At a school where music represents more than a major, and musical performance is a fixture of campus life for many students, Arms' facilities are decidedly poor. The lack of rehearsal and performance space, while critical, constitutes just one of a variety of faults. Significant sound bleed, the absence of an orchestral pit in Buckley and limited scope for exploring different musical genres handicap musicians and instructors alike. It is rather difficult, on the basis of such inadequate support, to imagine how the College can continue to pride itself on its musical traditions.
Institutions of similar means and weaker musical heritage have gradually improved their facilities to match the needs of their communities; it should be time for the College to at least consider an expansion of Arms. Precisely what degree of improvements will suffice ought to become the subject of discussion for all students in the coming weeks, when two juniors expect to release a report comparing Arms to peer institutions' facilities.
We happen to believe, if it's not already blindingly obvious, that a larger building is needed. A refurbishment-a redesign, even-of Arms achieves merely the effect of a gilded box. More space is key. Unless Arms, in some miraculous reincarnation, becomes a high-rise, the College's planned increase in enrollment for upcoming classes will only exacerbate the current squeeze.
When we consider some of the numbers already involved, it baffles the mind how the orchestra, choral and a cappella groups, jazz ensembles and student bands all co-exist in that limited domain. Arms' design, at the time, took into account just the orchestra and choral groups, both of which have increased in scale since. Little thought was given either to the soundproofing needed for amplified instruments (such as those featuring in jazz bands), or to the possibilities of musicals and theater.
Conditions that potentially restrict talent development will equally drive away qualified, well-rounded prospects, much as, say, poor athletic facilities work against the recruitment of scholar-athletes. The analogy becomes particularly legitimate when we consider the extensive degree to which this community participates in music.
We don't wish to discount the efforts that have been made towards the concerns articulated. But these, by and large, have been piecemeal and stop-gap. We appreciate practice rooms in James and Stearns, but where are the dozen more needed in a centralized location? Measures like these that have characterized the administration's attitude towards music thus far cannot be reasonably sustained without compromising cherished traditions.