The Los Angeles Philharmonic : What’s Next? : Who the next music director will be and when he is named depends on many factors, including an element of luck. . .

For the present, it is business as usual at the Los Angeles Philharmonic, now immersed in a spottily attended Festival Boulez at UCLA. Only those dates at the end of the Hollywood Bowl season left conductorless in the aftermath of the sudden and bitter resignation of the music director, Andre Previn, serve as reminders that the artistic interregnum has begun.

The orchestra’s future leadership, in the meantime, is being decided by its powerful managing director Ernest Fleischmann and a search committee of five others, authorized by the Philharmonic board of directors. Just who will be the next music director and how long it will be before he is named--and then effectively on the job--depends on many factors, including a real element of luck.

World-class conductors don’t come along every day, and filling major openings in New York, Berlin and elsewhere could well create a domino effect, further complicating the situation. The names most mentioned as candidates elsewhere--James Levine, Riccardo Muti, Lorin Maazel, Seiji Ozawa, Claudio Abbado--are not necessarily those being raised as possibilities for Los Angeles, however.

Three weeks after Previn’s resignation, the Philharmonic’s hunt for a successor became organized when its search committee held its first meeting. The committee includes two elected members from the orchestra--flutist Roland Moritz and trombonist Jeffrey Reynolds--and three officers of the board of directors executive committee--President Michael J. Connell, Vice Chairman Rocco C. Siciliano and Vice President Stanley Beyer.

And then there is Fleischmann, who has been with the orchestra since 1969. Asked what constituency he represents on the committee, Fleischmann replied, “Everything. Everything--the world of music. You’ve got to be aware of many issues. The orchestra’s needs are probably the foremost ones, but they are not exclusive.”

Fleischmann, who disdained a search committee as being “a sham” and “a farce” after Carlo Maria Giulini resigned as music director of the Los Angeles Philharmonic in 1983 because of his wife’s illness, would not discuss in any detail how the present committee will function. “The search process,” he told The Times, “is a very private and sensitive area, and in the few places where it was conducted in public it’s ended in disaster.”

The New York Philharmonic, which is searching for a replacement for Zubin Mehta, who announced his departure in November, 1988, is even more secretive about the process, declining to say even if it has a search committee, let alone who might be on it. The American Symphony Orchestra League’s handbook on “Selecting a Music Director” also enjoins strict confidentiality.

Connell indicated that in Los Angeles the committee’s effort will not be made under a rigid parliamentary system, but rather will be to seek a consensus on the best available candidate to present to the full board. “The ultimate decision will be made at an open meeting of the board, discussed and voted upon,” he said. The question to the board will be: “Do you want this person, or do you want to continue the search?”

Reynolds, who joined the Philharmonic about the same time Fleischmann did, noted that “this is one of the first times that members of the orchestra have been allowed to make suggestions and have any kind of advisory capacity to the manager and board of directors. . . . I hope frankly (that) the public never knows who the orchestra wants,” he said.

Just whom Fleischmann, the orchestra and the members of the search committee may want as Previn’s replacement is being kept a tightly guarded secret. Selection of the fourth music director since the Music Center opened 25 years ago could be a long and difficult process. The world of music has changed drastically in the 70-year history of the Los Angeles Philharmonic.

Gone are the days dominated by the likes of Arturo Toscanini, Wilhelm Furtwangler, Bruno Walter, or even Herbert von Karajan, who announced his retirement from the Berlin Philharmonic the day before Previn announced his resignation a month ago. Great conductors are still among us, but with major orchestras evolving into more complex and more democratic organizations, with greatly extended seasons, the post of music director has ceased to be one of autocracy.

Modern orchestras need music directors who are “organizational leaders who can excite the public through their music-making and persona,” said Joseph Kluger, general manager of the Philadelphia Orchestra, whose music director Riccardo Muti is frequently cited as a possible successor to Karajan in Berlin.

“You need somebody who can not only stand up on a podium and make music but also help the institution achieve its objectives,” Kluger said, “(someone who) has enough of a reputation to generate interest from recording companies, television production companies and the public . . . someone who recognizes the business structure of symphony orchestras in the United States and the requirement to raise a significant portion of our income through contributions. . . .

“Conductors shouldn’t have to be the ones who actually ask people for money,” Kluger said. “But it is important for the music director to recognize that corporations need to receive recognition for their contributions. Conductors have to go to receptions and make public appearances because that’s the corporation’s return on its investment.”

Getting someone here who can fill all those qualifications could take a long time, given the advance contractual obligations that conductors enter into nowadays.

“So much depends on the availability of the person or persons we would like to have--conductors are booked approximately two to five years in advance,” Connell observed.

In fact, even though Previn’s contract with the Philharmonic did not expire until 1991, a decision on whether it should be renewed again was to have been made soon.

“A decision had to be made on renewal by June anyway,” Fleischmann said. “I don’t know why everyone is so surprised at the timing (of Previn’s resignation).”

According to board members who requested anonymity, Previn’s support on the board had softened almost from the moment he arrived, for reasons ranging from the perception of him as a dull personality on the podium to resentment over what some considered perfunctory involvement in fund raising. Negotiations between Previn and the executive committee on the renewal were not going smoothly. Some board members suggested that Previn resigned to preempt a foregone decision not to renew his contract. Previn declined to comment for this article.

“Our biggest drawback is that we are still perceived to be very far from the musical centers of the world,” Fleischmann said, while refusing to discuss his relationship with Previn. “But that’s shifting, particularly with Japan and Korea becoming more interesting (and) important. But it’s not there yet. We are still too far from Vienna, Berlin and London.”

Fleischmann acknowledged that Los Angeles may not get its No. 1 choice.

“If you look all over the world, you cannot possibly believe that anyone who’s a music director anywhere was inevitably a first choice. This is realistic. There isn’t an enormous number of suitable people out there.”

Connell concurred. “I think we’re talking about a small, finite group of people,” he said. “I think the issue will be who is available and willing.”

“Basically the problem is this,” said Connell. “Anyone who would be a candidate . . . each one of them would like to believe they are the only person and the first person we are considering.”

Potential music directors for the orchestra, Fleischmann said, will wait for the committee to approach them. “It’s certainly a courting and wooing process.”

Whoever is selected, however, will have conducted the Philharmonic previously. “It cannot be a stranger,” Fleischmann said. “It’s not fair to the orchestra. Whoever is chosen will have had to have done some work with the orchestra.”

As that work could be yet to come, the guest conductors who will be dominating the coming Philharmonic seasons will be under close scrutiny.

Some observers within and outside the orchestra suggest that the intense rivalry between Previn--who said in his terse resignation note that, “in the current structure of the Los Angeles Philharmonic, it has become obvious to me (that) there is no room for a music director”--and Fleischmann may discourage some high-powered conductors from considering the post.

“Ernest wants to have power over everybody,” said one member of the orchestra who asked for anonymity. “He likes to have his finger in everybody’s pie. He just wanted to dictate. Andre was the music director and should have been able to do what he wanted to do.”

Another orchestra member who also asked not to be identified said that many of the musicians hoped that “recent events here don’t scare away a potential music director. . . . We don’t want to be refused by potential conductors just because they’re afraid of what happened with Andre.”

Fleischmann, however, said he doesn’t believe that the news stories about the problems that led to Previn’s resignation will hurt the Philharmonic’s search for a new conductor.

“Not in the least,” Fleischmann said. “It’s nothing unusual . . . There’s nothing to hide. Not only I, but everybody here has wonderful friends and supporters out there. There are good loyalties in the music world. That doesn’t change.”

Other observers suggested that a strong administrator is needed to oversee day-to-day administrative matters--including some work with programming and guest conductors traditionally considered the province of the music director--in this day of world-jetting maestros.

“I think any artistic organization requires a single vision,” said Esther Wachtell, president of The Music Center board of governors, the public/private partnership that contributed $4.4 million--the largest amount given to any of the resident groups--to the operation of the Philharmonic for the 1988-89 season.

“It has to be a single vision led by a single human being, and I’m not sure who it has to be. Here it’s Ernest,” says Wachtell, who is one of his most vociferous supporters.

Fleischmann sees his role as managing director as “basically to hold the fort while the music director is not there, and to support and reinforce and work as a team (with) the music director when he is there.”

Said Fleischmann: “We all know there has been this enormous change in the way orchestras work. . . . When there wasn’t jet travel, it was possible for a music director to stay in one place for most of the season. The economics were totally different.”

Regardless of the widespread changes that have overtaken symphony orchestras and the role of the music director in their affairs, and despite Previn’s declaration that he found no place for a music director at the Philharmonic, the board is seeking someone who will be in Los Angeles for substantial periods of time and willing to assume the full mantle of music director.

“We are looking for a person who would fit the traditional model of music director,” Connell said.

How long the search committee will be looking depends on many variables, as Philharmonic history shows. When Mehta announced his resignation in 1976, there were predictions of a long interregnum. Many observers were surprised when Carlo Maria Giulini was named music director in 1977, taking over immediately after Mehta’s departure at the end of the 1977-78 season. Although Previn did not appear until several years after Giulini’s resignation, his advent also was unexpected and a result of coincidences elsewhere beyond the Philharmonic’s control.

Previn, in fact, came to Los Angeles after enduring struggles in Houston and Pittsburgh similar to those he would undergo here. Said Fleischmann, “I saw him (Previn) months and months before (he was named to the Philharmonic post), and he was quite happy to remain in Pittsburgh--then suddenly things happened in Pittsburgh, and he became available.”

Publicly, Fleischmann says he doesn’t want to see the Philharmonic rushed into selecting a music director, and there is reason to believe that he will be reluctant to gamble on any relatively unproven talent or quick fixes. His supporters say he is ambitious to see the orchestra established among the perceived international elite, and at 64, he is probably involved in his last major personnel campaign.

Even the opening of the Walt Disney Concert Hall, now scheduled for 1994, does not set an outer limit for the search, said Fleischmann. Asked how long the process could go, Fleischmann responded, “Until we find the right person who responds to our entreaties. . . . It could be a week, it could be a year, five years.”

There are many, however, in the orchestra and on the board pushing for a relatively quick selection.

“If we wait, we might lose out on a really top music director,” said Philharmonic principal oboist David Weiss. “We don’t want to let the other orchestras go out and have first pick.”

Connell said that it might be possible to name a music director “within six months, we hope,” adding, however, “we hoped that the last time too.” Naming a music director, however, should not imply that the conductor will assume his duties immediately. A long time can elapse between the candidate’s appointment and completion of contractual commitments elsewhere.

The next meeting of the search committee has not been set, as its members have schedules almost as complex as those of the conductors they are tracking.

“We’re not going to be rushed just because we’ve got to have a music director,” Fleischmann said. “There’s no sense of panic here.”

Although concert-goers and the public tend to identify orchestras with the highly visible personalities on their podiums, the long-term trend has actually been a shifting of the real responsibility for the fundamental decisions of orchestra life to behind-the-scenes administrators and, to a lesser degree, boards of directors. While many music directors still are expected to choose repertory, guest conductors and soloists, as well as to arrange tours, make recordings and participate in community outreach programs, some of those obligations seem to be shifting to professional managers in some instances.

Some observers have suggested that Fleischmann’s activity in some of those areas, particularly the attempts made by Fleischmann to advance the local position of the young Finnish conductor Esa-Pekka Salonen, exacerbated the tension between him and Previn. Certain plans infringed on Previn’s contractual prerogatives.

While disagreements between Previn and Fleischmann were well-known among the orchestra’s musicians and officials, Previn’s biggest problem was probably lackluster attendence. Although subscriptions were down only slightly in Previn’s final season (see accompanying chart), his programs were often conspicuously underattended, compared to the audiences for some of the Philharmonic’s more popular guest conductors.

“There were many more empty seats on the nights that Previn conducted than on the nights we would have (Kurt) Sanderling or Simon Rattle or Esa-Pekka Salonen or some of the other really wonderful conductors,” said Wachtell, who acknowledges having no particular expertise in classical music.

Had Previn been a big hit with the Philharmonic’s board members and the audience, he might have survived the ongoing conflict with Fleischmann. But when push came to shove, it was the managing director, not the music director, who had the ears of the top fund-raisers and contributors.

Contributors to this article were John Henken, Judith Michaelson, Martin Bernheimer, Barbara Isenberg and Pamela Lopez-Johnson.

L.A. PHILHARMONIC MUSIC DIRECTORS

Directors of the Los Angeles Philharmonic from the opening of the Music Center in 1964.

Music Budget Concert Reason for Years Director (millions) Subscribers Series Departure

1964*- Zubin $2.6 NA** 4 1978 Mehta $7.9 20,585 9 New challenges

1978- Carlo Maria $9.4 21,713 9 1984 Guilini $17.8 29,213 13 Wife’s illness

1985- Andre $22.2 30,932 13 1989 Previn $27.1 30,611 14 Artistic differences

* Mehta was appointed in 1962. ** Subscribers were not counted before the advent of telecharge services.

Source: L.A. Philharmonic