THE MUNICIPAL BAND.

Waipa Post, Volume XXIV, Issue 1687, 17 November 1925, Page 5

THE MUNICIPAL BAND.

iSir,—lt is a pity than any discussion should have developed into a criticism of individual giving. It would be better, I imagine, to seek the causes for disbandment of the Te Awamutu Municipal Band, and thereafter find a- remedy. The secretary in his report to the Borough Council, gives two primary reasons: (1) inadequate membership; and (2), lack of funds. He very plainly infers that public support is lacking; and I do not doubt that this is so. But why? To find the reason I suggest it is necessary to traverse the history of tlhe Band and note the changes which have takdn place within the Band itself. In 1914 it was a purely voluntary organisation: its members made the Band their hobby. Between 1914 and 1919 the spirit of the Band never changed, and in consequence all the setbacks and difficulties experienced at that time were overcome. Since 1919 'the policy has been gradually Changed, and there has been a steady drift from an amateur to a professional status. Prior to 1919 the members made no call upon the funds save only in the case of men who, through attendance at engagements, lost their usual earnings. In such cases an amount equivalent to the wages actually lost was paid out of the .funds. That was but right and proper, for in principle there could be no suggestion of professionalism in a system which reimbursed merely the amount a member would have earned in tlhe usual course of his week’s work. But in practice it was abused, and it became a known fact within the Band that in some instances members were claiming for lost time although their regular earnings had not been affected. This gave rise to a good deal of discontent, and more than one of the older members resigned rather than be associated with a Band which was drifting towards a policy of individual gain. A commendable effort was made to check the abuse, and it was decided that all claims for wages lost should be announced in the band room and bear the certificate of the bandmaster; but the effect was to give rise to still greater bickering and discontent; it became a matter for individual comparisons, and the claims increased in number. "Whereas in 1914 only two or three members would be affected in these wages claims, six years later the claims would come from almost every bandsman. It was in 1922, I think, that the amateur status was completely scrapped, and in its place it was proposed in tlhe 'band room that every member playing at an engagement should be paid as a player, regardless of any other consideration; and this method was adopted on more than one occasion. It is to the credit of a few of the members that, although paid ■their appointed fee, they forthwith redonated the amounts to the funds of the Band. It was also in 1922, I think, that a fairly strong movement developed in .support of a suggestion that street collections should - be divided amongst the players; and the Christmas collection that year was partly distributed, and only the balance reached the funds. In the following year, it will be remembered,' some pressure was brought to bear, and the carolling was done 'by a private party of musicans, who were granted the use of Band property. I could quote, if necessary, many instances to show r .how the Band has gradually drifted from an amateur to a professional body, and I contend that it is this drift more than anything else which has caused the present disbandment. Through it the Band has lost some of its best and most enthusiastic members, and through it .many who remained members to the end lost all of their old-time interest and ■ enthusiasm. Very certainly it was responsible for a great deal of bickering and discontent within the band room.

What was the effect beyond the band room? Whereas in 1914 the Band was allways ready to do its utmost in support of any other public cause, by 1922 the spirit of mutual help was very largely lacking. More than one committee has discovered that before the Band’s services could be obtained there had to be a sort of “ round robin ” in the band room to determine how much each player was to ,be paid. In such circumstances it more than once happened that the Band was dispensed with. The result was inevitable. Just as the Band withheld its assistance, so did others withhold help from the Band. To my mind, it seems perfectly illogical for the members of any band to expect to raise funds for maintenance by public subscription (in the case of the Te Awamutu Municipal Band about £l5O per annum) in order •to provide the equipment for the members to play for private gain. My views on this question are well known to the bandsmen, and I expect to be told—as I have been told so often before —that the amateur status may suit those who, like myself, know oniy the Te Awamutu Band; that the division of earnings is an accepted custom amongst bands elsewhere; that the bandsmen have worked to purchase the instruments and equipment, and have a right to their use; and that the players really earn any money paid to them. Even if all these contentions could be upheld—and I submit they could not — it is my belief that no institution can be both amateur and professional. Moreover, I submit that so surely as the professional considerations are allowed to enter there must be at once a sacrifice of that spirit which makes a thing a hobby. If bandsmen want proof of my meaning, let them recall how seldom th§re 'was a difficulty in securing a combination when a fee was assurled compared with that almost inevitable “ I can’t be there ” when it was proposed to .play for the Band funds. 'When the Band ceased to be the members’ hobby, and when professionalism was allowed to enter, collapse was inevitable. It is far from my desire or intention to abuse the members, but I do think the present disbandment can be traced to a wrong policy in the band

room. Nobody beyond bandsmen themselves knows better than I do what membership in a band entails, the sacrifice of time, the fact of being disciplined at functions which for others are occasions for freedom and pleasure, and the loss of home life. I know of no institution 'which calls for so mucji from its members as does a band, but there are some compensating benefits: the love of music, a pride in the band, and the knowledge of serving in a public cause. Moreover, there are occasions when bandsmen can obtain some concessions and benefits which would not be otherwise open to them. Members will appreciate my meaning if I refer to the loss of these concessions during recent years, since they came to be regarded as professionals and paid servants. iSurely a hobby band is better than a professional band: in the one there is comradeship, enthusiasm, and a love of the band for the band’s sake —the other is just a business. I would appeal to the members, even to those who have disagreed with me on this question of policy, to carefully consider whether it is not a fact that all or at least most of the difficulties during recent years can be traced to tire loss of the hobby spirit and a striving for a professional ideal. Having tried the (professional status and proved it a failure, why not return to that proud position the Band occupied in 1914. I can claim to speak from .experience when I say that the public will most readily support such a Band as we had then. I believe many of the old m'smbers will return if the old policy is restored. Here we have instruments, uniforms, band room, and equipment all paid for. Moreover, we have in Te Awamutu sufficient bandsmen to assurle a good combination, and behind it all we have keen public appreciation of a (Band, not only in Te Awamutu but throughout the district. All that is needed is a revival of that hobby spirit which gave rise to the enthusiasm that made .the Te Awamutu Municipal Band such a success in 1914. In those days Te Awamutu was proud of its Band: still prouder were the men who took their places in the ranks of this Band. I refuse to believe that the same enthusiasm cannot be resuscitated to-day.—l am, etc., ,A. G. WARBURTON.