Klarinet Archive - Posting 000265.txt from 1999/02

From: DHmorgan@-----.com
Subj: Re: [kl] Women and orchestras
Date: Sat, 6 Feb 1999 18:48:42 -0500

In a message dated 2/6/99 8:00:34 AM Pacific Standard Time, johnathant@-----.com
writes:

<< I've been following this thread with great interest and it seems that the
fundamental issue is that even though we can have "blind" auditions where
the race, gender, whatever of the performer is not visible, we can not have
"fair" auditions since some element of the performance contains a clue to
the race, gender, whatever of the performer. Given the clue, the judges will
make biased decisions in favor of the clues that indicate their personal
preferences. In short, if I hear the clue that indicates "this person plays
like a man" I assume "this person is a man" and I vote for them because I
"prefer" men. Despite the opportunity that last sentence provides for ribald
remarks - I'll let it stand.>>

Hurray! I feel *heard*. That's all I've been saying. With a big emphasis on
MIGHT. If you stuff a rat full of saccharine it'll get cancer, but does it
mean humans will when they take it in small doses? At first they said yes,
then they said, "Oh, we're wrong." Generalizability is very tricky.

<< Assuming that I have couched to issue correctly (and please correct me if I
haven't) then the real debate is - so what? How would we be able to change
the perceptual biases of auditions in any meaningful way?>>

If you have enough diversity on the audition committee, that might be one way
to even things out.

<<There is always
the very real possibility that the "bias" is just a preference for a sound
that is more pleasing to the ear of the judge. Simply put, if I like the way
Germans play clarinet and you play like a German then I like your playing.
If you "play like a German" behind a screen and you are, in fact French,
then what is improper about me judging your playing "superior" because of
the "clues" in you performance?>>

But French and German are not underprivledge groups that have been historially
oppressed--de jure and de facto--for hundreds of years in American society;
the possibility of bias against them strikes us as less repugnant because
opportunities for them are presumably available elsewhere. There is,
obviously, a social justice agenda behind the investigation of bias.
Opportunities for blacks and women are circumscribed, however, so if we never
did anything about bias, they would always lack opportunities.

<< If the real problem is that some orchestras use the audition process to
select people that meet some other criteria than performance ability or
style then the audition process is not at fault. The fault lies in the
bigotry of the culture of the orchestra or the community itself. If that is
the fundamental problem then debating the audition process is looking for a
solution in the wrong place.
A solution might be to remove the audition from the biased environment. For
example, if an orchestra is making biased decisions during auditions, then
they ought to hire independent judges who hear candidates in isolation from
the entire culture of the orchestra and then hire the candidate selected by
the judges. As absurd as this sounds, the only way to resolve a situation of
biased judgment is to remove the bias i.e. change the judges. >>

There are various different ways to attempt to address bias--all have their
plusses and their minuses.

Don

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org