THE PHILADELPHIA ORCHESTRA'S CENTENNIAL COMPOSITION COMPETITION

by Simon Woods

Back in 1997, in the early stages of planning for the centennial of The Philadelphia Orchestra, it was clear that new music would play a big part in the celebrations. This orchestra’s association with living composers has been one of the most remarkable aspects of an extremely rich 100-year history. Many important composers – from Bartòk to Barber, Rachmaninoff to Rouse, Ginastera to Hannibal – have heard works of theirs played for the first time by The Philadelphia Orchestra. Also well-known is the orchestra’s role as an early ambassador in the United States for masterpieces such as Mahler’s Eighth Symphony, Stravinsky’s Rite of Spring and Schönberg’s Gurrelieder. So the centennial offered an obvious opportunity both to revisit some of the works with which the orchestra had been associated, and to commission significant new works to stand alongside them.

Beyond this, we had a more ambitious goal, which was to involve the public in a dynamic dialogue about the music of our time. Early in the planning for the centennial it was suggested by Co-Principal Horn David Wetherill that we might consider a competition where the audience and musicians of the orchestra would choose the winner. This seemed like a very valuable way of continuing The Philadelphia Orchestra’s long tradition of doing things just a little bit differently and a little more boldly. The idea was enthusiastically embraced by Music Director Wolfgang Sawallisch, who volunteered his involvement both in the judging process and as conductor of the finalists. The Centennial Composition Competition was officially launched in the spring of 1999.

Running any competition is no small task, and we have been fortunate to work with the inestimable American Composers Forum as an administrative partner in this project. After an initial announcement through the Forum’s extensive mailing list and publications, we received more than 300 scores from all over the United States. This significantly exceeded our expectations, giving us considerable apprehension about the complexity of the judging process and also much cause to rejoice in the willingness of composers to participate in such an unusual competition.

The strong response also sends a salutary message that we cannot ignore. The full-time composer of today, whose music receives regular performances and who has the luxury of moving directly from one paid commission to another, is a rare breed. The vast majority of composers in this country, of all ages and backgrounds, write music simply because it is a creative imperative for them. Not because there is a large check or a prestigious premiere waiting when the work is completed, but because the act of writing music is fueled by an inner fire that cannot be assuaged simply by fear that the score will receive just one hearing (if they are lucky) and then gather dust on a shelf for years. So they live in hope that one day the work to which they have devoted many months of energy will get the attention it deserves. Three hundred and thirty composers sent in scores written with that hope, some never performed, some heard in rehearsal only, some played in concert by youth or community orchestras, but every note penned with belief. On Oct. 5, 2000, we are giving three of these composers the opportunity of a lifetime.

But let’s return for one moment to the process by which we arrived at those three finalists. By the time the submission date had come, the conference room in the American Composers Forum’s St. Paul office was almost completely submerged under scores, biographies, tapes, CDs and return envelopes. After taking a deep breath, Forum Program Director Philip Blackburn, with the generous help of composers Libby Larsen and Aaron Jay Kernis, and Greater Twin Cities Youth Symphonies Conductor Paul Jan Zdunek, began the task of evaluating the scores and reducing them to a short list. In doing this they were not only seeking to find works of originality and lasting interest, but also to represent the broadest possible cross-section of styles, from an almost overwhelming diversity and range. Six scores were sent to Wolfgang Sawallisch, who made the choice of the three works to be heard on Oct. 5.

The three works are so different as to render comparisons or judgments almost meaningless. Kevin Beavers’ Sinfonia draws on popular American culture with wonderful feeling for sonority and color, Keith Fitch’s Totem is a compelling drama played out with masterly orchestral skill, and Huang Ruo’s Three Pieces for Orchestra are spare, Zen-like studies which turn unexpected corners with astounding authority and conviction. The plain truth is that all three are winners, and their achievement is cause enough for celebration.

Needless to say, our competition has not been universally welcomed. There are those who have somewhat cynically suggested that regardless of the relative merits of the works, the audience will inevitably choose the least challenging of the three. Others are suspicious of any composition involving layers of "expert" opinion. There are even those who abhor the idea of competitions altogether, and would have preferred us to give an opportunity to as many composers as possible to hear their work played once in a rehearsal. These points of view may all have some validity, and indeed it is certainly true that what we are doing is a drop in the ocean of what is really needed to support the music of our time. But the fact remains that as well as celebrating emergent talent among American composers, this competition has another, less evident goal: to engage the audience with the music of three composers whom we believe are among the real hopes for the future of new music in this country. Not because in some didactic way we think that new music is good medicine, or even simply because as a leader among the world’s musical organizations we believe we have a critical role to play in keeping our culture a living culture, but because not a measure goes by in any of these three works that does not contain something intriguing to hear. By turns thrilling and contemplative and dramatic and playful and seductive and colorful, these three works gloriously reflect the dynamism and eclecticism of our times.

Finding a worthy winner to champion is only part of the fun. If the clink of coffee cups during intermission is accompanied by the buzz of heated discussion and lively disagreement, then we have succeeded.

Simon Woods is The Philadelphia Orchestra’s artistic administrator and an ACF board member.