It should be no surprise to anyone musically active at Tufts University that the realization of a proper performance space has had a long and complicated history.
As a prospective student who wanted to make membership in the Tufts Symphony Orchestra a central component of my undergraduate experience, I was excited by the University's ambitious plans to upgrade its musical facilities. During my four years at Tufts, I can remember frequently walking past a bulletin board outside the music library that proudly displayed the latest incarnation of the prospective music building that was to be the centerpiece of a new arts complex.
Fundraising concerns, permit holdups, and other complications pushed the opening date further and further back. Even though the groundbreaking for the new facility did not take place until after my graduation in 2005, I was thrilled that the future musicians of the Tufts Symphony Orchestra would be able to perform in a setting deserving of their passion, dedication and talent.
Thus it was with great concern that I read Bruce Hamilton's article ("New music hall may be too small for TSO and Chorale," Mar. 6, 2006). Frustrated musicians in the Tufts Symphony Orchestra have for years voiced Professor Andrew Clarke's sentiment that the remodeling of Cohen Auditorium rendered it unfit for musical performance over a decade ago. This fact is not debated by anyone.
It was the understanding of many in the Tufts Symphony Orchestra that the planned music hall would serve as a new home for the ensemble. This was particularly relevant in light of the many scheduling issues and acoustical deficiencies that rendered Cohen Auditorium a blatantly unsuitable home. These considerable inadequacies required the leadership of the Tufts Symphony Orchestra at the time to search beyond the confines of the Hill to find a suitable performance space for its concerts.
Everyone who had an interest in the new music building understood that it needed to be built to benefit the entire music department.
I don't doubt that many administrators took into account the interest of the more than two hundred dedicated members of the Tufts Symphony Orchestra and Tufts Chorale, along with their respective directors.
This is why I was surprised by the words of Construction Project Manager Raymond Santangelo: "The hall was never intended to hold the orchestra."
Would the University dedicate its fundraising efforts to build a new athletic complex from the ground up knowing it would be too cramped to be used by Tufts' many accomplished teams? Or undertake the arduous task of constructing a new state of the art laboratory knowing that it could not benefit all of Tufts' budding scientists? This is preposterous.
If the new music hall cannot serve as a home for the Tufts Symphony Orchestra and the Tufts Chorale, I cannot concur with Professor Janet Schmalfeldt's conclusion that the new facilities will allow the Tufts music program "to reach its full potential."
Unfortunately, without enough room to comfortably hold either the orchestra or the chorus or both, a main function of the music hall is significantly frustrated. The ensembles will be forced to expend more time and money to perform a majority of their concerts away from the University.
It is most unfortunate for the many active students in the Tufts University Orchestra and Tufts Chorale that the new performance hall will be obsolete before it is even opened to the public.
Tufts University has many reasons to be proud of the Tufts Symphony Orchestra and the Tufts Chorale. The ensembles promote the ideals of active global citizenship and diverse cultural influences that are so crucial and fundamental to a Tufts education.
Because of all they offer to the University and to their student members, the Tufts Symphony Orchestra and the Tufts Chorale are worthy of having a home they can be proud of as well.
Phillip Hummel (LA '05) is a former Co-President of the Tufts Symphony Orchestra
