Nashville Principal Clarinet

I think it is a good thing to have an online forum for sharing ideas on how to make auditions fair, and some commenters on this thread have raised valid points/concerns, but it really bugs me when people abuse free speech to tear down people and make assumptions, especially under the cloak of anonymity.

Yes, it is true that the assistant principal was a finalist for the same audition Parrette took and, yes, she was involved in the advisory committee deciding Parrette's tenure. But it is so hard to believe that she is a person of integrity who genuinely cares about the wellbeing of the orchestra's artistic growth and quality, and wouldn't put her self interests before the orchestra? As mahlertitan put it: "You could assume the worst and just make it prohibited altogether, or you could trust that they’d participate fairly since it could be their section mate for the next 25 years."I understand some people would assume that a sore loser would try to sabotage the person who won the position for which they both auditioned. However, that was not the case here. The assistant principal (who did not want to take the audition in the first place because she specializes in E-flat clarinet) took the audition in hopes that no matter the outcome her orchestra would have the best principal clarinetist, and she so was never bitter about the results. She welcomed Parrette with great enthusiasm and treated him with the respect and courtesy she gives to the other section leaders. However, there were several factors that were problematic for multiple musicians, even musicians who were not on the tenure committee or in the woodwind section. Those factors were brought up during tenure progress meetings, so Parrette would have been aware of those issues, yet chose not to improve. Those factors had more with the Music Director's decision rather than an act of alleged retaliation. Moreover, to reiterate other commenters in this post, at the Nashville Symphony the tenure committee is entirely advisory and only the Music Director has the final say in who is granted tenure so as to cultivate the orchestral sound they want. One person's opinions cannot skew the decision making when there are multiple people involved. It goes both ways -- if the assistant principal was the only person who supported Parrette but the rest of the tenure advisory committee were against him, her opinion holds no sway over the collective hive mind that is determined against him. So why are we so eager to peg the blame on the wrong person if we don't know the whole story?

(On a side note, I do agree that musicians should have more influence over the tenure process because there have been a lot of unfair instances where Music Directors have discriminated against musicians because of race and/or ***.)

I think the people who blame the assistant principal for "blatant conflict of interest" that led to "the wrong decision" (yes, those are the actual quotes) should reconsider their accusations because they simply are not true. And mods, please take down the misleading comments saying she ousted Parrette to play principal because that is not true either (Daniel Goldman is the current Acting Principal Clarinetist, and is doing a fantastic job). To me, this all seems designed by some person(s) who has(have) a personal vendetta against the assistant principal clarinetist and/or the Nashville Symphony because why else would anyone post on a thread that's two and a half years old?

In conclusion, are all auditions/trials/tenure probations perfect? No, but they are all held in in good faith. Can we do better? Yes, we should strive to make the playing field equal for everyone, especially for those who are at a socioeconomic/gender/racial disadvantage. Should we demonize or blame the people involved in certain decisions that are not to our liking? Certainly not. I'd like to think that every audition committee and tenure committee sincerely wants to make music with the best and will put their pride on the side in order to make true harmony. Call it naive, but if we don't normalize focusing on creating quality art instead of bickering over rumors and assumptions, it will give orchestra management all across the US more reason to do away with blind auditions and job security that comes with tenure.

Interesting that you keep referencing this "anonymous" forum, yet somehow only just realized your own personal URL was not anonymous and changed it.

This entire thread, which is not unique at all in terms of how people view auditions, is just evidence that better practices are needed at this orchestra. The orchestra can decide if the input of a section member who auditioned for the spot in question is more valuable than either the chance of shenanigans OR the appearances of shenanigans. Nashville Symphony has enough of a past that I would advise them to consider the damage not being worth the input they would receive from someone whose very influence you are also downplaying.

Correct

😕