If you must compete, race against a clock or towards a finish line, but never contend with a judge. Consider what happened during the 1936 Olympic Games in Berlin. Jesse Owens was a gifted African-American track and field athlete; Adolf Hitler was a bigot who spread racial propaganda. This propaganda inevitably addled the thinking of the public and of the Olympic judges. During the qualifying heat for the long jump, Jesse Owens was almost disqualified because the judges said he jumped past the takeoff point twice. Just before his last attempt, the German long-jumper Luz Long offered to place a white towel at the takeoff point so that Jesse’s footprint would prove that he jumped where he should have. This brilliant idea took the power away from the biased judges and back to the unbiased proof of distance. By the way, Jesse set a world record; Luz became his lifelong friend, and Hitler, well…
Here is the point: any competition based on judgment is inevitably based on biased opinion. So we pose the question: since beauty is “in the eyes of the beholder” and art is so subjective, should any of the arts be subjected to judging and competition? There are pros and cons to consider.
Competition’s lure of drive and ambition
Granted, some may argue that competition brings out the best in people and drives them to reach greater heights. School systems are rapidly changing to accommodate children that don’t learn in the traditional way. Similarly, the customary use of competition to create drive for the arts may cause some gifted people to achieve, but for others such an approach is like a wet blanket on a fire.
Competition’s lure of fame and fortune
When money and awards start rolling in, they can become an artist’s best friend. But how much does it contribute to the work of art itself? You can’t ignore the generated revenue and attention from shows like X-Factor or Somewhere-On-The-Planet’s Got Idol or Talent. However, the great late pianist Oscar Peterson said that there were moments when he got so into his craft that he played sounds he could never play again and that at times he would forget to breathe or even drool on himself. This wonderful place of artistic nirvana requires an environment without distractions. But just as rainforests disappear for short-term gain, competition is often allowed to disrupt the Zen-full womb where art is born.
Who says who’s better?
Art that satisfies is successful.
Competition shifts the focus from the art to the competitive drama.
However, when you think of how purely the artists could express themselves without the distraction of “winning” something, surely deep down we all yearn to enjoy moments of bliss in an environment unconstrained by expectations – and therefore, limits.
If you are an artist of some sort, you should consider your panache for competition before you create. If the fear of rejection or the desire to please becomes overriding during the creation process, you need to know if that will help you achieve something amazing, or stifle your ability to explore and develop. Resolve this matter before you expose your art to judgment.
Just as all travelers must play the role of driver, passenger, or pedestrian, inevitably we all float between the position of artistic critic and judge.
Whether or not you are a born competitor, a shy, behind-the-scenes genius, or a judge and a critic, always remember that art is intimate. Paint for yourself, play for the one person you know will understand, dance to share, cook to satisfy, photograph a moment no one ever thought to capture before. Art is the way to bond and relate to kindred loves. In this way you gain from contribution – not competition.
