Threaded Order Chronological Order
| Perhaps the family/estate can donate that $3.5 million payout back to the Met to compensate the Orchestra and Chorus who haven't been paid in a year | |
| Posted by: Singapore/Fling 12:45 pm EDT 03/17/21 | |
| In reply to: James Levine passed away over a week ago - ryhog 10:33 am EDT 03/17/21 | |
|
|
|
| That would be one way to help out the "staff and unions" who are otherwise being neglected by Management. | |
| reply to this message |
| You will have to take it up with his WIFE! | |
| Posted by: ryhog 01:03 am EDT 03/19/21 | |
| In reply to: Perhaps the family/estate can donate that $3.5 million payout back to the Met to compensate the Orchestra and Chorus who haven't been paid in a year - Singapore/Fling 12:45 pm EDT 03/17/21 | |
|
|
|
| seems he got married before he died, to the woman he has lived with for years. news to me, but a crafty tax dodge. | |
| reply to this message |
| re: You will have to take it up with his WIFE! | |
| Posted by: Michael_Portantiere 11:08 am EDT 03/19/21 | |
| In reply to: You will have to take it up with his WIFE! - ryhog 01:03 am EDT 03/19/21 | |
|
|
|
| "News to me, but a crafty tax dodge." I suppose that may be the only explanation that makes sense. In my opinion, all joking aside, Levine should have willed AT LEAST the amount of money he won in his settlement with the Met back to that severely struggling company. Or rather, more specifically, if he wanted to make sure that people like Peter Gelb and the other powers that be at the company didn't benefit from the bequest in any way, he could have donated it specifically to a fund for the musicians, many/most of whom he worked with for many years. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: You will have to take it up with his WIFE! | |
| Posted by: ryhog 11:35 am EDT 03/19/21 | |
| In reply to: re: You will have to take it up with his WIFE! - Michael_Portantiere 11:08 am EDT 03/19/21 | |
|
|
|
| He should have, but I suspect he felt abandoned by them since I do not recall anything but crickets when he was suspended and then fired. (I don't know.) I also suspect that leaving the money to her was in reaction to her (a) not abandoning him and (b) providing him with cover for years. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: You will have to take it up with his WIFE! | |
| Posted by: Michael_Portantiere 11:37 am EDT 03/19/21 | |
| In reply to: re: You will have to take it up with his WIFE! - ryhog 11:35 am EDT 03/19/21 | |
|
|
|
| "....providing him with cover for years." Such as it was. Kind of like that unseen character in AVENUE Q, the girlfriend who lives in Canada. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: You will have to take it up with his WIFE! | |
| Posted by: ryhog 12:02 pm EDT 03/19/21 | |
| In reply to: re: You will have to take it up with his WIFE! - Michael_Portantiere 11:37 am EDT 03/19/21 | |
|
|
|
| haha yes. It did provide cover. I think we often underestimate the extent to which the general public is oblivious about "things." |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: You will have to take it up with his WIFE! | |
| Posted by: Michael_Portantiere 01:05 am EDT 03/21/21 | |
| In reply to: re: You will have to take it up with his WIFE! - ryhog 12:02 pm EDT 03/19/21 | |
|
|
|
| ****It did provide cover. I think we often underestimate the extent to which the general public is oblivious about "things."**** I know what you mean, but in this case, any "cover" that existed seemed to me practically non-existent. Levine didn't do very many interviews, and as far as I can remember, he hardly ever mentioned having a girlfriend, not do I remember seeing many (or any) photographs of them together. Of course, I may have just missed all of that..... |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: You will have to take it up with his WIFE! | |
| Posted by: PlayWiz 02:57 pm EDT 03/21/21 | |
| In reply to: re: You will have to take it up with his WIFE! - Michael_Portantiere 01:05 am EDT 03/21/21 | |
|
|
|
| From what I was told by someone in the opera business, after some of these payments made by the Met for his illicit acts and arrests, Levine's life mostly was confined in a way to being shuttled between his apartment and the opera house, or in other cities in the U.S at least, between where he was living and where he was conducting. You didn't read much about him in the media at social events (other than the Met's special events), his views on much other than music, his personal life (other than his preparing for his upcoming engagements), etc. He was very focused on preparing his operas, rehearsing and conducting opera. His other interest was gossiped about for years, sometimes quite openly by audience members at the opera house, but it took decades before management did anything about it publicly to stop the abuse. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: You will have to take it up with his WIFE! | |
| Posted by: ryhog 06:09 pm EDT 03/21/21 | |
| In reply to: re: You will have to take it up with his WIFE! - PlayWiz 02:57 pm EDT 03/21/21 | |
|
|
|
| He did mentioned her, and they did appear together at times (I say this from what I read about the marriage, not from personal recollection) but I also think, as I said above, that we underestimate the assumption of "regularity" that most people make about people. (There are of course tons of film stars [and politicians, etc] who were just assumed to be straight by the general population, even though "we" knew better.) Regarding those latter years, I think his health was a big factor in his seeming "reclusiveness." I would like to think that he was suffering in the shame that he had brought upon himself but I suspect that's wishful thinking. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: You will have to take it up with his WIFE! | |
| Posted by: Michael_Portantiere 06:18 pm EDT 03/21/21 | |
| In reply to: re: You will have to take it up with his WIFE! - ryhog 06:09 pm EDT 03/21/21 | |
|
|
|
| I am a little confused. I read somewhere they Levine and the woman in question were only VERY recently married, and before that she was just presented as a girlfriend or maybe a common-law partner. Is that incorrect? | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: You will have to take it up with his WIFE! | |
| Posted by: ryhog 07:08 pm EDT 03/21/21 | |
| In reply to: re: You will have to take it up with his WIFE! - Michael_Portantiere 06:18 pm EDT 03/21/21 | |
|
|
|
| What I recall reading was that she was in fact his roommate. I do not recall reading that he presented her as anything except perhaps by implication. If he did, I am not challenging that because everything I know on this subject is from one article that I read quickly. All I can say beyond that is that I would be embarrassed to be her, but I realize she had a nice payday for what she did. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: You will have to take it up with his WIFE! | |
| Posted by: larry13 11:30 am EDT 03/19/21 | |
| In reply to: re: You will have to take it up with his WIFE! - Michael_Portantiere 11:08 am EDT 03/19/21 | |
|
|
|
| I don't think Levine had any good feelings towards the Met since his firing. As for the orchestra, did any musician, let alone as a group, ever speak up for him?(NOT that I believe they should have nor that he shouldn't have been fired.) |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: You will have to take it up with his WIFE! | |
| Posted by: Michael_Portantiere 11:47 am EDT 03/19/21 | |
| In reply to: re: You will have to take it up with his WIFE! - larry13 11:30 am EDT 03/19/21 | |
|
|
|
| I guess my position is that even if none of the Met musicians "spoke up" for Levine in terms of defending him against moral improprieties and/or crimes of which he was accused (and which had been discussed behind the scenes for DECADES), Levine might have willed a large amount to the Met orchestra musicians directly as a way of commemorating and preserving the positive legacy he left in building that orchestra to a world-class ensemble. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Perhaps the family/estate can donate that $3.5 million payout back to the Met to compensate the Orchestra and Chorus who haven't been paid in a year | |
| Posted by: NewtonUK 02:08 pm EDT 03/17/21 | |
| In reply to: Perhaps the family/estate can donate that $3.5 million payout back to the Met to compensate the Orchestra and Chorus who haven't been paid in a year - Singapore/Fling 12:45 pm EDT 03/17/21 | |
|
|
|
| That would be nice ... though Mr Levine had no connection to the shut down of the opera house ... | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Perhaps the family/estate can donate that $3.5 million payout back to the Met to compensate the Orchestra and Chorus who haven't been paid in a year | |
| Posted by: MockingbirdGirl 09:24 am EDT 03/18/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Perhaps the family/estate can donate that $3.5 million payout back to the Met to compensate the Orchestra and Chorus who haven't been paid in a year - NewtonUK 02:08 pm EDT 03/17/21 | |
|
|
|
| And I can't imagine is feeling particularly kindly disposed toward The Met these days. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Perhaps the family/estate can donate that $3.5 million payout back to the Met to compensate the Orchestra and Chorus who haven't been paid in a year | |
| Posted by: Singapore/Fling 03:08 pm EDT 03/17/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Perhaps the family/estate can donate that $3.5 million payout back to the Met to compensate the Orchestra and Chorus who haven't been paid in a year - NewtonUK 02:08 pm EDT 03/17/21 | |
|
|
|
| No, but when we talk about the lack of funds at the Met and how it has been suffering budget woes since before the Pandemic, we can't ignore the fact that Levine's payout for being fired over the many allegations of sexual harassment and abuse represents not just a significant pot of money in general, but underlines the way that non-profit arts organizations pay their senior management outrageous sums of money while asking "staff and unions" to accept reduced wages and austerity budgets that are meant to support the long-term health of the organization (because, you know, we're all in this together). And of course, it's not just the Met. Just recently, we learned that BAM gave their new President a million dollar bonus to buy park side real estate, provided she remain in the role for five years. This was quite the vote of confidence on behalf of the Board - but Boards always find a way to pay their own - considering that she'd never run an organization as large as BAM, and also quite generous, considering that she only had to give a five years of work - and indeed, once those five years were up. she promptly moved to a new organization and kept the house. Meanwhile, BAM was asking its various artistic and programming departments to continue providing the high quality work that audiences expect of them on less and less money, and morale throughout the organization was at an all-time low (all of this reported in the Times a few weeks ago). At least the Met has the good sense to own the million-dollar apartment that Peter Gelb lives in as part of his compensation package (though I wouldn't be surprised if he manages to hold onto it if he leaves the organization). Things are no different at the city's other major arts institutions (MoMA's executive compensation compared to what their museum staff gets paid is truly shameful), but the Levine payment is perhaps the most egregious because of how directly it points to the corruption at the heart of our arts culture and the ways that it continually rewards the privileged few at the hands of the many, who nonetheless are constantly encouraged to find solidarity in serving their art despite not being well paid for it. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.047032 seconds.