From Page To Stage
Map Music Room Welcome    

 

 
 

Artistry

The Guild of Judges spends a lot of time considering artistry, what it is and how to judge it. In 1998 they devoted a plenary session to it and I'd like to share the outcome.

To kick the session off, we agreed on some questions that we would like answered. They were

  1. What is artistry?
  2. Can artistry be coached?
  3. Can a 'C' level performance have elements of artistry in it?
  4. Are artistry and musicality the same thing?
  5. Is our artistry and the general public's artistry the same artistry?
  6. Whose artistry is it anyway?

Perhaps unsurprisingly, most of the session was spent discussing question 1. The following observations were made about artistry and what it is.

  1. Superlative.
  2. A quality expression.
  3. God given talent.
  4. A performance that delivers an appropriate positive emotion without apparent technique.
  5. A superlative outcome that transcends technique.
  6. Transparency of technique.
  7. A successful communication.
  8. Charisma.
  9. It is potentially unique.
  10. It is rare.
  11. Holistic.
  12. It is of the moment.
  13. The result of experience in art.
  14. A magic moment.
  15. Soul.
  16. Aspiration for practitioners.
  17. It is a personal experience for the receiver.
  18. A force that touches the deepest bits.
  19. An undefinable touch of magic.
  20. It is in the eye (and/or ear) of the beholder.

Observations about question 2 included the following.

  1. There is no set of rules for artistry.
  2. It is the performer's responsibility.
  3. It can be facilitated.
  4. A coach can enable it.
  5. You can teach the tools but not the artistry.
  6. It can be un-coached.

The session ran out of time before the remaining questions could be addressed but minutes of the meeting were circulated and Steve Plumb, the Chairman of the Society Contest and Judging Committee responded with his own comments.

Greetings, BABS Judges:

I read with great interest your discussion of this past weekend on "artistry." The notes from the blackboard certainly paralleled many similar ones from meetings we have held.

I offer some summary comments derived from many such deliberations of ours (and please understand that these are NOT graven in stone as Society C&J policy, by any means):

What is artistry?

This can be as elusive as picking up a drop of mercury. Your list of many adjectives and defining phrases was as good as any.

Can artistry be coached?

We generally believe that gifted coaches can enhance the artistry of talented performers. I personally believe in the Watkins theorem that a coach must be a step ahead of the performer in order to make a significant difference in the performer's artistry. As to A performers: there is considerable artistry already present, according to the scoring definitions, and the coach here often serves as the mirror for the performer to help refine the effects achieved, as opposed to directly "coaching artistry."

C-level artistry?

We generally believe in the presence of recognizable (small) amounts of artistry in a C performance. One that is TOTALLY lacking in artistry is a benchmark of the D performance.

Are artistry and musicality the same thing?

Ah! What a great discussion point! In the Society there are many performers (and some judges) who think these terms are synonymous, and in many ways they are. There is artistry in the technical elements of musicality, for certain, but there is a dimension beyond technique that our system seeks to reward. And, as elusive as that is, I cherish the challenge to find that in all of our judging categories---to truly separate the value of the highest A performances. This is why "from the heart" was brought in as an up-front element of Presentation scoring (and included in the Common Ground definitions).

Is our artistry and the general public's artistry the same artistry? Whose artistry is it anyway?

Great questions! There is evidence that the public view of artistry is often "technique"-based, but a truly artistic performance will entertain/move/affect the public more than a purely technically excellent performance.

Steve Plumb Society Contest and Judging Chair

 

Different people will look at these answers with different viewpoints but the key points for me are

  • It is rare. We can't all do it and even those who can probably don't do it all the time.
  • It seems easy. The result is apparently effortless even though we know it isn't.
  • It is in the eye of the beholder. One man's art is another man's toilet paper.
  • We are unsure whether it can be coached but we are agreed that it can be un-coached.

 

  

Neil Watkins 2002