Near the end of last year, I wrote a post asking whether inclusiveness was a meaningless virtue. This post was written in response to several comments and posts that I’ve seen expressing related thoughts: 1) boundaries are essential for an identity to have meaning, 2) those who argue for inclusion without limits either implicitly place limits anyway (so, they are hypocritical) or do not realize that a limitless inclusion is meaningless (so, they are naive.)
My reaction was to say that I thought that advocacy for inclusion implicitly placed limits, so rather than this being hypocritical, this was just a part of the term — even if people weren’t explicit about it. In response, one interlocutor collected several memes where limits were not (and could not be) reasonably implied. Look at those silly people!
I still think about this. Especially when we consider something like the LDS Church (with its disciplinary actions) in specific of the Gospel of Jesus Christ more generally. Must one focus on the exclusive aspects of Mormonism or Christianity for things like Zion, the church, salvation, or exaltation to be meaningful? The common “political” breakdown (although this is not a clear-cut breakdown) has politically liberal folks seeing that the Gospel must be inclusive, while politically conservative folks tend to focus on the narrowness of the road that leads to life — there are not many that find it. (and then, of course, there are conservative folks who argue for a different kind of inclusion. For example, Elder Bednar’s comments that there are no homosexual members of the church can be seen as radically inclusive — according to him, every son or daughter of God can strive to follow the commandments [no matter what aspects about them cause them to struggle with those standards!].
Every instrument is precious
I thought of a certain metaphor that occasionally gets used by various church leaders, which is taken by many folks online as example of more inclusive tendencies. The church and its members have often been compared to an orchestra with many members. For example, in an October 2000 General Conference address from then Relief Society General President Mary Ellen Smoot, we are all instruments in the hands of God:
Truly, we may each be an instrument in the hands of God. Happily, we need not all be the same kind of instrument. Just as the instruments in an orchestra differ in size, shape, and sound, we too are different from one another. We have different talents and inclinations, but just as the French horn cannot duplicate the sound of the piccolo, neither is it necessary for us to all serve the Lord in the same way.
But lest you think that be merely advice of a bygone era, or advice only to the sisters of the church, please also recall Elder Joseph B. Wirthlin’s comments in his talk “Concern for the One” during the October 2008 Conference:
Some are lost because they are different. They feel as though they don’t belong. Perhaps because they are different, they find themselves slipping away from the flock. They may look, act, think, and speak differently than those around them and that sometimes causes them to assume they don’t fit in. They conclude that they are not needed.
Tied to this misconception is the erroneous belief that all members of the Church should look, talk, and be alike. The Lord did not people the earth with a vibrant orchestra of personalities only to value the piccolos of the world. Every instrument is precious and adds to the complex beauty of the symphony. All of Heavenly Father’s children are different in some degree, yet each has his own beautiful sound that adds depth and richness to the whole.
These quotations sound really good, and they sound like positive messages for both sides of the spectrum — everyone is welcome…but we are all welcome to serve.
So, why does there need to be another post here?
The misunderstood saxophone
Well, it all got started when I was thinking of a story to go along with one of my video game cover songs.
I was covering a song from an old Playstation game, Final Fantasy Tactics. The song was called “A Chapel,” and in the original game, there’s really not any saxophone or jazz — so I wanted to provide some sort of explanation to why I would do a saxy, jazzy cover of such a song. I also wanted the video to be somewhat autobiographical — let people see and hear more about me while they listened.
In weaving a story, I thought about my own upbringing as a child. I remembered how growing up, several of the more musically-inclined boys and girls in the ward would play special musical numbers during sacrament. I wasn’t the best musician, but I always wondered why I could never do the same. At some point, I asked, and I was told that the saxophone simply wasn’t a reverent enough instrument for the church.
I didn’t really think much about it. I mean, I wasn’t really that great at music back then anyway.
But here we come to the present. Isn’t it strange that there would be talks in Conference about how every instrument is precious and adds to the complex beauty of the symphony, and yet certain instruments are categorically banned from the chapel? (For more information, please check out this link of frequently asked questions for music during sacrament. It directly quotes a section from the 2nd Handbook that comments that “Instruments with a prominent or less worshipful sound, such as most brass and percussion, are not appropriate for sacrament meeting.”)
But then I re-read the general conference talks, and realized that what everyone had taken as radical inclusion had its own boundaries all along.
Instruments of the Symphony Orchestra
When I grew up, I was in symphonic band. We did not have a whole lot of french horn players, so frequently, my band director would rewrite music that was designed for french horn to be for the saxophone instead. I didn’t think anything of it — I just thought: well, we don’t have a lot of french horn players.
I did notice that occasionally, the orchestra director would hold auditions for certain band people — clarinetists, flautists and oboists, usually — to join in an orchestra production. I wondered why saxophonists were never asked, but I didn’t think much of it.
But if you look at the image above, you will see the reasoning. A symphony orchestra simply doesn’t include every instrument in a modern marching band, much less every instrument that was ever created. The symphony is a particular styling of music with particular instruments.
The Symphony and the Church
In one sense, this metaphor of the church as a symphony is a great example of how a seemingly inclusive metaphor can still implicitly have its limitations (even if those limits are not explicitly mentioned or emphasized). However, this metaphor can also serve as a great example of how seemingly inclusive intentions can nevertheless lead to exclusive behaviors and outcomes.
If you asked me if I thought Elder Wirthlin or President Smoot intended for their metaphors to be self-limited, I would say, “No”. I think that they intended these metaphors to be inclusive — anyone who is willing to repent and serve is allowed in the church.
And yet, this metaphor is implicitly exclusive.
The orchestra may not need only piccolos, but it never needs an electric guitar. If you want to play electric guitar, you have to find something other than an orchestra. A saxophonist may sometimes be invited to play with the orchestra, but only if he can conform his sound to that of a french hornists, or only if his conductor is picking musical selections from composers who wrote saxophone in with the orchestra.
So far, we have stuck with mostly European instruments, but if you think, the unexpected exclusivity of the orchestra has implications on scales of distance and times.
The orchestra is a particular creation in time and space, and although it has modernized somewhat over the decades and centuries, it has in other senses been resistant to change. That’s the main reason why the saxophone, invented in 1840 only after much of the classical orchestral repertoire had congealed, is not a standard part thereof. But the orchestra also is primarily European, and so instruments like the Chinese erhu don’t play a role in the standard orchestra. (This does not mean that there cannot be orchestral fusions like The Butterfly Lovers Concerto, but these are exceptional [in both the literal and colloquial senses of the word], and even this concerto was original written for western instrumentation, with traditional Chinese instrumentation only seeping into performances after China’s cultural opening in the 1970s.)
This provides rather unexpected (if not disarming) depth to the metaphor for the church — the church too is situated in time and space, and risks alienating those who fail to conform to that time and space. Or, put in another way…in the same way that any musician can play in the orchestra (but only if some of them pick up different instruments or learn to play certain styles of music), everyone can be a good Mormon (but only if they conform to certain cultural expectations that may or may not be identified as eternal or divinely inspired.)
Wheat & Tares 
Nice, thoughtful post, Andrew S, as always. I think one of your points explains a good deal about the inclusive/exclusive divide. Boundaries are indeed essential for identity to have meaning, but they’re also essential for community to have meaning. Many people have a desire to be a part of a community and so embrace, on a certain level, the idea of exclusivity: If you’re going to belong to a club that everyone can join, their thinking goes, what’s the point of having a club? Fair enough, I suppose. However, when the markers/boundaries/characteristics of exclusivity (i.e., the things that make one a member of the club) become an end in themselves, that’s were the problems begin, IMO.
In the LDS context, what can (and does) happen is that we become so indoctrinated about doing the things that are “really important” (living temple worthy, attending meetings and the endless drumbeat about obedience) that they become the end in themselves. Once that happens, we’re no different from the Pharisees. If we walk around thinking we’re awesome because we follow the rules of the club, we’ve lost any attachment to the gospel as Christ taught it, since he taught us to especially reach out to, love and help those who aren’t in the club. In other words, reveling in our membership in the club makes it less likely, not more, that we’re members of the club in ways that really count.
Brother Sky,
I agree that boundaries are important to identities and communities to have meaning. My understanding is that when people advocate for inclusion, though, they are really just moving the boundaries elsewhere — that is to say, a big tent doesn’t mean that there is no tent.
What people recognize is that some of the criteria we use as boundaries are inconsistent with our goals and ideals. They can recognize that our goals and ideals still aren’t for everyone, but call for there to be a change in boundaries in the meantime.
In other words, most folks would probably say that priesthood should not just be conferred to any random person. Keeping it within the realm of faithful members is probably appropriate because of what it signifies. But does there have to be a limitation by race? (We have decided that apparently there does not have to be, although it took several years to get there.) Does there have to be a limitation by gender? (We are still as a culture deciding that, but so far, we think, yes.)
Andrew, I see your point and agree with you to a large extent. Even if the tent is bigger, there will always be a tent. I think, however, that there are also multiple tents. If, for example, we believe that god loves all of his children, that’s pretty inclusive. That means god loves both Hitler and Mr. Rogers. That’s a pretty freaking big tent, IMHO. There are other tents, of course that are smaller, including the one you point out about the priesthood.
I wonder what the end game is here. As disciples of Christ, I’ve always thought we, on a personal, individual level, should go big tent: Love everyone as best we can, try to take care of others, try to be full of love and joy and empathy. I think it’s (fortunately or unfortunately, depending on your viewpoint) the institutional church’s job to make the smaller tents. That’s where doctrine and policy, but also culture, fear and superstition, come into play. Not the ideal situation by any means, but that’s what we’ve got. I like to think that we, as individuals, should be able to determine for ourselves what constitutes being a “good” Mormon or, for that matter, just a good person; it’s between us and god, I always thought. Others who more readily buy into the church’s authority and rules, might have the view that the church, too, has its role in saying what constitutes being a good person.
Brother Sky,
Interestingly, I would think that to the extent that individuals have fewer resources than institutions, an institution is more able to be “big tent” than an individual.
As an individual, I can’t be very big tent. I either have to decide to spend my limited time and resources on particular causes, or even if I decide to spend a little time on every cause, I am still limited because I do not have unlimited resources and time.
Like, let’s say I try to help every person that I meet — well, at the very least, I’m limited because I live in a particular city, so I can’t help someone halfway across the world. (Even if I go online, etc.,)
As an institution, the church has the same sorts of issues, but on a much larger scale. It can decide to mobilize teams in multiple parts of the world, on different initiatives, but ultimately, it still must choose which initiatives it focuses on. I think that there is a value to that task of choosing what to focus on, but I wouldn’t necessarily say that the institutional church’s job is to make the smaller tents…I would hope that the church inspires and pushes people to expand tents. But I dunno; maybe I’m off track.
“ities to have meaning. My understanding is that when people advocate for inclusion, though, they are really just moving the boundaries elsewhere ”
That is an excellent insight.
It also calls to mind a comment I heard once “jogging is not swimming ” that didn’t make sense at the time and now does.
Maybe a place can be found for any musician with any instrument, as long as that musician respects and sustains the orchestra and the conductor. In such a case, the musician with the novel instrument will be welcome and the conductor will find a place for him or her somewhere, in some piece.
ji,
I think that is reasonable. Musicians with strange instruments should also note that, depending on the conductor and the music they want to play, they may never be asked to be included. Such musicians should be OK with this, and also OK with the idea that even those the conductor emphasizes how the orchestra is a place where everyone plays together, that some folks will nevertheless be on the sidelines, despite that rhetoric.
Those musicians should be OK with doing their own thing quietly or even silently, so as to not disturb the rest of the musical performances that do not include them.
I like this analogy. Another very Mormon wrinkle to this institutional symphony is that the conductors always seem to be drawn from the same category of instruments, say the violins. The violinists get to play most of the time, they often have the melody, they’re close to the conductor. They wonder why anyone chooses to play a different instrument than the violin. A conductor who rose through the ranks of the violins may not be as aware of the needs of the percussionists, or think to assign french horn parts to a saxophonist.
How many years has it been since the LDS hymnbook was updated?
Joel,
I think the intended goal of talks like Elder Wirthlin’s is to point out that the conductors shouldn’t prioritize violins.
To that extent, I think the message is meant to be more inclusive.
But an orchestra conductor just isn’t going to include electric guitar. That just doesn’t belong in an orchestra.
my understanding is that the last major series of updates to the hymnbook was in 1985. No comment 😉
Andrew I really appreciated this because ironically – my mom just asked me for advice on a RS lesson she was teaching about inclusion and I said, “Use the analogy of a symphony so everyone knows their parts are needed to make beautiful music.”
You are right though – symphonies are exclusionary. And my asking for a bigger tent still is pro-tent. Huh. Lots to think about here. It reminds me of a post from last summer at FEMWOC, “Forget the Seat at the Table” in favor of radically flipping the table. I still am thinking about that post. Excellent.
Kristine, I really love that post. In some sense, this is the debate between incremental and radical (which certainly plays out in the musical and other artistic worlds in an analogous way).
I think one big question would be – is it feasible to live without some form of a tent, some form of a table? In the musical context, even if we don’t have an orchestra, we have some body of music, instruments, parts, etc. We like melody and harmony, but not a lot of us like cacophony.
Gershwin–Rhapsody in Blue and Summertime. And, Prokofiev’s Lieutenant Kije.
Star,
The Gershwin pieces are good examples of relatively recent (contrasted to many orchestral piece), generally, non-orchestral pieces. Prokofiev’s is probably closer to the idea of “modern orchestra using sax” but then there are probably better examples (e.g., Romeo and Juliet)
I think Ravel’s Bolero is another good example of something in a more orchestral style and instrumentation, but which “happens” to feature saxophone. And yet, many sources will point out how unusual it was to have saxophone
In response to ji and to comment generally,
I loved this article. It reminded me of a story that has an all too literal connection to OP’s metaphor.
My father-in-law is an extraordinarily talented professional musician. He has a PhD in [brass instrument] performance. Once upon a time, he was also a bishop. Many years ago, he found out that one of the 12 Apostles was coming to preside over a special regional conference. He offered to play his instrument for a special musical number, but was curtly told by the visiting apostle, to his face, “No. You can’t play that [instrument] in a chapel. It drives the spirit away.”
My FIL was devastated. Musical expression is a spiritual activity for him and his instrument of choice is a big part of who he is. To be so dismissively rejected by an apostle for such an arbitrary reason stung pretty deep. He eventually left the church for a lot of reasons, but that cold rejection was certainly a factor.
Good job on your sax solo Andrew! I like your ring too.
I think the leadership sees itself as totally inclusive and universal. If you are gay and want to be in the church, of course you can, because you are not really gay. Come to church, and the church will help you to understand that. If you are liberal and want to be in the church, you are very welcome to come, and we will teach you to become conservative. We will be patient as you gradually work on overcoming your liberal or homosexual feelings. All are welcome, but all will be encouraged to follow a particular agenda of self transformation. So if you play electric guitar, you are welcome to come, but you have to learn to play an orchestral instrument.
This is fine, and normal, as you say Andrew, because “limitless inclusion is meaningless.” If someone prefers electric guitar, they can go join Sodom’s band. But the problem is that the Mormon orchestra isn’t just any orchestra. This is the ONLY good orchestra, and the only group of musicians that get to perform in the Celestial kingdom.
The difficulty of it is that people are denied their proclivities and passions. If they really love and connect to electric guitar, and they would rather do that than play in orchestra, that is an eternally wrong and sinful choice. But people who love electric guitar feel “called” to it, they feel drawn to it, as if it were a gift from God. So if they feel it is “right” they think that the Mormon orchestra should include it, because Mormons say that ONLY things that are good and right are included, and everything that is wrong and evil is excluded.
Great playing.
My daughter’s a big homestuck and undertale fan, so I’ll have to show her those!
I understand the point you are trying to make with the symphony orchestra and boundaries. But still, I’m quite narked about the rules on brass instruments.
I resumed trumpet lessons this year… My daughter and I only get to play in church at Christmas, not in sacrament meeting.
Andrew C. That’s awful. Your poor FIL. People have some very strange ideas about what drives the spirit away. Personally I think it’s more their own attitudes than anything anyone else is doing.
re 15
Andrew C,
It’s really sad that that happened. 😦
Your story in conjunction with Hedgehog’s comment in 17 made me think of something though……the church definitely wants to point how its members are multifaceted and multi-talented. (Remember the I’m a Mormon campaign from a few years back?) When it comes to music, I’m sure the church would love to say, “And here is [Andrew C’s father-in-law], a PhD brass instrumentalist and Mormon!” It would probably even love to say, “And you know, his Mormonism contributed to that” (regardless of whether it did or not.)
And yet, despite of this, the church really doesn’t nurture or appreciate all of these gifts.
re 16,
Nate,
Thanks! I agree with your summary. I mean, I have definitely seen comments to this effect: “Of course we are inclusive. Everyone is invited to repent and follow the commandments!” And to some extent, I agree that the church can establish its standards and promote those standards for its members. But it’s tricky because the line between divinely inspired and social norm is often blurred.
Really thoughtful article, Andrew!
This probably wouldn’t conform to reality when applied to the metaphor, but…
I was thinking that most orchestral productions nowadays are hybrids. Sure, Symphony Orchestras are still symphony orchestras and probably will always be. That’s what makes them special. However, it’s pretty easy to argue people will hear orchestras more frequently in movie and/or game soundtracks, alongside electric guitars and synthesizers, than in actual symphony orchestra scenarios.
Josue,
I think that’s true. However, that also points out something interesting — a LOT of people still question whether video games are art, and whether the music of video games counts as art. I mean, obviously, for gamers and people who grow up with games around, it’s art — there is no question. But for some, folks, the very ideal of covering video game music doesn’t make sense. “Why don’t you cover any real songs?” I have heard.
Andrew C,
I regret that outcome for your FIL. Many years ago, one of my Boy Scouts and I (the Scoutmaster) played harmonicas on campout, and then at a Cub Scout pack meeting — from the hymn book, harmony not unison, very moving for many. Our ward Relief Society President wanted us to play in sacrament meeting, but the bishop always said no. I sustain his right to say no.
Years later, our stake did a pioneer trek. I recommended a brass band for our sacrament meeting as true to history — really, it would be true to history. Stake president’s counselor said no, so we sang in the field a cappella. Again, I sustain his right to say no, even while wishing he had been broad-minded enough to say yes. Imagine a pioneer trek with a state’s youth singing Come, Come, Ye Saints with a brass band.
Technically, the sad thing is this is policy per the handbook. It’s not just about whether individual leaders are broad-minded or narrow-minded.
#20, Game music is becoming more a serious thing I think: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b053bpzg , has to be if BBC R3 are broadcasting it!
My daughter listens to the sound tracks a lot.
Also discussed here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00yj887
It is a challenge for me to not think of the Gershwin’s as orchestral, as my daughter’s symphony orchestra played them on the American program last year.
Kije has a very prominent sax part in some of the movements; going to have to search out R and J. Thanks! Always looking for new music to listen to!
And, when Mozart wrote the Clarinet Concerto the Clarinet was the weird instrument. So I guess it will take another generation?
Hedgehog,
Awesome links!
Star,
This is probably just a personal idiosyncrasy of mine, but for some reason I see jazz as somewhat separated…I see Rhapsody in Blue as more of a jazz band piece that later got expanded instrumentation. (Or maybe when I was growing up, the orchestra director just didn’t personally like anything that jazzy?) So I guess I would probably ultimately agree with you.
Anyway, I certainly would hope that as time passes, saxophone and other instruments (especially instruments from other regions) can become more standardized. While I think this is somewhat the case, I also think that in terms of an orchestral canon, there might always be a bias toward a certain era that just didn’t feature those instruments, even if there certainly more recent compositions that take advantage.
I really liked the way the OP explored this metaphor and I also liked the sax playing (nice job!)
I remember as a kid hearing a trumpet trio (a father and his two sons) in sacrament meeting. It created a stir, because back that things were even more tight than they are now. But my dad was bishop and felt that it was not only appropriate in that case but that it would be conducive to certain people feeling the Spirit. I remember being a little stunned and exhilarated by it — it had a lot more power than I was used to. I’m generally the type who appreciates the quieter contemplative form of worship in our chapels, but loud reverence certainly has it’s merits and should have a place. “Hosanna!” indeed.
I know this post is long done, but I enjoyed it.
I’ll add one more thing. I attended a YSA ward’s fast & testimony meeting and a non-member kid stood up and bore his testimony of Christ through rap. I don’t personally care for hip-hop or rap, and I can’t deny that having it done from the pulpit as a testimony was a little weird, but I felt what that kid was trying to express. It was just awesome. It was also well-received by the congregation generally. I still don’t like rap, but I’m glad I didn’t miss that.
Martin,
It’s surprising (but also AWESOME) that the trumpet trio was able to play on sacrament! I think there is definitely room to appreciate multiple methods of worship
Percussion adds even more complexity. A good percussionist isn’t limited to just one instrument, but whatever the composer happens to call for. A dedicated timpanist or pianist may rate a regular position in an orchestra, but a dedicated triangle player would be lucky to rate “roadie” status (sorry Ed Grimley). A good percussionist should be able to handle anything, from flexatone to vibraphone to any strange thing someone imagined.
The best instrumentalists I know learn to play several instruments, changing to use whatever is needed rather than an arranger changing the music to suit the instruments at hand.
I suppose this comes to the flip side of your argument. Perhaps the problem is not in making the orchestra or tent large enough, but in playing instrument that will fit properly.
I’m not a big fan of “it’s you, not me”, so I could just be overthinking it. Either that or just wanted to use “flexatone” in a response.
Frank, I agree this is really common for percussionists, but it’s also not unheard of for woodwind and brass. At higher levels especially, many woodwind players are expected to “double” in related instruments. For example, if I wanted to be serious, I probably should have learned clarinet along with saxophone.
This probably does have good implications to the church analogy too. It’s not, “come as you are” but “practice being and doing things you might not normally do”
Great job incorporating “flexatone” haha
When I was a kid I remember having occasional sacrament meetings with a trumpet. Specifically I remember it playing the fanfare for “God of Our Fathers, Whose Almighty Hand” (Hymn 78). Whenever I sing that song to an organ fanfare it never sounds quite as good. I also remember a trumpet accompanying some patriotic hymns annually around July 4th. I don’t know that the tradition has continued.
I think Frank’s point in #30 is a more accurate representation of the “I’m a Mormon” campaign. It’s fine to exhibit individuality and a range of talents as long as you are willing to conform in core ways (testimony of Christ, belief in unique Mormon doctrines, Sunday worship, etc.). Again, though, defining those necessary core traits brings us back to boundary maintenance.
Mary Ann, “willing to conform in core way…Sunday worship”, which in my experience precludes brass. Jealous of you all (Mary Ann, Martin) who have had brass in sacrament meeting. Amazing!
“Whenever I sing that song to an organ fanfare it never sounds quite as good.”
A recent General Conference one of the hymns sung by the choir had organ fanfares. My conference notes included the words “needs trumpets!” It was absolutely crying out for brass IMO. The organ just did not cut it.
This is how I feel….if the instrument is played for the Lord in a referent and holy manner to the Lord I do not see a problem. But…..it should be in a devoted and holy manner!
That is …my….opinion.