Wouldn’t the world be better if orchestras stopped propping up white supremacy with their programs full of Bach, Beethoven, and other such composers? That’s the idea behind the push to diversify programs so that minority voices are no longer “silenced.”
Writing for American Institute for Economic Research, Joshua Nichols argues that if the “diversity” proponents have their way, the result will be less enjoyable concerts.
He begins, “The League of American Orchestras (LAO) recently released a guide incorporating Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion in artistic planning for orchestras. They say the guide ‘lays out actionable strategies for orchestras seeking to diversify the repertoire they present, drawing on interviews with orchestras of all budget sizes.’ While many orchestras are advocating for more diverse concerts and inclusive programming, this particular guide puts teeth in the mouth of artistic planning. The problem with the guide is that it destroys meritocracy in the orchestral repertoire and places a heavy burden on artistic organizations to choose diversity over compositional merit.”
It’s bad enough that the “progressives” want to ditch blind auditions in favor of hiring musicians based on race or other irrelevant characteristics, but now they want to impose their “equity” agenda on programs. Note, it’s very easy to stay home and listen to works you know you’ll enjoy and save the expense of going to a concert where some of the programmed pieces won’t have much appeal.
Nichols concludes, “We should allow a free marketplace of ideas to decide, through the messy process of hearing music over and over again, with different ears and at different times, what should stand the test of time. Rigging the system to avoid a composition’s merits in exchange for more diverse music will ruin what classical orchestras are capable of and meant to do: play the greatest music known to the world without regard to race, class, gender, and sexual orientation.”