Personal opinion: Why music competitions should be banned Automatic translate
The idol of the audience, the amazing pianist Vladimir Horowitz said: “I think that competitions are not useful. Everything is built not on the perfection of the game, but on the selection. There are continuous intrigues: it doesn’t matter who plays, it matters who is the judge. In the 90s, there was a Rubinstein competition in Russia. Ferruccio Busoni, one of the greatest musicians of the time, took part in it and received a second prize. The first one was received by a certain Mr. Dubasov. Do you know this one? I do not know either". The only music competition that has the right to exist is getting into the playlist of an ordinary listener, such as, for example, this one: Hitster.fm .
Conducting any competition brings a lot of problems
Not so long ago, a ballet competition ended in Moscow. It ended with a scandal. Before the last round, it turned out that there was no money for prizes! In the end, everything was settled, the Ministry of Culture transferred the promised amount, and the winners received awards. But this is taxpayers’ money, our money. There are many problems with any competition. Including financial ones. And for a long time and not unreasonably they talk about the crisis state of music competitions, about the decline in their prestige. It happens that in most specialties the first prizes are not awarded: the jury does not see worthy candidates. Maybe this way of revealing talents just outlived its usefulness?
Competition does not make a musician talented
Participation in a competition does not make a person talented. There were and still are outstanding, great musicians who did not participate in competitions. Neither Vladimir Sofronitsky, nor Maria Yudina, nor Glen Gould, nor Horowitz had any laureate titles. There are many more to be named here. And vice versa: you can get a prize at a competition and then wither away, not take place. There are many names here too.
Competition as a chance to break out of the country
For example, for Soviet performers, success at an international competition really turned out to be a chance to break out of the camp (it happened, by the way, that our performers used the competition as an opportunity to stay in the West: this was, it seems, with Valery Afanasyev). But are they really needed where there is no need to run away, and the “market” still puts everything in its place?
One of the greatest cellists of the century, Grigory Pyatigorsky (an American who emigrated from Russia in the 1920s) wrote: “I am convinced that a strong talent will definitely find its way and come to well-deserved fame out of competition. Art is not a sport. It does not matter at all who is the first, the second or the fifth. It’s important to be an artist. ”
A real disaster
I have heard negative opinions about the impact of competitions on the learning process. All potential contestants learn the same works included in the competition program. Teachers train students. Trips to the competition break away from normal classes and disrupt the educational process.
Competition is a real disaster for educational institutions. She creates an unhealthy environment. In the minds of students, the main thing is the pursuit of awards, for profit, and not art, not creative self-improvement. Let us remember what the poet said: "The purpose of creativity is self-giving, not hype, not success." Very young artists who receive awards while still at school develop conceit, narcissism, and a sense of superiority over their comrades. Is it pedagogical? And failure can have a fatal effect on a fragile personality, on all future destiny.
to advertising revenue.
Turn off Adblock, please!