Competition

I was reading on a certain website where people share their thoughts about music education and there was a big thread on competition. I started to type but before I knew it it had gotten away from me and become something more than a comment in a conversation. So I’m posting it here.

Competition: whats the point?

Competition isn't part of my musical experience really so these are observations from outside. I'm also just writing it out as a think it so maybe I'm super wrong!

Why bother making music a competition at all? Whats the point of creating aesthetic hierarchies of achievement? 

The meaning of musical performance isn't getting a plaque that says "good job" or even "outstanding work" but in the exchange and connection between audiences and performers and the musical experiences they make together. 

I'm not a wind band person but I am a person who has played music all their life, and will continue to do so. I'm also a person who finds competition demoralizing- not because I'm a loser- but because the intention behind competition and its reward structures disincentivize a lot of folks. 

Music is important to me as a lens for experience and an inter and intra cultural dialogue as well as inter and intra-personal exploration/growth and expression and turning that into an experience where you can win/lose at expressing yourself seems... not great?

I'm not sure what the value of the musical exchange/conversation is when the point isn't the aesthetic experience or the sharing of meaning but judgement against some very subjective IDEAL PERFORMANCE. ( this isn't to say that there aren't differences in execution or technique between ensembles or that those differences aren't important or that skill is unimportant)

Intent Matters

 The pursuit of excellence is great but if its that drive for excellence is driven by the desire for the best possible adjudication then you've effectively robbed the music of its meaning by devaluing it. its no longer about creating music for communication or expression of authentic human emotion but learning the dots right as a means to get a good rating.  

It's judging the poetry competition on the handwriting. ( not to say that legibility and technique don't matter, if you can't write so people can read they can't take in your message- Technique is important....in service of the message you're sending)

I'd be more interested in whether or not a performance moved an audience, made a statement, created joy, entertained people, or achieved personal goals of growth for the musicians than any other kind of adjudication.

 Did we enjoy it? Did we grow? 

Like, if there is a student who is a Killin' oboe player and they want to get better at the Oboe because they love its sound and its history, they want the feedback they want the challenge- then Solo festivals are where its at, not because they get the rating but because they get the experience and an opportunity to perform in front of people who can help them to grow as players. The plaque or rating  should be beside the point, or not present at all.  The role of adjudication should be coaching not evaluation as end point. 

If a band plays a really amazing concert but no one scores it, did it ever really matter? 

Be a Baller

I suppose there is an analogy here between professional and pickup basketball- one might be more fun to watch but you're probably never going to get onto the court and play. The other you're going to have a great time but folks aren't going to mistake you for Lebron. 

although it occurs to me that when the lakers play its for fans, as entertainment and there isn't someone sitting in the middle of an empty stadium saying " you did a good basketball, but not outstanding basketball you get a II" even professional basketball is about connection and entertainment...

I, personally, come down more on the side of creating systems for achievement in music that line up more with empowering everyone to start a pickup game after work.  The reward is in the personal expression, audience connection, the experiential side of music making. 

Music making is not necessarily about the drive for the perfection that the vast majority of players will not achieve. Most folks aren't going to become virtuosos, or play in super banging bands,  that doesn't mean their music is lesser in meaning or experience to them or to their audiences. 

Who is if for?

Competition is about trying to reach that pinnacle of performance I suppose, but it feels like ignoring the journey up the mountain just to get to the top. The destination isn't the feeling, it's the marking. 

 It’s the feeling of validation that comes not from aesthetic and emotional connection but from subjective acknowledgement by a peer. 

Motivation and intention set the stage for the meaning you’re making.  If that stage is set with the intention of making a good grade, then your actions aren't about expression they are about transaction. 

If what you want is validation of a peer on your technique, thats a great way to go about it. I don't know if I am trying to play to my peers, usually I am trying to reach an audience that isn't musicians or specialists. I'm trying to entertain people. 

That isn't to say that growth and emotional connection or aesthetic experiences don't happen because you decided your gonna go get adjudicated just that the intention shifts a little, and that shift in intention toward getting the grade, for me, undercuts the foundations of why I and most of my friends make music. 

Music is about people creating meaning, that while impermanent and often imperfect can reach others and change their minds and moods. 

What does a plaque do but hang on your wall?

Continuing Questions

Does competition belong in music?
Do you agree that the intent of performance matters?
Does competition change the intent of the performance?
How does competition benefit student growth?
How does competition fit into the larger cultural narratives in america?
What does Aesthetic competition mean to you?