I recently attended a wonderful concert of the Boston Symphony Orchestra at Tanglewood, their summer home in Lenox, Massachusetts. The BSO has been one of the greatest orchestras in America for over a Century and has been led by some of the most distinguished conductors during that period including Pierre Monteux, Serge Koussevitsky, Charles Munch, Erich Leinsdorf, William Steinberg, Seiji Ozawa, James Levine, and most recently, Andris Nelsons. As a major orchestra that reflects the best of both European and American influences, the BSO is known to function as a rather harmonious institution in all aspects–not something that is often found in American orchestras. However, recent developments have changed that feeling within the orchestra.
The Board of Trustees of the BSO (typically large donors to the orchestra who come from the business and academic worlds or institutions not necessarily affiliated with the arts) announced in February that current music director Andris Nelsons would not be retained when his contract runs out at the end of the 2026/2027 season. This took everyone by surprise, not least the members of the orchestra who were never consulted prior to the Board’s decision and truly respect their beloved conductor of the past 12 years. The main reason given for this sudden dismissal was a failure to come to agreement regarding the orchestra’s “future vision” and its financial scenario. Other reasons, not publicly stated, may concern the falling attendance and programming concerns. However, contradictions regarding the orchestra’s financial status have recently come to light. As stated in the Boston Eagle on 7/17/26, the BSO in their latest tax filings “reported a 27.5 million surplus…..The surplus was fueled by strong philanthropy and investment returns.” In fact, the BSO’s 700 million in assets, including 603 million in endowment, is the largest of any major American orchestra. This has put into question whether the real motives behind the Board’s decisions are that they are looking to change the way the BSO functions and is to be promoted as well as the way Symphony Hall (the finest sounding concert hall I have ever played in) is to be utilized and promoted. Or perhaps, as I suspect, it is the appointment of Gustav Dudamel as the new conductor of the New York Philharmonic that is leading the Board to try and find an equally charismatic figure? Attempts by the orchestra members to persuade the Board that their decision was erroneous and to reconsider have been thoroughly dismissed. Once again, the most important people in the process, the musicians, are left out in the cold–the last to be informed and the ones with no say.
The circumstances that the BSO musicians are currently experiencing are not unique. It is reminiscent of situations that musicians in all facets of the music industry eventually find themselves in when dealing with corporate mentalities and power brokers. The money people care little about the individual musicians they employ and often know even less about the way that art evolves from an inside perspective. To them, all musicians are “chopped liver,” easily replaceable. And you’re going to in essence fire a conductor that a major orchestra respects and works well with on a daily basis, that the concert-going public responds to, and has won multiple Grammy Awards with their recordings? In discussing these developments with friends in the orchestra, they described the current mood within the organization as “toxic.”
The idea that any and all performers are replaceable permeates the business and sports worlds. We see this in sports all of the time when athletic icons are traded or allowed to sign with other franchises only to see their former teams falter without them. (Red Sox and Mookie Betts, New York Giants and Saquon Barkley, etc.) When seasoned, award-winning reporters and correspondents on 60 Minutes are replaced by newspaper opinion writers we shrug our shoulders and think “business as usual.” But a major symphony orchestra of 75-80 musicians does not function like a sports team or a tv show. Everyone onstage is an expert on their instruments creating music as a unit at the highest levels while responding to the musical dictates of its conductor. The orchestra and conductor have been working at their craft for anywhere between 20-50+ years. The performers act as both ensemble players, soloists, and leaders who play the entire concert. Additionally, the BSO has one of the most demanding schedules of any major American orchestra with a majority of the members also playing in the Boston Pops. As an ensemble, they personify the perfect human example of a fine-tuned machine. And the conductor is the manager and the one who is ultimately judged by the artistry he/she creates with them. They are the ones that people come to hear, not the wealthy donors Board members or their hirees! Doesn’t it make common sense for those that make the art to have a word, any word, in choosing their leader?
In a recent article, musicologist Joe Horowitz stated: “Back in 1927, Charles Edward Russell–a popular socialist writer–called America’s orchestras our foremost cultural asset, a sign of honor among nations.” The BSO represents one of the greatest cultural institutions that this country has produced and the pride of the Boston cultural community since its inception in 1881. Anyone who has witnessed the BSO live during Nelsons leadership and heard the multitude of magnificent recordings they have produced would therefore find these recent actions by the Board to be incomprehensible. (The complete Shostakovich Symphonies, recorded from live performances, stand alone as among the finest yet to be issued in my opinion, and the complete Brahms Symphonies are wonderful.) Yet, in spite of all the unnecessary stress surrounding them, the BSO continues to perform with the greatest sense of artistry and professionalism, as I witnessed.
In a recent interview, former Associate Principal Bassoon of the Boston Symphony, Rick Ranti, addressed the real problems facing arts and society today. Here is part of what he had to say about the state of classical music in the U.S. and his suggestions for maintaining this type of arts organization. It should serve as a guide to heads of cultural institutions regarding what they should really be concerned with.
What is the biggest change you’ve seen in your orchestra over the course of your career?
R.R. My career started in the late 80s in the Philadelphia Orchestra, then I shifted to the Boston Symphony a few years later. Those were bustling times. Every seat in the [Philadelphia] Academy of Music was sold out before the season started. We recorded every week in what was a final, ten-year flourish as we digitally re-recorded the oft-recorded great repertoire, and the Boston Pops was still riding a wave of TV, John Williams, and excited audiences. Over the next 50 years, there has been a slow and steady attenuation. Good music education is not a given, the media market is fractured and impossible to monetize, attention spans are short, and the world bombards us with hyperstimulation. It’s harder for classical musicians to make their way in this “attention economy.” But it is very wrong to apologize for bringing to life the greatest artistic achievements humankind has produced. Great is great–all people can recognize that. They just need to quiet the noise in their heads, get in our seats, and listen. When they do this, they are transported. In an increasingly artificial and ugly world, great musicians have a vital role to keep something real, powerful, great, and beautiful alive. The selling of us seems obvious. To all managements and boards: say it loud, say it proud. If you don’t believe in great music, get another gig.
What is it like to experience your orchestra from the audience perspective?
R.R. The BSO is thrilling on stage and from the audience! I love the artistry, the expressiveness, the dedication, the expertise. I know very well how hard everyone is working, how much it means to them, how much they love the music and their jobs, and I am so very grateful for it because their efforts blow me away. I am moved and in awe. [Now] I am also grateful to just sit back and enjoy the performances without the distraction of trying to do what they are doing!