OT: Funny true story
D.G. Porter
and maybe can identify with the situation.
OK, the background is that some politicians want government services
"contracted out" to private employment services as a way of "saving
taxpayer dollars." This was especially touted by former governors (all
GOP) Reagan, Deumejian and Wilson, as well as supervisors who don't like
their uppity unionized workers. The problem is, you get what you pay
for, and if it sonds too good to be true, it is.
Yesterday morning, near the the Performing Arts building on the CSU
campus, 9 AM, suddenly there's this horrendous din coming from outside.
In the biology class being held in the recital hall (1st floor, near the
glass-enclosed foyer leading outside), the students couldn't hear the
instructor. My wife is up inthe 2nd floor office, mid-building,
surrounded by walls, offices and hallways, and she can ehar this racket
going on for 5-10 minutes. She had no idea what it was, but it sounded
like screeching metal and a deafening clatter.
So after this has been going on for a while, this shy little girl
student comes up to her in the office and asks her to call campus
police. There's this guy outside the foyer, operating a hand-held lawn
mower. But he's not mowing the lawn. He's stumbling about, drunk or
something, and MOWING THE CONCRETE! Sparks are flying eveywhere and he
just keeps on a-mowin'.
Imagine what he might have thought.
"Damn this grass is tough!"
"Oops, the concrete's too high this morning! Better fix that!"
"Why is my shopping catrt making so much noise??"
"Where am I???"
"I seem to have run out of lawn. Won't let that stop me!"
9 AM and this guy is three sheets to the wind with the jib flapping!
Turns out he's one of the Physical Plant's "contracted out" temps in one
of the welfare-to-work programs that are being touted as the be-and and
end-all for employment problems. This is what you get trying to run on
the cheap.
I can imagine the lawsuits if some student had been injured. The girl
said the guy was wobbling about and nearly ran into a couple of
students.
The gardeners here are running their mowers right now. I hope they
don't have someone like this working with them.
Emrla
>something, and MOWING THE CONCRETE! Sparks are flying eveywhere and he
>just keeps on a-mowin'.
>
Maybe he was just sharpening the blades!
EMR
Harold Kahl
thing would be untouchable.
"D.G. Porter" wrote:
>
> I know this is off-topic, but some of us work at or with universities,
> and maybe can identify with the situation.
>
> OK, the background is that some politicians want government services
> "contracted out" to private employment services as a way of "saving
> taxpayer dollars." This was especially touted by former governors (all
> GOP) Reagan, Deumejian and Wilson, as well as supervisors who don't like
> their uppity unionized workers. The problem is, you get what you pay
> for, and if it sonds too good to be true, it is.
>
> Yesterday morning, near the the Performing Arts building on the CSU
> campus, 9 AM, suddenly there's this horrendous din coming from outside.
> In the biology class being held in the recital hall (1st floor, near the
> glass-enclosed foyer leading outside), the students couldn't hear the
> instructor. My wife is up inthe 2nd floor office, mid-building,
> surrounded by walls, offices and hallways, and she can ehar this racket
> going on for 5-10 minutes. She had no idea what it was, but it sounded
> like screeching metal and a deafening clatter.
>
> So after this has been going on for a while, this shy little girl
> student comes up to her in the office and asks her to call campus
> police. There's this guy outside the foyer, operating a hand-held lawn
> mower. But he's not mowing the lawn. He's stumbling about, drunk or
> something, and MOWING THE CONCRETE! Sparks are flying eveywhere and he
> just keeps on a-mowin'.
>
D.G. Porter
>
> Well, he probably got fired, whereas the union worker who did the same
> thing would be untouchable.
Union-bash.
Let me tell you from 2nd-hand relation of 1st-hand experience. If
there's witnessed proof of a job fuck-up, no union can save you. OTOH,
there are too many in management who like to just plain fuck with their
subordinates, and the union is your only hope of setting things
straight.
Matter of fact, many unions aren't powerful enough.
A while ago I posted a story about this fellow "Gourdine" -- some of you
may remember it -- and how he was a darling of the administration and
how administration went after two guys (who he had harrassed physically
and sexually) who made jokes about him, and the union was the only thing
that protected them.
Lousy administration gives rise to lousy unions.
Harold Kahl
Where I work, random drug testing is required. Test positive, and you
will be fired. If you work for the union, that's not the end of the
story though. After filing a grievance, you will likely be reinstated
with back pay and placed in the employee assistance program.
I have no ax to grind with the unions; I don't own a business or
supervise union employees. However, in my experience, people in unions
rarely perform up to their potential. I am talking about a lack of
resourcefulness, drive and initiative.
Nothing against the individuals, it's just the way people act when they
are not accountable for their performance. If that's union bashing, so
be it, it's the truth.
As to the matter of employees who are "screwed" by their employers: Ever
thought of finding another job?
"D.G. Porter" wrote:
>
> Harold Kahl wrote:
> >
> > Well, he probably got fired, whereas the union worker who did the same
> > thing would be untouchable.
>
> Union-bash.
> Let me tell you from 2nd-hand relation of 1st-hand experience. If
> there's witnessed proof of a job fuck-up, no union can save you. OTOH,
> there are too many in management who like to just plain fuck with their
> subordinates, and the union is your only hope of setting things
> straight.
> Matter of fact, many unions aren't powerful enough.
> A while ago I posted a story about this fellow "Gourdine" -- some of you
> may remember it -- and how he was a darling of the administration and
> how administration went after two guys (who he had harrassed physically
> and sexually) who made jokes about him, and the union was the only thing
> that protected them.
> Lousy administration gives rise to lousy unions.
>
<snip>
Fred Nachbaur
pro-union hype is dubious. However, I /will/ agree that it's off-topic.
--
+----------------------------------------------------------+
+ The Best Things in Life are still Free... +
+ http://www.netidea.com/~fredn +
+ ... but now you can also buy my CD :) +
* http://ecom.mp3.com/cgi-bin/order.cgi?cd_id=50719 +
*UK/Europe: http://www.peoplesound.com/artist/frednachbaur +
+----------------------------------------------------------+
Neal
Harold Kahl <hk...@cobweb.net> wrote in message
news:5CBF671206207F4B.C0020990...@lp.airnews.net...
> You mean a personal experience like Al Gore with his dog's medicine?
>
> Where I work, random drug testing is required. Test positive, and you
> will be fired. If you work for the union, that's not the end of the
> story though. After filing a grievance, you will likely be reinstated
> with back pay and placed in the employee assistance program.
I have to laugh when I see Staples employees are drug tested. What if a
cokehead sold me a computer? Of a pot smoker rang up my hole puncher? I
shudder to think...
D.G. Porter
>
> Where I work, random drug testing is required. Test positive, and you
> will be fired.
Without telling what kind of work you do, it's hard to react to this
statement. Do you fly a commercial aircraft? Or do you write
software? Or do you cook for Carl's Jr.? Or do you write movie
soundtracks? How much impact does what you do at home have on your job
performance? Would your private behavior adversely affect people that
you work with? Does your employer merely feel that they have a right to
control every aspect of their employees' lives?
("We are a major Hollywood studio! We drug-test our studio composers!
Drugs make musicians act funny! Mustn't let them write music with minor
chords!!")
> If you work for the union, that's not the end of the
> story though. After filing a grievance, you will likely be reinstated
> with back pay and placed in the employee assistance program.
Which is how it should be unless you're a brain surgeon or airline pilot
or run a butcher's band saw.
> I have no ax to grind with the unions; I don't own a business or
> supervise union employees. However, in my experience, people in unions
> rarely perform up to their potential. I am talking about a lack of
> resourcefulness, drive and initiative.
Well, there are several factors at work here. (1) The kind of people
employed (some people simply lack dive no matter what the job but
someone has to be hired to do it), (2) the kind of work (using nasty
chemicals to clean toilets is no one's favorite job), (3) the fact that
your employer tests you for stuff you do off the job (getting drunk off
the job is OK, but enjoying a doobie is not, e.g.). Again, w/o telling
me what you do, it's hard to say whether or not your observation is
valid or not, depending on circumstance. I know that plenty of
university professors get roaring drunk in their spare tme and it
doesn't affect their ability to teach during class hours. I also know
"drug testing" is really a very fascistic method of social control.
(The Stater Bros. suepmarket chain tests for drugs - if you're a meth
freak, I can understand them not wanting to hire you, but if you're just
a pothead, what difference does it make, except to a control freak? And
why not psychologically test people for mental aberations while we're at
it?)
> Nothing against the individuals, it's just the way people act when they
> are not accountable for their performance. If that's union bashing, so
> be it, it's the truth.
No it's not. My wife (white-collar worker) is very active in her union,
and believe me, she is very accoutable for her performance. Until a few
months ago her supervisor was a real bitch (personally I think the woman
was deranged) and would put crap into her personnel file that had no
basis in reality - things like "She dresses like a slob" and such (she
is in fact an impeccable dresser, sporting some eclectic ethnic clothing
- perhaps the ethnicity factor was what drove her supervisor into a
tizzy). You could take one look at her and know this was utter
bullshit, but it still went into the file (which she is now in the
process of purging). It took years before this bitch crossed over the
line and even her "friends" in administration had to recognize she was
loonie - meanwhile, look at all the damage she caused with everyone in
the department.
> As to the matter of employees who are "screwed" by their employers: Ever
> thought of finding another job?
After 21+ years, with retirement near, that isn't an option. Nor should
it be. One bitch of a supervisor allowed to ruin a good record? Keep
the good (unionized) employee and lose the bitch. (Well, that finally
happened...)
I get tired of this "My way or the highway" attitude. The myth is that
there is "a great job market out there"; the reality is a lot
different. Picking up and moving to another state is out of the
question. It still boils down to: Why should a shitty supervisor be
tolerated by higher levels of management? (Answer: "Well it keeps 'em
in line!")
BTW, since we're talking about a university music department, it remains
somewhat on-topic.
D.G. Porter
>
> Whether it's funny is debatable. Whether others will sympathise with the
> pro-union hype is dubious. However, I /will/ agree that it's off-topic.
Since it involves a university music department, a place that does
profess to teach performance and theory (regardless of the actual
result!), it is somehwat on-topic. Since it also elicits peoples' true
feeling about unionization per se, it is also interseting to see all the
negativity it brings out in a classical music crowd.
Hmmm, let's talk about the musicians' unions...
Peter T. Daniels
> ("We are a major Hollywood studio! We drug-test our studio composers!
> Drugs make musicians act funny! Mustn't let them write music with minor
> chords!!")
There are no minor chords. Only minor musicians.
--
Peter T. Daniels gram...@worldnet.att.net
David Cleary
: I have no ax to grind with the unions; I don't own a business or
: supervise union employees. However, in my experience, people in unions
: rarely perform up to their potential. I am talking about a lack of
: resourcefulness, drive and initiative.
This does not describe any union employee I know, and I know
several.
Dave
Clovis Lark
A better response might be: "I don't have an axe to grind with
owners/administrators. However, in my experience, owners/administrators
of non-union businesses rarely treat their workers up to standard. I am
talking about a lack of medical plans, pension plans and initiative for
positive working environments."
> Dave
D.G. Porter
>
> In rec.music.compose Harold Kahl <hk...@cobweb.net> wrote:
>
> : I have no ax to grind with the unions; I don't own a business or
> : supervise union employees. However, in my experience, people in unions
> : rarely perform up to their potential. I am talking about a lack of
> : resourcefulness, drive and initiative.
>
> This does not describe any union employee I know, and I know
> several.
>
Well, just to be fair and accurate (and surprise everyone), this does
describe one or two that I know. They happen to be related, both work
(or worked) "janitorial," perhaps because it's all the know, and neither
are what you would call the sharpest knife in the drawer. Both come
from a lower socio-economic-educational background. *That's* the real
reason they are like what they are like, not because they're union
members and feel "safe."
Sometimes a nominal union member will piss off his fellow members so
much that they disassociate themsevles from the guy. Then when he does
something else stupid (it's a safe assumption that he's already done one
really stupid thing and embarrassed everyone around him), he'll be out
in the cold all alone. I heard about one guy from my wife who is, um, a
few clowns short of a circus, and he's just about in this position now.
But most unionized workers take pride in what they do and work their
asses off.
I used to know many unionized musicians (back when I worked for
orchestras). They'd often show up for the dress rehearsal only, and,
having played the repertoire many times and being consumate pros, did
their job excellently and earned their union scale. But they all tend
to be from a higher socio-economic-educational background. It goes with
the territory.
Dr.Matt
Clovis Lark <cl...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote:
>In rec.music.classical David Cleary <dcl...@fas.harvard.edu> wrote:
>> In rec.music.compose Harold Kahl <hk...@cobweb.net> wrote:
>
>> : I have no ax to grind with the unions; I don't own a business or
>> : supervise union employees. However, in my experience, people in unions
>> : rarely perform up to their potential. I am talking about a lack of
>> : resourcefulness, drive and initiative.
>
>> This does not describe any union employee I know, and I know
>> several.
>
>owners/administrators. However, in my experience, owners/administrators
>of non-union businesses rarely treat their workers up to standard. I am
>talking about a lack of medical plans, pension plans and initiative for
>positive working environments."
And the sad thing about this is the money they waste refilling positions
over and over again and retraining the new cheap employee.
--
For spammers: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~fields/uce.htm
More for spammers: http://www.goldinc.com/cgi-bin/harvest_this.cgi
My CD "Kabala": http://www-personal.umich.edu/~fields/cd.html
Matt Fields DMA http://listen.to/mattaj TwelveToneToyBox http://start.at/tttb
John Brower
<5CBF671206207F4B.C0020990...@lp.airnews.net>,
Harold Kahl <hk...@cobweb.net> wrote:
> I have no ax to grind with the unions; I don't own a business or
> supervise union employees. However, in my experience, people in unions
> rarely perform up to their potential. I am talking about a lack of
> resourcefulness, drive and initiative.
>
they
> are not accountable for their performance. If that's union bashing, so
> be it, it's the truth.
>
Ever
> thought of finding another job?
Here's an interesting bit of synchronicity.
The company I work for has a new CEO, thanks to the Board of
Directors. The new CEO's contract specifies that if he is fired, he is
to be paid twice his annual salary. If he is retained for the period
of his contract, he keeps his salary and stock bonuses.
Employees are leaving, and grumbling has spilled over to an public
investors newsgroup.
Here's a quote from a posted message to the investors newsgroup:
"And, by the way, sounds like the new CEO wins (BIG) any way this story
ends! That's my definition of a good (NO GREAT) businessman. Looks like
the board feels the same."
Why do unions get publicly vilified for protecting incompetent workers,
but corporate heads get golden parachutes and move on to their next
position?
And, no, I am not a union member. I work in the computer industry.
Has a union ever negotiated a contract allowing fired members to
collect two years' salary as severance?
John B.
~-------------------------------------------------------------~
"You'll never make it. Give up now. Quit squirming. You idiot. Who
cares? Surrender. It won't work. Aha! Told you so." -- Matt Groening,
LIFE IN HELL (1982)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Jim Curtis
superior skills that any employer would be happy to have aboard? What would
such a person gain by being in a union? Aren't unions better suited for
replaceable workers that would want to create a not-so-replaceable and
intimidating force that can as a collective gain security in their
mediocrity?
"D.G. Porter" <dgpo...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:39CA55...@pacbell.net...
Dr.Matt
Jim Curtis <jcur...@uswest.net> wrote:
>Why would a musician want to be in a union if he is a consumate pro with
>superior skills that any employer would be happy to have aboard? What would
>such a person gain by being in a union? Aren't unions better suited for
>replaceable workers that would want to create a not-so-replaceable and
>intimidating force that can as a collective gain security in their
>mediocrity?
This assumes that employers understand the value of a good employee.
jbay...@my-deja.com
"Jim Curtis" <jcur...@uswest.net> wrote:
> Why would a musician want to be in a union if he is a consumate pro
with
> superior skills that any employer would be happy to have aboard? What
would
> such a person gain by being in a union? Aren't unions better suited
for
> replaceable workers that would want to create a not-so-replaceable and
> intimidating force that can as a collective gain security in their
> mediocrity?
One of the institutions musical unions are responsible for, I'm
given to understand, is the practice of blind rehearsals. The blind
rehearsal assures that someone is hired according to his/her
abilities, and not because his/her skin happens to be the correct
color or he/she is a friend of the conductor's son, or he/she is
the right gender.
In other words, white, well-connected mediocrities have good reason
to despise unions.
John
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz
>
> Why would a musician want to be in a union
"Closed shop".
Perhaps not as well known in the west?
Dennis
--
Dennis Báthory-Kitsz
MaltedMedia Productions: http://maltedmedia.com/
Kalvos & Damian's New Music Bazaar: http://kalvos.org/
The Transitive Empire: http://maltedmedia.com/empire/
OrbitAccess Accessibility: http://orbitaccess.com/
Downloadable Scores: http://maltedmedia.com/scores/
Lullaby for Bill Gates: http://www.mp3.com/bathory/
ICQ: 10526261 / AIM: DBathory
Harold Kahl
regulations. Not the same as a university campus, but the original post
implied that the drunk or high lawn mower guy was typical of a non-union
worker, and I think the opposite is more likely to be the case, whether
it is in a nuclear plant or on a campus.
Dr.Matt
Harold Kahl <hk...@cobweb.net> wrote:
>It's a nuclear power plant, drug testing required by Federal
>regulations. Not the same as a university campus, but the original post
>implied that the drunk or high lawn mower guy was typical of a non-union
>worker, and I think the opposite is more likely to be the case, whether
>it is in a nuclear plant or on a campus.
Oh, well, I happen to think it's more typical of a worker with
conserative-party connections than anybody else.
Dr.Matt
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz <bat...@maltedmedia.com> wrote:
>Jim Curtis wrote:
>>
>> Why would a musician want to be in a union
>
>"Closed shop".
>
>Perhaps not as well known in the west?
>
>Dennis
Here in the midwest, doctors are forming unions. USD100k/year to
USD400k/year doctors. Unions.
It seems HMOs have sometimes followed management principles that
save money only very short term, burn out doctors, and promote bad
health care. Doctors seem to think they can make some positive suggestions.
Only problem is that some of them might not be prepared for the time
commitment necessary to do just that. It's an interesting time.
Composers form professional societies for yet another set of reasons...
Clovis Lark
> Why would a musician want to be in a union if he is a consumate pro with
> superior skills that any employer would be happy to have aboard? What would
> such a person gain by being in a union? Aren't unions better suited for
> replaceable workers that would want to create a not-so-replaceable and
> intimidating force that can as a collective gain security in their
> mediocrity?
WHy don't you contact members of the CSO, Cleveland Orchestra, NYPO, etc.
also Janos Starker, etc. to find out. Unionization means quite a bit more
than what you just outlined.
John Brower
"Jim Curtis" <jcur...@uswest.net> wrote:
> Why would a musician want to be in a union if he is a consumate pro with
> superior skills that any employer would be happy to have aboard? What would
> such a person gain by being in a union? Aren't unions better suited for
> replaceable workers that would want to create a not-so-replaceable and
> intimidating force that can as a collective gain security in their
> mediocrity?
On a trip to China last year, I heard a radio interview with the music
director for the Beijing Symphony Orchestra (sorry, I've forgotten his name).
He told of working for years to get government acceptance to unionize the
musicians so they would not defect to the West. Only by doing this did he
feel able to bring the orchestra, the best in China, up to the standards of
Western symphonies.
Musicians unions, like everything, have plenty of problems.
They also serve important functions.
John B.
~-------------------------------------------------------------~
"You'll never make it. Give up now. Quit squirming. You idiot. Who cares?
Surrender. It won't work. Aha! Told you so." -- Matt Groening, LIFE IN HELL
(1982)
M Magers
Dr.Matt
Actually, it's the conspiracy of thinkers about typicals.
You see, you can prove anything if you accept "I think it's typical of"
as a proof.
Dr.Matt
Jeffrey Quick <j...@po.cwru.edu> wrote:
>In article <JEyy5.4127$O5.9...@news.itd.umich.edu>,
>fie...@login.itd.umich.edu (Dr.Matt) wrote:
>
>> In article
><7BBE9597A5D26A64.16856493...@lp.airnews.net>,
>> Harold Kahl <hk...@cobweb.net> wrote:
>> >It's a nuclear power plant, drug testing required by Federal
>> >regulations. Not the same as a university campus, but the original post
>> >implied that the drunk or high lawn mower guy was typical of a non-union
>> >worker, and I think the opposite is more likely to be the case, whether
>> >it is in a nuclear plant or on a campus.
>>
>> Oh, well, I happen to think it's more typical of a worker with
>> conserative-party connections than anybody else.
>>
Do either of us need a valid reason to think that?
M Magers
Best regards,
M Magers
Clovis Lark
> In article <aDvy5.3677$kY3.2...@news.uswest.net>, "Jim Curtis"
> <jcur...@uswest.net> wrote:
>> Why would a musician want to be in a union if he is a consumate pro with
>> superior skills that any employer would be happy to have aboard? What would
>> such a person gain by being in a union? Aren't unions better suited for
>> replaceable workers that would want to create a not-so-replaceable and
>> intimidating force that can as a collective gain security in their
>> mediocrity?
>>
> 1.Trust fund gigs
> 2. Basically, free advertising, for freelancers, by showing up on the union
> list.
> 3. Cheap medical and equipment insurance, benefits
> 4. Bargaining power (as all non-profit arts orgs are run like any other
> business)
> 5. wanting to work in a closed shop
I don't think you quite understand the mechanics of orchestras in this
country.
> --
> The Democrats: the next third party.
> "Politicians and diapers have one thing in common. They should be
> changed regularly, and for the same reason."
> -----Gerry Brooks (in the Toronto Globe & Mail)
Jim Curtis
<jbay...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8qe55e$2ft$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In other words, white, well-connected mediocrities have good reason
> to despise unions.
BWWAHHHH? You weenie liberals are shameless. How can you apply that
clap-trap to music with a straight face? You want me to believe that every
black trumpeter, Jewish violinist and Asian cellist ( you might be able to
apply some famous names for the descriptions to help you follow my logic )
that might want to join an orchestra is better off getting paid what the
rest of the collective is getting rather than bargaining their own contract?
The music listening public is not hellbent on throwing their money at
white-protestant-males. If an orchestra won't hire the best musicians
because of skin color or any other reason, that orchestra is doomed to fail
in a free market because they won't be offering the best product. Unionized
orchestras that receive NEA grants and other entitlements that are not based
on their ability to perform CAN get away with creating groups that look a
certain way. What would happen if there were no unions for large orchestras?
Better orchestras and much fewer good orchestras. Hometown orchestras would
suck and the musicians wouldn't be paid very well while the few elite
orchestras would be touring-orchestras that would sell out every night and
the musicians would be paid like baseball players because they would have
competing orchestras bidding for their services. Unions=mediocrity but you
can argue mediocrity is a good thing, if you want. I expect this logic ( and
any logic ) is lost on you.
Jim Curtis
"Dr.Matt" <fie...@login.itd.umich.edu> wrote in message
news:6Ovy5.4122$O5.9...@news.itd.umich.edu...
> This assumes that employers understand the value of a good employee.
He won't be an employer for long then. The natural order of things puts that
employer out of business. How can it ever be otherwise? If a worker thinks
he knows better than his employer about what constitutes a good employee, he
needs to go into competition with his employer to put that guy out of
business.
Clovis Lark
> "Dr.Matt" <fie...@login.itd.umich.edu> wrote in message
> news:6Ovy5.4122$O5.9...@news.itd.umich.edu...
>> This assumes that employers understand the value of a good employee.
> He won't be an employer for long then. The natural order of things puts that
> employer out of business. How can it ever be otherwise? If a worker thinks
> he knows better than his employer about what constitutes a good employee, he
> needs to go into competition with his employer to put that guy out of
> business.
Not without collateral.
Clovis Lark
Dr.Matt
Jim Curtis <jcur...@uswest.net> wrote:
>
>"Dr.Matt" <fie...@login.itd.umich.edu> wrote in message
>news:6Ovy5.4122$O5.9...@news.itd.umich.edu...
>> This assumes that employers understand the value of a good employee.
>
>He won't be an employer for long then. The natural order of things puts that
>employer out of business. How can it ever be otherwise? If a worker thinks
>he knows better than his employer about what constitutes a good employee, he
>needs to go into competition with his employer to put that guy out of
>business.
You're dreaming.
Any sufficiently large employer (e.g. a university or large corporation)
can bleed talent for decades before it catches up with them. They'll just
"downsize" and "outsource" to make up for the costs of the brain drain.
If they're a high-tech company, they'll hire kids fresh from school to
replace their experts.
You're also forgetting the nature of corporations. If a corporation can
be driven into the ground so that it falls apart just as its top brass is
retiring, the top brass has nothing to lose. They've gotten their personal
profit out of it, so now if the corporation is bankrupt or in debt, they
themselves aren't bankrupt or in debt.
Clovis Lark
> <jcur...@uswest.net> wrote:
> I think you miss the logic here. Blind auditions were instituted to prevent
> affirmative action. The idea was that the performer SHOULD be the best
> available, regardless of race. Sometimes this has been defeated through
> political pressure (Michigan legislature and Detroit Symphony being one
> example), but on the whole it has worked as it should.
> Cleveland just hired its first black woman, violist Eleisha Nelson, whom I
> knew as a student violinist. Don't know personally how she plays now
> (presumably very well), but she had the attitude to make it anywhere.
Blind auditions were instituted to reduce "incestuous" hiring practices
based upon recommendations from acquaintances and to reduce
discrimination. The principle was and is that a blind audition allows
the best candidate (on a particular day--unfortunately some great players
have off days) to be selected without consideration of looks, race,
gender:
Orchestrating Impartiality: The Impact of "Blind" Auditions on Female
Musicians
Claudia Goldin
Cecilia Rouse
Discrimination against women has been alleged in hiring practices for many
occupations, but it is extremely difficult to demonstrate sex-biased
hiring. A change in the way symphony orchestras recruit musicians provides
an unusual way to test for sex-biased hiring. To overcome possible biases
in hiring, most orchestras revised their audition policies in the 1970s
and 1980s. A major change involved the use of blind' auditions with a
screen' to conceal the identity of the candidate from the jury. Female
musicians in the top five symphony orchestras in the United States were
less than 5% of all players in 1970 but are 25% today. We ask whether
women were more likely to be advanced and/or hired with the use of blind'
auditions. Using data from actual auditions in an individual fixed-effects
framework, we find that the screen increases by 50% the probability a
woman will be advanced out of certain preliminary rounds. The screen also
enhances, by severalfold, the likelihood a female contestant will be the
winner in the final round. Using data on orchestra personnel, the switch
to blind' auditions can explain between 30% and 55% of the increase in the
proportion female among new hires and between 25% and 46% of the increase
in the percentage female in the orchestras since 1970.
Note: LS
Availability: out of print
Publication-status: American Economic Review, forthcoming.
Order-url: http://www.nber.org/papers/w5903
Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:5903
REGARDING THE HIRING OF BLACK MUSICIANS, THIS ARTICLE POINTS OUT THE VERY
DIFFICULTIES INVOLVED:
http://www.gregsandow.com/afram.htm
The interviews, including with Henry Fogel, are at this site:
http://www.gregsandow.com/afamint.htm#FogelJackson
Dr.Matt
Clovis Lark <cl...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote:
>In rec.music.classical Jim Curtis <jcur...@uswest.net> wrote:
>
>> <jbay...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8qe55e$2ft$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
>>> In other words, white, well-connected mediocrities have good reason
>>> to despise unions.
>
>> BWWAHHHH? You weenie liberals are shameless. How can you apply that
>> clap-trap to music with a straight face? You want me to believe that every
>> black trumpeter, Jewish violinist and Asian cellist ( you might be able to
>> apply some famous names for the descriptions to help you follow my logic )
>> that might want to join an orchestra is better off getting paid what the
>> rest of the collective is getting rather than bargaining their own contract?
>> The music listening public is not hellbent on throwing their money at
>> white-protestant-males. If an orchestra won't hire the best musicians
>> because of skin color or any other reason, that orchestra is doomed to fail
>> in a free market because they won't be offering the best product. Unionized
>> orchestras that receive NEA grants and other entitlements that are not based
>> on their ability to perform CAN get away with creating groups that look a
>> certain way. What would happen if there were no unions for large orchestras?
>> Better orchestras and much fewer good orchestras. Hometown orchestras would
>> suck and the musicians wouldn't be paid very well while the few elite
>> orchestras would be touring-orchestras that would sell out every night and
>> the musicians would be paid like baseball players because they would have
>> competing orchestras bidding for their services. Unions=mediocrity but you
>> can argue mediocrity is a good thing, if you want. I expect this logic ( and
>> any logic ) is lost on you.
>
It's simple. Jim Curtis believes every musician has a right to starve.
Clovis Lark
The ironic thing is that, like baseball, orchestras have a base salary,
and higher salaries for musicians who hold solo/principal positions. When
a player feels he/she isn't happy with his/her circumsyances, they can
choose to audition for another orchestra (sort of like free agency), which
is Mark Nuccio did when he left Pittsburgh for the NYPO where he is now
solo clarinet. The difference is that it's a "buyers' market" out there.
That means each opening is a bit like spring training. Winning the
position isn't completed without fulfilling a probationary period (1 to 2
years) and being voted in or out by the orchestra with the music director
often having a greater say (even veto power). SO, one who thinks that the
audition process promotes some sort of mediocrity is really misinformed.
It is also incorrect to assume that one could simply purchase the best
players and have the best orchestra. Players specialize and their style
reflects this. Some players' uniquely overt style makes them ideal for
solo playing, but not good for blending into a large ensemble. The
opposite is true. Audition committee members have the difficulty of
seeking exactitude in playing while also looking for natural musicality,
even though the 2 attributes tend to work against each other.
Jim Curtis
to stoop to join a union" which I guess we are saying they do if we want to
believe that blind auditions make for quality orchestras, but...Blind
auditions are lame. You have members of an orchestra that can't trust their
own ears to realize what is musical quality so they have to put a bag over
their head...the game is already lost at that point. What if an orchestra
that is all men thinks it would be a good idea to add some females to the
orchestra? Do they need to rely on the blind audition if they, for what ever
reason, want a woman in the orchestra? What if the winner is 8 months
pregnant and you are auditioning for a musician that will be leaving for a
tour of Europe in a month? What if the winner is just so damn ugly that
he/she will scare away the audience? The reason that a safeguard, and its
minimal effect, even needs to be in place is that the orchestra can suck and
still get paid because of art-welfare and other entitlements such as local
governments and corporations who will finance the thing not so much because
of music quality but that you gotta have an orchestra named after your city
because that is supposed to say something about the quality of life in that
city. And that's why unions can exist, because mediocrity can be funded. If
all orchestras had to fund themselves with the money that is collected at
the door, unions couldn't exist and there would be fewer but better
orchestras.
"Jeffrey Quick" <j...@po.cwru.edu> wrote in message
news:jaq-ya02408000R2209001216530001@news...
> In article <ozKy5.28441$zK.7...@news.uswest.net>, "Jim Curtis"
and
> > any logic ) is lost on you.
>
> I think you miss the logic here. Blind auditions were instituted to
prevent
> affirmative action. The idea was that the performer SHOULD be the best
> available, regardless of race. Sometimes this has been defeated through
> political pressure (Michigan legislature and Detroit Symphony being one
> example), but on the whole it has worked as it should.
>
> Cleveland just hired its first black woman, violist Eleisha Nelson, whom I
> knew as a student violinist. Don't know personally how she plays now
> (presumably very well), but she had the attitude to make it anywhere.
>
Jim Curtis
>
> It's simple. Jim Curtis believes every musician has a right to starve.
I think it's kind of mean of you to imply that *every* musician would be
otherwise not employable if their propped up music job were taken from them.
However, I do think that everyone should have the *right* to starve, if it's
what they choose to do.
Jim Curtis
"Clovis Lark" <cl...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
news:8qfvi2$kjm$1...@flotsam.uits.indiana.edu...
> Not without collateral.
C'mon, no one uses collateral anymore. If you are truly smarter than your
employer, you should be able to convince a capitalist, they live to fund
this stuff. Offer stock to get your company going..." Ohhh man, too much
work, I'll never convince anyone I'm smarter than my employer"....then you
aren't smarter than your employer and are just one of the 95% who think the
boss is a dink.
Jim Curtis
> ??????
Well, had I known you were gonna read it I would have put up " WARNING: Puny
Clovis brains will be boggled by the following" disclaimer.
Jim Curtis
ground so they never replace the dweebs cuz stockholders just want to be
broke. How is it they can get away with bleeding so long? From what I've
seen, there is always some money grubbing capitalist ready to pounce on the
weakness.news:%mLy5.4245$O5.9...@news.itd.umich.edu...
> In article <tLKy5.28513$zK.7...@news.uswest.net>,
> Jim Curtis <jcur...@uswest.net> wrote:
> >
> >"Dr.Matt" <fie...@login.itd.umich.edu> wrote in message
> >> This assumes that employers understand the value of a good employee.
> >
> >He won't be an employer for long then. The natural order of things puts
that
> >employer out of business. How can it ever be otherwise? If a worker
thinks
> >he knows better than his employer about what constitutes a good employee,
he
> >needs to go into competition with his employer to put that guy out of
> >business.
>
> You're dreaming.
> Any sufficiently large employer (e.g. a university or large corporation)
> can bleed talent for decades before it catches up with them. They'll just
> "downsize" and "outsource" to make up for the costs of the brain drain.
> If they're a high-tech company, they'll hire kids fresh from school to
> replace their experts.
> You're also forgetting the nature of corporations. If a corporation can
> be driven into the ground so that it falls apart just as its top brass is
> retiring, the top brass has nothing to lose. They've gotten their personal
> profit out of it, so now if the corporation is bankrupt or in debt, they
> themselves aren't bankrupt or in debt.
>
>
>
>
>
jbay...@my-deja.com
> >
> > It's simple. Jim Curtis believes every musician has a right to
starve.
>
> I think it's kind of mean of you to imply that *every* musician would
be
Jim, there has never been, at least technically, better orchestras
than in the age of these allegedly evil, mediocritizing unions.
You've got an ideological bug up your butt.
John
Clovis Lark
> "Clovis Lark" <cl...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
> news:8qfvi2$kjm$1...@flotsam.uits.indiana.edu...
>> Not without collateral.
> C'mon, no one uses collateral anymore. If you are truly smarter than your
> employer, you should be able to convince a capitalist, they live to fund
> this stuff. Offer stock to get your company going..." Ohhh man, too much
Offering stock is offering collateral.
> work, I'll never convince anyone I'm smarter than my employer"....then you
> aren't smarter than your employer and are just one of the 95% who think the
> boss is a dink.
By the way, name some capitalists who are ready to invest. I know a
cellist who needs a donor for a decent instrument. Surely, compared to
the market of the last 2 weeks, the long term investment in an instrument
provides a greater return. I'm assuming from your remarks that this
should be fairly easy.
Clovis Lark
> ground so they never replace the dweebs cuz stockholders just want to be
> broke. How is it they can get away with bleeding so long? From what I've
> seen, there is always some money grubbing capitalist ready to pounce on the
> weakness.
Names please. For real, I want to hook them up with the investment of a
fine instrument to be played by a real talent. Instruments accrual of
value is exceptional, even with the collapse of Intel...
> "Dr.Matt" <fie...@login.itd.umich.edu> wrote in message
> news:%mLy5.4245$O5.9...@news.itd.umich.edu...
>> In article <tLKy5.28513$zK.7...@news.uswest.net>,
>> Jim Curtis <jcur...@uswest.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >"Dr.Matt" <fie...@login.itd.umich.edu> wrote in message
Clovis Lark
> "Clovis Lark" <cl...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
> news:8qfvmd$kjm$2...@flotsam.uits.indiana.edu...
>> ??????
> Well, had I known you were gonna read it I would have put up " WARNING: Puny
> Clovis brains will be boggled by the following" disclaimer.
You do have a problem don't you...
Jim Curtis
>
> By the way, name some capitalists who are ready to invest. I know a
> cellist who needs a donor for a decent instrument. Surely, compared to
> the market of the last 2 weeks, the long term investment in an instrument
> provides a greater return. I'm assuming from your remarks that this
> should be fairly easy.
How exactly will the capitalist make money by buying this cello? Will she
hand over a percent of her paycheck each week to the capitalist? Banks lend
money if you are willing to pay them back over a period of time plus
interest so the bank makes a little money and she has the cello to make
money with. I hope my advise will help your friend. I give you the "your
welcome" in advance.
Jim Curtis
your friend having this cello. I hope you don't expect me to do all the work
for your friend.news:8qg9q7$m9q$3...@flotsam.uits.indiana.edu...
Clovis Lark
> to stoop to join a union" which I guess we are saying they do if we want to
I'll be sure to pass your remarks on to Janos Starker today. Any other
"stoopers" I should contact?
> believe that blind auditions make for quality orchestras, but...Blind
> auditions are lame. You have members of an orchestra that can't trust their
> own ears to realize what is musical quality so they have to put a bag over
> their head...the game is already lost at that point.
Why don't you read what has been posted before blowing off like this.
I've already posted why blind auditions were instituted.
What if an orchestra
> that is all men thinks it would be a good idea to add some females to the
> orchestra? Do they need to rely on the blind audition if they, for what ever
> reason, want a woman in the orchestra?
Read about the process. Actually go and meet musicians and find out about
the system.
What if the winner is 8 months
> pregnant and you are auditioning for a musician that will be leaving for a
> tour of Europe in a month? What if the winner is just so damn ugly that
> he/she will scare away the audience? The reason that a safeguard, and its
> minimal effect, even needs to be in place is that the orchestra can suck and
> still get paid because of art-welfare and other entitlements such as local
> governments and corporations who will finance the thing not so much because
> of music quality but that you gotta have an orchestra named after your city
> because that is supposed to say something about the quality of life in that
> city. And that's why unions can exist, because mediocrity can be funded. If
> all orchestras had to fund themselves with the money that is collected at
> the door, unions couldn't exist and there would be fewer but better
> orchestras.
You should stick to areas that you can provide articulate insight on...
> "Jeffrey Quick" <j...@po.cwru.edu> wrote in message
> news:jaq-ya02408000R2209001216530001@news...
>> In article <ozKy5.28441$zK.7...@news.uswest.net>, "Jim Curtis"
Jim Curtis
>
> What if the winner is 8 months
> > pregnant and you are auditioning for a musician that will be leaving for
a
> > tour of Europe in a month? What if the winner is just so damn ugly that
> > he/she will scare away the audience? The reason that a safeguard, and
its
> > minimal effect, even needs to be in place is that the orchestra can suck
and
> > still get paid because of art-welfare and other entitlements such as
local
> > governments and corporations who will finance the thing not so much
because
> > of music quality but that you gotta have an orchestra named after your
city
> > because that is supposed to say something about the quality of life in
that
> > city. And that's why unions can exist, because mediocrity can be funded.
If
> > all orchestras had to fund themselves with the money that is collected
at
> > the door, unions couldn't exist and there would be fewer but better
> > orchestras.
>
> You should stick to areas that you can provide articulate insight on...
Can you point to any flawed logic in my comments? Make a case to why the
insight is wrong, if you can.
Jim Curtis
<jbay...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8qga0k$ia3$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
>
> Jim, there has never been, at least technically, better orchestras
> than in the age of these allegedly evil, mediocritizing unions.
>
> You've got an ideological bug up your butt.
This from the guy who claims that only whites can survive outside a union...
Clovis Lark
> "Clovis Lark" <cl...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
Perhaps you can read up on the increase in value of a del Jesu, Amati or
Strad over 10 years. You go buy it, let the player use it. When you are
ready to collect on your investment, you sell it to another investor. It
happens all the time. Currently, a certain del Gesu violin has been
appraised at over 4 million, twice the price of a Strad. As per my
previous request, there is an Andrea Guarneri cello on the market in
Europe. Locate a capitalist...
Clovis Lark
> your friend having this cello. I hope you don't expect me to do all the work
> for your friend.
You've made several assertions concerning the way sections of our economy
work. Back them up. You've also implicitly maligned a whole sector of
elite artists whose work (here I am making an assumption) you've probably
been consuming. I think you might review your comments and then come up
with something positive instead of the above. I've given you an avenue
concerning the first item. Are you saying you know of no such
capitalists?
> "Clovis Lark" <cl...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
> news:8qg9q7$m9q$3...@flotsam.uits.indiana.edu...
>> In rec.music.classical Jim Curtis <jcur...@uswest.net> wrote:
>> > Yesyes, the public owners love it when the heads drive the company into
> the
>> > ground so they never replace the dweebs cuz stockholders just want to be
>> > broke. How is it they can get away with bleeding so long? From what I've
>> > seen, there is always some money grubbing capitalist ready to pounce on
> the
>> > weakness.
>>
>> Names please. For real, I want to hook them up with the investment of a
>> fine instrument to be played by a real talent. Instruments accrual of
>> value is exceptional, even with the collapse of Intel...
>>
>> > "Dr.Matt" <fie...@login.itd.umich.edu> wrote in message
>> > news:%mLy5.4245$O5.9...@news.itd.umich.edu...
>> >> In article <tLKy5.28513$zK.7...@news.uswest.net>,
Clovis Lark
> In article <dpNy5.28655$zK.1...@news.uswest.net>,
> "Jim Curtis" <jcur...@uswest.net> wrote:
>>
>> "Dr.Matt" <fie...@login.itd.umich.edu> wrote in message
>> >
>> > It's simple. Jim Curtis believes every musician has a right to
> starve.
>>
>> I think it's kind of mean of you to imply that *every* musician would
> be
>> otherwise not employable if their propped up music job...<blah blah>
> Jim, there has never been, at least technically, better orchestras
> than in the age of these allegedly evil, mediocritizing unions.
True, true. At this point in time, orchestra like Phoenix, Utah, and
others that offer their players small salaries and only 9 month contracts
boast string sections that would have won the praise of Szell, Reiner and
Walter, had their respective orchestras played at that level in their day.
> You've got an ideological bug up your butt.
Jim Curtis
> Perhaps you can read up on the increase in value of a del Jesu, Amati or
> Strad over 10 years. You go buy it, let the player use it. When you are
> ready to collect on your investment, you sell it to another investor. It
> happens all the time. Currently, a certain del Gesu violin has been
> appraised at over 4 million, twice the price of a Strad. As per my
> previous request, there is an Andrea Guarneri cello on the market in
> Europe. Locate a capitalist...
I kid you not, bring your story to some investor with money and you might
get the cello. If you brought the story to me, I would say " Hmmm, why do I
let your friend use the thing? Why don't I just go buy it and put it
somewhere safe rather than risk having you break my investment?" And you
might shoot back " The cello will be of more valuable if she plays it every
day" then you might need to convince me of that.
Jim Curtis
> In rec.music.classical Jim Curtis <jcur...@uswest.net> wrote:
e. I've given you an avenue
> concerning the first item. Are you saying you know of no such
> capitalists?
I might do the leg work for you and locate this capitalist but, as these
things work, I would want some money up front. If I was convinced that you
had a valuable proposition I might do this on a promisary note but you
haven't convinced me that this is a worthy venture yet.
Clovis Lark
> "Clovis Lark" <cl...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
I already did, but either didn't read it or myopically elided it. I gave
a reason, backed by a study and a report that was carefully researched,
showing how blind auditions have created a fair market for players seeking
work in open positions. They were able to achieve these conditions
through group negotiations under the aegis of a union. In the US, there
is only one top level orchestra which is nonunion, Seattle. Players are
not leaving San Francisco or Chicago to join Seattle and Seattle conforms
in its hiring practices to those practices established by union
orchestras.
Dr.Matt
Jeffrey Quick <j...@po.cwru.edu> wrote:
>In article <79Ky5.4241$O5.9...@news.itd.umich.edu>,
>fie...@login.itd.umich.edu (Dr.Matt) wrote:
>
>> In article <jaq-ya02408000R2209001011020001@news>,
>> Jeffrey Quick <j...@po.cwru.edu> wrote:
>> >In article <JEyy5.4127$O5.9...@news.itd.umich.edu>,
>> >fie...@login.itd.umich.edu (Dr.Matt) wrote:
>> >
>> >> In article
>> ><7BBE9597A5D26A64.16856493...@lp.airnews.net>,
>> >> Harold Kahl <hk...@cobweb.net> wrote:
>> >> >It's a nuclear power plant, drug testing required by Federal
>> >> >regulations. Not the same as a university campus, but the original post
>> >> >implied that the drunk or high lawn mower guy was typical of a non-union
>> >> >worker, and I think the opposite is more likely to be the case, whether
>> >> >it is in a nuclear plant or on a campus.
>> >>
>> >> Oh, well, I happen to think it's more typical of a worker with
>> >> conserative-party connections than anybody else.
>> >>
>> >Why?
>>
>> Do either of us need a valid reason to think that?
>
>It depends on whether we want to be regarded as intelligent people.
If we're presenting our arbitrary notions--i.e. that a union
member is more likely to mow the sidewalk than a non-union member--
what does intelligence have to do with spouting that notion?
Clovis Lark
> "Clovis Lark" <cl...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
OK, so you really don't know about this. An instrument locked away in a
vault loses condition. It needs to be played regularly and be subjected
to the vibrations of use or it becomes "unplayable". That is why a good
many nonperforming owners who can actually afford fine instruments loan
them to performers. You may have heard of the Library of Congress Strad
quartet? But don't take my word for it. Go ask a professional luthier.
they'll give you the scoop. NOw we come back to your assertions of those
capitalists out their who are ready and willing... Are you going to give
some names?
Clovis Lark
> "Clovis Lark" <cl...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
> news:8qgb78$mi6$2...@flotsam.uits.indiana.edu...
>> In rec.music.classical Jim Curtis <jcur...@uswest.net> wrote:
> e. I've given you an avenue
>> concerning the first item. Are you saying you know of no such
>> capitalists?
> I might do the leg work for you and locate this capitalist but, as these
> things work, I would want some money up front. If I was convinced that you
> had a valuable proposition I might do this on a promisary note but you
> haven't convinced me that this is a worthy venture yet.
So you are not a friend of the arts...
Dr.Matt
string instruments get a lot more attention to their environment and
maintenance requirements when they're used frequently.
Dr.Matt
Jim Curtis <jcur...@uswest.net> wrote:
>Yesyes, the public owners love it when the heads drive the company into the
>ground so they never replace the dweebs cuz stockholders just want to be
>broke. How is it they can get away with bleeding so long? From what I've
>seen, there is always some money grubbing capitalist ready to pounce on the
>weakness.
Exactly so. See the history of Daimler-Chrysler.
Samuel Vriezen
wrote:
>
>"Dr.Matt" <fie...@login.itd.umich.edu> wrote in message
>news:6Ovy5.4122$O5.9...@news.itd.umich.edu...
>> This assumes that employers understand the value of a good employee.
>
>He won't be an employer for long then. The natural order of things puts that
>employer out of business. How can it ever be otherwise? If a worker thinks
>he knows better than his employer about what constitutes a good employee, he
>needs to go into competition with his employer to put that guy out of
>business.
Absolutely correct, in the theoretical microdomain of old hat
capitalism. Where I live however it's called 'the real world', and the
trains never run on time.
Hey, I've got this great idea. Why don't third world countries simply
stop doing cheap (child) labour for us until we supply them with good
hospitals, computers, food, education....
--
Samuel
A prelude by Johann Sebastian Bach performed by the guitarist, Lord Baden Powell
- Chr. J. van Geel
Samuel Vriezen
wrote:
>Again....try a bank or go and convince someone that he will make money by
>your friend having this cello. I hope you don't expect me to do all the work
>for your friend.
I believe it's a question of putting your money where your mouth is.
Samuel Vriezen
wrote:
>
><jbay...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8qe55e$2ft$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
>> In other words, white, well-connected mediocrities have good reason
>> to despise unions.
>
>BWWAHHHH? You weenie liberals are shameless. How can you apply that
>clap-trap to music with a straight face? You want me to believe that every
>black trumpeter, Jewish violinist and Asian cellist ( you might be able to
>apply some famous names for the descriptions to help you follow my logic )
>that might want to join an orchestra is better off getting paid what the
>rest of the collective is getting rather than bargaining their own contract?
>The music listening public is not hellbent on throwing their money at
>white-protestant-males. If an orchestra won't hire the best musicians
>because of skin color or any other reason, that orchestra is doomed to fail
>in a free market because they won't be offering the best product.
Something wrong with the Wiener Philharmoniker?
Samuel Vriezen
wrote:
>> What if the winner is 8 months
I think most of us can, but not as quickly as you can flaw your logic!
As to that you're putting up a virtuoso performance. If I weren't too
rich to care about that I'd even hire you to become my teatime
philosophical entertainment. It takes a lot of opinion and a very
thick skull.
But here's a homework assignment. Why don't you try to work out why
the following are hard to believe having come from the same person:
1.
>>> > What if the winner is just so damn ugly that
>>> > he/she will scare away the audience?
2.
>The music listening public is not hellbent on throwing their money at
>white-protestant-males. If an orchestra won't hire the best musicians
>because of skin color or any other reason, that orchestra is doomed to fail
>in a free market because they won't be offering the best product.
--
Clovis Lark
>>
>><jbay...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8qe55e$2ft$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
>>> In other words, white, well-connected mediocrities have good reason
>>> to despise unions.
>>
>>BWWAHHHH? You weenie liberals are shameless. How can you apply that
>>clap-trap to music with a straight face? You want me to believe that every
>>black trumpeter, Jewish violinist and Asian cellist ( you might be able to
>>apply some famous names for the descriptions to help you follow my logic )
>>that might want to join an orchestra is better off getting paid what the
>>rest of the collective is getting rather than bargaining their own contract?
>>The music listening public is not hellbent on throwing their money at
>>white-protestant-males. If an orchestra won't hire the best musicians
>>because of skin color or any other reason, that orchestra is doomed to fail
>>in a free market because they won't be offering the best product.
> Something wrong with the Wiener Philharmoniker?
Yes, very. But with such a glut on talent, they aren't hurt. Perhaps
after the EU finishes with UEFA, they'll turn their ugly red eye toward
Wien?
Samuel Vriezen
wrote:
>Are you saying that America's
>unionized orchestras are mediocre?
I think if unionized orchestras aren't mediocre, then this is either a
proof of the failure of capitalism or of the existence of god.
Possibly of the existence of people who like to play music well or of
the possibility that a more stable environment than that provided by
cutthroat capitalism at its most theoretically dynamic might help the
formation of things like group mentality in performance... hey, wait,
this is going way too deep now...
Samuel Vriezen
wrote:
>> Something wrong with the Wiener Philharmoniker?
>
>Yes, very. But with such a glut on talent, they aren't hurt. Perhaps
>after the EU finishes with UEFA, they'll turn their ugly red eye toward
>Wien?
>
Well I heard that they now finally have their first female player at
last.
As to soccer, I'm not a connaisseur, even though I'm from the country
of Johan Cruyff, Marco van Basten and Ruud Gullit. You have two kinds
of non-dutch people, the ones that start shouting Rembrandt and
Vermeer and the ones that start shouting Gullit when you tell them
you're Dutch.
And still being very much off topic and sadly not very funny, I find
the EU a strange and worrying beast, most of all since everything that
is touched by the Brussels bureaucrats turns ugly. I mean in the sense
of aesthetics. The sign that was designed for the Euro is a complete
calamity in the history of typography, being designed as a corporate
logo rather than as a graphic symbol. Which might be telling.
Clovis Lark
> wrote:
>>Are you saying that America's
>>unionized orchestras are mediocre?
> I think if unionized orchestras aren't mediocre, then this is either a
> proof of the failure of capitalism or of the existence of god.
> Possibly of the existence of people who like to play music well or of
> the possibility that a more stable environment than that provided by
> cutthroat capitalism at its most theoretically dynamic might help the
> formation of things like group mentality in performance... hey, wait,
> this is going way too deep now...
Cood yew tranzlate dat inta reydneck?
Clovis Lark
> wrote:
>>> Something wrong with the Wiener Philharmoniker?
>>
>>Yes, very. But with such a glut on talent, they aren't hurt. Perhaps
>>after the EU finishes with UEFA, they'll turn their ugly red eye toward
>>Wien?
>>
> Well I heard that they now finally have their first female player at
> last.
SOmeone other than the new second harpist who takes over from the retiring
Ani Lelkes?
> As to soccer, I'm not a connaisseur, even though I'm from the country
> of Johan Cruyff, Marco van Basten and Ruud Gullit. You have two kinds
And Neeskins, and Suurbrier, and Cocu, and Koemans, and on and on....
> of non-dutch people, the ones that start shouting Rembrandt and
> Vermeer and the ones that start shouting Gullit when you tell them
> you're Dutch.
What about De Bruin, Hoogenband and that awesome baseball??? team?
> And still being very much off topic and sadly not very funny, I find
> the EU a strange and worrying beast, most of all since everything that
> is touched by the Brussels bureaucrats turns ugly. I mean in the sense
> of aesthetics.
Look at Belgian football and you have your answer...
> of aesthetics. The sign that was designed for the Euro is a complete
> calamity in the history of typography, being designed as a corporate
> logo rather than as a graphic symbol. Which might be telling.
Perhaps they will do something right for a change and avenge Gertrude
Rossbacher.
Jim Curtis
> In article <4lNy5.28651$zK.1...@news.uswest.net>, "Jim Curtis"
> <jcur...@uswest.net> wrote:
>
> > This still doesn't answer the question " Why would a superior musician
want
> > to stoop to join a union" which I guess we are saying they do if we want
to
> > auditions are lame. You have members of an orchestra that can't trust
their
> > own ears to realize what is musical quality so they have to put a bag
over
> > their head...the game is already lost at that point.
>
> ONLY by the ears.
And a union might need to trick themselves into being artistic where an
orchestra that would rely on box office receipts would have the main concern
of selling the best possible product for their own survival and would have
no incentive to blind themselves to be legit.
>
> What if an orchestra
> > that is all men thinks it would be a good idea to add some females to
the
> > orchestra?
>
> Why? Because females are superior musicians? So the guys can play grab-ass
> during intermission? Why would the players care, if they are "superior
> musicians"?
Could be a lot of reasons. Maybe you want more women to show up for the
concerts and think this would help. Maybe they just have this idea in their
heads that gender diversity will inspire the orchestra to greater heights
and maybe it would if they actually believed it would. Perhaps a sweet
little thang in the orchestra would inspire better playing by the males,
might if they think so.
>
> Do they need to rely on the blind audition if they, for what ever
> > reason, want a woman in the orchestra? What if the winner is 8 months
> > pregnant and you are auditioning for a musician that will be leaving for
a
> > tour of Europe in a month?
>
> Most orchestras think longer-term than this. They can hire a sub.
>
> What if the winner is just so damn ugly that
> > he/she will scare away the audience?
>
> I can't imagine anyone who couldn't be adaquately prettied up at audience
> distance with makeup.
Perhaps but what if she has tourettes syndrom and is freaking the audience
out with insulting spasms? What if she has a very uninspiring performing
style that would bring down the rest of the orchestra? Hey...ya never know
when you go in blind.
>
> The reason that a safeguard, and its
> > minimal effect, even needs to be in place is that the orchestra can suck
and
> > still get paid because of art-welfare and other entitlements such as
local
> > governments and corporations who will finance the thing not so much
because
> > of music quality but that you gotta have an orchestra named after your
city
> > because that is supposed to say something about the quality of life in
that
> > city. And that's why unions can exist, because mediocrity can be funded.
If
> > all orchestras had to fund themselves with the money that is collected
at
> > the door, unions couldn't exist and there would be fewer but better
> > orchestras.
>
> OK, let me clarify my position:
> 1. As I've said here before, I am opposed to all government arts subsidies
> 2. I am opposed to all government interventions on the side of organized
> labor OR organized capital.. Since the bosses can conspire, connive, and
> cartelize, the workers should have the same rights, and thus join a union.
I agree 100%.
>
> I'm trying to figure what the hell you're arguing here.
Am I arguing or discussing the dynamics of union influence on the music
scene?
You're basically
> arguing for the right of an orchestra to make employment decisions on
> whatever basis they please. In principle, I'm all for this. But in fact,
it
> is artistically lame to make such decisions on ANY other factor than
> artistic ability. Can they do they job better than anyone else? Give them
> the gig. Yet you're arguing against a procedure (blind auditions) that
> supports musical quality, and saying that other factors are just fine.
Why?
> What do you want our orchestras to be? This is not a flame; I'm just
trying
> to figure out where you're coming from. Are you saying that America's
> unionized orchestras are mediocre?
Could all of the orchestras in the US support themselves if they only had
the take from the box office to split amongst themselves? No. How many could
be supported in this way? half the current? One quarter? More likely about a
handful. Logic would tell us that these orchestras would be better because
the talent pool would be less diluted. The reason you can have many
orchestras with the diluted talent pool is because of entitlements pouring
in to keep these orchestras afloat. This means there is money to divy up and
you can blame ( or applaud ) the financing as much as the unions because
they go hand in hand. There would be downsides. If government funding allows
for orchestras the ability to have *creative* programs without so much
concern that they need to impress a large amount of ticket buyers, there
would be less programs of less popular music but then you can argue that the
government shouldn't be financing the specialized entertainment of a few.
Perhaps they would play any program that they want because you would still
sell out the now not so common performances. Is there enough interest in
Schoenberg that one orchestra could tour the world and sell out every night?
So you get Schoenber once a year, who needs more than that? My brain hurts
now, gotta go.
Jim Curtis
> OK, so you really don't know about this. An instrument locked away in a
> vault loses condition. It needs to be played regularly and be subjected
> to the vibrations of use or it becomes "unplayable". That is why a good
> many nonperforming owners who can actually afford fine instruments loan
> them to performers. You may have heard of the Library of Congress Strad
> quartet? But don't take my word for it. Go ask a professional luthier.
I could vibrate the cello myself, no? What if I buy a robotic instrument
vibrator that will vibrate the thing continuously? Or, does the cello need
to be vibrated by a great musician? If this is the case, tell me more about
this phenomenon because it is really interesting. You might sell me on this
yet.
> they'll give you the scoop. NOw we come back to your assertions of those
> capitalists out their who are ready and willing... Are you going to give
> some names?
Hey Clovis, ever heard of a phone book?
D.G. Porter
>
> Why would a musician want to be in a union if he is a consumate pro with
> superior skills that any employer would be happy to have aboard? What would
> such a person gain by being in a union? Aren't unions better suited for
> replaceable workers that would want to create a not-so-replaceable and
> intimidating force that can as a collective gain security in their
> mediocrity?
Curtis: The glass is half empty!
Porter: The glass is half full.
> "D.G. Porter" <dgpo...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
> news:39CA55...@pacbell.net...
> >
> > I used to know many unionized musicians (back when I worked for
> > orchestras). They'd often show up for the dress rehearsal only, and,
> > having played the repertoire many times and being consumate pros, did
> > their job excellently and earned their union scale. But they all tend
> > to be from a higher socio-economic-educational background. It goes with
> > the territory.
D.G. Porter
>
> It's a nuclear power plant, drug testing required by Federal
> regulations.
YOW!
Is there a guy named Homer on the staff? ;-)
> Not the same as a university campus, but the original post
> implied that the drunk or high lawn mower guy was typical of a non-union
> worker, and I think the opposite is more likely to be the case, whether
> it is in a nuclear plant or on a campus.
Well, I know the opposite to be true.
Like I said, I know of doofuses in the union, but they come from places
like Southcentral LA, where intellectual growth is not usually seen as a
plus amongst one's peers. Since the union is for ALL state employees,
you get a diverse lot. The problem is a societal one, not a labor
problem.
> "D.G. Porter" wrote:
> >
> > Harold Kahl wrote:
> > >
> > > Where I work, random drug testing is required. Test positive, and you
> > > will be fired.
> >
> > Without telling what kind of work you do, it's hard to react to this
> > statement. Do you fly a commercial aircraft? Or do you write
> > software? Or do you cook for Carl's Jr.? Or do you write movie
> > soundtracks? How much impact does what you do at home have on your job
> > performance? Would your private behavior adversely affect people that
> > you work with? Does your employer merely feel that they have a right to
> > control every aspect of their employees' lives?
> >
> > ("We are a major Hollywood studio! We drug-test our studio composers!
> > Drugs make musicians act funny! Mustn't let them write music with minor
> > chords!!")
> >
> > > If you work for the union, that's not the end of the
> > > story though. After filing a grievance, you will likely be reinstated
> > > with back pay and placed in the employee assistance program.
> >
> > Which is how it should be unless you're a brain surgeon or airline pilot
> > or run a butcher's band saw.
> >
> > > I have no ax to grind with the unions; I don't own a business or
> > > supervise union employees. However, in my experience, people in unions
> > > rarely perform up to their potential. I am talking about a lack of
> > > resourcefulness, drive and initiative.
> >
> > Well, there are several factors at work here. (1) The kind of people
> > employed (some people simply lack dive no matter what the job but
> > someone has to be hired to do it), (2) the kind of work (using nasty
> > chemicals to clean toilets is no one's favorite job), (3) the fact that
> > your employer tests you for stuff you do off the job (getting drunk off
> > the job is OK, but enjoying a doobie is not, e.g.). Again, w/o telling
> > me what you do, it's hard to say whether or not your observation is
> > valid or not, depending on circumstance. I know that plenty of
> > university professors get roaring drunk in their spare tme and it
> > doesn't affect their ability to teach during class hours. I also know
> > "drug testing" is really a very fascistic method of social control.
> > (The Stater Bros. suepmarket chain tests for drugs - if you're a meth
> > freak, I can understand them not wanting to hire you, but if you're just
> > a pothead, what difference does it make, except to a control freak? And
> > why not psychologically test people for mental aberations while we're at
> > it?)
> >
> > > Nothing against the individuals, it's just the way people act when they
> > > are not accountable for their performance. If that's union bashing, so
> > > be it, it's the truth.
> >
> > No it's not. My wife (white-collar worker) is very active in her union,
> > and believe me, she is very accoutable for her performance. Until a few
> > months ago her supervisor was a real bitch (personally I think the woman
> > was deranged) and would put crap into her personnel file that had no
> > basis in reality - things like "She dresses like a slob" and such (she
> > is in fact an impeccable dresser, sporting some eclectic ethnic clothing
> > - perhaps the ethnicity factor was what drove her supervisor into a
> > tizzy). You could take one look at her and know this was utter
> > bullshit, but it still went into the file (which she is now in the
> > process of purging). It took years before this bitch crossed over the
> > line and even her "friends" in administration had to recognize she was
> > loonie - meanwhile, look at all the damage she caused with everyone in
> > the department.
> >
> > > As to the matter of employees who are "screwed" by their employers: Ever
> > > thought of finding another job?
> >
> > After 21+ years, with retirement near, that isn't an option. Nor should
> > it be. One bitch of a supervisor allowed to ruin a good record? Keep
> > the good (unionized) employee and lose the bitch. (Well, that finally
> > happened...)
> >
> > I get tired of this "My way or the highway" attitude. The myth is that
> > there is "a great job market out there"; the reality is a lot
> > different. Picking up and moving to another state is out of the
> > question. It still boils down to: Why should a shitty supervisor be
> > tolerated by higher levels of management? (Answer: "Well it keeps 'em
> > in line!")
> >
> > BTW, since we're talking about a university music department, it remains
> > somewhat on-topic.
> >
> > > "D.G. Porter" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Harold Kahl wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Well, he probably got fired, whereas the union worker who did the same
> > > > > thing would be untouchable.
> > > >
> > > > Union-bash.
> > > > Let me tell you from 2nd-hand relation of 1st-hand experience. If
> > > > there's witnessed proof of a job fuck-up, no union can save you. OTOH,
> > > > there are too many in management who like to just plain fuck with their
> > > > subordinates, and the union is your only hope of setting things
> > > > straight.
> > > > Matter of fact, many unions aren't powerful enough.
> > > > A while ago I posted a story about this fellow "Gourdine" -- some of you
> > > > may remember it -- and how he was a darling of the administration and
> > > > how administration went after two guys (who he had harrassed physically
> > > > and sexually) who made jokes about him, and the union was the only thing
> > > > that protected them.
> > > > Lousy administration gives rise to lousy unions.
> > > >
> > > <snip>
Jim Curtis
> >> In rec.music.classical Jim Curtis <jcur...@uswest.net> wrote:
> > e. I've given you an avenue
> >> concerning the first item. Are you saying you know of no such
> >> capitalists?
>
> > I might do the leg work for you and locate this capitalist but, as these
> > things work, I would want some money up front. If I was convinced that
you
> > had a valuable proposition I might do this on a promisary note but you
> > haven't convinced me that this is a worthy venture yet.
>
> So you are not a friend of the arts...
I think so but my good intentions aren't gonna secure you this money to buy
a cello. If this friend of yours is in an orchestra perhaps she gets to rub
elbows with rich, arts patrons from the community who might be better to hit
up on such an investment. If you want to send me $50 I will make a few calls
for you, can't promise anything though. Send a video of your friend's cello
playing and all the important info ( the business/investment plan ) You said
there are musicians that are already using these invested in instruments and
it might be a good idea to ask them how they did it.
>
Clovis Lark
> "Clovis Lark" <cl...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
> news:8qgccn$mi6$5...@flotsam.uits.indiana.edu...
>> OK, so you really don't know about this. An instrument locked away in a
>> vault loses condition. It needs to be played regularly and be subjected
>> to the vibrations of use or it becomes "unplayable". That is why a good
>> many nonperforming owners who can actually afford fine instruments loan
>> them to performers. You may have heard of the Library of Congress Strad
>> quartet? But don't take my word for it. Go ask a professional luthier.
> I could vibrate the cello myself, no? What if I buy a robotic instrument
> vibrator that will vibrate the thing continuously? Or, does the cello need
You can check recent issues of Strad for a citation for an answer which
is that there is such a mechanism. However, its use is not endorsed by
all and is only suggested for "reconditioning" instruments.
> to be vibrated by a great musician? If this is the case, tell me more about
> this phenomenon because it is really interesting. You might sell me on this
> yet.
What would be the point of reconditioning an instrument if not to be
played anyway? Sale value of an instrument increases not only because of
its existence, but also the emotional value attached to those who played
on it. So encouraging use by artists is an asset.
>> they'll give you the scoop. NOw we come back to your assertions of those
>> capitalists out their who are ready and willing... Are you going to give
>> some names?
> Hey Clovis, ever heard of a phone book?
Funny, but you said you knew there were these capitalists out there. The
assumption is that you know who they are. Obviously, if I had the direct
line to some, I'd be telling you so and getting my position endowed. As
Samuel said, my point was: Put your money where your mouth is.
Jim Curtis
"Samuel Vriezen" <s...@xs4all.nl.getridofthisone> wrote in message
news:39cbb794...@news.xs4all.nl...
> On Fri, 22 Sep 2000 14:25:54 -0500, "Jim Curtis" <jcur...@uswest.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Again....try a bank or go and convince someone that he will make money by
> >your friend having this cello. I hope you don't expect me to do all the
work
> >for your friend.
>
You think I should buy into what appears to me to be a bad investment
because of what again?
Jim Curtis
"Samuel Vriezen" <s...@xs4all.nl.getridofthisone> wrote in message
>
> Something wrong with the Wiener Philharmoniker?
If it's as good as can be, should we introduce diversity to mess it up? Or
should we model all orchestras on this successful example?
D.G. Porter
>
>
> Cleveland just hired its first black woman, violist Eleisha Nelson, whom I
> knew as a student violinist. Don't know personally how she plays now
> (presumably very well), but she had the attitude to make it anywhere.
When you say "just," how long ago do you mean?
When we were in Cleveland in October '98, I noticed that while there
were a few black faces ON the stage, there didn't seem to be any black
faces OFF the stage -- in the audience. At first I thought, "Well,
maybe it's just whee we're sitting." But the other night we were
talking about this -- how Severance, the Art Museum and Case Western
Reserve U. are this oasis of white skin amongst a sea of black, where
you can't even find make-up for caucasian tones in the Rite Aid! (well,
my wife did find something that was close, with staff help!) -- and my
wife, who attended 3 of the 4 concerts, said she definitely noticed the
same thing!
BTW, the local state-licensed liquor store (with all that armor along
the counters) on MLK Bl. is run by a large family from the Middle East
(and the son running the cash register is the family doofus!!).
Jim Curtis
person is scaring the audience and the bad vibes from the audience are
effecting the entire orchestra? Truth is ugly.
"Samuel Vriezen" <s...@xs4all.nl.getridofthisone> wrote in message
> On Fri, 22 Sep 2000 14:33:41 -0500, "Jim Curtis" <jcur...@uswest.net>
> wrote:
>
> >> What if the winner is 8 months
> >> > pregnant and you are auditioning for a musician that will be leaving
for
> >a
that
> >> > he/she will scare away the audience? The reason that a safeguard, and
> >its
> >> > minimal effect, even needs to be in place is that the orchestra can
suck
> >and
> >> > still get paid because of art-welfare and other entitlements such as
> >local
> >> > governments and corporations who will finance the thing not so much
> >because
> >> > of music quality but that you gotta have an orchestra named after
your
> >city
> >> > because that is supposed to say something about the quality of life
in
> >that
> >> > city. And that's why unions can exist, because mediocrity can be
funded.
> >If
> >> > all orchestras had to fund themselves with the money that is
collected
> >at
> >> > the door, unions couldn't exist and there would be fewer but better
> >> > orchestras.
> >>
> >
> >Can you point to any flawed logic in my comments? Make a case to why the
> >insight is wrong, if you can.
>
> I think most of us can, but not as quickly as you can flaw your logic!
> As to that you're putting up a virtuoso performance. If I weren't too
> rich to care about that I'd even hire you to become my teatime
> philosophical entertainment. It takes a lot of opinion and a very
> thick skull.
>
> But here's a homework assignment. Why don't you try to work out why
> the following are hard to believe having come from the same person:
>
> 1.
> >>> > he/she will scare away the audience?
>
> >The music listening public is not hellbent on throwing their money at
> >white-protestant-males. If an orchestra won't hire the best musicians
> >because of skin color or any other reason, that orchestra is doomed to
fail
> >in a free market because they won't be offering the best product.
>
Jim Curtis
"Samuel Vriezen" <s...@xs4all.nl.getridofthisone> wrote in message
> >unionized orchestras are mediocre?
>
> proof of the failure of capitalism or of the existence of god.
>
> Possibly of the existence of people who like to play music well or of
> the possibility that a more stable environment than that provided by
> cutthroat capitalism at its most theoretically dynamic might help the
> formation of things like group mentality in performance... hey, wait,
> this is going way too deep now...
Now you're thinking! I can't disprove any of that. They may very well be
able to convince themselves that this is true and thusly make it so.
Clovis Lark
> "Jeffrey Quick" <j...@po.cwru.edu> wrote in message
> news:jaq-ya02408000R2209001513490001@news...
>> In article <4lNy5.28651$zK.1...@news.uswest.net>, "Jim Curtis"
>> <jcur...@uswest.net> wrote:
>>
>> > This still doesn't answer the question " Why would a superior musician
> want
>> > to stoop to join a union" which I guess we are saying they do if we want
> to
>> > believe that blind auditions make for quality orchestras, but...Blind
>> > auditions are lame. You have members of an orchestra that can't trust
> their
>> > own ears to realize what is musical quality so they have to put a bag
> over
>> > their head...the game is already lost at that point.
>>
>> It's not trusting the ears, it's not trusting the brain to be influenced
>> ONLY by the ears.
> And a union might need to trick themselves into being artistic where an
> orchestra that would rely on box office receipts would have the main concern
> of selling the best possible product for their own survival and would have
> no incentive to blind themselves to be legit.
The issue is not "seeding" an orchestra with predetermined agendas. It is
assuring that anyone, no matter their looks, race, sex, is given the same
consideration. A blind is in place to force all listening to evaluate
sound only.
>>
>> What if an orchestra
>> > that is all men thinks it would be a good idea to add some females to
> the
>> > orchestra?
>>
>> Why? Because females are superior musicians? So the guys can play grab-ass
>> during intermission? Why would the players care, if they are "superior
>> musicians"?
> Could be a lot of reasons. Maybe you want more women to show up for the
> concerts and think this would help. Maybe they just have this idea in their
> heads that gender diversity will inspire the orchestra to greater heights
> and maybe it would if they actually believed it would. Perhaps a sweet
> little thang in the orchestra would inspire better playing by the males,
> might if they think so.
Specious argument.
>>
>> Do they need to rely on the blind audition if they, for what ever
>> > reason, want a woman in the orchestra? What if the winner is 8 months
>> > pregnant and you are auditioning for a musician that will be leaving for
> a
>> > tour of Europe in a month?
>>
>> Most orchestras think longer-term than this. They can hire a sub.
>>
>> What if the winner is just so damn ugly that
>> > he/she will scare away the audience?
>>
>> I can't imagine anyone who couldn't be adaquately prettied up at audience
>> distance with makeup.
> Perhaps but what if she has tourettes syndrom and is freaking the audience
> out with insulting spasms? What if she has a very uninspiring performing
> style that would bring down the rest of the orchestra? Hey...ya never know
> when you go in blind.
Finals are blind in only one orchestra in the US, the MET (where,
incidently, you have the only 1st tier ensemble with equal representation
of gender). Once you win a position, you have to proceed through a
probationary period. Your colleagues see you, associate with you, hear
your playing day in and out. At the conclusion of the probation (had you
read my earlier post, you'd know this already), your continued employment
is voted on. So your what if's don't have any basis in reality.
The talent pool is extremely rich and deep. I know of numerous players
who go for each first tier opening who could easily fill the job, but have
bad days, nerves, and return without a job. The competition for positions
does not decrease as you get lower on the orchestral totem pole. Ask the
coordinators at Phoenix or Utah or Colorado how many show to audition for
an opening? Nonoe of these orchestras can rely on government subsidy for
survival. They cling to as much as they can get because ALL funding is
necessary. But most of it comes from business and private donations and
ticket sales.
The reason you can have many
> orchestras with the diluted talent pool is because of entitlements pouring
> in to keep these orchestras afloat. This means there is money to divy up and
> you can blame ( or applaud ) the financing as much as the unions because
> they go hand in hand. There would be downsides. If government funding allows
> for orchestras the ability to have *creative* programs without so much
> concern that they need to impress a large amount of ticket buyers, there
> would be less programs of less popular music but then you can argue that the
> government shouldn't be financing the specialized entertainment of a few.
The ensembles that rely the most on subsidies tend to also provide the
most response to audience presumed wishes on repertoire. They are the
ones with large pops programs, the ones who contract out to back up the
Mandrell's, the ones who have the programs where the audience votes for
what they want to hear.
> Perhaps they would play any program that they want because you would still
> sell out the now not so common performances. Is there enough interest in
> Schoenberg that one orchestra could tour the world and sell out every night?
> So you get Schoenber once a year, who needs more than that? My brain hurts
> now, gotta go.
Now you are asking for ensembles to play only what you want to hear.
Steven Forrest
>> capitalists out their who are ready and willing... Are you going to give
>> some names?
>
>Hey Clovis, ever heard of a phone book?
Yeah, just look in the yellow pages under "Capitalists".
-Steve
D.G. Porter
>
> This still doesn't answer the question " Why would a superior musician want
> to stoop to join a union"
Exhibit A as to why Curtis isn't a serious person -- "Stoop" to join a
union.
> What if the winner is just so damn ugly that
Exhibit B showing that Curtis flirts with being a dumb-ass.
> And that's why unions can exist, because mediocrity can be funded.
Thank you, Salieri.
It's obvious that you simply cannot stand the idea of unionization.
And the "Liberal weenies' remark proves that you are somewhat of a jerk
to boot.
Jim Curtis
"Samuel Vriezen" <s...@xs4all.nl.getridofthisone> wrote in message
. You have two kinds
> of non-dutch people, the ones that start shouting Rembrandt and
> Vermeer and the ones that start shouting Gullit when you tell them
> you're Dutch.
I'd be the third guy saying " what's up with that kid with his finger in the
dyke?"
hope I used the right spelling on the dyke word there.
D.G. Porter
Jeffrey Quick wrote:
>
> OK, let me clarify my position:
> 1. As I've said here before, I am opposed to all government arts subsidies
Why? (Per se.) Why not have a committee that decides, "This is worth
funding at a national level as it benefits American art in general and
American culture as a whole"?
Assuming the art already exists and is tangible. This would be
remuneration, not buying a pig in the poke.
D.G. Porter
>
> In rec.music.classical Jim Curtis <jcur...@uswest.net> wrote:
>
> > "Clovis Lark" <cl...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
> >> Perhaps you can read up on the increase in value of a del Jesu, Amati or
> >> Strad over 10 years. You go buy it, let the player use it. When you are
> >> ready to collect on your investment, you sell it to another investor. It
> >> happens all the time. Currently, a certain del Gesu violin has been
> >> appraised at over 4 million, twice the price of a Strad. As per my
> >> previous request, there is an Andrea Guarneri cello on the market in
> >> Europe. Locate a capitalist...
>
> > I kid you not, bring your story to some investor with money and you might
> > get the cello. If you brought the story to me, I would say " Hmmm, why do I
> > let your friend use the thing? Why don't I just go buy it and put it
> > somewhere safe rather than risk having you break my investment?"
Man, a real dimwit!!! That's what INSURANCE is for. You just thought
halfway and then quit, didn't you?
> > And you
> > might shoot back " The cello will be of more valuable if she plays it every
> > day" then you might need to convince me of that.
>
> OK, so you really don't know about this. An instrument locked away in a
> vault loses condition. It needs to be played regularly and be subjected
> to the vibrations of use or it becomes "unplayable". That is why a good
> many nonperforming owners who can actually afford fine instruments loan
> them to performers. You may have heard of the Library of Congress Strad
> quartet? But don't take my word for it. Go ask a professional luthier.
> they'll give you the scoop. NOw we come back to your assertions of those
Clovis Lark
Sounds like the union players are honoring their contractual status. All
the union players I know show up to every rehearsal they are required to
attend and they show up ready to play, whether that be the final rehearsal
of a part time group or every rehearsal of the CSO, Cleveland or MET.
If everyone acted in good faith, there would be no unions. That is not
the case. Managements balk on contract negotiations, refuse to settle
issues before the season commences. Individual players have no recourse.
Many ensembles have long lists of subs they can call in to avoid paying
contractually obligated benefits. Recently, a major orchestra tried to
unilaterally reduce tenured positions through attrition and replace those
positions with these subs. An opera company and, more recently, a ballet
company put on performances using taped recordings of those very players
they locked out in negotiations (the recording was, as I understand it,
not management's property). So job security becomes an issue. Union and
nonunion musicians understand that they play an equal role assuring the
stability of an artistic institution. Collective bargaining has helped
them gain a say as artists in determining the best ways to assure
viability of their emsembles
There are among us here some highly esteemed members of both unions and
management who can attest to the fact that there are going to be these
types of "fringe" malfeasance on opposing sides of issues from time to
time. However, they will surely attest to the hard work that both sides
put into making orchestral institutions stronger and finacially more
secure.
There is quite a bit more at stake than simple "market" economics.
Actually, there is a market, a cultural market. It operates differently.
Jim Curtis
> What would be the point of reconditioning an instrument if not to be
> played anyway? Sale value of an instrument increases not only because of
> its existence, but also the emotional value attached to those who played
> on it. So encouraging use by artists is an asset.
Ouch, we will have a tough time convincing the capitalist to invest in
"emotional value".
>
> >> they'll give you the scoop. NOw we come back to your assertions of
those
> >> capitalists out their who are ready and willing... Are you going to
give
> >> some names?
>
> > Hey Clovis, ever heard of a phone book?
>
> Funny, but you said you knew there were these capitalists out there. The
> assumption is that you know who they are. Obviously, if I had the direct
> line to some, I'd be telling you so and getting my position endowed. As
> Samuel said, my point was: Put your money where your mouth is.
Your sanity is slipping. I don't know the names of the people in your
community who would invest in such a venture. That is why I recommended the
phone book to you and suggested that maybe you take your case to some rich
music patron in your community. I'm not really sure what you are getting at
with all this presumption that I'm gonna set up this venture for you. I just
haven't been able to get real excited about the prospect of your friend
playing an expensive cello. But others might be, get busy and find those
people, I can't hold you by the hand and bring you around town pitching your
idea. Just ain't enough in it for me.
Clovis Lark
> In article <LUPy5.29785$zK.1...@news.uswest.net>,
> Jim Curtis <jcur...@uswest.net> wrote:
>>> capitalists out their who are ready and willing... Are you going to give
>>> some names?
>>
>>Hey Clovis, ever heard of a phone book?
> Yeah, just look in the yellow pages under "Capitalists".
And there it was: Bill Gates, number UNLISTED...
> -Steve
Clovis Lark
> "Clovis Lark" <cl...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
> news:8qgcf4$mi6$6...@flotsam.uits.indiana.edu...
>> In rec.music.classical Jim Curtis <jcur...@uswest.net> wrote:
>>
>> > "Clovis Lark" <cl...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
>> > news:8qgb78$mi6$2...@flotsam.uits.indiana.edu...
>> >> In rec.music.classical Jim Curtis <jcur...@uswest.net> wrote:
>> > e. I've given you an avenue
>> >> concerning the first item. Are you saying you know of no such
>> >> capitalists?
>>
>> > I might do the leg work for you and locate this capitalist but, as these
>> > things work, I would want some money up front. If I was convinced that
> you
>> > had a valuable proposition I might do this on a promisary note but you
>> > haven't convinced me that this is a worthy venture yet.
>>
>> So you are not a friend of the arts...
> I think so but my good intentions aren't gonna secure you this money to buy
> a cello. If this friend of yours is in an orchestra perhaps she gets to rub
> elbows with rich, arts patrons from the community who might be better to hit
> up on such an investment. If you want to send me $50 I will make a few calls
> for you, can't promise anything though. Send a video of your friend's cello
> playing and all the important info ( the business/investment plan ) You said
> there are musicians that are already using these invested in instruments and
> it might be a good idea to ask them how they did it.
>>
I know how it is done (I know about the Strad Society and the person in
question is registered with them). This player is a soloist, not an
orchestra player (many orchestras have instrument funds that you can
borrow against). You have indicated you knew who the money sources were.
I thought you'd just help all out in your deep wisdom and profer some
names of these capitalists. The more options, the better. I really don't
need to send you the tape because I'd just as soon send it straight to the
capitists in question. So let's cut to the quick...
Clovis Lark
> "Samuel Vriezen" <s...@xs4all.nl.getridofthisone> wrote in message
> news:39cbb794...@news.xs4all.nl...
>> On Fri, 22 Sep 2000 14:25:54 -0500, "Jim Curtis" <jcur...@uswest.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Again....try a bank or go and convince someone that he will make money by
>> >your friend having this cello. I hope you don't expect me to do all the
> work
>> >for your friend.
>>
>> I believe it's a question of putting your money where your mouth is.
> You think I should buy into what appears to me to be a bad investment
> because of what again?
You said you knew of people. We're not asking for your cash.
Jim Curtis
Now, what's the point of that comment? Anyone can respond to everything with
"bullshit" but what do we learn with this? When I see these kind of replies
it usually tells me that the respondant can't actually dispute but just
doesn't like the tone of a particular truth.
> Now you are asking for ensembles to play only what you want to hear.
Never did that. You imagined it.
>
>
Jim Curtis
"Steven Forrest" <sfor...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
news:8qgjh9$o0f$1...@flotsam.uits.indiana.edu...
> In article <LUPy5.29785$zK.1...@news.uswest.net>,
> Yeah, just look in the yellow pages under "Capitalists".
Throw a dart at the white pages, make the call and pitch the idea. Still
seems to me that the best bet would be to find a rich classical music lover
and run the idea by him.
Clovis Lark
> "Clovis Lark" <cl...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
> news:8qgim4$nsf$1...@flotsam.uits.indiana.edu...
>> What would be the point of reconditioning an instrument if not to be
>> played anyway? Sale value of an instrument increases not only because of
>> its existence, but also the emotional value attached to those who played
>> on it. So encouraging use by artists is an asset.
> Ouch, we will have a tough time convincing the capitalist to invest in
> "emotional value".
This is fun... Obviously you don't follow auctions at Sotheby's and
Christies. I suggest you check out the next sale of instruments, see how
they are described, including players who owned/borrowed them and who
shows up and buys them. Emotional value adds great value. How much for a
Biedermeier chair? How much for one Napoleon sat in as he signed his
surrender at Waterloo (I know he didn't sit in one--just an example). A
Rawlings baseball, a Rawlings baseball hit over Wrigley Fields bleachers
by Ruth described as the "called shot". Any difference in value. A
Strad, Menuhin's Strad--any difference?
>>
>> >> they'll give you the scoop. NOw we come back to your assertions of
> those
>> >> capitalists out their who are ready and willing... Are you going to
> give
>> >> some names?
>>
>> > Hey Clovis, ever heard of a phone book?
>>
>> Funny, but you said you knew there were these capitalists out there. The
>> assumption is that you know who they are. Obviously, if I had the direct
>> line to some, I'd be telling you so and getting my position endowed. As
>> Samuel said, my point was: Put your money where your mouth is.
> Your sanity is slipping. I don't know the names of the people in your
> community who would invest in such a venture. That is why I recommended the
> phone book to you and suggested that maybe you take your case to some rich
> music patron in your community. I'm not really sure what you are getting at
> with all this presumption that I'm gonna set up this venture for you. I just
> haven't been able to get real excited about the prospect of your friend
> playing an expensive cello. But others might be, get busy and find those
> people, I can't hold you by the hand and bring you around town pitching your
> idea. Just ain't enough in it for me.
You made the comment and now start redefining your criteria. Give me your
names. I know how to dial long distance...
Jim Curtis
> Jim Curtis wrote:
> >
> > This still doesn't answer the question " Why would a superior musician
want
> > to stoop to join a union"
>
> Exhibit A as to why Curtis isn't a serious person -- "Stoop" to join a
> union.
Someone with what we were calling superior skills being absorbed by a
collective when he might be much in demand and could call his own terms as
an individual. If you read with your emotions you not only miss the point
but your feelings will be needlessly hurt.
>
> > What if the winner is just so damn ugly that
>
> Exhibit B showing that Curtis flirts with being a dumb-ass.
"Flirts" is being kind, I was being a dumb ass there but the point I made
could be valid. I'd kiss you if you weren't so damn ugly.
>
> > And that's why unions can exist, because mediocrity can be funded.
>
> Thank you, Salieri.
> It's obvious that you simply cannot stand the idea of unionization.
Not really. Mediocrity is relative and often is good enough. What we might
call a mediocre American symphony orchestra might be better than a superb
Peruvian symphony orchestra. It's on a curve dude.
>
> And the "Liberal weenies' remark proves that you are somewhat of a jerk
> to boot.
I don't care much for liberals, so someone like you would think me a jerk.
No prob.
Dr.Matt
Samuel Vriezen <s...@xs4all.nl.getridofthisone> wrote:
>On 22 Sep 2000 20:26:12 GMT, Clovis Lark <cl...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu>
>wrote:
>
>>> Something wrong with the Wiener Philharmoniker?
>>
>>after the EU finishes with UEFA, they'll turn their ugly red eye toward
>>Wien?
>>
>
>Well I heard that they now finally have their first female player at
>last.
>
>As to soccer, I'm not a connaisseur, even though I'm from the country
>of Johan Cruyff, Marco van Basten and Ruud Gullit. You have two kinds
>of non-dutch people, the ones that start shouting Rembrandt and
>Vermeer and the ones that start shouting Gullit when you tell them
>you're Dutch.
To my mind the place conjures up Mathias Ghizighem.
--
For spammers: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~fields/uce.htm
More for spammers: http://www.goldinc.com/cgi-bin/harvest_this.cgi
My CD "Kabala": http://www-personal.umich.edu/~fields/cd.html
Matt Fields DMA http://listen.to/mattaj TwelveToneToyBox http://start.at/tttb
Dr.Matt
Jim Curtis <jcur...@uswest.net> wrote:
>
>"Samuel Vriezen" <s...@xs4all.nl.getridofthisone> wrote in message
>>
>> Something wrong with the Wiener Philharmoniker?
>
>should we model all orchestras on this successful example?
>
But in reality, it's a middling European orchestra.
Jim Curtis
> As someone who received, after the fact, a nice-sized NEA grant...
>
> Jeffrey Quick wrote:
> >
> > OK, let me clarify my position:
> > 1. As I've said here before, I am opposed to all government arts
subsidies
>
> Why? (Per se.) Why not have a committee that decides, "This is worth
> funding at a national level as it benefits American art in general and
> American culture as a whole"?
Americans won't support American culture with their own wallets? You want a
committee of government dependency advocates deciding what is worthy
American culture?