Composition competitions are often maligned. They are sometimes cited as proof of a culture that does not prioritize growth and improvement, especially by individuals who advocate for a more holistic creative community.
Depending on how the competitions are structured, the applicants may be asked to pay a fee — often seen as predatory when used to seed the prize money — and then receive little or no communication after submission.
And there is no guarantee of success, so the energy expended applying and then receiving rejections can lead to burnout, fatigue, and an encroaching sense of failure for a committed and skilled composer.
These are all legitimate critiques.
And yet, composition competitions offer substantial benefits to those chosen as winners. Indeed, most composition competitions come with some combination of the following:
Prize money for a pre-existing work, or occasionally a commission contract and commensurate commission fee to create a new work;
A performance, often a world premiere or substantial professional premiere or second performance;
An audio and/or video recording of the live performance, and occasionally even a recording session on the work for commercial or professional release;
Travel funds to offset the cost for the composer to attend the performance;
Enhanced renown andpublicity by being named the winner, especially if the organization funding the competition has a broad reach of members and supporters;
And occasionally, some competitions may also offer the possibility of publication/distribution of the finished score by a publisher or a distributor.
Beyond these tangible benefits, there is also the impossible-to-replicate experience of being in the room, hearing one’s work performed by a living, breathing ensemble of singers and players. In many ways, first performances of works function as laboratories or workshops for the eventual final score or finished piece. (It is exceedingly rare that the composer makes no changes to a manuscript after an ensemble’s first reading.)
Most composers have the chance to attend a dress rehearsal prior to the performance, where they can hear the ensemble’s best efforts to interpret their score. This is an invaluable learning experience, as they begin to understand how well they’ve communicated through notation:
Has the ensemble clearly interpreted their intent, and are there ways they can make the notation clearer if not?
Has the conductor found nuance in their interpretation that they didn’t think possible?
Are there times in the score where the ensemble and conductor made a different choice than notated (perhaps with regard to tempo, articulation, etc.) and why? Asking why they came to that choice can teach the composer more about the “instrument” for which they are writing.
And finally, the premiere performance also gives the composer the chance to gauge an audience’s reaction to the work “in real time.” How is the work paced? Does it effectively set and deliver the text — if a texted work — and is the meaning of the words clear to the listener who may not be able to read a program note? Does it move the listener?
These opportunities can also be afforded during any premiere of a new work, of course. Yet in the context of a competition, the composer is most often unknown to the players, singers, and conductor before the process, so it allows for an entirely new series of “inputs” beyond the previous circles of connections the composer may have. New information, new people, new connections: all of this helps to refine the composer’s ability and prowess.
Indeed, for those chosen as the winners, composition competitions can be a profoundly important part of their career development.
And for the profession, composition competitions help to identify new talent, works, and voices. There is always a need for music of our time, and competitions help to curate that vast trove of scores so we are aware of the very best new scores being written right now.
To return to the critiques from earlier in my note, we can do more to enhance the value of competitions for those who are not chosen as winners. A few simple changes — already implemented by some organizations — will go a long way to ensuring a positive place for the role of competitions in our profession:
Eliminate application fees. There is no reason to charge a composer $25, $50, or more to apply for a contest. Find another source of funding that is not those seeking the prize.
Provide constant communication throughout the process to the applicants. Confirm receipt of their application in writing. Communicate a clear timeline for decision-making. Give the composers the courtesy of a note of gratitude for applying, prior to announcing the winner(s).
Consider awarding honorable mentions. They cost you nothing, and they give a burgeoning composer a line for their resume that may help them in their career.
Curate a jury that provides informative and helpful critique when adjudicating the scores and share some of that insight—as appropriate—with the applicants if they are not chosen as winners. It may be helpful for a young composer to read comments like: “Not enough textural variety; everyone sings all of the time” or “The soprano tessitura is too high for too long and would not result in a successful performance with our ensemble.”
If the score is excellent, but there were limited prizes, tell them that too. It may also be true that there is nothing wrong with the score at all. If a composer’s score is acceptable, but there were too many applicants and only one or a few prizes, that is valuable for a composer to know—it amplifies their confidence and provides external affirmation and reassurance that they are doing good work.
With small changes like these, we can ensure that composition competitions remain vital tools for identifying and supporting talented new writers, for uplifting our ecosystem of creators who don’t always win, and for advocating for the creation of new music everywhere.
Dominick DiOrio is a conductor and composer who has been recognized with The American Prizes in both Choral Composition and Choral Performance. He is Professor of Music at the Indiana University Jacobs School of Music, where he leads the select, new music chamber chorus NOTUS, an ensemble invited to perform at the IFCM’s 12th World Symposium on Choral Music in Auckland, New Zealand, before it was cancelled due to the pandemic. As part of the honor of being invited, NOTUS was named an IFCM Ambassador in 2022. He is also the 14th Artistic Director & Conductor of the Mendelssohn Chorus of Philadelphia, now celebrating its 150th Anniversary. Learn more at: dominickdiorio.com
Contact: ddiorio@indiana.edu
Edited by Caroline Maxwell, UK
Comments