Philip Pickett sentenced to 11 years imprisonment

[teamsaint]

Diligent readers will know that I am rather bored with the repetitiousness of twofer discussions.

Nevertheless, I personally find insistent virtue signalling far harder to take, and very much support the decision to move the Retrospect stuff to another place.

I think if you are going to point the finger on virtue signalling, you should name names please.

[Master Jacques]

Its pretty disappointing that Sampson appears not to have distanced herself from King. As one of the most respected in her field, she surely can’t be short of offers of work, if that was a justification?

(Blood pressure up again.) Teamsaint, I think the behaviour you're describing is called "being loyal to your friends", no matter what crime they've committed or however nastily the gutter press might be reviling them as disgusting, sub-human vermin who ought to be strung up and crucified.

[Pabmusic]

I want to avoid "we" here, and stick to "I", for the reasons Stanf gives in his #193...

You are of course right.

[teamsaint]

(Blood pressure up again.) Teamsaint, I think the behaviour you're describing is called "being loyal to your friends", no matter what crime they've committed or however nastily the gutter press might be reviling them as disgusting, sub-human vermin who ought to be strung up and crucified.

Well loyalty may be an aspect of it.And as Pulcinella has pointed out, we can have differing but valid views on how to respond.

But there is more than one way of showing loyalty. If people can’t see the problem, then I suggest thinking it through again, perhaps from differing perspectives. One might, for example, imagine the response of his victims and their families. Or if they happened, theoretically, to be in the audience.
Regardless of what the gutter press may say ( nothing much in King’s case I think) I think it shows very poor judgement to take a public stage with him.

[Mal]

We might consider, that as we have at best a mere five degrees of separation from everyone in these islands - whatever their crimes - then in Hamlet's words, "who shall 'scape whipping?" If the benighted musicians of Retrospect/King's Consort are "guilty by association", then every single person on this forum who has bought any records, by anyone at all, ought to be sent to Coventry along with them.

There is only one degree of separation between the Retrospect Ensemble and King's Consort. Do you let off the receiver of stolen goods because he's not the thief? Fifth degree of separation might be you buying a CD in a police sell off... so there can be a vast difference between first degree of separation and fifth degree of separation. Also, even those of a first degree of separation might be blameless, or even to be applauded; if a friend of the thief shopped the thief, for instance (... If the thievery is bad enough, say, beating up & mentally torturing a kid before taking all his possessions.) Imagine the bad thief was headmaster of the local primary school. After he gets out of prison do you give him his job back?

[MickyD]

All hail! Though I rather wish you would get rid of those posts from this thread, because I for one find they're raising my blood pressure to dangerous levels, and I was rather hoping the discussion could have been confined to Bach on record.

We might consider, that as we have at best a mere five degrees of separation from everyone in these islands - whatever their crimes - then in Hamlet's words, "who shall 'scape whipping?" If the benighted musicians of Retrospect/King's Consort are "guilty by association", then every single person on this forum who has bought any records, by anyone at all, ought to be sent to Coventry along with them. Who knows what that third desk of violas gets up to on Friday nights.

Do some music-lovers never listen to a note of Ireland, Wagner or Gesualdo, on moral grounds, I wonder? These stained-glass attitudes seem a long way from the Christian charity celebrated in Bach's Ascension Oratorio. So unless the CD itself is bronzing, I personally doubt whether opinions that the Retrospect recording is "tarnished" have any place on this thread.

[Mal]

... imagine the response of his victims and their families. Or if they happened, theoretically, to be in the audience.
Regardless of what the gutter press may say ( nothing much in King’s case I think) I think it shows very poor judgement to take a public stage with him.

You don't have to imagine:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/feb/01/i-couldnt-deal-with-it-it-tore-me-apart-surviving-child-sexual-abuse

The Daily Mail highlighted King's ongoing support from the public school boy establishment, but did not suggest he should be "strung up and crucified":

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2357693/Conductor-jailed-sexually-abusing-choir-boys-star-concert-hosted-Prince-Charles-charity.html

"‘It is as if nothing has happened,’ said Peter Saunders, of the National Association for People Abused in Childhood. ‘He made these teenagers’ lives a misery – the trauma continues for them. I can’t believe that the Royal family or their charities would have anything to do with him.’"

One parishioner ... said she was ‘shocked’ about King’s background. ‘I had absolutely no idea. You wouldn’t want Gary Glitter playing at your church, would you?’

So there's the Christian response: "not in my church". This seems reasonable! Not in my house, not in my concert hall, not on my CD player.

[Constantbee]

Just a thought ... but would it make any difference to what you thought of public performances of Robert King’s work if you’d been told he’d been a victim of child sexual abuse himself? He may or may not have been – it really isn’t any of our business - but this, sadly, is in some caseswhy people commit such crimes in later life. I'm inclined to believe he's got powerful protectors, but on the other hand I like his work, and it must take immense moral courage to continue working in the face of public pressure.

[doversoul1]

Just a thought ... but would it make any difference to what you thought of public performances of Robert King’s work if you’d been told he’d been a victim of child sexual abuse himself? He may or may not have been – it really isn’t any of our business - but this, sadly, is in some caseswhy people commit such crimes in later life. I'm inclined to believe he's got powerful protectors, but on the other hand I like his work, and it must take immense moral courage to continue working in the face of public pressure.

We do admire those who have overcome tragedies but whether that adds anything to their musical performance is, I think, entirely a separate matter.

I imagine Simon Heighes needed quite a bit of courage to return to work but I don’t think the thought of courage is something that can be associated with King. He seems to be completely oblivious to the fact that his victims are still alive and suffering. His crime wasn’t an unfortunate accident. He has a son now. It can’t be that difficult to imagine how he would feel if this happened to his son. Would he feel nothing but admiration every time he hears the perpetrator’s name or his performance?

If King and those who gather around him have no thoughts about the victims’ sufferings, we could at least show that we care about the victims by refusing to listen to just one of many conductors’ performances. This has nothing whatsoever to do with wife killing. It is about living persons whose sufferings we may collectively ease even a very little by showing our support.

[Barbirollians]

I am amazed that King’s extraordinary front and no doubt public school inculcated arrogance are described as immense moral courage .

[Dave2002]

I wonder what's going on though. Has Google (not a system/company I always like much...) decided to downgrade searches for recordings by RK?
On the other hand Hyperion records still has a long adulatory bio, with no mention of any extra musical problems that I can see.

Are these issues (both physical and mental) which should be permitted to fade away quietly? By this I don't mean swept under the carpet, but having been exposed, and due recognition given, then allowed to disappear slowly, with no benefit to the perpetrators.

I do have recordings by PP but none that I can recall by RK - unless perhaps they are in some collections/big boxes.
The concerts I mentioned earlier were by neither of these, but by prominent conductors from the other side of the Atlantic. In neither case was I aware of problems before attending those events.

[Master Jacques]

As Mal points out, the tabloid press did indeed have a field day over Robert King's long-expected fall from grace. I am told by someone close to him, that King still gets death threats daily, and needs to employ bodyguards (as well of course as chaperones when directing children's choirs).

I am shocked myself, that neither music nor Christianity seem to have modified a hard-line in his case, for certain forumites. As someone who believes that knowing music - somehow, obscurely - makes us all "better people" (e.g. more charitable, more forgiving) I can only repeat my unanswered question: would those contributors who won't go near Retrospect's recording of the Ascension Oratorio on moral grounds take the same line about listening to John Ireland's superlative piano music, Wagner's inexhaustible operas, or Gesualdo's fascinating choral music?

Unless they do, I worry that there's some double-think going on here, for convenience of conscience.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I don't think that your question has been "unanswered", MJ - unless there are still victims of child abuse perpetrated by Ireland, Wagner, or Gesualdo around to witness their abuser's continued public and unrepentent profile, these are very different cases, and no "double-think" going on for you to worry about.

[teamsaint]

As Mal points out, the tabloid press did indeed have a field day over Robert King's long-expected fall from grace. I am told by someone close to him, that King still gets death threats daily, and needs to employ bodyguards (as well of course as chaperones when directing children's choirs).

I am shocked myself, that neither music nor Christianity seem to have modified a hard-line in his case, for certain forumites. As someone who believes that knowing music - somehow, obscurely - makes us all "better people" (e.g. more charitable, more forgiving) I can only repeat my unanswered question: would those contributors who won't go near Retrospect's recording of the Ascension Oratorio on moral grounds take the same line about listening to John Ireland's superlative piano music, Wagner's inexhaustible operas, or Gesualdo's fascinating choral music?

Unless they do, I worry that there's some double-think going on here, for convenience of conscience.

I don’t think there is doublethink, though there may be fine judgements to be made. King has the opportunity to deal with the effects of his crimes, and the industry is employing double standards , in the here and now. Looking at how we respond to those from the past who commited crimes is a different issue, IMO.

If King is, regrettably, getting death threats, he might usefully choose to earn his living, and use his talents, in a less public way. That might help his cause.

As regards needing chaperones when directing children’s choirs, in almost any other case, he would just be banned from working with children. The DBS regulations for school teachers, for example, allow for the banning of a teacher for doing something as trivial as living in the same house as a person with a caution for ABH. So not much chance of rehabilitation inside the profession for convicted child sex offenders, but hopefully opportunities elsewhere in society.

There are difficult decisions to make, hard cases to call. Boycotting RKs performances and recordings just isn’t one of them.

The “hard line “ holds almost everywhere else in the music industry, as I think it should .

[Master Jacques]

Thank you, teamsaint for your thoughts on "fine judgements". Though you still don't tell me what your "fine judgement" bids you to do, when it comes to listening (or not) to John Ireland. Contra ferneyhoughgeliebte, I don't feel that death is the end of all criticism - the ongoing furore and ban on playing Wagner in Israel rather refutes that welcome idea.

The powers that be took the sensible line with King, that in order to pursue his career, he had to be allowed to work with children again. As the offences for which he was imprisoned took place decades before, when he was little older than a child himself, they took a sensible and humane view on the case.

I am interested you describe arts performance as an "industry". Some of us would think of it, rather, as a "calling": and as with many victims of a calling, the likes of Carolyn Sampson and the ex-Retrospective players don't make a fortune. They do not have the luxury of "choosing" who they work with, unfortunately, and have to scrape by while they've got the skills to do so, supplementing their meagre incomes with teaching children and other related work.