Well, I guess that my ignorance comes across as being disingenuous. People sure seem to think I know more than I do on this topic. Here's MY administrative side:
1) Vice President of the Board of Apollo's Fire: the board has no say in which guest artists are hired. A pretty clear meritocracy from what I have seen. And of course, merit to be hired for an ensemble requires skills that go beyond the purely musical (show up on time, be prepared, work collaboratively with others, etc) 2) Board Member Early Music America: not a presenting group but does sponsor competitions. I haven't judged them myself but I've also been very impressed by the winners 3) I set up and funded the Pat O'Brien lectureship for LSA. Based on who Pat wanted. Purely subjective and not based on any independent assessment of merit. Tough luck there. 4) Used to be on the Board of LSA. Never had a say in who the seminar faculty would be (other than the POB lecturer). Not every single faculty member at every LSA seminar of all time would necessarily have been my first choice if I was the King of LSA but certainly most would have been. Of late, every faculty has included both big names and emerging talent (or at least first time faculty) So no, I don't know who these organizations are that present solo lutenists or small ensembles and who seem to be cutting you and Ron out of your deserved shows and CD contracts for political reasons, if that's really what all the euphemisms mean. Or faculty appointments? Board memberships? Spots on the Tonight Show? It is of course also a business, so a talented "name" that sells out a hall will always be preferred over a talented newcomer that doesn't pull in a crowd, but so that has been since the early days. And also to emphasize, the fact that I don't know who these groups are doesn't mean that I dismiss the possibility that they are out there. "Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you" (Joseph Heller) Danny > On Feb 26, 2015, at 1:34 PM, Christopher Wilke <chriswi...@cs.dartmouth.edu> > wrote: > > Danny, > > I must respectfully say that I think you're being disingenuous here. > You've been on the administrative side of things long enough to know that > merit is rarely a prime consideration when it comes to who and what is > promoted by arts organizations. Beyond a certain level of competency, > institutions in a position to help advance careers frequently anoint > "beautiful ones" on the basis of political, rather than aesthetic criteria. > I'm not at all suggesting that you are personally involved in any of this, > but over the years I have trouble believing you've never witnessed it > happening. > > Having been a victim of this system myself (repeatedly and much more > frequently lately, it seems), I can totally understand Ron's reticence in > naming names. Even describing scenarios in a general manner is a great way to > lose old friends, make fresh enemies and work yourself out of work. However, > a dismissive, "There's no Establishment or Conspiracy. You're paranoid," is > not an appropriate response to legitimate issues. > > Keeping one's mouth shut and pretending there is no dysfunction in the > early music industry is absolutely unhealthy. We should ALL be keenly aware > of that in the wake of the recent Philip Pickett scandal. (For those who > aren't aware, Pickett was a long time professor of early music at the > Guildhall School of Music who, just convicted of raping several students, is > currently serving an 11-year prison term. Sickeningly, the school > administration was informed of his behavior and responded by telling the > students to simply switch schools.) I'm not suggesting that anyone else is > involved in such horrible activities, but those who use their influence to > squash the deserving deserve to be called out. Many in high places are long > overdue for a harsh dose of karma. I have a feeling it's finally starting to > happen and will be here in force soon. > > Chris > > > > > Dr. Christopher Wilke D.M.A. > Lutenist, Guitarist and Composer > www.christopherwilke.com > > -------------------------------------------- > On Wed, 2/25/15, Daniel Shoskes <kidneykut...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Subject: [LUTE] Re: Lute in the Future > To: "Ron Andrico" <praelu...@hotmail.com> > Cc: "Lute List" <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu> > Date: Wednesday, February 25, 2015, 1:07 PM > > Ron: when I read many of your posts, > I sometimes feel confused and undereducated. You often refer > to “those people we all know” or “certain groups” > and I guess I’m not with the “in crowd” because I > honestly don’t know who or what you mean. > > So, for the information of me and others like me on the > outside looking in, what “certain incorporated non-profit > organizations” are you referring to? > > Danny > >> On Feb 25, 2015, at 8:15 AM, Ron Andrico <praelu...@hotmail.com> > wrote: >> >> ... but as far as I can see the only > viable solution in >> our niche market is to ask our certain > incorporated non-profit >> organizations to stop behaving like > fan clubs and make targeted funds >> available to energetic and motivated > artists for recording worthwhile >> projects - and not with limitations so > the funds apply only to the >> select few students of the gatekeepers > who have been running the racket >> for far too long. >> > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > > >
