Thank you so much for this information. Sandra M

So, is it to be a site where one may AUDITION for admittance to Julliard, or a campus where one may receive a Julliard-style education?

[EDIT]: Never mind - I read the Times' article.

Ed

You're welcome!

I think that it is quite a significant piece of news.
Top conservatories should be aggressively pursuing the world's best, most motivated students rather than passively waiting for them to show up at the door, particularly from countries that have become increasingly xenophobic or anti-immigration.

Or maybe the most motivated and talented students should be agressively pursuing schools that don't try to make them all play THE SAME.

Touche.

On the other hand, given that the chances of becoming a successful concert pianist are somewhat more worse than being struck by lightning twice each time while collecting your million dollar lotto winnings, it is understandable that parents and young talents try to increase their chances by associating with a " name brand " that also opens up elite social networks.

I would love to see some European conservatories take the same approach as Julliard is doing. It don't see it happening anytime soon. They aren't as aggressively commercial.

My sentiments exactly.

It didn't take you long to take another stab at the U.S.

I know I am butting in, but I am curious how that is a stab at the U.S. I thought it might have been reference to other countries, who as they continue to develop economically wish to keep their brilliant minds to produce at home.

What I find interesting is that Juilliard is seeing itself as a brand, not (necessarily) an experience or a community.

Part of Juilliard (and a big part, I think), has always been that it's in NYC, the center of the artistic universe. It will be interesting to see what aspects of the Juilliard experience are portable and what parts are not. (And of course, the faculty are already portable and go to China quite often.)

Also, a big part of Juilliard is that in addition to music, it also has world-class dance and drama programs. I didn't see any mention of those in the NYT article.

A lot of interesting questions remain to be answered. What exactly will the Chinese institute offer? What kinds of communication and shared resources will it have with NYC and Lincoln Center? To what extent will the institute rely on Asian faculty? Western faculty? Resident/guest faculty? How will the rest of the world respond? Will a Juilliard-China pedigree carry the same weight as Juilliard-NYC? Will it strive to copy Juilliard-NYC's mission, or will it respond to the unique artistic and economic demands of the Asian community?

Regardless, it's nice to see established institutions branching out and trying things. Whether it succeeds or fails, I think we'll learn an awful lot about the performing arts in our increasingly global community.

Kreisler,

While yours is a VERY INTERESTING observation about Juilliard considering itself a brand, it appears that I read the rest of The Times article differently. After I posted the question above, I dug into it a bit more, and it seems that the Chinese facility will be structured similar to a couple other "feeder" institutions of Juilliard's - "junior Juilliards", as it were.

The talk about bringing Juilliard to the Orient is based upon candidates' ability to AUDITION for Juilliard-proper right there in China. If accepted, they would still be coming here for their education.

That is the way I understand it.
Ed

If these conservatories are truly "top," then why would they need to recruit students?

The sad truth is that virtually ALL colleges and universities are recruiting harder than ever. A few years ago, when our economy was fat, happy, and oblivious, places like Eastman and Juilliard could afford to take only the very best players and writers, and subsidize them. (Read: Scholarships)

But now the huge endowments from alumni are shriveling, and the yields on investments are no longer performing well. These conservatories need to return to getting money from TUITION. And that translates into finding students whose parents can pay the full freight. It becomes a competition not just for the top students, but for the top WEALTHY students. That requires recruiting.

And what countries would you be referring to? China? China has a very open immigration policy, anyone can leave (that's not to say everyone can find a place to go). In fact, pretty much all top students in any field from China leave and go to the US. Nothing is holding them back, even if they'd like to have them stay and help out over there where they're more needed.

I just hope they don't open it in Beijing...

For the students' sake!

Well, comparing the approach of for example top Dutch conservatories, say Amsterdam and The Hague, to Julliard, students from abroad, when they are accepted, only pay around 1600 euro all-in for their year's tuition and lessons. As The Netherlands has become more right wing and xenophobic over the past years, increasingly questions are being raised why the Dutch taxpayer should be footing the majority of the bill for a bunch of foreign pianists to complete their training here just to leave again.

The idea of aggressively creating a commercial " brand " or recruiting top students on site in the most promising countries of the world to capture highly profitable students and funnel in hundreds of thousands of dollars in tuition fees per student just doesn't even come into the equation. Which is why there is no Julliard-class conservatory in Europe, but also why not just kids with wealthy parents get to study piano and/or why there are no students graduating with hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt.

This is unfortunately true.

In addition, schools in the US face increased competition for students. A lot of students (and their parents) have a hard time justifying a $35,000 tuition bill at Juilliard when they could go to the UMKC Conservatory (which is excellent) for $10,000. Plus, there are a lot more programs now than there were a few decades ago, and students have a lot more options. A recent article I read placed the number of pianists pursuing the DMA in 2010 at 987. In 1998, that number was 593. Over the same period, the number of academic jobs has fallen (though not as sharply as people might think.)

Julliard

J U I L L I A R D

How embarassing! Thank God someone is watching the farm. (Where's that EDIT button when I need it the most?)

I was not referring to any country in particular, I was just curious how that statement was some sort of Jab at the US, and that it could be read another way.