[Dixielandjazz] Re: Competition in the arts?

[Patrick Cooke]

MIke Vax said:

     >The problem is that many band  programs
>today have become extensions of the athletic >department.  They  exist to 
>enter
>competitions and win trophies.  What does that mean?   >They learn three or 
>four
>tunes for each band (jazz, concert, and marching) for  the >whole year, and
>that is it!!!!!!!  They keep working on these tunes  over >and over.
.
        Mike, this is probably true in a lot of cases....the students 
education is lower priority than winning a competion.
        I have to say that I don't believe in competions in the arts.  Can 
you imagine a competion between Renoir, Degas, Van Gogh, and Monet?  Or a 
competition between Hemingway, Joyce, and Dickens? or how about a 
competition between Cole Porter Jerome Kern, and George Gershwin?  Its 
absurd.  To say that one is better than the other is purely subjective, and 
if you're going to buy one, buy the one the judges liked as opposed to the 
one you like.
        It would appear that over half the girl children in the country 
attend dancing schools.  Taking dancing lessons is fine, but the focus is on 
the revue, and the competitions.  Both are mainly revenue enhancers for the 
schools, point the focus of the learning process in the wrong direction.
        The arts are not athletic events.  It is impossible to keep a valid 
score.  The results rest only on the opinions of the judges.  I would do 
away with all competitions in the arts....that goes for the magazine polls, 
the Academy awards, the Grammys, etc.
        I played for a singer/drummer who got a teeny fan club for himself 
started, and got them all to make multiple entries in the downbeat poll for 
him.  That year he actually came in second to Sinatra! It's a million to one 
you never heard of him.
        A cutting contest is something else.  There are no prizes awarded. 
Everyone goes home knowing who they liked the best.
        Pat Cooke