I can't give the citation (because I wasn't paying enough attention to
write down the source of the information), but I recall reading over the
past year or so that an academic study of virtuoso instrumental musicians &
how they got that way discovered that their main defining characteristic --
more than innate ability, more than aptitude, more than raw talent however
defined -- is an intense drive that compels them to practice, practice,
practice.
-- Alan Cole, rank amateur
McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
At 01:53 PM 11/19/2004, you wrote:
Scott wrote:
__________________________________________________
If your definition of talent is that it is some sort of god-,
genetic- or race-given ability, then I resent the implications.
If your definition of talent is 'ability derived from drive,
education, inspiration, experience, guts, risk-taking, love, spirit
and some measure of human normalness' then I might be inclined to
agree with you.
______________________________________________________
But of course one needs both.
Genes do mean something -- for example, they're why we aren't trees.
But good genes without Kopprasch don't get one very far.
BTW, what do you mean by "normal"? Sounds like it doesn't apply to horn
players, at any rate.
Chris Earnest
_______________________________________________
post: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
unsubscribe or set options at
http://music.memphis.edu/mailman/options/horn/archive%40jab.org
