Since its inception, the opening performance for the APOGEE Inauguration Ceremony (Inaug) has been delivered by the Music Club. However, this year marked a departure from the norm, as Gurukul set the stage for the fest’s commencement. This dispute was brought to light during the APOGEE Review Meet (ARM). The English Press Club sat down with Utkarsh Sharma, the coordinator of the Music Club, to gain insight into the behind-the-scenes negotiations as well as the club’s perspective on the decision.

Utkarsh explained that Inaug has been a joint event between the Music Club, Dance Club, and Mime Club for approximately the last four decades. This year, however, Gurukul also decided to pitch for the event, and after subsequent meetings with the two clubs, CoStAA decided to have Gurukul perform in the event. Utkarsh shared that this decision was unexpected — and caused ‘shock and disbelief’ among the Music Club members — who plan their semester events around the Inaug performance. He added that although the club could not do much to dispute the decision, they pitched for ‘Rock Nite’ as a pre-fest event so they could ‘contribute to the fest in whatever way possible’. 

Talking about the ARM, Utkarsh said that CoStAA cited three reasons for their decision. The first reason was a directive from the 2019 CoStAA — passing the responsibility for subsequent performances to Gurukul. He alleged that CoStAA is basing this on an article from 2019 by the English Press Club without a complete understanding of past events. He explained that the directive was a reactionary measure due to a dispute between the 2019 CoStAA body and Music Club and was not carried through by the 2020 CoStAA. The decision not to proceed with the directive was influenced, in part, by concerns raised by the withdrawal of the Department of Sounds from the fest in protest of this decision. He added that the circumstances surrounding the directive were addressed and resolved during the 2019 APOGEE itself, highlighting that the matter had been effectively resolved before the current decision-making process.

The second reason cited by CoStAA was that ‘Gurukul deserved this opportunity, owing to the positive consensus among the GBM in their favour.’ Utkarsh called this reason completely subjective and highlighted that the music club has also had overwhelmingly positive responses. He opined that this reason did not justify the shifting of responsibilities in such an abrupt manner since everything had been great for the last fifty years. 

The final reason cited by CoStAA was their aim to establish a joint music society —  showcasing an inclusive representation of BITS music culture. While Utkarsh appreciated this initiative, he mentioned that it would have been ‘impossible’ to get a music society ready on such short notice. He commented that although it is ‘not an allegation’, the close friendship between two CoStAAns, including the General Secretary, and PoR holders in Gurukul, might have influenced the CoStAA’s decision. He added that the Music Club perceives this development of making decisions based on personal relationships as concerning for the integrity of future fests.

Outlining their plans for the future, he shared that the club planned to get their responsibility for the APOGEE Inaug performance added to the charter. Detailing their plans for the music society, he stated that discussions are underway, and the clubs initially plan to work together on relatively low-stake events like ‘Psenti Nites’. 

On a concluding note, Utkarsh commented that both clubs are great at what they do, but the Inaug performance is important to the club as they see it as a platform to represent the music culture on campus.