I recently went to the San Francisco Symphony for the first time for a performance of Beethoven’s 4th Symphony.  Before I can comment on the music, I have to address the matter of the conductor, San Francisco’s much-beloved Michael Tilson Thomas.  At the risk of sounding like a jaded old queen (an accusation that’s been leveled more than once), I didn’t like this guy one bit.

 I know, I know — he’s adored by one and all around here.  But here’s my gripe:  He walked out on stage to the usual round of applause, then turned to make what I assumed would be a few prefatory comments.  To my utter astonishment, he yammered on for twenty minutes!!!  Even worse, he took us through parts of the symphony, explaining the composer’s “intentions” (as though he knew Beethoven personally). 

I don’t know about you, but I don’t like to be told how to think.  If I’m viewing an abstract painting, I want to respond to it in my own way, without having my impressions clouded with some preconceived notion as to what the painting is “about.”  The same goes for music, particularly if it’s such a well-known piece as Beethoven’s Fourth.  For me, good music should evoke memories from my own life, or perhaps inspire images of one sort or another — but I don’t want to be told what those images should be.  Who does this Thomas guy take us for?  Third graders?!

But my criticisms don’t stop there, because I took issue with Thomas’s conducting as well.  Overall, I just didn’t find him believable as a conductor.  A quick read of his bio reveals that Thomas’s parents were Vaudevillians of some sort.  Well, the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree, because that’s what his performance looked like — a Vaudeville act.  He pranced around daintily on the stage, looking for all the world like he was aping for some silly ballet spoof.   I understand there’s a bit of acting involved with conducting a symphony; but this wasn’t showmanship, it was Romper Room. 

Here’s my point of reference.  Let’s consider a  ”Great Conductor,”  like William Christie, for example.  I’ve seen Christie numerous times, and he seems to actually extract the music from the instruments, and he does it with great dignity and poise.  And lest you think I’m a stodgy old Anglophile, my all-time favorite conductor is Seiji Ozawa, who is anything but “restrained” in his conducting mannerisms.  But Ozawa’s technique positively exudes authority — there’s no mistaking that he’s a serious musical scholar.    Contrast that with Thomas’s antics, in which he looks like he’s auditioning for a children’s ballet gig.  The part of Tinkerbell, perhaps.  I also read that he led some sort of children’s program at Tanglewood years ago, which is easy to believe — to me, his “performance” was more geared towards kids than adults. 

Am I in a bad mood as I write this?  Not at all.  But I was during much of the performance, thanks to the ridiculousness of Mr. Thomas.  There was, however, much I liked about the symphony itself, and there’s a simple solution to my crabbiness:  At future performances, I’ll make sure to go when there’s a guest conductor.  Judging from the SF Symphony calendar, that covers close to three-quarters of their performances.  I can see why.

Enough grumping.  Here’s what I liked about the performance.  1) The musicians.  They were fantastic, and pulled off the symphony flawlessly.  One of their double-bass players, of all things, struck me as being particularly talented.   Likewise for their first violinist.  2)  The venue.  If you haven’t seen a performance in this space, you should.  The interior is aesthetically strking, particularly in the performance hall itself.  There’s a certain California modernity to it, but with an appropriate nod to older music venue traditions.    The common and lounge areas are appealing too, and the bar offers a nice view of the opera house across the street.  When you arrive, be sure to check out the Henry Moore sculpture outside.    3)  The people watching.  Always fun at the symphony or opera, this venue didn’t disappoint:  There was a wonderful range of costumes, with SF-ers all decked out in their full regalia.  We met some fun people at the bar during the intermission, and even ran into a friend I hadn’t seen in awhile. 

Afterwards, we had dinner at Home, a thoroughly good restaurant near the intersection of Church and Market.  This isn’t San Francisco’s finest dining experience, but it’s not bad, and the “scene” is always great.  What’s more, you don’t have to refinance your home to eat here.   I recommend avoiding the gimmicky appetizers and sticking to the entrees and desserts.  More of a “lively night out” than a romantic dining spot, it’s worth a gander if you’re in the area.  

Posted on January 15th, 2008 by Thomas
Filed under: Restaurants, San Francisco, Symphony