Eastman School of Music backs out of China tour: Why politics is inseparable from the arts

This piece was originally published on Medium on 12/03/2019 and can be found here.

In a statement sent on Oct. 25, Eastman School of Music, part of the University of Rochester, received harsh feedback when it decided to replace three student musicians in the Eastman Philharmonia. On Tuesday, Oct. 29, amid pressure from alumni and others, the dean reversed his decision to replace the three, emailing the student body that he would postpone the tour until visas are obtained.

The Eastman Philharmonia was scheduled to embark on a tour to China, in what appeared to be an exciting and memorable opportunity for its students. However, the trip was complicated when it was revealed that three South Korean members of the orchestra could not participate because, according to the school, their South Korean citizenship prohibited them from obtaining work visas. The visa restriction is a part of a series of Chinese political and economic retaliatory policies toward South Korea for allowing the US deployment of the THAAD missile defense system in 2016. The story placed Eastman in the national spotlight, with articles from the New York Times, and NBC News covering the incident.

Since that incident, several political incidents relating to China occurred on the University of Rochester’s main campus, including the University’s reclassification of Taiwan and Hong Kong from “sub-nation” to “other region”. There was also an incident of protest art drawn and later painted over which supported Uighur minorities, Tibet, Taiwan, and Hong Kong. Simultaneously, tensions in Hong Kong have increased, and the New York Times published an exposé detailing organized mass detention of Muslims in Western China.

The recent developments internationally and on-campus affirm why the decision to postpone Eastman’s concert was so important. The initial decision highlights a tendency toward appeasement which seems increasingly common not only at the University of Rochester but in universities across the country. As an arts institution, the stance Eastman eventually reached is particularly important. There is a fundamental link between the arts and politics which needs to be understood.

Although the international political conflict, in our case visa restrictions against South Koreans, which caused this controversy is larger than Eastman, as artists we should never shrug off our responsibility to take a stance, nor should we forget the significance of the arts or a performance by an institution like ours. Institutions refusing to take action is what allows questionable politics and policies to continue. Replacing the three South Korean students would have equated to appeasement.

Let’s consider the significance of arts diplomacy in this case. China would have gained a tour by a top tier American music school on their terms, receiving a series of concerts to share with their citizens. The Chinese government would have also reaped the benefits of claiming cultural exchange and diplomacy with people representing us. Going on this trip would implicitly give our approval: approval of politics — like the conflicts affecting Hong Kong, Tibet and Uighur minorities in Western China — and approval of policies that prevent our own peers from performing with us because of politics beyond their control. It twists our music’s soft power against us. Considering Rochester’s political history including abolitionists and champions of equality such as Frederick Douglass and Susan B. Anthony, we should take the responsibility of representing our city very seriously.

If this tour continued, China would have reaped those rewards while restricting any South Korean gains in soft power through our students. Suppose a Chinese child watching Eastman’s Philharmonia was to love the way one of our South Korean students played their instrument. The Chinese government would no longer have to worry about South Koreans being humanized through music, nor would they have to worry about how to explain away what could have been a positive interpersonal experience contrasting the government’s negative politics towards South Korea. If we’re discussing arts diplomacy, interactions like the one mentioned are extremely meaningful.

To act as though music floats above political conflict is to ignore the linkages between music, our spirits, and our society. We must remember that meaningful music is music that represents ourselves, our values, and our character. Consequently, music — and the arts in general — have always been intertwined with current events. The arts cannot stand independently from them. As artists, it’s our obligation not only to represent and showcase our changing society for future generations but also to catalyze change in the present.

Many of our idols throughout history made pieces related to the state of society or politics. Beethoven wrote music and his opinions about the French Revolution. Dave Brubeck refused to play to segregated audiences when asked to replace his African-American band members. Jean Sibelius, the great Finnish composer who nearly taught at Eastman, wrote Finlandia, a tone poem he hoped would unite his Finnish brethren against Tsar Nicholas II’s Russian nationalist policies. Music was their platform. They didn’t act as though they were above the fray. They were aware, they had opinions, and they expressed them through art.

We must never believe that we should ignore our personal convictions, act above politics, and perform. This is self-defeating if we are to believe that the arts have power and importance. It especially falls flat in the context of politics that affect our fellow students.

After all, as a community centered around an educational institution that prides itself on open discussion through diversity, how can we justify opportunities like an international tour to a country which excludes our student body explicitly and implicitly. South Koreans are legally excluded, and students from Hong Kong surely chose not to audition for this tour. Offering an opportunity like this which limits its participation is inappropriate. It is a restriction of our peers’ expression. It is an acceptance of their restriction. Our orchestra’s performance wouldn’t have been a holistic representation of our community, but rather a censored representation of our community.

It is understandable that decisions to forgo opportunity can be difficult. We got a glimpse of that in Dean Jamal Rossi’s statement to students and faculty which seems to lament at the negative effect postponement would have on the school’s reputation in China, as well as students’ and parents’ disappointment in canceling the tour.

“Since becoming Eastman’s dean six years ago,” our Dean said, “I have tried to make certain that everything we do enhances our reputation internationally. I believe that canceling Philharmonia’s first international tour in more than thirty years just two months in advance of the tour would reflect very badly on our school.”

In an email to faculty he explained the negatives of canceling, writing:

“Cancelling would likely have a negative impact on Eastman’s reputation within China, and potentially limit other opportunities to recruit, perform, and tour for our faculty and other ensembles.”

The reasoning follows a trend of institutions giving their tacit approval and looking to appease the Chinese government. Notable examples like the NBA come to mind. But again, it is worth noting, in our case, if our art is meaningful, important or perhaps worth funding, it needs to represent our communities, therefore it needs to represent our values. Like the NBA, Eastman’s political power is cultural; it is soft power. If music doesn’t include our values, how can it be expression? If music isn’t expression, it’s just noise.

Rightfully, this incident has led many inside and outside Eastman to question our community’s values. Eastman School of Music and the University of Rochester chose to pander until alumni and the local community remonstrated. The school cited that the orchestra voted to continue with the tour, implicating the student body in the process when in reality, this should be an institutional decision. After all, how could the University ask students to grapple with the ethics of leaving behind their peers for a trip that they have every right to be excited about?

Thankfully, the greater Rochester community and Eastman community affirmed our values to the University of Rochester. However, we all must learn from this incident. As citizens, but more importantly, as artists, we can’t allow ourselves to be distracted by competing interests that go in conflict with our values. We must always be guided by our values, recognizing that the arts are powerful and significant because of — and not despite — them.