Competition and the Arts: A War of Opposing Ideas or an Essential Relationship?

An oft cited view on competition in the arts...

An alternative view...

Lastly, the populace view...

Competition and the Arts

Throughout my career, I have been faced with the decision on how to balance competition and my daily activities as a musician and an educator. When I was young, I was often told the following phrase, "Right now, someone is working harder than you and when you meet them in competition, they will be better than you." Another, popular motivational phrase, "Hard work beats talent when talent does not work hard."  Eugene Corporon always said to us, "Every day is audition day." 

I firmly believe there may not be a more competitive industry than the music industry. Tens of thousands of individuals will compete for a place on popular shows, such as, American Idol. An equally high number of people will study and earn advanced degrees to be one of 400+ people auditioning for a single place in a professional orchestra, which may only have an opening for that instrument every 25+ years. All of this competition also leads to a perilous existence where your future is dependent upon maintaining near perfection with your performance level. One blow to your mouth or hands and it can all be over in an instant. Moreover, composers compete to have their music performed or published. Publishers compete to maintain the viability of their companies. Students compete to enter universities or earn a scholarship. In addition, it is quite common for there to be 100+ people apply for a single secondary school band job. Jobs at the collegiate level are often even more competitive. 

As in all disciplines, the need to progress as a musician to a level of mastery is a never-ending journey. There is always someone who can play faster, higher, louder, more musically or with a bigger sound. The cycle of competition is always spinning and can be a powerful tool for progress, both personally and collectively. 

Bartok is correct, for great music to happen, we must work together and we cannot be in competition at the moment. The beauty of music is the sense of community we all experience from being immersed in the art, both in creating and listening to music. Music has always had the power to unify communities, nations and all of mankind. The essential nature of competition makes this collaborative relationship tenuous, if not impossible. I believe this is the basic premise of this quote attributed to Bartok.

“People who make music together cannot be enemies. At least while the music lasts.” –Paul Hindemith

Competitions and School Music Ensembles

This is a divisive topic in music education. Much like politics, opinions on this topic are strong and usually unwavering. As a music teacher, competition can be presented to our students and our ensembles in many forms. The balance of these approaches can be healthy or lethal; the responsibility for this choice falls in the hands of the teacher. There are staunch critics of the prototypical music competitions, where multiple groups perform and then are ranked from first to worst. These types of competitions, the critics cite, are destructive and derail us from our true mission of developing young musicians into artists. Ironically, some of the most vocal opponents to music competitions teach at some of the most prestigious schools of music in the country, where someone must compete at the highest level simply to enter the school, much less earn a degree. I firmly agree, when winning trophies supersedes progress and the growth of your students, and you begin to adopt the Machiavellian creed of, "The end justifies the means." you have developed a destructive approach to music and education. However, the problem, in my opinion, is not competition as a concept, the problem is the person leading the group. 

When I lived in Florida, I used to teach in the same district as one of these anti-competition critics, who was quick to discuss the destructive nature of competition in school music, while proudly displaying his Midwest Clinic plaques (as he should) from their performance at the prestigious event and the numerous state awards for musical excellence. Clearly, he was an outstanding musician and educator. When I tried to point out the hypocritical nature of these two issues, he was quick to refute me that those awards did not represent competition in music. As I said, often unwavering. I have attended the Midwest Clinic many times, and the quality of those performances is a direct result of the high level of competition required to be selected for that honor. When groups are compared, no matter what form, there is competition. 

Critics and Music Competitions 

"...a frightful period indeed, which puts the muscles and lungs of the band, and the patience of the audience to a severe trial..." --The Harmonicon on Beethoven's 9th Symphony

Music history is filled with critics who got it wrong. A critic is simply a person who is asked to share an opinion. Sometimes the critic is an enlightened and helpful voice for the reader. The critic can be equally cruel and destructive. Personally, as a musician, educator and as a composer, there have been many critics who were encouraging and supportive, and an equal number who were cruel and demeaning. The tense relationship between critic, composer and musicians has always existed. Does this dissenting or supporting voice need to be silenced because the relationship can sometimes be destructive or incorrect? In my opinion, competitions for school music groups are planned opportunities to expose our students to critics. Your own artistic vision and self-confidence will determine what you do with this information. If Beethoven had let the critics drive his work, I am sure many of his masterworks would have never seen the lights of a stage. His creative genius and vision was far ahead of anyone around him, and no wonder the critics were caught unaware. Possibly, this too could be the genesis for Bartok's quote. Personally, I have never let a critic--or a competitive result for that matter--define me. I have, however, used that information as motivation to help me improve and to push myself to new levels of success. 

Rank and Rate?

It begs the question, if all we want is feedback, why then do we feel the need to rank and rate our students and our ensembles? Well, in my opinion, our pursuit of musical excellence comes in many forms:

• prestigious performance opportunities, i.e., Midwest Clinic,
• evaluation festivals,
• chair placements for differentiated instruction,
• ability-grouped ensemble placements,
• scholarship auditions,
• composition contests,
• music competitions sponsored by music associations, i.e., MTNA  and ITG, 
• All-State, Region and District ensembles,
• grades on juries,
• acceptance to a university school of music,
• winning any job in the music business,
• select summer camps, such as Tanglewood, 
• select premier honor ensembles, i.e., Regional Youth Symphony Orchestra, and
• the list goes on and on...

What do all of these musical situations/opportunities have in common? There is a process of rating and ranking of musicians or the musical product. If you are going to prepare your students for a life in music, you need to teach them how to effectively compete, how to compete with themselves and how to use the lessons of success and failure as motivation for personal growth. Even if they do not continue with a life of music-making, these lessons will serve them well throughout their life in their chosen field of endeavor. 

Closing 

Well, to answer my own question, I believe the answer is, "YES!" Music and competition can be at war and at the same time exist in an essential relationship. The responsibility lies within the musician as to how you handle the competition process and results. Educators carry an even greater burden of responsibility to help our students effectively develop this essential skill and understand this dichotomous relationship.