Top composers demand suspension of Juilliard teacher
NewsA who’s who of American composers, academics and music admnistrators have put up a petition calling for the immediate suspension of composer Robert Beaser from the faculty of the Juilliard School.
Beaser, 68, was accused last week in a VAN magazine investigation of multiple alleged incidents of inappropriate sexual conduct with students. Juilliard has ordered an independent legal investigation but the petitioners want Beaser to be banned right now.
They write:
We, a diverse community of composers, musicians, educators, leaders, and allies, call for action regarding the allegations of a decades-long abuse of women and power by composer Robert Beaser.
While his conduct is being third-party investigated, we call for his immediate placement on administrative leave from the faculty of The Juilliard School. Though we recognize and appreciate the need for due process, the volume of allegations, testimony, and supporting evidence of Beaser’s misconduct are undeniably unsettling. Until the investigation is resolved, Beaser’s presence in the Juilliard composition department could jeopardize the emotional well-being of students and inhibit a safe and healthy learning environment…
The signatories include composers Missy Mazzoli, Nico Muhly, Sarah Kirkland Snider, Steven Mackey, Gabriela Lena Frank, David T. Little, Vivian Fung, Julia Adolphe, Frank J. Oteri, Conrad Tao, Aaron J. Kernis and Andrew Norman.
See the full list here.
UPDATE: More than 450 have now signed.
Although the list of signatories contains a who’s who of virtue signaling mediocrity and many composers who didn’t even go to Juilliard (rejected?), those of us who went there knew about Beaser the whole time, and plenty of other instrumental teachers who dallied. I wonder how Beaser’s wife feels now. They were getting it on when she was a student. And that’s not hearsay, I was there.
His wife is a friend of mine. They have a young daughter and you’d be better off keeping your nasty insinuations to yourself.
so what does your contribution have to do with all the allegations against Beaser?
Oh, that’s nice. So we should “shut up” about it now that it’s out in the open because you’re friends with his wife. Okay. Or, maybe Mr. Beaser should have thought about that before engaging in reckless behavior.
Yes, because he is innocent of all charges until proven otherwise. Be thankful for that, for when you get accused of something.
Sex is the primary weapon of mediocrities. But that is not my primary reason for commenting on this inappropriate ban on contact between “students” and “teachers.” In a traditional school setting, or any setting for that matter, the job—and it is a job, not a laying on of hands—the job of the educator, which is what I choose to call it (for there is a difference between a teacher and an educator in the same way there is a difference between a statesman and politician) is to convey knowledge in an almost clinical hygienic atmosphere. This is what some are looking for and I make no objection to it. Moreover, the primary task of the educator is to educate not to prowl the sacred halls of academe looking for victims of perverted desires—for vulnerable students who can be used for sex. All that having been said, most students are adults—minors are a different matter—and as such, in today’s eternally-adolescent educational hierarchy, there is an unprincipled movement that says that because you are a student, you sacrifice the inherent rights of adulthood. This return to a Victorian moral thinking that says young people are incapable of controlling their emotions and must be protected. (I lived part of my life in Germany [Ravensburg] where, in the later afternoon one can see sixteen-year-old students sitting in the Lokal “flagrantly”consuming ein’ Halber of beer. A very gifted student (don’t remember the topic of study) came to Princeton to study. After two or three arrests or summonses or whatever, he returned to Germany to study because at least there he felt he would not be punished for growing up. Admittedly, Princeton is a town of playactors and hypocrites, but it is not unique. I— it seems like eons ago—I was hired to teach at a school in uproar because the students were threatening to shut down the school over the enforcement of in loco parentis principles and other such nonsense and I have what might be called the Isle-of-Lesbos view of teaching. There should be no social distinction made and certainly none enforced between adults, whatever their status, ie, between those in a position to help learn and those wanting to learn. There are certainly enough laws to cover the regulation of private affairs ( no pun intended). We don’t need more.
Do you always jump through this many rhetorical hoops to justify having sex with your students?
Innocent til proven guilty. No matter how outraged or “unsettling” one may feel, there is no excuse for not giving the benefit of the doubt. It is fascinating, that this letter judges the individual though without having any insight at all into the details of the available evidence. That is in itself stunning. Isn’t that how we did it during the McCarthy years with alleged communists, or, worse, during the time when lynching was common?
After all, what is good enough for Supreme Court justices in the US, Donald Trump and others, should be equally appropriate for this individual. Or, gasp, is the US a society with multiple standards…!?
Your argument is that because justice has not happened in some case, justice can not be pursued or even discussed in other cases.
You did not read the letter. They are not labeling him as “guilty” and therefore should resign. They are asking Juilliard to “suspend” him while investigations take place. He is being given the benefit of the doubt regardless.
Just checked out the list. Either Beaser (whom I heard nary a word about when I was at Juilliard) was the most prolific sexual abuser in human history, or, or….many people (including many whom I know) are jumping on a bandwagon without any personal knowledge of the events. Chilling.
Shouldn’t someone ask the question about Joseph Polisi and Ara Guzelimian ignoring what everyone knew? And what about the Juilliard Board of Directors?
Complaints were also made directly to the board of the American Composers Orchestra where Beaser was artistic advisor and absolutely nothing was done about it.
“Alleged” apparently means nothing in 2022 to those who want their pound of flesh.
Remember that in cases of misconduct/abuse, the testimonies of the abused are often the only evidence to prove the abuse even happened. “Alleged” should not mean “true,” but should not necessarily mean “dubious” either.
The issue of assuming misconduct happened, and the other issue of not believing victims and calling them liars are both real issues and should be treated maturely.
Many people have been fired or jailed for false accusations, and many people who have had many accusations have also faced no consequences (James Levine)
Exempli Gratia for the second issue: Donald Trump, who has been accused by at least twenty women of misconduct. He settled out of court with multiple accusers for hundreds of thousands of dollars while making his supporters believe that one powerful man with a fifteen year friendship with Jeffrey Epstein was right and twenty women were all lying.
While they shouldn’t immediately be taken at face value, not taking allegations seriously is exactly how James Levine continued to harm people while the Met allowed it to continue.
You left-wing “artistes” never can resist a chance to diss President Trump, for which those allegations are much less believable than the myriad of allegations against Bill Clinton. But people rarely mention him in these types of discussions.
Nevertheless, allegations are just hearsay, not evidence of any kind.
Is there even one musician among these idiots, who could not wait for the charges to be proven? Shun them.
It should be standard practice to place people on administrative leave — paid leave — if the evidence for allegations of serious misconduct has been deemed sufficient to require a formal investigation. This should be the case whether the alleged misconduct is financial, sexual, or other serious violations of institutional policy (not to mention violations of law).
No, not paid leave. If the worse you get for assault is paid leave then you’d probably still do it.
Unpaid leave only, and if that’s too totalitarian for your tastes then I guess you’ll just have to accept that you can’t diddle your students. What a loss, boo hoo.
I disagree completely. There is a burden of proof that must be met before someone receives any form of punishment. Paid administrative leave is equitable and allows for an investigation to take place thoroughly, while also removing an accused person from the situation where they could continue offending or come into contact with their alleged victims.
There have been plenty of cases of wrongful and disproven accusations out there too.
I don’t know the chap, nor anyone associated with this case, but his remaining in place and actively working while this is investigation in underway feels like a serious misstep in procedure, PR and welfare.
anon raped me 20 years ago. I must be believed and they must be removed from their job (and from this site) until it’s proven it didn’t happen. Anything else will be a tacit complicity from all.
Which hurts their current students enormously. No.
If you read the Washington Post article (which is behind the paywall, so guessing many haven’t), the school put him on leave Friday afternoon, which is also when open letter was posted. So they were clearly already preparing to take that step.
Also, from the article, the school is quoted saying;
“Allegations that were previously reported to The Juilliard School were handled at the time, based on the information that was provided,” the statement reads. “However, in order to review new information and to better understand these past allegations, the school’s current administration has launched an independent investigation.”
So he is on leave while they investigate. Seems like appropriate due process to me. Let’s hope the investigation gets it right.
Meanwhile at the New York Times, they’re following Yo Yo Ma around in the national parks getting back to nature by playing his cello to wandering campers and mooses, Pulitzer Prize stuff.
Some serious allegations here. It doesn’t look good for Beaser. Juilliard is investigating. But I’ll tell you something else: I rarely trust artists who sign petitions regarding a colleague—a lazy performative exercise in virtue signaling. I note that several of the signers were also directly and actively involved in the attempt to destroy Bright Sheng at the University of Michigan over the risible Laurence Olivier “Othello” movie flap a year ago. If you think that the signers of the Beaser petition—the vast majority of whom, I’d wager, have little to no knowledge of the actual details and circumstances of the accusations—are operating out of 100% pure motives, do I have a bridge to sell you. I imagine inboxes at Juilliard are already being inundated with resumes from preening vultures stuck at lesser institutions.
” I imagine inboxes at Juilliard are already being inundated with resumes from preening vultures stuck at lesser institutions.” Beautifully put
Those mass petitions are painfully similar to those of Stalin era when the workers were forced to protest en masse the Jewish doctors or whoever was chosen by psychopathic dictator to be guilty of crimes that nobody knew about.
Those letter signatories don’t care a whit about due process – they are checking the box just to dismiss it – but here is the problem. When the case seems obvious (and yeah, Beaser’s does), you may feel justified in trashing due process – but you really mess things up for the doubtful cases that also come along. Due process can’t always be retrieved easily from the trash can, and the rush of trashing it might not easily be dropped by the people who have a strong hunger to see punishment.
The folks who are drawn to setting due process aside may not like to hear this, but they have something in common with the people who used to drag suspects from jail and apply justice on a tree outside town. The guy’s guilty, why wait?
This list makes a most efficient means of identifying whom I should avoid professionally (and personally)