The Tonic of Decorum

In June and July of 1998 there was spirited and extended discussion on Sweet Music Digest on the topic of music theory related to modes and their use with the mountain dulcimer. People spoke their mind, expressed differing opinions, and generally wrestled with this topic. But it sometimes seemed that list-members were wrestling with each other. This happens from time to time on the Digest and in other list-serve communities.

As the man said on the mountain, "Blessed are the peacemakers...." With this in mind the Index would like to suggest that participants try to thicken their skin a bit when the discussion becomes opinionated. This would make for fewer offenses and misunderstandings. And remember, the internet is a public place and Sweet Music Digest is a public forum.

Dwain Wilder, a luthier in Rochester, New York, wrote the following message to the list as the modal theory controversy was kicking up digital dust. It is honest and insightful and if taken to heart could uplift the discussions on Sweet Music Digest. Read on:

Dear List-members,
Recently KLM wrote, "The Sweet Music list has been peculiarly vitriolic (about theory types of stuff)."

Ye gads! If the recent music theory threads haven't been gentlemanly and gentlewomanly, what do these terms mean?

The way people on this list casually accuse one another of vitriol, mayhem, sedition, ad nauseum has already driven away some fine thinkers and players in the culture. RLS won't be returning "because of the press of other business." LHB looked in and ducked right back out again. We have recently seen the most cooly posted yet snide jabs at KN and RB. And someone baldly stated he saw no point in builders talking speculatively to one another about instruments they haven't built yet...

My word! It seems futile to say anything more than the mountains that have already been said about the matter of civility, for fear it will be treated as just one more spear tossed into the pile. But, as Rodney King said while watching Los Angeles being consumed in rioting over his being beaten half to death by the LA police, "Can't we all just get along?"

I don't know why KLM thinks the postings about theory have been vitriolic. I have found them invaluable in my building, and many others have posted appreciative comments. Perhaps she was being droll.

Or perhaps we are seeing one of the liabilities of this medium of communication where the most casual utterance can have unintended effects. For example, I recently sent e-mail at my office that seemed to me to be innocuous. Later find to my horror that someone else thought that I had delivered a really horrid screed to my client's service providers. So I know from my own embarrassment how easily this can happen.

We should all be aware that this is a medium of writing where expression is effortless and quickly sent irretrievably into the internet. So we need to air out our prose a great deal before hitting the "send" button. And be aware that a harmless bit of smart-alec prose can look quite dyspeptic on someone else's computer screen.

Here's what may be happening: Has it ever occurred to you to consider how private your computer screen really is? When something appears on my screen, it can really have a great deal of impact on me . This impact reminds me of the shocked and sour looks I have recieved from people by staring at them as they sit in their cars. Try it sometime -- just look observantly and alertly at someone in the car next to you while at a red light. This can almost start a fist-fight because to you they are in public, but to them they are in private.

People think they are in private space inside their cars. But they can be seen by others as if they were in public. Being cooly observed is felt as a real affront. Maybe we are making a similar mistake in feeling that our computer screens are our private territory and so are not quite prepared for the consequences of public sentiment appearing right there on our very own turf! So someone who makes a provocative comment, perhaps really quite slight, has a significant impact on all the list-members.

I am 6'-2" / 220 pounds, and although I don't think of myself as an imposing sort of guy, I've had to learn to speak as mildly as possible, because my physical size looms so large when I'm around other people (I still haven't thoroughly learned that lesson!). Perhaps we all need to learn a similar lesson -- we make a huge impact on other people as they sit before their computers, seeing what we have splashed across their screens. In this situation, a little old-fashioned decorum is quite tonic.

Best regards,
Dwain