Friday, November 28, 2014
Commentary: CMU competition thinks outside the music box
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: The participants, all full-time CMU students, were responsible for marketing the 30- to 45-minute performances. Every program had to include a new arrangement of a song on the Billboard Hot 100. In video interviews recorded before the competition, the groups were asked about Rembacher, the competition’s namesake. One claimed that Rembacher was Salieri’s hamster and also, somehow, simultaneously, Ayn Rand. Another said she was an elderly cat lady living in Shadyside.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I think this comoetition is a very interesting idea. I wish there was a clearer sense of what the performers were supposed to accomplish, but the ways in which the musicians mixed medias are very interesting, and I wish I had seen it. It seems like a fun, competative way to encourage artists to stretch themselves into new media and new performance methods. Though I understand that this was a way to introduce artists to the modern method of solo creation, I think it would be possibly more interesting as a collaborarive competition, where computer science, music, art, theater, and all disciplines work together to create something new. I look forward to what they come up with in the spring.
This is wonderful. CMU continually talks about how much they encourage a blend of the arts and the sciences, and here is a prime example. I especially love how they talk about the union of music, performance and visual media. These seem like the just the things CMU drama is intent on producing. I would love to see some work in the school of drama that incorporated some of these talented students. The more we can bring together artists from difference mediums, the more exciting art we can create.
I really regret that my workload prevented me from attending this. It sounds like it was a truly engrossing and captivating experience. The article brought up some interesting points about the administrative side of this competition. As Ms. Bloom states, "There were growing pains. The rules were established before we had fleshed out their feasibility". It sounds as though this mid-course correction negatively impacted the number of participants. I hope that they set forth their expectations earlier to allow students time to adjust.
That said, I think the judges chose excellent criteria with which to judge performances. How well a performance utilizes and optimizes its resources is an aspect so often overlooked. However, as the students were using the Kresge, a venue that is really showing its age, perhaps this was not the most well-suited venue for this particular competition. I'm really glad this enterprise is gaining attention, as it really strikes at the true heart of any CMU education. I hope that as it moves forward, expectations and guidelines are laid out more clearly to ensure that the students turn out the best performance they can.
This reticle reminded me about two wonderful things about CMU. Firstly, it is wonderfully open to interdisciplinary projects. This is also evident through the school of art's Open Studio Show. As a university, professors tend to be so diversely talented themselves that it becomes natural and even encouraged to cross between diciplines, sometimes even creating new disciplines as a result! Secondly, CMU's school of music encourages experimentation, a thing that many classical musicians struggle with. After learning in such a strict conservatory programs, classical musicians become very talented of course, but they can lose the freedom and creativity that compliments that structure. All in all, this article has once again assured me that CMU is a wonderful, innovative pkace to be!
Post a Comment