Florian Riem catches up with Deborah Borda at the recent International Conducting Competition Rotterdam
Deborah Borda has pushed the artistic, commercial and technological boundaries of what an arts organisation can be in the 21st century. As President and CEO of the New York Philharmonic (NY Phil), she revitalised the institution, working with leadership both at the orchestra and at Lincoln Center to transform David Geffen Hall. She also deepened community connections through initiatives such as NY Phil Bandwagon during the Covid-19 pandemic, and appointed Gustavo Dudamel as the orchestra’s next Music and Artistic Director.
Throughout her career, Borda has reshaped how arts organisations serve their communities through her leadership of ensembles including the Saint Paul Chamber Orchestra and the Detroit Symphony Orchestra. Her tenure at the Los Angeles Philharmonic was especially transformative, where she oversaw major projects such as the construction of Walt Disney Concert Hall, the renovation of the Hollywood Bowl, and the creation of Youth Orchestra Los Angeles (YOLA), now a model of community engagement.
You have served on the jury of a number of major competitions, most recently spending two weeks in the Netherlands as Chair of the jury at the International Conducting Competition Rotterdam. What stood out to you about this competition?
It’s called a competition because, in the end, you select a winner, or in our case, winners. At the Conducting Competition in Rotterdam, both winners had excellent, if very different skills. What struck me most was the scope of the competition. It isn’t simply a star turn, but a programme designed to develop young artists over more than a year. They are taken to Vienna and London, introduced to key people, and given opportunities that make it stand in a different league. I think the actual experience for the conductors is almost the equivalent of getting a master’s degree.
The programme was demanding. How did the finalists cope?
In one week they conducted five concerts, each with three rehearsals and wildly different programmes – something even a senior conductor in the United States would rarely do. Yes, they had time to prepare, but five different programmes in a week is a true marathon: not just physically exhausting, but intellectually and artistically demanding.
It was also a marathon for the core jury!
The contestants were probably unaware, but there were five different juries. The challenge was to integrate and meld the incoming specialty juries with the core jury. There were five specialist groups for each category: people like Dame Jane Glover and Iván Fischer came for Baroque music, composers like Brett Dean, Eric Whitacre and Cathy Milliken came for the contemporary round, Sarah Hicks (a terrific conductor who has a pops specialty) came for the pops concert in the park, and Vasily Petrenko and Han-Na Chang came for the finals with the Rotterdam Philharmonic. It was fascinating to have two juries working together, and they all did very well.
If you were on the core jury, you worked for ten days straight. It was exhausting, but it was also a wonderful learning experience.
How does it compare with the other competitions you judge?
The other competition where I serve on the jury is the Mahler Conducting Competition in Bamberg, which is also excellent. It’s very different, although it is held over a significant period of time. It has very different operating rules. In Rotterdam, we didn’t discuss the conductors until after we voted; in Bamberg, we discussed as we went. Here, the repertoire is more spread out, even though at the Mahler they also do classical and contemporary repertoire. And then, of course, there is
a big Mahler symphony, which is quite a challenge for most young conductors.
Looking at the history of the Mahler Competition and its laureates, there are a lot of winners who have made it to the top ranks, including Gustavo Dudamel.
I wasn’t on the jury in 2004, but Esa-Pekka Salonen was keeping me in touch. I was in Los Angeles, producing a Hollywood Bowl Extravaganza, when he first told me about this remarkable young guy. At the end, Dudamel almost didn’t win. There were certain people on the jury – I won’t say who they are – who were just opposed. It was ridiculous. At any rate, the minute he won, Esa-Pekka called me up and said, “Hey, are you willing to take a risk? I think we should have
this young guy. He barely speaks English, he doesn’t speak
a word of German, but it was the best damn Mahler Five
I’ve ever heard!” I booked him the next day. He came to LA, we had two dates at the Hollywood Bowl, and it was love at first sight.
You were also on the jury of La Maestra.
Yes, I also went to La Maestra in Paris, which was a somewhat old-fashioned competition, except that it was all women. I do not believe in all women competitions. We have to have the best people, period. On the other hand, I’m glad that La Maestra was held, because it brought people’s attention to a problem that really matters.
In Rotterdam, there were no women in the finals.
Indeed, I could not believe that it was all men. There are so many gifted women, so many young women conductors – I did not understand that. The directors felt badly about it, and somehow it was simply the way it had worked out, but I realise we must use our positions to make sure we have more gender balance in future. This is an ongoing problem, a problem that is changing and evolving. Not only me, but also the men on the jury felt that way. But in any case, I don’t think it will happen again.
What do you think is the reason for this outcome?
It’s hard to give you a reason aside from systemic barriers, including sexism, but you should remember that one of the difficulties for young conductors is that unlike a pianist, who can always get a piano, and unlike a violinist, who always carries their instrument along, a conductor always needs an orchestra to practice on. I was the first woman to run one of the big five orchestras in the US, and that wasn’t until 1991. We did not set quotas at the New York Philharmonic, but we were determined to ensure gender diversity.
Did you face discrimination yourself at the time?
I had been Deputy Director of the San Francisco Symphony for almost nine years, so I had a lot of experience. From San Francisco, I went to be President and CEO of the Saint Paul Chamber Orchestra, and from there, President and CEO of the Detroit Symphony. But then, I was offered the Pittsburgh Symphony, which is a wonderful orchestra as well. We had agreed on a contract, the orchestra committee wanted me and the board wanted me – all I needed was the blessing of the Music Director, Lorin Maazel. I was flown to London and went to meet him for tea at the River Room of the Savoy Hotel. I waited for two hours, but he never showed up. So I called the chairman, and I could tell immediately that something wasn’t right. Still, he told me to see Maazel at an orchestra rehearsal the next day. I went and approached Maazel during a break, but he completely ignored me. Only when I insisted, he offered to see me after the rehearsal. He took me to his dressing room, put his feet on the desk right in front of my face, took out a cigar box and said: “Would you care for a cigar?” I said: “Thank you, but I don’t smoke.” He sighed and went on: “Alright, tell me your brilliant life story!” I replied, “Well, it’s not brilliant, but here is the story.” He listened to me for about four minutes, then stood up and said: “You are going to have a magnificently successful career. Thank you very much. Goodbye.”
I went back to my hotel, called the chairman and said: ”I don’t think this is going to work…” It was a very painful moment. I share this story because although it was deeply hurtful, it made me even more determined. And before long, I became Executive Director at the New York Philharmonic.
That was in 1990. Looking back, how have orchestras in the US changed over the past 35 years?
They are much more innovative and adventurous than they used to be, especially the “Big Ten” US orchestras, but I think the most profound changes have taken place in finance and in society. I remember my parents having a Thursday night subscription for the New York Philharmonic. There were several series, meaning that the orchestra had about 80 per cent of their tickets already sold in advance. The security of subscription sales gave orchestras more financial and programming flexibility. But this capital has completely evaporated over the past decades, and now you have to consider your programmes differently, because you have to sell a lot more single tickets.
Social media has had a major impact on how people purchase tickets and, in fact, plan their lives. This obviously has challenging aspects, both positive and negative. For example, you can now benefit from dynamic pricing: you can raise ticket prices for Martha Argerich or Yo-Yo Ma, and you can take prices down to fill the house for a contemporary music performance.
We used to take out big ads in The New York Times every week. Today, it´s all about social media, about consumer-friendly websites and about being creative in discovering new pockets of consumer interest.
In addition to all of this, our fixed costs have escalated. Twenty years ago, you could cover up to 70 per cent of your annual budget through ticket sales. Today, even the healthiest orchestras cover less than 40 per cent of their overall budget on their own. The other 60 per cent has to be raised through fundraising and other revenue. The fixed costs of an orchestra are tremendous: full-time salaries for 106 musicians, pension plans, healthcare. Some of these costs can rise by as much as 20 per cent in a single year, so it takes a lot of effort to generate the additional funding needed to keep an organisation healthy. Still, it can be done.
Has the comeback after Covid been harder for American orchestras, given that their European counterparts could rely on public funding? And has this led to more US orchestras being cut entirely?
We still have hundreds of orchestras, and none of the top fifty have gone out of business. Some smaller locations have, yes, but it has always been challenging to run an orchestra in the US. We never had government support anyway, so we’re used to it. But sooner or later, I think the great challenge will come for the Europeans when populist politicians erode government support for culture!
There are a lot of things you can say about Americans, but one positive aspect of American culture is generosity – it’s in our DNA. When the first settlers came to North America, when the waves of immigrants came, there were no public services, so they funded hospitals, libraries and orchestras themselves. The first orchestra in the United States, the Handel and Haydn Society, was founded in Boston in 1815. The New York Philharmonic, founded in 1842, is now 183 years old – that’s the same age as the Vienna Philharmonic. We gave to these orchestras, the same way as we give to hospitals. It’s a beautiful thing about Americans: they are generous. Thank goodness – we need it!
Does this mean that the current geopolitical situation will hurt American orchestras less than it will in Europe?
Let me give you an example. The LA Philharmonic today has a budget of around US$130 million. They receive an annual grant from the federal government of about US$100,000 to US$150,000. It simply does
not matter.
Of course, it’s a different issue for local governments. For example, the city of Los Angeles supported YOLA (Youth Orchestra
Los Angeles).
But back to Europe: if you look at what’s happening in Berlin – the huge cultural funding cuts – I believe that sadly this will become more of a reality for European orchestras in the future.
The Covid years were a particularly challenging, but also very successful, time for you…
Helping to guide the New York Philharmonic through Covid and keep paying them was tough, especially in New York, which was the epicentre of the pandemic in the United States. But I knew at the very beginning that such a horrible situation would also bring opportunities. We decided that we would take advantage of the crisis and accelerate our construction project for David Geffen Hall. I worked with the board, the orchestra’s Chairman and the Chairman and President of Lincoln Center to raise US$450 million – in one year. You could not meet in person, so we did most of it on Zoom and designed a “virtual” tour of the hall. People were at home with more time on their hands, so they would agree to talk to us, especially people
who would not normally agree to meet us. It
was totally different from everything we were used to, and it was incredibly challenging, but
it worked, and we now have an amazing
concert hall.
I look back at this period as a final steep climb in my career, which has been exciting and
deeply fulfilling.
