A Whitwell Proposal for a new Festival Format
The following proposal was sent to CaliforniaHigh School Band Directors in 1986, where it met that quiet death which tends to fall on anything requiring a change in the status quo.
There are several significant problems with the normal band festival (read: competition) which are obvious to any experienced adjudicator. First, whereas the purpose of music is experiential and in particular is a means of expressing our feelings and emotions, the typical adjudication form asks the adjudicator to pay attention only to the “left-brain” grammar of music, rhythm, tone, intonation, etc. No where does the form ask, “Is it musical?”
Second, it follows that music exists to be listened to, but there is almost never anyone listening other than the judges. Logic would stipulate that the other bands participating should be listening to each other. They do not.
Third, although it is the band which is given a score, as everyone knows we are in fact judging the conductor. Few facts in human history have been so universally understood but never acknowledged. It was in recognition of this fact that William D. Revelli, in one of his most quoted observations, wrote on an adjudication sheet, “the only thing that could make this band worse is one more rehearsal!”
Finally, generally speaking, the conductor pays little attention to the judges’ comments. One reason for this, contrary to the fact discussed in Number Three, above,is that due to a typically human, psychological “slight of hand” the conductor tells himself that the comments are about the band and not about him.
Another reason the conductor attributes little authority to the judges comments is became they have so little actual financial value. Once, when I was judging bands all day and was waiting for a stage change for the next band, I divided the fee I was being paid by the number of bands and was astonished to see that I, with some 25 years experience in adjudicating bands, was being paid $11.00 per band. At that time one paid even a beginning plumber $65.00 for an evaluation. Why wouldanyone pay attention to an evaluation worth only $11.00?
Philosophy and Purpose of the Festival
The purpose of a music festival is to listen to music. The purpose of an High School Band Festival should be for the band members to hear the music performed by other bands. The students should be prepared for the literature they will hear, and not prepared only for listening to who has the “best” band.
There should be no awards or ratings of any kind. The festival should be divorced from any concept which holds that its primary purpose is as an instrument of accountability of the school band program (this will be discussed below). The festival might even serve to raise the quality of literature heard if the conductor were selecting literature to be listened to, and not for the purpose of confronting traditional adjudication.
A New Format
I would propose an invitational festival for six bands, performing approximately thirty minutes each during the morning hours. A rotating schedule should provide for each band to have one slot for warm-up, one slot to perform, one slot to put away instruments and three slots to listen as members of the audience. Three bands, together with accompanying adults and other audience members would provide each band with a reasonable audience to perform for. Each band member would only have to listen for an hour and a half of performance, a small enough amount of time that we should be able to expect quiet, concentrated listening.
The band director who wanted his students to profit even more from this experience might find out in advance what literature his students would be hearing and prepare them somewhat for this, as for example by perhaps using the repertoire of the other bands as sight-reading material.
After a noon break, the six bands would combine into three combined, larger bands to be rehearsed by the three adjudicators. The adjudicators should not discuss any literature heard during the morning, but rather use their own literature, selected for the teaching purposes they hold important.
On Adjudication
There should be no adjudication forms whatsoever.
The three adjudicators should have a rotating schedule, whereby they take turns going to a separate room to discuss with the conductor of the previous band his performance as a conductor. The format for this discussion would center on the viewing of a video made of the conductor from the back of the band, facing the conductor. Except for the first band (which would have three adjudicators present), all bands would then be heard by two adjudicators – the third always being out of the room with the previous conductor.
Regarding the two remaining adjudicators, one should make tape comments solely and privately for the conductor. These comments, except in an extraordinary circumstance, should not deal with technical problems, or the “grammar” of music, such as “in bar 129 the third clarinets were flat,” etc. The comments, rather, should deal with how to make the performance more musical or more effective in a general sense. If a director felt he needed a statement for the purpose of the accountability of his program for his administration, I would recommend that a confidential letter from this judge to the administration could be requested. I don’t believe the present system, where often a rating is produced by three colleagues, carries much weight as an accountability document.
The second adjudicator should make a tape which could and should be played for the band members. These comments should center on compliments on musical achievement and musical suggestions.
One of the three adjudicators should be from out-of-state, someone highly respected by the six directors participating in the festival. It is a very great mistake not to do this, for it cuts these programs off from a connection with the rest of the band world and it very much limits their ability to evaluate how they compare with the best of the nation. This would be possible if each performing band paid a performance fee of $250 or so. This is not very much compared to what we raise for other purposes. It is not much for the school to pay for, given the value to so many students.
1