 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: SecondTry
Date: 2026-06-13 18:18
This topic has been discussed here before, but some recent experiences have prompted me to revisit it.
Before doing so, I should acknowledge my own biases. Although I am Caucasian, I generally support initiatives that expand opportunities for people of color to enter fields from which they have historically been excluded or underrepresented, whether due to socioeconomic barriers, racial discrimination, cultural factors, or other inequities. While society has made significant progress, I do not believe we have yet achieved a truly level playing field, and I think there is still work to be done.
At the same time, I recognize that efforts to increase representation can sometimes result in difficult tradeoffs. There may be instances in which a candidate who is equally qualified—or even more qualified—but who does not belong to an underrepresented group is passed over in favor of advancing broader diversity objectives. In such cases, the outcome may be unfair to that individual, often bearing no responsibility for the historical conditions those initiatives seek to address.
Where I draw the line is in fields where performance can be evaluated relatively objectively and where selecting the most capable candidates is essential to the mission of the institution. For example, few people question the fairness of the racial composition of professional basketball. Given the competitive and financial stakes involved, teams are expected to recruit and retain the best players available. The prevailing sentiment is that roster spots are earned through performance decisions only.
This brings me to the arts, and specifically to symphony orchestras. I strongly support programs that introduce more minority students to music, connect them with outstanding teachers, provide access to quality instruments, and help remove financial barriers that can prevent talented young musicians from pursuing serious study. If there are initiatives that effectively expand those opportunities, I would gladly take out my checkbook, and offer my time (and have) to support them.
However, when it comes to professional orchestral positions, I remain convinced that appointments should be based solely on musical excellence. The best players, regardless of race or ethnicity, should earn those positions, and blind auditions should remain a cornerstone of the selection process.
There are already examples of extraordinary African American musicians who have risen to the highest levels of the profession through their artistry and achievement. Among them are Anthony McGill, principal clarinet of the New York Philharmonic, Afendi Yusuf, principal clarinet of The Cleveland Orchestra, and Mr. McGill's brother Demarre McGill, principal flute of the Seattle Symphony.
I have no doubt that each occupies those roles because of exceptional talent and musicianship.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2026-06-13 21:23
SecondTry wrote:
> However, when it comes to professional orchestral positions, I
> remain convinced that appointments should be based solely on
> musical excellence. The best players, regardless of race or
> ethnicity, should earn those positions, and blind auditions
> should remain a cornerstone of the selection process.
>
> There are already examples of extraordinary African American
> musicians who have risen to the highest levels of the
> profession through their artistry and achievement. Among them
> are Anthony McGill, principal clarinet of the New York
> Philharmonic, Afendi Yusuf, principal clarinet of The Cleveland
> Orchestra, and Mr. McGill's brother Demarre McGill, principal
> flute of the Seattle Symphony.
>
> I have no doubt that each occupies those roles because of
> exceptional talent and musicianship.
>
I don't disagree with most of what you wrote, but I wonder what specifically brought it to mind now. Have you heard recently of specific situations that involved discriminatory orchestral hiring? This has been an issue forever in the performing arts. That there may be regression in fair hiring practices isn't really a problem specific to symphony orchestras. It has alarmed people in all kinds of hiring markets in recent years.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SecondTry
Date: 2026-06-14 01:16
>
> I don't disagree with most of what you wrote, but I wonder what
> specifically brought it to mind now.
It came about by my examination of the Sphinx National Alliance for Audition Support website and its recommended audition and tenure guidelines.
It's leading principal is that those who sign on to its principles, and there are quite a number of partner orchestras, believe that orchestras should reflect the racial makeup of the communities they serve and should in good faith pursue that goal.
Now don't get me wrong, that sounds great in principle, just as long as a the principal (note the double entendre on the principle/principal) of some instrumental section within the ensemble first and foremost can handle the repertoire before local (racially reflective of the community) talent is hired.
> That there may be regression in fair hiring practices isn't
> really a problem specific to symphony orchestras.
Affirmative action programs, which I generally support, have their limits in fields in which, as I originally wrote 1) talent is relatively easy to measure, and 2) the competitive need to hire the best mandates racial blindness. It's one thing for me to see some corporate training program seek higher levels of minority participation, and yet another for the NBA, where millions of dollars are at stake, to contract with anyone but the best players, or orchestras, many of which are already struggling, produce anything but the finest performances from the best talent their budgets will allow.
Before I'm labelled a bigot, I embrace everything organizations like Sphinx National Alliance for Audition Support do to get minorities not only into audition slots but make them competitive, but the nature of this work makes meritocracy IMHO, the only fair way to put the best players in seats on the performance stage.
Of course AI is apt to put all many of us out of work, as sure as it is to do so with complete racial blindness.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2026-06-14 04:51
I doubt it would affect situations where there is ONE thoroughly competent candidate amongst a passel of contestants (though there are such situations). I believe if there little deviation amongst the top tier candidates, it would be AWFULLY IMPORTANT to show deference to idea that racial parity is in everyone's best interests.
Personally I thought the gutting of the civil rights bill was about the worst decision since the Dred Scott v. Sandford.
Let's all try to celebrate Juneteenth together.
..................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dan Shusta
Date: 2026-06-15 00:02
What is Fair? That's an interesting question.
First of all, I'm a believer that fairness simply does not exist. It never has and it never will.
Now, why do I believe that? Well, as I head towards 80, I've seen and experienced a lot of things in my lifetime which certainly influenced me towards this belief.
However, because this is a clarinet bulletin board, SecondTry mentioned Anthony McGill, so let me start with him. Is Anthony McGill an extremely talented clarinetist...there's no question about that. However, I began to wonder exactly where his talent originated, so I began to look at his genealogical background.
Anthony's brother is Demarre McGill, an internationally well known and highly respected flutist. https://www.demarremcgill.com/. Anthony's father played the flute but the following article doesn't mention if he played professionally. https://munroreview.com/2026/04/11/5-things-to-know-about-demarre-mcgill-guest-artist-with-the-fresno-philharmonic/
Both Anthony and his brother, Demarre, attended Interlochen Summer Camp which is not cheap. https://www.collegeessayguy.com/blog/interlochen-summer-camp
Both Anthony and his brother attended Curtis Institute of Music which has a long history of no tuition or fees and only accepts very talented musicians. https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/curtis-institute-of-music-3251/paying His brother went on to get his master's degree from Julliard as mentioned in the link about his him.
So, what am I really trying to say? Anthony McGill and his brother, Demarre, are where they are today not just because of their talent but more importantly because of where their talent came from...their genealogical DNA line of a musically talented father who "gifted" them the talent which they are using today. (mo)
Now, I ask you...is that fair? Where would Anthony and Demarre McGill be today without their musical DNA genealogical history? Yes, Anthony and Demarre practiced hard and attended the finest schools of music. Now, I need to mention another important factor and that is...money. My readings do not indicate that Anthony and Demarre McGill came from a poor or even a lower middle class family. To get where Anthony and Demarre are today required inherited talent and quite possibly a childhood, monetary living standard of an upper class family.
Now, I ask you again...is that fair? How available are both of these to other minority young people?
Okay, it's time for me to get off of my soapbox.
All of the above are simply my opinions.
Post Edited (2026-06-15 02:13)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SecondTry
Date: 2026-06-15 01:23
That fairness doesn't exist, or perhaps better said, hasn't been achieved in society or might never be doesn't IMHO preclude our defining it, much that we may have different opinions on what attributes comprise it, or what constitutes it, or most important, striving to achieving something closer to it than existed prior, even if we never fully (can) achieve it.
Anthony McGill's older brother was named after their father Demarre. The flutist in the family is Anthony's brother, as stated in the OP. I can see where the identical first name might make things confusing.
It's entire possible McGill's dad had artistic talent. I just don't know. But sources say that while he supported the arts he in fact by vocation was a fireman, rising through the ranks of the Chicago system to Deputy Commissioner. And it was only through several landmark lawsuits that minority representation in that department, let alone rise of minorities through its ranks was possible.
Perhaps Anthony McGill, rather, is here today because talent met hard work, which met opportunity, which met parents willing and able to pay for such things.
====
If I may, let's get back on track. We as a group may have different lines on where fairness is drawn, and where, in an effort to promote such fairness, that striving for fairness can go to far and begin to look more like unfairness.
For me, fairness in closer to achieved when programs that give opportunity to those historically deprived access to performing arts due to societal barriers are made available. But where such classes of people are chosen for things like professional orchestras on anything other that merit (I'm fine accepting a equally ranked minority candidate) problems can arise. Such decisions can not only disenfranchise other orchestra members and auditioners, but result in a group of players that is suboptimal.
So I guess, regardless of whether fairness is a unicorn or not, I believe in striving towards fairness of opportunity, not results, just as sure as I would be thrilled if an all minority orchestra resulted, but only because those players were the best at blind auditions.
Such a situation would signal true progress to me.
Post Edited (2026-06-15 01:23)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dan Shusta
Date: 2026-06-15 02:22
lmliberson,
Thank you very much for the correction. At first, I was highly embarrassed because of how my dyslexia and other word translation abnormalities can really turn things around backwards for me. However, your correction of my mistake actually reinforced by belief about fairness.
I, of course, made numerous corrections in my above post and, hopefully, I have straightened everything out.
Again, thank you.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dan Shusta
Date: 2026-06-15 02:51
SecondTry,
How can musical fairness even exist when everyone is not only musically unequal, financial unequal, motivational unequal, job opportunities unequal, etc.
Going back to your original posted question of "What is Fair?", to me fair mean "equal" and all of us are not equal and therefor, I submit, fairness cannot even exist.
IMHO, our country has an unfortunately long history of unfair treatment towards minorities and I totally agree with Paul Aviles statement: "Personally I thought the gutting of the civil rights bill was about the worst decision since the Dred Scott v. Sandford."
I believe I understand what you're trying to say, however, I, unfortunately, believe that prejudicial beliefs will always exist to undermine fairness which could and should exist.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SecondTry
Date: 2026-06-15 05:03
Dan Shusta wrote:
> SecondTry,
>
> How can musical fairness even exist..
It doesn't, anymore than our country's framers sought a perfect union but a "more perfect" union. (Back then "more perfect" meant "better," it wasn't a contradiction in terms. )
> Going back to your original posted question of "What is Fair?"...
The point is should we seek to offer as many people as close to equal as possible opportunity to excel in musical performance but maintain a blind audition meritocracy, or should (additionally?) the disadvantaged potentially get seats in orchestras to right past wrongs even if their play is inferior, to the penalty of those who might come from wealthier families that never exhibited such discrimination and were denied employment because of this?
I opt for the former, not latter as the better alternative. I say this because it is a hard enough "pill to swallow" to get beaten in an audition by a better player who had more resources available to them. Whether those resources came from family money or public programs from the disadvantaged, it still stings.
> I believe I understand what you're trying to say, however, I,
> unfortunately, believe that prejudicial beliefs will always
> exist to undermine fairness which could and should exist.
>
As long as human beings make decisions, you don't have to believe, because I guarantee you that those decisions run the risk of being less than completely fair. Perfection is often not the goal in any life improving circumstance. By metaphor we drive safer cars today than in the past, with safety a noteworthy goal, much as in our imperfect world people still sadly die in motor vehicle accidents.
Careful not to "throw out the baby with the bath water here." Just because we can't define or achieve perfect fairness doesn't prevent us for ranking different suboptimal goals, and striving towards perfection with time.
I'm utterly confused how a point you initially made about DNA that was in error, and how life is unfair because some of us have better genes, has actually reinforced your belief about fairness.
Post Edited (2026-06-15 05:06)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Eichler
Date: 2026-06-15 06:05
I am not an expert in this field. However, my understanding is that orchestras are not just looking for musical excellence, per se, but also musical style and how well the player is likely to fit into the general context of that particular musical ensemble.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Dan Shusta
Date: 2026-06-15 08:15
SecondTry,
In my initial post, I stated: "I'm a believer that fairness simply does not exist. It never has and it never will."
By reinforcement of this belief, what I was trying to convey was that the "life circumstances" for the McGill brothers appear to have been far more abundant for them than for others. Their father may have been a musical genius who, for whatever reason, chose not or could not pursue music. However, his possession of a flute reveals he had a talent to some degree (imo).
However, from my study of genealogical diseases such as cancer, alcoholism, etc., a generation can be skipped over. What this means is that the McGill brothers may really have received their extraordinary musical DNA from their grandfather rather than from their father.
So, for the McGill brothers, "life circumstances" appear to have favored them more because of: 1) appropriate musical DNA (not just better genes); 2) better financial resources; 3) more than just adequate moral familial support (I believe it really helps when you have brothers pursuing musical careers together); and 4) sufficient opportunities to help energize their efforts necessary to practice countless hours. It was when I was informed that they were brothers that all of the 4 items listed above came into sharper focus. Not everyone with a high DNA musical talent has the other "life circumstances" necessary for a successful career. Hence, fairness for everyone simply does not exist.
An extraordinary musical career is only possible when all of the necessary "life circumstances" are available.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
