Six items, eighteen minutes: is the poi item the problem?
A rōpū of 22 (Years 12–13) has six items ready for a competition with a strict 18-minute set. At the final run-through the set runs 21 minutes 40 seconds. The poi item is the newest, learnt five weeks ago. In its second verse the kaitātaki wahine has gradually increased the tempo, and the poi line has split into two - the eight performers in the front row finish the hurihuri about half a beat early, and it is audible. Two of those front-row performers joined the rōpū this year and are placed there for line height. The tutor's proposal is to keep the poi item and move the two newest performers to the back row. A senior ākonga proposes cutting the poi item entirely and spending the time on the two waiata ā-ringa, which have been stable since March. The competition also requires one item composed by the rōpū itself.
1. Choose between the two proposals, or a third option, and justify your choice with the evidence in this scenario.
Read the worked answer
Test the diagnosis before choosing a solution. The evidence points at the tempo: the drift starts with the kaitātaki wahine in verse two, and the front row finishes the hurihuri half a beat early - meaning they are ahead of the pace rather than behind it. If the tempo is moving, repositioning two performers does not fix the split. The front row will still split. The tutor's proposal treats a symptom, and it also removes two tall performers from a row placed for line height, which is a cost paid for no benefit.
Test the cut. The set overruns by 3 minutes 40 seconds. Cutting one item does not necessarily recover that; the poi item may be only around three minutes, and if it is not, a second cut becomes an unprepared decision on competition day. Cutting the newest item is also not the same as cutting the weakest item.
Recommended sequence:
- This week, fix the tempo (see next task) and re-run with a timer. Evidence first.
- In parallel, find the 3:40 inside items - long introductions, an unnecessary repeat, a slow entrance - before removing a whole item.
- Decide at the end of the week using re-timed evidence, with the rōpū-composed item protected because it is a competition requirement and carries the rōpū's own mana.
Why this answer scores over picking a side: it refuses a false choice and shows what evidence would change the decision.
2. How would you diagnose and fix the tempo split, and what evidence would tell you the fix had worked?
Read the worked answer
Diagnose the cause, not the symptom. Likely causes: adrenalin lifting the tempo at the start of the second verse; the kaitātaki breathing in an unrehearsed place; no agreed cue for the hurihuri; and no external pulse, so the line has nothing to lock to except the leader's voice.
Fixes, in order of cheapness:
- Mark the score: name the cue for the hurihuri and who gives it.
- Give the line a listening point - a vocal entry or a drum beat that everyone must land on together, so the hurihuri is triggered by a shared sound rather than by memory.
- Have the kaitātaki rehearse at performance tempo while tired and while singing slightly louder than comfortable, because that is the condition that produced the drift.
- Use a fixed reference in rehearsal only (a recording of the item at the correct tempo, or a counted pulse), and remove it before the dress run.
- Rehearse at 80 per cent tempo, then at full tempo, and time both.
Evidence the fix worked: record the item three times at full tempo and count the splits. If the hurihuri lands cleanly in all three, the item is stable. If it splits at full tempo but not at 80 per cent, the arrangement is the problem, not the performers - move the hurihuri to the start of the verse where the tempo is settled, or remove it.
3. If a whole item still has to be cut, which one goes, and on what criteria?
Read the worked answer
Criteria, in priority order:
- Obligation. The item composed by the rōpū cannot be cut: it is a competition requirement, and it is the only item whose whakapapa is entirely the rōpū's own. Cutting it would be the wrong kind of saving.
- Claim on the rōpū. An item the rōpū has a deep, specific obligation to - composed for them, gifted by a kaumātua, tied to a whānau event - outranks an item learnt from a recording or from a general repertoire.
- Stability. The two waiata ā-ringa stable since March are cheaper to keep than a five-week-old poi item, if the poi item cannot be made stable.
- Balance of the set. A set needs contrast in discipline, tempo and mood. Cutting the only poi item changes what the set is, not just how long it is - that must be a conscious trade, not a by-product of a clock.
- Audience and judges' reading. What the set says about the rōpū's identity. A set of borrowed items with no poi may still be coherent; a set that keeps a borrowed showpiece and drops its own composed item is not.
Applying them: if the 3:40 cannot be recovered inside items and the tempo cannot be stabilised, the item cut is the one with the weakest claim - likely the newest borrowed item - not automatically the poi item. The senior ākonga's proposal is only right if the poi item fails the stability test after the fix is attempted. Before the cut, protect the composition, and record in writing why the choice was made, so the rōpū can explain it.