I hope you can forgive my potential ignorance here.  I simply don't know what it's like to be part of any minority group. 

 

I tell my colleagues that Social Studies teachers do not argue for their place in the public school system.  It is accepted that their place is significant and appropriate.  Music teachers always seem to want to argue that music is important.  Making that argument, in fact, calls to question our relevance.  If our subject were truly equal, we wouldn't have to argue its equality.  In doing so, we perpetuate its subservience. 

 

If I were to be asked to attend a concert of music of all gay composers, I would automatically think, “Is this music good enough to be part of a regular concert program, or was a special theme required for it to be performed?”  I have to think that isolating any group, however pure the intentions, works to perpetuate isolation of that group and attacks inclusivity. 

 

What is more important to the concert, that these people are gay, or that they are composers?

 

Respectfully,

Malcolm Gilbert

Themed concerts do not imply that a special concert has to be mounted in order for the music to be performed.  Apply the same question to the music of immigrant composers, or music in the dorian mode.  If it is a concert of Italian Christmas music, would we assume that German was simply not good enough?  What can be learned by the fact that we jump to notions of "good or "bad" in some themes, but not others? 

 

One nice thing about a themed concert is that it gives the audience a new lens through which they can hear the music.  Barber does not need a gay-themed concert to be heard, but when placed in that theme, the audience is given the opportunity to think about what kind of poetry he chose, or the stories he decided to tell.  A large number of gay people make art, and that in itself is interesting and worth pondering.  Throughout Western history, homosexual expression, when not silenced, has often been forced to operate indirectly, in a sort of code.  This is another interesting thing worth contemplation.  We should not assume that all cultures naturally condemn homosexuality; rather we should try to discern what the musicians are trying to say within their own cultural framework.  This may reveal fascinating truths, or in may uncover nothing.  The point I’m trying to make is that providing interesting contexts for the audience makes for a different kind of concert experience. 

 

Samuel - look into Elegy for Matthew by David Conte. 

Michael and Simon,

Two very convincing arguments! 

 

Something might also be learned from the fact that when I emailed some of this thread to myself, my school district’s email system kicked it back for inappropriate content.  Apparently the word “gay” is inappropriate!  Now I know.

A few items have bothered me in this thread. I’d like to address them in my own natural verbose, contrived manner.

 

A few (too many) words about the "perfect world" in which I live:

The world I live in is different from my neighbors' because it's shaped by my own perspective, as unique as my fingerprint. In my world, each individual is different, but just slightly. When someone disagrees with me, they're probably wrong in my world. I can admit that. However, the disagreement doesn't make me angry. The discourse will either strengthen or re-shape my own feelings. My interest will have more to do with the level of the conversation than the level of agreement.

Here's the thing: if this straight choral director were to have a discussion with some random gay musical director on 35 random topics, we'd probably agree on some 32 of them. We are more same than different. We ALL are.

My "perfect world" has nothing to do with same or different. One of my best friends in the world happens to be attracted to buxom blondes. I happen to prefer petite brunettes. I'm not sure how much that makes us divergent. My "perfect world" is shaped through the fact that I control it through my own actions and my own reactions to the actions of others- which very rarely include anger.

I urge you to visit my world! Our art appeals to so many from so many different walks of life. Can we please use our platform to change the paradigm? We are same more than different. Make decisions based on the content of character and composition, not on race, creed, or bed partner.

I am a straight, middle-classed, white, divorced, slightly obsessive choral director. I am outspoken, irreverent and I work out too much. I teach white, middle-classed, suburban kids in a large public school on Long Island. If any of that information lends itself to any bias, you created that, not me. If that's the world you live in, I feel sorry for you. My world IS perfect. 

 

Finally, I believe strongly that racial equality will never be realized for as long as the great speeches and writings on the matter are done by black guys.  Until straight men start being the people to speak out most strongly against sexuality bias, it will live on. This is not the first, and won’t be the last time I get up on a soapbox.  To play off John’s remarks, don’t we all have a dog in this fight?

Given the high concentration of queers* in choral music, the fact that the very art form is born of the church, and the history of religious persecution against homosexuality, it seemed inevitable that we’d see a collision of values in this discussion.  C’est la vie.  And tempting as it is to pick up any of a number of threads dangling out there, I’ll focus on Samuel’s original post about programming a concert for his university choir using a theme of gay/lesbian composers.

 

Assuming that the concert is a university function, I wouldn’t worry about repelling a few who were put off by the gay theme; you’d attract just as many for the same reason.  And if it were truly a concern, the theme wouldn’t have to be advertised.

 

So that leaves me pondering the question of what is to be accomplished by programming a concert of music written by queers – for that would have some bearing on WHICH gay composers I would suggest.  Is there such a thing as a gay aesthetic that would be heard more effectively when framed in a concert with that as its unifying theme (kind of like all music by German composers or music written in the 19th century)?  Hmm…  That’d be a difficult case to make.  I’ll leave that for the attention of some courageous doctoral student who is willing to do some digging and persuasive conjecture.

 

A concert ‘by women composers’ would heighten awareness about an under-represented segment of society both in terms of output and recognition within the field of choral music.  The purpose here could be to inspire more women to become composers and for conductors of all flavors to expand their repertory to include previously overlooked treasures.  This might have some correspondence with the idea of a concert ‘by gay composers,’ but not much.  There’s a bounty of gay composers – especially American composers – certainly a higher percentage of gay to straight than Kinsey would have found in the general population.  IOW, queers don’t need encouragement to write or to be heard; we as a collective body have been quite prolific.  Furthermore, we can always hide in the closet.  You know…  the invisible minority.

 

Speaking of the invisible minority, this brings me to wonder who is most served by a concert written by queers, and that would be gay men and women, closeted and out, who sing and perhaps hear this music.  It speaks to them not because the music is inherently different from music written by people who do not identify as gay, but because it brings dignity to those that have historically been oppressed.  Call that political if you’d like, but for the young men and women who are just coming to terms with their gayness, a concert that holds queer musicians in a favorable light will be deeply inspiring.  They’re not thinking politically; they’re just grateful to be validated.  Even in this day of post “Will and Grace” and “Don’t Ask; Don’t Tell,” the cultural default is still to assume that everyone is straight (and it’s better to be straight than not) unless something interrupts that presumption.  For students who are not gay – even those who distain the life style – it’s healthy for them to witness this experience of affirmation, especially in the environment of a public university.

 

So…

I recommend focusing on really famous composers who happen to be gay, and preferably those who were out during their lifetime:  Aaron Copland, Benjamin Britten, Ned Rorem, Leonard Bernstein, Samuel Barber, Peter Tchaikovsky, (there are many more), and though the evidence is less conclusive, I’d include Schubert and Handel on that list.  The program might be more interesting to include specific pieces in which the composer’s sexual orientation fuels their passion for what’s expressed in the piece:  for instance Lou Harrison’s “When I Heard at the Close of the Day,” text by Walt Whitman.  The text for Benjamin Britten’s “Hymn to St. Cecilia” was written by his dear friend – a flamboyant queer – W. H. Auden.  There’s lots to that story.

 

Respectfully submitted…

 

David York

Portland, Oregon

 

*queer – my word choice because its capacity to include all sexual minority folk (lgbt).  By making it a part of everyday language we circumvent its power to be used as a weapon against the marginalized people it describes.