Neil Mulvie: ‘I find it difficult not to be impressed by the approach to judging and scrutiny that Norman [Matheson] describes in his letter to Andrew Wright. And I am certain that Andrew would have totally agreed with Norman’s views.
‘Andrew often quoted Andrew MacNeill, saying that he was more comfortable awarding a prize to the piper, ‘who went off the tune rather than one who was never on it in the first place’. Musicality has to trump minor blemishes/inaccuracies in my view.’
Duncan Watson: ‘Senior judges, as opposed to the lower level of Approved, should be required to give an account of their views on the playing that they have assessed. This would be beneficial to the pipers participating and be of interest to the paying audience – often scant in numbers. Interestingly there is comment in the letter that the competition playing in question was not ‘top class’. When this takes place, lengthy debate on who should be in the list rightly follows – and it goes beyond whether there are note errors.
‘If competitive piping is purely an exercise in accuracy, and sometimes it seems so, then in the words penned by the writer, the ‘welfare of piobaireachd playing’ is not being looked after. This can be a difficult pill to swallow for the participants, but is not so unusual. Undoubtedly, scrutiny of judging assessments/results should be a fact of life for judges, particularly, those at Senior level.
‘The letter writer, the late Norman Matheson, was meticulous in his note taking, retaining all of his notebooks on judging for about 42 years. I know this as I have viewed the books. They are in a sort of personal shorthand more understandable to the writer than a casual reader. But the point is, Norman had something to refer to whenever he was challenged on a result and that happened on a few notable occasion in his long career on the bench.’
Robert Wallace: Knowing Andrew Wright well I can endorse Neil Mulvie’s comment. Andrew was nothing if not the consummate piobaireachd musician. The cardinal error to him was not failure of technique (within reason) but failure in accuracy of timing and expression. The references in Norman Matheson’s letter to promotion of error free tunes over a musical one with a technical blemish would have come from the complainant not from Andrew.
The complainant would have been of the ‘you have not completed the contract if you err’ opinion. Any departure from the printed score, no matter how slight, and the transgressor should not be considered for a prize. This is a flawed approach.
Judging is a difficult job. It is when faced with dilemmas such as those at Glenfiddich 1994 that the experience and knowledge gained over a lifetime of listening and performing at the highest level comes to the aid of the adjudicator.
You are safe in your understanding of the music; you can tell the difference between a good pipe and a great one; your ear alerts you immediately to high quality rhythmical technique over the workmanlike.
In the end it should come down to this: Did a small slip or note error interrupt the pleasing, musical effect the piper was producing? If so, then yes, down the list he goes. If not, then let music win the day.
- Read the original article here.
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.
