Women in Brass Bands

owain_s

Member
Anyone else hear the report on radio 4 this morning? about how the Metropolitan Opera Orch in NY brought in blind auditions...initially to combat sexism, and a good interview with the 1st trombone Weston Sprott one of the first black trombonists to occupy a major orchestral chair, he is a big supporter of blind auditions, they even use heavy carpet on the floor so the pannel can't pick out a females footsteps.

Against the idea was the manager of the LSO, he was against because as he pointed out that if a female or minority player won the audition they still are given a trial and that is when any anti feelings will be made known as per Dave's posts earlier.
Don't remove one potential barrier, because others might still exist? What a bizarre position that was to take!
 

MoominDave

Well-Known Member
It doesn't stack up as a real life position to take - so I wonder if what he was saying was more along the lines of "Even if you do this, if you have underlying problems, it won't fix them"?

But I wasn't listening to it...
 

Bbmad

Active Member
I could point out how bizarre I find it that of our current generation of political leaders, none have yet graduated from their 40s?
Not at all bizarre. Everyone knows that varsity educated men in their 40s make for the best leaders. Brass Bands would benefit from having a few more public schoolboys who know what they are talking about.
 

2nd tenor

Well-Known Member
Similarly, you seem to suggest that younger people's points of view are less valid, purely on an ad hominem basis.
QUOTE]

My post was addressed to Dave Taylor and as it questioned his (perceived) thoughts rather than attacking the person I believe that it cannot correctly be described as ‘ad hominem’. (Ref: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_hominem). Dave will no doubt challenge me if that’s not his understanding too and knows that I respect his thoughts regardless as to whether or not they match mine.

Thinking more broadly about this thread and the forum I think attacks on the poster rather than constructive questioning of their ideas are far too common and discourage potential posters who might well otherwise add useful comment. Is it any wonder that so few women have posted on this thread when the blokes behave in an adversarial manner?

On a personal note I won’t claim to be perfect – self improvement work is in progress - but, like others, find that some forum members chose to attack me rather than properly reading and addressing the points I’ve raised. Sometimes I attack back and sometimes I let matters ride, depends what I think will be for the best.

Now getting back to the OP how do we get more women to show us the way forward that they want? Mind, if we but read them in depth, I think ten left thumbs did a very good job of answering the OP in her few posts.
 
Last edited:

owain_s

Member
My post was addressed to Dave Taylor and as it questioned his (perceived) thoughts rather than attacking the person I believe that it cannot correctly be described as ‘ad hominem’. (Ref: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_hominem). Dave will no doubt challenge me if that’s not his understanding too and knows that I respect his thoughts regardless as to whether or not they match mine.
Sorry, I wasn't clear, I meant that it would be an ad hominem dismissal of the (hypothetical) young persons' views, but in any case I doubt this was the intention.
 
Sorry, I wasn't clear, I meant that it would be an ad hominem dismissal of the (hypothetical) young persons' views, but in any case I doubt this was the intention.
There is also the ad hominem dismissal of non players views. But it's ok, 2nd Tenor has the full weight and backing of the always accurate Wikipedia.
 

2nd tenor

Well-Known Member
Sorry, I wasn't clear, I meant that it would be an ad hominem dismissal of the (hypothetical) young persons' views, but in any case I doubt this was the intention.
That's ok, mostly we try to be clear but sometimes we are not and sometimes the reader doesn't understand.

Whatever, I really think it's time to focus on the OP and agree to differ where we do.
 

MoominDave

Well-Known Member
My post was addressed to Dave Taylor and as it questioned his (perceived) thoughts rather than attacking the person I believe that it cannot correctly be described as ‘ad hominem’. (Ref: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_hominem). Dave will no doubt challenge me if that’s not his understanding too and knows that I respect his thoughts regardless as to whether or not they match mine.
In case my reply got lost in the last few posts - #240 at 10:29.

I think where the drop in communication came was in my applying the (fairly unarguable) idea that there is a natural tendency to 'set' in one's thinking as one ages, that kicks in at different ages for different people, to the specific example at hand. Not so many people (but still more than is comfortable to live amongst) fall into this trap before they leave youth. Almost nobody reaches old age without it happening. So by elimination middle age is the usual venue in which this occurs.
But it doesn't seem to me that we are talking about a usual sample of middle-aged people here in thinking of the Munich Phil management of the 1980s. Rather, these were people who saw fit to be extremely reactionary in the face of a fight that a wider worldview would have instantly shown to be both hopeless and shameful. Theirs weren't the actions of people who took an active interest in integrating new ideas and information into their minds, but rather the actions of people who had already decided how the world was, and saw it as their mission to maintain their faulty perceptions in the face of the evidence by altering the world to fit.
In other words - this specific bunch of people had clearly already submitted to the age-dependent 'setting' threshold in their thinking. And it is my observation that the younger that someone does 'set', the more zealously dogmatic they are about it. There's probably something about the nature of truth and each individual's varying need for certainty in this...

I hope that makes my brief off-the-cuff thought a little bit clearer? "Ageism", specifically in its form of applying "a tendency to regard older persons as debilitated" (as www.dictionary.com has it in the most pertinent of its definitions) to middle age, was nowhere present in my thinking, so far as I'm aware, even after having peered into my thoughts a bit more closely.

Thinking more broadly about this thread and the forum I think attacks on the poster rather than constructive questioning of their ideas are far too common and discourage potential posters who might well otherwise add useful comment. Is it any wonder that so few women have posted on this thread when the blokes behave in an adversarial manner?

On a personal note I won’t claim to be perfect – self improvement work is in progress - but, like others, find that some forum members chose to attack me rather than properly reading and addressing the points I’ve raised. Sometimes I attack back and sometimes I let matters ride, depends what I think will be for the best.

Now getting back to the OP how do we get more women to show us the way forward that they want? Mind, if we but read them in depth, I think ten left thumbs did a very good job of answering the OP in her few posts.
Part of the problem is that the OP phrased themselves deliberately provocatively. For what it's worth, I think Steve Anker was probably factually correct in immediately calling them out as deliberately trolling in making that post, but there's no reason such a post can't be followed by a reasonable discussion - as indeed at many times in this thread it has. But that original apparently spiteful intent has carried forward to some extent, infecting the quality of the ongoing discourse.

It's a difficult topic to discuss, as it always attracts people with contrasting views and often a great and not really justified sense of certainty based on systematically biased observation of the world around us. But I don't think we're doing too badly so far this time. Some needling, but in the main the lid has stayed happily on the simmering pot and Peter Bale hasn't so far as I've noticed had to break out the Flash to rub off the spillage from the hob.

The 'Ad Hominem' accusations that went back and forth a few posts ago I think show nothing more than how difficult it is to be simultaneously sensitive to others and to make points that are usefully non-specific. I see how one could have suspected ageism from my post, carefully though I thought I'd written it, and hope this is cleared up now. Similarly, writing "Indeed the younger folk with their ‘modern’ ideas know less than they think and are near the start of an education process that will shape them throughout life" is rather incautious, and does read as hopelessly overgeneral and a bit provocative - despite the fact that it is fairly clear that you were only intending this as a background thought with an inadvertently omitted "sometimes" attached to it.
 

2nd tenor

Well-Known Member
There is also the ad hominem dismissal of non players views. But it's ok, 2nd Tenor has the full weight and backing of the always accurate Wikipedia.
You seem to have an issue and I want to help you with it. It's Christmas, peace and good will to all, etc.

Please imagine that I am a figure of authority (I'm not but imagine it anyway) and that I have placed you on a stage to speak about your veiws on the OP. Please do gather your thoughts then speak, educate us with the observations and insights you have to offer to the debate.

I really do hope that something you say will be useful and if I hear something that (to my mind) is then be sure that I'll say so.

Please do begin as soon as you can .... but like near all in your potential audience I would like to hear a well thought out and logical speech - some support facts we can check up on would be good to. Good luck and remember to speak both clearly and in a friendly manner.
 
Last edited:

2nd tenor

Well-Known Member
In case my reply got lost in the last few posts - #240 at 10:29.

The 'Ad Hominem' accusations that went back and forth a few posts ago I think show nothing more than how difficult it is to be simultaneously sensitive to others and to make points that are usefully non-specific. I see how one could have suspected ageism from my post, carefully though I thought I'd written it, and hope this is cleared up now. Similarly, writing "Indeed the younger folk with their ‘modern’ ideas know less than they think and are near the start of an education process that will shape them throughout life" is rather incautious, and does read as hopelessly overgeneral and a bit provocative - despite the fact that it is fairly clear that you were only intending this as a background thought with an inadvertently omitted "sometimes" attached to it.
Thanks Dave, good points (thoughout all the post) and well made. An example of what's possible - note to self, 'must try harder'.;)
 

Bbmad

Active Member
Please imagine that I am a figure of authority
[/QUOTE]
Ha ha you wish mate!
Seriously though, that was a superb post, with very good points made in an erudite manner. No spelling mistakes at all, just wonderful. I do hope to see more posts of this quality very soon.
 

Vegasbound

Active Member
This topic started me thinking along the lines of:

Is the recruitment is carried out in brass bands a carry over from the so called amateur days? when players where poached or approached in secrecy?? even now ads for certain chairs carry the wording "in strictest confidence"......and hushed rumoured converstions on the subject of retainers!!

Would it not be more honest and beneficial to advertise these positions openly and honestly?..........then hold blind auditions ?

People forget that Ian Bousfield had to go through the same to win the Vienna Phil job, at the time he was principal trombone of the LSO!

Just a few thoughts!
 

Bbmad

Active Member
This topic started me thinking along the lines of:

Is the recruitment is carried out in brass bands a carry over from the so called amateur days? when players where poached or approached in secrecy?? even now ads for certain chairs carry the wording "in strictest confidence"......and hushed rumoured converstions on the subject of retainers!!

Would it not be more honest and beneficial to advertise these positions openly and honestly?..........then hold blind auditions ?

People forget that Ian Bousfield had to go through the same to win the Vienna Phil job, at the time he was principal trombone of the LSO!

Just a few thoughts!
As if the top bands even audition for new players
 

2nd tenor

Well-Known Member
Anyone else hear the report on radio 4 this morning? about how the Metropolitan Opera Orch in NY brought in blind auditions...initially to combat sexism, and a good interview with the 1st trombone Weston Sprott one of the first black trombonists to occupy a major orchestral chair, he is a big supporter of blind auditions, they even use heavy carpet on the floor so the pannel can't pick out a females footsteps.
Would that report have been on the 'Today' programme (between 6 and 9 am)? I believe that that programme will become available on iplayer, some indication of time heard (within the programme) would be helpful in targeting when to 'listen again'. Thanks, 2T.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Vegasbound

Active Member
Would that report have been on the 'Today' programme (between 6 and 9 am)? I believe that that programme will become available on iplayer, some indication of time heard (within the programme) would be helpful in targeting when to 'listen again'. Thanks, 2T.
Yes the Today programme, somwhere within 15 minutes either side of 8am I believe, although wasn't paying too much attention to the time!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

2nd tenor

Well-Known Member
Yes the Today programme, somwhere within 15 minutes either side of 8am I believe, although wasn't paying too much attention to the time!
The programme is available of iplayer (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04vk6kp I think). Unfortunatley I've not heard the interview yet and have listened from (effectively) 7.40 to 8.35 - but Mervin King has had a lot of interesting things to say. If I find it later I'll post the 'time'. Weston Sprott has a note on his facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/weston.sprott) about being on the programme with Clive Gillinson and expects to post the content (text) when he gets it. It seems that the excert on Today is part of a bigger seperate programme.
 
Top