La política como factor de desarrollo e industrialización

persistent feature of Gareth's character. Various facets of Gareth's behaviour - "not knowing what he wants", and infrequent attendance are thus linked together and displayed as indexing an underlying motivational disposition obliquely referred to as "the v/ay he is at the moment". So it is that Gareth is depicted as a particular

motivational type, as someone who is more than likely to be inconsistent and someone who in all honesty one could not consider for any commission. Though Gareth's infrequent attendance is initially linked to his

not "know(ing) what he wants", i.e. to his personal disposition this is not the only formulation available and indeed in her next utterance the H.L.S. causally links the same feature to Gareth's membership of the forces (7275).

The B.M. ("How could, How could yer give me a position when I was

18?" 7273-4) does not challenge the H.L.S. but rather through collocating Gareth's depicted state with that of his own at that qge makes available

a different interpretation. I propose that this interpretation may be explicated as follows (i) Gareth's motivational state .arises out of a stage in maturation

(ii) that this feature places a question

mark over his (and anyone of his age) suitability for office

(iii) that his appointment would entail a '

risk

(iv) that the census board have in the past

chosen to accept this risk and appoint a D.BM. at 18 (i.e. Tony Brewer - the present B.M.)

(v) that this risk should not preclude Gareth from consideration.

The H.L.S. then proceeds to differentiate Gareth's case as being

of a different order, distinguishing it from the precedent that applied in the B.M.'s case and thus requiring separate consideration ("Yes but you wasn't in forces" 7275). Gareth's infrequent attendance is now made available not in terms of some motivational disposition but in relation to Gareth's employment and formulated as something

over which he has no command or possibility of changing in the immediate future. His suitability for office is thus presented as being contingent on the candidates situation in life. In this way the discussion

is guided away from a consideration of Gareth as a motivational type to his situation in life, to his availability for service -

"he might be posted to Cyprus, Germany or anywhere" (7276-7). The Sldr. (7279-89) echoes and elaborates this concern disclosing the fact that Gareth is expected to take a regular commission in November and furthermore suggesting that Gareth's involvement with Jackie will place an added constraint on his availability. I. take the significance of the Sldr's reference to Jackie to lie in an "understanding" that as Jackie is not a member of the Army she is unlikely to welcome or encourage Gareth's additional involvement in the Army. This understanding is contested by the B.M. (7290) who cites an occasion when Gareth took Jackie to band practice as evidence to the contrary.

The B.M. (7293-6), whilst expressing a preference for not allocating commissions according to need, underlines the motivational efficacy of being placed in .a position of responsibility, though in the same breath he denies that Gareth needs motivating (7296). It seems that for the B.M. the raising of the possibility of providing an additional

incentive is an important point in favour of promoting Gareth, but at the same time he is orientated to the possibility that in raising this issue he may occasion doubts in the minds of those present about Gareth's motivational disposition - hence the hedging of his comments with a statement of general preference ("I rather

concerned abo u t chucking positions out er just for the sake

of giving positions"7292-5) and his qualifier ("not that he needs anymore" 7296) which v/ould seem to be aimed at foreclosing this possibility. The BM seeks further information concerning Gareth's

suitability as to whether the other members feel like the H.L.S.

- "What would you feel about Gareth" (7298).

The H.L.S. (7300-5) interprets the B.M.'s remarks as implying that her questioning of Gareth's suitability is motivated by personal considerations and that her misgivings may be seen as indexing an unwillingness to encourage him. She maintains that her misgivings

are not motivated by personal grievance indeed she is "all for encouraging him" in fact "nobody encourages him more than I do" but relates

to a general "worry" concerning the efficacy of appointing members cf the armed forces as local officers. In displaying these aspects the H.L.S. can be regarded as authorising the objective nature of her misgivings.

The author - as - participant interrupts the B.M. (7306) and attempts to establish some parameters for the discussion, distinguishing

between competence as a proper matter for consideration by the census board and availability as a separate issue warranting additional information from Gareth, and also suggesting ways in which the later question might be approached (7307-12). The Lieut, echoes those with a further example (7313).

Before the C.S. can comment (7315) the author-as-particpant interrupts in order to solicit feedback on his proposal.

The C.S. does not direct his comments to this issue but to the motivational state of the candidate,

7315 "Listen

he was offered a ppsition and it meant some work

it wasn't v/hat he wanted so he turned it down, weren't

7320 'appy with it so he turned it down."

is used by the C.S. to characterise Gareth as someone who is work- shy and not prepared to take on a job he does not like, implying that Gareth is motivated more by personal gratification than holy ambition. This characterisation however is not the only available understanding of a refusal for it emerges from the Ca p t .'s account

(7321, 7323-5) that a refusal may be portrayed as a judicious decision reflective of a careful weighing of personal capabilities and limitations in relation to the skills required. Moreover anybody not just one

particular motivational type "can have second thoughts" (7321). The H.L.S. continues with her "worry" about Gareth being in the forces, intimating that membership is a way of life and not like a job (7327). The B.M. attempts to counter this argument with the use of examples from the London Corps where membership of the forces has not disqualified bandsmen from becoming D.BM.'s (7329 - Peter Wise is a renowned euphonium soloist and at that time was Deputy Bandmaster of one of the Army's established bands (7331-2).

The autnor-as-particpant persists with his proposal that Gareth's availability is not a proper matter for discussion since it requires knowledge that i s ‘not to hand, that only Gareth can provide (a proposal which receives some measure of support from the Captain. 7345),

and that the meeting concern itself solely v/ith ascertaining his competence (7333-7344, 7346-7351).

The Lieut. (7352-8) suggests that "we" (the census board) "could decide to see him" and also provides further examples of cases from her home corps and Linden where the fact that members' availability was restricted by the nature of their work did not prevent them from holding senior census board positions ("Tony who is 'on call' occasionally" 7355 "Now our Y.P.S.M. was at 'ome was on 'shift week', once a month he wasn't there, but he was still Y.P.S.M." 7356-7). The C.S. proposes a qualifier to this line of reasoning "that's

all according what you've gotta do in't it?" (7359). The B.M. follows this with the first formulation of what the job of D.BM. involves. No reference is made to 0 & R regarding authority for this formulation, indeed it shows every sign of being developed ad hoc to deal with

the concern about availability. Thus the job is defined more in relation to criteria of irrelevance (i.e. what is not involved) than relevance (i.e. what is). (7361-7366). The crucial defining

factor for the B.M. is that a Deputy is not in charge, the implication being that the requirements for availability are commensurately

lower than those for one who is in charge. This implication is spelt

out with regard to the C.S.'s infrequent attendance on Sunday mornings,

the point being that Ken's ability to fulfil his duties as a senior census local would not seem to have been seriously impaired by his restricted availability. The B.M. makes it clear that he is more concerned with the principle than with criticising the C.S. ("I'm not getting at you Ken, I'm just saying you know you're a Secretary and look at, how many Sunday mornings have you put in?" 7368-70). The C.S. does not seem to regard the two cases as being of the same order, for whilst he regards his own restricted availability as

being of little consequence the use of the qualifier "though" implies that he does not so regard Gareth's restricted availability (7372). The notion that the C.S.'s infrequent attendance is non-consequential is challenged by the author-as-participant v/ho points to the C.S.'s membership of the band as being a line of activity that is affected by his infrequent attendance on Sunday mornings.

Before the C.S. (7374) can elaborate on the nature of a Deputy's responsibility the H.L.S. interrupts referring to the possibility that Gareth could be posted anywhere, citing the example of her

brother-in-law's experience in the Marines as a case in point (7375,7). This possibility is contested by the author-as-participant who maintains that in Gareth's case serving in the forces is a job and not like

being in the Marines. The equivocation is combined with a re-emphasis of the view that availability is a matter to be discussed with Gareth, a matter that will only arise if the census board considers him

competent (7378-81, 7383, 7386-7388, 739407399, 7401-7404). This

is followed by a pause of 4 seconds duration.

The Captain then proposes that the census board considers what the

"job itself" (7405) entails, a formulation which she herself undertakes. Again there us no specific reference to 0 & R. Two qualities are

identified as being important, "a good knowledge of music" (7408,9) and "good spiritual character" (7410). The quality "good spiritual character" is accorded primary significance because of its perceived importance for leadership. Ability to lead men and women and "correct that thing that was a-matter" (7417) is directly linked to the possession of a "good spiritual character". An illustration of the outworking

of this character is provided (7411). A competent leader (i.e. someone of good spiritual character does not enter into a "brawling match in hall" (7416) but conducts criticism in "a brotherly way" (7417) "put(s) an arm round their shoulder and tell(s) him nicely and quietly" (7414-5)).

Whilst there is no detailed description of the kinds of "troubles" a Deputy might have to cope with those that are specified are depicted as pertaining to the individual - "to deal with someone about something or other" (7412 my emphasis). The possibility that members may at

times have a collective grievance is not countenanced - even though Is.'tsr' on in hsn o.ccovin"fc shs nsfons "to ^son^stsns splitting dov/n the middle" (7449-50).

No deference is paid in the Capt.'s account to the fact that the job being considered is of a Deputy whose main task is to "assist the BM particularly with musical affairs" (0 & R my emphasis). The Capt. seems to be invoking the standard of responsibility associated with the senior local officer, the leader of a section, 3.3 applying

to the Deputy. The reason for employing this gambit of compliance (Bittner 1965) may be related to an example which the Capt. furnishes a little

later in the proceedings as a cautionary tale. (7428-37).

The BM (7418) discounts the possibility that Gareth may lose his way, a metaphor which I understand as referring to Gareth's spiritual character. With what seems to be a summary of his position the BM dismisses all knowledge of transactions at previous census meetings maintaining that (a) Gareth is capable (b) the position of D.BM. will provide Gareth with an incentive to "get home" (7426) and (c) "its good for me (i.e. the BM) to have someone to talk to" (7218-26). The Capt. (7428) questions the advisability of giving "jobs to encourage

people". She provides an example from her home corps to illustrate

this "worry". The thrust of her misgivings would seem to lie in the possibility that in appointing a member to encourage him "you

can get yourself in a false commitment" (7428-31). This "false commitment" would seem to relate to an implicit understanding that a Deputy

will normally expect and be expected to succeed the incumbent leader ("before he knev; it the person that he was assisting gave up and

therefore it involved him in a census position" (7434-6) "And therefore he was involved in the end, they had to put 'im on census board"

7439-40)my emphasis.) The "commitment" to deemed to be a "false"

one if the Deputy was selected in relation to the lesser responsibilities of an assistant and not in relation to those of a leader,as would

seem to have been the case in the Captain's example ("it involved him in a census position and he wasn't really equipped for the job workwise or spiritually" 7436-7). Thus the lesson and preference the Captain draws may be represented as follows; candidates for promotion to the status Deputy should be judged in relation to the senior post to avoid the possibility of having to promote someone who is not suitable for leadership.

The possibility that elevation to the status Deputy may or should be viewed as a possible end of the line or that the selection of a BM should be viewed as a discrete decision point and not a matter of entitlement is foreclosed despite the fact that there are notable examples where this has occurred (e.g. David Davis was D.BM. at Linden on more than one occasion without ever succeeding to become B M ) . The Capt.'s formulation also ignores the distinction drawn

in 0 & R across a wide range of commissions between leader and assistant and reflected in different levels of responsibility and criteria

for selection. Neither is there anything on the b$nd or commission that signals the type of commitment that the Capt. speaks of. The Capt.'s formulation shows every sign of being constructed to obviate the "trouble" that occurred in her home corps "songsters

splitting down the middle" and which she presents as having been occasioned by the "false commitment". Note it would be possible to present

a different reading of the "trouble" focusing on the reluctance of particular members of the songster brigade to change their style

of uniform. In this respect it is interesting to note that the Sldr's

instruction regarding the wearing of summer uniform is not deemed in itself to be injudicious,but rather it is the process, the manner in which it was handled that is regarded as being at fault - "because it was approached in the wrong way" (7450-51).

The BM (7454-65) proceeds to qualify his comments concerning the motivational value of holding a commission. He suggests that the

fact holding a commission may act as a spur to members of the

census board to attend ("you go because you think (you) should" 7456/7) on those occasions when they "are not really bothered" which they feel and that "when you get there (i.e. to the meeting) you

know you come out on top" (7457-8). Coming "out on top" here would

seem to refer to a battle over spiritual inertia (elsewhere in testimony the BM has on occasions made reference to a'lack of desire to come

to the meeting but coming all the same and then "gaining the victory" i.e. the victory over the sin of indifference).

Further the BM makes it clear that he is n o t .saying that Gareth

or "anybody" only comes to the meetings because they hold a commission ("to be whatever he might be, or anybody does" .7459). Though he

admits it is possible for that to be said, he insists that they do not ("I mean you could say that about everybody here, we we do it because w e ’ve got one, in fact we d o n ’t, whether yer know w e ’re expected to do, you could say that about everybody" 7459-6 2). The BM. reiterates his point about Gareth’s ability emphasising his superiority regarding musical qualifications, a judgement with which the author-as-participant concurs and interprets as being the concensus view.

The BM. seems to propose that that is the point at issue, a view

not shared by the C.S.,the author-as-participant or the Capt. The

Capt. re-emphasises her view that the suitability of a candidate should be determined in relation to the standard expected of a BM. ("I'm saying y o u ’re judging to take up really a responsibility" 7470/71). this is followed by a pause interrupted by the BM. resting his case "Well I (?) about the subject anywhere as far as say well"

(7476).

Capt. undertakes a further formulation of the parameters for deciding suitability, emphasising the provisional nature of the deliberations and echoing the author-as-participant's policy concerning availability. There is an implication that if something had been said then action would be required. The possibility is also raised that Gareth might not feel able or be willing to accept the commission, "He might say well I don't think I could have it at this time I don't feel

I can cope with it" (7 4 8 3-4 ).

The C.S. seems assured that Gareth will not refuse the commission (7488) this assurance is queried by the author-as-participant (7492). The H.L.S. replies "Well he told me he wanted it when he was at

music camp when he were only 1 8 !" the implication being that this is a position for which Gareth has a strong measure of personal

affection. The discussion of age continues in a somewhat eliptical

manneij reference being made to the son of the C.T. "Our Bill" (7®0 ).

I've chosen not to address this part of the transcript (7497-500). Following this the BM. raises the question of Gareth being considered for another position ("Well what other positions were there" 7501), questioning the manner in which this was conducted (7502-4). Before

the C.S. (7 5C6) can elaborate the author-as-participant interrupts,

displaying a preference for divorcing the past from the present ("Well We11 I mean that that's happened and in, as far

as I'm concerned that's in the past and er I mean I