Baffles me as to why their second concert was ticketed - we have to pay to listen to kids who are not up to the mark ::rolleyes:mri_fan wrote:1) the children in the concert are not at the level of given concerts...not at all...some of them may have given some, but none of them have ever given concerts at Cleveland besides the SS group. They are from the pool of students who have competed before, so there's no reason to thing they shouldn't be allowed to compete again.
The fact that they have been trained by musicians in india for an extended length of time that puts them in a different bracket. Rather than assuming the status quo approach, it is only appropriate for the committee members to review their competition policies.
Difficult, but not an insolvable problem - the context relates to point 1.mri_fan wrote:2 ) This is a valid criticism that happened last year...you can dig up previous threads about it. It remains as a problem that the committees may want to try to address, but it's very difficult to do so.
Even by the rules published on their site, she should not have been in the competition. Here is the snip from their site "People who will be performing a concert in this Aradhana, or who have performed a concert in a previous Cleveland Aradhana are not eligible to participate in the competition"mri_fan wrote:3) Why should the girl who won the concert competition be barred from further competition? As I see it, she has every right to continue competing in other categories (she hasn't won 1st place in those categories) and it's common for some people who win the same prize in multiple years.
Strangely, she even participated in the 'concert' competition this year too. Surely, the organizers were sleeping in not following their published rules.
Even in the city level competitions, the judges make it a point to ensure to check on these factors to ensure that there is not even a perception of any bias. Whether GJR knew or did not, it is organizer's responsibility to address this. After all Anuradha Sridhar was awarded the best teacher award this year and if the committee claims to be unaware of her students participating, that is hog wash.mri_fan wrote:4) I doubt that GJR has the time to learn exactly who is Anuradha Sridhar's students...but that's really sort of an inevitability. Mridangam students who compete have often taken lessons from Raja Rao sir, or Dorai sir, etc. Violin students who compete also may have taken lessons from some of the judges, but we must have faith that judges will base on music.
Let me give you an example.
Recently, GJR was the judge for a student in the senior violin category who had taken lessons for him. The student competed in Kriti, in which he got 3, ragam (in which he got third and the other participant got second, with no first) and pallavi (he was the only student, and he didn't win anything in that category). doesn't seem too biased to me...
Whether there was bias or not is immaterial - it is the perception that counts; as they say perception is reality.
Can anything be stranger than the CD's of this kid being sold in front of the auditorium and then you have the kid competing.mri_fan wrote:5) Although that family may have some world record they got from a website, he has not played in a regular concert at cleveland, which I understand is the only factor which can disqualify you.
Organizing any competition is not an easy task by any means. The room for improvement unfortunately is the size of the university campus - if you ask me they have chosen the path of least resistance in running the competition. I will post more comments when i get some time later this week.mri_fan wrote:Cleveland's competition is incredibly difficult to pull off, considering how hard the students who compete work. There will always be some disgruntled participants, but that is an inevitability. There is always room for improvement, but understand the Herculean effort it takes to pull of 10 days of world-class music.
Shanks