enrique Sánchez Lansch took this occasion to tell a hitherto unknown chapter in the history of the Berliner Philharmoniker: the years of National Socialism from 1933 to 1945.
novakant's comment had me dig around a bit, and I found Misha Aster's The Reich's Orchestra: The Berlin Philharmonic 1933-45. I'm through the 1st chapter, which describes how the orchestra, because of the state of the German economy, appealed to the government for support and entangled itself with the Nazis and I realized that governmental sponsorship and the history of orchestras are probably also why I have the differing ideas about German and French composers. The French government sponsorship of orchestras is much more limited (30-40 ensembles in France versus 129 in Germany according to Gemini) and looking at the histories of various orchestras, a large number of them originated as Staatskapelle, or the private orchestras of the various small states before German unification. Thus, you get the competition that gives rise to the symphonic tradition. So its understandable why things are weighted towards that German tradition.
Regarding the hierarchical culture, it's interesting that the Berlin Philharmonics, who choose their own conductors in a democratic vote, picked a series of nice guys (after Karajan):
Abbado, Rattle, Petrenko.
(Rattle's early relationship with the orchestra was described by himself as "turbulent" but watching them perform over the years, I felt that these were birthpangs. Also, he had a lot of unfair detractors in Germany.)
Interestingly, they also always picked the candidates that embodied a turning away from Karajan's heavy, 19th century 'German' style.
Abbado over Maazel and Barenboim
Rattle over Barenboim
Petrenko over Thielemann
It is unsurprising to me that you have so many problems with conductors, the whole hierarchical culture and the intense competition in some ways overdetermined this kind of outcome. I try to avoid putting up Gergiev (he used to come through Kumamoto at least once a year and sometimes twice with the Marinsky Orchestra because of Yoko Nagae Ceschina, who was originally from Kumamoto) because of links to Putin and Celibidache, who was one of the main antagonists in the Abbe Conant story and now, Dutoit.
Solti was known as 'the screaming skull' but apparently mellowed in later years. Going further back, you hear stories of Reiner and Toscanini (rehearsal recordings like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=886gkXViXi8 make those stories of the music librarian 'pre-sawing' the batons so they would break easily, because they realized that after he broke a baton, he'd calm down, easier to give credence to)
A famous brass anecdote was Ravelli, the U of Mich band director, who often use to isolate a section and make each player perform the offending passage to humiliate them and one time, he went down and one by one, they misplayed the passage until the last one absolutely nailed it, and Ravelli, not missing a beat, says 'you were late for rehearsal last week, what were you doing?'
However, when you are in that environment, those kind of incidents become a sort of glue that the ensemble holds on to, It's no surprise that other high stress team environments (like the chef and the brigade de cuisine) exhibit similar tendencies.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “Moving towards Epiphany”
BTW, you can treat my comment as an evidence for "one bugfix/person/year".
Happy New Year one and all!
"
I think I've found the source of the "comment links are not changing color if you've previously clicked on them"
style.min.css
needs to have an addition:
a:visited{color:red}
(or some other color). It seems that otherwise links, whether visited or not, get whatever color is inherited. Just tried with a local copy of the OW main page, and it works.
"
That's absolutely beautiful, russell. I don't know if you've posted it before, but IMO you could post it every new year's day. By the end, I was truly emotional.
"
In the spirit of moving toward whatever epiphanies await us, good or ill, I wish all here a happy, peaceful, healthy New Year.
Here's a lovely old chestnut. I probably post this every year, but it's a personal favorite, so I hope you will forgive me.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xQXU2PIgreM
"
Is there a cadre of old school Republicans? I'm sure there is. Willing to turn the GOP around? That, too. Able? I beg leave to doubt it. Like russell, I don't see how anyone could.
The closest I can picture is explicitly splitting the party (with the old school guys willing to abandon the name, which I expect them to hate). But that would leave them with too small a base to compete effectively. They would do better to wait for the Democrats to fission, and join one of the pieces. But that's not a turn-around.
"
A happy and healthy new year to everybody here! Please God let it get better......
"
Attractive, but likely not to the current base of the (R) party.
Is there a cadre of old school (R)'s ready and able to turn the GOP around in 2008? I don't see it. I don't know how they would do it.
I'm also not sure the (D)'s will go for someone who leads with "we're gonna go after all of the Trump era malefactors". Too divisive!! Can't have that!!
My epiphany of the last year (or 10 years) is how durable the paranoid style continues to be. Drive a stake through it's heart, it just keeps coming back for more.
"
I don't watch TV news so I don't know how far the regression has gone, but CBS, aka Pravda West, has had the opposite of an epiphany.
The msm let themselves get used by Republicans to promote slanders, lies, fake investigations, all kinds of bullshit until part way through Trump's first term when they finally figures out that they needed to be more than a megaphone. An epiphany! They needed to actually do their jobs.
But CBS seems to have regressed: DHS conducting massive investigation after viral video alleges fraud at Minnesota day care centers | Watch
CBS is collaborating by spreading Republican lies. The coverage consists of extensive repetitions of Republican false allegations, followed by a brief partial rebuttal, followed by horse race coverage of how the false allegations might affect Walz. At no point to they explain that the Biden admin already did a massive investigation and achieved around 50 indictments. A viewer would come away with the impression that Minn had done nothing about the fraud, that DHS deserved all the credit and that opps! a Republican blogger was mistaken about the Somali day care centers. Not one word said about the devastating flood of hate now directed at those centers.
And, of course, not one word about the organized hate campaign now underway by Republicans against all Somalis.
Fuck you, CBS.
"
"through an Overton lens, Trump’s increasingly-insane inanity will make any Bush-style Republican very attractive in 2028. a white man who isn’t a psychotic narcissist will be soberly declared, by once-again-endorsement-friendly editorials everywhere, to be the kind of stable genius we all need. the press will wet themselves in bliss at the idea of the GOP returning to a normal balance."
This is my fear. And I don't think the Republicans under that hypothetical person will be different in substance than they are not. In degree, yes. Substance, no. And the substance will be gerrymandering, election rigging, tax cuts for the rich and screw everyone else, pro-corporate power and anti-public interest legislation, and more Federalist SOciety ideologues in judgeships as they go full steam ahead on the plant to turn the US into a one-party oligarchy and only looks like a representative democracy.
"
>Well, that and the Democratic base picked a candidate they should have known was unelectable.
did Obama promise to go after the sins the Dem base was sure Bush committed Bush's?
will a Democrat get through the primaries who says he won't spend every second chasing Trump's crimes?
"
One thing I've noticed in myself is that I'm far less bothered by the dwindling number of vocal tRump supporters I see, be they IRL or on social media. They aren't the threat they used to be, at least as I perceive them. I almost pity them now, like they're clinging to a dying mythology. My meaner impulse is to laugh at them.
I know that's not the most enlightening thing to write on the subject, but it's my own subjective synthesis of everything I'm seeing. It feels different than it used to.
"
Of course not. That's why McCain won in 2008. Well, that and the Democratic base picked a candidate they should have known was unelectable.
/s
"
through an Overton lens, Trump's increasingly-insane inanity will make any Bush-style Republican very attractive in 2028. a white man who isn't a psychotic narcissist will be soberly declared, by once-again-endorsement-friendly editorials everywhere, to be the kind of stable genius we all need. the press will wet themselves in bliss at the idea of the GOP returning to a normal balance.
the Dem base will have picked someone who promises to litigate all the Trump era scandals that the press is currently ignoring. the country will not be interested.
GOP by 15%.
"
I'm getting to the end of The Reich's Orchestra, (I'm going to wait until after New Year's to check out the documentary link novakant sent me, as you get a 12 day trial, so I want to have some free time to listen to as much as I can) but one 'bright' spot is this
Hartmann recognised the orchestra’s post-war ethical dilemma: the Berlin Philharmonic was to an exceptional extent cherished, groomed and protected by the Nazi regime. That the Berlin Philharmonic was, at the same time, not a Nazi orchestra, by spirit, constitution, or membership, was also true. The Berlin Philharmonic, however, did not have to be a Nazi orchestra to serve its purpose to the regime—in fact, it was desirable that it not be. And the regime went to great lengths to protect and promote the exceptionality of its prized musical asset.
The current crew doesn't understand quality and ability, and everything is subsumed under fealty to Trump, and that absence of taste should make things go incrementally faster.
"
I completely agree on Vance. To hold their current coalition together post-Trump, they would need a figure who, among other things, is a showman like Trump is. Vance not only isn't, he not even vaguely close. And while there are doubtless would-be demagogues out there, there isn't one who seems likely to be the necessary unifying figure.
I see how the US and its Constitution could continue (with some modifications/Amendments, but recognizably a continuation). What my imagination is not adequate for is envisioning a path from here to there.
The Christianist nationalists can get pushed back into their former condition of minimal relevance. Just one more group of wierdos in a country which has long had a plethora of them. That's not the real challenge.
While other countries manage just fine with multiple parties, the US seems to favor a two party norm. The parties don't have to agree on much policy-wise, just be willing to accept that the majority of voters will sometimes favor one and other times the other. (That's a big piece of what is driving the Republicans into irrelevance: the voters overall like pieceful transfers of power. )
A third party can arise, but in a relatively short time it will either replace one of the two major parties or join the ranks of the essentially irrelevant minor parties (think Greens or American Independence Party). How does that happen? It's difficult to say, since there are only a couple of examples:
I doubt that the current Republican Party is salvageable. But will a new party arise (probably including many ex-Republicans, like the Whigs in the early Republican Party)? I'm not seeing any sign of that, at least not yet. Or will the Democrats split, and on what basis? I'm not seeing any glimmers of that either. There are places (e.g. California) where the Republicans have embraced irrelevance for decades, but the Democrats here are still divided by individual personalities, rather than by anything resembling groups.
As I say, I can see something of where we could get to, but not how to get there.
On the other hand, where else we might go is not obvious either. The mechanics are clear -- the Constitution provides for piecemeal amendment or complete replacement. But what would get hammered out in a Constitutional Convention, should we go that route? And how would it be able to satisfy the majority required to ratify the new one? "Prediction is difficult, especially about the future."
"
I think MTG's response to Trump's comments at the Kirk Memorial are telling. It's not the nail in the MAGA coffin, but it may signal an inflection point for a lot of people as they start looking to shift their allegiance. I'm reminded of "The Awakening Conscience" by William Holman Hunt:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Awakening_Conscience#/media/File:Hunt-AwakeningConscience1853.jpg
I expect that for a great many of the christian nationalist MAGA faithful we are going to see them start to think that The Ancient Orange One is King Saul, tormented by spirits, prone to fits, and abandoned by God, and see them turn instead to the Sofaphiliac as King David. Couchie has received Erica Kirk's anointment and has the trust of Sharkey's Hobbits. He Who Slumbers may not see out his term if the Project 2025 wing think they can Amendment 25 him and cut their losses.
If they do decide to go that way, good luck on keeping that lightning in the bottle. Vance is a pail of lukewarm dog vomit and naked ambition. I don't think he can hold any of it together for long.
What still terrifies me, though, is what comes after. I'm not convinced that the US Constitution can keep this place running with just another patch. This is a really risky and consequential moment and I don't think the cultists are done yet.
"
One more year. After the midterms, which Republicans are likely to lose, he'll be a lame duck president for real.
"
I do also think his instability/mental deterioration is becoming more apparent. Not to mention some ideological splintering within MAGA, like the Shapiro - Tucker Carlson row, and the Marjorie Taylor Green defection, and Trump's response to that, and the murder of the Reiners. Although why anybody would be surprised at the latter, given one of his first reactions to 9/11 was to crow about his building now being the tallest in NYC, is anyone's guess.
I'd like to think his comments at the Zelensky press conference about how Putin wants the best for Ukraine, and wants Ukraine to do well, and Zelensky's facial expression, may have cut through with some sane and politically engaged right wingers, as well as the fact that Trump had phone calls with Putin both before and after the Zelensky meeting, but I guess that's an idle hope. People sane enough to see it, and with enough political influence to do anything about it, still seem in vanishingly short supply.
"
I'd say the biggest epiphantic sign is that the cultists, while they don't appear to be leaving the faith, are much less willing to flaunt it. The signs and banners and hats are far less in evidence than they a year ago, or during his first term. Might it be that they are, perhaps not entirely consciously, preparing themselves to bury their past?
P.S. I'm not sure the lack of turnover in Trump's cabinet reflects any concern about getting replacements approved. That would require a firmer grasp of reality than we see elsewhere. Instead, I think it reflects the fact that they are all shameless toadies who constantly tell him how wonderful he is, and feed him fantasies about how successfully they are doing what he wants. As opposed to last term, where there was a lot of turnover from people telling him No . . . and failing to lie about what was actually going on.
There were lots of disparaging comments, during the first term, about the so-called "adults in the room." Mostly reflecting the view that they didn't seem to be stopping him from creating one mess after another. Having now seen what happens without them, it's pretty apparent that a lot of restraint was, in fact, happening. It seems like some apoligies are in order. Not that I expect to see any.
On “Weekend music thread #10 Maurice Ravel”
novakant, thanks!
"
lj, you might be interested in this (free reg. required):
https://www.digitalconcerthall.com/en/film/108
The “Reichsorchester”
In 2007, the Berliner Philharmoniker celebrated their 125th anniversary. Film director Enrique Sánchez Lansch took this occasion to tell a hitherto unknown chapter in the history of the Berliner Philharmoniker: the years of National Socialism from 1933 to 1945.
Not the greatest doc ever, but very informative.
"
novakant's comment had me dig around a bit, and I found Misha Aster's The Reich's Orchestra: The Berlin Philharmonic 1933-45. I'm through the 1st chapter, which describes how the orchestra, because of the state of the German economy, appealed to the government for support and entangled itself with the Nazis and I realized that governmental sponsorship and the history of orchestras are probably also why I have the differing ideas about German and French composers. The French government sponsorship of orchestras is much more limited (30-40 ensembles in France versus 129 in Germany according to Gemini) and looking at the histories of various orchestras, a large number of them originated as Staatskapelle, or the private orchestras of the various small states before German unification. Thus, you get the competition that gives rise to the symphonic tradition. So its understandable why things are weighted towards that German tradition.
"
Regarding the hierarchical culture, it's interesting that the Berlin Philharmonics, who choose their own conductors in a democratic vote, picked a series of nice guys (after Karajan):
Abbado, Rattle, Petrenko.
(Rattle's early relationship with the orchestra was described by himself as "turbulent" but watching them perform over the years, I felt that these were birthpangs. Also, he had a lot of unfair detractors in Germany.)
Interestingly, they also always picked the candidates that embodied a turning away from Karajan's heavy, 19th century 'German' style.
Abbado over Maazel and Barenboim
Rattle over Barenboim
Petrenko over Thielemann
On “Not the Christmas presents we want, but maybe the ones we deserve”
Wow, thanks!
Not sure I'm going to look at it, but good to have it "out there".
On “Weekend music thread #10 Maurice Ravel”
It is unsurprising to me that you have so many problems with conductors, the whole hierarchical culture and the intense competition in some ways overdetermined this kind of outcome. I try to avoid putting up Gergiev (he used to come through Kumamoto at least once a year and sometimes twice with the Marinsky Orchestra because of Yoko Nagae Ceschina, who was originally from Kumamoto) because of links to Putin and Celibidache, who was one of the main antagonists in the Abbe Conant story and now, Dutoit.
Solti was known as 'the screaming skull' but apparently mellowed in later years. Going further back, you hear stories of Reiner and Toscanini (rehearsal recordings like this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=886gkXViXi8 make those stories of the music librarian 'pre-sawing' the batons so they would break easily, because they realized that after he broke a baton, he'd calm down, easier to give credence to)
A famous brass anecdote was Ravelli, the U of Mich band director, who often use to isolate a section and make each player perform the offending passage to humiliate them and one time, he went down and one by one, they misplayed the passage until the last one absolutely nailed it, and Ravelli, not missing a beat, says 'you were late for rehearsal last week, what were you doing?'
However, when you are in that environment, those kind of incidents become a sort of glue that the ensemble holds on to, It's no surprise that other high stress team environments (like the chef and the brigade de cuisine) exhibit similar tendencies.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.