The Well-Tempered Ear

Classical music: Are the rules of the Madison Symphony Orchestra’s Bolz Young Artist Competition fair? Or do they need to be changed?

By Jacob Stockinger

Everyone The Ear has spoken to agrees: The Madison Symphony Orchestra’s concerto competition that took place last Wednesday night — and which was broadcast live over Wisconsin Public Radio (WPR) and Wisconsin Public Television (WPT) — was an extraordinary and inspiring artistic event.

All of those people had nothing but the highest praise for all four teenage finalists – (below, from left) violinist Julian Rhee, harpist Naomi Sutherland, pianist Michael Wu and violinist Yaoyao Chen — who performed under the baton of MSO music director John DeMain.

The Ear can only endorse the fantastic review of the event by local music critic Greg Hettmansberger:

https://whatgregsays.wordpress.com

And you can find out more about at the contestants at this past posting, which has links to biographies and biographical YouTube videos about them and also lists the REBROADCAST TIMES ON TODAY AND SUNDAY:

https://welltempered.wordpress.com/2017/03/25/classical-music-education-watch-it-on-public-television-or-radio-stream-it-live-or-hear-it-in-person-the-final-forte-free-finalists-concert-with-the-madison-symp/

But several people The Ear knows also raised a difficult question that the MSO, WPR, WPT and seems to have avoided:

Is it fair that the impressively talented 16-year-old violinist Julian Rhee, from Brookfield, got to win the first prize for a second time?

Curiously, there was no mention of his previous win in 2015 – a younger Rhee is seen below — when he played the first movement of the Violin Concerto by Brahms. That win went unspoken during this year’s live broadcast, and even in the pre-event publicity or in the post-event publicity.

It almost seems as if the organizers recognized that pointing it out would sound funny, awkward or questionable.

Also, no mention was made that the gifted Rhee also won a competition with the Wisconsin Chamber Orchestra and then played at Concerts on the Square; or that just a month ago, Rhee appeared on the regular season of the Wisconsin Chamber Orchestra, playing the complete Brahms concerto under WCO music director Andrew Sewell.

Such experience probably qualified Rhee – a maturing prodigy — as a professional or at least a semi-professional, assuming he got paid for the WCO appearance, rather than an amateur.

Let’s be clear: This year, Rhee played the opening movement of the Violin Concerto by Tchaikovsky stupendously well. It is hard to argue with the decision of the three judges to award him first prize.

In short, Rhee did nothing wrong and everything right. His winning was not in any way tainted. He won fair and square. He played brilliantly, beautifully and engagingly.

What some people are questioning is not Rhee’s victory, but whether the rules themselves are unfair by allowing a previous first prize-winner to compete a second time. It certainly appears to put the other young competitors with less experience at a disadvantage.

Now, the rules do allow for a performer to win multiple first prizes. Historically, a couple of contestants have indeed won again, performing on different instruments for each appearance.

And no one seems to object that a second-, third- or fourth-prize winner gets a chance to try again to do better and win.

True, the eligibility rules do require that one year passes before a first-prize winner can compete again.

But the question seems to be: Are the rules fair? Or should they be modified, so that the playing field is more even for all the young participants?

Should first-prize winners be excluded from competing again?

That is the question that is being raised, however it is answered.

So The Ear and others want to know:

What do you think?

Are the rules fair or unfair?

Should first-prize winners be allowed to compete again?

Should the rules be changed or stay the same?

Leave your point of view in the COMMENT section.

The Ear wants to hear.