2: Dami Kim
3: Jinjoo Cho
4. TIE: Ji-Yoon Lee Ji-Young Lim, Yoo-Jin Jang
Zwilich prize: Suyeon Kang or Stephen Waarts.
CrackCritic’s Ideal Final: (in no order) based on the first and second round. This would have been an intriguing, engaging and authentic final. But hey, the sun'll come out tomorrow.
Dear M. LeCrack,ReplyDelete
I wholeheartedly agree. There was, as the expression goes, no contest between Mlle Lark and the rest of the finalists. Certainly the winner was a surprise complete, since that person's playing did not deserve such a prize at all. This must be either an instance of the jury being split on the interesting players, and/or bribed. I also agree with your ideal final. Many players were cut early, for no discernible reason other than being too good, and in competition with students of jury members.
This was quite a silly contest.
Another IVCI, another puzzling result.ReplyDelete
I thought Tessa Lark was in another league compared to the other finalists. The winner was a surprise to me, though I had her figured for 3rd - 2nd at highest. However, I'm grateful to IVCI for introducing Ms Lark and ECCO to me, as well as to Ms Kang, Stephan Waarts, and several others. Looking forward to hearing these young artists in future. Also hoping you will post your thoughts on the finals in detail - your earlier analysis was fascinating reading.
The results you have listed are incorrect. Please update.ReplyDelete
I will say this much:ReplyDelete
Let's look at the names of the teachers. It's already been pointed out, but it's good to consider in light of the results.
Dear Anonymous the Third: please take a moment to consider the title of this post. It says CrackCritic's Indianapolis Violin Competition Results, not Indianapolis Violin Competition Results. They are not incorrect and there need be no update. With the finalists we were given, this was the only possible result I could imagine. However, in an 'ideal' world where music reigns supreme, the final round would have been much different.ReplyDelete