Ryan Tracy for the Directorship of the New York City Opera presents

A WAY FORWARD: A Rescue Plan for the New York City Opera

Friday, January 9, 2009

Table of Contents:

Overture: Introductions
A Brief State of the New York City Opera
The First Eighteen Months
Need for Fiscal/Administrative Transparency
Limit of Term
Administrative Re-Organization
The Board of Directors
Creative Advisory Board
A Home for New York City Opera
The Unsung Singer
The Singer’s Body
Stagione V Repertory
Programming
Sustainability
Finale

OVERTURE: INTRODUCTIONS

On December 9, after being nonplused by New York City Opera’s wayward quest to find a new leader, I announced my candidacy for the directorship of the organization. Since the announcement, I have worked tirelessly with a team of engaged and fiercely minded creators and advocates of the performing arts to shape a clear and feasible future for a New York City Opera in peril. Together, we have come up with the following proposal that we believe is both in tune with the history of NYCO while looking forward to the future of opera in New York, the United States, and the world.

A BRIEF STATE OF THE NEW YORK CITY OPERA

I don’t think we need to go into too many details here. We all know that the New York City Opera has been without a Director since early November. We know that the future of NYCO’s programming is completely unknown at this point. And, we know that the company is facing a pretty dire financial outlook, and even more scary, a shaken public confidence in the institution.

Rumors have circulated of possible offers and appointments, but nothing has yet to materialize. And hey, if we’re the only ones who are ready to take on this mess, then so be it.

As we see it, NYCO needs to improve immediately in several key areas, as well as execute an almost total reorganization and re-prioritization if it is not just to survive, but to thrive and move forward as a leader of opera in this century.

As Director of New York City Opera, I plan on nipping these problems in the bud, and setting NYCO on a course of improved artistic integrity and fiscal security.

Now, we should also mention that this global economic collapse has accompanied the perhaps more finite earthquake at City Opera. That will obviously factor in to how we are able to move forward.

But it needs to be said that, everyone here, for possibly any number of reasons, believes that if New York City Opera fails, it will be a serious loss for New York City.

THE FIRST EIGHTEEN MONTHS

I don’t intend to touch any programming that’s already been set in motion for the spring. Let’s look at what New York City Opera has planned for the rest of this season:

• Two concert performances of Barber’s Antony and Cleopatra at Carnegie Hall January 15th and 16th. The first performance is also a gala fund raiser. This probably needs to have a few more eyes on it. Fund raising events can be tricky, and if not done well, are large wastes of time.
• March 7 “Looking Forward” concert at Laguardia High School for the Performing Arts. Fine.
• April 11 “Looking Forward” concert and “patron dinner” at Alice Tully Hall. Fine, except for I would like to review what exactly the “patron dinner” is. Are patrons paying for this dinner? Is it a fund raiser? A cultivation dinner? Does City Opera need to spend this money when they’re operating a $15 million deficit?
• And then May 1 and 2 are the two days of the VOX series. Great.
• There are also six installations of the “Opera Matters” series. I haven’t been to one, but they seem like lecture/film screening events. I’m okay with these continuing as planned. There is no need to cause any unnecessary upheaval right now.

Moving forward, I don’t think any more lectures, special series, screenings, and the like are necessarily effective in terms of a transition of leadership. Mortier gave at least one lecture, and it obviously didn’t convince detractors.

I don’t think we should spend money on big PR events, when we can communicate everything digitally.

I’m not saying I won’t be making public appearances. But our plan for moving into the 2009-2010 season will be to hunker down, focus all of our energy on planning out a feasible season that is representative of the ideals and goals we are about to set forth here, and to also get the organization into tip top shape, so it can move forward efficiently, and with gusto.

We should also look immediately to anything that we can salvage from Gerard Mortier’s proposed schedule. Counter Critic has received a few requests to do so, with particular interest in Glass’ “Einstein On The Beach,” and Messiaen’s “St. Francis of Assisi.”

We believe it is possible to get some full productions up by the fall of 2009 and continue strong into spring 2010. What those productions are and how many there are is entirely dependent on a full review of the financial standing of the company.

NEED FOR FISCAL/ADMINISTRATIVE TRANSPARENCY

At this point, we have no real financial numbers from the City Opera, other than, reportedly, the $36 million budget proposed by the board, and a $15 million deficit. The City Opera offices have been closed and will remain closed through January 5th. But their website doesn’t even list who its employees are, so we’re not even sure who to contact for what information. We’re obviously not insiders. Therefore, all of our recommendations today come with the caveat of a full fiscal and administrative survey of the company. We need to know who is in charge of what. What money is going where. What we can afford in the immediate future. And we need to be accountable to the public for the money that it gives us.

We need to know how the endowment is doing. By and large, endowments over the last twelve months have shrunk from 30-50% in some institutions. Let’s see where NYCO’s is.

We also heard, from one of our readers, that NYCO “fucked through” a twenty million dollar endowment. We need to look at this and figure out exactly what is happening.

As Director of New York City Opera, I will make transparency at all levels of operation a hallmark of my tenure.

LIMIT OF TERM

I immediately propose a limit of term of 4-8 years (or two four-year terms) for the position of New York City Opera General Director. I think a term limit will help New York City Opera stay fresh, and constantly prepare for the next chapter. It is an opera of, for, and by the people, and as such, it should be run by as many talented, qualified individuals as are out there. Rather than being a position that seems plagued by turmoil, the seat of NYCO General Director could end up becoming a notch in the belt of great opera administrators.

It will also prevent mediocre or unsuccessful leaders from trying to hold onto the reigns for until, as has happened, it is too late and the company is on the verge of collapse. We don’t need dynasties, and I do not intend to build a Camelot. I intend to come into City Opera, fix what’s wrong, start what needs to be started, give the company a structure that can adapt and withstand unforseen circumstances, and in the end, hand over the reigns to another qualified, talented leader who should be selected in a process that is far more transparent than the current one has been.

ADMINISTRATIVE RE-ORGANIZATION

Again, we have the caveat that any recommendation we make here are contingent on the information we get from a complete organizational review.

Directorship

Option 1 – Ryan Tracy as General Director

I wouldn’t be offering myself to direct the New York City Opera if I didn’t believe I was capable of managing the artistic, fiscal, operational, and political responsibilities inherent in the position.

Option 2 – Co-Directorship

It is rumored that a co-directorship of the New York City Opera is on the table. The rumor goes that NYCO may be planning to install a recognizable opera star to be a sort of public face of the organization, while another director would actually be making the big decisions. I am against this kind of division, since it is dependent on a “false” face (or leader) on one hand, and a sort of shadow director behind the scenes.

Rather, I think a directorship division as is currently in place at BAM, where the President oversees the fiscal and political operations and is the main liaison for the board of directors, while the Executive Producer oversees the curatorial end of things, could really work at New York City Opera.

I would propose possibly tapping a former NYCO official to come back and assist in the administrative transition. I understand that Jane Gullong left NYCO because Mr. Mortier’s structural plan virtually eliminated her position. I would be happy to function in co-directorship with an administrator who has a history with the City Opera, and who would bring a sense of stability back to NYCO leadership.

Furthermore, I think this model may allay possible constituent trepidations regarding my own newness to the organization.

Chair of the Board – I know this doesn’t really fall under the Director’s appointments, but I figured I would weigh in here. Susan Baker has been good for City Opera, as far as I can tell. I assume she’s the glue that’s keeping everything together right now. She also showed great artistic instinct in her effort to bring in Mr. Mortier, even if the plan wound up being derailed. My plan is to meet with Ms. Baker as soon as possible, find out who she believes is working well at NYCO, and keep those individuals on board.

Chief Financial Officer (CFO) – We don’t know who this is right now. We’ll have to find out and review their performance. (Keep in mind, this isn’t a witch hunt. I have no interest in inflicting panic on NYCO employees. But we do need to look at who is in the key positions, and evaluate how they’re doing their jobs. It simply has to be done.) The CFO’s role, as I would have it be, is to keep artistic goals financially feasible, keep operation costs reigned in, serve as a model for NYCO employees, and play a vital role in the growth of the company. We have two nominees from outside the ranks of New York City Opera. At this time, it would not be prudent to name them. But again, we will need to know who is currently in this position.

Marketing Director – New York City Opera needs to get a new brand/image immediately. We also need a new website now. I don’t know who is in charge of this at the moment. It’s safe to say that their job is on the line. I have picks for nominees for this position as well, but, again, it would not be appropriate for me at this time to make those announcements.

Development Director – NYCO needs a new Development Director now. The “I Am City Opera” campaign is shameful. We need this position filled by someone who is connected to new media and understands how to harness its power, while simultaneously engaging in trustee and patron cultivation at a higher degree than is currently happening. The Director of Development needs to send a message that NYCO is the place to donate money if you want to support diverse, vital, and cutting edge opera for the people of New York City, while also instilling confidence that such funds will be put to good and efficient use.

Musical Director – We’ll have to see where George Manahan falls in all of this. As far as I’ve experienced, his musical directorship has been sufficient. But, I’m not comfortable with running a company that is sufficient. I want to run a company that comes through above and beyond expectations. Our music is our image. It’s what’s real beyond the marketing and the hype. If people come to our productions and are let down because the musical direction isn’t fierce and hot, then we have a serious problem. Really, here, we need someone who’s willing to take it up to the next level.

THE BOARD

Susan Baker should send some serious messages to The Board. They are partially to blame for the predicament we’re in. Having worked for the past five years in arts development, I understand what relations with the board can be like. I also know that there are board members, probably in all organizations, who end up causing more problems than good. We don’t need to cater to this kind of behavior. I believe in asking for what you want, showing why your organization deserves it, and demanding that board members fulfill their responsibilities. We’ll need help getting new money in, and fast. The Board needs to step up and save this institution. If there are members of the board that are obstructing progress, withholding financial commitments, or discouraging money and support from coming into NYCO for political or personal reasons, these members should be released from their responsibilities, and the Director(s), the CFO, the Development Director, and the remaining trustees need to jump into overdrive to fill any open positions.

Again, I know it isn’t my position to tend the board of directors, but a successful New York City Opera does depend on a successful board of directors.

CREATIVE ADVISORY BOARD

I would like to bring in a handful of talented, shrewd and brilliant thinkers/artists, from various disciplines, to generate ideas about the future of opera, which is the future of NYCO. We have a long short-list of nominees. Readers of Counter Critic have also made some great suggestions.

The Advisory Board is not charged with developing programming or creating opera work themselves (although this may be a great first step into bringing unfamiliar artists into opera), but would simply meet with the Director, the CFO, and possibly the board of directors to offer advice and ideas for developing opera into the future.

The Advisory Board could change each year, ensuring that a fresh group of ideas is circulating through the company. The idea is to continue to promote the sense of possibility that so much of opera excludes. There are so many things that opera can be and do, and most large opera companies are just falling short here: NYCO included.

Reaching out to leaders in other fields who are interested in opera, and who may be interested in shaping opera’s future, would also be a perfect way to draw in audiences that might not otherwise look to opera as entertainment and culture.

A HOME FOR NEW YORK CITY OPERA:

This is the most problematic part of any proposal for a New York City Opera recovery. City Opera has been back and forth about this since its inception by Mayor Laguardia, residing at what is now City Center from 1943 until it moved in 1966 to the State Theater, which was designed to serve George Balanchine, Lincoln Kirstien and the New York City Ballet.

In recent years, campaigns to build a new home for NYCO have been squashed, including an idea to move to a new space at the World Trade Center.

Now, a one hundred million dollar gift has been given to renovate the State Theater to the benefit of the City Opera, and the renovation process is already underway.

This ambivalence about where the home of New York City Opera should be located has long been part of the company’s identity. Moving forward, we need, at the very least, a direction to a definitive answer.

Residing at Lincoln Center comes with many benefits. Lincoln Center is regarded as the center of the classical arts not just in New York City, but in the United States at large. It draws millions of tourists a year. The grounds are historic and magnificent (excepting the erroneous elimination of the Juilliard plaza). Until recently, we have been largely successful while residing there.

But there are drawbacks as well. There are limitations to our seasons because of sharing the space with New York City Ballet. I’m sure this leads to additional capital overhead as a result of sharing storage. We will need our CFO to fully review the financial impact of this situation.

The State Theater, even with renovations, may still be bad for opera performance, necessitating amplification of singers’ voices. It also requires the City Opera to produce big productions at higher costs.

It also doesn’t make sense to continue to linger in a space, and co-reside with a company, that has been difficult and, at times, antithetical to the goals of our organization.

We will seriously discuss the feasibility of a permanent move away from Lincoln Center. But all the details need to be known before we can say either way if this would benefit the company in the long run.

I know it may seem like a radical idea to walk away from a $100 million renovation. But what is City Opera really getting for that money? Not much, from what I see. $100 million could have gone to shoring up NYCO’s finances. Instead, the organization is on the brink of financial apocalypse.

So, New York City Opera has two options before it: 1.) Make the best out of a bad situation and stick it out at Lincoln Center. Or 2.) Leave Lincoln Center for good, and find a path to a new home.

Even if we stay at Lincoln Center, it seems necessary to broaden our reach throughout the city of New York. We propose an unprecedented programmatic series of new, lean and innovative opera performances at partner organization around the city in an effort to make room for experimental and cutting edge opera works while introducing opera to new, younger and more diverse audiences.

Now, if we decide to move from Lincoln Center, in addition to moving forward with the ancillary partnerships for more experimental works, we propose this:

Move to BAM.

Why BAM? Because BAM has gone from being a marginal yet cutting edge arts organization, to being a major player in the cultural makeup of New York City. It has managed to build its organization and reputation while sustaining success as an innovative company tied to both American and international arts, as well as both local and international communities. BAM is a model for New York City Opera, especially in its commitment to the contemporary performance arts, including opera.

Now, I’m not saying we need to imitate BAM. But there are things we can learn from BAM.

The way we see it, BAM could outsource its opera programming to New York City Opera. They benefit from an enriched opera program, and we would benefit from BAM’s solid infrastructure, which has the capacity to produce/market our productions.

Furthermore, BAM may be expanding their seasons, which would leave room for us. Starting as early as fall 2009, we could find any gaps BAM may have in their schedule–there won’t be many–and slip in some of NYCO’s more edgy productions that may be ready to go at a moment’s notice. We’ll have to see what’s available. BAM’s spring season tends to have more gaps in it. Or, we could also think about having a season during their summer hiatus.

With this scenario, NYCO will necessarily have to drastically reduce large-scale opera output. But this may, in the end, save NYCO by reducing costs and getting back on good financial ground while still being able to produce opera on a large scale in New York City. We could stay at BAM, work with BAM, until we have stabilized as a company, at which time, a capital campaign can begin to either build or purchase a new and permanent home.

Again, before either scenario is enacted, a full fiscal survey must be done. Whichever proves to be a better course for New York City Opera will be the recommended course of action.

THE UNSUNG SINGER

Central to our effort to reclaim integrity for the New York City Opera, is the idea of utilizing the vast and evergreen talent pool of American singers. I trained with them. I studied with them. I know their stories. I know they’re out there.

New York City, while being a center for opera singing in America, also creates a fiercely competitive and often inhospitable climate for many singers to enter. There are too many trained and talented singers in this country not getting work, many of whom simply choose to end their careers because they do not believe there are opportunities for them in professional opera.

A former voice teacher of mine, who possesses one of the most incredible voices I have heard, moved to New York in the late nineties, spent about five years here getting no work, and no auditions, and then moved back to California to teach. What does that say about the institution of opera when there are so few opportunities for capable and gifted American singers in what is perceived to be the cosmopolitan center of American opera? Providing professional performance opportunities to American singers has always been at the heart of NYCO’s mission. We intend to take this even further.

We propose to reinvigorate our relationships with key conservatories in New York City and across the country, as well as focusing on a broad scouting campaign to seek out new talent and bring it to City Opera. Instead of, like The Met, having a tiered program of auditions that draw people from the outside inward, we will, like they do in baseball and football and other sports, send out scouts to conservatories across the country. Each school we visit can host an open audition for any singer who wishes to sing. We may even be able to set up open auditions at community centers or regional performance venues. This would send a great message that the New York City Opera is coming to the people, that we are interested in talent across the country and without pre-screening based on pedigree alone. There are unsung singers waiting for a chance to show what they can do. We should run out to meet them.

We should also be looking to things like MySpace, YouTube and Facebook. People are posting videos and recordings of themselves at unprecedented rates. Classical music can benefit from internet auto-promotion the same way the pop music industry has turned its attention to the media savvy artist in an effort to seek out talent. But we shouldn’t completely turn our backs on those without internet savvy. A two-pronged scouting outreach would ultimately be ideal.

We also intend to send clear message that we will not be operating a “star vehicle” system. If anything, New York City Opera should be giving as many singers as possible as many opportunities as possible to perform. City Opera has a history of launching careers. We don’t do this by focusing on a superstar who, if they withdraw from a production, sends the production’s appeal down the drain. Our guests will know that whatever night they go to the opera, they will hear some amazing singing from a wide array of talent.

THE SINGER’S BODY

One of Peter Brook’s chief concerns about opera is the lack of concern for the physical presence of the singer. I share this concern. But moving forward with a program of opera that places a greater emphasis on the physical presence of the singer’s body must be tempered by an acknowledgement that a beautiful voice, no matter what package it comes in, is a prime concern (and to some opera fans, the only concern) of opera, and that, in seeking performers who know how to use their bodies, we are not misunderstanding and redirecting the effort to create an atmosphere and implication that only “skinny” singers deserve a place on stage.

What is at stake is not skinniness, or telegenic prowess, but a sensual and theatrical connection between a singer and their body. Peter Brook thought this non-concern with how singers used their bodies got in the way of creating theater. And it does. We want to push all of our singers to use their total body in performance. If we can give singers diction and vocal coaching, we can, by all means, give them classes in physical improv, dance, Alexander technique, yoga, whatever: anything to send a message that physical connection does matter on-stage, and we can expect singers to improve here, and to care about their bodies.

STAGIONE V REPERTORY

We’re bringing this up because Gerard Mortier had already proposed a stagione system for the production season. It would be quite a departure for New York City Opera to go through with this proposal, but there are benefits to it.

A stagione system would cut costs by reducing the amount of labor necessary to handle several sets in any given period. This kind of system also makes each engagement a kind of “limited-time event” that people are drawn to be part of. This system works wonderfully at BAM.

The drawbacks are, naturally, more dark nights, since singers need breaks. And City Opera guests won’t interact with the opera house as much and in as short of a period as they would during a repertory season.

If we are to move to BAM, obviously we would have to revert to a stagione system, since we would be producing so few shows. Keep in mind, we will also have a series of fierce, ancillary, smaller-scale productions in partner venues around the city.

If we are to stay at Lincoln Center, then we have the option of going back to a repertory system.

But we propose to stick with the stagione system.

We would skirt the issue of dark night by double-casting operas. With our newly reinvigorated program for American singers, we will have a wealth of talent to choose from. No matter which cast a City Opera guest sees, they will be assured to hear some great singing. This is opera for the people, and we intend to insist on maintaining democratic ideals at all levels of operation.

We could also put in place a hybrid format. Maybe run two shows at a time in rep. But I just don’t see NYCO being able to produce ten or twelve shows a season based on what their finances sound like.

PROGRAMMING

First, all programming is subject to the pending fiscal survey of the organization. Not having that information, we are proposing programming that is adaptable to a variety of scenarios.

Secondly, we must initiate a new era of lean, scaled-back, yet still fully-staged opera productions. The giant set is a dead-end path. It is unnecessary, cumbersome, and far more often than not, it is a major let down. So why try to keep up with the Gelbs when we don’t need to?

Any new productions must have a tighter budget, and should insist that the artists brought in to create these productions are using their full talent and ingenuity to create the best theater experience with modest means, instead of substituting exorbitant budgets for creative ideas. This can be done, and it can be done well. I have seen individual dance-theater artists create entire universes on stage with little more than an iPod, some creative lighting, and the genius of their own presence. If our underfunded downtown performing artists can do this, then the City Opera can find artists–who even at a reduced rate will still be making far more than any downtown dance-theater artist could ever realistically hope–who can make due with lean budgets. Let’s use the economic downturn as a chance to promote creative excellence among our artists, producers and directors.

Now, New York City Opera is often credited for its push to promote new operas by American composers. And while they have probably done more than most American opera companies, when looked at overall, our assessment is that New York City Opera could be doing a lot more on this front.

In its history, NYCO has premiered 28 American operas. Now, that may sound like a lot, but it also means that in sixty-five years of producing opera, they have only produced a new American opera every other year. So, for approximately every 20 operas that NYCO produces, only one of them is a new opera.

This has to change. We need to start commissioning new operas now. We need to find the composers who are interested in writing new opera. I do volunteer myself as one of them, but I understand that my compositional goals may have to be put on hold while I lead the NYCO into fairer waters. I am prepared to make that sacrifice.

We also need to find opera groups and theater and dance ensembles who are interested in forging new territory in opera. This does happen, it is happening, and New York City Opera must seek out these artists and begin to promote them by bringing them under our umbrella. This is not only important to keep opera fresh and exciting, but it will also position New York City Opera, specifically, to attract audiences that are hungry for intellectually rigorous and artistically adventurous work; in other words, audiences that even Mr. Gelb is not attracting.

However, there should also be a concerted effort to keep opera’s history, and the classic operas enjoyed by audiences across the board, a consistent and faithful presence in the opera house. We are working in the tradition of classical opera, and we intend to honor those roots. So we are keeping classic operas, maybe even in traditional settings, a regular part of the repertoire.

There also needs to be a more innovative curatorial approach to how productions are chosen. Too often the City Opera schedule–and even the schedule at The Met–looks like a random mish-mosh of operas pulled out of the vault. A meticulously curated season or series would give New York City Opera a fresh identity, and set it apart from other major opera organizations.

To satisfy each of these desires–and again, our ability to successfully realize any and all depends on the total fiscal capabilities of the institution–we are proposing a three-track structure for opera programming:

Tracks of New York City Opera Programming:

Contemporary opera – Contemporary opera breaks down into two categories:
o Fully-staged productions of newly commissioned operas. There should be no less than two of these per year (depending on full scope of season). We need to start commissioning new operas now. Operas take a while to write. However, I’m sure there are composers out there with half- or completely finished works just resting inside the seat of a piano bench. We can review the VOX program and see what pieces really worked, and give them a chance. Maybe there’s something there we can already bring up. But generally, there needs to be a better, more well organized and earnest effort to scout new composers around the country. And the curatorial choices, frankly need to raise their taste level, and find some really rigorous, challenging and delightful music. You can get all of that at once.

On a side note, we’re looking into the possibility of poaching Rufus Wainwright’s opera, which recently fell through at The Met. Perhaps we can import it after it premieres this summer at the Manchester International Festival. I would consider this a coup, and a sign that we intend to take programmatic risks that The Met, even under Mr. Gelb, is not willing to take.

o Experimental opera staged in smaller theaters throughout the city. We can partner with places like The Kitchen, Dance Theater Workshop, Les Poisson Rouge, New York Theater Workshop, The Abrons Arts Center, P.S.122, The Stone, The Zipper Factory, Galapagos, Monkey Town, The Public Theater. There are literally dozens of performing arts institutions that would be willing to partner in new opera productions if they are forward-looking and in-tune with contemporary ideas and aesthetics. This would allow NYCO to play a greater role in the development of new opera while alleviating the risk inherent in mounting large-scale productions of avant-garde works. Let’s put our brand on more cutting edge projects. And should they develop beyond the scope of smaller theaters, then we can bring them up to the big stage.

Currently, NYCO operates, at I would assume a low cost, the VOX program, which started in 1999 as a showcase for new American operas. In its ten year history, only three operas presented at VOX have matriculated onto the stage at NYCO, and two of those were by the same composer. We propose folding VOX into the new contemporary opera initiative, while still maintaining a broad range of the kinds of new opera it has been producing, although maybe with fewer works that simply sound like musical theater.

Furthermore, the series occurs only two days out of the entire year. Our belief is that NYCO’s commitment to new opera should be a 365-day commitment. That’s what we’re bringing.

Standard Reperoire – We will keep productions we already have that work well, and scrap anything that doesn’t. We want NYCO guests to know they can trust us to present classic works, while broadening our overall programming. But it would be a false step to completely disregard the needs of the more conservative operagoer. Also, true opera freaks will see multiple productions of an opera if they love the opera. So we shouldn’t be afraid to tread on The Met’s territory.

Curated Season/Series – Our seasons, encompassing both classic and new operas, can be shaped to present clear perspective about opera; what it was, how it’s been written, how it’s practiced, where it’s going. This will allow us to vary our repertoire, and shape our seasons in innovative ways.

If a completely curated season becomes impractical, we can at least devise curated series that would accompany the classic and contemporary opera tracks.

Our website has received some suggestions regarding this idea:

o A season of Strauss. It would be brilliant to exhibit the transformation of Ricard Strauss’ ideas as a composer of opera, as his musical development changed from wildly atonal to exotically but traditionally romantic.

o Overlooked Gems of Bel Canto. I’m not the biggest fan of Bel Canto, but there are countless opera fans who can’t get enough and are always lamenting the absence of great Bel Canto productions. There’s no reason we can’t give them what they want, and also keep the productions innovative and fresh.

Brainstorm of New Rep: Just for fun, we also wanted to throw out some ideas developed during a brainstorm, as a way to, maybe, show what five young people in a room can come up with in ten minutes that somehow, with all the time and money the “professionals” of operas have, can’t seem to think of:
• Barber: NYCO is doing really great with Barber. Let’s see if we can get fully-staged productions of all three of his operas.
• Stage smaller works (chamber operas) or works that are less traditionally considered opera, like Peter Maxwell Davies’ “8 Songs for a Mad King.” We have a singer, Peter Tantsits, who’s been performing this well in an inventively staged production throughout New York City.
• Beethoven’s Fidelio. Let’s get a really solid production of Fidelio. It’s Beethoven’s only opera. It has some amazing music. Getting this one right could draw a big crowd.
• Choral works that leave room for creative staging. In line with what Mark Morris is already doing (and what he will keep doing under my directorship), we could enlist choreographers/dance-theater/theater artists to stage works like Mahler’s 8th Symphony, Ein Deutsches Requiem, Les Noces. From our new roster of singers, I’m sure we can come up with a sub-ensemble of singers who can dance as well. These productions should push for more complete integration between the singers and dancers. I find that–now the singers sing while the dancers dance–division annoying and unnecessary. Mark Morris does a pretty good job, but, I have seen work, and been part of work that really pushes this relationship even further.
• Let’s get a Ring Cycle going. If we can introduce one new episode of The Ring each year, by 2013 (assuming we get something up by spring 2010), NYCO could have its own box set. And yes, we should film them and sell them.

Touring
New York City Opera has a modest history of touring, including a tour to Japan as recent as 2005. This could be revived.

NYCO should also be looking into the future. China and India are set to be leading importers and exporters of art, culture and performance. If we can revamp our touring capabilities, we can start sending NYCO productions oversees, increasing revenue and world-wide visibility previously unknown to this-or-any American opera company. We’re serious here.

On the home-front, regional tours, while bringing in revenue, could also expose hosts of American opera lovers and potential donors to our organization. We have the advantage of being from New York, and having “New York City” in our name. We should take advantage of our geographical cache and let people across the country know what opera in New York City is really about.

Also, if mounting full-scale tours isn’t possible, perhaps we can adopt a Broadway model of previewing new productions out of town before premiering them on the big stage. We could develop a network of regional theaters that would run our shows before they get to New York City. Building steam is a great way to increase buzz, generate press, and also find out what is wrong with a show before it crashes and burns on a blind landing in the State Theater. This would also increase the visibility of NYCO within our surrounding areas, making it a more likely destination for opera-going tourists.

Opera on Film
This is perhaps the most overlooked facets of opera, in terms of how New York City Opera presents opera to New Yorkers. It is also one of the easier problems to remedy.

We would by no means suggest that NYCO should attempt to replicate Peter Gelb’s HD simulcast program, which has been a major success, and is definitely good for opera overall.

But what NYCO could do, is present, in tandem with it’s live and on-stage programming, a specially curated series of opera on film at an/or several art house cinemas throughout the city; i.e. Film Forum, The Walter Reader, IFC, BAM, The Angelika, or The Sunshine.

Films could include operas that have been adapted into cinematic works, actual and possibly archival footage of staged NYCO productions that are no longer circulating in the repertory (or if they are, screening them on film before the production premieres would be a great way to generate interest), and also other kinds of films/video works that cross over into opera’s territory, like Matthew Barney’s “Cremaster 5,” or the much overlooked R Kelly urban opera masterpiece, “Trapped In The Closet.” Seriously.

If this is fiercely curated, and marketed well, this could bring opera, and New York City Opera, into new cultural circles, and into a more casual and popular presence with New Yorkers.

MEDIA FRONT

New York City Opera isn’t completely failing on the new media front, but, as it stands, it is not functioning at a competitive capacity.

We should be filming and selling our productions. I don’t have numbers on this, but from what I can tell, the Met has this market cornered. Let’s not be afraid to step into the game.

The NYCO blog should be an essential part of how New York City Opera communicates to the community. The current blog has not published a new post since late November. In a time as uncertain as this, it is imperative that this organization communicate with the outside every step of the way. Our culture has rapidly developed to a place where audiences demand information at a faster speed than ever before. The lack of information coming out of the New York City Opera right now is disconcerting, and will certainly hinder any efforts to build public, patron and trustee confidence, which in turn effects fund raising capabilities and the overall appeal of the organization.

In addition to a dearth of blog posts–and please keep in mind, you are all here right now because of a blog–there are almost no comments on any of the blog posts that are even on NYCO’s website. This must change. We must encourage the NYCO audience to come to the website daily to interact with the company. It is a law of the internet: the more you put out, the more you bring in.

As Director of the New York City Opera, I plan to maintain a daily blog in an effort to achieve this level of interactivity and transparency. I will let our audience know, every step of the way, our progress toward recovery. It gives people comfort to feel that they are connecting to a real person. Reading a form letter from the Chair of the Board can only do so much. People want to hear a real voice, an informal voice; it makes them feel recognized.

The website also needs to be redesigned, as we have mentioned. But a new identity and look can only do so much on its own. The website needs to be maintained competently and be kept up-to-speed. Right now, if you go to the “history” page of NYCO’s website, you’ll find that it ends with the designation of Gerard Mortier as General Director, with no mention of his parting. This is embarrassing. This does not inspire confidence. This is not a way to run a major arts organization.

We also need to amp up podcast initiatives. Get more than just conversations with NYCO creatives, but also release arias, overtures, video podcasts of productions and behind the scenes footage of new productions in the works. The internet is allowing audiences to own experiences more than ever by participating in them on multiple platforms.

And just generally, NYCO needs to be more savvy about how it’s using these technologies. Yes, they have a Facebook page and a YouTube profile, but how are these being used? And what are they cultivating? It’s one thing to start a Facebook page; it’s quite another to use it to interact with a real audience that feels part of the experience of your organization. The Met is succeeding here where we are not. This is the easiest and most cost effective problem to remedy right now.

SUSTAINABILITY

Finally, no way forward is possible without considering ways that New York City Opera can be environmentally sustainable. We propose coming up with plans that both reduce cost and protect the environment. This would also call for an immediate survey of NYCO’s carbon footprint and overall environmental impact.

Doing away with free nightly programs in favor of a smaller run of a more substantial paid program that functions doubly as a souvenir, is a possibility. This model works in Europe.

Also, encouraging patrons and guests to interact with NYCO digitally will allow us to initiate more web and email-based communications. While there are merits to certain publications that can actually be held in one’s hands–like a seasonal brochure–there are probably ways we can reduce costs through a reduction in paper marketing and fund raising.

FINALE

We have developed this proposal, this path to recovery for the New York City Opera, with hard and critical thinking, and a sincere desire to see this company succeed. All of us care about the future of opera. All of us care about the future of New York City Opera.

I offer myself as a leader in that effort. I do not intend to run New York City Opera alone. After all, it is an opera that belongs to the people of this city; to everyone in this room.

No progress made will be valid without the involvement of the people. It is our opera. It was founded for us, for the people of New York City.

Well, we are New York City.

And we are New York City Opera.

BACK TO CAMPAIGN HEADQUARTERS