Auditioning the Audition Process
Robert Levine wrote (responding to Nathan Kahn):
NK: “The comparison between US symphonic audition procedures and hiring procedures for surgeons and pilots does not equate because those careers require initial and ongoing government certification.”
RL: But isn’t it interesting that those who hire surgeons and pilots find the mere fact of certification completely inadequate when choosing amongst those already certified? Why don’t we take the kind of care in hiring that they do?
Good question, which should perhaps be directed to Music Directors,those who sit on audition committees, and the orchestra members themselves. I guess it really comes down to “shall we spend our time listening to just a few highly qualified candidates, or shall we have a cattle call looking for the best candidate for our orchestra?” At the end of the day, each orchestra does what suits them best. Cleveland tends to use the first procedure, and Chicago tends to use the second. Neither orchestra is required by an outside entity to do either, but that is what they have chosen.
NK:”…the question ‘…does the tenure process work well enough in fixing hiring mistakes made by music directors and audition committees?’ troubles me greatly. According to whom? Who is vested with sole and exclusive right to determine if ‘hiring mistakes’ are made by music directors and audition committees?'”
RL: So who should make those decisions, and why? In Berlin, both hiring and tenure decisions are made by the entire orchestra. Is this equivalent to the “music police”? If not, why not?
Not at all. In Berlin, the entire orchestra is vested with the authority of hiring and granting tenure. In the US it is too often self-appointed persons who seek that authority. That, in my opinion, is the definition of “music police
No comments yet.
Add your comment