# Klinghoffer HD is canceled. Gelb makes deal with ADL.



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

“I’m convinced that the opera is not anti-Semitic,” said the Met’s General Manager, Peter Gelb. “But I’ve also become convinced that there is genuine concern in the international Jewish community that the live transmission of /The Death of Klinghoffer/ would be inappropriate at this time of rising anti-Semitism, particularly in Europe.” The final decision was made after a series of discussions between Mr. Gelb and Abraham Foxman, National Director of the Anti-Defamation League, representing the wishes of the Klinghoffer daughters."

Hmmm! Censorship rears its ugly head.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

John Adams in 2008: "I can't check in at the airport now without my ID being taken and being grilled. You know, I'm on a homeland security list, probably because of having written The Death of Klinghoffer, so I'm perfectly aware that I, like many artists and many thoughtful people in the country, am being followed."

http://www.theguardian.com/music/2008/oct/19/classicalmusicandopera-usnationalsecurity

"Perhaps, Herr Adams, you should be a bit more cautious about what you write, würden Sie nicht auch sagen?"


----------



## Jobis (Jun 13, 2013)

Is it really so bad that this opera was cancelled? I can perfectly well understand why the family would not want it performed, less so how it might affect the Jewish community. At worst it might upset his daughters; I would not want an opera written about my father's death, it would be grossly insensitive, but certainly it can't be said to incite hatred.


----------



## sharik (Jan 23, 2013)

KenOC said:


> http://www.theguardian.com/music/2008/oct/19/classicalmusicandopera-usnationalsecurity


well now the USA has there own Shostakovitch.


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

This Foxman (what an appropriate name!) obviously does not realize that such actions are only going to cause more and more resentment.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

Jobis said:


> Is it really so bad that this opera was cancelled? I can perfectly well understand why the family would not want it performed, less so how it might affect the Jewish community. At worst it might upset his daughters; I would not want an opera written about my father's death, it would be grossly insensitive, but certainly it can't be said to incite hatred.


If it would be only about that family and their feelings, probably nothing would be cancelled. It's all political and this aspect is just attempt to give the "offended" side a more human face.

Just goes to show that this hyped freedom of our age is mere illusion - do something that some influental party might dislike, and you'll see it shattered. We didn't go that far from times of censorship distorting Verdi's operas, at all.


----------



## mountmccabe (May 1, 2013)

Peter Gelb, last September.



> But as an arts institution, the Met is not the appropriate vehicle for waging nightly battles against the social injustices of the world.


I think the Met was right to go forward with _Eugene Onegin_, I really wish they were still going to go forward with the HD and radio broadcasts of _The Death of Klinhoffer_ and can only hope the in-house performances still happen.


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

mountmccabe said:


> Peter Gelb, last September.
> 
> I think the Met was right to go forward with _Eugene Onegin_, I really wish they were still going to go forward with the HD and radio broadcasts of _The Death of Klinhoffer_ and can only hope the in-house performances still happen.


I agree with you. I have just run to get my tickets which I suspect now will be sold-out performances.


----------



## mountmccabe (May 1, 2013)

I would be hesitant to purchase tickets in response to this, in part because I don't want to reward the Met for doing this... but if I were not leaving NYC I might well be buying tickets anyway because _Klinghoffer_ was on my can't miss list. I was really happy that four of the five operas I most wanted to see at the Met were included in the HD season; now we're down to 3.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Freedom of artistic expression. Its ultimate test is allowing views that one finds contrary to one's own, no matter how offensive they may be. 

The questions with censorship are always where does one draw the line and who does the drawing?

I say, let it be. You don't like it, nobody's forcing you to watch it.

This is the ultimate test of freedom of artistic expression. It's called tolerance of opposing views.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Never mind! From what I've heard of Adam's music the world will not be culturally poorer.


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

hpowders said:


> Freedom of artistic expression. Its ultimate test is allowing views that one finds contrary to one's own, no matter how offensive they may be.
> 
> The questions with censorship are always where does one draw the line and who does the drawing?
> 
> ...


Ideally it is the artist himself that should do the drawing - what is acceptable and what is not, what is beatiful and artistic even if it goes against the conventions and what has purely shock value and is made only to shock and disgust the audience. Some of the more controversial examples of modern art would not be possible in earlier times not because they would have been censored, but because it would not cross the artist's mind to create something that would be only repulsive and shocking. Nowadays all such internal limits are encouraged to be broken down.


----------



## Bellinilover (Jul 24, 2013)

I'm confused as to why they're cancelling only the radio/HD broadcast but still allowing the in-house performances. If the opera is that offensive (and I'd never even heard of it until this year, so I don't know), then why not just cancel it altogether? Or do they think that would be too drastic? It does seem like nothing more than an appearances-over-substance type of gesture.


----------



## peterb (Mar 7, 2014)

This is really a cowardly decision. To be clear, I think that _The Death of Klinghoffer_ is, from a political point of view, pretty juvenile. I personally don't want to sit through it. But this whole "We'll stage the opera, but not broadcast it" is the worst of all possible decisions. Stage and broadcast the opera, and the people who don't like it can go jump in a lake. That's fine. _Don't_ stage and broadcast the opera, because you think there are ethical problems with it. That's fine too. But "We're going to try to have our cake and eat it too by staging it but not broadcasting it" is just stupid.


----------



## amfortas (Jun 15, 2011)

sharik said:


> well now the USA has there own Shostakovitch.


Because the two situations are exactly the same.


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

KenOC said:


> "Perhaps, Herr Adams, you should be a bit more cautious about what you write, würden Sie nicht auch sagen?"


are there taboo subjects for opera, then? Maybe there should be a list, so we all know what not to attend, just in case it gets used against us somewhere down the line...


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Of course not. Anything goes. If they allow Salome, Klinghoffer will be mild in comparison.

I can't wait to see it. All appointments cancelled so I can watch. I will revel in the noble principle of artistic freedom of expression.


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

peterb said:


> This is really a cowardly decision. To be clear, I think that _The Death of Klinghoffer_ is, from a political point of view, pretty juvenile. I personally don't want to sit through it.


Not clear from this whether you have sat through it and therefore don't like it, or whether you are going on what you have heard about it.

I have watched this excellent film of the opera and thought it was a lot of things (harrowing, puzzling, even-handed, sometimes rather odd), but not juvenile.


----------



## sharik (Jan 23, 2013)

amfortas said:


> Because the two situations are exactly the same.


not exactly, in the US you get killed like John Lennon or Michael Jackson.


----------



## amfortas (Jun 15, 2011)

sharik said:


> not exactly, in the US you get killed like John Lennon or Michael Jackson.


Ah.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

sharik said:


> not exactly, in the US you get killed like John Lennon or Michael Jackson.


As if John Lennon or Michael Jackson were some kind of rebels. They both were as mainstream as they come, John's whole hippy "rebellion" was a show put on for the sake of entertainment. Any classical fan who refuses to be a part of pop culture is more dangerous to the mainstream than they were.


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

mountmccabe said:


> I would be hesitant to purchase tickets in response to this, in part because I don't want to reward the Met for doing this....


But then you are simply knuckling under to those who wanted you NOT to do that in the first place. 
I refuse to give in to such demands. It only holds hands with censorship.


----------



## sharik (Jan 23, 2013)

SiegendesLicht said:


> As if John Lennon or Michael Jackson were some kind of rebels


not rebels, but Lennon wanted go touring the USSR, which would have made the West lose face. Jackson was of inconvenience for being 'too white' for a black in this age of Multiculturalism.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

sharik said:


> not rebels, but Lennon wanted go touring the USSR, which would have made the West lose face. Jackson was of inconvenience for being 'too white' for a black in this age of Multiculturalism.


I find these theories...diverting. Can't understand why nobody has proposed them before.


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

Let's get back to the topic before this disintegrates into a West vs USSR debate that has no place here.


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

An interesting article on audience reaction - another possible explanation for the charges that have been laid against this opera.

Klinghoffer in Brooklyn Heights


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

mamascarlatti said:


> An interesting article on audience reaction - another possible explanation for the charges that have been laid against this opera.
> 
> Klinghoffer in Brooklyn Heights


An interesting article. I was struck by this comment: "Their original pride in the fact that 'absolutely no sides were taken' (Adams), that the sombre work strove to reach 'a human level, beyond all political differences' (Sellars), has hardened over the years into a firm conviction that they are being punished simply for their temerity in giving the Palestinians in their opera any voice at all."

I do believe that the opera tries to explore the motivations of the people involved -- motivations that were probably considered noble by the hijackers. Trying to understand why people do these things is not at all the same as condoning their actions, something hard for some people to understand. These people would object to anything other than a simplistic good-versus-evil morality play with its cardboard cut-out characters being moved about the stage.

Some interesting facts about the hijacking's aftermath:
- The four hijackers served prison terms varying from six to 24 years.
- The mastermind, Abu Abbas, admitted responsibility for Klinghoffer's death in 1996.
- The PLO reached a financial settlement with the Klinghoffer family in 2007.
- Meanwhile, Abu Abbas was captured in Iraq in 2003 and died in US custody in 2004 of natural causes (so stated). He had renounced violence and this was believed by Israel, who allowed him to cross their lines into Palestinian territory (per a 2004 BBC article on his death).


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

mamascarlatti said:


> An interesting article on audience reaction - another possible explanation for the charges that have been laid against this opera.
> 
> Klinghoffer in Brooklyn Heights


I read the same article last night (via a link on a post KenOC made elsewhere). It's certainly a convincing interpretation of the situation.


----------



## Zoe (Jun 20, 2014)

> I'm confused as to why they're cancelling only the radio/HD broadcast but still allowing the in-house performances. If the opera is that offensive (and I'd never even heard of it until this year, so I don't know), then why not just cancel it altogether?


A very good question-- I'm surprised no one reporting on this has raised the question about the role of the company that broadcasts the operas-- Fathom Events-- and whether or not they had something to do with this decision. Fathom Events has a notoriously "right of Fox News" agenda with the events they offer beyond operas and concerts, consistently offering a one-sided slate with the likes of Glenn Beck, Kirk Cameron, and the anti-gay Focus on the Family. Like you, I'm curious as to why the Met plans to still present the opera, but the simulcasts are out. Was the Met and the ADL really the only people involved in this strange decision, or did the personal politics of those who run Fathom Events, the company that's actually the one to HD simulcast, come into play? I'm not saying they were, but I do think someone should at least ask (it'd actually be a bit odd if Fathom was left entirely out of the decision, as presumably they'll lose money from it).

On a related note, it's worth noting that while Peter Gelb was claiming the Met was above politics in the Russia/anti-gay laws controversy, they were actively doing business with Fathom Events, who were distributing material like Focus on the Family's anti-gay propaganda piece "Irreplacable" to theaters. That's not exactly the Met being non-political-- it may be holding your nose to do business with an organization that (I hope) has a serious difference in values than the Met, but that silence is, like it or not, a political move in itself (I've often debated paying out money for the HD broadcasts if that's in any way getting funneled back into Fathom's active promotion of bigoted political broadcasts).

The Met has an increasingly weird and selective stance as to how it deals with political controversy; note for example there was _actual_ abuse and imprisonment going on in Russia toward gays, but one gets the sense that if a group like GLAAD had demanded the Met not simulcast "Eugene Onegin" because of how the pro-Putin sentiments of some of its participants might further impact Russian gays, they would have been told to take a flying leap. But here, a group demands that a simulcast not happen because of merely the _possibility_ of some undefined action somewhere, at some potential nebulous time, and the Met drops the Klinghoffer simulcast like a hot potato. Very strange indeed. If one didn't know any better, one might suspect a serious double-standard.


----------



## sharik (Jan 23, 2013)

Zoe said:


> there was _actual_ abuse and imprisonment going on in Russia toward gays


no, in fact. any examples?


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

I thought this was about Klinghoffer and the Met, how did gays show up in this topic?


----------



## Crudblud (Dec 29, 2011)

SiegendesLicht said:


> I thought this was about Klinghoffer and the Met, how did gays show up in this topic?


I think the point in bringing that up was to illustrate how the business relationships behind the scenes affect how decisions like this are made, and that the likelihood of decisions being made in response to a particular group is dependent on the views of certain partner companies.


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

This thread has completely veered off the original topic AGAIN into East-West politics and is now closed. All posts that relate to politics in general rather than the topic have been removed. You are welcome to start a new thread to discuss politics in the Social Groups as per the terms of service:



> A special forum has been created for Political and/or Religious discussions that are related to Classical Music. If members wish to create topics for discussion regarding political and religious topics not related to Classical Music, such will be strictly limited to Social Groups only. As always, the same rules apply to Social Groups as they do on the open boards.


----------

