Thank God it’s dead! Granted, the French and the Dutch voted “no” to the proposed EU constitution for the wrong reasons, but then who had the time or energy to actually read that bloody 400+ page behemoth, produced by an unaccountable collection of bureaucrats to better entrench themselves at the center of European political life? What most of you probably do not realize is that the document contained more than a few “protections” resulting from vigorous lobbying by performing arts organizations. These were mostly buried somewhere in the bottom 300s, page-wise, where no sane person would likely notice them. However, as a public service to our European readers, we have examined them very carefully with an eye towards seeing what impact “the new Europe” might have on the market for recorded music. Herewith, some of our findings:
Paragraph 397(C)(iii), better known as the “Mahler Mandate,” states, in part: “Every orchestra receiving any form of public subsidy, and consisting of at least sixty (60) full-time salaried musicians, shall establish its own proprietary record label within one year of ratification of this Constitution for the purposes of recording, annually, the complete symphonies of Gustav Mahler. For avoidance of doubt, both Das Klagende Lied and Das Lied von der Erde shall be defined as a “symphony” within the meaning of this section.”
Section 397(C)(iv) goes on: “In order to facilitate international distribution and sales, a sufficient sum shall be set aside from the annual EU budget for the creation of the Trans-European Mahler Sales and Marketing Consortium (TEMSMC), which shall serve as a clearinghouse and central distribution facility for all Mahler recordings produced both within the EU as well as abroad. By general agreement of the signatories hereto, the TEMSMC shall be moved at 27 month intervals to a location to be mutually agreed, commencing with an initial investment of 3.7 million Euros for start-up plant and facilities in Riga, Latvia.”
It would seem that some orchestras, in anticipation of smooth passage of the constitution, had already begun following the “Mahler Mandate.” I was, for example, initially puzzled at the recent appearance of the Fifth Symphony on an ebs SACD, performed by the Würtembergishe Philharmonie Reutlingen, but now I understand what’s going on. I believe that even Mahler enthusiasts will agree that we all owe the French and the Dutch a debt of gratitude for stemming the potential flood of legally mandated, heavily subsidized, mediocre Mahler symphony recordings. An unnamed source at the European Commission informs us that the original proposal was far more ambitious, with the Germans and Austrians pushing for Bruckner, the British Elgar (naturally), and the French squaring up behind Boulez, not because they like him, but out of the sheer malicious joy of inflicting him on the rest of the world. Mahler was the compromise choice, despite continued objections from Greece (pushing hard for Xenakis), Estonia (Tubin), and Portugal (promoting long-shot Joly Braga Santos, bless them).
Meanwhile, if the dreadful news of Hyperion’s losing its copyright suit in the U.K. raises a red flag throughout the classical music industry, then take a gander at Paragraph 411(J)(vii)(n): “Copyright protection shall be extended to all scores, parts, manuscripts, editions, revisions, emendations, and editorial work of any kind on music of any period, as from the date hereof until the end of recorded time, without exception. For purposes of enforcement of this clause only, the sentence of death shall be reinstated throughout the EU as a maximum penalty for any violations or non-compliance with the terms of this provision. The Pan-European Copyright Security Police shall be established in the former STASI offices in East Germany, with satellite offices in all member states. Violators may be held without charge indefinitely, and shall be tried and sentenced by secret copyright tribunals composed of specifically designated anonymous representatives of Schott, Universal Edition, Boosey & Hawkes, Oxford University Press, Edition Hans Sikorski, and Bärenreiter. The minimum penalty for the first offense shall be surgical removal of the right index finger. New critical editions of the following composers will be issued annually: Bach, Handel, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Bruckner, Mahler, Schubert, Tchaikovsky, Shostakovich, Brahms, Verdi, Puccini, Britten, Ravel, Debussy, Gounod, and Havergal Brian. Failure to use them within the EU from date of issuance will constitute a capital offense. All copyright proceeds collected under this clause shall inure to the benefit of French farmers pursuant to the relevant statues of the Common Agricultural Policy.”
Perhaps the most insidious potential impact of the proposed constitution on the arts is tucked away among the endless litany of environmental protections beginning with section 187 and running no less than 2,397 paragraphs and sub-paragraphs. In particular, paragraph 217(X)(cccxxxviii)(q), more commonly known as the Opera Greenhouse Gas Emissions Control Act, states, in part: “It having been scientifically established that the average opera singer in performance emits approximately fourteen (14) times the standard amount of carbon dioxide as would a normal person over the course of a single day, the proliferation of opera houses throughout Europe, while consistent with EU artistic policy for the performing arts, constitutes a potentially adverse environmental threat directly linked to the possibility of enhanced global warming. In order to mitigate the potential harm of increased operatic activity, all opera houses must, within six months of the date hereof, be hermetically sealed and outfitted with carbon dioxide emissions reduction systems to prevent the escape of excessive greenhouse gasses. In addition, all opera singers will be required to wear individual emissions control devices in performance which shall fully cover the nose and mouth, and which shall be configured so as to reduce the emission of carbon dioxide to normal levels.”
How did this ludicrous provision get into the constitution? Here the cynicism of the politicians seems to have reached new lows. According to anonymous sources, German delegates pointed out that the presence of the necessary breathing apparatus, ductwork, vents, and tubing would simply be understood by the audience as a typical “concept production” such as has characterized much European (and especially German) stagecraft since the end of the Second World War. The Italians noted that certain works, such as Verdi’s A Masked Ball, naturally lend themselves to such treatment, and would simply be produced more frequently. Concerns about excessive cost, particularly as regards larger productions featuring extensive choral participation, were quashed by a minor sub-provision permitting the chorus to be housed en masse in inexpensive, air-tight transparent plastic bubbles akin to those used to isolate persons with severe immune deficiencies. The effect on the individual members of the chorus of the lack of sufficient oxygen in such enclosures is not addressed.
I have to admit that there may be other relevant sections that I did not find, life being too short for some things. A colleague tells me that there’s some foolishness in there somewhere about requiring lessons in microtonality and graphic notation in elementary schools, and the Poles apparently insisted that Penderecki’s opera The Devils of Loudon (with emission control measures in place, one presumes) be broadcast on all EU television stations each New Year’s Eve instead of the current Vienna Philharmonic New Year’s Concert, but the above seems to be the gist of it. Whatever the ultimate reality, it’s always fun to watch the politicians squirm, particularly when they are asked to accept the outcome of the democratic principles to which they pay such obsequious lip-service. So: Bravo! to the French and the Dutch, as well as to the British this week for insisting that their rebate will not be sacrificed without reform of the CAP. Isn’t it funny how these sensible, perfectly understandable actions are regarded by the bureaucrats as a “crisis?” Go figure.
David Hurwitz
