How do you know if you have talent?

thurlowe · Post by **thurlowe** » Fri Jan 31, 2003 1:46 pm

Lots to ponder in this venerable old thread:
http://chiffboard.mati.ca/viewtopic.php ... 24&forum=1

People really put their thinking caps on for this thread on innate vs. learned talent.

Cara

tt327 · Post by **tt327** » Fri Jan 31, 2003 2:15 pm

Yes, obviously some people are more "gifted," musically and otherwise, than others. I'm just saying that, for most of western history, and the histories of other parts of the planet, the amount of musical ability possessed by a particular individual has mattered less than the simple fact that msuic was something practiced by everyone. This, alas, is no longer true in western culture (and others that are learning from ours) where the vast majority of people don't make music but buy it. It is only western culture that has, fairly recently in the grand scheme of things, elevated those individuals thought to be "talented" or "geniuses" to godlike status, diminishing everyone else.

Tim

johnkerr · Post by **johnkerr** » Fri Jan 31, 2003 2:57 pm

I'm a case in point, not for music but for dancing. I have no aptitude whatsoever for dancing, which is odd because I have a strong sense of rhythm in my flute playing. At least 10 people have tried to teach me how to do a simple waltz, and all of them, including experienced dance teachers, have failed. I tell them my story and they say, confidently, "I can fix that," but they can't, or at least nobody has been able to do it so far. I never approach it with the preconception of "I can't dance." I'm always optimistic about it. I have spent hours practicing those apparently simple steps, but when it comes to actually dancing them to music I fail miserably. I've also been contradancing for 20 years and am just as bad as when I started. People have actually asked me to leave the dance because I keep messing it up. I keep trying, but I do recognize that I have no aptitude or "talent" for dancing, and I'm at peace with it.

Brad, I think your problem is that no one has told or taught you that dancing is not about doing steps to music. Which is not to say that dancers don't do steps to music, becuase they do. But that's not the key to dancing. Dancing is actually all about _shifting your weight_ to music. If you don't do that, you can step all you want and you'll never be dancing. As someone who used to do a lot of dancing (Irish sets and ceili dancing, a mis-spent year of contradancing, cajun dancing, swing dancing, even some ballroom dancing), I'm amazed that very few dancers or dance teachers ever talk about the weight shifts involved in dancing. They just talk about steps, figures, arm twirls, etc, etc, all of which without proper weight shifts are meaningless. I'm surprised by this, but I guess for people who are natural dancers it just comes so easy to them that they do it without even thinking about it. But to try to teach someone to dance without teaching them how to shift their weight is like handing them a flute, saying "Okay, just blow into that hole. Now, here's how you do a roll..."

So Brad, I say that if you can shift your weight in time to music, you can learn to dance. And if you can learn to do this and you can walk and count to eight, then definitely you can be a contradancer. And knowing you, I think you meet these requirements. So find yourself a good teacher or a good partner, and give it another try!

[ This Message was edited by: johnkerr on 2003-01-31 15:59 ]

bradhurley · Post by **bradhurley** » Fri Jan 31, 2003 3:30 pm

On 2003-01-31 15:57, johnkerr wrote:
So Brad, I say that if you can shift your weight in time to music, you can learn to dance. And if you can learn to do this and you can walk and count to eight, then definitely you can be a contradancer.

Thanks, John...I do appreciate your confidence in me but in this case it's entirely unfounded. I'm hopeless.

I have indeed been taught about shifting my weight, but that hasn't helped. I think one issue is that I get so distracted by the music that I forget to move...I've actually stopped dead in the middle of contradances to listen to the band, much to the consternation of the other dancers around me (especially my partner). I definitely can't walk, count to eight, and listen to music at the same time. Music seems to take over everything, which is why I can't listen to tunes at work, for example.

I think I also have some sort of three-dimensional spacial handicap. I am utterly incapable of learning a dance by watching someone else, unless they stand right next to me and guide me through it extremely slowly.

Also, I have no ability to retain what I've learned when it comes to dancing. I was in Brittany last spring and went to several festou-noz with my girlfriend (who's from Brittany herself, a great dancer and dance teacher). She would teach me each dance before it started, but if the same type of dance (An-dro, Hanter-dro, or Plinn, for example) came around 20 minutes later she'd have to teach it to me all over again from scratch.

Anyway, I'm sure you and other people reading this think I'm nowhere near as hopeless as I sound, but believe me, I am!

I love to PLAY for dancers, though. I'm playing for a dance tomorrow night in fact, with The Big Night Ceili Band, here in Montreal. C'mon up...we sound great! Laura Risk and Karen Iny on fiddle, Steve Jones on whistle, myself on flute, and Rachel Aucoin on piano. Bill White is calling the dances, Irish, Scottish, Quebecois, and more.

[ This Message was edited by: bradhurley on 2003-01-31 16:37 ]

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Fri Jan 31, 2003 4:14 pm

Well, I can't speak to the measurement of talent in others, but I can tell you about when I realized I had talent. Years ago a fellow asked me to play the highland pipes at a dedication of two new church doors. Yes, he dedicated two new church doors in memory of his deceased parents. A wonderful gesture. I was to play a tune in the church during the dedication and then lead the congregation through the new doors at the end of the ceremony. All went went. The fellow paid me $100.00 and a box of 24 cans of peaches (I believe they were from Georgia, but they could have been from the Carolinas--really good peaches in heavy syrup as I recall). I knew right then that I had talent. Now, I guage my talent on the flute and the other instruments I play by how much money I can make. As good a measurement as any in a capitalist country, I reckon.

Aodhan · Post by **Aodhan** » Fri Jan 31, 2003 4:29 pm

Now, I guage my talent on the flute and the other instruments I play by how much money I can make. As good a measurement as any in a capitalist country, I reckon.

Uhm....ok.

I've always looked at it this way, in that there is talented, and gifted. Everyone is talented, in that you can learn to do just about anything you want to. Some people have better motor or cognitive skills, and can pick things up faster, but anyone willing to put in the time relative to their learning ability can achieve a reasonable level of performance.

Where gifted comes in is the ability to make it seem effortless, and move other people because of it.

Now, I am very talented. (Wait, before you start guffawing at my ego, listen!

) What I mean is, I have been participating and competing in various things since I was 5. (Mostly sports.) Because of this, I can pick up almost anything having to do with physicality (Dance, martial arts, flute (finger dexterity) and whistle most recently) in a very quick fashion. Thus, most people I participate with term me "talented".

I am, however, not gifted. When playing chess, I have memorized bunches of openings, and can play a pretty good game, but I can't "see" moves and gambits others can. One of the best examples I can give is Gene Kelly and Fred Astaire. Fred Astaire, while being (arguably) one of the best dancers ever, is very technical and precise. Because of that, I can appreciate his dancing, but it doesn't leave me in awe. Gene Kelly was BORN to dance. He floats, and everything seems effortless. He makes you FEEL the dance that he is doing. That to me is the difference between being talented and being gifted. Anyone can be talented with enough practice, not everyone can be gifted.

Aodhan
P.S. If you want another example you can see, watch Michael Flatley's "Gold" DVD, for the parts where he was in RiverDance, or some of his solos. Then watch Colin Dunne in the RiverDance DVD doing the same dance, and you will see the same thing. MF always seems like he is working at it, CD makes it effortless.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Fri Jan 31, 2003 4:39 pm

That's exactly what I was saying. It is how much money you can make. I'm sure those guys don't dance for peanuts.

bradhurley · Post by **bradhurley** » Fri Jan 31, 2003 4:40 pm

On 2003-01-31 17:29, Aodhan wrote:
Fred Astaire, while being (arguably) one of the best dancers ever, is very technical and precise. Because of that, I can appreciate his dancing, but it doesn't leave me in awe. Gene Kelly was BORN to dance. He floats, and everything seems effortless.

I'm no expert on dance (see above!), but I would submit that you have this backwards. I think Astaire's dancing is more effortless and buoyant than Kelly's. Kelly feels heavier and more technical to me when I watch him, more acrobatic or gymnastic. Astaire seems lighter, more elegant, refined, less self-consciously showy.

[ This Message was edited by: bradhurley on 2003-01-31 17:44 ]

Aodhan · Post by **Aodhan** » Fri Jan 31, 2003 5:05 pm

On 2003-01-31 17:39, piper7 wrote:
That's exactly what I was saying. It is how much money you can make. I'm sure those guys don't dance for peanuts.

That is not what I intended. I'm sure everyone knows someone that could be making a great deal of money, but do something for the love of it rather than what can I get from it.

Not everything is about materialism, but I doubt if I could make you understand.

Aodhan

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Fri Jan 31, 2003 6:23 pm

No, I think I get it. If I call Mr. Olwell, a very talented flute maker, and ask him if, because he is so good at what he does and in fact probably loves what he does, he would give me, yes, give me, one of his flutes. It could work.

Post by **Nanohedron** » Fri Jan 31, 2003 6:40 pm

I agree with Aodhan about talent and being gifted. I especially believe it's very important to be able to say "I can't do that YET". One small word, one big difference!

N, can't type well yet

Lorenzo · Post by **Lorenzo** » Fri Jan 31, 2003 7:19 pm

For years, off and on, I worked with an aspiring musician, he was very smart and had a good memory, and fooled me into thinking he had some talent.

One day, as I was teaching him backup progressions on the bouzouki, I decided to go into the "b" part of the tune early (me playing the flute). Well, he continued playing the "a" part perfectly.

I kept quiet and tried it in other tunes as well...he never knew, because he couldn't "hear" music too well...HE MEMORIZED HIS PARTS! This guy was a psychiatrist by profession so I had to be careful.

One day I had an idea...I got behind him so he couldn't "mirror" me, or see what I was doing. I hit a note and asked him to hit the octave. He couldn't find it! The fifth above...he couldn't determine, except for counting up, where it was. Minor 7th has a very distinct sound in chording...I'd hit it...he couldn't name the chord exactly, even after identifying it and coming back to it later.

At that point I knew he didn't have natural talent...though I think it could be acquired. Natural talent is mostly inherited, and only slightly acquired or enhanced through the environment...that's my opinion anyway.

Post by **Nanohedron** » Fri Jan 31, 2003 7:39 pm

The Japanese (in the martial tradition, anyway) have a saying to the effect that talent is a misfortune, meaning: talent takes a person only so far, and when the going gets tough, too many get discouraged and give up, or, just as unfortunately, stick to their guns as it were, making no real further progress. "Seishin tanren": forging the spirit through practice and training; to me this can be applied anywhere, flute playing included.

You mean I have to actually work at this?!

N, now removing my Yoda hat

Gordon · Post by **Gordon** » Fri Jan 31, 2003 7:55 pm

There is a difference between being talented and making music, and playing an instrument. Half the whistle players out there move their fingers and blow. Just not very well.

Brad, you can dance. You might be terrible, but you can dance.

I think on some level, that's all some want to do. There are many untalented people out there, and no one's stopping them from playing (trust me, I've tried!). That falls into the "do what makes you happy, and try not to annoy too many other people," school of life, and I think it's a fine credo.

Seriously, though, most of us have an idea whether we have musical talent. Then it becomes a matter of working hard to get better, as Rob said. There are always those that have a natural feel for things and make it seem effortless. With rare exception, though, was it ever effortless. The ones who really work at something endlessly usually appear the most "gifted". Often, the difference between the great and the mediocre can be translated into how much time they spend on whatever they do.
Of course, the fine print here is whether they are spending time usefully, really feeling and understanding and putting a lot of themselves into what they're doing as they get their technique(s)down, or if they're just getting the techniques down.

Astaire and Kelly were both masterful dancers -- which was more artful is a matter of subjective taste. I'm sure we'd end up with quite a battle if we decided to list which flute player we feel plays with more soul than technique, or vice verse, and is that better or worse.
The answer, of course, is whichever moves you, and whatever it is in the craft you admire.

MandoPaul · Post by **MandoPaul** » Fri Jan 31, 2003 9:25 pm

The previously mentioned thread on work vs innate talent is great.

I think part of it is also desire. I'm with Brad on the dance-challenged front. My body coordination starts at my fingertips and ends at my wrists... However, I'm usually much more interested in hearing or playing the music than dancing to it. So, I play instead.

If you *want* to play and enjoy playing (when it works

), play. If other folks also enjoy your playing, you're on to something.