| Something I'm working on. Comments Please. |
| Monday, 27 August 2007 | |
|
Readers, this Hot Topic! article will address statements that I've read and heard about the necessity of building a cohesive community of classical musicians of color such as the Myrtle Hart Society. Some adversaries feel it unnecessary to segregate based on race. Some circles feel that since we can't join 'em or beat 'em, we form our own groups, a lesser version of their prototypes. They say if we were on their level to compete, we wouldn't have such problems with diversity. Yes, I've heard many alarming and hurtful statements, some of which made me cry angry tears. I've been frustrated. I've asked questions. I've demanded answers. Now I feel that I finally have enough to go on. I need to speak my heart. I may not always get the language correct, but I do hope that my point shines through… Many groups and individuals talk about diversity without really taking the steps to ameliorate the problem. I remember one job interview in which it was suggested during the interview that I inquire about positions within similarly structured, yet "colored" organizations. I was of course taken aback since it was this organization that was allegedly trying to diversify. Organizations "of color" have little problem with diversity, rather accepting all perspectives (ethnicities, races, etc.). It took me a while to realize that the problem is not that a hegemonic ideology of anti-racism discourages honest conversation about race. Rather, it is a refusal by most members of the classical music community and other arts organizations to recognize that our practices, language, and institutional structures maintain and perpetuate racial boundaries. Our collective goal as advocates of social change should be to match and surpass the generally accepted status so as to establish that all of us have an equal capacity to achieve intellectual and musical excellence in these complex endeavors. Why should we do this? Many organizations feel that they are doing a lot already: making substantial financial contributions to organizations that promote diversity; funding scholarships for musicians and composers; retaining diversity consultants; using creative approaches to identify and recruit Black and Latino performers' supporting their own diversity committees and, in some cases, engaging in regular communication with colleagues about diversity goals. All of these are most certainly worthy endeavors. But they will not produce sustainable results until we acknowledge and address the looming problem of culture. Most organizations do these things because they are committed to the need for diversity; however, they stop short of recognizing that our professional culture has deeply embedded attitudes and behavior that impede our progress. Effective leaders of any race in many organizations, like their counterparts in the larger society, play a critical role in the development of beliefs and attitudes. They can encourage the adoption of policies that are likely to change behavior in the short term. My life experience has convinced me that many people do not have fixed opinions on racial equality. I firmly believe that good leaders have the capacity to influence attitudes and behaviors and to eliminate structures that present barriers to change. For meaningful change to occur, however, our leaders, from elementary school principals to President hopefuls, must support the implementation of a candid discussion about race – not because it is "politically correct" to do so, but because it is ethically correct and politically necessary. I say "politically" because this discussion begins a process that ends with classical musicians of color exercising the same intellectual, cultural and institutional clout as their white peers. Hence, there can be no progress until all musicians/composers/art administrators agree that such an outcome is desirable. Many of us have at one time or another been the only musician of color in the orchestra or ensemble. How many among the white musicians have had a comparable experience? In classical music, that is, not in jazz or some other form of "Black music?" (See discussions on Defining Black Music) Why does that matter? How many influential white musicians grew up without encountering Black youths as peers? How many have been told—and believed—that their chances of admission to college or graduate school were diminished by affirmative action? How many went through college learning almost nothing about African-American history or culture? (My, and countless others, whole musical lives, I've learned so much more about white composers and musicians than any Black American history and culture, especially in college.) How many have referred to "qualified minorities" but not "qualified whites" when discussing recruitment into orchestra positions or arts administrative jobs, or have heard such reference and not even noticed? Our principal goal should be to raise expectations by eliminating the destructive view that diversity results in lower quality. (Did I hear someone say "stereotypes are a real time-saver"?) Leaders in community music schools, public schools, arts-driven organizations and institutions can raise expectations by treating our young students of color as men and women capable of playing leading roles as, dare I say, tenured musicians in major orchestras, or who can develop new skills when necessary to support the bottom line in the same way that white musicians often do. If there is one thing that I can say unequivocally about major orchestras it is this: the mind set of the performers will almost always follow their conductor because they fear the consequences of not doing so. And thus my proposal to you now: we must come to terms with why our progress as conscious Americans advocating for change has been so slow, and ensure that our organizations and orchestras receive acceptable returns on the investments in diversity that we all are making today. |
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|