The
Vienna Philharmonic’s Letter of Response to the Gen-Mus List.
In February 1996 members of the gen-mus list sent a letter of protest written by Jeanice Brooks to the Vienna Philharmonic protesting its categorical exclusion of women. I include the gen-mus letter here along with the VPO´s reply, and some explanatory notes:
"Dear
General Manager of the Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra,"
"A group of concerned musicians and
scholars is compiling information on policies concerning gender equity in large
orchestras. The end result of this
inquiry will be a list of orchestras which do not discriminate against women,
which we will forward to individuals, and to those persons at universities and
colleges responsible for the acquisition of recordings, so that buyers of
recordings may make better-informed decisions about their purchases. As part of our collecting process, we would
like to obtain official information
from your
orchestra concerning the following policies.
What steps are taken to ensure that women are allowed equal opportunity
with men to audition for vacant posts in the orchestra? How are players selected for audition? Are auditions conducted anonymously? If not, how are they conducted? When women are successful in auditioning for
vacant posts, what steps are taken to ensure they are treated fairly once
admitted to the orchestra?
"If you
could write us a short letter explaining your policies, we would be very
grateful. Please send your response to
Dr L.J. Brooks, Department of Music, University of Southampton, Southampton
SO17 1 BJ, England, who will ensure that all signatories of this letter receive
a copy of your response. Thank you
verymuch.
Sincerely,"
(Co-signed by members of the gen-mus list from around the world, mostly in academia, including deans and heads of departments.)
_____________________
Note: To
understand the VPO´s response it is necessary to know that the Vienna State
Opera and Vienna Philharmonic are the same orchestra under different
names. The opera orchestra is owned and
operated by the Austrian Federal government, but the Philharmonic is a
nominally private enterprise the musicians run on the side.
In Austria and
Germany, as in many European countries, there are strong maternity laws. Mothers are legally entitled to a paid leave
of absence before and after giving birth.
Men are also allowed to take a leave of absence after the birth to care
for the infant, instead of the mother.
As in most countries, it is not legal for anyone, man or woman, to sign
away general rights guaranteed by law. Pregnant
women can, however, voluntarily use the rights to the minimum, and take a short
leave of absence.
This is my translation of the letter that was typed-out from the hard copy by Anagret Fauser and placed on the gen-mus list. Lisa Feurzig has also made a translation and placed it on the gen-mus list, in case you would like to make comparisons. Sometimes the sentences are convoluted and awkward. I tried to help where I could, but I also had to consider accuracy. All statements in parenthesis are theirs. My commentaries and some German words are in _square_ brackets.
William Osborne
The
Vienna Philharmonic's letter of response:
Vienna, April 19
1996
Dear Dr. Brooks:
In reply to your
letter of February 25, 1996, may I first say that theVienna Philharmonic has no
General Director, but only a democratically elected administrative board with a
chairman at its head. At the same time
may I explain how the orchestra is organized:
To start with,
the orchestra musicians of the Vienna State Opera are employees of the federal
government. In 1842 these musicians founded
the Vienna Philharmonic Union, which is private and independent. The two historical roots of the orchestra
are the court music chapel, founded in 1498, which was responsible for church
services; and the other is the orchestra for the court opera. In both musical bodies, naturally, there
were no women. You obviously know that
today this is still true in the Vienna Philharmonic, otherwise you wouldn't
have written to us.
The reasons for
this are generally accepted by most women who are informed of our problems in
detail, and I will presently come to them.
Militant feminists, who are more interested in equal rights than
artistic efficacy, will obviously reject them.
The orchestra, as
a whole, that is the State Opera orchestra and Philharmonic taken together,
presently has 147 musicians. Between
September and June each year they complete about 300 opera performances, as
well as 110 rehearsals. In addition
there are about 80 to 85 symphony concerts here and abroad, also with an
appropriate number of rehearsals, and beyond that the Salzburg Festival in July
and August.
Television
productions, record recordings, etc., are added to that, as is the chamber
music activity of most members, which is absolutely necessary to maintain
orchestral quality.
To continue the
Vienna instrumental and musical tradition (the Vienna Philharmonic uses wind
instruments directly descended from the late 18th century), it is also
necessary to send teachers to the Austrian conservatories which pass on this
tradition. All together this is a horrendous amount of work.
[Note: For the
musician´s protection their contract puts a maximum limit on the amount of work
that can be completed within any given six week period.]
All these
activities are only possible through the voluntary renunciation of claims to
(sometimes minimal) social rights, which are otherwise taken for granted and
guaranteed as legal worker protection.
Every member has the right to an unpaid one year leave of absence once in
his life. (Experience has shown that after
longer absences artistic reintegration is very difficult, indeed even
impossible.) This can, however, be
revoked at any time at short notice, if the orchestra finds it artistically
necessary. Our first solo flutist, for
example, painfully discovered this, when he had to cancel his leave two weeks
before it began, and thus cancel solo concerts around the world.
We are currently
in consultation with the Women's Ministry of the Austrian Republic concerning
the solution of the question of admitting women, without finding, to date, an
acceptable result that would permit us to uphold the artistic organization in
the present successful form. Even our
discussion partners do not yet see how to get a grip on the problem of
compensating for the expected leaves of absence [if women are allowed in]
without a further enlargment of the orchestra (192 members would be artistic
ruin, because the pool of musicians would then fall into two parts) and without
creating a two-class society with different social rights. Other world-class orchestras do not have
this problem, because they are either opera or concert orchestras, and because
they are mostly supported by the public hand;
and it is absolutely not a problem at all for orchestras that aren´t
quite first class, because it isn't so difficult to find adequate substitutes.
I fear that these
arguments will not impress you. First,
because you surely lack the time to make yourself familiar with the
problematics here on the spot [an Ort und Stelle]. And secondly, because it is not music that stands in the
forefront of your thoughts, but rather a socio-political goal. This can be derived from the observation,
that in your opinion, the aquisitions of academic institutions, such as record
archives and libraries, should not follow artistic, but rather socio-political
perspectives placed superior to them.
It should be
noted that we are also not happy with the status quo, namely, that we must
renounce many first-class women musicians.
We are very conscious of the fact that women are discriminated against
in public life. Looking just a few
kilometers south of our border [i.e., to former Yugoslavia], one is gripped by
an indescribable horror at what people are capable of doing to one another, and
in this case especially to women. Not
to mention the social position of women in many cultures of the earth. The need
for urgent remedies does not even need to be discussed.
One should
discuss, however, whether artistic organizations must automatically be the
mirror of society, or whether there should not be some leeway in this
area. Does it not follow, that the
consequent demands for equal rights would produce absurd results?
May quartets only
appear these days with gender parity?
That is naturely
a ridiculous question. But what about
an octet, or a larger chamber music ensemble?
Where do you set the limits here?
It is, of course,
understandable that every citizen of this State has a fundamental right to work
in an orchestra financed entirely by the state, if they have the necessary
qualifications.
But the situation
with the Vienna Philharmonic musicians is rather different: The tax
contribution by the orchestra musicians is higher than the state expenditures
for the two organizations. This is
because the State Opera pays low wages, and because the state hardly subsidizes
the Philharmonic at all. This assures a
large measure of independence and protection from state intervention.
One can, of
course, very correctly argue against this, that it has nothing to do with the
basic morality of this group of artists, and that it is a sign of this bad
morality that women are excluded. And
thus, it would follow that a boycott of these musicians is a worthy goal. But here we move beyond the woman question
into the basic one: women are indeed
only ONE among the many underprivileged groups. If I thus establish a record archive from the perspective of the
woman question, then I must also ask:
How many colored people belong to this American orchestra whose CD I
would like to buy? Does this
correspond to their proportion in the population--or will someone claim that
colored people are less gifted in the area of classical music? [Note: Colored
is not an antiquated term to many German speakers.]
Do the great
London orchestras reflect the combination of the population of that city? How
many Palestinians or Christians play in the Jerusalem Symphony?
You must ask
yourself all these questions, if you´re not primarily and exclusively lobbying
for women.
I personally
believe that artists and their works cannot be judged primarily by moral
criteria. (I hope you agree if I put
musicians--with this term we mean both the male and female gender--under the
concept of artist.) If we are already
so picky [heikel] about the morality of interpreters, how much more severely
must we then condemn the creative artists!
What about
Mozart's Baesle letters, and--according to Constanze's complaints--his
"chambermaideries" [thanks to Lisa Feurzeig for her translation of
"Stubenmaedelien"]; what about Haydn who wrote to his beloved: "In order for us to finally be united,
four eyes must first be closed." (those of his wife and the husband of his
beloved); what of the bordello patron and syphilitic, Schubert; what about
Wagner, accustomed to seducing the wives of his patrons; how can the works of
all these misogynist monsters belong in our record collections?
In this letter I
have made an effort to convey some thoughts to you and your female colleagues
[Note: many men signed the letter he is responding to], and indeed with such
thoroughness as to show you that we take you, your concern, and the entire
woman question seriously. We know about
the seriousness of this problem, and know also how many female musicians--in
some cases outstanding ones--there are in Austria.
All this will not
protect us from standing out on your watch list as a particularly despicable
example.
Should you ever
come to Vienna, and nevertheless have an interest to
discuss-and-take-apart-our-problems [ausseinandersetzen] here on the spot, please
let us know well in advance, so that we can take time for you and for your
questions. You are warmly welcome at
any time!
Yours sincerely,
Wolfgang Schuster
Head of the Press
Department