International Women's Day: Tuesday 8 March

[Richard Barrett]

do we really want a situation where women feel they have to declare what they have to offer as women (re Alpie's example) and men declare what they have to offer as men ? That would seem to lead back in the wrong direction.

I guess what we really want is gender-blindness (as when people audition for orchestral positions behind a curtain so they can't be seen by the adjudicators, but without the curtain), but no amount of wishful thinking or ignoring the issue (ie. "blindness" in PGT's terms) is going to bring it about. Regarding EA's anecdote, it is of course not inevitable that having a woman in a given position is going to further the cause of gender equality (cf. Thatcher).

[ahinton]

It was what I meant too.

Then clearly several of us mean the same on this.

That said, do we really want a situation where women feel they have to declare what they have to offer as women (re Alpie's example) and men declare what they have to offer as men ? That would seem to lead back in the wrong direction.

That would indeed not only be retrogressive but also play into the hands of those who would have sought to advocate maintenance of the one-time status quo; in the field of musical composition/improvisation, it would seem especially absurd, since no one has anything to offer within it specifically as members of a particular gender, yet that fact was once widely and conveniently overlooked by those who oppressed, or were content to discourage and/or confine, the activities of female composers.

[ahinton]

Being "gender-blind" is a way of saying things are OK and don't need to change, which is all very well if you belong to the dominant group. In academic circles, for example, there is a growing body of opinion that men should refuse to sit on conference panels that don't include at least one woman. This seems to me an embarrassingly minimal demand. Yet there are still many (men) who don't accept the relevance of it - because, I presume, they're "gender-blind".

Yes - although it might also be worth pointing out en passant that gender-blindness differs from the other kind in that the former is wilfully acquired whereas the latter is usually an unavoidable misfortune.

[french frank]

it is of course not inevitable that having a woman in a given position is going to further the cause of gender equality (cf. Thatcher).

No, it's not. And when faltering steps are taken, mistakes are made for all sorts of reasons: there are no guarantees on how the new 'winners' are going to perform or whether they will, on the contrary, act against the cause of reform.

[jean]

...(cf. Thatcher).

If Thatcher hasd ever campaigned on the basis of her sex (which of course she never did) she wouldn't have found it quite so easy to keep other women out of her cabinet.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

No, it's not. And when faltering steps are taken, mistakes are made for all sorts of reasons: there are no guarantees on how the new 'winners' are going to perform or whether they will, on the contrary, act against the cause of reform.

Indeed; and some of the most prominent opponents of reform throughout the ages have been/are women - just as, if for different reasons, many people from working-class were opposed to early-Twentieth Century social reforms of Health and Education. Questions of Justice are what's behind this - not (simply) the attitudes and experiences of individuals.

And, to agree for the moment with scottychimp - he is absolutely correct to suggest that if the BBC/R3 is sincere in its commitment to redressing the imbalance of works by women composers (and it may be! ) then it needs to redress this throughout the entire schedules, not restrict its commitment to just one week in the year.

[oddoneout]

[QUOTE=ahinton;At the risk of repeating the b***d**g obvious, one of the daft things about all of this is that one can never tell that a piece of music has been composed by a woman just by listening to it in any case.[/QUOTE]
Quite, hence my comment pages back,about broadcasting music 'blind'. However, since the problems of prejudice apply to things like 'modern' music, individual composers(regardless of sex)etc, then the occasional opportunity to listen to music without having the chance to put up the shutters is arguably worth pursuing for everyone's benefit? Innocent Ear anyone?

[ahinton]

And, to agree for the moment with scottychimp - he is absolutely correct to suggest that if the BBC/R3 is sincere in its commitment to redressing the imbalance of works by women composers (and it may be! ) then it needs to redress this throughout the entire schedules, not restrict its commitment to just one week in the year.

Indeed - and, mindful of RB's recent reference to a stopped clock being right twice daily, even the teaboy can be right on occasion!

To paraphrase the cliché about dogs and Christmas, a woman composer is for life, not just for International Women's Day...

[ahinton]

If Thatcher hasd ever campaigned on the basis of her sex (which of course she never did) she wouldn't have found it quite so easy to keep other women out of her cabinet.

She was apparently an admirer of Bartók and played the piano, although I am unaware that she ever planned to record his second piano concerto. There's also no evidence that she composed, as far as I know, though where she might have been thought to fit into all of this if she had, I have no idea, although I can imagine that some men might have sought to encourage her to compose more if it would have involved a reduction in or curtailment of her activities in prime ministerial office...

[MrGongGong]

True as that may be, there are also plenty from whom it is not, but that's not quite the point, really;.

Indeed that is true
But what Scrotum Junior was suggesting was that there is only ONE way of people making work.

[ahinton]

Indeed that is true
But what Scrotum Junior was suggesting was that there is only ONE way of people making work.

Anyone much less like a junior edition of Prof. Scruton would not, I think, be easily imaginable; that said, I'm not quite sure what you mean by there being (in your reading of PG's view) "only ONE way of people making work", in terms of the particular context.

[MrGongGong]

Anyone much less like a junior edition of Prof. Scruton would not, I think, be easily imaginable; that said, I'm not quite sure what you mean by there being (in your reading of PG's view) "only ONE way of people making work", in terms of the particular context.

I mean that PG is making the assumption that because gender/class/ethnicity/whatever isn't significant in his mind for the music he listens to that it therefore follows that it isn't significant for all the other music in the universe. Composers make work in many ways and with many different frameworks and preoccupations.

[ahinton]

I mean that PG is making the assumption that because gender/class/ethnicity/whatever isn't significant in his mind for the music he listens to that it therefore follows that it isn't significant for all the other music in the universe. Composers make work in many ways and with many different frameworks and preoccupations.

OK, I see the point that you're making here.

I happen personally to be wary of including "class" into the scenario because of my comparative doubts about it; whereas there's no arguing about the factual existence of different genders or ethnicities which are not susceptible to or dependent upon enforcement, the "class" one seems to me to be more of a perception based upon what some people who see themselves as belonging to the upper echelons thereof would like to create, maintain and enforce to suit their own agendas and convenience and to keep "others" in "their place"; that said, outright denial of the significance of difference of gender, ethnicity et al seems suggestive of heads wilfully being immersed in sand to such an extent that they'd be unable to hear any of the music in the first place.

I think that PG falls prey both to a denial of historical fact and to a fundamental misunderstanding of one particular issue where women composers are concerned. OK, Thea Musgrave has said that she is a woman and a composer but never both at the same time and Elisabeth Maconchy similarly claimed that she was a woman to her family and friends but a composer to her audiences (by which she could be argued unwittingly to have let slip that her family and friends did not form part of her audience!) - and, as I've said, listeners cannot in any case know whether music to which they listen is by a man or a woman just by listening - but the mere fact that such composers have felt it incumbent upon them to make such statements is an indirect illustration of the existence and history of the problem for women composers.

If PG cannot or (more likely) does not wish to - grasp that or related nettles, preferring instead to subscribe to a far narrower world-view (or rather the kind of demi-monde blinkered vision from which not even going to Scottyspecsavers could have rescued him) that is of his own making and notable more for its smug complacency than for its imagination and intelligence, there's little to be done there, methinks; waking up and smelling the coffee is not something that seems a likely expectation of one styling himslf as P. G. Tipps...

[teamsaint]

OK, I see the point that you're making here.

I happen personally to be wary of including "class" into the scenario because of my comparative doubts about it; whereas there's no arguing about the factual existence of different genders or ethnicities which are not susceptible to or dependent upon enforcement, the "class" one seems to me to be more of a perception based upon what some people who see themselves as belonging to the upper echelons thereof would like to create, maintain and enforce to suit their own agendas and convenience and to keep "others" in "their place"; ..

I would think that ethnicity is for many people a matter of ( self) perception, ( and increasingly so), and gender doesn't seem to be as fixed as once seemed the case.

the existence of a class of people that dominates our society is a reality in many peoples minds. I should think one could prove it beyond reasonable doubt with statistics. The educational background of RAM students might be a place to start.......

[vinteuil]

the existence of a class of people that dominates our society is a reality in many peoples minds.

... o, not just "a reality in many people's minds", surely : a reality tout court.

But while there is clearly a 'dominating' class it seems to me that the situation is far less clear - far more fluid - nowadays as to the make up of other class groupings than was the case, say, when Marx was thinking about these things.