Evening star., 1940-02-14
Letters to the Editor
Benefit Performance Suggested
For National Symphony Orchestra


For National Symphony Orchestra
To the Editor Of The Star:
As . former member of the National
Symphony Orchestra both before and
after DR.. Kinder was chosen director,
and as an acquaintance Of several mem-
bers Of the board, I feel qualified to dis
cuss its problems. With some degree Of
accuracy may point to basic troubles
and focus attention on the fundamental
reasons why such an impasse as the
present one has occurred.
Most of the letters and articles have
read contained disparaging remarks
about our union. These are completely
unjustified, because the union is quietly
doing its Job Of attempting to arrange q
contract. the conditions of which, con-
corning base pay, period Of employment.
number Of services. etc., have been de-
termined through the vote Of the or
chestra players themselves. The unions
function is only to see that certain
minima are adhered to, and II cannot
ethically change the contract without
the consent Of the players. It can, how.
ever, suggest alternatives, and some-
times does.
1nasmuch as the raising of funds for
such an institution as the National Sym
phony Orchestra is not done on an emo-
tional basis, but is strictly business, the
Board Of Directors and the management
know accurately and in advance the
amount Of money they may expect to
raise, and whether or not they can get
the $27 900 additional asked by the play
ers for next season. In this instance I
think the desire is there but the money
supply is not sufficiently elastic. The
orchestra management must be realistic.
But the men also must live, and this
requires money. It is all very well to
say that these men are entitled to live
in homes Of their own and hold up their
heads IN the sun with the rest; but 1t
is utterly naive to say that they can do
that on their present income. might
point out that these men do not even
know If they are going to have their
little income (about $1,000 a year, from
one season to the next because the con-
tracts are for year and 1t makes no
difference how long they have been in
the orchestra or how capable they are
II for some reason another new face
is needed. the ak has fallen many q
time before, and Is poised again.
It is evidently the public belief that
the symphonist has q great many out
side engagements bringing In extra
money, but this is true only In . few
cases. And the myth that he teaches
q great many pupils is absurd. Actually,
about the only means he has of in
creasing his income is to 60 into dance
work, radio, movietone, and such; but
the really flne artist instinctively rebels
against this procedure. This prostitu-
ton Of life work is too great . sacrifice
for most Of them. But let's see what Is
to be done.
Government subsidy is not only . re-
mote possibility but would probably in
dicate final gasp. The public, accord
ing to business, has 1oosened its heart
and pocketbook to the limit. Maybe .
few thousand dollars more might be oh.
tained, but 1t would be long time be-
fore the orchestra musician could COM
mand an annual income Of even $500.
It would seem, then, that he must either
seek musical employment elsewhere in
the country or stay on here working as
usual and on the side preparing himself
for other employment and relegating
music to the sidelines.
Isn't there something else that may
be done2 Perhaps. I believe that the
eFchsstrs could and would 2lay . coupls