Rogers Band 1893 (L) & Chautauqua Symphony Orchestra 1928 – 2015 (R)
A Tradition of Music in the Chautauqua Program
I wrote in my Tale of Two Amps post, the hindsight of looking back in history and making comparisons sometimes allows for greater context, better perception, and a more thorough understanding of current events. This time we look back to the summer of 1979 and examine another controversy that boiled over, leading to; divided loyalties, rumors and disinformation, frustration with Chautauqua’s leadership, as well as petitions and public forums. Once again I trust this sounds all too familiar, as the possible dismantling/replacement of the Chautauqua Symphony Orchestra then, will be our latest analogy for the current Amp debate, and quite possibly portends the atmosphere in Chautauqua for the coming season. We compare the situation then and now, in such emotionally charged environments. Some of the similarities are striking.
“Those who don’t know history are destined to repeat it.” – Edmund Burke
Bob Osborne, Howard Gibbs & Dr. Hesse Review Plans for the Amp
All the controversy was over a 2nd season Chautauqua President speaking out about changes he was planning on making to improve Chautauqua in general. Specific attention was given to Chautauqua’s facilities and the program. The Amphitheater was the focal point of the facility efforts as it received improvements totaling over $2 Million over the next three years. But some Chautauquans were leery of the relative newcomer and the changes he was proposing to the program and the Chautauqua Symphony Orchestra. In the season opening June 23 Daily Editor Alfreda Irwin interviews Dr. Hesse as he leads off the season telling Chautauqua that change is coming.
Dr. Hesse Opens the 1979 Season with 3 Taps of the Gavel
“First change is inevitable. The only way to more than survive is to change. Any organism that doesn’t change, dies. Chautauqua isn’t a museum. It is a community that is alive and vital…The heart of Chautauqua is its program. We have taken the basic program and have developed it, trying to improve it, following suggestions that Chautauquans have made, some of our own ideas, and opportunities that have opened.”
He clarifies his goal of excellence for Chautauqua in a July 14 Guest of the Editor article in the Daily. After a year of listening and learning the emboldened President is starting to implement changes and is effectively acting as the music director which is ruffling some feathers. The opening paragraph is below and typical of Dr. Hesse, as he goes right after the review of the CSO, confirming rumors already circulating around the grounds resulting in a growing controversy among Chautauquans on both sides of the issue.
“The goal of excellence is a tradition at Chautauqua. Hence continuous, review, evaluation and planning is required in order to insure and to increase the quality of its whole program. Focal to the summer program is music. So it is natural and indeed desirable that the lengthy necessary process of review include the Chautauqua Symphony Orchestra.”
Dr. Hesse was having to publicly respond to rumors that he was trying to dismantle/replace the CSO just one season after Chautauqua celebrated its 50th anniversary. Alfreda Irwin in her Three Taps of the Gavel: Pledge to the Future, put it best:
“Dr. Hesse didn’t realize that his attempt at honest discussion would be troublesome to his beginning presidency and even disruptive within the community. His boldness in facing change for the sake of the future development of Chautauqua was not easily matched even by those who sensed his vision. Most of the fear of what might happen to the orchestra became articulated with the summer arrival of the members of the Symphony. Rumors from benign to violent began to circulate. Personal loyalties were put under pressure; sides were eventually drawn.”
Dr. Hesse was once described by a friend of mine who worked in the Colonnade at the time, as “a bull in a china shop, and maybe that’s exactly what we need right now.” Counter balanced by highly respected, long time Chautauquan and Board of Trustees Chairman, Howard Gibbs, they made an unlikely yet effective team as the 2nd Century fundraising campaign saved the Amp and other buildings that had suffered from deferred maintenance due to lack of capital for much needed improvements.
Howard Gibbs & Dr. Hesse
Dr. Hesse in his editorial in evoking a goal of excellence had offended the Orchestra members, as it seemed from his comments, that excellence was currently lacking. Dr. Hesse went on to explain the boards function/responsibilities in this decision making process. The decision making process is the same as we approach the summer of the Amp debate.
The Board of Trustees of Chautauqua Institution, according to its bylaws, shall have the care, management and control of property, business and affairs of the corporation. Is thus constituted with the purpose and responsibility for developing; the policies of the Institution. As such, it has an obligation to review, as a part of its stewardship, any and all functions and agencies of the Institution in keeping with the purposes, intent, and for the benefit of Chautauqua Institution. The Trustees delegate their responsibility to administer these policies through the President and he, in turn, through his administrative staff.
Dr. Hesse wanted to thoroughly review the Orchestra with the goal of increasing it’s size and the overall quality. By increasing the size of the Orchestra it would be eligible for additional outside funding and allow for more flexibility as the Orchestra supported the Chautauqua program. Dr. Hesse had written a position paper in January (and a subsequent incomplete draft) for the Program Committee set up to review the CSO by the Board. Unfortunately “someone” had leaked the paper to Orchestra members during the off season, which ignited the controversy as the Orchestra members felt threatened by the scrutiny. Dr. Hesse explained later in the summer during the public forums, his stance in the position papers. The second was never completed but possibly leaked as well. Excerpts from the January position paper by Dr. Hesse are below:
“Today, the CSO no longer enjoys the stature it did years ago, it no longer attracts (according to its severest critics) and several knowledgeable authorities the same caliber of player it once did…Many players have been coming to Chautauqua for many, many years and have become integrated into the community. The overall problem we perceive is that of quality which speaks also then to size, expense, repertoire, membership, audience, funding, programing and of course, stature.”
Chautauqua Symphony Orchestra
Chairman of the Board of Trustees Howard Gibbs was interviewed by Alfreda Irwin in her July 18 Daily editorial as he explained further the Boards function in the CSO debate and announces that there will be a public forum on the matter later in the season, although he states decisions can’t be made by referendum:
“Well, by the State charter, the Chautauqua Board of Trustees bears the accountability for the way Chautauqua functions. We can’t delegate that to anyone. Decisions can’t be made by referendum… but neither can decisions be made in isolation or in a vacuum”…Alfreda asked ‘If decisions can’t be made by referendum, how can Chautauquans be heard?’ “We Chautauquans are not shy about expressing ourselves…In line with that, I’d like to say that an open forum on the Orchestra will be scheduled…What is different today is that this administration and this Board is action-oriented. We are willing to make decisions, to take risks, even to fail and to correct our mistakes if mistakes are made.”
Although Board Chairman Howard Gibbs spoke up in mid July, the Board would not issue a formal statement on the CSO issue until August 14, after the first of the public forums was completed. We have all heard the prolonged outcry for Chautauqua’s Board to join the electronic and social media fray over the Amp. I have no doubt they have taken the higher ground at this stage of the conflict, as there is nothing to be gained by stepping into the breach at this time. Frankly, I for one would be disappointed if they entered this internet war of words. They will however be front and center on the battle lines in Chautauqua this summer, as they should be. A position, I frankly don’t envy, as there could be shots fired from all angles. And you know what they say about opinions…everybody has one.
Dr. Loew, Howard Gibbs & Dr. Hesse
In Alfreda Irwin’s opening coverage of the public forum on the CSO in her August 7, 1979 Editor’s Note Board Chairman Howard Gibbs opens the Forum calling it The Future of Chautauqua and continues with some explanations and notes the rumors on the grapevine and their negative effects:
“This forum is a continuing effort to be sensitive to the wealth of ideas and talent at Chautauqua. ‘He asked those assembled to take him at his word that he is committed to utilizing all of the talent that is on these Grounds. I do not believe in a board of trustees being a hidden enterprise… I have been impressed and challenged by the positive ideas that have come from Chautauquans individually and in groups by chance and by design…But I would be less than honest, if I did not say that the misinterpretation, the misinformation, rumors, and downright distortions are not as encouraging because they are counterproductive to the attempt to constantly improve the quality of Chautauqua, to restore and preserve what is great here, and to expand the quality of what could be ‘better…We cannot expect instant answers, because the problems are too complex and for some issues there are no answers readily available. We need the best advice we can get from within this group and from outside the Grounds. One reason for setting the (2nd) forum date for August 18 is that we are bringing onto the Grounds some objective non-Chautauquans highly knowledgeable in the music area so that we can take advantage of those. We covet what you want to talk about…”
Describing the Public Forum
From Alfreda Irwin’s August 10 article covering the Public Forum:
Dr. Paul Irion points out one source of frustration among Chautauquans (then and now):
” Looking back to the beginning of the season there was no signal that all was not well in Zion until information came from orchestra members who had seen a paragraph in their contracts and had received some ‘papers’…And only after responses came from the community did we begin to get the picture…’Then he went on to say that the style of the administration, (not the administrator, he pointed out and he was not calling, ‘Foul’) that seemed to be emerging is that of not involving Chautauquans before the fact, but after the fact.”
Just as we face today, the “style” and timing of the decision making process appears to some to be the bigger issue. Before or after the fact, seems to be the sticking point. Or as someone else once asked “What did they know and when did they know it?” I have received emails from people who are more upset with the process than they are upset about the ultimate conclusion to the process (rebuilding of the Amp). As I previously posted the reveal of the D-E-M-O word was surely procrastinated but it doesn’t make that decision any less correct. Unfortunately the mean spirited messages coming from the committee portend a summer of “less” than civil discourse. The committee is acting as if they are preparing for a last stand, expressing frustration in an almost child like fashion with little regard to the impending facts regarding the failing structure of the Amp as they attempt to marshal recruits for the coming summer (battle). As I said before the facts would only spoil a good fight. I have pinged many people on this topic and there is a certain amount of trepidation regarding this divisive topic and how it may adversely affect the coming season in Chautauqua. Just as it affected the Summer of 79′.
Dr. Irion continued, followed to the podium by Dr. Hesse.
“Much of the pain we have felt and I have not particularly enjoyed this summer at Chautauqua, is because of questions related to unfounded rumors.” – Dr. Paul Irion
‘Dr. Hesse took the microphone and said rather soberly,’ “I haven’t enjoyed this summer much either….We ask the questions: What is it we want: What is it we need? What can we afford? We achieve a delicate balance that makes Chautauqua unique…If you’re afraid of the answers, you’ll be afraid of the questions…But some people have performed a terrible disservice to say, “Hey, guys, this is what it’s all about.” That isn’t what it’s all about. We try to come to grips with the situation. We have to explore all possibilities. I have to ask the questions and you must, too, and I would ask you, as you think and talk, to contribute to the solutions and not to the problems.” – Dr. Hesse
Those who so vociferously oppose the rebuilding of the Amp are operating with tunnel vision and a deaf ear and we must be forewarned that they are going to attempt to emotionally hijack this summer in the forsaken name of Historic Preservation. “This isn’t what it’s all about.” They continue to wail about the Amps historic integrity when the conversation should be focused on her structural integrity, the safety of all those who walk through those gates, and how the Amp supports the program going forward into the future (not the past).
Chautauqua Symphony Orchestra – Note the Empty Seats Behind the Orchestra
Public Forum Continued
Ken Fradin stepped to the microphone and spoke out about the delicate fabric of Chautauqua and how the CSO debate threatens that:
“I am very comforted by the forthright, measured, rational response of Dr. Hesse and his manner of addressing this extraordinarily complex and emotional situation…I think this is a perilous juncture in the history of Chautauqua and on the eve of a critical major fundraising effort which must succeed to insure the Chautauqua of the Future, and I think that you – we – should consider this complex question in a rational way to avoid further assault on what is the rather delicate fabric of Chautauqua.”
The 1979 season was about saving the orchestra, of which many of the members were a long time part of the Chautauqua community. One Chautauquan wrote in to the Daily speaking of good friends in the CSO, and how they participate in all facets of Chautauqua, and our kids go to club together. That was about friends and neighbors and their continued place in Chautauqua. When the dust had settled Dr. Hesse ended up reorganizing and expanding the CSO from 74 to 84 members, was authorized to engage a resident Music Director, and some other fine tuning mechanisms were set up to gradually improve quality. Is our Chautauqua today composed of such “delicate fabric” that could be threatened by the Amp debate? What if the committee doesn’t go quietly into the night after the structural engineers report the Amp is unsafe, and we watch the slow inexorable march of the historic preservationists away from the committees camp as they come to realize it’s true.
CSO (notice the empty seats just behind the Orchestra)
Public Forum Continued as Bill Cooper stepped to the podium:
‘He said he appreciated the frustrations of the trustees and staff who are “damned if you do, and damned if you don’t,” and said he hoped they would continue with hope and faith. The problems of informing a public such as this are insurmountable, he said. When you explore ideas, you are accused of making decisions. We should be able to consider the options without getting uptight about them. I, too, would like to see things stay as they are and not to change, but unfortunately, the world is just not like that.”
This time it’s not about people, but it is about “bricks and mortar,” an oft used real estate term, except the only bricks are being reused. This time it’s about a 122 year old building with a failing structural support system (and its 36 year old previous surgical interventions) and some really old wood and a functionally obsolete back of the Amp. They spent $400,000 on structural supports in 79′, as there was legitimate concern about her structural integrity then (see article quote below).
Mary Lee Talbot in her June 29, Guest of the Editor column titled Change and Tradition, wrote the following about Spiteful violence and brought it home with her Chautauqua Aspect. She was writing of non-violent protest but I thought it appropriate now:
“Spiteful violence tends to occur where change is occurring. Spite is defined by Webster as ‘a mean or evil feeling toward another, characterized by the inclination to hurt, humiliate, annoy, frustrate, etc.’ This is hardly in keeping with any great religious or philosophic tradition. It is certainly not-in keeping with the ‘Chautauqua Spirit.’ Let us not be tools of annoyance or humiliations; creativity in a positive vein is the way Chautauqua has always responded to change…The delicate balance of change and tradition is only hurt by spite and malice.”
“Let us not be tools of annoyance or humiliation” this summer. The committee has spent the last few months trying to annoy and humiliate Chautauqua’s leadership. What kind of reaction will we get this summer when all their efforts in this campaign go for naught?
Guest of the editor – Bob Osborne – Tuesday, August 21, 1979 writes that the Amp was in dire need of repairs and all of this should sound familiar as well:
“…the Amphitheater has experienced only one major face-lifting: the installation of the Massey memorial organ in 1907. In 1977, routine inspection uncovered serious structural defects in the roof support system. The Board of Trustees, mindful of both the importance of the building and of the need for maximum safety precautions, immediately approved the expenditure of $400,000 to rebuild and strengthen with steel beams the entire superstructure area. For the casual concert-goer, it is difficult if not impossible to see what was purchased for that $400,000 because most of it is hidden. For the engineers and the Board of Trustees, however, what was purchased was the structural integrity of the Amphitheater and peace of mind. Unfortunately, that project was only the beginning. Additional needs are apparent to anyone who looks around and particularly to anyone who ventures backstage: a) totally inadequate restroom facilities for the audience or for the performers; b) poor use of available backstage space, including such inadequate dressing rooms that we have difficulty in explaining the problems to top-level talent we try to attract to Chautauqua (for example: no hot water in the dressing rooms). At this moment the sewer lines leading from the Amphitheater are completely plugged, necessitating the use of portable toilet units on the rear porch. Paint is peeling from the ceiling, water is finding its way through the roof and onto the stage, and the electrical wiring that is used for lighting and sound is inadequate and should be completely replaced. To repair and improve the Amphitheater will cost approximately $1,425,000 in addition to the $400,000 already spent.”
This summer their will be a repeat of public forums on another highly controversial topic, but lets focus on the structure, not the history that doesn’t change. The main steel beams that connect to the superstructure of the roof are leaning, causing “asymmetrical stress” to the entire structural support system above the ceiling. It’s time to focus on the Future of Chautauqua’s New Amphitheater as the leadership of Chautauqua has done the due diligence and should make the very hard but correct choice to rebuild the Amp once again. They got it right in 79′ with the CSO and this leadership group will get it right this summer. As Alfreda wrote in Three Taps of the Gavel: Pledge to the Future after all the public discussion was over:
“Like it or not Chautauquans had to rest their faith in the Board of Trustees who in the words of Mr. Gibbs ‘weigh carefully all suggestions before making a decision in any of these major areas where differences of opinion exist.”
Original & Subsequent Refreshment Booth with Peter’s Bridge in Bacground
“I like the dreams of the future better than the history of the past.” – Thomas Jefferson
Please stay tuned as next week we join “the committee” in reading between the lines – subtext anyone?
Drift of the Day 