In 1993 there was a boycott of the main piping competitions by a large tranche of the competing piping community. They had been driven to take such drastic action by what they perceived as the poor standard of judging then extant.
The boycott led to the formation of the Joint Committee for Judging representing all interested parties, pipers, promoters, judges. It was to oversee matters of dispute. Andrew Wright was chairman when, in November 1994, a letter of complaint was received.
It concerned the result at the Glenfiddich piobaireachd event the previous month. A piper had been given a prize despite note errors in his tune. The judges were Norman Matheson, Jimmy Young and Major John Allan. Andrew wrote to them asking for an explanation.
On January 4th, 1995 Norman replied: ‘Thank you for your letter of 14th December. Although a reply may not have been called for, I think it appropriate to respond, as do my fellow judges. What I have to say however expresses my own views, although John Allan and James Young, who have seen this letter, are in complete agreement.
‘There are a few general points to be made. First, since we now have a Joint Committee for Judging it seems proper that it should question decisions that seem controversial, and I for one welcome your letter. Secondly, however, it is unlikely that the matter would have been raised in this way had W McCallum’s performance not been broadcast.
‘The ability to listen and re-listen to a recording gives everyone the great benefit of hindsight which is not available to judges on the day.
‘In my own experience there are not infrequently disagreements about note errors or departures from the score. On several occasions I have been suspicious or convinced of errors to be assured by my colleagues to the contrary or vice versa.
‘Thirdly, criteria and standards of judging should be similar whatever the status of the competition whether it be a ‘top class competition’ or a less prestigious event. In addition, although the Glenfiddich Championship is a prestigious event, the piobaireachd competition in 1994 could not be called ‘top class’ in terms of musical quality, a sentiment that conveys the views of all three judges.
‘Fourthly, we do not agree with the statement that – ‘a tangible error should have excluded the competitor from the prize list, especially when there were note error free tunes further down the prize list and elsewhere in the event’.
‘It is of course a matter of opinion and different judges would have different attitudes – there are as you know no rules about judging which remains a highly subjective and idiosyncratic activity. From my own experience over the past twenty years or so, I feel certain that the significance attached to note errors has diminished and that many judges are prepared to overlook them to a degree in the interest of rewarding performances that are musically outstanding.
‘This is surely a healthy trend, for what keeps piobaireachd alive is musical interpretation and not note accuracy. It is of course a matter of degree, and admittedly gross departures from the score may be incompatible with the award of a prize. Where to draw the line is arbitrary, but in recent years most judges with whom I have sat would usually downgrade a good performance a place or two on recognition of a relatively minor note error.
‘I have however known first prizes to be awarded in major competitions despite full awareness of note errors and this must be common knowledge, though it may be wrongly assumed that judges were unaware of the inaccuracy.
‘To be perfectly honest about this case in point, we were in disagreement about the accuracy of W McCallum’s crunluath singling, but after full discussion decided to give him the benefit of the doubt. Personally I am in no doubt that on musical grounds he deserved his second place.
‘Nevertheless I should be prepared to concede that had there been agreement on inaccuracy he should possibly have been placed third, or maybe even fourth. On this point I cannot guarantee that my colleagues would have been similarly minded since one has expressed the view that second place was still the appropriate ranking. However, there is no support whatsoever for the view that he should have been excluded from the prize list.
‘This kind of analysis and criticism of judging seems to me to be healthy and I hope that it may give some comfort to competitors who feel they have been badly done to. In addition the more that judges are asked to account for their decisions, the more are competitors likely to gain insight into the process.
‘Remember however that the judging process is entirely subjective, with no rules, variable according to individual attitudes, and that judge are not infallible, especially in detecting note errors.
‘Of the various attributes of a performance that have to be taken into account, the quality of musical interpretation should surely be the prime criterion pf excellence and in these terms I do not believe that any great injustice was done in this particular case.’
Kilberry Book of Ceòl Meadhonach – Middle Music – digital book
This book was compiled and edited by Captain John Campbell, Kilberry, and his more famous son Archibald.
