Gold Medals and Scottish society

It seems totally INSANE to me that this subject is even remotely an issue in this century.

I would like to post my comment even though it has no real insight or any real feeling directly relating to the matter, but just maybe one of the people in question will read it, and have an epiphany of sorts. IT IS COMPLETELY BEYOND ME, TO TRULY UNDERSTAND HOW ONE JUDGES A MUSIC CONTEST WITH ANYTHING IN MIND OTHER THAN THE MUSIC? I’m younger, and racial and gender intolerance is just not part of my life. Sure I see it happen, but it’s not practiced by me. I can see feeling disrespected by someone looking a bit rubbish in their uniform or maybe an arrangement, but if the african american from iceland wearing trews and a glen atop his/hers mighty afro and plays “Lachlan Mac Neill of Kintarbert’s Fancy” while his white catholic mother and jewish father look on, and he plays it best, he/she should be awarded the prize. The judge should be concentrating on the music.

A woman won the Gold Medal? What’s next? Gortex bags? Carbon fiber drone reeds? Preposterous! If this sort of thing is allowed to continue, gawd forbid, a band from the rebel Republic of Ireland could win the World Championship. That just wouldn’t be the done thing, don’t you know, old chap. Next thing you know they’ll be playing some rot that’s not a Piobaireachd Society setting.

Excellent post, Andrew.

Faye’s achievement is fantastic – winning a Gold Medal, at 18 or any other age, over a field of very strong competitors, is a feat for any player. However, I’m reminded of the adage “How good does a female athlete have to be before we just call her an athlete?” It is interesting to me that, as a wider community, we are all discussing the matter of a *woman* winning. For me, this is interesting because, the last time I checked, playing bagpipes was not one of those very, very few activities that actually require one particular anatomical configuration over another.

More specifically this discussion is interesting to me because I believe that if we do not see and actively discuss gender politics within social phenomena, then we are not seeing them clearly – so I am pleasantly intrigued to see this discussion being brought to light. Addressing inequalities, imbalances or ignorance is not done through astonished outcries of it being unbelievable that they occur. Rather, I think it’s important to talk about why this is ‘news’ so we can look critically at what’s happening, discuss how we got here and how we might move forward (as you’ve pointed to in this post). Further, discussions of gender politics within the arts (particularly in literature and fine arts) continue to happen, despite the strangely pervasive (and incorrect) claim that we have reached some kind of post-gender utopia. These discussions are not only relevant, but also critical to pushing for changes in how we interact with each other. We’ve come a long way, baby – but not nearly far enough.

Additionally, I’m not sure that anyone can claim some kind of pure objectivity, as to claim objectivity is to refer to the masculine discipline of hard/natural sciences that seem to have appropriated all views into a kind of dogma that was actually the product of the perspective of a very specific group (mostly upper-class, white men). Claiming ‘objectivity’ seems to indicate that one can see ‘everything from nowhere’ and that everyone sees the world in the same way. To me, it’s perhaps more accurate to think of particular standpoints and acknowledge that knowledge and opinion come from an individual’s very specific location – the experiences and elements that shape their lives (with gender being only one such element). This means being clear that we all see ‘something from somewhere’ based on our specific experience and circumstances. It seems more important to do as you have done here with regard to the RSPS, to state explicitly the experiences and locations that are informing the circumstances around any given contest. Referencing these factors highlights the subjectivity of our undertaking and identifies both judges and competitors as subjects to particular experiences and biases. Thus, constantly referencing subjective positions also allows us to confront particular negative biases – such as those that might lead a judge to give the benefit of doubt to a player for non-musical reasons.

As I have heard many friends and fellow competitors say, usually in our more reasonable moments, contest results come from what a given set of judges hears on a particular day – instead of throwing this away, it might be better to hold on to this knowledge and put it in context. Reminding ourselves of the critical place of subjectivity – instead of masking it in a false objectivity (at best) or throwing it under a dogmatic bus (at worst) – seems like it would increase the transparency of contests, and certainly move things along in determining competence and fairness. Our strange idiom is so very subjective, the connection makes a lot of sense, at least to me.

Apologies for such a long response, but this is such a topical and fascinating discussion to me – and one that I have been thinking about for some time, even more so since Faye’s win. Thanks for this post – interesting points to think on and talk more about, that’s for sure. And the more people that broach the subject, the easier it becomes to understand and move beyond.

Best,
Ashleigh Weeden

Sounds as if in the next vote, (when would that be?) the majority will vote to allow women members. It will be quite interesting at that point to see how many women want to join. And also how many of the men would resign in protest.It would be interesting to hear from a member who is ‘against’ women members, to hear what their reasons would be. But they seem very quiet in all these discussions. Not sure why contest organisers continue to invite RSPS judges?? If I was a professional piper walking on to play in a contest, knowing I was being judged by someone who’d voted against women members of RSPS, I would certainly feel it put me at an unfair disadvantage (except that I wouldn’t put myself in this position- I’d boycott the contest first!). Even if the judge was a member of RSPS who had voted in favour of women members, they are still saying something like, ‘although I think X, I can go along with Y’ and where the Y is ‘no women members’ they are going along with that, so it’s still not on, imho. In any case what are amateurs doing judging professional pipers? Is it something to do with the past and landed gentry or something – heck we need to get out of the Ark and into the 21st Century. Having said all that, I’d be really interested to hear from a member of RSPS who was against women members, to hear what their view is, and why they would want to belong to a men-only club. Who knows? Although I can’t think of one, they may have some valid point to make? Unlikely though. Just off to my Ladies Luncheon Club — just kidding. Off to do a job I’ve trained long and hard to do, and one in which discrimination in any shape or form, would be picked up pretty smartish and I’d be out on my ear!! No place for it in this day and age. Including in the world of piping.

An interesting post with some good follow up comments. Ashleigh Weeden’s comments covered many of my own thoughts. I didn’t think much about the winner’s gender when the original announcement was made and I do find it surprising it did create some sort of stir. I’ve had female supervisors for most of my working life and don’t give much thought to gender issues but still occasionally witness new employees or outside vendors who are uncomfortable with it. It should be all about the music as others have stated. But many would agree that their is a long list of prejudices, biases, and personal preferences that often get in the way–or at least we imagine they do when we don’t like the judgement. Being so subjective it’s often hard to know when it was and when it wasn’t just about the music, and will continue to be so.

The thing that really struck me reading the post and comments was
regarding “amateur” and “professional” judges. Without knowing anything about the RSPS or the amateur judges in question my reaction is that people shouldn’t be too hasty to dismiss the ability of the amateur and rely on the judgement of the professional. As shown by the education debate in the US for example, being accredited doesn’t mean your necessarily good at it. Those not accredited should not be instantly dismissed as unworthy. It’s possible that they don’t have the ability to properly judge a top level competition, but the same might be said of some accredited judges.

While at a contest in the UK this season and during the world cup, there was a young kid that walked onto massed bands with his band wearing a Tshirt that had on the front “I don’t care who wins….” and on the back read “…as long as its not England!!”. Now while you could reasonably argue that quite a few nations would have their kids wearing something like that, for me, the occasion pretty much narrows down the nationality of the parent. Although arguably innocent, the reason this kind of thing annoys me is not that I always feel obliged or compelled to support other neighbouring countries when they are playing anyone other than England, regardless of whether they would support mine, it is that its the beginning stages of another cycle of hate based on history that has nothing to do with its current representatives, either side.

Contrast this to my grandmother, an absolutely lovely lady who has worked hard for her family all her life and would do anything for anyone, and who also would never “deliberately” offend anyone. Even with this, she comes out with the most outrageous, inherently racist comments I have ever heard (which thankfully never rubbed off upon my mother). I say inherently, because she is not actually racist; if you called her racist she would deny it, and ironically this isn;t a lie, because in real terms she isn’t. Its the things she randomly says that are truly shocking, and in themselves are 100% proof that she hasn’t got a single clue what she is saying or talking about or how offensive they are, and only says the things she does because “thats what we was always saying back then….”. The issue is that for the rest of her days, there’s nothing I or other family members can do to stop her saying the things she says or having the horrendously misguided views that she has.

My point is, that elitist attitudes and supporting your own UNQUESTIONABLY in every aspect of life whether it be between sex, religion, class, nationality, race, etc etc………will always continue to be an issue as long as humans remain impressionable from birth and unchanging and stuck in their ways once the irreversible damage has been done. But thats an issue that affects much more serious aspects of life than just a piping contest, imo.

Judges who were the kid and have become my grandmother are always going to place their loyalties above anything else, including a musical performance. If men are supposed to win things above women…….then thats what happens if they are in a position of casting that decision (as long as its at least remotely arguable, aka ‘benefit of the doubt’).

However, it has to be said that not everyone is or is liable to be like this. It is only a certain proportion of any group that gives rise to controversy, causing people to notice or talk about an issue such as this, and therefore should not be used to assume that it is a problem across the board.

In piping, all results are judgement calls, and so there are always going to problems with results with both judges appearing to have their own agenda, and competitors assuming that judges have been unfair (for whatever reason). At the end of the day, judges cant win, cause they are always going to have to place bands/competitors 1st to nth……..and they are going to be thanked by 1st place and slagged off by the nth competitor, whoever they are.

Its exactly the reason that I do what I do, which is because I love the music, not cause the results that end up on the website/sheets are fair and accurate. If at all possible, perhaps in several decades time when I believe the balance of biased to unbiased judging decreases to a point where people talk about how fair judges are and that their decisions are based purely on the music, I will be more interested in what the results are telling me.

The aspect of this that really interested me was the quality of player judging a player of noticable higher ability, since I am kinda swung between both sides of the argument. While I can see the valid reasons why one would think this is totally rediculous in terms of advising the competitor where they are going wrong and placing them, i think a certain amount needs to be taken into account for why this is the case. The first glaringly obvious reason is whether there is enough high calibre players available to judge contests. The next is, does the judge know what they are talking about but not physically capable of making their hands do what they need to do?

Great article, by the way and AGREED……….Judge the music, not the player/band.

What’s the fuss? – Everyone else seems quite relaxed about it. Faye played well by all accounts, as have other players, man and woman before her. With respect, the author appears to want to use it as some kind of cutting commentary on the shortcomings of Scottish society. Who gives one? How many females have been robbed a medal? Who knows? How many individuals have been robbed a medal by crap judging? Plenty.

Indeed there are several “jolly boys” still judging. However the most corrupt, blatant, partisan judging I ever witnessed (on a regular basis) was from one the the “greats”, who had won it all. I’ve also witnessed, on several occasions, judges from outside the UK (let’s call it Canada) with their sophisticated accreditation system, scoring some total howlers, so spare the sanctimony..

Yes, everyone should get on with it, as indeed they are already.