Leonard Slatkin, From Two Directions

One: True enough, although I'm coming to think that Barber has gone from deeply underrated to wildly overrated faster than you can say "Gustav Mahler." I should add that I've generally found Slatkin's Mahler refreshingly objective, last year's uncoordinated Symphony No. 8 excepted. I've also admired Slatkin's ease with the cooler late-romantic and early 20th-century literature (Dvorak, Elgar, Vaughan Williams) and the humor and heartiness he brings to the classical repertory, particularly Haydn, Mendelssohn and early Beethoven. Moreover, over the past year or so, he seems to be taking a greater interest in his work than he has in some time.

Two: Do you think there was a falling-off in the middle of Slatkin's tenure?

One: Oh, no question -- and he's admitted as much. When Slatkin was being considered for the music directorship at the Detroit Symphony Orchestra -- where he will begin his first three-year contract next fall -- he told the Detroit Free Press that his years in Washington were less than fully successful. He said this was partly because he had to answer to four different executive directors. But he also acknowledged his own failings. "There was a time when I wasn't focused and at my best," he said. "I'm much more focused in rehearsals than I used to be. I'm more detailed. After going through the standard repertoire many times in my life, I finally have developed a real sense of what I want to do with these pieces."

Two: That's refreshingly honest. What do you think happened to him during the years when he wasn't "at his best"?

One: Who knows? All of a sudden he was lazy and detached, relying on the same artists and the same formulas that had worked well for him before. I remember the dismay one musician shared with me in 2004, on condition of anonymity: "We'd play something and it would be loud, crass and unbelievably ugly, and he just couldn't be bothered with making it better. All he'd say in rehearsal was, 'It'll be fine.' And after a while we knew that it just wouldn't be fine."

Two: You rarely hear complaints from orchestral musicians that their conductors are going too easy on them!

One: This is a serious group of players and I think that they want to be -- and have at times come close to being -- a reliably first-class orchestra. My sources among the musicians tell me that their happiest concerts in the last few years have been with just those conductors who worked them the hardest: Dohn¿nyi, Masur and Maazel. They play very well for Iv¿n Fischer, who will be principal conductor for two years starting in September. So long as a conductor is respectful, well prepared and neither a bully nor a time-waster, I should think the NSO would be a pleasure to work with. Certainly, there's very little of that chip-on-the-shoulder, hostile aggression toward anybody who tries to lead them that you find in some of the orchestras in the larger American cities.

Two: And so now what for the NSO?

One: My hope is that it will engage a thoughtful, accomplished and charismatic musician who will commit to the orchestra and to the community, with deep and personal ideas about the great repertory of the past and a keen interest in, and affinity for, the best contemporary music around. This is a wealthy orchestra -- its 20-year old affiliation with the Kennedy Center has ensured that -- and it can pay handsomely for the privilege. Slatkin made more than $1.1 million a year from the NSO alone. Not many other orchestras have such financial security, so the NSO is going to be a "catch" for somebody -- and that's setting aside the incalculable prestige of leading the principal orchestra in the capital of the United States.

Two: Do you think it is possible that the NSO will move toward the modern European model -- hiring, say, a principal conductor instead of a full-time music director, and relegating most decisions about direction and personnel to the orchestra players themselves?

One: I've sometimes wondered whether the NSO might be taking a look at Maazel in this capacity. He lives an hour outside Washington, he's one of the two or three great technicians now before the public, he has a terrific rapport with the NSO, his tenure with the New York Philharmonic is up in 2009, and there is money in the hopper to meet what would undoubtedly be extravagant salary demands. On some level, it makes sense. But Maazel will be almost 80 years old by the time this could be put into play and I can't see him wanting to take on more than a few weeks a year. The president of the Kennedy Center, Michael M. Kaiser, has assured me that he wants the NSO to find a music director -- period -- and I think he is right. Surely there is somebody out there who can take this orchestra to the next level.

Two: What about David Robertson, who seems to be able to conduct anything anywhere, and whose contract in St. Louis is up in 2010?