MIXING THE MUSIC
It’s not all Beethoven and Chopin – competitions are ringing the changes in the repertoire they demand from their contestants and are championing the new
Much has been written about the benefits and pitfalls of classical music competitions to aspiring professional performers. While tales of individuals cracking under unbearable strain, for instance, are easy to find, the value of competitions to classical music itself rarely, if ever, appears in the story. Member organisations of the World Federation of International Music Competitions (WFIMC) are determined to challenge stereotypes about what they are and what they do. Participants and their development remain central to their work. Yet building future audiences, enhancing the experience offered to existing audiences and cultivating curiosity in new music and neglected repertoire also belong to the mouldbreaking, trend-setting ways of the music competition community.
Those who argue that all competitions are the same can do so only by ignoring the breadth of disciplines and depth of repertoire offered by WFIMC member competitions. The view that pianists have no chance of scoring a top competition prize without polishing their Chopin or Beethoven to perfection certainly needs revising. The Orléans Concours International (OCI), for example, offers a wonderful haven for pianists passionate about the music of today. Isabella Vasillota, the biennial competition’s artistic director, deals exclusively in new work and landmarks of the modernist repertoire.
‘All of what we do is around contemporary music and works from the first part of the 20th century,’ she notes. ‘Every time I write the competition rules, I ask why we want young pianists to perform Debussy, Ravel, Scriabin and Szymanowski as well as new scores. It’s because these composers were so important
Learning a test-piece in seven days is a good measure of a musician
for the development of the piano as a solo instrument. For the pianist to perform today’s music, she or he will have to pass through this repertoire from a time of musical revolution.’
Vasillota says that OCI is looking for performers who can penetrate the surface of complex contemporary scores. Mechanistic, technically precise performances should always take second place to those with soul, regardless of the repertoire. ‘Arthur Rubinstein could make “mistakes” as part of an incredible, personal interpretation,’ she observes. ‘Contemporary music can give the interpreter a completely new investment in the score, by allowing performers to speak with composers, to exchange ideas and to become part of a work’s creation. There was a conversation between performers and composers a century ago and, in turn, a dialogue with the music of the 19th century. Our competition recreates those conditions for our time.’
In the OCI’S first round each of 28 participants must present a new work written for them, most likely by their peers; new scores also surface throughout the competition. ‘Contemporary music is not something other,’ says Vasillota. ‘It’s part of the whole repertoire of classical music. We’re looking for pianists who can not only play contemporary compositions but also reach the public with this music. The best interpreter we can imagine is one who goes really deep into new scores while keeping a link with the classical repertoire.’
Belgium’s Queen Elisabeth Competition has historic connections to new music. Its founder, Eugène Ysaÿe, insisted that its contestants should always be measured against a piece specially written for them. The dozen finalists for this year’s violin edition, set to run from 29 April to 25 May, will see the competition’s compulsory commission for the first time a week before they are expected to perform its world premiere. They will retreat, score in hand, to the Queen Elisabeth Music Chapel in Brussels and prepare the new work without outside advice or looking on the internet for examples of the composer’s music.
Nicolas Dernoncourt, the Queen Elisabeth’s artistic coordinator, believes that learning the competition test-piece in seven days offers a good measure of a musician’s independence
and imagination. ‘It’s not very often they will have the chance to create a new piece in this way,’ he reflects. ‘They receive the score, have some contact with the composer and discuss the piece with the conductor – that’s it.’ The finalists study the work together and can, if they choose, share ideas about the music. ‘It’s a fascinating process,’ says Dernoncourt.
Beyond the obligatory final piece and a new short work for the semi-finals, the Queen Elisabeth Competition encourages contestants to take adventures. ‘The works for the first public round are prescribed,’ comments Dernoncourt. ‘But we want contestants to show us who they are as musicians as they progress through the competition. People are often not very creative in their repertoire choices, even though we’ve opened things up. Of course it’s understandable, given how stressful the competition is and the attraction of playing well-known works. But we’ve seen concertos by Bartók, Prokofiev, Shostakovich and others coming into the finals and the repertoire range is definitely growing.’
Growing the repertoire range has been no problem at TROMP Percussion Eindhoven. If anything, the biennial event faces the challenge of reining in repertoire boundaries, not least when contemporary solo percussion strays deep into music theatre territory. ‘This border is a thin line,’ says the competition’s general manager Arthur van der Drift. ‘We’re quite open and allow many pieces with high music theatre content to be performed.’
Van der Drift says that TROMP spans the gamut of solo percussion music, much of it written if not yesterday then at least since the present century’s turn. There’s room for everything from Bach arrangements for marimba and 20th-century classics by Xenakis to the latest virtuoso showpieces. Candidates are expected to choose one piece from a list of solo marimba works by Dutch composers for the competition’s second round, and tackle new compulsory works in the semi-finals and final; otherwise, they can choose what to play. ‘It’s a broad sport,’ comments Van der Drift.
TROMP Percussion Eindhoven is more than a competition. The organisation runs a festival and has launched a series of Repertoire Days led by TROMP jury members and laureates at conservatoires and other locations around the world. Recent Repertoire Day outings include visits to Shanghai, São Paulo, Boston and Moscow. ‘We’re busy spreading the world about percussion,’ says Arthur van der Drift. ‘We’ve seen a big increase in applicants since TROMP focused exclusively on percussion nine years ago, up from around 40 then to about 100 last year.’
Percussionists contesting this November’s Geneva International Music Competition can look forward to picking repertoire from an à la carte menu. The sheer variety of compositions prescribed for each round, together with opportunities for freely chosen pieces, should satisfy even the most catholic of tastes. The Geneva competition’s secretary general and WFIMC President, Didier Schnorhk, welcomes the return of percussion to its list of disciplines for the first time since 2002. The percussion event will run in tandem with the fourth Geneva competition for composers, a combination certain to deliver fresh repertoire to the programme.
‘I’m convinced that each of the Federation’s member competitions has its own identity, and that repertoire plays a big part in shaping that,’ notes Schnorhk. The Geneva International Music Competition has served a remarkable 26 disciplines since its creation 80 years ago. While stipulating compulsory works and repertoire lists from preliminary round to final, it allows candidates freedom to choose compositions that project their musicianship to advantage. ‘Young pianists and violinists, for
‘It’s important to renew and refresh the classical music repertoire’
example, are used to playing the same pieces, which is not good. It’s important to renew and refresh the repertoire of classical music. I believe that this should be part of the mission for international competitions.’
The Geneva contest’s artistic committee, chaired by Philippe Dinkel, director of the Geneva Haute école de musique (HEM), thrives on lively programming debates. In the case of percussion, its repertoire decisions were informed by input from Philippe Spiesser, HEM percussion professor and this year’s jury chair. ‘Philippe’s ideas were considered by the artistic committee,’ recalls Schnorhk. ‘We accepted some and added others.’ Pieces that made the percussion cut included 20th-century classics by Xenakis, Stockhausen and Donatoni and recent works by, among others, Brian Ferneyhough, Helmut Lachenmann and James Wood. There are new compulsory scores from Michael Jarrell and Pierre Jodlowski, and scope for participants to choose works for percussion and electronics and/or video. ‘The issue for our competition is to keep the same standard across disciplines, whether it’s piano, percussion or string quartet,’ adds Schnorhk. ‘We want percussionists to be judged on the same level as pianists or violinists.’
Like Geneva, the Prague Spring International Music Competition boasts a wide range of disciplines and consequent breadth of repertoire. Its remit runs from piano and violin to bassoon and harpsichord, the last two instruments served by few other international competitions. Contest secretary Michal Vencl observes that the Prague competition becomes expert in two disciplines each year. Its next edition, scheduled to run from 7-15 May 2019, trains the spotlight on oboe and flute. ‘We connect with the best among Czech oboists and flautists and prepare the repertoire lists with their help,’ he explains. ‘The second round must always include a new commission by a Czech composer. This year we have pieces by Martin Hybler for oboe and Jaroslav Pelikan for flute. We also have a long collaboration for our featured instruments, we make sure it’s included in the repertoire. After that it’s up to our competition committee to build the rest of the programme.’
The competition’s repertoire decisions are ruled by a committee comprising musicians from the Czech Philharmonic, Prague Symphony and Prague Radio Symphony Orchestras, and distinguished teachers from the Czech Republic and beyond. Because Prague Spring disciplines alternate on a fiveyear cycle, it has been possible for Vencl and his colleagues to sketch an outline of the competition’s programme until 2030 and include finer details of its plans until the 75th-anniversary edition in 2023.
‘We aim to prepare for next year’s competition with the most active musicians in this moment, those from the younger generation with new views and contacts around the world,’ Vencl observes. ‘If we work with young people, then we are fresh from the ground up. We need to communicate with them on their level, through social media and online. And we want to know what is modern, what is different in other competitions.’
Michal Vencl underlines the value of
WFIMC membership to his competition. ‘The Federation is a fantastic organisation for us,’ he comments. ‘Because our fixed dates often coincide, it’s a problem to attend its General Assembly. But we visited the meeting in Glasgow in Scotland last year and it was great to be there. We know that cooperation is so important for us. We want to stay in touch with our colleagues, because we share the same problems and goals and have so much to learn from them.’
As part of its learning process, the Prague Spring Competition despatched a delegation to Munich for the annual ARD International Music Competition. The trip, says Vencl, was money well spent. This September’s ARD event covers four disciplines – percussion, cello, clarinet and bassoon – and includes new works commissioned for each instrument respectively from composers Younghi Pagh-paan, Martin Since first setting compulsory new works for contestants in 2001, ARD has commissioned over 70 pieces from a combination of both young and established composers.
Meret Forster, the competition’s joint artistic director, says that ARD is determined to offer the most diverse repertoire. She points to the rich work-lists prescribed for each of this year’s competition rounds. Audiences will have the chance, depending on the candidates’ choice, of hearing everything from sonatas by Beethoven and Brahms to rarities by Roslavets and Reger and recent works by Wahlund and Widmann.
‘Everyone is obliged to perform contemporary music as a central part of the competition,’ explains Forster. ‘It’s so important for anyone aspiring to become a professional musician to be open to such diversity. And it’s attractive to the competition audience to hear our new commissions.’
The Munich competition’s repertoire range, says Forster’s fellow artistic director Oswald Beaujean, reflects a stratospheric rise in technical standards. ‘Things that were considered unplayable 30 years ago are now appearing in the first and second rounds! The attitudes of young musicians to new music have changed so much in that time too.’
Commissioning new work and encouraging competition entrants to explore contemporary music is also important for the long-term future of classical music itself, adds Forster.
It’s about planting seeds, she says. ‘I would be very happy if universities and conservatoires put greater focus on diverse repertoire. Performers have to be ready to deal with the music of our time as part of their daily work.’
That last sentence will ring true for musicians employed by Bavarian Radio, the chief backer of the ARD International Music Competition. Its seminal musica viva concert series, established by the German composer Karl Amadeus Hartmann in November
1945, serves as a platform for new and often experimental writing.
The broadcaster also has a strong track record in repertoire revival and revitalisation. ‘What we try to do is bring unknown and little known music into the competition,’ comments Oswald Beaujean. He concludes that international music competitions, thanks to their commissioning enterprise and timely support for young musicians, are ideally placed to influence the concert repertoire for generations to come.