Re: [Harp-L] Discussing SPAH

[Winslow Yerxa <winslowyerxa@xxxxxxxxx>]

Warren -Â

I'm sorry if you took offense at my response. But I felt it was my responsibility to correct what appeared to me to be errors in factual statements and yes, I did see those errors as being unfair to SPAH and its board and staff.

And by the way, this is a public discussion, not a private one. Warren and I are both running for office, and we are both making campaign statements, so my feeling is that this is something to be done in public. Harp-l is the best public forum for harmonica matters, and SPAH matters a great deal to all harmonica players, even if you're not a member and have never attended a convention. SPAH is a crossroads where many advances in harmonica playing have occurred or have been generated, and it has been Âlife changing experience for many prominent players who have in turn been deeply influential to everyone in the harmonica community.Â

And this is an open discussion. I invite the ideas and observations of all harmonica players. SPAH, like harp-l, is for you, and your participation will make it better.

Let me take up Warren's use of words likeÂ"inclusive" and "exclusive." ÂThese words carry the implication that someone is deliberately excluding someone else. When I first attended a SPAH convention in 1992, the older chromatic and harmonica band players (including much of the leadership) had a decidedly hostile attitude to diatonic players and the blues, and it was undisguised. But that was 1992. That has changed radically over time, and in 2011, inclusiveness is everywhere I look when I go to SPAH now, and is part of the attitude of SPAH board members and staff. Still,Âsmall pockets of intolerance remain among attendees, as Warren reports. That's unfortunate, but it is not the prevailing attitude at SPAH and hasn't been for a long time. But what are we gonna do, drum out the folks who have viewpoints we don't like? Problems like this just come with the territory.

A more serious problem is the de-facto exclusion that comes with the relatively high cost of attending SPAH, which Warren has now clarifiedÂis part of whatÂheÂmeant when he used words like "inclusive" and "exclusive."Â

So let's look at the costs, an the implications of those costs.

Advance registration for the SPAH convention costs $170, with reduced rates for spouses and under-18 family members. If you're not already a member, the $45 membership fee is added. The Saturday Banquet is included, along with all SPAH activities, except for some separate, privately run activities such as the Simpson-Smith seminars and the offsite Blues Blowoff founded by Jason Ricci.

But the big costs are in travel and accommodation. Staying at the SPAH hotel will run about $500, even at the lowered rates that we bargain for in the large hotels that have the facilities we require. You can often find other lower-cost hotels nearby that will save you money but reduce your convenience.

Air travel within the US will cost another $200 to $500.

Meals and incidentals will cost perhaps another $200-$500 (depends on your consumption levels).

So if you're a SPAH member who lives within easy driving distance and goes home every night, you could be only $175 out of pocket. But this is an international event and most of us travel to SPAH, soÂa total cost of $1,000+ is quite realistic.Â

As a large proportion of SPAH attendees are older folks, camping out or otherwise roughing it to reduce accommodation costs is not an option.

Cheaper hotels are not easy to find because they are either too far out of the way to be easily accessible by air, or because they lack the facilities we need to stage our activities.

On the other end of the spectrum, I've had folks suggest that we have the convention in New York City. High on prestige and visibility, but it would triple our hotel costs!

The net effect is that SPAH attendees tend to be either young enough to have attendance funded by parents, or old enough to have put the kids through college and paid off the house. There's a big gap in the middle that I'd love to fill. I don't see how we can do that by lowering the cost of attending SPAH. But there may be ways to offer value to members in other ways that are achievable with SPAH's resources and affordable by members.

Multiple smaller, local events are an interesting idea. But that immediately raises the questions of how to fund it, and who is going to do the huge amount of work required to pull off even a small event?

Non-travel value is a big area of possibilities . . . .

Let me change course, though and ask why is SPAH the way it is?

I think that SPAH has been shaped by the realities that have right-sized the event within what is actually possible.


Take membership, for instance. Let me relate some interesting facts. Back in the 1990s I was publishing HIP-the Harmonica Information Publication and Al Eichler was publishing American Harmonica Newsletter. This was before harp-l and the internet in general had opened up communication potential for small groups of far-flung folks interested in obscure topics. AHNÂcould never break the 1,000 mark in circulation despite being very inexpensive. HIP for its part was being advertised in major blues magazines and was in Tower Records internationally and still barely broke 2,000 in circulation.ÂCould it be that the world of harmonica enthusiasts willing to pay money to join an organization or buy a magazine is simply smaller than we wish it to be?

Don't get me wrong. I'm eager to expand SPAH membership. And it may well be possible that a new approach, and new value adds for members could help that happen.

I could go on, but this is already getting long.

So let me close by exhorting all who read this to get more deeply involved in the life of the harmonica by actively participating in SPAH.

Your ideas and dialogue are welcome, and can make a difference.

Thanks.

WinslowÂ
Â
Winslow Yerxa
Author, Harmonica For Dummies ISBN 978-0-470-33729-5
Harmonica instructor, The Jazzschool for Music Study and Performance
Resident expert, bluesharmonica.com
Columnist, harmonicasessions.com


________________________________
 From: W B <wbharptime2@xxxxxxxxx>
To: harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx 
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 11:00 AM
Subject: [Harp-L] Response to Winslow
 
Winslow, I really just wanted to share some of my thoughts early in
this election process. I did not expect the manner in which you
responded. I found it very confrontational. I will NOT play that
game. I would rather lose than play those games. With that said you
have left me no other choice than to respond to your âspinâ on my
original post. I will take this one piece at a time for starting with
comment #1
---------
===WARREN says: My goals are very simple when it comes to SPAH. I
would like to see the organization become more INCLUSIVE and less
EXCLUSIVE.

===WINSLOW says: SPAH includes anyone who wants to join. To my
knowledge, SPAH does not exclude anyone. SPAH members self-select and
all are made to feel welcome. To imply otherwise is simply untrue, and
is unfair to the hardworking and welcoming staff and board members who
organize SPAH.

We have people joining SPAH and attending the convention from Korea,
India, China, Japan, Brazil, Russia, Sweden, Germany, France, and the
UK and, Iâm sure, from elsewhere. They even let in Canadians like me.

Among our stateside members and attendees, SPAH includes folks of all
ages and ethnic backgrounds.

***WARRENS REPLY:Â the fact that I would like to see SPAH more
inclusive is based on my own SPAH membership experience over the last
9 years and my personal opinion. To dispute my accuracy on these
feelings is silly. To accuse me of being unfair to the staff with my
opinion is offensive. I served on the board for 3 years. I know all
about the hard work. Here are some facts that lead me to my feelings
on this issue:
1)ÂÂÂ Currently the âprice of entryâ to come to our only event (the 4
full day convention) is not small change. After travel, hotel, food &
beverage and convention fee my guess is that the average attendee
spends well over $1000.00 to participate. What else do we offer folks
that cannot afford the time or expense to come to our convention? My
desire is for SPAH to broaden its scope of offerings that will be more
inclusive to those with smaller budgets and limited ability to travel.
2)ÂÂÂ The fact that membership numbers after 48 years remain well below
1000 tells me we need to broaden our scope and offerings. I believe
that with a more inclusive philosophy and agenda we can find thousands
from around the world that would like to be involved with being a part
of preserving and advancing the harmonica.
3)ÂÂÂ At the conventions themselves I have witnessed situations that
could be perceived as ânot very inclusiveâ. I believe that SPAH must
set the proper âtoneâ at its gatherings. NO ONE that makes the trip
and spends their hard earned money should feel excluded in any way.
On numerous occasions I have been pulled aside at the convention and
gotten an âear fullâ from folks that just âdonât get itâ when they are
made to feel âless than othersâ.