The fuzzy middle. Uncertainty, indifference, and disagreement in the evaluation of contemporary art music

Abstract

This article looks at peer review in the “pure” pole (Bourdieu 1996; Dubois and François, 2013) of the artistic field, in contemporary art music. Based on observation of peer review panels in the United States and interviews with panelists in the US and France, I look specifically at the dynamics of evaluation in the upper middle of ranked lists – what I call the “fuzzy middle”. In this part of ranked lists, outcomes are unclear and often arbitrary. Two factors primarily affect outcomes: 1) a lack of recall on the part of evaluators regarding the specifics of the objects being evaluated, which leads to an attitude of indifference, and 2) confusion as to how disputes over artistic quality should be resolved. I find that uncertainty is present especially regarding the role that emotional reactions to the music being evaluated should play. In addition, not all participants are willing or able to participate equally in the evaluation process (Lamont 2009), and the interpersonal dynamics of these panels therefore heavily affects the outcomes of the evaluation. What results is that objects in the “fuzzy middle” are evaluated collectively using criteria that are developed ad hoc and on a case by case basis, as a way to translate emotional reactions into objectifiable criteria. I do not find, however, that quality uncertainty (Karpik 2010; Menger 2014) plays a role in these evaluations: at least at an individual level, these evaluators do not express doubts about their evaluations of artistic quality.