across my wokr: blogs, journals, workshops. SIG'S etc i have often talked about 'alternative's' and, in reference to my award title rationale, 'alterative assesment methods'. Because i use these methods everyday i have become ingnorant in the assumption that others who read or engage with my work will have the same understanding as me so thought it was time to explain myself.
Within the mainstream arts there is a massive emphais/use/history of the AUDITION which has become a traditional tool for assesment for various levels of the three disaplines. This method is used as a fliltering process..desifereing between the 'good' and the 'bad'.
as well as the expectations within an audtion there are also set ideas on perceptions on how to judge the level of talent....how deep can they strceth? how high can they sing? how loud can they shout?
all of these qurestions, in my oppinon have become accepted in the performance world due to complacency..
'its tough in the arts'
'thats just how it is'
but my interest starts with the questioning of the 'AUDITIONTRADITION'
how are we measureing talent? is it right?
is an audtion the right way for everyone to show maximum potential?
how far does a 'look' get you?
if we follow the 'un spoken rules' of audtion will we get through regardless of telent?
thoughts to begin with.....
No comments:
Post a Comment