Trouble at t'Proms

[Lateralthinking1]

You feel that apolitical British musicians should have been heckled in every country that opposed the invasion of Iraq?

[Chris Newman]

And protests against Israel, and Israeli policy are not the same as anti-semitism, as has been endlessly (but apparently fruitlessly) pointed out.

Exactly. Let us try to spell it out as there is far too much loose use of language flying about. Many western people fail to recognise or have historically forgotten that Jews and Arabs are all semitic people (they are related tribally) whilst Christianity, Judaism and Islam are all semitic religions based on the same god whose origin lies in Judaism. Islam and Christianity were breakaways from Judaism. OK. I accept that religious people may rephrase part of that and say thay Judaism came from God and that Islam and Christianity were breakaways. These irrational fears and jealousies leading to conflict stem from these differences: they are mostly either tribal or religious (this latter can be denominational: Christian v Christian etc). Anti-semitism has existed since time immemorial but was mostly fomented by Hitler and his ilk.

The protests last night were not anti-semitic. They were about national policies and were mainly semite versus semite.

[Norfolk Born]

It seems that a recording of the concert WILL be broadcast next week. There's some footage, shot by audience members, on the BBC News Entertainment page (there's a link from BBC News front page).

[Lateralthinking1]

Hi Chris and Don - So apart from in the US, Italy and one or two other internationally lawbreaking states, it would have been valid for apolitical British musicians to have been heckled in every country that opposed the invasion of Iraq, and indeed valid to have been banned by those country's national broadcasters, and particularly so if they were in orchestras promoting the UK?

ie It would have been about national policy so they had to carry the can really, whether they personally opposed the policy or not?

[MrGongGong]

Hi Chris and Don - So apart from in the US, Italy and one or two other internationally lawbreaking states, it would have been valid for apolitical British musicians to have been heckled in every country that opposed the invasion of Iraq, and indeed valid to have been banned by those country's national broadcasters, and particularly so if they were in orchestras promoting the UK?

ie It would have been about national policy so they had to carry the can really, whether they personally opposed the policy or not?

I think the problem with this argument is the phrase "apolitical British musicians "
when one plays music one is never apolitical
this is even more true when one plays in another country , thats part of the gig

having done work with the British Council in several countries it was always clear to me that this was part of a promotion of Britain, if my political views were completely against what Britain stood for it would have been impossible to do the work.
If one opposes one needs to make the opposition clear (as many Jewish musicians do in respect of the actions of the Israeli government)

[Lateralthinking1]

Call me odd but if I was at the top of my game as a classical musician, had been in one of the country's best orchestras for years, and had then suddenly seen Blair waltzing into Iraq, I wouldn't have thought that I immediately had to leave the orchestra.

While it would have crossed my mind that it made things a little trickier, at most I would have seen the link as tenuous. For me, it would have been about being a great musician in a great orchestra. And the higher moral ground of music itself.

Arsenal play at the Emirates stadium. I have never heard the issue of human rights in UAE being discussed by either players or supporters.

[ahinton]

Exactly. Let us try to spell it out as there is far too much loose use of language flying about. Many western people fail to recognise or have historically forgotten that Jews and Arabs are all semitic people (they are related tribally) whilst Christianity, Judaism and Islam are all semitic religions based on the same god whose origin lies in Judaism. Islam and Christianity were breakaways from Judaism. OK. I accept that religious people may rephrase part of that and say thay Judaism came from God and that Islam and Christianity were breakaways. These irrational fears and jealousies leading to conflict stem from these differences: they are mostly either tribal or religious (this latter can be denominational: Christian v Christian etc). Anti-semitism has existed since time immemorial but was mostly fomented by Hitler and his ilk.

The protests last night were not anti-semitic. They were about national policies and were mainly semite versus semite.

Agreed - largely - although I should perhaps clarify that my own use of the term "anti-Semitic" in this context was specifically intended in each case to refer solely to anti-Jewish sentiment.

The protests - or rather the disruption - at last night's Prom were made by a very small proportion of the audience as a whole, notwithstanding their vociferousness and the suggestion that there was some degree of organisation behind those disturbances. How typical they may be of minority audience response at IPO concerts I have no idea but I suspect that, were such incidents not uncommon, we'd have heard a fair bit about it before now, as this kind of behaviour at orchestral concerts in general is obviously rare. What such actions might hope to achieve for anyone's good is, at best, very difficult to determine. As I observed in another place, if anything positive is indeed to emerge from that experience, it should be that more attention be drawn to the wholly unacceptable and undemocratic practices of the Israeli government and their adverse consequences on Israel's immediate neighbours, especially given Israel's arrogance in seeking to parade itself as a democratic nation; yes, Israel does have a better human rights record that some other countries but it still has many reprehensible actions to its name for which it should be fully accountable. I accept also that Israel has had to fight hard for its own survival as a state, but at least it has national status and, until such time as Palestine acquires equal status as a nation state, Israel's actions against Palestinians and its efforts to suppress Palestinian aspirations towards such statehood need to be publicised - and appropriately vilified - as widely as possible.

That said, the place to try to do that is not at a public concert in London and the idea of boycotting such concerts given outside Israel by IPO, the Jerusalem Quartet, the Israel Piano Trio and other Israel-based ensembles - to say nothing of the idea of encouraging organisations to decline to invite such ensembles to perform outside their own country - will do no one any good and may well risk providing the Israeli authorities with extra ammunition in terms of enabling claims about external persecution and the like, however implausible and exaggerated they may be; how anyone could imagine that protesting at orchestral concerts, sending the IPO home or declining to invite Israeli musicians to perform outside Israel might help any of the profoundly disaffected Palestinians who continue to suffer at Israeli government hands is quite beyond me.

[Serial_Apologist]

Surely there is always going to be prior notice of hostility to visiting orchestras, bands etc? Organisers: "We might well face hostile demonstration in [named country] when we visit there. We need to discuss, you musicians and me, what position we intend putting across vis-a-vis the British government's policies on, eg. our security forces' engagements in Libya or Afghanistan". A statement could be agreed saying, "This orchestra dissociates itself from Britain's involvement in Afghanistan". Or, if no agreement on governmental positions can be agreed, musicians opposing the trip on principle can (as MrGongGong says, express their opposition by abstaining from being part of the tour in question.

It's all part of having a conscience.

[Serial_Apologist]

Arsenal play at the Emirates stadium. I have never heard the issue of human rights in UAE being discussed by either players or supporters.

It depends on whether or not one considers sport as having equvalence with art and music, in this context. I would expect art and music to place themselves on higher moral ground - but that's just me.

[Don Basilio]

I was giving a reason for the protest that I can sympathize with. Whether it is tactically the best way is another matter, which only time will tell (if there is not a nuclear holocaust as a result of Israel's continued stirring up of hostility - I support the state of Israel, and I fear Israel's actions towards Palestine are putting it in severe jeopardy.)

Maybe there would have been protests against Britain in Iraq, in which case I wouldn't be surprised. If we were only to associate with the morally pure, then who would we ever know? But Israel's behaviour is particularly blatant, and I can understand why the protest happened. (There is a type of person who likes protesting for the sake of it. I don't like that, but personal emotional motivation is not the issue.)

[Serial_Apologist]

Agreed - largely - although I should perhaps clarify that my own use of the term "anti-Semitic" in this context was specifically intended in each case to refer solely to anti-Jewish sentiment.

The protests - or rather the disruption - at last night's Prom were made by a very small proportion of the audience as a whole, notwithstanding their vociferousness and the suggestion that there was some degree of organisation behind those disturbances. How typical they may be of minority audience response at IPO concerts I have no idea but I suspect that, were such incidents not uncommon, we'd have heard a fair bit about it before now, as this kind of behaviour at orchestral concerts in general is obviously rare. What such actions might hope to achieve for anyone's good is, at best, very difficult to determine. As I observed in another place, if anything positive is indeed to emerge from that experience, it should be that more attention be drawn to the wholly unacceptable and undemocratic practices of the Israeli government and their adverse consequences on Israel's immediate neighbours, especially given Israel's arrogance in seeking to parade itself as a democratic nation; yes, Israel does have a better human rights record that some other countries but it still has many reprehensible actions to its name for which it should be fully accountable. I accept also that Israel has had to fight hard for its own survival as a state, but at least it has national status and, until such time as Palestine acquires equal status as a nation state, Israel's actions against Palestinians and its efforts to suppress Palestinian aspirations towards such statehood need to be publicised - and appropriately vilified - as widely as possible.

That said, the place to try to do that is not at a public concert in London and the idea of boycotting such concerts given outside Israel by IPO, the Jerusalem Quartet, the Israel Piano Trio and other Israel-based ensembles - to say nothing of the idea of encouraging organisations to decline to invite such ensembles to perform outside their own country - will do no one any good and may well risk providing the Israeli authorities with extra ammunition in terms of enabling claims about external persecution and the like, however implausible and exaggerated they may be; how anyone could imagine that protesting at orchestral concerts, sending the IPO home or declining to invite Israeli musicians to perform outside Israel might help any of the profoundly disaffected Palestinians who continue to suffer at Israeli government hands is quite beyond me.

The urgency dictated by the conflict forces people in circumstances of this kind to take sides in the issue. We are fortunate indeed in this country not normally to be in a comparable position; I was born too late to have to consider the possibility of conscienscious objection during WW2, as Tippett and Britten had to to uphold their pacifist principles. The nearest in my experience was supporting or not an industrial strike at my place of work. "You're either with us or a scab". Forcing members of said orchestra to come to a position hopefully critical of their government that can be put over to the welcoming country might help!

[Lateralthinking1]

DB - Yes, that is fair - to say "I can understand why the protest happened". I would just like to challenge another couple of assumptions and then I will shut up.

1. Is a national orchestra by definition locked into the current time? Must it be seen to be so drearily earthbound that it can only represent its country as it is now? Or should it not be seen as what it has been or, better still in this case, what it could be? Music itself is hardly trapped in today's clock. It transcends that in so many ways.

2. How far do the opponents go with this? Bernstein was very close to the IPO. Should there be a boycott of his music?

3. Did Mehta deserve it? The Government of India honoured him in 1966 with the Padma Bhushan and in 2001 with India's second highest civilian award, the Padma Vibhushan. In 1999, he was presented the "Lifetime Achievement Peace and Tolerance Award" of the United Nations. In 2009, he established Mifneh (Hebrew for "Change"), a music education program for Israeli Arabs, in cooperation with Bank Leumi and the Arab-Israel Bank. Three schools, in Shfaram, the Jezreel Valley and Nazareth, are taking part in the pilot project. What do people want him to do? Still stand up and solemnly declare how awful Israel is and then play a few modern anti-Government songs? Stay away? Whatever happened to people being supported in attempting change from within?

[Chris Newman]

Lt1,

That was not what I said. I was commenting on the rather loose use of a definition. My thoughts on demonstrations against third parties such as artists and sportsmen was I hope summed up in message 46.

I know what you mean, Petrushka. But there was and must always be the hope that traditional musical goodwill (the sort advocated by Daniel Barenboim and his wonderfully intentioned West Eastern Divan Orchestra) would succeed. I feel sorrow for Zubin Mehta and the IPO musicians as I did for the USSRSSO, Rostropovich and Oistrakh in 1968. I detested what the Eastern Bloc did on on the 20th of August of that year. I went to the USSRSSO concerts in sadness but to hear the music: then shouted my protest up the road at the embassy by Kensington Palace and went to the extra "Prom" where Barenboim and du Pre repeated the Dvorak Cello Concerto (Sunday Proms were rare in those days). I believe that the arts should be there to build bridges and there must always be hope that they will. I believe that Israel has become the creator of its own woes but it will not be moved to fairness by yobbish behaviour.

I believe it is right that Palestinians have the right to protest. However I do not think that demonstration at the Albert Hall was the the best way. I for one signed a petition to the Foreign Secretary and the UN last week calling for recognition of Palestine:

http://www.avaaz.org/en/middle_east_peace_now/?cl=1235755672&v=10054

If more people work that way, perhaps one day, peace will be possible.

[Serial_Apologist]

If more people work that way, perhaps one day, peace will be possible.

If that were still possible, it would be ideal. The trouble is, since Mehta gained those rightful worthy awards, the stakes have escalated exponentially, internationally. People are being jostled into taking positions, whether they know it, or like it or not.

[aeolium]

You feel that apolitical British musicians should have been heckled in every country that opposed the invasion of Iraq?

I think it would have been entirely understandable if touring orchestras from Britain had been heckled in for instance predominantly Muslim countries such as Egypt - were it not for the fact that most of those countries at the time suppressed any form of protest, unless approved by the government. It is impossible for organisations which are seen as cultural ambassadors for their country to be dissociated from the actions of their government overseas.