A deviation from the advertised programme during a classical concert would usually produce, at most, a few disgruntled mumbles from the audience.
But Jayson Gillham’s decision to interrupt his recital of Beethoven’s “Waldstein” sonata and Ligeti’s études to play a new work by his friend, the composer Connor D'Netto, set off a chain of events that is still reverberating through the arts world weeks later.
Gillham, an Australian-British pianist based in London, was performing a solo recital presented by the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra (MSO).
He told the audience that “the killing of journalists is a war crime in international law, and it is done in an effort to prevent the documentation and broadcasting of war crimes to the world.”
The MSO reacted immediately, removing Gillham from the line-up of a planned concert with the orchestra a few days later, replacing his Mozart piano concerto with a Beethoven symphony.
It explained the change in a letter to people who bought tickets by saying the pianist had made “unauthorised statements” representing an “intrusion of personal political views” amid a piano recital.
Debate Ensues
Gillham was interviewed, in which he said he was “really surprised” by what he saw as “an overreaction.”A cacophony of criticism ensued.
Australian artists, journalists, and music fans denounced the Symphony for cancelling the performance and defended Gillham’s right to free speech.
Even the UN Special Rapporteur on Palestine Francesca Albanese entered the debate, calling the decision “disappointing.”
But that wasn’t enough to appease an outraged and very vocal body of critics. On Aug. 26, it was announced that the Symphony’s managing director, Sophie Galaise, was departing.
“There is a clear understanding that we need to learn from these events to ensure the MSO is best positioned to continue offering world-class cultural experiences for our valued audiences.”
Not content to wait for the outcome of that process, the orchestra’s musicians passed a vote of no-confidence in its administration.
“We no longer have faith in the abilities of our senior management to make decisions that are in the best interests of the company at large,” they wrote.
The Orchestra issued an assurance that the inquiry would evaluate its “policies, procedures and processes and cover protocols around freedom of speech and artistic expression onstage.”
The Lawyers Get Involved
And there it might have ended.But Gillham then decided to get the lawyers involved, enlisting Marque Lawyers to write to the Orchestra, outlining his concerns about his treatment and how the MSO could resolve the issue without further legal action.
That would have required the Orchestra to issue him a public apology, affirm the right of artists to speak freely, compensate him for “reputational damage” caused by the initial cancellation, and guarantee future engagements to repair his professional standing.
He also demanded the MSO commission a new piano concerto by a Palestinian composer and to donate the revenue to the Edward Said National Conservatory of Music in Palestine.
That seems to have prompted the MSO to reverse its previously conciliatory tone. Its lawyers, Arnold Bloch Leibler (ABL), responded that the pianist had “abused his position by using an MSO concert to air his political opinions.”
“Your letters make serious allegations about breaches of the law by MSO,” the ABL response says. “They are wrong and Mr. Gillham knows they are wrong. Mr. Gillham has made outrageous demands of the MSO for compensation and other relief. They will never be met.”
Gillham responded, “The actions taken by the MSO constitute direct discrimination because of political belief or activity, which is protected under the Equal Opportunity Act 2010 (VIC) and also violates protections under the Fair Work Act 2009.“These actions infringe my right to freedom of expression and my workplace rights.”
The MSO denies this.
Gillham also alleged he was not being allowed any input into an independent review, an allegation to which the MSO did not directly respond.
Asked at a press conference whether artists should be able to express their political views in their performances, Victoria’s minister for creative industries, Colin Brooks, appeared to back Gillham, saying, “All art is inherently political.”
“We know there are really difficult times at the moment, and people are concerned about world events and other things and, not surprisingly, artists who, by their very nature, express themselves,” Brooks said.
“We see people’s views being expressed, but [it] needs to be done in a way that’s a safe place for everybody, and that’s the work that I think many institutions are doing at the moment—finding a way for that to happen.”
