Why can't a young prodigy (under 10) perform a truly profound rendition..

[leonidas]

...of for example a late Beethoven Sonata, or another great musical work?

Let's define the word profound for a moment here:

'showing intellectual penetration or emotional depths; from the depths of your being'

Now, I can see why they (perhaps) can't do this, but I'd like to question my own question here, and ask is 'profundity' really the remarkable thing about great works like this?

Let's say it wasn't, and say the music is great for the usual reason people think music is great - because it 'sounds good', which I feel may be the only important matter in producing great music.
Also, if the infant plays the music in a way that is 'musically' amazing - ie. beautiful rhythm and dynamics, and they don't happen to feel the (IMO) secondary elements of emotional and intellectual 'profundity', does this necessarily mean the audience members won't feel the 'profound' reaction to the great musical work, aswell as the primary musical one.?.

[pianochick93]

I believe that most 'young' performers would not have the emotional depth to feel the music, if what they are playing is particularly profound.

Such depth is generally not recognised until about 14 or 15 I think.

It depends on the person though. I was more deep at 12 than most of my friends are now.

[bob3.1415926]

I know not everybody agrees with me on this, but I think it is because great interpretations are based in personal experience.
At 10, the kid is unlikely to have experienced much, but that aside, they're unlikely to have gone through puberty, their body is mostly devoid of those colourful hormones which stop life from ever being that simple again.
When you're a kid, life is (comparatively) simple. The pieces you suggest involve complex emotion and thought. They're a bit beyond a 10 year olds understanding. I'm not saying 10 year olds are stupid, far from it, but the world is a lot more black and white at that age, and great interpretations require lots of colour.

[jlh]

The pieces you suggest involve complex emotion and thought. They're a bit beyond a 10 year olds understanding. I'm not saying 10 year olds are stupid, far from it, but the world is a lot more black and white at that age, and great interpretations require lots of colour.

Exactly. 

leonidas,

Just think of what was going on in Beethoven's life when he composed the late sonatas... he was going deaf (or already deaf for some of the sonatas), had chronic illnesses, family troubles with custody of his nephew, problems with women (he never married) and possibly had bi-polar disorder among other things.  This all after a long life of a musician -- do you think a 10 yr old kid would be able to fully comprehend what Beethoven was trying to express in his music and then convey it with the same profundity as someone older (with more life experience) would?

[counterpoint]

...of for example a late Beethoven Sonata, or another great musical work?

Let's define the word profound for a moment here:

'showing intellectual penetration or emotional depths; from the depths of your being'

That's a very intellectual definition 

If very young musicians are not able to perform truly profound (and that's not limited to late Beethoven Sonatas), then it is, because they are influenced too much by older people.

That's my opinion 

[jlh]

That's a very intellectual definition 

If very young musicians are not able to perform truly profound (and that's not limited to late Beethoven Sonatas), then it is, because they are influenced too much by older people.

That's my opinion 

How does that make sense?  If they are influenced more by older people wouldn't they take on more traits of older people and play more profoundly?

[counterpoint]

How does that make sense?  If they are influenced more by older people wouldn't they take on more traits of older people and play more profoundly?

The underlying assumption is, that older people are playing more profoundly.

I doubt this.

Because the playing of older people often is a bit boring, they have invented a criterion named "profound" 

[leonidas]

I believe that most 'young' performers would not have the emotional depth to feel the music, if what they are playing is particularly profound.

Just think of what was going on in Beethoven's life when he composed the late sonatas...  -- do you think a 10 yr old kid would be able to fully comprehend what Beethoven was trying to express in his music and then convey it with the same profundity as someone older (with more life experience) would?

No, but then, I am bringing up a related point.

Emotion and intellect are secondary in music, and they exist as a reaction and an inspiration too of course.

Now, knowing our emotional reaction to the music is important, we think the performer must be going through the same thing, but isn't it perfectly possible to be musically involved but emotionally detached or unaware?

Is it possible, just by musical talent, for the you prodigy to perform the piece amazingly in a musical way, without feeling the emotions that you as a listener associate with it?

[jlh]

Now, knowing our emotional reaction to the music is important, we think the performer must be going through the same thing, but isn't it perfectly possible to be musically involved but emotionally detached or unaware?

I don't think it is possible.  There must be a connection between the emotional center of the person playing and the piece or else there are just notes.  Especially for something like late Beethoven.  I have yet to hear an exception to this.  Think of it as method acting for pianists in a sense.

Is it possible, just by musical talent, for the you prodigy to perform the piece amazingly in a musical way, without feeling the emotions that you as a listener associate with it?

Yes, this is possible, but then again I wouldn't expect every person to have the same reaction as everyone else to any stimuli, musical or not.

[leonidas]

I don't think it is possible.  There must be a connection between the emotional center of the person playing and the piece or else there are just notes.  I have yet to hear an exception to this.  Think of it as method acting for pianists in a sense.

I just find the relation of music and emotion very interesting, and unlike most others I don't necessarily view it as an intrinsic element.

Any random person can feel emotion, and they can't write anything like Beethoven composed.

I agree they are connected, but I think Beethoven's genius would be the same if he was tortured or not.

Could a happy content man write music like that though?

We come to roundabouts here, but I would like to assert that a comical scherzo is not necessarily a lesser musical work than a piece that expresses 'deeper' emotions.

[counterpoint]

Could a happy content man write music like that though?

leonidas, your questions are getting more and more interesting!

[teresa_b]

Is it possible, just by musical talent, for the you prodigy to perform the piece amazingly in a musical way, without feeling the emotions that you as a listener associate with it?

Of course, just listen to Data on Star Trek play the violin in the exact style of Heifetz! 

Seriously, you are asking, I think  , a basic Artificial Intelligence question.  Whether that's true is argued all the time by those who believe AI is theoretically capable of totally simulating human thought/behavior, and those who don't.  Now, the question of "Once a robot appears conscious, is he really conscious?" is a real toughie.

Teresa

[bob3.1415926]

I agree they are connected, but I think Beethoven's genius would be the same if he was tortured or not.

Could a happy content man write music like that though?

Fantastic question. I imagine that Beethoven's output would have been very different (and probably less interesting) had he not suffered, but this is speculation, I don't know it would.

Looking at the examples, Schumann and Schubert both had pretty messy lives (and died young) Brahms was in love with his much admired mentor's wife, Mozart died young and penniless, Liszt had a burning determination to prove himself as the greatest to high society, coming from a 'lower' background, then later became a religious fanatic (this is another major source of inspiration for composers)

It isn't exactly happiness and joy. I think you need passion and intensity. Misery is an readily available source of this. But there are others (religion being quite a common one in music)

There's some quote about contentment being the bane of inspiration, but I can't remember who it is by, or the exact wording. 

[tengstrand]

As being the older guy here, I think one of the few perks is that I can be a little like (I know, this is the most annoying comment ever...) "when you get older you will understand this, blabla... "
Lately I have put the music I play much more in the perspective of being connected to all music, not historically, but with its emotional output, so to speak. I have, and this I would have thought was a very corny thing to think years ago, connected the incredible passion, sweat, pride and, yes, feeling, of Bruce Springsteen singing Born in the USA with the same tributes in let's say the finale of the Hammarklavier Sonata. Just realizing that music is a human experience, living in us all differently, not as an "interpretation". Very hard to express this, but take this video, my favourite on youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6_SbflSwAg&feature=related
I think this is Horowitz coming back to his homeland after the exile...I cannot believe this did not matter in his performance, and I'm pretty sure it partly made this the incredible performance that this is. I'll stop babbling now, just watch the video, think of the circumstances, and you'll get what I can't really express here...
Sorry for this being so unclear, folks...
Per

[daniloperusina]

I feel something similar. Many years ago I was a bluesguitar player and was heavily into Clapton, Robert Johnson and others. Above all I loved music with 'passion, sweat, pride and feeling', as you say. Although it's a long time ago, sometimes I can feel a connection to that. As if, say, Schubert's D960 is suddenly a blues. I mean spiritually. Robert Johnson sings Schubert.

I remember reading an eyewitness account of Horowitz' return. A student at the Conservatoire. Briefly something like: 'hiding in the toilets (no one was allowed in the building), hearing that the audience started to come, sneaking out, bluffing his way past security and ticket controllers, standing at the back of the hall, and as soon as Horowitz took his first steps out to the platform he could see many people around him breaking into tears. 60 years absence. And the student risking his whole career over one concert. Isn't that profound?

I don't know if a 9 year old can't be profound. But profound in a sort of nine-year old way?

[counterpoint]

We should clearly distinguish between true feelings and sentimentality.
If sentimentality is "profound", then I don't want to hear profound performances.

Kids are never sentimental (I see this as a great advantage!), but it's very easy for them to imitate sentimentality just for fun.

[jazzyprof]

This is the same as asking why a young prodigy can't give a truly profound reading or performance of Shakespeare's King Lear.  Playing the piano is after all speaking a language.  In order to move your audience you don't just mouth the words by rote.  You have to feel what you are saying.  What we feel and how we react is a result of years of accumulated experiences and memories.  All these inform our interpretations whether it be in playing a sonata or telling a story. 

[counterpoint]

This is the same as asking why a young prodigy can't give a truly profound reading or performance of Shakespeare's King Lear. 

There's an important difference:

In literature we have to know many things about life and history to understand what's going on.

Music is understandable directly, without needing additional information.

For example you don't need to know what a blue note, a 7th chord or a syncope is, to hear and feel Jazz music. And what is needed to improvise and play Jazz - a prodigy will be able to learn this very quickly.

[leonidas]

Indeed.

I'd like to question why profundity makes a work great.

Like I asked before, why is, for example, Islamey considered not as 'great' a work as the Beethoven op111, as an eg.

Both are innovative, rich,  and excite great reactions in most listeners.

[jazzyprof]

Music is understandable directly, without needing additional information.

For example you don't need to know what a blue note, a 7th chord or a syncope is, to hear and feel Jazz music. And what is needed to improvise and play Jazz - a prodigy will be able to learn this very quickly.

That is an immense falsehood.  For someone brought up on nothing but rap music, the sound of Bach at a first hearing may be nothing but noise.  To hear, feel, and appreciate any new type of music you need repeated exposure and experience.  To play a solo in jazz that actually touches the listener one needs more than technical virtuosity.  That's why jazz players will sometimes criticize a player as "having nothing to say"...they can play tons of notes with great rapidity but their playing doesn't tell a story.   

[jlh]

That's why jazz players will sometimes criticize a player as "having nothing to say"...they can play tons of notes with great rapidity but their playing doesn't tell a story.   

The same could be said of performers in ANY music genre.

[counterpoint]

The same could be said of performers in ANY music genre.

... and of performers of ANY age   

[gerry]

We argue here about whether or not these young prodigies are capable of a profound interpretation of, for instance, late Beethoven; but, in reality how many of them are attempting to? I seem to see and hear them playing a lot of Lizst Chopin, and some early Beethoven but seldom, if ever, late Beethoven Sonatas and the like. Perhaps they are covering their lack of profundity by sticking to impressive and virtuosic pieces. Does anyone have examples of 8- to 11-year -olds attempting some of these more "profound" works?

Another thought. If it were true that some young geniuses could be capable of really understanding to the fullest, great music and art, would they, as a result, be way too tortured too early on in their lives to handle it without burning out or going mad? Would it be sensory overload so to speak?

[jakev2.0]

Young Hofmann.

End of.

[cygnusdei]

Young Hofmann.

End of.

Under 10?

[viking]

The answer is quite simple.  Nobody at the age of 10 is physically, nor intellectually developed enough to be able to create the right sound.  They are unable to have a true presence or focus in the sound that they make, therefore they fail to produce a touching rendition of, say Beethoven's Op.111. 

[jlh]

Look at it this way:  Would you entrust your life to a 12 yr old prodigy surgeon, even if they knew everything someone 30 yrs old knows?

I think the analogy is valid.

[cygnusdei]

I'd like to peddle my own theory. Late Beethoven, or Beethoven in general is not intuitive, i.e. it requires formal training to play correctly. Therefore it is not suitable for young children who may have excellent musical instincts, yet lacking in proper tuition.

On the other hand, Bach, Mozart, and even Chopin is intuitive music. You can pretty much rely on your own ears for guidance, provided that you have a good set.

[counterpoint]

I'd like to peddle my own theory. Late Beethoven, or Beethoven in general is not intuitive, i.e. it requires formal training to play correctly.

That's an interesting point of view.
I'm not sure if I really agree - I have to think about it - but late Beethoven is indeed not a music that can be described in a positivistic way. It's a bit like: "I will show you, how bad music can sound". Early avantgarde-music.

I know, I will get killed now... 

[jlh]

I'd like to peddle my own theory. Late Beethoven, or Beethoven in general is not intuitive, i.e. it requires formal training to play correctly. Therefore it is not suitable for young children who may have excellent musical instincts, yet lacking in proper tuition.

On the other hand, Bach, Mozart, and even Chopin is intuitive music. You can pretty much rely on your own ears for guidance, provided that you have a good set.

I also have a theory about my 12 yr old prodigy surgeon... everyone knows that heart surgery in general is not intuitive, i.e. it requires formal training to perform correctly.  Therefore it is not suitable for young children who may have excellent medical instincts, yet lacking in proper tuition.

On the other hand, brain surgery is intuitive medicine. You can pretty much rely on your own patient for guidance, provided that you have a good one.

[jakev2.0]

Under 10?

W.J. Henderson in the New York Times on Hofmann November 29, 1887 Metropolitan Opera House debut (as related in Gregor Benko's 1976 introduction to a Hofmann book):

Men shouted "Bravo!" and women waved their handkerchief.  Pianists of repute were moved almost to tears.  Some wiped moisture from their eyes.  The child had astonished the assembly.  He was a marvel. ...Josef Hofmann ...is worthy of the sensation that he has created.  More than that, he is an artist and we can listen to his music without taking into consideration the fact that he is a child.

This was written at a time when the playing of Liszt, Rubinstein, and Tausig were still fresh in the ears of the reviewers, and when Rosenthal, Busoni were busy achieving prominence.  Not trivial stuff.

Hofmann was 9 at the time of the concert.

[maxy]

Yesterday I had an interesting conversation about Kant with some 8 year old kid.   

[counterpoint]

Yesterday I had an interesting conversation about Kant with some 8 year old kid.   

Who is Kant?