‘Dangerous Liaisons’

I am writing in response to Timothy Pfaff’s review of the premiere of Conrad Susa’s opera “Dangerous Liaisons” (“ ‘Liaisons’ a Tricky Outing in San Francisco,” Sept. 12).

I do not propose to comment on Pfaff’s aesthetic objections to Susa’s work; Pfaff has every right to express his opinion, however obtuse, and in whatever style he chooses, however mean-spirited. As a musicologist who clings to the old-fashioned virtues of absolute probity and historical accuracy, and as I am personally acquainted with Susa, I am writing to correct Pfaff’s inaccurate claim that “Susa’s score may not even be his work.” Pfaff further claims that “you didn’t even have to be a member of the local music community to learn that someone close to you was orchestrating a passage or two.”

I was able to follow all of Susa’s work on “Dangerous Liaisons,” from its initial sketches to its completion. In July, I modestly aided in the production of the final score by proofreading several scenes in the second act. I can assure Pfaff and his readers in the Los Angeles Times that Susa composed every note of this score and is responsible for its orchestration.

The two gentlemen that Pfaff cites in his review, Donald Ontiveros and Manly Romero, worked from Susa’s meticulously annotated short score, where the choice of every instrument was clearly indicated. In other words, they acted as two highly skilled and sensitive amanuenses, helping Susa in the massive task of preparing the full score. Aside from proofreaders and computer copyists, nobody else was involved in the preparation of this opera. The composer carefully checked the scoring of each scene and made further refinements to his orchestration during a series of readings held this summer by the San Francisco Opera Orchestra and conducted by Donald Runnicles and Randall Behr. Many composers have sought such assistance in the production of the full score of a large work, by the way, including Berlioz, Debussy, Holst and, most notably, Prokofiev, for whom this was standard operating procedure.

I am willing to entertain the hope that Pfaff’s erroneous claims in this matter were the result of mendacious sources. I must suggest, however, that he strive to distinguish fact from innuendo and trim as much of this sort of unhealthy journalistic fat from the body of his criticism as possible.

BYRON ADAMS

Associate Professor of Music

UC Riverside