I find myself asking over and again: "What is the distinctive feature of a community orchestra? What is its essence? How is it different from professional orchestras (other than the obvious)?"
An allied question is: "Are community orchestras uniquely placed to make a special contribution to the cultural experience of their local communities – one that is perhaps different from professional orchestras? (eg are we freer to try new formats, new styles, new music, new forms of music presentation, - in ways that a professional orchestra could not?")
"DO we feel we have “made it” when we look like and sound like a professional orchestra (is that the goal)?"
These are all questions that have fascinated and continue to intrigue the writer.
The simple answer – they are orchestras made up of amateur players. But that is not a sufficient answer...there is more to it than that.
As soon as you put a group of people together, and provided they have something to keep them together, something unique to that group will start to emerge.
The interactions of the different personas will begin to shape the group. The group’s perceptions of its role in society will shape its agenda.
The extent to which they engage in discussing issues around being a group will be critical, though if a leadership group emerges and keeps leadership issues to itself without input from the “rank and file” members, then I think we are heading for a very narrow and introspective interpretation.
As a psychosocial analyst I see at least 3 strong dimensions to an orchestra:
there is the social dimension - we are social animals - social interaction is essential for our health. Orchestras are social settings.
There is also, of course the artistic dimension. Orchestras are formed and operate to make music, to express musicality.
And there is the commercial dimension. An orchestra is a business. Indeed, if it can't operate effectively as a business it is surely going to go out of existence. It has to balance its books.
There are other things that orchestras do also. But is one more important then the others? And how critical is it that we do all three things to a high standard. Let's go even further and ask ... what do we do in our orchestras to make each of these functions the best that we can?
I would love to have some other input on this topic. What do you think?
I imagine that there are some people for whom this discussion is irrelevant - at least that may be what they think and say. But for others it is far from irrelevant. But let's see.
If you have an opinion, please feel free to express it.
We might, indeed we should, ask as part of this discussion: "Who is our community?
Some orchestras in NZ will be very much influenced/affected by their location. NZ has some very different environs and doubtless have particular views on how to ‘adapt’ to their local communities.
But location aside, do we have in mind a particular part of the community spectrum? (ie do we have a particular empathy or concern for a portion of the whole community – do we feel we would be more “successful” or “satisfied” with reaching a particular segment?"
I think this is a topic for another day (another blog) but feel free to take it up now, if you wish.
Ross Gurney 28/7/2024
If you would like to contribute an opinion in relation to this topic, please write including whether or not you would like your comments printed in this blog.
Comments