Prodigies

[zamyrabyrd]

I'd like to start a thread about the pros and cons of musical prodigies.

Recently in some discussions, I have been rather on the defensive about my own reservations about "little musical miracles". It seems that even intelligent people would like to believe a star is born without all the infrastructure of preparation. I haven't seen in all my years anything that contradicts what Joe E Lewis allegedly said about "overnight success", that it took him 20 years to achieive it.

Similarly, a child cannot be expected to learn all that a professional knows so a teacher standing by or hovering over and dictating "interpretation" is the most likely scenario. When listening to these little geniuses (quite a few on youtube but won't mention their names here), I find the fallacy is at least with pianists, not really building up an interpretation from the harmony and structure. Instead, many of them have a kind of seductive, sometimes too souped up melody that corresponds to their dramatic movements or looking up to the ceiling as though channeling the spirit of the composer.

Lang Lang, not a kid anymore, is one of whose teacher admitted putting together cut and paste interpretations to the extent that his counterfeit bills pass for the real thing. That is, if one is not fully aware of what goes on these days, especially with Far Eastern musicians. But the Russians are just as bad at times. Over the past few years, I have been amazed at the amount of mimicry kids are capable of and the amount of effort that the teachers invest in order for their students to "win prizes". On this basis alone, I feel that interpretation by copying alone is wrong and even harmful.

Now that the Olympics are about to begin, would anyone think that any athlete doesn't train 8-9 hours a day from an early age? But still, the promoters of musical prodigies would like you to believe that they don't need to practice very much and "inspiration" is all that is required.

Someone mentioned on one of the sites that getting the child really young, like 3, is the secret because the neural patterns are much easier to establish. And this might be true as a very facile colleague of mine, but not very advanced musically at the age of 31, actually went to the Gneissin School at the age of 3 1/2. Also the Suzuki method starts them young.

The constant wash of superlatives over prodigies is very bad as well. Conceivably if you have already "made it" by the age of 16, what more is there to learn? This can not be only humbling but devastating to admit that one is just like everyone else standing before the portals of the great art of music and realize the ticket to admission is leaving one's ego behind.

Last but not least, the function of the musician as performer has changed drastically over the centuries. From time immemorial they were one and the same. In the name of division of labor, a separation took place but not necessarily for the better. Also the need for performers in the 19th century going from place to place to familiarize the public with works they could not have heard live  was superceded by recordings in the 20th century and by computers in the 21st.

So where is the crying need to train human note machines?  Given all of the above and more, how can it be justified to take a child from play at 5 and force him or her to practice long hours to produce a note perfect performance that parents, teachers, promoters and the public will admire?

By now, it can be inferred that my own teaching philosophy about music is SELF expression and enjoyment. As a rule, my students are very accurate. I had to defend this more than once with administrators, etc., but am not willing to pay the price of TOTAL accuracy that requires much more time and effort to achieve it, at the expense of just making music. Those teachers I observed whose students "win prizes" do a very limited repertoire that they hack over and over again.

In short, I do believe that children may be musically talented at an early age but they should not be pushed into performance or competitions too early. And they should be given the option to throw it all over and play dolls or ball, whatever the case may be.

ZB

[Renfield]

So where is the crying need to train human note machines?

In the inferiority complexes of those who wished they could have been that, and thus earned an imaginary early shortcut to self-respect.


That is in general my current view concerning prodigies in any field. Personally, I am not at all convinced the only prodigies are those who become "prodigies" in the eyes of the public, or that all those who become "prodigies" in the eyes of the public really are as prodigious.

Perhaps one day I might meet a person who can spontaneously wield a skill (rather than display it) without (self-)training. But I doubt that, and even whatever knowledge or experience I have with how skills develop in the mind points to the contrary.


As for how people should treat a "prodigy", how a prodigy should be "put to use", I think it should(?) be obvious that when someone treats another human being in terms of "putting them to use" and then expects them to create*, something seems off-key, to say the least.

"Let prodigies be people, and let them receive training appropriate to their skill" is how I'd put it. No more, and no less.


(Interesting topic, incidentally. Thank you: those are often rare around here, outside the strictly musical! )


*Note: "Create" as used in the context of "creative writing", rather than "create a mathematical model for turbulence", for example.

[zamyrabyrd]

So where is the crying need to train human note machines?

In the inferiority complexes of those who wished they could have been that, and thus earned an imaginary early shortcut to self-respect.

Hi there,

I'm glad you said that as well as the rest of your post. In my immediate experience is one pitiful character who didn't make it herself but is turning out little clones playing repertoire from Russia of the 1960's.

A teacher like that is more like an Olympic coach, with more than a dose of obsession "to win". She herself speciailizes in competitions that warm the hearts of parents. The whole premise is wrong, though, to be better (more special, genius, etc.) than the next person, being totally closed off from any constructive criticism and swelling the ego to gargantuan proportions. This alone is bad for kids, or for anyone.

It's not only the public that wants to believe in miracles but seemingly intelligent people as well. Remembering the Hatto scandal, she and her husband conned almost the entire musical establishment for decades. Why? Because very few, if any questioned the premise that one could play all those difficult works without the necessary work and infrastructure.

But Beethoven's father got the message back then as well, passing his son off as 8 when he was 10. And Mozart himself had serious personal conflicts entering adulthood because real life was not the glitter and excitement he was used to as a child.

ZB

[Josquin des Prez]

I don't see the problem with Russia's way of doing things. The 20th century really belongs to them in terms of quantity AND quality of musicians produced.

China on the other end...

[zamyrabyrd]

I don't see the problem with Russia's way of doing things. The 20th century really belongs to them in terms of quantity AND quality of musicians produced.
China on the other end...

I have had a lot of experience with Russian musicians and don't think they deserve on the whole such a reputation. Askenazy allegedly said that he didn't start to develop until he left the Soviet Union. In general they have an unfree and regimented way of doing things. Most of the teachers I worked around show the students what to do and they are supposed to just imitate what the teacher wants.

There was even a former student of mine who complained that this Russian pinched her when she made mistakes. I myself saw a lot of handling on one occasion so much that I made a formal complaint. I told the 9 year old girl that no one is allowed to touch her. At least this had been my training, not to touch students, or at least without asking first or excusing oneself. This is quite unbelievable in the West but I suspect not forbidden, at least back then in the Soviet Union.

But even without physical aggressing, the mental pressure is quite daunting. The teacher is an authority figure, not a guide. I got some reports recently that the educational situation over there is still quite grim.

I also noticed that they tend to favor the stars and everyone else is just fodder. As a rule, they don't have ethics (or at least the ones I had the misfortune to be around) in dealing with colleagues.

ZB

[Josquin des Prez]

Askenazy allegedly said that he didn't start to develop until he left the Soviet Union.

Askenazy is a sorry ass musician so it doesn't surprise me that he would say that.

Sorry, but the fact remains that Russia produced most of the finest musicians of this past few generations, and no automatons either, but true and genuine artists. High standards and hard work seem to lead to results, softer methods merely create slackers and arrogant and disrespectful slackers at that.

[zamyrabyrd]

Sorry, but the fact remains that Russia produced most of the finest musicians of this past few generations, and no automatons either, but true and genuine artists. The results speak for themselves.

First of all, I don't think that statement is even correct. The greatest singers apart from Chaliapin were not Russian. Conductors? Well, not a Cyrillic name on the current poll. Horowitz and Rachmaninoff left Russia quite early. OK, Kogan, Richter and Gilels. But the rest of the 100 Philips Great Pianists are not.

Also I wanted to add that such an environment either favors the stars or snuffs out lesser talents who are also important in society. Paging through "I, Maya Plisetskaya" on amazon.com, for instance, is a horror. Emerging with any artistic integrity from such a system is a feat in itself, the rare exception, not the rule.

ZB

[jochanaan]

Askenazy is a sorry ass musician so it doesn't surprise me that he would say that. 

That's your opinion.  I happen to like him a lot; he's much more than "just a virtuoso," but a thoughtful artist.

[Don]

Askenazy is a sorry ass musician so it doesn't surprise me that he would say that.

There's no good reason to dump on Ashkenazy as if he was a musical piece of crap.  Although he's far from being one of my favorite pianists, he deserves some respect.

[scarpia]

Askenazy is a sorry ass musician so it doesn't surprise me that he would say that.

Sorry, but the fact remains that Russia produced most of the finest musicians of this past few generations, and no automatons either, but true and genuine artists. High standards and hard work seem to lead to results, softer methods merely create slackers and arrogant and disrespectful slackers at that.

Whether Ashkenazy happens to be a favorite of yours or not, the first remark is so stupid as to not merit any reply. 

The second remark is no better, fine classical musicians have come from every part of the world where classical music is admired.

[Josquin des Prez]

Whether Ashkenazy happens to be a favorite of yours or not, the first remark is so stupid as to not merit any reply. 

Ha yes, i forget. This is GMG. No musical criticism allowed. Everything revolves around individual opinion. Personal taste is unassailable. I know the song.

The second remark is no better, fine classical musicians have come from every part of the world where classical music is admired.

Nonsense. Every age has had it's stars in the number and distribution of great artists and thinkers. At no point in history there existed a perfect egalitarian balance among Western nations, and in the 20th century Russia certainly played a much greater role in producing classical artists, performers and composers then most others. And it's just not Russia. Lot's of Eastern European countries have been particularly preeminent as well. What maddens me is that many of those artists today seem to be completely ignored, for no apparent reason. You have second rate artists like Simone Dinnerstein braking the charts but a genius like Vladimir Feltsman, probably the greatest modern Bach interpreter on the piano remains unknown. Why? And what about Nikolai Kapustin, veritably, the Scarlatti of our age, who's existence was ignored until Hamelin had the grace to record his music?

For all their "draconian" methods, it seems Russia managed to do quite well.

[greg]

At no point in history there existed a perfect egalitarian balance among Western nations, and in the 20th century Russia certainly played a much greater role in producing classical artists, performers and composers then most others. And it's just not Russia.

Well, at least in the early 20th century, I can't think of another country with more "big" composers than Russia, although it seems to have faded out over the years..... i mean, the only "big" Russian composer i can think of this second who is still alive is Gubaidulina, but come on....... sadly, they are nowhere compared to a century ago in terms of composers.

Right now, the countries leading the way in modern composers seems to be Finland, the US, and England with maybe France and Poland right behind..... maybe it'll change and the Germans and Russians will be back in the game again- hopefully it won't be too long  0:)

[scarpia]

Ha yes, i forget. This is GMG. No musical criticism allowed. Everything revolves around individual opinion. Personal taste is unassailable. I know the song.

There is a difference between criticism of an artist's performance and a foolish slur.

[Don]

You have second rate artists like Simone Dinnerstein braking the charts but a genius like Vladimir Feltsman, probably the greatest modern Bach interpreter on the piano remains unknown.

Just my opinion, but I'd take Dinnerstein's Bach over Feltsman's any day of the week.  His butchering of Bach's repeats in the Goldberg Variations is unacceptable to me and bespeaks a pianist of poor taste who places himself above the
composer. 

Also, Feltsman is hardly unknown.  He came to the USA with a ton of propaganda but seems to have worn out his welcome rather quickly.

[jochanaan]

There is a difference between criticism of an artist's performance and a foolish slur.

So now that we've exhausted THAT topic...

I think that, if we knew more about the home lives and inner lives of these young virtuosi, we wouldn't be so quick to demand so much from them.  On the other hand, some of the best Mozart I've ever heard was a live concert by 14-year-old Helen Huang in Boulder, Colorado.  And her playing was not merely "virtuosic," but had thought and heart.  I hope she's been given the chance to mature wisely.

[zamyrabyrd]

I think that, if we knew more about the home lives and inner lives of these young virtuosi, we wouldn't be so quick to demand so much from them.  On the other hand, some of the best Mozart I've ever heard was a live concert by 14-year-old Helen Huang in Boulder, Colorado.  And her playing was not merely "virtuosic," but had thought and heart.  I hope she's been given the chance to mature wisely.

If the urge to make music comes from an inner drive and a good teacher is available, that is surely a winning combination. One kid I got at the age of 10 insisted that he play the Pathetique Sonata because he heard the theme on a mobile phone, even before he could read music. It took about 2 years with other pieces in between for him to be able to play the first movement REALLY WELL. My idea was to hook up with his own ambitions and take it from there. He was happy and spontaneous in his playing.

I got however no end of flak from various sources. One teacher used to go to his practice room and say, "you shouldn't be playing that" although he himself gave a Chopin Nocturne to a very talented 9 year old. Soon the cat was out of the bag that he was a major find for the school (no credit to me of course) and the powers that be decided he needed a Russian teacher to make him into a "star". She drilled and badgered him for long hours every week until he could be a faithful clone of WHAT SHE WANTED.

The moral of the story is I think I can at least tell the difference between dictated interpretation and that which satifies an inner need at any age. Some clues are the lack of sponteneity, every time is done in the same way and programmed overly dramatic facial and arm movements.

There was a film I think on Mezzo TV about teaching music in the former Soviet Union. One talented woman shown playing with an orchestra said she had to do EXACTLY what she was told. Also shocking was "teaching" with two pianos, the teacher playing on one and the student trying to match it on another.

Probably one cannot get away from imitation in any art. We don't know how much we are imitiating and it is probably a lot. But once the structure is known of a work, there is freedom within the structure.

This is also a fallacy of some of the "interpretations" I had a recent dispute about. If the interpretation doesn't come from at least an intuitive grasp of the structure (like with the kid above who played the Pathetique) then the only explanation is that it comes STRAIGHT from the teacher.

But in the end, it really useless when one is in the realm of the irrational. People want to believe in miracles, despite the fact that no one would suspend belief to accept that an Olympic athlete doesn't need to practice hard hours every day. So the trail of superlatives is long and unending when describing such kids. And as always, the promoters would not contradict any wild claim since they are only giving what the public wants to hear.

ZB

[greg]

One talented woman shown playing with an orchestra said she had to do EXACTLY what she was told. Also shocking was "teaching" with two pianos, the teacher playing on one and the student trying to match it on another.

lol, so most piano lessons are on one piano, aren't they? I did get that impression......
that type of "teaching" sounds like what is done with just about any other instrument...... guitar, obviously...... maybe not percussion....... i'm pretty sure with a trombone- "hey, teacher, did i do well?" "this is how ya play it, son" and then the teacher puts their lips on the mouthpiece 

i don't see what's wrong with following directions EXACTLY as long as by the time you perform it, you're allowed to play your own way, although in your post it sounds like some of them can't for some reason.

[zamyrabyrd]

i don't see what's wrong with following directions EXACTLY as long as by the time you perform it, you're allowed to play your own way, although in your post it sounds like some of them can't for some reason.

Sure, imitation is important and unavoidable. I took over a class from a Russian teacher for a month and was shocked that for practically everything, the students were looking at me as though to ask, "What do I do now?"

[Ten thumbs]

How about the Bonis method? Bang the piano lid down on the child's fingers!

[Pierre]

First of all, I don't think that statement is even correct. The greatest singers apart from Chaliapin were not Russian. Conductors? Well, not a Cyrillic name on the current poll. Horowitz and Rachmaninoff left Russia quite early. OK, Kogan, Richter and Gilels. But the rest of the 100 Philips Great Pianists are not.
ZB

Sorry, that comment smacks of prejudice or at the very least is terribly confused: Rachmaninov left Russia when he was about 45 - hardly 'quite early'. If you mean he left the Soviet Union quite early, then why on earth mention Chaliapin. And talking of great singers nurtured by the Soviet Union, what about Lemeshev, Kozlovsky, Vishnevskaya and Borodina? And it's ridiculous to talk 100 Philips Great Pianists as the final arbiter of which Russian pianists qualify as 'great': how about Sofronitsky? Lazar Berman? Mikhail Pletnev?