Would This Be Legal..., ...In your country? Options

[freda_bloogs]

All's I'd say is that you should just put up with it. If you take this attitude to your line manager when you get out into the big wide world you will lose your job. We all have to do things we don't agree with but at the end of the day the teacher is in charge and she has to take what'll benefit the group as a whole to heart.

I was in the position last year where I was more skilled than a teacher but I just got on with my work and helped other people if they asked for it, often putting his mistakes right - I didn't kick up a massive fuss with the management.

Just my deux centimes.

[neilthecellist]

Just a few comments on an impossible situation:

1) Any orchestra that can play the Suk Serenade should cope easily with the Elgar "I & A";

SHOULD. By "orchestra", do you mean the players, the conductor, or the whole ensemble? I know for certain the tha players are capable of Elgar's "I & A", but again, when you have a conductor who is ruining it, you know what that does to the players. They slack. They don't care anymore. And since this is a high school ensemble, that level of "not caring" is exponentially dangerous for the years to come in the ensemble.

2) A conscientious conductor should "know how the music goes" (George Hurst's phrase), by reading the score carefully and either studying with a master conductor or listening to a range of interpretations, or both;
3) Elgar's scores, and in particular the "I & A", are notated in great detail, and the differences (e.g. "molto rit."/"poco rit.) really do matter;
4) The many speed variations, and the number of parts, make the "I & A" a substantial challenge for a conductor
5) A conductor of any orchestra ought to have some understanding of the strings, so as to know the varieties of timbre that are available from them;

George Hurst was right! As most conducting textbooks say as well. Also, you're right, any conductor should have a fundamental understanding of strings, that is taught in ALL conducting classes.

6) In professional orchestras, conductors usually rely on the leader or other section principals to advise the other players on technique;

Usually, or sometimes? Because I know professional conductors myself who instate the string technique, or at the least, have a conference with the principal string leaders before the first rehearsal.

7) In the UK, music degrees (B, M or D) do not necessarily involve tuition in conducting, even as an option;*
* I think this is scandalous, as many music graduates go into teaching and may immediately find themselves conducting school orchestras and choirs.

Sorry, I live in the USA. Um... does "tuition" mean to teach, in UK-English? In America, "tuition" means "money." But anyway, I'm straying off topic! What kind of music degree-focus do you mean? Music performance? Music Education? Music Composition?

But you're right, it's scandalous, and totally inappropriate. Having a Master's Degree in music education but not knowing the difference between molto rit. and poco rit. is like saying, "I didn't really pay attention in graduate school, but I'm your teacher anyway! Muhahaha! Evil wins!"

8) Much of the technique of conducting can be taught, and there are short courses in conducting at summer schools e.g. Canford SSM
9) If you can't easily attend a course, many aspects of conducting can be learnt from books, e.g. "Orchestral Performance : a Guide for Conductors and Players", by Christopher Adey, which is particularly aimed at amateur and school orchestras.

I 50% agree, 50% disagree. I believe that the physical act of conducting can be taught, but as far as manifesting the ART of conducting, that must be taught not out of textbook, and only through human interactions.

I myself have studied and effectively learned conducting both ways, through books and people.

I feel very strongly for neilthecellist's situation, because the "I & A" is such a great work (one of Elgar's top three, IMO, along with the Variations and "Falstaff"), and to be involved in its perversion would plunge me into such depths of depression. In his position, I would certainly leave the orchestra.

Thanks. I'm already thinking about leaving. I thought that maybe the orchestra was salvagable, but at this rate, I don't think that's an option anymore.

All's I'd say is that you should just put up with it. If you take this attitude to your line manager when you get out into the big wide world you will lose your job. We all have to do things we don't agree with *snip*

In the real world, I would be earning money, not a superfluous grade. Of course, if I were under Barenboim or Ozawa's baton (or Karajan!) I would shut up and obey, but when I'm still just a student, and 22+ years apart from my teacher, and I happen to at least UNDERSTAND how to treat the kind of music we normally play... THAT is grotesquely in itself, frustrating.


=====
To people in general:
Just because you may have had a bad conductor in your lifetime does not make that conductor "correct" in their actions. If the world were 60% murderers and 40% innocents, does that mean that because the majority of the society are murderers, that the act of random murder is morally justified and correct? No.

In the United States, we have the National Standards for Music Education. My teacher doesn't follow them, clearly.

[snhs]

I think either is acceptable, not entirely sure though. To be honest if the teacher can get everyone using apostrophes properly they're usually quite happy

Yes but if you use an expansive metaphor every time then it can be difficult for a musician to distinguish between when you want a massive difference or a slight one. Equally musicians at high school, particularly towards the end of the day can just get lazy, they probably know its not loud/quiet enough but they don't need an expansive metaphor to explain it and if its not enough then a bit of shouting/imagery can be useful. In a professional context if its a crucial part of the conductor's 'vision' then the metaphors etc can help, but it can also take two or three times as long to do so and in a professional setting time is money so you don't get as much rehearsal time as you might like. It can easily become a balance of harms, if the first two movements are fantastic but you run out of time to do the third then the concert will still be reviewed as a bit of a flop.

Paradoxes are sometimes all there is to it, but one standard doesn't fit all even if it is written by some guy at a state or national level. The inverse is also true obviously, e.g. if the metaphor goes so overboard that your principal flautist on recollecting it bursts out laughing half way through a solo.

Valid point, but if i were to play that same music while watching an episode of a children's TV show or watching a farce at a theatre it wouldn't seem as majestic. Equally if his stimulus in writing it had been a shopping list or a piece of mouldy bread and he had orchestrated it in a similar way it could still sound just as majestic, even though his motivation was less so.

Do you think Renaissance/Baroque music sounds nice? A lot of it was written because a bunch of rich guys wanted something nice to play or listen to. Sometimes it was even just a matter of keeping up with the Joneses. They didn't really care what the composer was thinking of as he wrote it as long as it did what they wanted and often the players would decorate the melody so much that the composer might find it difficult to recognise it adding massive rits changing the tempo at will. It wasn't true to the composers intent the conductor probably wouldn't have done any research into the composer's thoughts in composing the piece, but people loved listening to it and music was able to develop partly because of that patronage of those who heard it.

There is any number of reasons why a teacher could not be aware of a school's regs or could make a mistake on them. If the parents had previously only complained to her and she believed her subject/course was for whatever reason exempt then why wouldn't see repeat the same information to numerous students over the course of several years. If the first child's parents had contacted the office and the policy had been clarified to her then there would be no question of her being fired (and even with the paper evidence she may have been told/believed that it wasn't applicable). If she was doing it in full knowledge that the school regs said something different then it may be a valid point, but if key students had left the orchestra and its standard declined then her head might have ended up on the chopping block anyway.

I've seen quite a few professional conductors, been conducted by a few and several non professional conductors who are teachers with degrees etc. But in spite of that at the end of the day, on the stage the conductor is just that a metronome who keeps the orchestra together, at times adapting to a situation or adding to the mood obviously. Your example on the Mahler actually demonstrates the point, a professional orchestra can play well and get a decent review regardless of (some might say despite) the guy up front. Indeed they can do fairly well with no conductor at all and just a leader or soloist directing, as was common in Baroque/early music. There's obviously more to it than that if you go to a high enough level, after all just about anyone can fold a bit of paper in two but it takes talent to turn it into an origami swan. By the sound of it you've had professional or near professional conductors previously and they've maybe went about it in the same way as if you were a pro group, but why what was their motivation? Chances are it was to add a bit to their C.V., they needed experience wielding a baton before they could get their profile high enough for them to be attractive to other groups. They needed your group to play well so that their career could advance, and they might have been inspiring to you, but a teachers motivation is different.

To give tuition or receive tuition would generally be if you were being taught, i think in the U.K. we'd use tuition fees if we were referring to the money side.

But when she is on the podium she is Baremboim or Ozawa or whoever else, not literally of course. It's like the mentality of ship Captains a few hundred years ago 'on this ship i'm God' kind of thing, you had to follow whether they were a Nelson or a Bligh. The same is true of conductors, if you'd follow certain people were they to do the wrong thing then surely your teacher is due the same degree of respect.

I'm not entirely sure if your perception that your position has turned into the forlorn hope is correct, couldn't you try persuading the teacher to let you conduct the group as a extra thing for your interviews and to help you explore technique etc (with her 'supervising' obviously)?

[neilthecellist]

I think either is acceptable, not entirely sure though. To be honest if the teacher can get everyone using apostrophes properly they're usually quite happy

Yes but if you use an expansive metaphor every time then it can be difficult for a musician to distinguish between when you want a massive difference or a slight one. Equally musicians at high school, particularly towards the end of the day can just get lazy, they probably know its not loud/quiet enough but they don't need an expansive metaphor to explain it and if its not enough then a bit of shouting/imagery can be useful. In a professional context if its a crucial part of the conductor's 'vision' then the metaphors etc can help, but it can also take two or three times as long to do so and in a professional setting time is money so you don't get as much rehearsal time as you might like. It can easily become a balance of harms, if the first two movements are fantastic but you run out of time to do the third then the concert will still be reviewed as a bit of a flop.

Paradoxes are sometimes all there is to it, but one standard doesn't fit all even if it is written by some guy at a state or national level. The inverse is also true obviously, e.g. if the metaphor goes so overboard that your principal flautist on recollecting it bursts out laughing half way through a solo.

Valid point, but if i were to play that same music while watching an episode of a children's TV show or watching a farce at a theatre it wouldn't seem as majestic. Equally if his stimulus in writing it had been a shopping list or a piece of mouldy bread and he had orchestrated it in a similar way it could still sound just as majestic, even though his motivation was less so.

Do you think Renaissance/Baroque music sounds nice? A lot of it was written because a bunch of rich guys wanted something nice to play or listen to. Sometimes it was even just a matter of keeping up with the Joneses. They didn't really care what the composer was thinking of as he wrote it as long as it did what they wanted and often the players would decorate the melody so much that the composer might find it difficult to recognise it adding massive rits changing the tempo at will. It wasn't true to the composers intent the conductor probably wouldn't have done any research into the composer's thoughts in composing the piece, but people loved listening to it and music was able to develop partly because of that patronage of those who heard it.

There is any number of reasons why a teacher could not be aware of a school's regs or could make a mistake on them. If the parents had previously only complained to her and she believed her subject/course was for whatever reason exempt then why wouldn't see repeat the same information to numerous students over the course of several years. If the first child's parents had contacted the office and the policy had been clarified to her then there would be no question of her being fired (and even with the paper evidence she may have been told/believed that it wasn't applicable). If she was doing it in full knowledge that the school regs said something different then it may be a valid point, but if key students had left the orchestra and its standard declined then her head might have ended up on the chopping block anyway.

I've seen quite a few professional conductors, been conducted by a few and several non professional conductors who are teachers with degrees etc. But in spite of that at the end of the day, on the stage the conductor is just that a metronome who keeps the orchestra together, at times adapting to a situation or adding to the mood obviously. Your example on the Mahler actually demonstrates the point, a professional orchestra can play well and get a decent review regardless of (some might say despite) the guy up front. Indeed they can do fairly well with no conductor at all and just a leader or soloist directing, as was common in Baroque/early music. There's obviously more to it than that if you go to a high enough level, after all just about anyone can fold a bit of paper in two but it takes talent to turn it into an origami swan. By the sound of it you've had professional or near professional conductors previously and they've maybe went about it in the same way as if you were a pro group, but why what was their motivation? Chances are it was to add a bit to their C.V., they needed experience wielding a baton before they could get their profile high enough for them to be attractive to other groups. They needed your group to play well so that their career could advance, and they might have been inspiring to you, but a teachers motivation is different.

Well, we were discussing the Introduction and Allegro by Edward Elgar. That piece is solely majestic. You can't try playing the Introduction and Allegro as if it were Beethoven's Ninth. Clearly, there exists some ground in the way it was written (http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&id=-CcRAAAAYAAJ&dq=introduction+and+allegro&printsec=frontcover&source=web&ots=CJ6Xri3lsa&sig=6YopYGM3KPP8f5dw4QM8ilrgnLs)
that strongly indicates that you can't play it otherwise.

I'm not interested in the motives of my previous conductors. A job is a job. Such has stayed the same, only the people who take that job have changed. Indeed, every conductor has their own set of principles, but nonetheless, there exists a common ground, in both State/National standards for music education as well as what the piece itself demands.

Basically, imagine playing "Twinkle Twinkle Little Star" but as Beethoven. You'd probably throw accents, ffffffff dynamic and the opposite of morando as the subline. Sure, the cops won't come in and say, "What you're doing is illegal!" because, as you and I would probably agree, there isn't LITERALLY a force that can check on such acts.

In the end, however, if one is dissatisfied with how things are running in an orchestra, if that one person finds that principles are being violated, either his/her personal principles or just any principles in general, and is angry for that reason, among many others, I think (as many others have suggested) I should just leave the ensemble.

Hm... But to be honest, I wouldn't want to leave without getting the message across to my teacher first. I mean, if I'm going to leave, it wouldn't hurt, would it? In fact, it would probably help more than hurt, telling her why I am leaving.

But of course, if it's just a job to her... Then it's only money, not the caring-aspect for the classes she is required to teach.

Music is not just ink on a piece of paper!


Btw, you're right about the Baroque music thing, but I don't see its relevance to the topic at hand.

[kenm]

1) Any orchestra that can play the Suk Serenade should cope easily with the Elgar "I & A";

SHOULD. By "orchestra", do you mean the players, the conductor, or the whole ensemble?

I meant specifically that the violinists must have an excellent technique for a high school to play the last movement of the Suk Serenade, which is even more difficult than the Elgar I & A. A good professional orchestra would deliver at worst a coordinated performance of the Elgar under your conductor, but she would still prevent them from delivering its essence.

I know for certain the tha players are capable of Elgar's "I & A", but again, when you have a conductor who is ruining it, you know what that does to the players. They slack. They don't care anymore. And since this is a high school ensemble, that level of "not caring" is exponentially dangerous for the years to come in the ensemble.

Making the players care about the music is the prime responsibility of a conductor. Destroying that care is the height of immorality.

6) In professional orchestras, conductors usually rely on the leader or other section principals to advise the other players on technique;

Usually, or sometimes? Because I know professional conductors myself who instate the string technique, or at the least, have a conference with the principal string leaders before the first rehearsal.

I would expect them to discuss bowing, phrasing and timbre (e.g. sul tasto or sul ponticello) but not to tell professionals how to play. Monteux used to forbid his conducting students to talk from the rostrum to the section in which they played themselves. However, amateur and youth orchestras are different, and a string playing conductor may well advise them on technique.

7) In the UK, music degrees (B, M or D) do not necessarily involve tuition in conducting, even as an option;*
* I think this is scandalous, as many music graduates go into teaching and may immediately find themselves conducting school orchestras and choirs.

Sorry, I live in the USA. Um... does "tuition" mean to teach, in UK-English?

I mean that they should be taught to conduct, and at some universities they are not; at others they are, on the Bachelor degree. Note that the standard of Bachelor degrees in the UK is generally thought to be somewhat higher than in the US, where a Masters is a requirement for many teaching posts.

What kind of music degree-focus do you mean? Music performance? Music Education? Music Composition?

I meant general music degrees at a university, which usually involve history, counterpoint, some composition and possibly some analysis and performance in the first two years and choice of some of these subjects for the third year. For music education, graduates would spend a fourth year in an Education Department on a Postgraduate Certificate of Education (learning how to teach). Most performers attend a conservatory of music, and if they are intending to be professional performers may not care to learn conducting. However, conducting is an option at most conservatories in the UK, AFAIK.

But you're right, it's scandalous, and totally inappropriate. Having a Master's Degree in music education but not knowing the difference between molto rit. and poco rit. is like saying, "I didn't really pay attention in graduate school, but I'm your teacher anyway! Muhahaha! Evil wins!"

If they studied music in secondary school (= high school) they weren't listening then either.

8) Much of the technique of conducting can be taught, and there are short courses in conducting at summer schools e.g. Canford SSM
9) If you can't easily attend a course, many aspects of conducting can be learnt from books, e.g. "Orchestral Performance : a Guide for Conductors and Players", by Christopher Adey, which is particularly aimed at amateur and school orchestras.

I 50% agree, 50% disagree. I believe that the physical act of conducting can be taught, but as far as manifesting the ART of conducting, that must be taught not out of textbook, and only through human interactions.

The personality to be a top conductor is not teachable, but rather more than stick technique is. A major responsibility of the conductor is to listen to the ensemble, compare what would be heard by the audience (perhaps 50 feet behind the rostrum) with what should be heard, and change the performance to approach the ideal more closely. The sensitive ear, the attention to detail and the memory to do this within an efficient rehearsal can all be improved by study and practice.

[snhs]

What if a conductor were to decide it might sound nice with a more jazzy sound though maybe swung quavers? The fact is if you change the context you are listening to any piece in it can diminish/augment the piece or turn it into farce. If it were to used in a coronation the majestic side would appear to augment the majesty but if it were used as part of a pastiche of a coronation in a comedy it would sound not majestic but incongruous and may due to that setting sound ridiculous as opposed to majestic (even if the conductor was doing everything as Elgar envisioned).

It can be argued that teaching is not a job, but more of a vocation. If you ever get the chance to see Mr Holland's Opus you might see what i mean. Your teacher is never going to get rich or famous conducting your group or teaching, her aim is, hopefully, to make a difference to your lives. I would view that as being a nobler motive than someone who was in it predominantly for their own self interest or even for the greater glory of music. But if you went to a particularly poor school, or an area that was less well off do you think teaching would be at the same standard, or even meeting the basic standard? Politicians and bureaucrats are great at writing paper mountains for everyone else to climb but very few can reach the summit. If it meets Elgar's vision then great, but if your state's documents demand the kind of standard/precision/analysis you seem to expect then i'm certain the vast majority of schools won't come close to matching them.

What about a jazz version or turning it into a fugue? They might sound every bit as nice as the original if not more so, why should we keep doing the same things just because they've been done? Remember why Kennedy wanted to get to the moon, "not because these things are easy, but because they are hard".

If thats what you think is best under the circumstances then do so. Equally if people just left every time they disagreed with the establishment America wouldn't exist. I don't think telling her its wrong is the best way to go about it, what's the point in starting a feud when you'll be gone in a few months anyway? In this kind of situation though you can't really work around her, so its either with her or leave. Having said that if you're subtle enough you may be able to bring her round to your view without pitched battle.

Music is just ink on a page, in a certain form anyway. It can be infinitely more but it can also be far less. Music is dead until someone plays it and brings it to life, if we allow music to stagnate with no advancement then its already doomed to history on the other hand if people can bring it to life then it can be alive once more in the way Beethoven etc intended, maybe not identical to what they thought it should be but alive and vibrant.

I think she is probably just as interested, if not more so, in teaching your class and doing the best by them than any of your previous conductors. Maybe she isn't the best conductor but she is trying, she may be taking the class because some pro got a better offer and it was too late to find someone else. You can't really know, my guess is her view is that the class is primary and the music is secondary in this case, and for a teacher that is probably the best mindset.

You had emphasised the importance of conducting, i was pointing out that the role of conductor can, and has, been fulfilled without waving your arms around or standing at the front using metaphors or anything else. As long as someone or something is there to keep the beat then thats all that is needed, music is bigger than that on which it depends, if you turn conducting into some high art then it can easily become the main focus rather than the music (even if all the while you're trying to get what Elgar wanted).

[erard]

Hm... But to be honest, I wouldn't want to leave without getting the message across to my teacher first. I mean, if I'm going to leave, it wouldn't hurt, would it? In fact, it would probably help more than hurt, telling her why I am leaving.

If you are, as I assume, going to apply to University for a music related course will she not either be asked to write you a reference, or be asked to advise the head teacher or whoever does? If she takes you telling her why you are leaving badly it could potentially hurt quite a lot.

[neilthecellist]

Hm... But to be honest, I wouldn't want to leave without getting the message across to my teacher first. I mean, if I'm going to leave, it wouldn't hurt, would it? In fact, it would probably help more than hurt, telling her why I am leaving.

If you are, as I assume, going to apply to University for a music related course will she not either be asked to write you a reference, or be asked to advise the head teacher or whoever does? If she takes you telling her why you are leaving badly it could potentially hurt quite a lot.

Yes, I've already filed my applications to universities.

Could you clarify what you meant by what I've bold-faced in your quote?

[sarah123]

Hm... But to be honest, I wouldn't want to leave without getting the message across to my teacher first. I mean, if I'm going to leave, it wouldn't hurt, would it? In fact, it would probably help more than hurt, telling her why I am leaving.

If you are, as I assume, going to apply to University for a music related course will she not either be asked to write you a reference, or be asked to advise the head teacher or whoever does? If she takes you telling her why you are leaving badly it could potentially hurt quite a lot.

Yes, I've already filed my applications to universities.

Could you clarify what you meant by what I've bold-faced in your quote?

I don't know if its the same in the US, but here, teacher references are really important to getting into university, so you want to avoid upsetting your teachers, otherwise they might spoil your chances by writing something horrible about you.

[kenm]

What if a conductor were to decide it might sound nice with a more jazzy sound though maybe swung quavers?

If anyone decided that with this particular piece, it would demonstrate his/her totally lack of artistic judgment. Bach in straightforward rhythms takes the added complexity with no damage; in the Elgar piece, the rhythms are extremely complex, with triplet quavers against duplets in some places.

The fact is if you change the context you are listening to any piece in it can diminish/augment the piece or turn it into farce. If it were to used in a coronation the majestic side would appear to augment the majesty but if it were used as part of a pastiche of a coronation in a comedy it would sound not majestic but incongruous and may due to that setting sound ridiculous as opposed to majestic (even if the conductor was doing everything as Elgar envisioned).

Playing this piece at a coronation would also show lack of artistic judgment.

What about a jazz version or turning it into a fugue?

It has a fugue in it already.

[...]You had emphasised the importance of conducting, i was pointing out that the role of conductor can, and has, been fulfilled without waving your arms around or standing at the front using metaphors or anything else. As long as someone or something is there to keep the beat then thats all that is needed, music is bigger than that on which it depends, if you turn conducting into some high art then it can easily become the main focus rather than the music (even if all the while you're trying to get what Elgar wanted).

The initial post claims that the conductor is keeping a beat that contradicted Elgar's express requirements, so even your very low standards of conducting are not being met. Knowing what the Italian tempo terms mean is not "high art"; not knowing what speed to conduct at is just lazyness, since many performances are available on record.

[neilthecellist]

Hm... But to be honest, I wouldn't want to leave without getting the message across to my teacher first. I mean, if I'm going to leave, it wouldn't hurt, would it? In fact, it would probably help more than hurt, telling her why I am leaving.

If you are, as I assume, going to apply to University for a music related course will she not either be asked to write you a reference, or be asked to advise the head teacher or whoever does? If she takes you telling her why you are leaving badly it could potentially hurt quite a lot.

Yes, I've already filed my applications to universities.

Could you clarify what you meant by what I've bold-faced in your quote?

I don't know if its the same in the US, but here, teacher references are really important to getting into university, so you want to avoid upsetting your teachers, otherwise they might spoil your chances by writing something horrible about you.

I already got a rec letter from a previous teacher. (rec letter in the US = "teacher references" in the UK?)

What if a conductor were to decide it might sound nice with a more jazzy sound though maybe swung quavers?

If anyone decided that with this particular piece, it would demonstrate his/her totally lack of artistic judgment. Bach in straightforward rhythms takes the added complexity with no damage; in the Elgar piece, the rhythms are extremely complex, with triplet quavers against duplets in some places.

The fact is if you change the context you are listening to any piece in it can diminish/augment the piece or turn it into farce. If it were to used in a coronation the majestic side would appear to augment the majesty but if it were used as part of a pastiche of a coronation in a comedy it would sound not majestic but incongruous and may due to that setting sound ridiculous as opposed to majestic (even if the conductor was doing everything as Elgar envisioned).

Playing this piece at a coronation would also show lack of artistic judgment.

What about a jazz version or turning it into a fugue?

It has a fugue in it already.

[...]You had emphasised the importance of conducting, i was pointing out that the role of conductor can, and has, been fulfilled without waving your arms around or standing at the front using metaphors or anything else. As long as someone or something is there to keep the beat then thats all that is needed, music is bigger than that on which it depends, if you turn conducting into some high art then it can easily become the main focus rather than the music (even if all the while you're trying to get what Elgar wanted).

The initial post claims that the conductor is keeping a beat that contradicted Elgar's express requirements, so even your very low standards of conducting are not being met. Knowing what the Italian tempo terms mean is not "high art"; not knowing what speed to conduct at is just lazyness, since many performances are available on record.

Completely agreed, I can't better say it myself.

[sarah123]

maybe you'll be ok then, if you're absolutely sure it won't affect you, go for it and have it out with this teacher (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[erard]

As Sarah says, if anyone at your school needs to write to support your university applications and has not yet done so they are likely to ask the relevant subject teacher (ie the head of music) for her opinion. You want to avoid a situation where the teacher is feeling upset with you when this happens (or for her to truly believe that as you disagree with the teacher so much you will not fit in well with the university course or aren't good at the subject - teachers usually assume they know more than the student). She is, after all, human!

It was at least 15 years ago also not unknown in the UK for universities to ring up the school off the record and ask for more information (informal, off the record, and I believe not supposed to happen any more). I have no idea how much of this applies to the US but caution may be wise until you have a firm offer of a place.

[notmusimum]

As I'm only a parent I can't give you any advice. Just wondered are you the only student dis-satisfied with the Conductor? If you have a body of support then maybe you could find a way round the situation until the end of year. By either leaving on mass (drastic) or getting together to discuss how the pieces are going to be played and doing them that way as best you can ignoring her directions (dangerous).

I think like you, if it was me in your situation I'd want to hit back. I suspect though from what you have said that she's not the type of person to recognise what you are saying so it maybe pointless having it out with her, even though you might feel better afterwards.

[snhs]

Artistic judgment aside, the setting can completely change the perception of any piece no matter how majestic or profound.

I think i was continuing his example of Twinkle Twinkle, and unless the basic version has changed quite a bit i don't think it contains a fugue. My point was that if no one ever thought music could be changed, and maybe even improved, we'd still be using modal constructs from Ancient Greece or some far more primitive harmony with no pianos/clarinets etc. Almost every time music has changed the old guard has been predominantly against it but if that change hadn't happened music wouldn't be alive, your Elgar piece wouldn't even exist. If we turn any piece into a quest for single minded perfection of the composers intent then we allow it to stagnate, if it becomes such a complex entity that only people with degrees in music can approach it then there is no point to it. Music is there to be enjoyed and while a handful of people may adore its technical perfection most people, the constituency you need to aim for, won't care so long as it sounds good.

Elgar is not a God, there is no reason why long after he is dead we can't have different interpretations of the same piece. Many conductors have ignored Beethoven's metronome marks on the basis that they're ridiculously fast/slow does that mean any recording that is outwith the range set by the conductor is automatically a failure/wrong/not worth playing/listening to? I didn't specify that the beat needed to be steady, nor did i say that it had to follow the intent of the composer. In what way am i implying low standards of conducting when i say music should be the main focus? If a conductor or player gets so involved with their own aim or 'higher' purpose they can lose sight of the whole point of the music, to be enjoyed. You, like the initial poster, are presuming the worst. Just because she doesn't follow the markings doesn't mean she can't understand what they indicate. It is quite obvious that she does know what speed to conduct at, as the conductor she sets the tempo, in the same way any other conductor would and if it varies from whats written or what famous composers/conductors would want it doesn't matter. If every piece was conducted in exactly the same way by every conductor and every orchestra played it identically with the same degree of technical proficiency it would just get boring after a while, the music would lose its vibrancy because there was absolutely nothing different to the other thirty times they had heard it.