Competition ?

[Richard Barrett]

The context posters choosing C20 composers they liked, and other posters dissing their choices

I would have said "and other posters making different choices".

You seem to be saying that one can be "competing" without being aware of it. I think of the word as connoting something rather more conscious and active than that.

[jean]

If it didn't float my boat as you put it, then I wouldn't join in.

But it seems to me there are more interesting questions around the idea of competition than simply whether competition is a good thing or not, and it was those questions that the original comment suggested to me. Especially as far as the rest of the universe is concerned.

But if you don't know what [I am] on about, I'd better leave it there.

[ahinton]

If it didn't float my boat as you put it, then I wouldn't join in.

But it seems to me there are more interesting questions around the idea of competition than simply whether competition is a good thing or not, and it was those questions that the original comment suggested to me. Especially as far as the rest of the universe is concerned.

But if you don't know what [I am] on about, I'd better leave it there.

Competition has its place(/s). I believe, however, that the world of musical composition is so very much not one of them as to be intrisically antagonistic to the very notion of it.

[MrGongGong]

But it seems to me there are more interesting questions around the idea of competition than simply whether competition is a good thing or not, and it was those questions that the original comment suggested to me.

Absolutely
which is why I was puzzled by your comments about what "he" said ?

never mind
moving on methinks

[Serial_Apologist]

there are surely two different contexts for competitive behaviour - one between the members of the team working together to achieve a common aim, and the other when the team meets another team, where such cooperative behaviour won't get you very far (unless you've got money on the result).

Neither is a very good analogy with the situation of a composer.

.

I would have thought any competitive situation to be a good analogy for any other, given the origin of competition as the prime motivator of "efficient" human behaviour being rooted in the Christian notion that, without competition, our innate indolence will inevitably lead to personal and then collective collapse into, probably, barbarism after exhausting a bit of sybaritic excess. It's why I've long advocated a (preferably) secular spirituality engaged with rather than alienated from and exploitative of the natural order from which we emerge(d), coupled with bottom-up socialist-type planning in the economy. Each of these 3 components reinforcing of the others. Animals have to compete over scarce resources, whereas we at least potentially have had the "intelligence" to understand this and practise this since storing for a rainy day was evinced - which was way before competition came along as a way of divide-and-rule, as Teamsaint says. The football team is a particularly good exemplification of limiting co-operation to within the firm - the firm in cometition with the other firm, whose workers are in some way "enemies" because they are outbidding us through superior leadership (we'd better keep out tactics secret!), superior intelligence, greater loyalty and capacity for scarifice, etc etc. In this way the co-operative principle is endlessly deflected and deferred.

[jean]

The football team is a particularly good exemplification of limiting co-operation to within the firm...

I agree - but that's actually what I said.

[Serial_Apologist]

I agree - but that's actually what I said.

Nothing wrong with support by restatement.

[teamsaint]

I would have thought any competitive situation to be a good analogy for any other, given the origin of competition as the prime motivator of "efficient" human behaviour being rooted in the Christian notion that, without competition, our innate indolence will inevitably lead to personal and then collective collapse into, probably, barbarism after exhausting a bit of sybaritic excess. It's why I've long advocated a (preferably) secular spirituality engaged with rather than alienated from and exploitative of the natural order from which we emerge(d), coupled with bottom-up socialist-type planning in the economy. Each of these 3 components reinforcing of the others. Animals have to compete over scarce resources, whereas we at least potentially have had the "intelligence" to understand this and practise this since storing for a rainy day was evinced - which was way before competition came along as a way of divide-and-rule, as Teamsaint says. The football team is a particularly good exemplification of limiting co-operation to within the firm - the firm in cometition with the other firm, whose workers are in some way "enemies" because they are outbidding us through superior leadership (we'd better keep out tactics secret!), superior intelligence, greater loyalty and capacity for scarifice, etc etc. In this way the co-operative principle is endlessly deflected and deferred.

THanks for this excellent stuff, S_A.

It has been deeply ingrained in us that we are innately selfish, individualistic, and that without the right controls we are doomed to a decline into chaos.

Much scarcity is of course simply artificial. There is no actual need for shortage of, say, transport capacity. Our society can afford all the good quality transport that it needs. Much other scarcity is down to structures, and simply won't be solved by the so called efficiencies of competition.


Here is a good example of the " benefits" of so called competition.

http://www.gponline.com/Opinion/article/1177694/Viewpoint-Thatcher-began-Camerons-bid-privatise-NHS/

NHS admin costs have double at least since the creation of the internal market.

If competition was really a cure for all ills, it would have sorted things out by now.

[jean]

I certainly don't think competition is a cure for all ills. I agree wholeheartedly with everything you say about internal markets in the NHS (and might say about companies competing for rail franchises). I am just interested in where competition unavoidable, and where it might possibly be considered useful.

For example:

The best football teams cooperate better than the bad ones...

In what sense are they best, if they are not - despite their cooperation within the team - in competition with a team other than their own?

What would be the point of the cooperation of the individuals involved, except to render them as a collective more competitive with some other group?

.

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

culture plays a part in how we see competition; this is an interesting read on winning, competition and Britain/America

[teamsaint]

I certainly don't think competition is a cure for all ills. I agree wholeheartedly with everything you say about internal markets in the NHS (and might say about companies competing for rail franchises). I am just interested in where it's unavoidable and might possibly be considered useful.

For example:


In what sense are they best, if they are not - despite their cooperation within the team - in competition with a team other than their own?

What would be the point of the cooperation of the individuals involved, except to render their identity as a collective more competitive with some other team?

My point about football was to demonstrate, rather ineffectively it seems, that something as generally seen as the epitome of competitiveness in fact has a highly collaborative element. It is competitive, (and mostly outside of the firm as S_A points out), but the cooperative element of what makes a football team good needs stressing more. Our society stresses the competitive element too highly.
Competition, and the benefits that it may bring, need to be seen in a much more balanced way, and the stressing of our apparently "competitive nature" needs to be seen for what it is...an instrument of divide and rule.

[Serial_Apologist]

culture plays a part in how we see competition; this is an interesting read on winning, competition and Britain/America

Thanks Calum - but for me all the sporting makes that a very difficult read. Sport in this country has become symptomatic of businessification since the time my dad and I used to walk to Stamford Bridge and watch teams largely made up local players competing in a game. Gamespersonship has lost its original meaning.

[jean]

My point about football was to demonstrate, rather ineffectively it seems, that something as generally seen as the epitome of competitiveness in fact has a highly collaborative element.

It's not that your demonstration was ineffective as far as I was concerned - it's just that the collaborative element seems obvious.

[Serial_Apologist]

It's not that your demonstration was ineffective as far as I was concerned - it's just that the collaborative element seems obvious.

In what way should or could it be made less obvious, jean?

[teamsaint]

It's not that your demonstration was ineffective as far as I was concerned - it's just that the collaborative element seems obvious.

fair enough. I don't think that element is emphasised nearly enough by, for instance, the media.
I would say the same things about business. It seems to me, (though I seldom read papers or watch the telly news these days,) that competition is always shown as the mechanism to achieve success, whereas in fact internal collaborative effort is at least as important.
Its just about emphasis, really.