You know, Doug, I figured someone might trot out the 'sour grapes'
argument.

I just didn't expect it to be you.

Your posting, above, is a marked contrast to the conversations that
we've had over the last several years regarding the direction that
the event has been taking.

Yes, you're a significant stake-holder; and I'm disappointed that
you're not acting in that role. I've only been involved as a volunteer
and supporter for 20 years. I haven't had every role in the event,
but I've done everything from answering phones in the office to
cleaning out a balky toilet, so I have some idea.

I don't know why you'd put words in my mouth--- I'm probably not
the largest financial contributor, never said I was. But it's
significant (at least to me). I *WAS* the driving persona behind
formalizing the Friends of the Festival which, here and now, provides
the lion's share of the budget.

When you say it's about 'recognition,' though, you're talking
through your hat. There's a lot more recognition at SMF if you
as either volunteer or donor are must 'seen and not heard.' Indeed,
I've been told that in so many words by a SMF organizer in the
last 30 days. Indeed, I'm quite aware of my risk of becoming
'persona non grata' in some of the MSM halls of power as a result
of my outspokenness.

But I can remain silent no longer.

And I have made every attempt---- EVERY attempt, to resolve these
issues 'in the family.' I've been rebuffed. More than one of us
has been rebuffed.

Ron, you make a very good point:

"[Festivals] are created to perpetuate and share the music that is
offered."

In making it, you put your finger on the core problem: The overall
sea music program at Mystic Seaport Museum is broken, it and
the Sea Music Festival as a reflection of that program have
deviated significantly from that mission.

A decade ago, the museum had on its staff four scholar/artists
as full-time chanty staff. It didn't happen over-night. It was built
on the shoulders of others, like Bob Walser and Sturat
Frank. Furthermore, there were others 'in waiting' to fill that
role when and if the others moved on. Their role was educational---
they researched and presented the music as witness to the lives our
seafaring ancestors lived and the struggles they faced. The Festival
was an outgrowth of that: it was part of the educatonal 'mission.'
The chantey staff where the 'curators' of these cultural artifacts.

What is the situation today? Of the four, three are gone or
at best are filling in a day, perhaps less, per week. In that
role, they're 'background music.' There is much less education
about the role the music played and how it bespeaks of the culture.
Those 'in waiting' were not moved to step into those roles---
they've moved on to other museums or jobs where they're happier
and treated better. A couple even within the Seaport.

Oh, they all say nice things in public about 'other opportunities' so
as not to burn bridges. But the reality is, the role of musical
artist/scholar at MSM gradually become untenable.

The museum's view of the Festival has gone (with some other
events) from part of the educational mission to one which is
judged by the administration according to its ability to bring
in revenue. Right in there with 'Lobsterfest.'

Now I hear some standing up and saying 'well what about this
year's line-up, with the fisher-poets and all?' To which I
respond that it's as much about what you don't see as what
you see. What you don't see contains a whole lot of unrealized
potential. Early in this process you could see it--- for
example in the booking of some rather odd choices of 'headliners.'
More recently, the organizers got to be a bit better at disguising
the priority-shift, but by the time that was done, there wasn't
much money and energy left to lend substance and growth.

What has happened to the 'curatorial' side of sea music at Mystic
is analagous to the Seaport allowing the C.W. Morgan to sink at
her wharf.

What has happened to the Festival isn't quite as bad--- more
like port-painting the ship and hanging the effigy of a pirate
in the rigging in order to make the kids say 'Mommy, Daddy,
lets go in there.'

If that happened, I believe someone who'd put a great deal into
Morgan's restoration and maintenance could probably get away with
raising hell--- publicly if it came to it--- without someone
coming along and accusing him of ulterior motives or starting
some side-debate about the proper role of donors.