Saturday, December 18, 2010

Commissions Continued...

Sarah and I have often discussed the topic of commissions, so I am glad that she’s started the topic here.  I, too, am incredibly grateful to all the performers I have worked with.  Commissions are tricky to navigate and hopefully discussing it will help us to figure out how to create a working relationship that positively benefits both parties.

The word “
commission” is used a lot in new music circles, sometimes indicating what it’s supposed to mean (thank you, Wikipedia: “the hiring and payment for the creation of a piece”) and other times meaning any request for a composer to write a new piece of music.  The definition has been muddied both for innocent reasons and for reasons as shady as composers trying to bulk their resumes and “commissioners” using the word to add clout to their requests without following through monetarily.
For the sake of this discussion, I will be referring to a “commission” as any request for a piece of music, not because I necessarily agree with that definition, but more because I want to discuss the broader topic of how to respond to requests for compositions. 

As a young composer, is it fair to charge for commissions?  If so, in what form do you charge? 

At first I thought I would never charge, figuring that the payoff would be the performance and the experience of collaboration with the performer.  But, as Sarah pointed out, how do you recoup the lost time when a commission falls through?  Obviously, you can feel good that you wrote the piece, but you still have a net loss until the piece is realized.  Based on this reality, it may be best to “charge” performers with performances and/or recordings and non-performers with a monetary fee.

It’s possible that someone may think, Shouldn’t the commission be a good enough opportunity for the composer that they don’t feel the need to “charge”?

Well…yes and no.  As a composer, I am always writing music, so giving me an “opportunity” to compose is not really that amazing.  Giving me an opportunity to compose with the knowledge that I will be working with a performer and hearing my music performed, however, is potentially invaluable.  If all commissions guaranteed such an outcome we probably wouldn’t be blogging about payment and contracts to this extent.  Composing, like any other craft, is work and a commission, while potentially enjoyable, is a job—a situation that is distinctly different from when a performer offers to play a pre-existing piece.  If I’m going to write something specific, something that I might not ordinarily write, I want to be compensated (with a performance or otherwise).  It’s somewhat analogous to the performer/accompanist dynamic: it’s generally recognized that an accompanist should be compensated for providing a service that takes time and work, something they aren't doing just “for fun.”

So, how do you make a contract? 

A composer friend of mine told me that she sits down with the performer to flesh out a non-legal contract stipulating her expectations in terms of communication, performances, and recordings, while offering the performer space to indicate their own expectations.

When I think about creating a contract, part of me cringes.  Since art composition is not an established trade in our market culture (see Composer versus culture), making a contract feels weird, almost diva-esque.  But it shouldn’t…you have to protect yourself—your time and your product as a worker.  I don’t think it’s unreasonable to ask for a specific amount of performances, recordings, and/or money based on your comfort level.  It’s possible it will scare away some people.  On the other hand, it might add professionalism, causing performers (and composers) to take the process more seriously. 

I would love to hear what others think about this subject, so please don’t hesitate to comment if you want to add anything!

Posted by Natalie

No comments:

Post a Comment