I think I'm a loser, to some extent, but I don't think that Mahler has anything to do with it. I've been "downsized", and have had my fair share of health problems. But on the plus side of the ledger, I've had a number of incredible experiences that were directly linked to Gustav Mahler - having to do with encounters that were pure coincidence, as well as some of the incredible "live performance" situations I've been involved in. Whatever faults and flaws I may possess, I can't blame them on Mahler.
San Francisco has become a big Mahler town - too much so, in some respects - and so it goes that a number of powerful and influential people very much like Mahler in this city. I find that to be a bit less true down the peninsula, as people's tastes are a bit more conservative around Palo Alto and San Jose. The "east bay" - forget it!
There's something wrong with the water from East Bay M.U.D., as I find that east bay people (Oakland, Berkeley, Richmond, San Leandro, etc.) often times have emotional problems, and think nothing of acting their problems out on the streets, or in shops. There's a lot of bad, public theater. I think Mahler could actually help them, if they would just give it a chance. S.F. is a tougher city but in a different way, so there's just less time, room, and tolerance for such behavior. It's more like N.Y. in that sense.
Marin county (north of the G.G. Bridge) . . . forget it! Nice people, but they're still into New Age. Actually, jazz is fairly strong in Marin AND the east bay. I've got to applaud them for that.