Better or Worse?

Conductor Mark Wigglesworth ponders perfection

Mark Wigglesworth 11:52am GMT 25th August 2010

Is it a compliment or a criticism to call someone a 'Perfectionist'? It probably used to be intended as praise but with our contemporary understanding of psychology the comment is now more often to be seen running alongside words like obsessive and controlling.

Musicians engage in perfection every day. Outside nature, there are not many things more perfect than The Marriage of Figaro or Mahler's Fourth Symphony and it's only natural that we should want to honour that perfection by attempting to mirror it in our peformances. But there's undoubtedly a point at which striving for that ideal starts to impede our ability to express it. As current business jargon aptly puts it: 'Better' is the enemy of 'Good'.

One of the main jobs of a conductor, or any other type of leader for that matter, is to inspire a large group of people to achieve more than they thought possible on their own. But if in trying to do so, you push people past the point at which they can express themselves, it very quickly results in a downward spiral of confidence and enjoyment. Without those two things, there's no way anything can improve. The question is how do you know when that point has been reached.

The answer, I think, lies in where our desire for Perfection comes from. As a motivating factor, it kills the joy of music. It completely gets in the way of our ability to express ourselves. As a goal in itself, it is unattainable - there can never be a perfect performance. Apart from anything else, it's going to be a matter of opinion and no two people are going to react in exactly the same way. In fact giving up on Perfection's attainability is the first step towards getting closer to it. Only by accepting little mistakes can you prevent yourself from being the victim of a bigger one. Nothing great was done by anyone who wasted time over-analysing their faults. If we insist on seeing everything with perfect clarity before we decide, we never make a decision. Shakespeare wrote some bad scenes, Mozart wrote a few boring pieces. I doubt it bothered either of them too much. Even the sun has spots.

It is the artist's lot, even perhaps their duty, to be unsatisfied. Musicians will constantly have unfinished business, always have reasons to try and make the next performance better. But those reasons should be about trying to get closer to the truth of what the piece is, not about trying to eradicate the mistakes that marred the previous attempts. The happy performers are the ones that see this journey as a pleasure, as an inspiration, and maybe even realise that beating yourself up about falling short is more about vanity than creativity. As the Buddhist nun Pema Chodron says: 'Do everything as if it was the most important thing in the world, but at the same time know that none of it matters atall.'

Mark Wigglesworth

Leading conductor Mark Wigglesworth is equally at home in the opera house as in the concert hall – and, indeed, the studio, where his acclaimed Shostakovich symphony cycle for BIS is nearing completion. In 'Shaping the invisible' Mark shares his passion for music and his fascination with the philosophies and psychologies that lie behind it. (Photo: Ben Ealovega)

Comments

"Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better."

Samuel Beckett, Worstward Ho (1983)

Perfection is what everyone strives for - or should - whether (for example) in technology, art or education. In technology it is a must: lives could depend on it. In education we do our best: too many factors play a role and 'perfection' is simply impossible. But we try. In art it is, for me, a different issue. When a musician plays 'to perfection', with perhaps Heifetz or Horowitz in mind, it is possible for it to still indeed be an exprssion of great art - but with most others it usually loses an essential part of the 'art'.  Michealangelo - most will agree - indeed achieved perfection in most he accomplished. And it is in part what made him great and timeless. With conducting, in my humble opinion as a ticket buyer, perfection could kill something. I feel that the relationship between conductor(maestro/dirigent/chef*) and the orchestra is one that should become "ONE". It is a magical, invisible thread between the two entities that can bring magic to life and carry one away to new realms and heights. When an orchestra is not able or unwiling to strive for this invisible but all too real relationship - or the conductor does not experience the abilities or atmosphere of the performers- nothing will happen. However, if it has the ability to strive for perfection, whether with bow, reed or baton, and allow the magic of 'imperfection' to polish and shine the performance to a brilliance that touches heart and mind, perfection takes on a new meaning and therewith allows for beauty possibly beyond expression.

* Great sense of humor in your other blog.

PS: I just saw that one can become a conductor through Phoenix University. On-line! The magic road of the internet!

Alfred Cortot and his bag of wrong notes would agree with you.  How many recordings are there where the artist approaches technical perfection and misses the true spirit of the piece?  This results in a performance that sounds misguided or lifeless.  Of course there are also recordings of thrilling performances frustrated by technical imperfections.  Maybe the concept of "perfection" comes from the fact that recordings allow us to hear a single performance repeatedly.  Attending live concerts allows us to hear something different each time a piece is performed.

Bart Simpson:

'Can't win, don't try'