2nd prize goes to Ina Zdorovetchi
3rd prize goes to Remy van Kesteren
After a phenomenal concert of three Ginastera concertos, all beautifully, professionally, creatively executed by our three finalists, the results of the competition were a huge disappointment. First prize was not awarded at all, (following a recent trend of withholding the first prize in other major international harp competitions such as Lily Laskine and Cité des Arts). As if that weren't disappointing enough, the announcement of the results was handled terribly. They did not warn us ahead of time that they would not be giving a first prize, so after announcing third prize, followed by second, they set poor Emily Levin up for a huge crash when she found out that she hadn't received anything at all. The audience was so appalled and upset by how it was all unfolding that when Emily's special prize for the Renié was announced, they applauded with such heartfelt sympathy that they worked themselves into a standing ovation.
I have no explanation for why this happened. When the jury makes a decision like this, they are effectively saying that nobody in the competition lived up to their standards. However, considering the high level of playing we saw today, we have to wonder if they expect an unrealistic level of perfection. Many people complain of unfair voting practices, or political influences (as they always tend to do after such events), and it is easy to be swept away by the general feeling of injustice. However, it may be more constructive to ask the question: is it fair to offer a first prize and not award it? After all, isn't "first prize" defined as the best one competing? Otherwise, it should be called something else, like "outstanding concert artist award," and the criteria for this award should be made clear from the beginning, not decided at the end, after we have all sacrificed so much to prepare.
Congratulations to the winners:
Emily, Ina, and Remy
29 comments:
First prize is the only one that comes close to minimum wage for the amount of work they'd have to put in to get there, let alone the expense. This is the worst snobbery I've ever heard of. Poor form, Israel Contest.
It happened only twice, including this year's competition, that no first prize was awarded in the 50 years history of the Israel harp competition. It must have been difficult for the jury to make such a decision. However, considering that this year is the 50th anniversary of the Israel competition, the jury might have a higher standard set up for the first-prize winner of this special competition. On the other hand, most jury members are previous Israel competition first-prize winners, they certainly would not compromise if the finalists do not perform up to their standards for a first-prize winner. Surprise? Maybe not that much of a surprise. Unfair? Competition is competition. Not many harpists who have attended harp competitions feel they have been fairly treated by the jury after all. Well, except the first-prize winner, of course.
Elizabeth, your summary is very well put.
All three finalists were wonderfully competent, artistic, and professional. Congratulations to all of them.
Emily, your playing moved me to tears and inspired me to start working on a new piece this morning. Your obvious love for the music was so much fun to watch. We look forward to hearing of your future successes, and those of Ina and Remy.
(Remy, your harmonics and overall technique were unbelievable.)
Regardless of why none of these outstanding musicians won first place, it was handled so horribly, it was cruel. I just hope the harp world does give the Israel Competition another chance in 2012.
Following the concert by radio (and unfortunately of course without hearing stage I, II and III)we were really disappointed about the jury's decision.
We felt terrible with Emily and the whole way of pronouncing the prices.
If you already make this decision (which is a pity of course, but stays jury's final decision) - so please don't let people suffer!
What a pity after all the hard working...
Well, you guys there in israel - enjoy the time after the competition and take as many good things as you can get from it with you!
Elizabeth and Marta, thank you for this blog, which has enabled us to follow the competition from afar. The whole ceremony last night was a disaster, especially for Emily, and a huge disappointment for all. Rather than agreeing with other comments on the "wisdom" of the jury in not giving the first prize, I would like to see a discussion (perhaps at the WHC?) on what you yourself write in your blog : definition of first prize, this "trend" of withholding it,and criteria for doing so (there should at least be an extensive motivation).
Congratulations and good luck to all you great young harpists out there.
I am totaly agree with your opinion, and with those which have appeared as "comments".
I couldn't bielieve the results when I watched them in my PC yesterday night, as soon as the oficial web said what had happened with the jury's decision.
I could listened to everybody before the final stage, and I think that this decision is a tiranny with the young people, close to child, who spent at least two years of their lifes to preper this contest, even without knowing if theay have been acepted to participate in the contest until a few month before it begins...
My congratulation is for all the contestants, the three finalists, and with special feeling to Emily Levin, because she won also in our minds.
MRNP
The decision of the jury is incomprehensible. Elizabeth, I agree totally with your observation that the best person at the time should be awarded first prize. Decisions such as this one mean that these musicians are competing against an aspiration. I would have thought that they should be competing against each other...
I have liked the comments in this blog so much, and appreciated the reports and the interviews. The jury may have professional skills in music, their conduct has been very poor. I hope the participants will not be disappointed too much by this lack of humanity and remain enriched by the many positive aspects of the contest.
Thank you a lot for your nice work and all the best for your future.
Elizabeth, this is Emily's father. I stopped listening after they announced the second place winner. It was only much later that I heard the true results. I know exactly how Emily felt and am saddened by what must have been a very difficult few minutes coming down from the euphoria of thinking you had won. Thank you for giving me an indication of your impression of the performances and the audiences response to Emily. I appreciated being able to have a connection through your blog to the goings on of the competition.
It is not extremely uncommon for competitions to withhold first prize. It happens in other prestigious instrumental competitions. There are responsibilities that come with the first prize, such as concert tours and recording debut. The winner has to go out there and represent the harp in the classical music community. It is only natural for the jury to have a high standard, which may be very different from that of an audience.
I personally do not find the result to be surprising.
We all know how much work the contestants put into to get themselves there, including the ones that did not make pass the previous rounds. In that sense, everyone is a winner. Congratulations to all!
Many thanks to Elizabeth & Marta for enabling so many of us to follow the entire process. I listened to the 3 finalists via web across the globe in Hawaii, and was tremendously impressed with their artisty. The judges' decision was astounding; I'm still smarting, and am heartbroken for Emily. It takes so much courage to be a professional musician ! Best wishes to all you young artists reading this -- know that we celebrate your expertise & beauty ! It's miles above any sort of official prize.
Cruel snobbery.
Dear Elizabeth, thank you so much for your summary.
I'm an italian pianist, and I recently fell in love with harp, so it was very interesting to follow the Israeli contest through your eyes and your words.
It was interesting also your discussion about the meaning of "first prize", and I agree with you.
Also in piano competitions first prize is often not awarded, but the jury usually announces its decision BEFORE. It was really a horrible "gaffe"...
I wish all the best for you and the other talented contestants.
Hello Elizabeth and Marta, thank you very much for your blog! I hope you won't stop posting now when is over, cause I really like the way you write about preparing to the contest, being a musician, all the interviews and in general - harp world... Please, do write something more!
I agree that the first prize, by definition, should be the best player on the day.
The fact that they were all accepted into the final indicates they all were of the appropriate standard - or they would not have passed the semi!
Judges are just people, with their foibles, egos and ambitions. Some judges go to competitions to build their own careers, and often their decisions reflect this.
I don't know if this is relevant to this particular incident, but I have to wonder.
Here is some interesting observation on the prize announcement at Israel Competition's website.
Yesterday the website said "First Prize: NO First Prize. The decision was made according to the Rules and Regulations." Today, the announcement has a few more words added "First Prize: NO First Prize. The decision was made according to the Rules and Regulations based on all 4 stages of the Contest." I guess they are trying to explain to people that they made their decision based on all 4 stages performance. I personally do not think it is inadequate for the jury not to award the first prize. But I agree with most comments that the way they handle the announcement of not awarding first size is quite inconsiderate.
Emily, I hope you're reading this. I was at the finals and I just keep thinking of how beautifully you played and how lovely your whole performance was. How you smiled at the conductor and felt the music in your body. So inspiring. I was sitting next to my harp teacher who was at all the stages (and has been at the last few competitions) and we were all sure you had won first. For your audience, you are the first prize winner. (And the chamber music winner too.)
I guess the jury did not have so much sympathy attached to the contestants as did the audience. Otherwise, there would have been a first prize winner. Then to whom should the first prize go according to the audience .... Well, you choose whoever you like. Maybe the audience should be given a chance to vote unofficially after the competition? But the award will not be "first prize winner" but "most admired harpist." How's that?
Jerusalem post:
"This year, for some strange and inexplicable reason, no first prize was awarded. The result was a verdict typical of contest juries that habitually tend to promote commonplace performers that are technically correct, fairly brilliant, orthodox and not exceptional outstanding musical personalities. Consequently, Zdorovechi emerged as prima inter pares with a second prize.
More personal artistic qualities, such as Kesteren's extreme sensitivity and utmost abundance of delicate dynamic nuances, or a straightforwardly communicative, emotionally intense expression such as consolation prize winner Levin's, are wasted on such a jury. This is not particularly surprising, since ten of the twelve jurors were harpists, naturally judging according to the strict, narrow-minded professional rules of the game, and blissfully unaware of artistic imponderabilia that remain beyond their musical horizons. This is not likely to change so long as there are no representatives of other disciplines into the illustrious ranks of the jury."
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1256150024011&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
On what should have been an incredible celebratory occasion (the 50th anniversary of the Israeli Harp Competition) it seems that the jurists were terribly short-sighted in their failure to award all the prizes that were offered. Why would future competitors waste two years of their lives preparing for a competition that audaciously showcases the first prize award, but withholds giving it? The jurists have not only devalued the competitors' efforts and abilities, they have devalued the entire competition itself. What if Olympic athletes, after years of preparation and finally achieving the honor of representing their country to attend the Olympics, were to perform their events and then have the gold medal withheld? Israeli Harp Competition, you truly have hit a "low note" in your previously esteemed 50-year history.
The Israel Competition shoots itself in the foot. How many harpists do you suppose will compete in 2012?
Emily Levin is a soulful musician.
"This year, for some strange and inexplicable reason, no first prize was awarded. The result was a verdict typical of contest juries that habitually tend to promote commonplace performers that are technically correct, fairly brilliant, orthodox and not exceptional outstanding musical personalities." (quote from the link http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1256150024011&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull) Does this comment imply that all previous first prize winners of Israel Competition are "commonplace performers that are technically correct, fairly brilliant, orthodox and not exceptional outstanding musical personalities?" I hope not. Unfortunately, no one really knows why the first prize is not awarded this year except those who have been involved in the decision process. However, if the competition committee could set up a more clearly defined rule for awarding or not awarding first prize, the jury's decision might have been more convincing to the public.
It would be interesting to know how many of the jury did not want to award the prize, if it was a unanimous decision or only a small number of them.
There is nothing wrong with not awarding a first prize if the jury thinks that no one is good enough. I'm sure that the three finalists played very well, but perhaps the jury thinks that no one is exceptional - look at all the past first prize winners - all of them, every single one, is outstanding. The jury is doing this for the pride of the competition, and not for themselves.
There is only controversy about this because people just can't seem to accept the fact, or feel sorry for certain people. To make the finals or even the semi-finals is a great achievement. And everyone knows that. Music is not like sports. Not all prizes have to be awarded. It will certainly be a shame if that were to happen in the music world.
How cruel! All these blog comments and the "anonymous" people that just let their thoughts out for the whole world to read, do you even consider that the involved harpists/finalists are reading this, too??? They have worked too hard for too long to have, in the end, such a bittersweet experience! And the general public is making it EVEN MORE difficult for them by throwing all these mean words on the internet.
I personally know two of the finalists and believe me, every bit of their artistic personality IS outstanding, musically and technically! No need to speculate on the jury's decision. It is what it is. And that's that.
The fact that a first prize was not awarded has nothing to do with the musicianship and professionalism of the contestants. It is purely a question of money : the Israel Harp Competition just didn't have the funds to finance the artistic events that are intended for a first prize winner (concerts, publicity, recording...) It happens regularly (actually, the same situation occurred in the Marguerite Long piano competition in Paris a few days ago), and it should be considered as an unwritten rule. the disappointment of the contestants is totally understandable, but it's part of the game. The competition committee can't inform them in advance that a first prize won't be awarded, because nobody would enroll, which means no money, which means risks of bankruptcy. What happened this year is monetarily necessary for the competition to take place again in the future. competition is a buisiness like any other : they make money, they spend money... They need to stay afloat in order to survive.
It is possible that the first prize was not awarded because of budget issue. I have seen this situation happen this year in other competitions too, music or non-music. But this is still only a speculation or just possibly part of the reason.
USA international harp competition will be held in 2010. I hope the economy has recovered at that time so the budget would not be a factor in the decision process.
By the way, USA competition awards eight finalists with cash prizes while Israel competition only awards three finalists.(not counting the special awards) It is somewhat unrewarding when someone is able to enter the semi-final and yet does not get any cash award if he/she does not enter the final stage in the Israel competition. This might play a role in harpists' decision on which competition to attend if they could only afford to attend one.
The last two comments allude to what I was thinking. The first prize was a golden harp and a record deal, right? That's a lot of money. The contest organizers must have an incentive to not award the prize. Does the jury also have a monetary incentive to not award it? Was the jury bribed by the organizers? Follow the money.
Did you sign some document with a fine-print disclaimer saying that the first prize might not be awarded?
Post a Comment