AIBU to not let DD drop out of music tour because her violin has to go under the coach?

[ToInfiniteaAndBeyond]

DD is due to go on her school’s week-long music tour to Italy in two weeks’ time. This is a trip that takes place every two years - the school orchestras and chamber choir spend a week travelling around, sightseeing in the day and doing concerts in the evenings.

This year they’re going to Tuscany - about 50 girls and 8 teachers will be travelling 24 hours by coach to get there. Obviously, the coach will be pretty packed, so the girls have been told that any instruments bigger than a flute/clarinet will have to go in the luggage store under the coach. DD is a violinist so her violin falls into this category.

However, there are a few violinists at the school who have extremely valuable violins (probably worth £10,000+). These girls are all musical prodigies from extremely musical families.

They seem to have quietly been given an exemption from this rule and will be allowed to have their violins next to them on the coach (I imagine their parents wouldn’t allow them to go on the trip in any other circumstances).

DD’s violin is pretty much worthless in monetary terms, but it is of huge sentimental value to her. It belonged to her beloved grandmother, who recently died. It’s German-made from the 1850s and rather beautiful, but it’s not from a famous violin maker and only the body is original. When her grandmother gave it to her a few years ago - having not played for 20 years after developing arthritis in her hands - we found it was in very poor condition. We paid to have it restored so that DD could play it, but everything apart from the body had to be replaced.

DD feels that the sentimental value of her violin is equal to the monetary value of the other girls’ violins, and means she should also be allowed to have it with her on the coach. I’m sympathetic to this, and have asked the school, but have been told that there just isn’t room on the coach for anyone else to have their instrument with them.

DD is now saying she’d rather not go on the trip at all, as she’s so worried that harm will befall her violin. While I understand her concern, she hadn’t mentioned this once before she found out about the other girls’ being given an exemption. It only seems to have become an issue for her when she found out that it didn’t apply to absolutely everyone. She seems very offended by the suggestion that these girls’ violins are more important than hers, when they’re all ‘equally irreplaceable.’ I think she also has a bit of an inferiority complex with the super-musical girls - she’s a great violinist, and works very hard, but she doesn’t have their level of effortless talent and definitely won’t be making music her career.

I really don’t want her to drop out at this stage - we’ve already paid for the trip, and I think she’ll end up really regretting it if she misses it. Swanning around Tuscany for a week and performing music with her friends sounds utterly wonderful. Additionally, I asked the music teachers and not a single instrument has been lost or damaged in all the years they’ve been running this trip - so DD is almost certainly worrying about nothing.

She’s not a defiant child, and if I tell her she’s getting on that coach, she will. Am I being unfair to insist she goes?

The difficulty is that no matter who does what there is always a risk that a violin will be damaged, whether it is in under the coach or cradled on your daughters knee or strapped in next to her. If it is that valuable or that important it shouldn't be going on the trip.

God, the pandering to children on Mumsnet. My child would be told in no uncertain terms that they’d be going on the trip and to stop banging on about the violin. Can you honestly not see why the school would be nervous at such costly instruments being put under the coach?
Yes, yours has sentimental value. But that isn’t the school’s problem in the same way.
And not one instrument has been damaged in all of these musical trips over the years? Get on with it child!

She has already asked. They said no.

You sound nice

This is quite simply discrimination on the part of the school. The richer/elite students are being given privileges. I would be very proud if my child was vocal about that and willing to stand by their convictions in such a way. However, it wouldn’t be fair at all if she actually missed the tour. The only reasonable solution here is that the school is told that they are discriminating against less fortunate students and they correct their stance to be fair and equal, in one way or another. Either all violins with their respective owners, or all in the luggage hold. The message they are sending here is not just about the value of the instruments, but also the value of the children themselves. It’s almost Dickensian. I wonder if Ofsted would be interested in such clear encouraging of disparity by the school? What next? Are they going to make students who get free school dinners wait until all the paying students have been served first?
For what it’s worth op - my humble advice here is that you step up and champion your daughter’s astute perception of this situation and properly challenge the school on this. You have a huge opportunity here to use this situation as a significant development curve. If she sees you now standing up for her and for discrimination in general, you will be giving her the confidence to go forward and not be trampled underfoot in other circumstances. I hope that a daughter centric solution can be found and she gets to enjoy her trip.

She sounds fine. And she’s right.

At 15 I had a friend with a cello worth £25k. She’s now a professional. (With a much more expensive interment!!) she has to book a seat on a plane for her cello when she travels. It costs her an arm and a leg.

I’d like to know whether the expensive cellos have a chance to sit on the bus. Why is a 10k violin more important than a 10k cello? They are digging themselves all sorts of holes if they start saying instruments can only come on the bus if they’re “worth” something,

Can you go back to the school and really stress the sentimental value, and that’s she’s really anxious about it? It seems unfair that she can’t just put it on her knee, as then she’s taking the hit for it being there iyswim and it isn’t taking up space.

I’ve just dropped my DD (16) off for a similar music tour (although it’s shorter and to Belgium) and she’s allowed her cello on its own seat on the coach!

Edit - just to add that my DD’s school is a comp so it’s not only private schools that do this!

Further edit - but if the school still refuse I’d make her go anyway as I’m sure it’ll be an amazing experience.

Ask the school music department if they have a spare violin. Exceptions for some
violins and not all are tough, blanket rules would have been easier to deal
with. I’d for sure want my daughter to go ahead on the trip.

It will be covered by the included insurance. Another vote for a rental.

She may see this issue as a hill she is willing to die on and I for one support her.

the school is unreasonable to say that some can have their violins with them and others can’t. In doing so they are acknowledging that the violins in the hold are at risk but it doesn’t matter because they are not worth as much. She is right to make a stand

But I'm not sure we know the students with more expensive violins are necessarily from "richer" families. Different families prioritise things differently and could apportion a greater relative amount of their wealth towards their dc's musical development - aka financial sacrifice. Perhaps those children miss out on family holidays in lieu of investment in their music. The richest kid on that bus might have the least expensive violin; its too simplistic to equate the value of a child's violin with the wealth of the family - especially where real talent is involved which may skew how deeply the parents are prepared to invest in the child's musical future. Also, violins can be rented; it doesn't mean the parents coughed up cash for the total cost without even feeling it in their bank account.

I think discrimination is a word we bandy about with ease because, yes, in egregious, inappropriate and targeted cases it is something that needs addressing. But to me this has been more akin to selecting members of a choir: surely we don't have to abandon the concept of best singers as a selection criteria? Here it is "most costly violins." I do see where you are coming from, because in the case of people it isn't fair to make "monetary value" a selection criteria. But I'm not sure that logic applies in the case of inanimate objects/assets. I am also not sure the "elite" players are being given priority (though there is a basis for defending that in terms of the performances on arrival). We don't know that all the very best violins belong to all the best players in mathematically ranked order.

I do agree that it seems incompetent of the school not to have sorted out some mode of transport for these instruments that didn't involve splitting the instruments into different treatments, but I also think we have to avoid making things into more of a "discriminatory issue" than they really are, for fear we actually come to devalue the term and concept of discrimination itself.

For s number of reasons, I think I'd fight my daughters corner on this; either violins are allowed up front or they aren't.

On the rental point- yes agreed it’s not quite the same as playing your own but a school orchestra tour is not a recital for the menhuin school! If she has it for a week before and does a bit of practice chances are she’ll get to grips with it. Lots of musicians I know have second instruments for outdoor concerts/ tours/ when their main instrument is being repaired.

Rather this than go head to head with the school, damage the other violin or not go.

Get her an alternate one well before the trip so she has time to practice.

If she isn't a superstar the degredation in playing ability will not be that bad.

Plus it will be useful for the future if she has an alternate instrument for when similar situations occur.

If she really is that attached to the violin she has it should really be kept at home and not hauled around from place to place.

@PerditionCatchMySoul almost all cellos require a plane seat. My son’s friends with their half size cellos have to buy a seat on the plane. Even student cellos require plane tickets! And just cello cases are crazy expensive anyway- so much more than violin cases.

A different perspective. It could be the expensive violins are loaned to the children or their families. As a ‘music mom’ I don’t know anyone with 10K+ violins who own their instrument. Most are on loan and they often come with strict insurance conditions which would mean that if you said to my son that his violin would have to go in the hold he may not be able to travel with the orchestra. And the major orchestras he plays with all have a way of transporting their instruments that meet those insurance requirements (usually a separate vehicle since they are transporting other big instruments like the harp etc). And when he travels with us his violin goes as cabin baggage.

I totally agree about the insurance and the rental/loan comments for very expensive instruments.

How would it be reasonable if you had insurance requirements around your child's instrument and the school said "well unfortunately we cant accommodate that, as there is one student who has a low-value violin but has deemed it to be of inordinate sentimental value, so that trumps the market value of the one your child has on loan."

The truth is they should have arranged transport that allowed the same treatment for all, but since they haven't I don't think the "favoritism" is wholly unjustified on the basis they have outlined.