Hi Valerie On 24 May 2010 18:18, valerie wells <[email protected]> wrote:
> > In the case I posted about when I initiated this thread, I had started > with this group from it's early beginnings and had worked side by side > with the director and other members of the group to build the band and > recruit quality musicians. I always served cheerfully and responsibly > in any capacity within the section. > With you all the way there. > > This was (still is) a young band, however, that had no clear cut or > consistent policy of principal selection. In some sections the > selection criteria was by default seniority, while in other sections > it was clearly playing ability. In one section (the cornet/trumpets) > there was no principal and the director rotated the parts among the > section members. > My experience is that in most adult amateur groups (as opposed to youth orchestras) this lack of a consistent policy is the norm rather than the exception. Provided everbody is happy, every section is left to get on with it as they collectively see fit, and the conductor doesn't intervene unless there is some significant problem. > When I gently approached the director with my desire to play some > first horn parts, I did not demand or treaten to leave the band if I > did not get my way. I made it abundantly clear to the director that I > was generally happy playing in the band and would continue regardless > of his response to my request. I simply communicated to him that I > would find it a more musically satisfying experience if I could > occasionally play first horn parts like the trumpet players get to do. > That was OK, though I would have made the initial request to the first horn rather than behind his back to the conductor. > And ... if the only way I could play first horn parts was to become > the principal, then I'd do whatever it takes to accomplish this > (auditions, etc.) I think this is where you left yourself open to misinterpretation, as can be seen by the fact that several people here have misinterpreted you. This could easily be interpreted as politicking to get the position of principal. If you didn't intend it that way, then treat this as a lesson learned in how to address these sorts of delicate situations. > I made no veiled threats or unreasonable demands. > You might not have thought you were doing so, but the mention of auditions inevitably was going to raise this question in people's minds. You were opening the possibility of the principal being expected to re-audition for his post. No matter how diplomatic you thought you were being, this has the potential to leave a bad taste in people's mouths. > I proposed no breech of established band policy as there was NO > consistent established policy. > The policy was to have no policy, and you were wanting to change that. > > The director expressed his gratitude for my making the request. He > immediately removed the designation of "principal" from every section > in the band and began rotation of parts with in the horn section as a > result of my request. The outcome of my actions was positive as the > director indicated to me. > In that case it has turned out well. > > To further domonstrate the positive outcome I share this: Shortly > after the director made the decision to distribute the horn parts > amoung the horn section, I was forced due to unfortunate circumstances > beyond my control to withdraw from this band for a season. During > this time, the director, the horn section mates and other band members > communicated with me to let me know that I was missed and they were > eager for my return. > > In conclusion I reiterate my point that there are special times and > special circumstances when an amatuer band/orchestra member can and > should encourage a director to make changes in a section. > This is just my opinion, but based on what you have said here, my approach would have been to keep it within the section, unless the principal decided that the conductor's input was needed. As it happens, your approach seems to have worked, so there's no harm done. > > I appreciate those who took time to carefully read my original post, > exercised restraint and courtesy to respond in a constructive, > thoughtful manner. I'm saddened by those who impulsively took > advantage of the awkwardness of my words and twisted their meaning to > malign my character. > No, it wasn't like that. Don't assume bad faith with regard to anything that can be explained adequately through misunderstanding. Regards Jonathan West _______________________________________________ post: [email protected] unsubscribe or set options at https://pegasus.memphis.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/options/horn/archive%40jab.org
