The Envelope Please
In the summer of 1956 I stood with fifty other kids, all beside our decorated bicycles, and all competing to be the first to whistle after eating eight saltines. This contest had two components: the decorating of bicycles competition, and the whistling despite crackers competition. These are examples of two distinct kinds of contests, both of which are madly popular these days.
The decorated bikes contest was what you might call a subjectively decided competition, and the whistling contest was what you might call an objectively decided competition. Subjective means "Taking place within the mind and modified by individual bias," and in this category of competition would fall bicycle decorating contests, beauty pageants, juried art shows, American Idol, the Gong Show, the Ted Mack Original Amateur Hour, "Best of Town" awards, "Best of Show" awards, the Grammys, the Emmys and so forth. It would include poetry competitions, album of the year, sculptor of the year, lifetime achievement, and all other awards that are won as a result of opinion. This can be the opinion of one person, a panel of judges, or -- via online, telephone, or paper polls, or applause meters and so forth -- the general public.
Objective means "Undistorted by emotion or personal bias; based on observable phenomenon." Objective contests would include competitive sports, first to whistle after eating saltines, first to fly around the world wearing a snood, NASCAR, the Kentucky Derby, Fear Factor, the Iditarod, pie eating contests, and all others that are won as a result of some sort of countable proof. You don't have to vote at a pie eating contest; they count the tins.
Most contests in the arts -- including folk music contests -- are of the subjective, opinion-based type. What strikes me as problematic with folk music contests is that folk music, by most definitions of it (mine anyway), is the most varied of all music subcategories. So much so that it's really NOT a distinct subcategory. How can you select a "best album of the year" when you are serenaded by Tuva throat singers, maundering navel gazers, and cajun accordionists, all with new CDs? It's like asking someone: Who's better, Modigliani or Oprah?
Even interpretation of the results of subjective contests are subject to subjectivity. When the last couple presidential elections (subjective contests) were almost perfectly tied at 50%, all the pundits said this indicated how strongly the country was divided. Strongly? If you throw 100 pennies in the air, 50 will come up heads. A 50% tie could occur with a strong division of opinion, or with no division of opinion at all: complete randomness. Such a tie would be the result if the voting public, for example, felt that the candidates were pretty much the same.
I heard the MC of a big dance competition TV show ask of a contestant who had just lost due to his receiving only, say, six million viewer votes as opposed to the winner who had received, say, seven million viewer votes, "So, why do you think America doesn't like you?" This is another completely weird and 100% subjective interpretation of contest results, very much like a president thinking a tiny sliver of a margin of victory is a "clear mandate."
It's a real challenge in any contest, particularly a subjective contest, to see the contest for what it is, and to remember that the winner is not intrinsically "better" than any of the losers; that the judges may have been underpaid, overworked, in love, unqualified, biased, stoned, crooked, feverish, mean, tired, hungry; and that in any event, the whole shebang is based on opinion. Bob Dylan, Leadbelly, and Woody Guthrie would have lost American Idol in the first round.
Which brings us back to folk music. It isn't just happenstance that seems to make folk music too diverse for competition; diversity, you might say, is in its charter. So isn't it odd to have a subculture whose foundation is all about individuality and unique personal expression to imply that one person's effort is better than everyone else's? But folk music competitions are everywhere. There are fiddle playing contests, trad CD competitions, folk songwriting prizes, guitar play-offs, readers' choice folk music awards, the works. They are hosted by banjo companies, BMI, ASCAP, folk festivals, newspapers, folk music magazines, folk venues, and now even by the great North American Folk Music and Dance Alliance itself.
I don't know how I feel about all this. If I won a Folk Album of the Year contest I suppose I might think, well, you know, this is really a pretty good idea, this contest thing. And it often does contribute to a boost in business for people who win such awards. Also, since self-image is such a problem in the creative realm -- I read a whole book once based on the idea that writer's block is caused entirely by a dip in self-image, and it was pretty helpful -- winning such an award could help the winner actually create more and better art. Problem is, it may be only a good thing for the one person who wins, and a potential hindrance for the zillions who lose.
Then again, it could be that in competing for an award, all contestants would be goaded to practice a lot or write real hard or whatever, thereby increasing the overall creativity index of the world in general. I imagine a contest like this could conceivably help build a buzz of excitement not only within an organization like the Folk Alliance, but within the larger entertainment community, and maybe even to the far reaches of the general public. Maybe your neighbor Jane Doe would pick up her Friday paper and see an ad for her regular weekend rock faves, Bondo and the Hardeners, but is won over by a little article about the Orihula Jug Band, when she reads that they are winners of the 2007 Folk Alliance Album of the Year, or BMI or ASCAP Album of the Year, or Joe's Bait and Small Engine Album of the Year. She goes to the show and decides then and there to dust off her own zither.
So maybe it is a good thing; I can't decide. But I have a nagging hunch that today's competition frenzy relates to bigger issues, like the threatened balance between majority rule and minority rights. Or am I nuts? What do you think? Vote now!