You don't have to allow him to behave rudely. You can shout your displeasure, you can walk out, ask for a refund, or write a letter to the editor of the NY Times, all in an effort to dignify your outrage. Still, you are circumventing the issue he raised, and putting yourself in a position to abdicate judgment. And as you say, "abdication of judgment is a form of judgment."

Change of topic: Assuming our moderators are reading this over our shoulder, I want to say that it is good we're having this discussion, because these kinds of situations come up periodically in classical music. I first got into this thread with a long post detailing incidents in the lives of several concert artists of the past who found themselves in situation where they had to decide whether or not to take a political stand. Roland Hayes, Paul Robeson, Marian Anderson, Aksel Schiotz--they all had to take a stand, like it or not. May there possibly be some young pianists reading this thread who will find themselves in a similar situation some day? And is it possible that reading this thread will have been a valuable primer to them? This thread is a service, as they won't get it through the usual music school curriculum. I hope our moderators will take this into consideration, even if each and every post doesn't touch squarely on pianism.

Tomasino

I would have loved to be there to show my disgust by walking out and demanding a refund. I wouldn't stop buying his cd's or whatever but I would want a refund for that particular concert.

Yes, it's clear that you and Piano-Dad were writing at the same time, and you both need to carefully reread my post. I did not use, or imply the word "align." The issues of civil rights and international relations are very different, the time frame is different by a number of decades, and the motivations of people involved are different. How could I possibly be misconstrued into saying that those who disdain rudeness at a concert are aligned with "republicans who were silent on civil rights?"

My point is that to take a position of neutrality on a devisive issue is an easy way to "abdicate judgment," and as Piano-Dad says, "abdication of judgment is a form of judgment."

Tomasino

Out of curiosity, how is abdication of judgement a form of judgement? Sorry if you've already explained this but i haven't been reading this thread for a while.

I couldn't agree more. That sort of discussion is very germane to this forum - an artist using (or abusing, depending on your point of view) their position and captive audience to influence social change. The examples you cited in your first post were both relevant and moving IMHO.

Having said that, when the discussion sinks to the level that this thread has on numerous occasions - especially when it goes on for several pages - it's usually a signal that it can only go south from there. My previous post was an attempt to return the discussion to matters more relevant to us here and a warning that the discussion would be cut off should that not happen.

I think a number of good and important issues have been raised in this thread and a number of really hard questions have been asked about the appropriateness of Zimerman's actions in his recital. On a personal level, they've caused me to think hard about what my reaction would be if I went to a recital and the "performer" did something other than "perform". If we continue to discuss those issues and trade opinions about them then this discussion can and should continue. If, on the other hand, we devolve into a liberal vs. conservative sparring match, it'll be shut down.

What if someone in sports started a political rant in the middle of a game. A sport like tennis for example. What would you do if you're a Brit and Venus Williams or some other tennis pro started talking badly of England during Wimbledon? What then?

Personally i wouldn't care too much!

You say that now in the calm vacuum of cyberspace. But if you're in the stands filled with your countrymen, and a foreigner starts putting your country down, a different reaction might occur.

No it really wouldn't
Not that i necessarily agree with the scenario but i really couldn't care less. Everyone has an opinion.

Is it not a tacit approval, ipso facto a judgment in favour?

That's my take.

I have to admit I'm very conflicted on this issue. To take it to an extreme what if I went to see a movie and right before the climax they showed a political advertisement that I was deeply opposed to? How about one I was in sympathy with? Does that change anything? I confess I'm not completely resolved in my own mind. One could argue that the situation here is different because the advertisement is "canned" where Zimerman was "speaking from the heart" but (again) taken to an extreme, isn't it the same thing? I paid "good money" to be "entertained" and the performer took advantage of my captive position to promote a position or rant at the audience depending on your point of view.

If it's a "noble" cause like anti-racism does that make it more acceptable than if it's an ad for a political party? Personally, I don't think there are any nice clean lines that work in every situation or even a majority of them so it's unlikely we're going to arrive at consensus here.

What I take it to mean, in the context of this thread, and in light of the questions Zimerman raised about international relations, is that it validates the status quo. Abdication of judgment, in effect, judges and adopts the status quo as a position, and approves of it. It suggests no change is needed, and no pressure is applied to hasten change. It is neutral, and neutrality is often a safe position, and may be taken for that reason. There is another reason to be suspicious of it though, as neutrality is often a feigned position. A scientist or rationalist might use the phrase quite differently. It would mean withholding judgment until further evidence is available.

Tomasino

I think it is interesting that Zimerman comes from the country of Lech Walsea and Solidarity - which might have some bearing on how he sees the value and role of public protest.

'Unlikely' is rather an understatement. I don't think any consensus was ever expected, certainly as we tend to be a bit politically polarized here. I very much like Damon on this board, but we're miles apart on the issue of Obama, and I honestly fail to understand his position.

IMO very well said.

Although I've been mostly staying out of this because I think most of it is way far afield of what's relevant to the OP or what we're here for, I've appreciated the discussion and particularly how civil almost all of it has been. It's great that you're keeping an eye on it and helping it be good.

My bad. It won't happen again...I promise =p

Mr. Gibbons, I just want to say you are super awesome.

I enjoy following your Facebook page!

WOW, Jack!!

As you might know from some of my posts, I've been a fan of yours (as have been many others among our members) -- but I can safely say that even if I weren't, I would have cringed at WR's post, had I known of it.

I hadn't known you had gone through such an awful accident and such injuries. Of course that makes your accomplishments of recent years all the more remarkable. We can all be glad that you have recovered as well as you have.

I'm sure you didn't relish giving such an account of what happened but felt compelled to do so when you saw that post. Let me say that I too have wondered about that member's actual identity, but many people do prefer to keep their identities private, and that can be reasonable. In any event, with no offense toward WR (not much anyway) in such situations it's good to stay mindful of that old Latin saying: "Illegitimi non carborundum."

However we slice it, IMO what he said was completely uncalled for, and your outrage is more than justified.

I still think that blog post was stupid and self-serving twaddle. The story of the accident makes no difference - it has no bearing on why I think so.

Of course, at the time I made the comment that I was influenced by the context here in which it was referenced, both of the thread in general, and by the specific poster to whom I was responding (who, interestingly enough, has been banned from this site). I don't expect anyone who wasn't part of it would really understand how it went. And at this very late point, it all seems like pretty ancient history to be rehashing.

The stuff about my real identity is irrelevant - most posters here are anonymous and the reasons why people choose that status have been discussed at great length, as most regular participants here know.

Wow. That's all I have to say...just...Wow.

+1. As OSK says.

I also enjoy getting your yt updates. Keep them coming!

I am shocked by wr's reply, but I don't know what to say about it beyond that.

I had no idea about your serious accident, Jack, and I'm very happy that you've made such a remarkable recovery. I still have vivid memories of an all-Gershwin recital you played at the South Bank, and how a student of yours, Anna, played the first two movements of Ravel's Sonatine quite beautifully on a piano with a challengingly heavy action in a church in Brill (a village in Oxfordshire, England, for other readers). I think those concerts took place back in the spring of '91. How time flies!

I support Zimerman a 100% in this. Btw. listen to Ron Paul, and what he has to say about foreign politics.
A lot of Americans are completely deluded as far as foreign policy goes, and have little or no understanding of what actually goes on in other continents. Americans talk about 9/11 like it's the worst catastrophe in the history of mankind, but have very few qualms with the US killing 100,000s of people in the Middle East and other regions around the world (including a lot of children and women). Do American lives matter more than others??

What a lot of Americans don't understand, is that there is PLENTY of propaganda going on in the USA, (not just in Soviet and other undemocratic countries). Among the worst offenders is Fox News, but the other networks are also pretty bad in this respect. Obviously, these major networks are bought and paid for by major corporations with strong economical interests, and thus have a big influence on the "making" (not reporting) of news. The effort to silence the Ron Paul campaign is just one of many examples. Unrealistic and warmongering potrayal of the "threaths" from Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran are other examples. Yeah, after more than 10 years in Afghanistan, things are now worse and more unstable than ever. Time to pull out with raised flags after a job well done? Where were the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? Now we're about to invade Iran too?

Fortunately a lot of Americans are waking to up to this issue, not to mention that USA is now about to fall victim to some of the same mistakes that were made by the Soviet Union. USA is spending ridiculous amounts of money to uphold and expand a world empire that isn't economically viable. We're talking about 900 American bases in 130-140 countries. One of the latest projects is a billion dollar embassy (bigger than the Vatican) in Iraq with a staff of 10,000 people! At the same time, America has a worse deficit-to-GDP ratio than Greece. Wake up!

What am I missing here?

Jack Gibbons' post disappeared. Was it edited for him or did he remove it? We wonders. Yes, we wonders.

I didn't touch it. When moderators change stuff, we leave it marked as edited.