Measure for Measure: Watching the competition
By Mike Chin on Apr 3, 2008 in Featured, Measure for Measure, News
Each Friday an A Cappella Blog contributor will take a look at both sides of a controversial, interesting, or seemingly random statement related to collegiate a cappella.
We welcome you to weigh in on the topic at hand by posting a comment.
We also welcome readers to offer up their own statements for our writers to consider, Measure for Measure.
This week’s topic: In competition, groups should be able to watch all of the other competitors for the evening.
True: Participants in a competition should always have the opportunity to observe those who they are competing against. How else can groups benefit from the experience of seeing and hearing their peers? How else can groups know if they got fair shakes from the judges? This would be like having an Olympic event in which competitors cannot see what each other are doing. A competitor has to take the judge’s word that she was the best, or that he wasn’t worthy of placing? It wouldn’t make any sense in the Olympics, and makes little more sense on the competitive collegiate a cappella stage.
False: Oftentimes, it’s just not possible for all of the competitors to get to see every performance at an a cappella show. First off, seating is limited at a lot of venues, meaning seating for the competing groups could make it impossible for spectators to attend the show. Secondly, unless we want long gaps between each set, and/or to rob groups of the opportunity to prepare on their own before they hit the stage, it’s just not possible for every group to catch every performance live. Beyond these practical elements, it’s also worth noting that some groups benefit from not seeing all of their competition, lest they be distracted, and either intimidated by the formidable opposition, or lulled into a sense of over-confidence from other lackluster groups.
RSS
I disagree - I don’t believe that in a competition, groups should be allowed to watch one another, with few exceptions.
First, the logistics: it can be distracting to the audience to have people traveling up and down the aisles (if the competing groups are to watch from inside the auditorium) during the show. If audience members paid good money to see the show, they should at least be given the right to a professional event at which all performers are already prepared to go onstage from backstage. (If the set/choreo requires the group to go onstage from inside the audience, I think an exception can be made, but this is rare.) I also echo all of the sentiments in the “True” statement above.
I also don’t think the argument that “knowing your competitor’s game makes you better” holds much water. In a competition, even if you do see one another’s set, you’re not going to make radical changes to your own moments before you go on stage. If you’re really into a cappella espionage, you’d attend the other competitors’ home shows and quarter-final appearances.
The only true egalitarian way of choosing the winner would be a broadcast on TV in which America gets to call in to vote and decide. Since we’re not quite there yet, we have to go on the merits of the well-rounded, highly qualified individuals who are selected as judges. In my years of producing and judging, while I have disagreed slightly about the scores of groups and awards, I have not once found that the group chosen in first place didn’t deserve to be there.
Here is where I think exceptions can be made:
1) If a show is performed in two acts with an intermission, I think that groups competing in Act 2 should be able to watch Act 1 (and vice versa), providing there is enough room in the venue and all PAID audience members can fit.
2) The group that is immediately following the one currently performing should be backstage and will likely be able to see the current set.
Valerie Kolko | Apr 4, 2008 | Reply
I think there could be an advantage in a group knowing if one of it’s songs had already been performed. Because some songs just lend themselves really well to a cappella, I have heard of competitions where the same song was performed multiple times. If, by the third performance of “Bring me to life” the judges are completely sick of the song, it might behoove a group to switch to another song. (I don’t know if that would be allowed, or practicle, but would save audiences and judges from hearing the same song 3 times in 3 hours.)
Nancy | Apr 6, 2008 | Reply