In this short analysis of my piece, "Take Flight", I assess the suitability of the piece for the competition it was written for and briefly assess the nature of competitions within the arts. In looking back on the essay I realise I had a lot more to say about the nature of competitions within the arts, in that I find as art is a subjective field that is believed to only be assessed on by technical proficiency, the question of writing to a specific brief makes the entire act of creating art feel like a piece of paperwork rather than a representation of personal expression. Within the piece itself, I realise that there are many positives in conjunction to the competition brief and many negatives. The piece itself would probably not have been to a performance standard in the 3 hour rehearsal time limit stipulated, and the oddly Spanish flavour of the Cabasa ruins the illusion of it being purely Scottish in its identity. I do still like the piece and believe it is a piece of art I am proud to have created, but in relation to the competition I know it did not deserve to win.

I do believe that competitions, especially those within classical music, can be very restrictive in their aims and begs the question of whether these art organisations offering such opportunities want to find new, talented artists or whether it is a cheaper way for them to get exactly what they want rather than commission a composer and get something entirely different to what they intended (removing the sense of collaboration within Western art music). I think competitions should change their way of handling the offer of opportunities. From my experience of scouring competition websites, the vast majority will stipulate the creation of an entirely new piece. Not only does this place a massive burden on the artist themselves, in that they are investing their time to create something (often highly specific and to be about a very particular subject matter) which can easily be tossed aside. There is also the question of payment in order to be considered for competitions. I find such a notion that I am expected to spend possibly a month (minimum) writing a new piece to only then have to spend money in order to be considered for the competition. Now we have both a monetary cost as well as a personal working time cost. 

Now of course that doesn't mean the work is worthless, in that it still exists as a piece of art, but with so many arts organisations forcing such restrictive guidelines and costs to be considered it makes the eventual work feel sullied when it is rejected. There are many organisations who do not fall into this trap, yet they are very few and far between. 

I feel competitions do have a place within the arts, in that they can provide exposure and opportunities that would not come about naturally, but I think arts organisations need to understand that a competition can be more like a collaboration and that there is a sense that the organisation wants to support emerging artists rather than find a loop hole to get a cheap commission they can easily profit from. 

If you have any questions for me concerning this specific piece of research, or any of the thoughts/reflections I have provided on the work, please feel free to contact me. Click here for access to the piece.