Recently the Vienna Philharmonic has met with increasing protest due to its
ideology that gender and ethnic uniformity give it aesthetic superiority.(1) The
Austrian government is pressuring the orchestra to admit women, the
international media is raking them over the coals, and protests are planned at
coming performances in Los Angeles and New York.(2) Since the Vienna
Philharmonic cannot openly defend its ideologies, it has been forced to fall
back on the excuse that they exclude women due to artistic problems caused by
maternity leave. Many European orchestras have shown, however, that maternity
leave does not present significant problems, even with Europes relatively
liberal maternity laws. Nevertheless, the Vienna Philharmonic has remained
adamant and is proposing that women be allowed into the orchestra only if they
reaudition after taking maternity leave. In this article I will discuss why
maternity leave is not really a problem, the lack of gender parity in the new
regulations, and the psychological appeal the proposed reaudition procedures
have to the misogynist mind-set.
The protest against the Vienna Philharmonic reached a turning point on January
16, 1997. Ioan Holender, the Director of the Vienna State Opera, announced that
women would be allowed to audition for the Philharmonic's parent organization,
the Vienna State Opera orchestra, effective immediately. (Currently the only
women in the opera orchestra are two harpists.) "From this moment on," he
declared, "I want to see the applications for the auditions, and to know how
many qualified women applicants will be invited. And I have also explained my
standpoint, that from this moment on women must be employed if they win an
audition."
Even though the Vienna Philharmonic is nominally a private and self-governing
organization, its charter requires it to draw its members exclusively from the
State Opera orchestra. It will thus be only a matter of time before the
Philharmonic will also be forced to accept women--probably about six to ten
years.
In response to Holender's decision, the Philharmonic's leadership and officials
of the Austrian government, formulated new leave-of-absence regulations for the
orchestra, which they openly state are aimed at reducing or discouraging
maternity leave. The Philharmonic says this will insure its artistic
continuity.(3) If a woman takes a maternity leave of less than one year she
must reaudition upon her return, but without competition from other candidates.
If she is gone more than one year, her position will be advertised and she must
compete against other applicants.(4) The orchestra says this stipulation must be
established before they will allow women membership.(5) Women would thus
associate maternity with the possible loss of their jobs.
The Vienna Philharmonic insists that the new regulations are necessary due to
Europe's strong maternity laws. In Austria women are barred from working for
eight weeks before and after the birth of their child. This is called
_Mutterschutz_. This leave can be voluntarily extended up to 18 months, and
this longer period is referred to as _Karenz_.(6) The Vienna Philharmonic
says that women would take _Karenz_ leave for years and damage the artistic
quality of the orchestra. Wolfgang Schuster, the orchestras Press Secretary,
has even suggested the Philharmonic would have to increase its personnel by 25%
due to the absences.(7)
These claims seem unfounded. Simple monetary considerations indicate that women
would not unnecessarily extend maternity leave. The compensation for _Karenz_
is only $450 per month.(8) By contrast, a woman at work would average about
$8,000 per month from the Vienna Philharmonic on top of her salary from the
Vienna State Opera.(9)
The Philharmonic's concerns also seem unfounded because numerous studies show
that absenteeism by professional men and women is approximately equal. This
conclusion is further substantiated by studies which demonstrate that women in
prestige positions such as the Vienna Philharmonic have fewer children, and that
they consider their careers more important than extended maternity leave.
These rather obvious observations were confirmed by Holender, "I have young
singers in the ensemble, even those who have had children on the side. For
them, career was more important than pregnancy leave."(10) It is also to be
noted that Austrian law allows fathers to take post-natal paternity leave.
These factors indicate that there is little justification for excluding women or
altering their maternity leave rights.
This view was confirmed by Sabine Meyer--one of the world's premiere clarinet
soloists--in an interview in _Der Spiegel_, which is Germany's largest news
magazine. When questioned about the Vienna Philharmonic's maternity leave
concerns she was incredulous:
" ...oh God, the same old story. Naturally it can happen that a pregnancy
doesn't proceed as unproblematically as one expects. And so? That can't be a
reason for not hiring a woman. Men, through accident or sickness can also be
suddenly absent. I felt great during my two pregnancies, I never played better
or more beautifully! Even in the eighth month I was standing on the stage.(11)
Meyer was also disdainful when asked about the belief that maternity reduces
musical quality:
"Rubbish. Children can enrich a musician enormously, give her strength, improve
her expressive capabilities. One is quite quickly back at ones performance
level. It is a question of organization--and by the way, also on the part of
the orchestra." (12)
Meyers views are shared by a wide spectrum of European society and it has
become very rare for orchestras to raise the maternity leave issue.
The Vienna Philharmonic was thus very concerned that their maternity leave
proposal be written in a politically correct fashion. It states that all
"men and women" who take an extended leave for any reason must reaudition upon
their return.(13) This does not disguise the irony that the stated purpose of
the regulations is to dismantle the job protection of pregnant women. Some
question that the regulations will even stand up in court.
It is also ironic that the Philharmonic wants to reduce the rights of women,
since men have long enjoyed special privileges as members of the orchestra.
They are exempted from Austria's compulsory military service. And they are
allowed a one time, one year sabbatical with no reaudition requirement.(14)
Reauditioning for men and women was deemed necessary only when it became
apparent women might enter the orchestra.
One of the most interesting aspects of the proposal is that the men are
sacrificing their right to take leave without reauditioning, since they feel the
same privilege cannot be trusted in the hands of women. But the reduction of
rights for both men and women does not necessarily create parity. Since men do
not bear children, they are not as dependent on taking leave. The men are
giving up considerably less than women.
In reality the Philharmonic has raised the maternity issue because it detracts
attention from the fact that 149 white men are making music based specifically
on an aesthetic ideology of gender and ethnic uniformity. On February 18th the
Vienna Philharmonic will vote on this maternity issue. No women will vote,
since none are in the orchestra. With no representation by or for women,
womens rights will be dismantled.
These ironies explain why the Vienna Philharmonic is the only orchestra in the
world to advocate the grotesque idea of postpartum reauditioning.
Perhaps it it would be less ironic to briefly examine some of the psychological
factors that explain why the proposal has a special appeal to the misogynist
mind-set. It should be clear that forcing a woman to reaudition after giving
birth allows men to subject her to a particularly demeaning form of objectified
control that could provide sadistic satisfaction. It is essential to the
misogynist psyche to objectify women, particularly in regard to their sexuality.
Women are thus reduced from being individuals with a creative identity to a mere
phenomenon of nature with a reproductive function. This view informs the
Vienna Philharmonic, which assumes that if the biologically determined nature of
women were left unregulated it would destroy the artistic quality of the
orchestra.
As absurd as all of this may seem, the same motives inform the postpartum
cleansing rituals surrounding female sexuality in many cultures. These
rituals presumably ensure that women who have given birth are once again made
acceptable to participate in society. Similarly, women in the Philharmonic
would be subjected to an audition procedure to ensure that they are once again
acceptable to participate in the ensemble. In many primitive societies these
rituals were invented by women and presided over by them, and are definitely
associated with the holiness of woman as the bringer of life. But in the
Philharmonic the rituals would have a different function. They would enforce
and inform a secondary status for women as a birth-giving phenomenon of nature
in contrast to the socially conditioned creative autonomy of men.
The special testing proposed by the Vienna Philharmonic thus contains a clear
element of denigration which serves a particular function in the employment
policies of a misogynist orchestra.(15) By forcing women to reaudition after
maternity, they would be subjected to a subtle and almost voyeuristic form of
genderized testing which would discourage them from entering the orchestra, and
which could eventually even drive them out of it. The proposed regulations are
thus another example of the misogynist trials and tests with which the history
of many cultures are replete, and whose purpose has often been the sadistic
objectification and control of feminine creativity on the reproductive,
spiritual, and intellectual levels.(16)
In conclusion, we have seen that Austrias current maternity laws would not
hinder the artistic continuity of the Vienna Philharmonic, and that there is
no reason to further limit maternity leave. There are, however, four principle
motives that explain why the Vienna Philharmonic proposes that women reaudition
after maternity, and they can be summarized as follows:
1) The maternity leave proposal is a subterfuge to detract public attention
from the orchestras belief that gender and ethnic uniformity produce aesthetic
superiority.
2) Through reaudition procedures which emphasize the reproductive role of
women, they are subtilely denigrated and thus discouraged from entering the
orchestra.
3) Forcing women to reaudition after maternity provides a subliminally sadistic
and sexually oriented satisfaction to the misogynist psyche of the orchestra.
4) A postpartum ritual is a psychological aid that helps the orchestra accept
and control the creative power of women.
It is therefore understandable that many women feel the Vienna Philharmonic's
reauditioning proposal is an act of bad faith, and that the orchestra is not
serious about allowing them membership. As one women put it, To have a baby,
and then to be trotted in front of your own orchestra to prove you can still
play is an affront to human dignity, and unworthy of any cultural
institution.(17)
William Osborne
100260.243@compuserve.com
copyright: William Osborne
[You may forward this post with citation. Please include the endnotes.]
1. For documentation of these ideologies see: William Osborne, "Art Is Just An
Excuse: Gender Bias In International Orchestras," _Journal of the International
Alliance for Women In Music_ (Vol. 2, No. 3, October 1996) pgs. 6-8. See also:
"Musikalische Misogynie," broadcast by the West German State Radio, February 13,
1996. I have translated and transcribed the relevant segements of the
broadcast. A link to them is on the world wide web at
http://www.dorsai.org/~buzzarte/zapvpo.html
2. For a collection of these reports see the world wide web at:
htt://www.dorsai.org/buzzarte/zapvpo.html
3. "Philharmoniker und die Frauen: Sonderloesung bei Karenzen," _Der Standard_
(January 25, 1997). It is essential to note that the maternity agreement will
be made between the government and the Vienna State Opera which is the parent
organisation of the Vienna Philharmonic. The Philharmonic considers itself a
private and autonomous organization. They might eventually claim they are not
bound by the same regulations.
4. ibid.
5. ibid.
6. "Kommen nun wirklich Philharmonikerinnen?," _Die Presse_ (January 24, 1997).
7. A note for journalists: for specific information concerning maternity laws in
Austria contact the Women's Ministry in Vienna at tel. int. +43 1 536 330.
8. This assertion was made by Wolfgang Schuster, Press Secretary of the Vienna
Philharmonic in a letter dated April 19, 1996. He was answering a letter
written by Jeanice Brooks inquiring about the orchestra's employment policies.
Brook's letter was co-signed by 30 people from 12 countries.
9. The orchestra is reported to have a yearly income of approximately 15
million dollars. There are 149 members. This would make the mean salary of
individual members about 100,000 dollars.
10. "Holender entschiedet sich fuer Gleichberechtigung," _Kurier_ (January 17,
1997).
11. "Die Welt ist voll Gedudel," _Der Spiegel_ (August, 33/1996).
12. ibid.
13. "Philharmoniker und die Frauen: Sonderloesung bei Karenzen," _Der Standard_
(January 25, 1997). It should be noted that the Philharmonic has been very
reluctant to reveal the complete details of the maternity leave proposal. One
of my sources will be meeting on February 12, 1997 with politicians who might
have knowledge of the agreement.
14. Clemens Hellsberg, _Demokratie der Koenige_ (Zurich: Schweizer Verlagshaus,
1992) p. 615.
15. In a celebrated case of such testing, trombonist Abbie Conant was demoted
from her first chair position in the Munich Philharmonic by Sergiu Celibidache
with the declaration, "You know the problem, we need a man for the first
trombone". To regain her position the courts required her to prove she had the
"necesssary physical strength to lead the trombone section of a world-class
orchestra". She had to have her lungs measured in a hospital, and endure
nerve-wracking examinations by a trombone specialist before the judges were
satisfied. For complete documentations see: William Osborne, "You Sound Like A
Ladies' Orchestra," available on the world wide web at:
http://www.dorsai.org/~buzzarte/
16. For discussion of related topics see: Sophe Drinker, _Music and Women_ (New
York: Coward-McCann, 1948); Michelle Rosaldo and Louis Lamphere, eds. _Women,
Culture, and Society_ (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1974) especially the
article by Sherry B. Ortner entitled Is Female to Male as Nature Is to
Culture?; and see the commentary on Ortners article by Ellen Koskoff, Is
Female to Male as Postmodern is to Modern? Implications for a New
Ethnomusicology (Procedings of the Goteborg Gender and Music Confernece 1996).
17. A statement by Abbie Conant in converstation with the author.