By BRIAN RUDMAN
When the Royal New Zealand Ballet's season of Cinderella opens at the Aotea Centre tonight, I doubt any Auckland Philharmonia players will be picketing outside.
But there is certainly a feeling of "disappointment" in the local orchestra that its traditional place in the pit has been usurped by members of the Wellington-based New Zealand Symphony Orchestra.
There is also a certain grumpiness that salaried players from the heavily subsidised national orchestra are muscling in on work which Philharmonia players - who are paid a mix of retainer and appearance money - would normally do.
The emergence of the NZSO as a touring pit orchestra certainly raises a few questions.
The new orthodoxy, spelled out by former secretary to the Treasury Dr Graham Scott in his 1996 review of the national band's financial woes, is that regional orchestras would accompany opera and ballet, leaving the NZSO as a prestige touring flagship.
And, apart from appearing every two years with the Wellington International Arts Festival opera production, the NZSO has stuck with this convention.
It is a separation of roles which pleases regional orchestras. In the past they reckoned the state-supported NZSO was not above engaging in a spot of orchestral dumping by under-cutting their tenders for accompanying work.
It was a practice which Ian Fraser pledged to put behind him when he took over as NZSO chief in 1998.
The NZSO's present ballet outing has the old suspicions fizzing again, even if Mr Fraser insists the playing field is totally level.
The history is that the ballet company asked regional orchestras to quote for the Cinderella season. The quote was to be based on a full 68-person orchestra.
It then decided it could not afford a national tour using a full orchestra and turned to the NZSO for a quote for doing a national tour with a 28-strong orchestra playing a reduced version of Prokofiev's score.
Without going back to the Auckland Philharmonia and the other regional orchestras for a revised quote based on a smaller-sized orchestra, the ballet hired the NZSO.
The ever-diplomatic Philharmonia manager, Lloyd Williams, says the decision "disappointed." His counterpart with the Wellington Sinfonia, Roger Lloyd, agrees, saying accompanying work is his orchestra's "raison d'etre."
Ballet general manager Sue Paterson and Mr Fraser both justify the decision on the grounds of cost. They also risk a fight by raising the issue of musical "standards."
Cost first. Paterson says substantial savings can be made by not having to pay for rehearsal time each time you deal with a new orchestra. This is no doubt true, particularly, perhaps, in the case of Dunedin and Christchurch, where the seasons are short. But in Auckland it's hard to see the economies.
The three required rehearsals would cost $15,000. Against that is feeding and accommodating 28 players for four nights. Allowing $150 a day for board and lodging, that adds up to $16,800. On top of that are return flights for 28 to Wellington.
Then there's the minefield of musical standards.
Ms Paterson says that with a touring band, the "quality is so good because you're using the same musicians all the time." Mr Fraser echoes this, saying that with a smaller orchestra, "every part is much more exposed." In other words, it's easier to hear the bum notes.
He says the ballet company felt there was a "quality issue." Even with the Auckland Philharmonia? Mr Fraser paused for a moment then said "Well, yes is the answer."
Fighting talk. And there's more. Mr Fraser also questions the convention that the NZSO stay out of the pit.
"I don't know how sensible it is that we continue under a self-denial ordinance where we say, basically, we're not in the market for pit work."
He says he is talking Wellington here and not Auckland; that travelling to Auckland "to pillage" jobs from the Philharmonia would be "a fairly expensive option."
As a Philharmonia fan, I hope he's right.
Read more from our Herald columnists
<i>Rudman's city:</i> Auckland's orchestra misses out on the ball
AdvertisementAdvertise with NZME.