|
|
Post by punter on Apr 22, 2008 9:30:45 GMT 10
Check this out from this morning's Age... interesting eh??
Music won't stop for departing jazz chief
Jo Roberts
April 22, 2008
The festival head passes the reins to a controversial successor.
AFTER three years at the helm, Albert Dadon has resigned as artistic director of Melbourne Jazz just a week out from this year's festival opening, citing increasing pressure from business and other creative interests.
Fellow board member Michael Tortoni, who also runs city jazz venue Bennetts Lane, has been appointed the artistic director designate for 2009 and beyond.
"I've been planning for a while to retire, it's not something that came at the last minute," said Dadon yesterday from the Queens Road office of property developer and funds manager the Ubertas Group, of which he is executive chairman.
"I thought I was going to make my last festival my last one. Then I decided to do one more, but knew I was stretching myself."
Dadon is making room for more jazz projects beyond Melbourne. Next year, as chairman and founder of the Australian-Israel Cultural Exchange, he is planning a big Australian festival over three cities in Israel, as well as a five-day Australian jazz festival at New York's famous Birdland jazz club.
"I'm not done with my contribution to Australian jazz," said Dadon. "I'm more interested now in promoting Australian jazz artists and that's why I'm keeping the Australian Jazz Awards."
In 2003, Dadon founded the awards, or the Bells, as they are known. This year's awards will be announced at 6pm next Tuesday, with Deputy Prime Minister Julia Gillard announcing the Hall of Fame inductee.
Dadon, 51, a French Moroccan, has lived in Australia for 25 years and is married to Debbie Dadon (nee Besen), a member of the powerful Besen retail family (Sussan Sportsgirl and Suzanne Grae), with whom he has three children.
Dadon was brought on to the festival board by Tortoni in 2002 and became chairman the year after. In 2005, Dadon was appointed artistic director and presented Umbria Jazz in conjunction with the director of Italy's Umbria Jazz Festival, Carlo Pagnotta, who left after a year, claiming that he was hampered by financial constraints.
The festival was not held in 2006 due to the Commonwealth Games, but returned last year with a blockbuster line-up that included Herbie Hancock, Chick Corea and Pharoah Sanders.
This year's festival, however, has been plagued with troubles. Headline act Nancy Wilson was forced to pull out earlier this month with a collapsed lung — it was to have been her farewell performance before retirement — and last month American artists the Roy Hargrove Quintet and Dr Bobby Jones and the Nashville Super Choir and Italy's Roberta Gambarini Quartet were cancelled because of poor ticket sales.
"If you let the act come and play to an empty audience, I don't think you're doing a favour to the act or to the festival," Dadon said.
Last year's festival box office was a little over $1 million, but Dadon admitted doubt that similar levels would be reached this year, with tighter consumer spending.
"The reality is that there is something going on out there which is impacting the festival," he said.
In his voluntary role as artistic director, Dadon has also been an active philanthropist, with support including paying the costs of last year's festival staff, in addition to its triennial funding from Victorian Major Events, believed to be worth about $1.6 million over three years.
He admitted Tortoni would be unable to follow such a model of directorship, but said that he would continue to make a "substantial" contribution to the festival himself.
"The model of my work between the arts and government is that philanthropy works hand-in-hand with government," he said. "The model is changing from more of a philanthropic model into more of a corporate model … we're opening up the festival now to corporate sponsorship, whereas before it was not the case."
Other members of Melbourne's jazz community yesterday questioned whether Tortoni's appointment might be a conflict of interest.
One person who did not wish to be named called Tortoni, who has run Bennetts Lane for 16 years, "a disastrous choice".
"There'll be a lot of angry musicians out there," he said. "Michael would have an absolute glaring conflict of interest."
Tortoni denied there was any conflict of interest because the festival was a not-for-profit organisation.
"It's a totally different structure, the Melbourne Jazz Festival is not for profit, it's a totally different structure to a commercial enterprise," he said.
"No matter what artistic director has been here, whether it was Adrian Jackson or Albert Dadon, they've always used Bennetts Lane as the (festival) cornerstone club venue," he said.
Tortoni will officially take the festival reins about May 15.
"I've got ideas on moving forward and building on the good work Albert's done, but until I really assume that role, it's a bit early to start talking about what I might do."
|
|
|
|
Post by ironguts on Apr 22, 2008 10:15:45 GMT 10
"I'm not done with my contribution to Australian jazz,"  ? WTF? |
|
|
|
Post by jazzer on Apr 22, 2008 17:44:15 GMT 10
"It's a totally different structure, the Melbourne Jazz Festival is not for profit, it's a totally different structure to a commercial enterprise," he said. NOT FOR PROFIT!!!NOT FOR PROFIT? Yes, not for the profit of melbourne jazz musicians!!!! THis really is outragous. So what do you have to do to get a gig at next years fest?..ring Michael 45 times...wait for him not to answer your calls...This is a woeful conflict of interest. This festival should not be run by him and I think we need to do something about this Melbourne Jazz Festival once and for all....Give it back to the artists please! |
|
|
|
Post by jeremy on Apr 22, 2008 20:42:17 GMT 10
how?
seriously, I want to know
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewh on Apr 23, 2008 5:32:25 GMT 10
how? seriously, I want to know Can I have a try? In short, Bennetts Lane is one of the key stakeholders in the MIJF (Tortoni: "No matter what artistic director has been here. . . they've always used Bennetts Lane as the cornerstone club venue"), and has plenty to profit from in the MIJF context in terms of audience footfall, increased exposure, etc. In 2004 Adrian Jackson characterised the Festival thus: "On one hand, you can appeal to a variety of audiences, and reach a much broader range of potential listeners, including people who wouldn't buy a ticket for a whole weekend of concerts but might decide to see one particular show, perhaps at a nearby venue. On the other hand, you don't have the same chance to cross-subsidise the program - every show at each venue has to pull a crowd on its own merits." So: (a) the raison d'être of the Festival is to attract an audience from outside the usual "jazz" crowd, so venues associated with the Festival receive a PR boost by default, and the potential for ongoing name recognition with new audiences (well, that is, if the Festival is doing its job); and (b) the Artistic Director has in his/her gift the matching of events with venues, so, if he/she so desired could ensure that a particular venue had the best possible chance of pulling its crowds. In 2005, reporting on Prince's visit to Bennetts Lane, Leon Gettler in wrote in The Age, "Prince was no jazz performer but Tortoni knew that getting him in would only strengthen the Bennetts Lane brand. In a business in which word of mouth gets more people through the door, landing the artist would only generate more buzz about the venue." Maybe that's Gettler taking liberties, but it was in the context of an extensive, laudatory interview with Tortoni, and there was no "we were wrong" the following day. Elsewhere in the same article, we read: "Putting it down to a question of economics, the laws of supply and demand make Tortoni a powerful figure in Melbourne's music scene. Tortoni acknowledges that owning the country's top jazz venue works in his favour. "As the brand gets stronger, they start making inquiries so they are coming in on my terms," he said. "With me ringing somebody and saying 'I want you to play at Bennetts Lane', then I am taking the risk. When they want to play in your club, it's on your terms, rather than difficult terms. That takes a long time to develop and it means doing it right all the time."" The appearance of a conflict of interest in this case would exist where the Artistic Director of the Festival – an individual representing de facto the funders of the Festival (which includes, we are told, "triennial funding from Victorian Major Events, believed to be worth about $1.6 million over three years" – that's mine and your money, folks*) – has the ability to utilise that position for the purposes of personal gain. The conflict would occur where the Artistic Director's professional obligations (as custodian of mine and your money) clash with his/her personal interests; typically, if the individual tries to perform that duty while at the same time trying to achieve personal gain. I think it's clear that the relationship of Bennetts Lane to the MIJF, and vice versa, illustrated above, makes it bleedingly obvious that there's a direct conflict of interest. It's obscured because of Bennetts Lane's place in the Melbourne jazz scene - it would be odd for the MIJF not to want to use the venue - but it doesn't mean the conflict does not exist. In the terms Tortoni uses above, it is the MIJF ringing him wanting to use Bennetts Lane. The MIJF - built in part on significant amounts of public money - taking the risk, entirely on his terms. Tortoni's startling disingenuity is pretty troubling though ("It's a totally different structure, the Melbourne Jazz Festival is not for profit, it's a totally different structure to a commercial enterprise.") - it's because it's not-for-profit, not in spite of, that the conflict arises. While it's entirely possible that Bennetts Lane charges MIJF no venue hire, takes no cut on the door, donates any profit from beverage sales to charity, etc, for Tortoni to pretend that even no appearance of a conflict exists, especially given the virtual non-sequitur he employs to defend it, is a little unbelievable. How is there a conflict of interest? It is, as they say, a no-brainer. Given Tortoni's inability to spot the difference one might also conclude that so is he. *Former Premier Steve Bracks launched Victorian Major Events thus: "To improve further on the major events strategy in the state, today I announced a new transparency arrangement for major events in Victoria. For all those disparate accounts held for major events, some being in the programs of government departments and some in the Treasurer's advance when matters have run over budget, there will be a capped figure of $40 million in the budget accounts ahead of time for major events in Victoria, as a net cost to the taxpayers of Victoria. Receipts for many millions of dollars will be submitted for the conduct of those events, and receipts will go out, but where there is a net cost to the taxpayer, such as for a licence or some other arrangement, the total sum the state will bear in the future will have a cap of $40 million identified in the budget, ahead of time and transparent for the taxpayer." There'd be a few Victorian taxpayers on here perhaps wondering at the transparency involved in Michael Tortoni being appointed Artistic Director of this Festival, of the obnoxious Albert Dadon being appointed Artistic Director of this Festival, even of Adrian Jackson being appointed Artistic Director of this Festival. There'd also be plenty of people on this board who would make fantastic Artistic Directors of this Festival, or one like it, were they given the chance - thoroughly transparently - to apply for the job. And whose conflict of interest, in taking it on, would be just as ticklish. |
|
|
|
Post by jeremy on Apr 23, 2008 6:57:04 GMT 10
thanks Andrew
|
|
|
|
Post by ironguts on Apr 23, 2008 10:35:09 GMT 10
Wow, that's an answer, well said.
|
|
|
|
Post by punter on Apr 23, 2008 11:58:30 GMT 10
Yep...
Look I think Michael has done a lot of good stuff for Australian Jazz and as the director of the festival he would certainly be better than the totally incompetent Albare. Albare goes on about philanthropy but the fact remains he has been given more taxpayers' money to play with than any previous director and, judging by the state of this year's debacle, has pissed it against the wall. So Michael would, in my opinion be an improvement. But the conflict of interest described above should surely not be dismissed?
And when you're mentioning obnoxious festival directors, please let's not forget that vile little toad from Umbria... It's really like the Spinal Tap of jazz this whole thing...
Perhaps there needs to be some sort of process put in place here, after all it's public money money.
|
|
|
|
Post by runningbear on Apr 24, 2008 2:20:46 GMT 10
mmm....
as far as the hand-over and public money and not-for-profit and all that... can someone clarify the structure that is Melbourne Jazz Fest?? I had been told that it was a private company that Albert owned - I'm not disputing whether it is set-up as NFP or not. But if it is a privately owned company then I wonder whether transparency is really something that should be expected. Maybe AJ knows more of that from his time there?
Keep in mind also the sponsorship from Crown and other various commercial/private sources - it is not all public money/support. I just mention this in order to not get too righteous about it being all "our" money. I don't dispute the large sum that has been funded by taxpayers but without sighting the budget it is impossible to properly debate this point. Please note that while I personally may not agree with the choice of certain sponsors and other matters, Albert should be given some credit for getting Major Events funding and in sourcing substantial support and/or funds from private sponsors as well.
Mmm... just another question that is raised if Albert does own the brand... he has resigned as Artistic Director but if he owns the brand then does he retain control anyway?
There are a number of issues either way on this, but without any substantiation it all remains conjecture.
But to events I do know more about:
I am concerned about the conflict of interest given Michael's prior history. The year when Melb City Council pulled its funding, was also the year that the Bennetts Lane International Jazz Festival happened. Partly due to being taken aback by the vocal protests of musicians and jazz organisations, the MCC did belatedly offer to come up with some support - then Michael came in to save the day with the MCC, with no acknowledgment to the efforts of the musicians/organisations who were fighting also. The festival went ahead, being able to capitalise on artists booked by AJ having their itineraries already booked in, so that they were coming anyway, but different promoters stepped in to carry the Melbourne shows - not all funded by Bennetts Lane.
Here was a chance for the community to pull together - musicians, venues and organisations - and really promote the whole scene: previous festivals had succeeded in boosting numbers at new and uncommon venues for jazz. One such venue was The 9th Ward - having performed there and spoken with the owners, I know that with AJ they always did well during the Jazz Fest. The year of the BL Intl. Fest was a fizzer for them - there was no difference to their regular crowds in anyway, if they were not actually down in numbers. The PR put out by BL had done nothing for them.
Up at the other end of town, there was smug satisfaction at how "successful" the festival was going, simply because BL was full.
Now, tis great if a venue is packed - that makes a successful night for that venue. But if it is a festival covering different venues then it can only be successful if all of the venues benefit.
I'll admit it was a hastily put together program and that maybe it was as much as Michael could do with limited MCC support and time. But my feeling is that there was little consideration for venues outside of BL - I forget now, but I am wondering if I remember a flyer at Bennetts Lane for the festival that listed just the BL gigs - or maybe I'm just thinking of the announcing on the night which promoted only the BL gigs with no mention of the wider program at other venues.
One full venue with 150 people and 5 venues with no one means you might encourage 150 people to come back to see jazz at your venue.
Six venues all half full with 75 people means you have 450 people that have gone out to see jazz for the night and might come back out to see jazz again as a result of the festival.
Surely the latter example is better in the long term for audience development.
This was all several years ago, maybe Michael has become more magnanimous in his outlook in that time?
I agree wholeheartedly about Andrew's comment regarding venue hire, etc. The MIJF may be not-for-profit in the same way the Melb Jazz Co-op is, but I imagine that it would be similar that MIJF would pay hire in the same way that the MJC do. MIJF and BL are separate entities - just because MIJF is non-profit, doesn't mean any of the participating venues are also or are even obliged to consider it. But at least the MJC and BL are not run by the same person. And I know that MJC pays substantially less in venue hire than if someone else comes to BL looking to hire a room.
Arrghh... why is it that we can't have a nice friendly, successful major jazz festival in this city?? It felt like it was on track to getting somewhere before the Umbria debacle but alas - it lurches along again! Fringe is fine but by its very nature, it can't replace what should be our major festival.
Waiting for the next instalment...
|
|
|
|
Post by aj on Apr 24, 2008 9:24:42 GMT 10
When I was at MIJF (late 97-mid 04), it was incorporated as a not-for-profit association. Funding came from some govt sources (local, state, Aus Council), some sponsors, and box-office ; there was a volunteer board that managed, and in effect owned, the organisation. Whether that structure has changed since 2004, I don't know.
With regard to the conflict of interest issue : in a scene as small as ours, some conflict of interest (or potential COI) is pretty hard to avoid. I would think that, if Michael is to be the AD for MIJF, it's up to the Board to satisfy themselves that the programming of acts is not suddenly changed to favor BL (and as MT has pointed out, it has been a key venue through the festival's history anyway), and that the financial arrangement between BL and MIJF is not dramatically different. I don't think that should be impossible to manage.
The real challenge for MT will be in assembling the broader festival program, if he doesn't have the ongoing financial support that Albert has apparently provided in recent years. I for one wish him luck ; I'd hate to see the festival simply go under.
|
|
jec
Junior Member
Posts: 52 
|
Post by jec on Apr 24, 2008 11:56:07 GMT 10
What a joke the festival is this year. Cancellations due to injury & illness are understandeable but to cancel performers due to financial considerations (after they are booked & advertised) is simply unforgiveable & demonstrates mismanagement of one kind or another. In terms of the artists booked this year I can't understand why the over reliance on big name overseas artists. From my perspective I think 1 or 2 such artists are useful in stirring interest ( such as Herbie last year) but then the programme should showcase our phenomenal local talent & I'm not talking about that noted jazzer Demi Hines. As for Dadon at last years festival I had a very strange conversation with him which surprised me greatly.
|
|
|
|
Post by shaggaz on Apr 24, 2008 13:05:59 GMT 10
fringe.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewh on Apr 24, 2008 16:05:16 GMT 10
With regard to the conflict of interest issue : in a scene as small as ours, some conflict of interest (or potential COI) is pretty hard to avoid. I would think that, if Michael is to be the AD for MIJF, it's up to the Board to satisfy themselves that the programming of acts is not suddenly changed to favor BL (and as MT has pointed out, it has been a key venue through the festival's history anyway), and that the financial arrangement between BL and MIJF is not dramatically different. I don't think that should be impossible to manage. With enormous respect, is that not just a little bit lame? Can we not respond to, and try to challenge, the crippling malaise in any aspect of our cultural life that touches on the economic, and the somnolence with which such decisions get made? "I don't think that should be impossible to manage," is probably what Dadon muttered to himself - patting his wallet at the same time - as he accepted his own kind offer of running the MIJF. Well, he was wrong. As I'm sure people pointed out at the time, he was a spectacularly misjudged choice of custodian. Can't we do better? Is Michael Tortoni really the best there is on offer? Can't we aim for excellence? Can't we hope for integrity? This cabalistic way of running things reflects no glory on us or our music. If the august Board of this esteemed Festival are keeping their hands rather than their eyes on the ball why should we not take it upon ourselves also to "satisfy ourselves" that the system is as transparent as it should be? Why should we just accept this Makhsen as the best we can hope for? Of course this scene is small, and a showcase such as this year's MIJF isn't going to make it any larger. (Make me Artistic Director: I'll announce shows for Coltrane and Miles and Louis and then cancel them a week before, claiming unavoidable death: the effect, for the audience, would be identical.) It's not about "some" conflict of interest, necessarily unavoidable, and asking people to rescind their right to question the work of an organisation with such a shoddy (and shady) track record is as good as asking turkeys to vote for Christmas. |
|
|
|
Post by aj on Apr 24, 2008 16:38:47 GMT 10
I'm not dismissing your right to question things that have happened, or will happen ; nor your right to ask for excellence and integrity, either in the artistic direction of the festival or the governance of the organisation. Both are to be encouraged wherever possible!
I was simply arguing that if Michael Tortoni is AD of the MIJF, his conflict of interest, as concurrent owner of Bennetts Lane, ought not be impossible to manage.
(by the way : 'Makhsen'?)
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewh on Apr 24, 2008 18:04:39 GMT 10
I was simply arguing that if Michael Tortoni is AD of the MIJF, his conflict of interest, as concurrent owner of Bennetts Lane, ought not be impossible to manage. I'm sure he's going to have a terrific time managing it. It's one of the most enviable conflicts of interest I've seen all year. What I wouldn't give for such a conflict of interest. "Tortoni denied there was any conflict of interest." Ha, what a kidder. Tell us another one, Michael. Why not open a stand-up comedy club and hire yourself every night. With lines like that you'd pack them in. Dadon can be support: "I'm not done with my contribution to Australian jazz." You guys kill me. Sorry, Makhzen. I was momentarily struck by the bit of trivia that Dadon is "a French Moroccan". If so, he'll be able to tell you what it means. |
|
