| This is a rather interesting thread you've started, my friend. Coincdentally, it's something I've been pondering as a result of thinking of, of all things, athletics!
I started thinking this weekend of the so-called "dumb jock", much maligned, in my opinion, and arrogantly so. If one can accept that everyone has a talent for something then my premise is that some are talented for music and some others for sports. Simple enough, right? Let's go further.
There are athletes and musician who seemingly have a single-minded purpose in life and that is to do what "coach/teach tells them to do" and, like good soldiers. they do it.
They "just do it".
If you sit and have a conversation with these folks about aspects of the "game" (music or otherwise) they'll quote you chapter and verse about the best way to prepare and execute. They'll have an instinct for what they do that is seemingly flawless. Go to another subject and they seem to be dumb as rocks about the things that happen to interest YOU.Thus forms our opinions about the "intelligence" of the jock/musician. I was very much dumb as rocks about everything in the world except for music when I was in school. As I listened to the conversations of those around me, I was terribly intimidated by how the reasoned lofty subjects the held forth about were.
It was also a time in my life where I rarely got nervous about anything having to do with music. I was eager to just play, no matter the style.
I went through a period of civilization and great knowledge-gathering about the more intellectual side of music, the more academic side, if you will. My teaching load increased and I found myself having to explain what I knew rather than "just doing it".
Well, thank goodness for people like Arnold Jacobs who taught me to wear different hats and reduce my teaching load for a while. Now, I teach as much as I used to but don't deal with the nerve issue because when I'm on stage I'm a singer and story teller. It's what I've always done best since I was a boy. In the lesson studio I can't be that. Instead, I'm the listener/analyst/motivator that you can't be on stage.
Performer-story teller
Teacher-listener
Those are the two hats I wear. The "dumb" jock tells his story everytime he goes to the plate and he only needs to be right about his story a third of the time for twenty years to get in the Hall of Fame! Yeah, I'd like to have a .333 batting average and still keep my job but it's not that way for us.
We become very educated and very sensitive to everything about us. Rich, your acute awareness of being louder than the clarinetist was your downfall in that one gig. The "dumb jock" wouldn't have cared that much, just played beautifully and probably not suffered the nerves. The comment afterwards would have been "Well, it was a little loud but geez, it sure was pretty." The sun would have risen the next day.
It's the price of knowledge for us the performers, this enhanced listening skill we develop. The wearing of a couple of hats is an important lesson. I think there's a reason Bud did not teach much. I think there's a reason Bud didn't record a wealth of solo CD's. He was the embodiment of focus and storytelling when he was active as everyone's All-American principal trumpet. And I'm sure he's the same but now he has a different job he's earned: legendary figure.
So, my premise is simply this, Rich; we could all afford to be a little "dumber" out there, on stage. There are parameters but I bet they're bigger than we care to admit. When you feel the performance judges talking to you before an entrance, SHOUT THEM DOWN WITH SONG!!! Just like that. Performing is the time for the application of knowledge, not the time for further study. If you aren't as familiar with a style of music then you are forced to "just do" your best.
That's something we can all do.
ML |