I have been thinking about this sort of thing in the last few days... A while back, I had a project that I was leading... and there was this comment, that isn't that uncommon in tertiary teaching circles. And I've always had a bit of an aversion to the concept... something about it just doesn't ring very true to me. But it is modern practice to feel like everyone can contribute equally and that all voices are equal and that this is somehow "democratic"... but for me, sometimes, it really errs towards favouring mediocrity and lowest common denominator thinking.

Now, I would say that if you have highly capable players in a chamber music setting... you do have something that does approach a democracy... in that all the voices have equalish weight... but even in this scenario, you will have mutually exclusives desires... and you will have to choose one or the other. Ultimately, you have players that are flexible and sensitive, with similar ranges of tastes... and then the entire thing is an unspoken dance and interplay of sorts in real time. I find that sort of thing when I'm playing music with my wife...

... but if there is a sticking point... well, someone will have to make an executive decision, either in real time in the performance, or by arrangement in the rehearsal. Thus, we are looking at something that is less like a "democracy"... and more of a "first amongst equals" sort of thing.

Now, where things get completely out of control... is when you have decidedly different skill levels and experience. Then... when you are deciding to have "democratic" processes... well, you are sort of replicating the internet... where you have complete laypersons arguing with experts in the field... and not realising that they are completely out of their depth! And more annoyingly, the endless discussion and decision making by committee... is just a waste of time, and again... settles to the lack of vision of a generally uninformed majority rule.... and trust me, I've seen too many ensembles fall into aimless interpretations where everyone is equally unhappy.

So, what is the decision making process for a chamber-sized ensemble? I know that it surely ISN'T democratic... even though for our modern sensibilities, we like to think that this is the best way to run everything. But it can't be... at best, in a circle of equals, it is a sort of unspoken give and take... and eventually, a first amongst equals sort of thing. And this is a must, as a concert unfolds in real-time... and you need the decisiveness of a leadership vision and risk-taker, alongside the fast and flexible response of a team of equals.

However in other situations, you are looking at something more akin to a benevolent dictatorship... the leader listens and takes into account all the various divergent interest and fears and desires... and uses it to inform their overarching vision. But it can't descend into thinking that everyone should have their desires completely fulfilled... or we get meaningless mush.

.... in the end, I think this sort of "everyone is an equal" thinking is a sort of painful reflection and perversion of what a modern society really is. Yes, we like to think we are all equal... and in many ways we are, human rights and basic needs and wants are equal... but on many other things, skills, knowledge, experience, and abilities... we are decidedly NOT equal... and THAT is what makes our society function, as we are all different types of specialists... and to think that we are all exactly the same, and able to contribute equally to ALL types of endeavours is well meaning, but deeply flawed.

I don't say this as an elitist sort of viewpoint either... everyone has their own personal strengths and weaknesses, and we shouldn't downplay that sort of thing by trying to iron it all out. I personally am very decent at certain things... and woefully terrible at others! So, I should be used in a way that maximises those strengths and avoids the weaknesses... sort of obvious, but oddly contentious at times!

I can also be found cross-posting at:
Hive
Steem
Publish0x

Handy Crypto Tools

Ledger Nano S/X: Keep your crypto safe and offline with the leading hardware wallet provider. Not your keys, not your crypto!
Binance: My first choice of centralised exchange, featuring a wide variety of crypto and savings products.
WooX: The centralised version of WooFi. Stake WOO for fee-free trades and free withdrawals! This link also gives you back 25% of the commission.
GMX.io: Decentralised perpetual futures trading on Arbitrum!
Coinbase: If you need a regulated and safe environment to trade, this is the first exchange for most newcomers!
Crypto.com: Mixed feelings, but they have the BEST looking VISA debit card in existence! Seriously, it is beautiful!
CoinList: Access to early investor and crowdsale of vetted and reserached projects.
Cointracking: Automated or manual tracking of crypto for accounting and taxation reports.
KuCoin: I still use this exchange to take part in the Spotlight and Burning Drop launches.