social?

[xovimat]

Thanks to MysticCat for his thoughtful response.

MC: "I'm not sure I've ever heard anyone claim that Sinfonia has always been social."

Of course, many Sinfonians do acknowledge that the professional-social balance has often been uncertain, ambiguous or wavering. But about five years ago, I participated in a discussion group (perhaps Google or Yahoo) where several brothers initiated in the late 1990s practically called me a liar for saying that at one time the fraternity described itself as professional. I suspect that they had undergone an intense we've-always-been-social indoctrination. I am glad that your contact has been with people who are more reasonable.

MC: "the movement of the last two decades has been to return to founding principles, including recovery of the Fraternity's social purposes."

One might conclude that during the professional period of the 1970s, Phi Mu Alpha -- although for benign reasons -- misrepresented itself.

MC: "My impression -- based on nothing but personal observation -- is that the professional-social balance varied in different regions of the country, with some areas leaning more to professional while others leaned more to social."

Absolute truth.

MC: "As for what was going on in 1898, a great deal of historical research has been done in the last few decades, with much material that was buried in boxes and elsewhere having been read and studied."

I firmly believe that a thorough knowledge of the fraternity's history enriches every brother's experience; it is indispensible. Yet I do not feel compelled to do everything the same way as it was done in 1898. Is it never right to proceed in a new direction?

MC: "BTW, Phi Mu Alpha Sinfonia officially withdrew from the Professional Fraternity Association yesterday (August 13)."

The deprofessionalization of Sinfonia has taken more than two decades, if you regard the 1985 convention as the beginning. This shows how deeply the professional vein runs.

- - Dave Barber