Interest Group at Marietta College

[rslpac1]

A thought on the difficulty you've had obtaining approval from the Sinfonian who is the music dept. chair:

See if any other male faculty at the school are Sinfonians, and ask for their help in the process. See if they can talk to the music dept. chair and convince him to give you the time of day. I would recommend holding off on going over his head unless it is the last resort - the worst thing you can do as a new music organization would be to piss off the music department chair!

Hope this helps - best of luck!

LLS,
Rich

[Boodleboy322]

I disagree with Rich. Phi Mu Alpha Sinfonia is a Social Fraternity for men in music and should not have dependencies on the music dept chair if he is not willing to help out. If this was a professional organization that only catered to music majors then I would agree. Since it is not I don't think that it's fair to the men interested in developing this fine organization on their campus. At the end of the day it's the men's campus and not the dept chair's. His salary ,to some extent, is being paid by these men that wish to bring our brotherhood to this campus.

Not trying to be difficult but just have a different opinion.

Regards,

Boodleboy322

Originally Posted by rslpac1

A thought on the difficulty you've had obtaining approval from the Sinfonian who is the music dept. chair:

See if any other male faculty at the school are Sinfonians, and ask for their help in the process. See if they can talk to the music dept. chair and convince him to give you the time of day. I would recommend holding off on going over his head unless it is the last resort - the worst thing you can do as a new music organization would be to piss off the music department chair!

Hope this helps - best of luck!

LLS,
Rich

[MariettaPhiMA]

I agree with you BoodleBoy. Sinfonia is no longer a professional organization and therefore should be under the control of the Office of Student Activities and Greek Life rather than the Music Department.

I wonder if this is a requirement left over from when we were a professional fraternity? That would be my guess. I think this should be brought up at the next national convention. It's too late for 2009 but it could be put on the legislative docket for 2012.

[Boodleboy322]

Here we go again - Phi Mu Alpha Sinfonia never really was a Professional Organization even though many brothers feel it was. The fact of the matter is that there was a period in which the fraternity went through an identity crisis and even affiliated with the National Professional Organizational Group (I don't remember their name). The group's foundations under our Founding Father were Social.

As far as your specific scenario at your school, it may be as easy as bringing it up to the right people. PM if you have any thoughts on this and I will contact my resources at Lyrecrest to help steer you in the right direction if you're interested.

Fraternally,

Boodleboy322

Originally Posted by MariettaPhiMA

I agree with you BoodleBoy. Sinfonia is no longer a professional organization and therefore should be under the control of the Office of Student Activities and Greek Life rather than the Music Department.

I wonder if this is a requirement left over from when we were a professional fraternity? That would be my guess. I think this should be brought up at the next national convention. It's too late for 2009 but it could be put on the legislative docket for 2012.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Boodleboy322

Here we go again - Phi Mu Alpha Sinfonia never really was a Professional Organization even though many brothers feel it was. The fact of the matter is that there was a period in which the fraternity went through an identity crisis and even affiliated with the National Professional Organizational Group (I don't remember their name). The group's foundations under our Founding Father were Social.

Boodleboy, it is not helpful to rewrite history. I can assure you that when I pledged and was initiated Phi Mu Alpha was a professional fraternity. Jervis Underwood's Centennial History can assure you of that as well.

It is quite true that we were founded as a social fraternity for students of music. (That is, we were founded as a social fraternity but not a general fraternity.) But it is also quite true that as time went on, the Fraternity's leadership, for a variety of reasons that were not limited to an identity crisis, consciously positioned Phi Mu Alpha as a professional fraternity. Not only were we one of the founding members of the (male) Professional Interfraternity Conference and the (male and female) Professional Fraternity Association, we billed ourselves in literature and on our letterhead with this officially adopted tagline: "The Professional Fraternity for Men in Music." The result was a fraternity that acted something like a hybrid of a social fraternity and a professional fraternity, with a foot in both worlds. But officially, we were a professional fraternity.

When I pledged, the National Constitution stated: "Phi Mu Alpha is a fraternity representing the music profession." That language was deleted in 1985. By that time numerous impulses, which included but was not limited to Title IX and its requirement that professional fraternities be co-ed, caused us to do some soul-searching, go back to our roots, take one foot out of the "professional" side and plant both feet firmly in the social side.

Yes, our foundation was social. But it just isn't accurate to say that "Phi Mu Alpha Sinfonia never really was a Professional Organization even though many brothers feel it was." If brothers initiated during that time "feel" it was, it is because the national fraternity governing documents and actions by the National Assembly said it was. We were social. Then we were professional, but with lots of social aspects still there. Then we were social again (but with aspects of professional that it has taken time to strip away).

Fraternally,
MysticCat

[Boodleboy322]

I am not re-writing history - the key words are "Even though many brothers feel it was". Whether that feeling was invoked because of a participation in a Professional Conference, initiation time period or because of some terminology that was deleted in 1985, I can assure you that when Father Mills began the Social Men's Club at NEC this specific wording or perception didn't exist.

Sure, I acknowledge the fact that brothers got initiated when the group was officially "Professional". My point is that when when this fraternity began it had social origins for men of music.

Also, how do we know that when the leadership positioned the fraternity towards being Professional it was just?


At the end of the day, a change to our original Object occurred during a time capsule in our history and this can be undisputed.

I've found that each brother's role with the fraternity by generation, time, culture and own experience influences their perception. I am proud of the fraternity's origin and our uniqueness in the Greek Community.

Regards,

Boodleboy322

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Boodleboy, it is not helpful to rewrite history. I can assure you that when I pledged and was initiated Phi Mu Alpha was a professional fraternity. Jervis Underwood's Centennial History can assure you of that as well.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Boodleboy322

I am not re-writing history - the key words are "Even though many brothers feel it was". Whether that feeling was invoked because of a participation in a Professional Conference, initiation time period or because of some terminology that was deleted in 1985, I can assure you that when Father Mills began the Social Men's Club at NEC this specific wording or perception didn't exist.

Sure, I acknowledge the fact that brothers got initiated when the group was officially "Professional". My point is that when when this fraternity began it had social origins for men of music.

Not trying to argue. Perhaps it is the choice of words that is . . . confusing.

I will not argue at all with your statement that Father Mills founded the Sinfonia as a social fraternity. The idea that we were a professional fraternity was never in his mind or in the minds of others influential in or founding and early development. To rightly assert that is not the same as saying that Phi Mu Alpha was never a professional fraternity. And you seem to agree with this when you say "Sure, I acknowledge the fact that brothers got initiated when the group was officially 'Professional.'" If you acknowledge that there was a time when we were "officially professional," then why say "Phi Mu Alpha Sinfonia never really was a Professional Organization even though many brothers feel it was"?

The latter statement implies two things that are giving me problems: that at no time in our history were we officially a professional organization, and that anyone who thinks we were is basing that thought on uninformed perception rather than reality. That's what makes it sound like history is being re-written, since as you say, there was a time when we were officially professional.

By declaring ourselves a professional fraternity, we strayed from our founding ideals and the intentions of Father Mills and others, but that doesn't change the fact that we did officially do it. Isn't it sufficient (and more accurate to the point you're making about the intent when we were founded) simply to say that Phi Mu Alpha was not founded to be a professional fraternity?

Fraternally,
MysticCat