Re: Categories


Subject: Re: Categories
From: KEVIN AUSTIN (KAUSTIN@vax2.concordia.ca)
Date: Thu Jan 21 1999 - 06:55:30 EST


Anders writes:

>The theme now is criteria for complexity. When an organisation applies
>for money to give a certain commissions to a composer, how to set up a
>sturdy system of 'boxes' to sort the intended work into.
>
>As i see it - other views appreciated! - the 'boxes' should account for
>
> * Complexity
> * Amount of work
> * Necessary knowledge

As I have experienced it, the situation is somewhat less a sturdy system
of boxes, and more one of creating 'minumum profile'. There are other
criteria, eg proven ability to finish a project, ability to complete a
project as proposed, "merit", developmental value to the composer /
performers ... such that the process of working through the commission
may be invaluable to an emerging composer (her first commission!!), while
of less importance to the composer currently struggling to complete three
works.

If the 'profile' is established before the jury process is started, and
is published with the CALL, there is (in my experience) the creation of a
more level playing field for those applying, and much greater clarity
for those who will decide.

There could also be categories for "emerging composers", "women",
"interdisciplinarity", "contact in the community" etc etc ... creating a
wide range of possible profiles, while giving the jury methods for
comparing Apples and Oranges.

The situation is similar to that faced by hiring committees, except that
in Commissioning Juries, one aims to prioritize a large number of
applicants, (and there is always "next year"), so it is possible to serve
many objectives, while with a Hiring Committee, only one person will get
the job!

Best

Kevin
kaustin@vax2.concordia.ca

-2 closely overcast sky



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Wed Jun 11 2003 - 13:08:49 EDT