ecarroll

TMers,

I just read with interest a quote from Kjetil Andre Aamodt, Norway’s “Baby Shark”, who now owns more Winter Games medals (8) than any Alpine skier in history:

“Spend a lot of time on the hill, spend time training, and then, if you work hard over a long period of time, with a lot of focus, good things will happen to you in the end.”

Wise words for budding trumpeters (old ones as well).

Cheers,
EC

Solar Bell

Good words indeed!

And he did a reat job skiing also.

-cw-

mazzrick

I know this first part is mostly irrelevant to the topic, but I'll get to something good, at least I think it's good.

the 1st part:
Bode Miller won 2 silver medals at the last olympics, is a 4-time world champion, and is the first American in 22 years to capture Alpine's overall world-cup title. So you can't say that he has nothing to show. He is though, without-a-dout not the model of smart preparation or traditional hard work. So perhaps if he applied himself better he'd perform better. Or would he? This leads to my question...

the good part:
Bode is a reckless, rebellious personality. There are numbers of musicians like this. How much of that personality and general cavalier attitude acounts for his success and the success of those similar to him? Would we know Hemingway if he had not found himself at the bottom of a bottle? Would we still talk about the Beatles if there had been no LSD (the song too)? Mozart might have even drunk himself to death. Was his greatness due to his lack of regard for himself and for nearly all else? Babe Ruth used to play drunk sometimes. You can't say he was running laps and lifting weights all day everyday.

Granted, there is no arguing that for mostly all of us, hard work and dedication and giving a damn is the key to all our wildest dreams; but could it be possible that like Bode Miller, some people need to party the night before the gold medal race? That for some people to achieve greatness, they need to simply not give a damn? Would those people do better if they trained as hard as they could, went to bed early, stayed sober? Would we know Mozart had he been selibate? Would we know Bruckner had he been a lecher? Are people only as great as they allow themselves to be? and are they seeking greatness as hard as they possibly can even though to the rest of us, they're dashing their chances of winning a race?

My appoligies for the philosophical ponderings of 4:54 am.

M.

Manny Laureano

Fantastic discussion!

I knew nothing about Miller before these olympics and still claim ignorance about most of his reputation but your post, Mazzrick, begs some questions.

What was the level of his "rebelliousness" and unhealthy behavior the last time he won all valuable minerals? Has it changed and was he more like the kind of olympian trumpeter we're talking about when he actually won? I don't know the answers; these aren't rhetorical questions.

I believe composers write based on who they are as people. So, no, Bruckner couldn't have been the composer we know if he were lecherous. If he tried to write the fourth symphony it would not have been that incredibly sincere piece of music it is. He would have been a totally different composer. So, he likely would have been a composer but not the one that we know. Maybe he would have been more of the passionate Wagnerian rather than the minimalist he became. Yes, I believe that Bruckner was the first minimalist composer.

Babe Ruth was a reckless boozer but not at the developmental parts of his life. His worst year, 1925, was his worst year as a reckless boozer. When he changed his behavior he became the great ball player the public knew again. 1925 was also a significant year because it was Lou Gehrig's first year and he, like Cal Ripken, was a Steady-Eddie: solid, no bad habits or scandals. He remained that way for all of his short life.

Again, very interesting discussion.

ML