When Peter Gelb took over at the Met, he was faced with the dilemna of satisfying his older tradional patrons who were his major source of funding or moderning the productions to bring in a younger audience he'd need for funding when the older wealthier ones were no longer around. He decided to take the provocative route, and risk rattling the old guard by bringing in directors and creative contributors from the worlds of film, avante guard theater, modern dance, and the art world. Much controversy ensued. Some of these productions were disasters, others were pure genius. Over time, I think Met patrons learned to judge each production on it's own artistic merits, instead of judging in generalization. The Met seems to have reached a place where there is appreciation for both, and the generational divide which was a factor in Gelb's early days seems less of an issue each year.