Jump to content
Mander Organ Builders Forum

Worcester - You May Not Believe This


Recommended Posts

Guest delvin146

Surely you're not serious. Unfortunately I suspect you are. Didn't a similar thing happen with Christchurch Oxford?

 

If indeed he were to leave after all this I'd be thoroughly disgusted.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Roffensis

I think it is nothing short of a travesty if Mr. Lucas is leaving Worcester, and one wishes that things could have happened sooner and possibly saved the poor old organ there.

 

The mind boggles.

 

 

R

Link to post
Share on other sites
Surely you're not serious. Unfortunately I suspect you are. Didn't a similar thing happen with Christchurch Oxford?

 

If indeed he were to leave after all this I'd be thoroughly disgusted.

 

Unfortunately I have good reason to believe in the veracity of my information.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My inside contact at Worcester Cathedral, one of only a handful of people to have had a piston channel reserved for their use on the old organ, had heard nothing of this when I saw him last night.

 

Re. precedents, although not exactly similar, DB didn't hang around long at Gloucester having had the organ tarted up to his requirements.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Re. precedents, although not exactly similar, DB didn't hang around long at Gloucester having had the organ tarted up to his requirements.

 

No he did not, although the situation at Gloucester (as you have observed) was not precisely similar. There were, for instance, long-standing issues with certain of the lay-clerks. DJB felt, in any case, that he had gone as far as he could with the choir. In fact, as you may know, he swapped places with Ian Ball for a few months before he left. It is possible that David may have stayed longer under these conditions, were it not for Ian's early departure from Gloucester Cathedral. I never had the courage to ask David if he had also swapped salaries with Ian....

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Roffensis
In the words of a pantomime script.....Oh no I'm not!

 

Adrian

 

 

Aha!! But to which pantomime "script" are you referring?

 

The ears of the deaf may yet be unstopped?

 

Wishful thinking :(

 

R

Link to post
Share on other sites
Malcolm Archer is a fine man and musician and St Paul's loss is most definitely Winchester College's gain. In between his stints at Bristol and Wells, Malcolm held a similiar post to the Winchester one at Clifton College in Bristol, so his new job will be a known quantity.

 

As for St Paul's, one name to consider is James O'Donnell. He appears to have survived the 'snakes in a sack' politics that comes with the job at the Abbey and, with his superb choir-training skills, would appear to have all the ideal qualifications for the St Paul's post.

 

Is it just me, or are the Organists and Master of the Choristers being appointed these days getting younger and younger?

 

 

 

No Jeremy they are getting younger Organist's and Directors of Music at Cathedrals. And why do u think that is ? Its' pretty obvious by any job description that these places are looking for a lot more than a Organist & Director of Music. They want u to be and Accountant, attend meetings and have a good working knowledge of Child protection issues. As well as execute the highest possible standard of Music on probably a paucity of a Music Budget. No matter how attractive the salary might be I am not doing several other peoples jobs. No wonder Organists are leaving there jobs in the UK. Who wants pushy clergy and all the politics that seem to go in these lonely places. My God no wonder why some Organists have commited suicide in these places the atmosphere as good as it might be musically must be pretty stifling.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But in the real world any senior management job requires a wide range of skills and the ability to keep numerous balls in the air at once. Of course a cathedral organist should have good financial management, negotiating and interpersonal skills - to mention only three. Anyone involved in running anything to do with people and money needs these.

 

The job is most certainly not just about making music.

Link to post
Share on other sites
In the words of a pantomime script.....Oh no I'm not!

 

Adrian

 

Adrian, I have been trying to contact you, but your e-Mail seems to have changed. Your switch-board lady was going to give you a message.........buzz me, will you?

 

Barry

Link to post
Share on other sites
Here we agree, Pcnd!

 

Warnings there have been enough, so that nobody will

be able to tell ".....That we did not know, what we did".

 

What really matters is not what is said, but who said it.

 

Pierre

 

I fully agree with this comment!

 

Pierre

 

Shurely shome mishtake?

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is clearly an unfortunate situation.

 

Mr. Lucas - my apologies for the content of my original post, which was evidently incorrect.

 

My information came from someone whose integrity I respect. The three other pieces of information which I received from the same source have turned out to be accurate. I hope that you can understand my confusion.

 

Sean Tucker

Link to post
Share on other sites
I fight against ideas, not the people!

 

Pierre

 

What really matters is not what is said, but who said it.

 

Pierre

 

Shurely shome mishtake!!!!

 

There seems to be a lot of inconsistency among several people now that Mr Lucas has appeared.

 

The railing against the removal of the old Worcester organ (and those who caused it to be) was only slightly exceeded by the Alexandra Palace thread in vitriol and outstripped all other topics by volume. Almost constantly people have referred, here and in other places, to "W..... somewhere in England".

 

Perhaps this is because Adrian Lucas evidently has a sense of humour and doesn't give a toss about what it says on this board - rather unlike certain other recent "celebrity" contributors...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe this has not been understood:

 

"What really matters is not what is said, but who said it"

 

This sentence I wrote in a book means: whenever several people

talk about something, the one who will win the case is ever the

higher placed in a dedicate hierarchy, regardless of the roots

of his/her convictions.

That is it.

I ever thought, and continue to think, to destroy Worcester's organ to be

a mistake.

But I respect the people who decided it, because it is not me that had

to do with a *special* organ in a difficult room.

Like to have to do a score in a race with a nearly brake-less 1950 Jaguar.

Such a vintage car belongs to a collector; meanwhile, Worcester's organ

should have been attributed to a kind of today's Howells, with a new organ

elsewhere in the Cathedral for the "premium" recital work.

And we owe respect to the builder(s) who will build the new organs there,

regardless of what we think.

Again: we may fight againsts ideas, but to fight the people themselves is

something widely different.

Pierre

Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe this has not been understood:

 

"What really matters is not what is said, but who said it"

 

This sentence I wrote in a book means: whenever several people

talk about something, the one who will win the case is ever the

higher placed in a dedicate hierarchy, regardless of the roots

of his/her convictions.

That is it.

I ever thought, and continue to think, to destroy Worcester's organ to be

a mistake.

But I respect the people who decided it, because it is not me that had

to do with a *special* organ in a difficult room.

Like to have to do a score in a race with a nearly brake-less 1950 Jaguar.

Such a vintage car belongs to a collector; meanwhile, Worcester's organ

should have been attributed to a kind of today's Howells, with a new organ

elsewhere in the Cathedral for the "premium" recital work.

And we owe respect to the builder(s) who will build the new organs there,

regardless of what we think.

Again: we may fight againsts ideas, but to fight the people themselves is

something widely different.

Pierre

 

Now I understand. Sorry for misunderstanding.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Shurely shome mishtake!!!!

 

There seems to be a lot of inconsistency among several people now that Mr Lucas has appeared.

 

The railing against the removal of the old Worcester organ (and those who caused it to be) was only slightly exceeded by the Alexandra Palace thread in vitriol and outstripped all other topics by volume. Almost constantly people have referred, here and in other places, to "W..... somewhere in England".

 

Perhaps this is because Adrian Lucas evidently has a sense of humour and doesn't give a toss about what it says on this board - rather unlike certain other recent "celebrity" contributors...

The use of oblique references to Worcester started as a response to certain other contributers suggesting that Worcester shouldn't be mentioned any more. In itself I think this is harmless humour.

 

A number of us, myself certainly included, very much regretted the decision to scrap the old organ and questioned the reasons for doing so. I think we've all moved on now, as its clearly a lost cause, and wish the extraordinary project to replace one organ with three every success. I'm sure everyone involved in the project, including Mr Lucas, will have expected a degree of controversy and must have been prepared for this. If any of my comments on the earlier Worcester thread can be interpretted as personal attacks then I apologise unreservedly for this.

 

I know that Adrian Lucas's work at Worcester is highly regarded by those who work with him and am very glad to hear that the reports of his departure have turned out to be incorrect.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...