GVO, like many such ensembles, is having a difficult time meeting its financial obligations. Although their concerts are well-attended, the income from concert ticket sales alone is not enough to pay the salaries of the orchestra members. Without significant donations from outside foundations and wealthy patrons, the orchestra simply could not continue to perform.

Struan is faced with a dilemma. His three largest donors all lost large sums of money in the collapse of the real estate market, and have informed him that they are no longer able to donate to the orchestra. Struan must raise $6 million, or the orchestra will have to cancel their season and declare bankruptcy. Two potential donors have indicated that they might be willing to step in and give the needed money, but both come with strings attached.

The first potential donor is a company named Altria. Altria has long been known in the arts community for their philanthropic activity; they support many regional performing ensembles, and seem especially interested in supporting innovative groups, like GVO, who perform new works. Altria is also the parent company of Phillip-Morris, a cigarette manufacturer that aggressively markets its Marlboro brand to children in 3rd-world countries. Altria’s support of the arts seems like a carefully calculated PR strategy to improve the public image of their company.

The second potential donor is Victoria Wagner, a well-known and very wealthy member of the local community. Wagner has never shown an interest in supporting the arts before, so Struan is understandably curious when she contacts him with the offer. In the ensuing conversations, however, if becomes clear why Ms. Wagner has had a sudden change of heart. It turns out that her beloved nephew is a struggling composer, and has had difficulty getting his works performed by professional ensembles. Ms. Wagner makes it quite clear to Mr. Struan that if she writes a $6 million check, she expects the Green Valley Orchestra to debut his latest composition.

So, Struan is left with three options. He can accept the money from a tobacco company hoping to buy some public good-will, he can accept the money from the doting rich aunt looking to launch her nephew’s career, or he can refuse both and close the doors of the Green Valley Orchestra.

Take a few minutes to think about the moral values that are in conflict in this dilemma. We will answer the following questions in class:

1. If GVO takes the money from Altria, is it an implied statement of support for the company’s business practices?
2. If a utilitarian were to evaluate the Altria donation, what consequences would they have to consider?
3. Struan is having a hard time evaluating the Wagner donation. He has a sense that some moral principle is being violated by her request, but he isn’t sure exactly what it is. What do you think is wrong with her request? What kind of moral principle does it violate?
4. Does it matter if the composition by Victoria Wagner’s nephew is well-written or not? Would it matter if he were already a well-established composer?
5. Struan is a devout Lutheran, and believes that God’s commands are the final source of moral authority. Is there a biblical command that could help Struan navigate either decision?
6. What should Struan do?

Group 1: Kenneth Lay, CEO of Enron

1. What was Enron’s core business?
2. What caused the collapse of Enron?
3. What was Lay’s total compensation in the year before the collapse?
4. What was his reputation within the community prior to the collapse?

Group 2: Richard Jewell

1. What was Jewell’s job at the time of the 1996 Summer Olympics bombing in Atlanta?
2. What was Jewell’s initial response to the bombing?
3. Who initially named Jewell as a suspect?
4. What were the personal and professional consequences of the accusations against Jewell?

• Lynsey and Brian will critique each other’s papers
• Zack will critique Joanna’s paper
• Joanna will critique Danny’s paper
• Danny will critique Zack’s paper

As her professional career advanced, Ayana often sang solo concerts, and used an arrangement of YALKERI MURA MURA as her encore. The melody was haunting and beautiful; people frequently approached her afterward and commented on how deeply moving that particular song had been.

After one concert, Ayana is approached by a young Aboriginal Australian man, who confronts Ayana over her use of the song YALKERI MURA MURA. The young man informs Ayana that the song is a “naming song”, used by an artist when he creates a churinga, a sacred painted stone with deep religious and cultural significance. The soul of the artist is imparted to the painting, and both the churinga and the song are considered sacred. The song is only to be sung while creating the churinga, and afterward only when handling it.

The young man tells Ayana that it would be considered highly offensive and deeply sacrilegious among Aboriginal Australians to hear the song used to entertain listeners in a concert, instead of its intended ceremonial use. He asks Ayana to stop using YALKERI MURA MURA in her concerts.

Questions for discussion:

1. What makes a cultural object (song, story, mask, idol, etc.) sacred?
2. Assume that the young man is a truthful spokesperson for the cultural group from which the song came. Should their sense of sacrilege matter in Ayana’s decision to perform the song?
3. In this case, the offense is hypothetical – the group that would be offended has not heard the song in this context, but they would be offended if they had. Many historical composers, such as J.S. Bach, would be similarly offended if they heard their sacred works being used as background music to violent or sexually explicit films. Should the same standard of hypothetical offense apply to their music as it might to cultural groups?
4. Is this a “property” issue? Does the aboriginal group “own” the song?

Republic, Book II, part 1 Outline

September 30, 2010