Only
someone with his head stuck in the sand would be unaware of Russia’s invasion
of the sovereign nation of Ukraine. Only those under the sway of Vladimir Putin’s
propaganda machine or blinded by their own prejudice would have anything
but sympathy for what the people of Ukraine are suffering right now.
The
backlash from the West has been immediate.
Vladimir Putin has managed to do in two weeks what President Biden was
unable to do in 13 months: the once-fraying NATO has unified and the Western
Alliance has solidified. The sanctions
with which Russia now finds itself saddled are bound to cripple the already
struggling Russian economy, and will hopefully awaken the Russian people to the
extent to which Putin has led them down a false path. From a military standpoint, despite Russian
brutality, the effectiveness of Ukrainian resistance has exposed weak points in
Russian strategy, unit cohesion, and equipment.
But the effects of the past few weeks have gone beyond the geopolitical
and military.
A number of
Russian classical music performers have found their careers in the West curtailed
and appearances cancelled. While some
would pooh-pooh this development as symbolic, it’s worth noting most of the
money these performers earn comes from concertgoers in Europe and the United
States. The most noteworthy performers
in this case are conductor Valery Gergiev, soprano Anna Netrebko, and pianists
Denis Mastuev and Valentina Lisitsa – all of whom have been vocally supportive
of Putin’s regime, with the particularly atrocious Lisitsa describing Ukraine
as a Nazi regime (despite Ukrainians electing a Jewish President).
I believe
VRS’s decision was an overreach. At the
very least, VRS owes the music lovers of Vancouver an explanation for their
decision. Which specific board members
voted for or against this action? Which
patrons/donors instigated and pressured the board into making this decision?
I am as
opposed to the actions of the Putin-led Russian government as anybody, and I
was warning others about Putin when President George W. Bush “looked the man in
eye” and “found him to be very straightforward and trustworthy”. Russia’s
actions over the past weeks cannot be excused by any rationale, regardless of
what North Korea, Venezuela, Serbia, and some on the American Right (and a few
on the far-Left) say.
Malofeev’s
career will thrive despite this cancellation.
It may even benefit from it in the longer term, as some are learning of
him for the first time. Yet I note that
there are those who haven't said squat about what Putin has done over the
decades, yet are wringing their hands about this. Also, those crying "cancel culture"
when this is hardly an example of that phenomenon - because Malofeev (unlike
the four stooges I mentioned above) hasn't done anything to warrant being
cancelled. Nor is it McCarthyism - and
those claiming it is have little notion of what Joseph McCarthy actually did to
destroy innocent people's lives.
First, what
is cancel culture? It stems from the
decision to withdraw support from public figures – performers, sports figures, politicians
– who have done something to offend sensibilities. The offensive act can be anything from physical
violence to sexual impropriety or even a clumsily phrased but well-meaning
statement. Malofeev has done none of
these things, so that term does not apply here.
What was
McCarthyism historically, as opposed to its recent use as a label thrown on
anything some group doesn’t like? Joe
McCarthy was a Republican from Wisconsin who was a senator from 1947 until his
death ten years later. During the
Army-McCarthy hearings, he claimed to have lists of government employees who
were active members of the Communist party – which neither was nor is illegal
in the United States. Not satisfied with
rooting out real Communists in government, McCarthy went after people outside
of government who were “suspected” of having communist sympathies, then he went
after homosexuals (of which, posthumously, he is suspected of being
himself). During the hearings, which
were televised, his common tactic was to wave a piece of paper stating “I have
here in my hand a list” of people who were accused of whatever offended him at
the moment. As often as not, the paper’s
contents were either unrelated to the subject or it was entirely blank.
Vis-à-vis
communism and the Cold War. I think the
point that many have missed over the decades is that while Presidents and
politicians of both parties railed against communism, it was never the real threat. Communism is an economic philosophy – one
which doesn’t work judging by the low standards of living in communist
countries. The real threat during the
Cold War was not communism but Russian Totalitarian Imperialism – the proof of
this is that a number of communist countries have never been a threat to either
the United States or the West. But
Russia has legitimately been a threat and ruined life in every country it
subjugated during the Cold War – the prime reason so many risked their lives to
flee the East and make their way to either Western Europe or the United
States. Very few opted to leave the West
and move to Russia. But I digress.
Some of
those impacted by McCarthyism include Aaron Copland, Leonard Bernstein, Lena
Horne, and Danny Kaye – all of whom weathered the storm and went on to have
successful careers. In the end, criticism
of them was unwarranted because they never cozied to the likes of Hitler or
Stalin.
But there
is an example from Classical music history that has been trotted out in past
weeks, and the comparison is worth raising – if only to demolish it.
Attempts to
excuse Gergiev’s behavior by comparing him to German conductor Wilhelm Furtwängler
miss the mark. For those who don’t know,
Furtwängler, the most eminent German conductor of the time, refused
to leave his home country while the Nazis were in power. For this, the conductor found his postwar
activities restricted and for a period he found it impossible to perform in the
United States. It was not the US
government which banned him. Rather a
coalition of performers and other cultural figures, including Arturo Toscanini,
Vladimir Horowitz, Arthur Rubinstein, and others declared they would have
nothing to do with any organization that engaged Furtwängler. Even late in life, Horowitz mistakenly claimed
the conductor was “a supporter of the Nazis.”
Horowitz, who had had bad relations with Furtwängler
preceding Hitler’s rise, may have been blinded by his personal antipathy for
the conductor. But even prior to the
pianist’s death in 1989 it had become clear that the Furtwängler
situation was more complex. For one,
Furtwängler (unlike, say, Alfred Cortot) was not an
anti-Semite. Rather, the conductor, whose
provincial thinking and naivety were matched only by his ego, believed that
German musical culture could not continue without him and that he would be able
to save it from the philistines who had come to power. Early in Hitler’s regime he spoke against
removing Jews from orchestras and against the banning of newer music. Remarkably, he shared his concerns with
Goebbels and Hitler himself, often in undiplomatic terms that would have sent
anyone else to a concentration camp. But
Furtwängler’s protestations came to naught, as Jews were purged
from German culture and “decadent” music was banned. Eventually, Furtwängler
narrowly escaped arrest as he fled to Switzerland in early 1945. But Gergiev will only escape the contempt of
conscientious music lovers if we forget his history. The same is true of Netrebko, Matsuev, and
Lisitsa.
But it was
wrong of VRS to cancel Alexander Malofeev’s concert. Nor does it make any sense to cancel
performances of works by Tchaikovsky and Shostakovich – they should continue,
and western audiences should be reminded of how their lives were impacted by
the governmental and social elites of their time.
During the
height of the Cold War, President Kennedy said that “No government or social
system is so evil that its people should be considered as lacking in virtue.” But I believe he, and every right-thinking
person, would draw a distinction between those who are cultural figures, and
those who are willing propaganda tools.
No comments:
Post a Comment