Just my opinion, of course...
BUT
If the performance was "uninspiring," I would lay that more at the feet of the musicians. They knew going in to the gig that Kaplan is NOT a profesional conductor. He has studied primarily ONE WORK for decades. His only discography to date consists of that same ONE WORK. He is not, nor does he claim to be apparently, an authority on conducting. I have no doubt that he is one of, if not THE, foremost authority on Mahler 2 in a scholastic arena. I think we all know some absolutely amazingly knowledgeable people that barely know where beat 2 is in a 4/4 pattern.
How many times have the NYPO musicians played Mahler 2 in their careers? OK, he doesn't do transitions well. But some of the most inspiring performances are far from being the cleanest. Give it whatchya got anyway! He is an amateur. He will go with the orchestra.
I lay it more at the feet of the musicians. WTH did they expect? The second coming of Toscanini? The man is an amatuer, no matter how he came to be on the podium, and no matter how many times he has conducted the piece elsewhere. The musicians are the professionals. If a musician can produce an "uninspiring" rendition of Mahler 2, perhaps it's time to re-evaluate WHY they are musicians. Given the chance to play this piece, on stage and with a competent orchestra, it would take Jack Hannah and a rinocerous dart to keep me from bringing the wood! If you can't get inspired to give a world-class performance of an intrinsically inspiring work like MAHLER 2 simply because you don't like the guy waving the white twig around, then methinks the motivations are not so much musical as egotistical.
Just because Kaplan's interpretation was "simplistic" doesn't mean the musician's has to be. The performance was "rudderless." Was this necessarily because Kaplan was in command of the ship, or was it because the crew resented how he got there and mailed it in? Mr. Finlayson claims that the musicians were "denied that journey." By whom? The journey is there for the taking! Does anyone honestly think that providing a more vigorous performance than what was being asked would be cause for repercussions?
Mr. Kaplan apparently was "unable to bring to the surface any of Mahler's darkness, pensiveness, and schizophrenia." OK, he isn't a professional. The musicians ARE. And as musicians, they owe it to the music to bring that out even if the interpretational skills of the conductor are lacking. I have always been of the opinion that it is up to me to play the music as I see fit musically. If that doesn't fit with where the conductor is going, then it is his job to tell me differently. If he doesn't say anything I'm going to assume that his interpretation and mine are from the same page of the hymnal. It's up to the musicians to bring the inspriation just as much as it is the conductor. If he provides none, it's up to the musicians to bring it all.
As a musician, you have to be able to accede to the wishes of the conductor. When those wishes are not known, or are not clear, the musician must be subservient to the music.
In the musicians defense, they were put in an unfortunate circumstance by management. However, out here in the real world, "unfortunate circumstance" translates to "gut-check time."
LJV's observation:
Lastly, I would be curious to know for whom Mr. Mehta and Mr. Maazel were not standing.
is particularly interesting. I would think that just out of plain old-fashioned respect that they would applaud the conductor. But in this case where they listened to the NYPO mail in a performance, I'm thinking that they were more showing their displeasure at the orchestra than at the man on the riser. The expectations for the orchestra were likely far higher from Messrs. Mehta and Maazel.
[/rant]
