Kurt’s letter:

I’m hoping to articulate my fuddy duddy feelings about the issue of
“Diversity.” The connotation seems to have evolved to ‘be inclusive of
who you allow to be part of one’s group.’ I don’t know if Lawyers, and
Librarians are inclusive, since they have so many different
organizations for different types of work…or roles.

I said I agreed with Kurt…perhaps the essence, but not all he said. As a
professional coming up in the 1950s and on, I always took a role in what
I was doing. If it was collecting, I collected anything I liked or
didn’t like if it was of the same things; rocks, spoons, recordings,
pipes, et al. There seemed no use for selecting or deselecting if the
item fit, and it didn’t cost too much (oops; a criteria).

As an early counselor, I had to deal with a bunch of boys, and some
girls, whether I liked them or not. It was my role to help them, and I
did. At church and at Interlochen, I held forth the best evening study
halls the students had had; I did not sit around like some of the
faculty, I was there to help them with their studies, and did graciously
like the librarian I came to be later.

Years later, developing a “second to none” library program at a State
Prison, (three new libraries; general, law, staff, a reading lab, and
two courses in law research and business development) and working with
inmates for 10 years, I discovered many issues the inmates had were the
same as those students of high school age. They needed to feel
important, so you gave them responsibility. I was told by one of the
inmates, if there was a riot, I would be able to leave without any
issues, because I treated everyone the same. I still do.

It seems the role of an ARSC member is to support members and the
organizations operations, as one’s own, in positive ways, i.e., “how can
WE do this better.”

As some have pointed out, times have changed a bit, and some members are
not as professional as they might be or could be, and that’s sad. But if
they are working in the fields of recordings and oral history, and now
media, it behooves all to be kind to one another. Whether one can
legislate that or not, I do not know…and there’s the rub…some don’t
think so, and therefore ARSC should not go forward. Some think it is
unnecessary, as I do. But if there are issues then perhaps, yes, it’s
required…which could lead to more or less members as an organization. I
think every member should remember their role is to support record
collecting and preservation, and adding to the collective knowledge
about artists and their work.

I am aware that some states are requiring statements of diversity in
Articles of Incorporation and By-Laws in order to remain non-profit or
non-profit charities, Whether this is now a requirement for ARSC, I
don’t know that either.

As an editor of writers stories, poems, essays and such, I have to be
careful of what goes into the Quarterly and our annual themed anthology;
fortunately we have had only a few spats that created resignations over
our 22 years of operations. So Kuddos to our Editors; it’s a heavy
job…and probably worse than mine.


Paul


*Trescott Research - Paul T. Jackson *

2503 Natalie Lane, Steilacoom, WA 98388

http://www.trescottresearch.com <http://www.trescottresearch.com/>

Support Authors:

https://www.plateauareawriterassociation.org/

Support Musicians

http://www.gatewayconcertband.org <http://www.gatewayconcertband.org/>

On 7/20/2020 3:14 PM, Gerald Seligman wrote:
> ARSC may have lost a few, but it gained me. I am impressed by the sensitivity of the debate, the positions being taken, and the respectful nature of the exchange. Also, importantly, I want to register my support for the Code of Conduct initiative and ARSC’s suggested new policies regarding the perilous social and political moment we are experiencing. In a time when health and reason itself have been politicized, it is more than appropriate for an association to review how it interacts with its constituency and membership.
>
> Finally, thank you Rebecca and Yuri for working so hard sustaining a thoughtful newsletter. Not easy, your position, and as others have noted, the coming issues are an ideal opportunity to flesh out the range of opinions being expressed in these email exchanges.
>
> In many ways, Kurt’s letter has been a timely stimulus for solidifying support around ARSC’s diversity initiatives… Though, not to put too fine a point on it, that might not have been his original intention.
>
> Best regards,
> Gerald Seligman
> Executive Director
> National Recording Preservation Foundation
>
> P.S. I hope everyone saw our call for proposals for new grants. Deadline is September 15th. Write me if you want the application form with a full explanation of our requirements.
>
>
>
>
>
>> On Jul 20, 2020, at 5:56 PM, Sarah Bryan <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> Corey Bailey wrote: "That said, let's not be overly harsh on the editor of
>> the newsletter."
>>
>> I agree very much. Much as I disagree with the letter itself, I respect
>> Yuri's decision to publish it.
>> Sarah
>>
>>
>>
>> **************************
>> Sarah Bryan
>> http://sarah-bryan.com
>> www.ncfolk.org
>> www.oldtimeherald.org
>> **************************
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 4:05 PM Corey Bailey <[log in to unmask]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> A followup to Rebecca's post:
>>>
>>> I would suggest a separate heading, column or department for 'Letters To
>>> The Editor' in the next newsletter. My guess is that there will be a few
>>> submissions.
>>>
>>> That said, let's not be overly harsh on the editor of the newsletter.
>>> She's doing her best and is, after all, a volunteer.
>>>
>>> I didn't intend to start a flame war and, so far - so good.
>>>
>>> Let the discussion continue and the ideas flow,
>>>
>>> Corey
>>>
>>> Corey Bailey Audio Engineering
>>> www.baileyzone.net
>>>
>>> On 7/20/2020 7:13 AM, Rebecca Chandler wrote:
>>>> Good morning,
>>>>
>>>> Thank you all for sharing your thoughts on the most recent Letter to the
>>>> Editor published in the newsletter. And thank you, Corey, for starting
>>> the
>>>> conversation.
>>>>
>>>> Some background: The Editor did share the letter with the ARSC board
>>> prior
>>>> to publication. While I and others on the board do not agree with the
>>>> contents of the letter, it is important to the integrity of the
>>>> organization to allow our members to express themselves without
>>> censorship.
>>>> We support the decision to publish the letter as an opinion piece in the
>>>> newsletter. There were no other Letter to the Editor submissions at the
>>>> time of publication.
>>>>
>>>> The Board has made its position known on the issues brought up in the
>>>> letter through its statement opposing racism and police brutality (
>>>> http://www.arsc-audio.org/pdf/ARSC_Statement_Opposing_Racism.pdf) and
>>> its
>>>> support of the DEI Committee in drafting the Code of Conduct currently
>>>> under member review. If you are not familiar with these documents, I
>>>> strongly encourage you to read them (the Code of Conduct draft is only
>>>> available to members while in the review stage).
>>>>
>>>> I am glad to see others sharing their thoughts and views here and I would
>>>> also encourage you to do so through giving feedback on the Code of
>>> Conduct (
>>> https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdTEK30QfzupbwcLpVk2eDykmaFBjeclI_nJAH9lIrXlMNURg/viewform
>>> )
>>>> and/or writing your own Letter to the Editor for consideration. You are
>>>> also welcome to reach out to me directly off-list if you do not feel
>>>> comfortable sharing your thoughts in a public forum.
>>>>
>>>> Thank you,
>>>> Rebecca Chandler
>>>> *ARSC President*
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 9:18 AM Gary A. Galo <
>>>> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> It was downright irresponsible for that letter to be published in the
>>>>> Newsletter, at least by itself. The Editor of the Newsletter should
>>> have,
>>>>> at the very least, sent that letter to a few other ARSC members, and the
>>>>> ENTIRE ARSC Board, for peer review, inviting them to offer their own
>>> views
>>>>> for publication in the same issue. Publishing that letter by itself
>>> could
>>>>> give readers the impression that Kurt's view is a prevailing one at
>>> ARSC,
>>>>> which is certainly not the case (I believe he speaks for a miniscule
>>>>> minority in our organization, at least I hope so). I would encourage
>>> other
>>>>> members, including members of the Board, to submit letters for
>>> publication
>>>>> in the next Newsletter, in the interests of offering a more balanced
>>>>> perspective on this subject, and upholding ARSC's reputation as an
>>>>> inclusive and welcoming professional organization.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>> Gary
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Gary Galo
>>>>> Audio Engineer Emeritus
>>>>> The Crane School of Music
>>>>> SUNY at Potsdam, NY 13676
>>>>>
>>>>> "Great art presupposes the alert mind of the educated listener."
>>>>> Arnold Schoenberg
>>>>>
>>>>> "A true artist doesn't want to be admired, he wants to be believed."
>>>>> Igor Markevitch
>>>>>
>>>>> "If you design an audio system based on the premise that nothing is
>>>>> audible,
>>>>> on that system nothing will be audible."
>>>>> G. Galo
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <
>>>>> [log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Corey Bailey
>>>>> Sent: Sunday, July 19, 2020 8:25 PM
>>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] [ARSCLIST] Comments on the open letter
>>>>>
>>>>> This message did not originate from SUNY Potsdam or one of its trusted
>>>>> senders. Do not open attachments, click on links, or provide your
>>>>> credentials if the source is suspicious.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>
>>>>> In the last newsletter, there was an open letter to the ARSC membership
>>>>> titled "Letters to the Editor" by Kurt Nauck.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyone care to comment on that letter?
>>>>>
>>>>> ~CB
>>>>>
>>>>> Corey Bailey Audio Engineering
>>>>> www.baileyzone.net
>>>>>