Some know that I like cycling and bikes. I don’t compete or anything, and am mainly a commuter cyclist, and I’ve ridden to work at least a few times a week year-round for about a dozen years now. Depending on the route I choose, it’s either a 25km or 34km ride each way.
I also like to accomplish as many things as possible at once. “Multitasking” is a word that suggests that, but it also implies that you don’t do any one thing well. But cycling to work achieves numerous things really well: physical fitness, travel, mindfulness, environmentalism, one less car, saving money, alertness, eating four meals a day . . . I recommend it.
I also like the idea of overlapping hobbies. I’m a baseball fan, and about six years ago master frame-builder Hugh Black at True North Cycles in Fergus, Ontario, designed and built a custom, old-style lugged steel frame and built up a one-of-a-kind fixed gear bike that riffs on the St. Louis Cardinals. I’ve been riding “The Redbird Express” ever since. Like Rothesay, she’s a bute.
But I’ve had in mind for many years the idea of combining piping with cycling. What if we could create a ride inspired by the 1936 silver-and-ivory R.G. Lawries I play? About a year ago I finally went back to Black with the idea.
We went with a hand-built titanium frame. In homage to our nine notes, the bike would be a nine-speed, with a nine-gear cassette and a single chain ring. The frame was powder-coated in a colour to match blackwood, and some of the components would be painted ivory, and the rims plain silver. To inspire Hugh, I left him with a piece of old silver-ivory Robertson drone that the late Gordon Speirs once loaned/gave to me when I broke a tenor pin on my first Hardie pipes.
We took another cool step: I took photos one of the engraved silver slides on my Lawries. Hugh sent me the raw titanium piece for the head tube, and I contacted David Davidse of Toronto, who is one of the world’s top silver engravers. He does a lot of work with reproduction replacement mounts for vintage pipes, as well as engraved mounts for new instruments.
David determined the titanium was suitable for engraving (some grades are too hard and brittle), and he sized-up the engraving on my slide perfectly for the head tube of the bike.
Hugh Black then got to work putting everything together and, finally, I took delivery of what could well be the first and only bagpipe bike. (If you’re a cyclist and interested in the components, just drop me a note and I’ll send them to you.)
Here she is, a flying drone of sorts, ready to slide through the streets and bike paths of Toronto, humming along at 485 or higher.
The demands on pipers, drummers and pipe bands become greater every year. So do the requirements of association executives, administrators and volunteers.
And as those demands become greater, the two sides grow further and further apart, creating more and more tension every year.
Let me explain.
Piping and drumming – especially at the higher levels – is increasingly the domain of the young. To support these hobbies to the extent needed to excel, complications like, say, a job or family are simply not conducive. Add to that the demand to maintain larger and more complicated repertoires, and most Grade 1 bands are rich with teenagers.
Where once the wiz-kids of Dysart & Dundonald of the late-1970s were the exception, and the Strathclyde Police of 40 and 50-year-olds the rule, the exact opposite is the case today.
Competitions and associations are more complicated and time-consuming than ever. With very few exceptions, executive and administrative roles are unpaid. Those who volunteer for them will be out-of-pocket financially, spending evenings and weekends to pursue their extraordinary passion to help. Pretty much the only people who can fill these roles are the retired and well-off – usually 55 years or older.
The younger playing-members side loves change, they embrace technology, they want things now and they want to move on to the next today. Allegiances to brands and customs are not yet established, and might never be. They communicate and interact in ever-new ways, and just as easily abandon one band for the next like they change social media platforms or smartphones.
And then on the association side these older folks are – in general – change- and risk-averse. They don’t want to deal with gizmos, learn social media, or adapt to new things. They dig in and some of them work tirelessly to preserve the past, the familiar and the safe – even though that’s exactly the wrong approach to take if they are to represent the will of the members, which is of course their core function.
The kids meanwhile can’t understand why new things can’t be tried. They get royally pissed off when they are told that an obviously good and generally harmless idea can’t be test-flown, while those in power try to suppress them, for reasons hard to fathom. Make a critical comment about the association or its people on social media and you risk being suspended. That totalitarian tactic might cool the comments, but it just creates more resentment and divide.
The old folks like their little paid trips and sandwiches at the games. They like being in charge. They like keeping these kids in their place. The old ways are the best ways. Don’t complicate things. Prop up the past. Long live “Corriechoille”!
So, we have two groups often at odds with one another: the kid competitors and the ancient governors, and while the members storm the technology gates, the “leaders” listen to 78s on the Victrola.
I exaggerate and, as with everything, there are exceptions, but exceptions are ever-harder to find.
The division between younger members and older officials will only become greater. It is not going away. The demands on each side will not become any easier or less time-consuming.
What can be done, then?
Keeping in mind that pipers and drummers are the associations, then it is the responsibility and role of the officials to respond to the demands and ways of the members, regardless of how old, young, intransigent or open-minded they are. The officials should work to adapt by at least appreciating and even embracing the new, and, most importantly, realize that they – the officials – are not the association.
An association is the pipers and the drummers, and the executives, directors, administrators all serve them. Members must demand that association leaders present a plan for the future and commit themselves to at least appreciating and respecting new ideas. Smart change is hard work. It takes courage and conviction, but it can come with great rewards. Doggedly adhering to the safe and familiar might seem easier, but it only widens the gap.
If anything is going to change, the members need to control their fate. If you are a competing piper and drummer and you are ever made to feel that you are serving those in power, then something is dreadfully wrong. Oust the fuddy-duddies and the conflicted. Force them to change through action. Attend meetings, vote out the laggards and suspected money-grubbers and bring in those who are more in tune with the times.
If that fails, then band together, and vote with your feet. If not reform, then revolution.
I hope that pipes|drums and “independent” are as synonymous to you as they are to me.
The publication originates from the old Piper & Drummer print magazine, which I edited and published with almost no interference from about 1987 to 2008. That magazine went to all of the members of the Pipers & Pipe Band Society of Ontario, and there was a blurb from the PPBSO president and their results (which I compiled on my own), but, apart from those things, every word of content was ultimately determined by me as editor. That quasi-independence deal was clearly understood by the leaders of the organization.
It was a very good relationship with the various presidents, starting with Henry Roberts for about seven years, and then the long and extremely successful tenure of Bob Allen, and ending with the late Ron Rollo. Until Ronnie arrived, the PPBSO understood the value of a publication that strived to do more than report bromides on themselves and tell association officials what they wanted to hear. There was freedom of thought, free-flowing dialogue, the raising of controversial and sensitive issues that needed to be aired, and lots of humour that did and didn’t always hit the mark. Not only that, but the publication often was a small profit-centre for the association.
And content in the Piper & Drummer was not always complimentary of the PPBSO itself. Confident leaders like Bob Allen understand that that, too, is ultimately a good thing for their organization – provided it is fair and well informed, which I have always tried to be.
In essence, there was a confidence with the PPBSO that such a publication being associated with it would position the society as a leader worldwide. To be sure, the organization did many leading-edge things along the way, but I believe that the Piper & Drummer also was a major contributor to the PPBSO’s positive world stature.
In 1994, I recognized the change to online, launching Piper & Drummer Online, the first piping and drumming news source on the net. I never asked for the PPBSO’s permission to do that; I just did it, and it was completely separate from the organization, although it shared the brand, which, by the way, I still own outright.
When Ron Rollo became president the relationship quickly unravelled. Ronnie and his Vice-President, the late Willie Connell, greeted me on an apparent mission to stop the Piper & Drummer. They intervened, questioned and chased down long-serving advertisers, and generally made my life miserable.
When I decided in 2007 that the Piper & Drummer had to go all-online, Ronnie did not receive the idea well. We had a series of meetings, and I offered to make a subscription available to the online publication to every PPBSO member at a reduced rate. Ronnie was a loving father, well-regarded and successful piper, an accomplished building contractor – not to mention a funny and nice guy – but I believe he was not particularly keen on technology or, for that matter, change.
There was a lot of harangue, Ronnie insisting that his organization needed to have a print publication, and he was rather suspicious of people like me who question “authority,” which can be the case with older Scottish men, I have found, when it comes to change in general. (See the RSPBA’s intransigence toward change and seeming desperation to maintain unquestioned “authority.”) It was untenable, so I decided to separate completely from the PPBSO with pipes|drums – a fresh start based on a familiar model. I believe Ronnie was startled and maybe a bit relieved that I walked away, perhaps hoping I’d toe the line and kowtow to becoming a boring corporate analogue Tannoy like, say, the RSPBA’s Pipe Band magazine. The PPBSO never created another print anything after that.
But since I made the decision to break away, to be completely independent, pipes|drums has gone from strength to strength. Totals for readership, subscriptions and advertising (rates for the latter two items have not changed since then) have increased every year, and the publication has remained non-profit. I’ve never pocketed a penny.
The magazine has embraced new technologies and social media to its benefit, and, as with the print Piper & Drummer, flattery notwithstanding, the format of the online publication has been copied by the usual rather sad, aping followers.
But there is one tenet of pipes|drums that has not been imitated: independence. And this is key.
pipes|drums remains the only truly independent piping and drumming publication in the world. Every other effort, ranging from the pretty to the dismal, is connected with a business or an association. They are all selling you something other than a subscription, whether it’s the official party-line of an association, positive reviews of products that you can conveniently purchase at the attached business or, in one particularly sordid alleged case, money exchanged for positive press.
There is nothing wrong with any of that, provided it’s disclosed so that readers can take it for what they feel it’s worth.
But independence can come with a price. Over the years I have received earfuls from friends and strangers when they have read things they don’t like or agree with. “Fair” is subjective, and my sense of fair is based on what I believe is sound journalism background, a liberal arts education and a family that constantly debated current events at the dinner table of large pitchers of sweet tea. Occasional humour and satire are important aspects of any good publication, and, as we all know, it’s generally not funny unless someone is offended. Once or twice, friends have walked away from me for good, which is sad. But I also know that pipes|drums is an extension of who I am as a person and, if they can’t abide by what’s written, then they really aren’t my type of person anyway, since true friends are open to both the good and the bad of themselves and others.
And similarly, I am certain that because of some perceived personal slight or expression of an idea that a solo piping judge disagreed with, I paid for it on the competition boards. I did okay, and was reasonably successful as a soloist, but there were times when results simply didn’t add up. Similar to falling out with the occasional “friend,” I reconciled the suspicious result by knowing that that sort of non-musical bias means that the judge is screwing other people, so his or her prizes, as Seumas MacNeill famously said, weren’t worth a pail of spit anyway.
Corruption of any sort should be exposed.
I am asked frequently two questions: “How do you do it?” (easy answer: time management, myriad connections and contributors from around the world, and an ability to collate information and write rapidly), and “Why do you do it?” For that, I sometimes ask myself the same question and wonder about the answer.
Why do it? After all, it’s just a musical hobby, and it’s supposed to be fun, so when people or organizations don’t like what they read and work to get back at you personally, is it really worth it?
The best answer I can come up with is, It’s bread in the bone. It can’t be helped. I had a brilliant academic historian father who surveyed various sides of things, came up with conclusions, and was never, ever afraid to ask tough questions and fight for everything that he believed – after well-informed consideration and analysis – was fair, and of course against anything that was unfair. He wasn’t the most popular man, but he was genuine and true to himself, and committed to trying to make a tangible difference and contribution to society. He was fearless, and he succeeded.
pipes|drums strives to make a difference, and I think it has. Independence – from outside influences and money – is essential to asking important and difficult questions, enabling dialogue and achieving constructive and productive outcomes that truly benefit pipers, drummers, the competition system and the art itself. Piping and drumming is slowly slouching out of its antiquated and often unfair traditions and customs, and I think that the magazine, by asking questions, tackling taboo topics and encouraging open debate, has contributed.
I’m willing to pay the personal price for that invaluable benefit for the greater good.