Starting over as a beginner, but serious about a career

[xerula]

pianowolfi: I'm not thompson_123, or a troll, or a gorilla. Is what I'm saying really so objectionable that you think I'm trolling? I'm just a guy who started posting on this forum today, unprepared for the degree of scorn my comments would arouse! I chose this thread, because it's a topic that's been occupying me a lot. I will also admit to some degree of lurking. So - hello!

No, I haven't skimmed hundreds of pianists' biographies with the goal of proving any particular idea. I've read through several anthologies of pianists' lives out of general interest (e.g. Harold Schonberg's "The Great Pianists", not that I'm recommending it), and I also sometimes like browsing youtube to listen to pianists I'm unfamiliar with, who I then look up on Wikipedia and various other sources. When thinking about the issues raised in this thread, I naturally referred to the information I've picked up in my reading. That seems to me a pretty normal thing to do.

m1469: Right - What I should have said is: "merely acknowledging that this is unlikely does not mean the entire foundation of your musical development is poisoned **so long as you have a sane foundation in the first place**". And if your foundations aren't sane, you can always reformulate them. I've seen it happen, with good results.

Also, I don't say things because they're "easy enough to say", and I think you're unkind for implying that I do. It seems I have genuinely misunderstood your position - I thought when you introduced the concept of the "artist" being "more than just a pianist trying to have a career", that you were saying a career is a negligible consideration in relation to artistry. And if you don't recall *me* saying as much, that was the entire gist of my second post - adult beginners accepting international acclaim is out of reach, but still practicing as if their potential was unlimited. I didn't explicitly write "for the music", but why else?

That acceptance doesn't have to be a starting point, or a foundation, or an impediment to musical integrity and progress, or anything at all but a peripheral observation that might stop rash decisions being made. It can be empowering, too.

My views on this topic are colored by my recent participation in a residential piano course, comprised of mostly adult learners. The two people - one guy and one girl - who were convinced of their genius and imminent stardom nearly ruined things for everyone else, making an atrocious racket with Stravinsky transcriptions far too advanced for them and acting like prima donnas with the teachers. Meanwhile, the adults with much more humble ambitions contributed lots of insights, because they had submitted to the necessity of focusing on the basics and the mastery of subtle details in simpler repertoire. They had, as you say, set out on their journeys the right way, and they absolutely "had something to say".

Anyway, please understand, I respect your passion for keeping the true wellspring of pianistic inspiration as pure as possible, and I share my thoughts in good faith.

[keypeg]

"It is indeed poisoned if that's the foundation of a person's musical development."

And it's at least as poisoned if someone is contemplating professional playing before having even attained solid competence. It's not negative to feel that such a person should be brought out of their delusion.

Anyone contemplating anything without knowing much about it will begin unrealistically simply because they don't know what it's about.  It is not a question of "Yes you can." "No you can't."  It's a question of telling the person what is involved and how to go about doing it.    Many people who started as children, maybe with their parents having that goal for them, also did not become concert pianists.  The point is that they went through a process.  So you describe the process.  that is much more useful than talking about "delusions" when discussing things in the future.  A person who has never touched the piano is delusional if he thinks right now he is a concert pianist.  A person who wants to work toward this as a goal is not delusional: he should be asking what is involved, and then if he thinks he is willing to do these things, go through the process.  The question of "can I" and the answer "you can" or "you can't" are all wrong.

[keypeg]

My views on this topic are colored by my recent participation in a residential piano course, comprised of mostly adult learners. The two people - one guy and one girl - who were convinced of their genius and imminent stardom nearly ruined things for everyone else, making an atrocious racket with Stravinsky transcriptions far too advanced for them and acting like prima donnas with the teachers. Meanwhile, the adults with much more humble ambitions contributed lots of insights, because they had submitted to the necessity of focusing on the basics and the mastery of subtle details in simpler repertoire. They had, as you say, set out on their journeys the right way, and they absolutely "had something to say".

That is the alpha and omega of it.  I disagree that "more humble ambitions" has anything to do with it.  Ambitions have nothing to do with it, period.  There are misperceptions of what musicianship is about.  It is mixed with images of professional musicians playing through inspiration and this magical thing called talent, and wanting to become this finished product called musician producing the finished product called music.  The fact is that the path involves a fair amount of drudgery of such boring things as getting a handle on timing, loud and soft notes, handling the peculiarities of the instrument, learning basic coordination.  In the Middle Ages music was considered a craft like tapestry and carpentry.  Michelangelo had to mix paints for the master and trace cut-outs called "cartoons" before he did serious work.  The professional musician who began as a little kid went through the drudge stages - proper posture, correct notes and the rest.  A while back we were hearing from teachers who got adult students who wouldn't do the fundamental things but were trying to impress them.  Often it may have been due to not knowing what is important.  If you're learning to play notes evenly then the teacher is not introduced in an inspired performance: she wants to hear even notes because that control is a tool you need to have.  After a while these same teachers avoided adult students.  Or they created "adult methods" designed to give shortcuts to playing your favorite pieces.

In the last couple of years suddenly we seem to be reading about a lot of adults who are attending colleges and conservatories, and yet are beginners.  I always thought those were places for advanced musicians who are doing the last stage of their development.  I've been wondering whether at least some of this was a way of handling people who have ambitions without the background and indulge paying customers.  The beginners that have been cropping up who attend these places seem to be learning from professors with lofty backgrounds, and they work on advanced pieces, are performance oriented.  Yet they don't seem to be given the basic tools of a beginner.  That is no way to become a musician, is it?

[m1469]

Also, I don't say things because they're "easy enough to say", and I think you're unkind for implying that I do.

Actually, that wasn't exactly my implication.  I can see, though, that I would be better off to leave this conversation because what I think and what I feel are things I must do, ultimately, and not just write .  Perhaps this is one thing that I meant.  Perhaps I also meant that if either of us actually meant exactly that, we could have just said exactly that, since it was easy enough to say.  In any respect, it's not a big deal.

It seems I have genuinely misunderstood your position - I thought when you introduced the concept of the "artist" being "more than just a pianist trying to have a career", that you were saying a career is a negligible consideration in relation to artistry. And if you don't recall *me* saying as much, that was the entire gist of my second post - adult beginners accepting international acclaim is out of reach, but still practicing as if their potential was unlimited. I didn't explicitly write "for the music", but why else?

That acceptance doesn't have to be a starting point, or a foundation, or an impediment to musical integrity and progress, or anything at all but a peripheral observation that might stop rash decisions being made. It can be empowering, too.

My views on this topic are colored by my recent participation in a residential piano course, comprised of mostly adult learners. The two people - one guy and one girl - who were convinced of their genius and imminent stardom nearly ruined things for everyone else, making an atrocious racket with Stravinsky transcriptions far too advanced for them and acting like prima donnas with the teachers. Meanwhile, the adults with much more humble ambitions contributed lots of insights, because they had submitted to the necessity of focusing on the basics and the mastery of subtle details in simpler repertoire. They had, as you say, set out on their journeys the right way, and they absolutely "had something to say".

Anyway, please understand, I respect your passion for keeping the true wellspring of pianistic inspiration as pure as possible, and I share my thoughts in good faith.

Everybody has a different makeup, one from another, and personally I believe we each have our own purpose, and that's what I *strive* to live by (also easier said than done).  What is right for one person to accept is not necessarily right for another person.  That is my opinion.

[xerula]

That is the alpha and omega of it.  I disagree that "more humble ambitions" has anything to do with it.  Ambitions have nothing to do with it, period.  There are misperceptions of what musicianship is about.  It is mixed with images of professional musicians playing through inspiration and this magical thing called talent, and wanting to become this finished product called musician producing the finished product called music.  The fact is that the path involves a fair amount of drudgery of such boring things as getting a handle on timing, loud and soft notes, handling the peculiarities of the instrument, learning basic coordination.  In the Middle Ages music was considered a craft like tapestry and carpentry.  Michelangelo had to mix paints for the master and trace cut-outs called "cartoons" before he did serious work.  The professional musician who began as a little kid went through the drudge stages - proper posture, correct notes and the rest.  A while back we were hearing from teachers who got adult students who wouldn't do the fundamental things but were trying to impress them.  Often it may have been due to not knowing what is important.  If you're learning to play notes evenly then the teacher is not introduced in an inspired performance: she wants to hear even notes because that control is a tool you need to have.  After a while these same teachers avoided adult students.  Or they created "adult methods" designed to give shortcuts to playing your favorite pieces.

In the last couple of years suddenly we seem to be reading about a lot of adults who are attending colleges and conservatories, and yet are beginners.  I always thought those were places for advanced musicians who are doing the last stage of their development.  I've been wondering whether at least some of this was a way of handling people who have ambitions without the background and indulge paying customers.  The beginners that have been cropping up who attend these places seem to be learning from professors with lofty backgrounds, and they work on advanced pieces, are performance oriented.  Yet they don't seem to be given the basic tools of a beginner.  That is no way to become a musician, is it?

I was describing a correlation, not a causation. You describe a category of student who is unwilling to focus on the basics, or even ignorant of the necessity of doing so.  Well, of course you can be wildly ambitious, or not at all ambitious, and have terrible or superlative musicianship in either case; there is no aprioristic connection, but in the particular case of adult beginners I personally observe a clear correlation in one direction. Perhaps I should not have used the word "ambition", but rather, "a sense of entitlement". After all, there is a noble connotation to the word 'ambition', too - that of aspiration. In any case, I don't suffer from a "misperception of what musicianship is about", rather, I'm seeking to characterize the psychological background of someone struggling to develop sound musicianship in the first place.

So yes, ambition and entitlement may well have nothing to do with musicianship, in an idealistic sense, just as vanity and ego are considered barriers to meaningful musical expression.  But pianists are humans first and foremost, and I am merely describing some of their human traits, in the interests of understanding the educational trend that you describe in your post. Conversely, as for young people taking the traditional route to a concert career - conservatories are hotbeds of intense competitiveness, and I've been lucky to know several young musicians who've gone on to great things, and they were very, very ambitious. Of course, zeal for fame and glory was not clouding their brains when they sat down to explore music every day, and their chief motivation was music itself, but nevertheless, they were highly ambitious as people.

I think you're right to raise the issue of teachers indulging paying customers. That's the other side to this ugliness, although it's not really the fault of individual teachers, but more the result of overwhelming social forces. Educators and educational establishments are often businesses who must respond to market pressures to survive. And the modern world is one where instant gratification is king, where musicians get famous regardless of their skill, and any "dummy" can learn any skill in "ten days or less" just by buying a book (or ten years, if the book is by Malcolm Gladwell)... as any amateur social commentator can tell you.

So, to answer your rhetorical question: no, that is no way to become a musician.

And, in respect of that consideration, I'm going to stop posting on this topic now, because I joined this forum to discuss music and piano playing, and somehow sidetracked myself into writing these silly essay-responses on ridiculous epiphenomena I don't really care about anyway! Oh dear!

[nyiregyhazi]

"Many people who started as children, maybe with their parents having that goal for them, also did not become concert pianists.  The point is that they went through a process.  So you describe the process.  that is much more useful than talking about "delusions" when discussing things in the future."

Of course they are delusions. A person who by their own estimation is not terribly accomplished would have to be a fool to be thinking of concert pianism before attaining competence. Their motivations are all wrong and everything is in the wrong order. There's a difference between telling someone they're a loser who'll never amount to anything and pointing out that somebody who has played for a long time yet never reached a standard of excellence is going to have a damned hard time approaching professional standards.

It's a very different situation where someone has time available and want to progress for the love of music and where someone wants to quit everything else for the sake of becoming a professional.

[nyiregyhazi]

This all reminds me of a segment shown by the BBC as part of a darts tournament. Some complete nutjob thought he could "choose" to become a professional darts player. He had scarcely played before, but quit his job and started practising for many hours per day. As I recall he'd been going for about a year or so. They got him to play a leg against Bobby George (long retired and probably nowhere near professional standards today). He didn't get a single score over 100 and I seem to remember that he only hit a single treble 20 in the entire leg. Professional darts players typically average well over 120 and would regard most throws under 100 (100 requiring at least one treble from the three darts thrown) as being a let-down.

As I recall, the guy was some kind of retired banker who probably had enough money to live off. Even though he was well and truly hopeless at darts, perhaps he was right to follow his dream- considering that he wasn't about to become poor. That said, I can't believe he would ever have got much satisfaction from giving up so much time for something he had no talent for at all. Sooner or later, he must have felt totally crushed- as he wasn't even close to the standard required to earn a penny. But in particular, if the average guy were to give up his livelihood to pursue a dream of earning money from something he wasn't even faintly accomplished at, it could only be viewed as a delusion.

It comes down to whether the goal is based on improving yourself based on manageable sacrifices. Nobody would be anything but encouraging about such a situation. If the starter goal is to be a pro (rather than to make self-development for your own satisfaction) it's a totally warped mindset.

[nyiregyhazi]

Here's the guy:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-510504/The-charity-boss-quit--darts-champion.html

[pianowolfi]

pianowolfi: I'm not thompson_123, or a troll, or a gorilla. Is what I'm saying really so objectionable that you think I'm trolling? I'm just a guy who started posting on this forum today, unprepared for the degree of scorn my comments would arouse! I chose this thread, because it's a topic that's been occupying me a lot. I will also admit to some degree of lurking. So - hello!

No, I haven't skimmed hundreds of pianists' biographies with the goal of proving any particular idea. I've read through several anthologies of pianists' lives out of general interest (e.g. Harold Schonberg's "The Great Pianists", not that I'm recommending it), and I also sometimes like browsing youtube to listen to pianists I'm unfamiliar with, who I then look up on Wikipedia and various other sources. When thinking about the issues raised in this thread, I naturally referred to the information I've picked up in my reading. That seems to me a pretty normal thing to do.

Well then I apologize of course. Hello and welcome to PS!

[keypeg]

"
Of course they are delusions.

A delusion is believing something is true when it is not.  If you have never played the piano and think you are an accomplished player right now, that is a delusion.  When you plan to achieve a goal, then saying it cannot be done is just as "delusional" as saying it can be done.  We are talking about a goal, which by definition is something that is not yet real because it has not happened.  The PROPER RESPONSE to that goal is not to tell a person "No, it is not possible."  It is to tell them what needs to be done, and what needs to be achieved.  If they decide to go through the process, they may still find out that they cannot do it, or that they don't want this.  The process itself is what matters.

[hastur]

A delusion is believing something is true when it is not.  If you have never played the piano and think you are an accomplished player right now, that is a delusion.  When you plan to achieve a goal, then saying it cannot be done is just as "delusional" as saying it can be done.  We are talking about a goal, which by definition is something that is not yet real because it has not happened.  The PROPER RESPONSE to that goal is not to tell a person "No, it is not possible."  It is to tell them what needs to be done, and what needs to be achieved.  If they decide to go through the process, they may still find out that they cannot do it, or that they don't want this.  The process itself is what matters.

This sums it up pretty well I think.

[nyiregyhazi]

A delusion is believing something is true when it is not.  If you have never played the piano and think you are an accomplished player right now, that is a delusion.  When you plan to achieve a goal, then saying it cannot be done is just as "delusional" as saying it can be done.  We are talking about a goal, which by definition is something that is not yet real because it has not happened.  The PROPER RESPONSE to that goal is not to tell a person "No, it is not possible."  It is to tell them what needs to be done, and what needs to be achieved.  If they decide to go through the process, they may still find out that they cannot do it, or that they don't want this.  The process itself is what matters.

I didn't say it cannot be done. I pointed out fantastically improbable it is. The delusion lies in the belief that if one simply finds the right path, success will follow automatically/. Being pragmatic is far healthier than encouraging a potentially damaging fantasy with ludicrously over the top encouragement.

If we relate it to business, the problem is market-saturation. If someone went on a business site and said they have a recipe for butter which isn't currently very nice but they are thinking of trying to improve it and then marketing it (by investing their life savings), would it help that person to encourage them to believe that they MIGHT succeed? Absolutely not. You'd tell them to either come up with a decent product for definite or forget it. Even if they had a fantastic tasting product, there are a wealth of other issues. Who needs a new butter- when there are so many around already? Before a person tries to chase a fantastically improbable dream, they need to decide what failure to achieve it would mean. If they can fail and be happy, fine. If it will crush them, unrealistically positive encouragement is exactly what they do NOT need.

If a person is serious about devoting everything they have to the possibility that they might someday turn an unfinished product into one that is spectacular enough to flourish in a saturated market of excellence, they are delusional. They have no grasp of quite what real life professionals have had to go through, or quite how much of head-start most of those began with due to sheer talent. Their delusion is constructed around wishful ignorance towards the reality of such things.

That a person would even refer to professionalism illustrates the level of delusion. Why is the goal not to play well? To presume the ability to achieve professional excellence in a saturated market (with an unremarkable track record) is just a pipe-dream. Leeds competition winner Michael Roll studied a doctorate of medicine (AFTER his victory), due to worry about making a living! For someone who has no track record of achievement, to be looking so far up the ladder is pure delusion. Such people need to put their fantasies aside and start aiming for self-improvement.

[hastur]

I don't think anyone here has the delusions of making a huge living out of music, Nyiregyhazi. But it is entirely possible to (and since you are so bad at finding implied words in sentences I'll add: BUT NOT GUARANTEED) make a living out of it. Be it as a music teacher for elementary school, selling sheet music and instruments, placing in competitions, playing recitals, or playing concerts.

By pursuing music as a career, you are quite likely to live a life of poverty. But if you are fine with doing that while pursuing the biggest passion of your life, then by all means, go for it!

[nyiregyhazi]

"Be it as a music teacher for elementary school, selling sheet music and instruments, placing in competitions, playing recitals, or playing concerts."

Of course. But the person mentioned becoming a "concert pianist". Not vaguely musical admin work.

"By pursuing music as a career, you are quite likely to live a life of poverty. But if you are fine with doing that while pursuing the biggest passion of your life, then by all means, go for it!"


Indeed. That's exactly what I was saying! I think it's irresponsible to encourage an excessively inflated dream without conveying the reality and the risks. Once they are understood, the person can then think about whether they still wish to pursue it.

[keypeg]

There is a huge time lapse between when we start pursuing something and years later.  That original goal may evolve into something else.  But we have to start somewhere.  To take every dream and always not try because "it is not pragmatic" or "we must be realistic" means we'll never get anywhere with anything.  We can live average lives doing average things and be invested in nothing.  You are probably a lot younger than I am, Niyer.  I'll tell you that too much "pragmatic" sucks.  When it goes into not taking any steps and staying on the fence for decades - you don't get anywhere in anything that way.  Little kids say they will be astronauts and stuff.  Do you tell them that this is unrealistic?  No.  The astronaut goal goes into an interest in science, and reading, and looking at the stars.  It turns into something.

[hastur]

Indeed. That's exactly what I was saying! I think it's irresponsible to encourage an excessively inflated dream without conveying the reality and the risks. Once they are understood, the person can then think about whether they still wish to pursue it.

Then why, for the love of music, were you not stating the risks but instead speaking all sorts of non-sense about delusions de grandeur?

Personally I believe he might be able to become a concert pianist, not necessarily a good one who makes obscene sums of money, but a concert pianist. This of course requires that he has at least a slight affinity for playing the piano, and that he owns a massive passion and love for music, and arms himself with rock solid ambitions and dedication. If this holds true for him, he can probably become a concert pianist, but again, not necessarily the next Rubinstein.

[nyiregyhazi]

"There is a huge time lapse between when we start pursuing something and years later.  That original goal may evolve into something else.  But we have to start somewhere.  To take every dream and always not try because "it is not pragmatic" or "we must be realistic" means we'll never get anywhere with anything."

I totally disagree. If a man played a little golf to an ordinary standard in his teens and then later starts practising more and decides he's planning on turning pro (without having yet so much as broken par for 18 holes), he is delusional. You do not need foolish dreams to be serious about developing yourself. For a person to realise that he is unlikely to go on to win the US Open does not mean he is therefore going to hold himself back with negative thinking. Focus should be placed exclusively on positive goals of self-development- not on some deluded and egotistical belief that you can simply "decide" to go from being ordinary to to one of the greatest golfers/pianists of our time.

"When it goes into not taking any steps and staying on the fence for decades - you don't get anywhere in anything that way.  Little kids say they will be astronauts and stuff.  Do you tell them that this is unrealistic?  No."

That's because they're kids. If a grown adult told me he wanted to be astronaut, I'd know that he were either completely delusional or coming from a proven background of extreme intelligence and skills. And even if it were the latter, his chances would be slim.

[m1469]

If a person is serious about devoting everything they have to the possibility that they might someday turn an unfinished product into one that is spectacular enough to flourish in a saturated market of excellence, they are delusional. They have no grasp of quite what real life professionals have had to go through, or quite how much of head-start most of those began with due to sheer talent. Their delusion is constructed around wishful ignorance towards the reality of such things.

That a person would even refer to professionalism illustrates the level of delusion. Why is the goal not to play well? To presume the ability to achieve professional excellence in a saturated market (with an unremarkable track record) is just a pipe-dream. Leeds competition winner Michael Roll studied a doctorate of medicine (AFTER his victory), due to worry about making a living! For someone who has no track record of achievement, to be looking so far up the ladder is pure delusion. Such people need to put their fantasies aside and start aiming for self-improvement.

Why oh why am I here?  argh.  I guess I've still got opinions to express!  I think part of the problem is that you can't reason with passionate dreams.  I mean, not truly.  The only way a person ever awakes from dreams and into reality is by growth, development and progress of some sort - and that particularly includes skill and perspective/discernment.  Either a person grows in the ability to discern what they are truly after and what is truly possible for them and/or they grow in the skills which actually make the dream possible and a reality.  For some people, it is just as delusional to live a life without pursuing a dream.  But, you can't force them into dreaming your dream, settling for what you are settling for, because other than the fact that they've probably thought about "settling" already, or have probably circled through many ways of "reasoning" ... you are still different people.  And, anyway, who are you?  

As a side note, I don't really get exactly what the big beef is, here?  Nobody is overtly encouraging the idea.  And, I highly doubt that a person who is fascinated by, as you call it, a delusion like this, would wake up from it just by reading this thread.  Reading something like statistics is just like seeing the gorilla standing there.  Oh, there he is again!  Yup, he keeps looking pretty much the same.  

I thought to add, though, an interesting little tidbit I remember from watching an interview with Lang Lang.  He mentioned about how many thousands of young, aspiring pianists there have become in China, especially since he has made his stardom, and how many of these youngsters are wishing to "become rich and famous" like him (Lang Lang).  I have to say, I saw a kind of tenderness in Lang Lang as he remarked about this, as it's obviously possible to do - I mean, the possibility exists in the world - but there's obviously so much more to it than setting a foot on a path and walking (okay, there is and there isn't  ).  In any case, you could say that probably many or most of these individuals aspiring to be something pianistically great are delusional, but somebody's not!  And, the "statistics" of how many people actually DO reach stardom are true for *everybody*, so still what determines the development of our own potential in that way is something that really hasn't got anything to do with statistics.  

[keypeg]

Niye:  Everyone STARTS with an idea.  The next thing to do is tell this person what is involved.  Then he decides what to do with his idea.  You do NOT say abstract negative things like "you are delusional" -- language of psychiatrist (the kind nobody should ever visit).  You inform him of the craft.  You invite him to learn as much as possible about it.  Then it's up to him to decide what to do with it.  Maybe the original impulse only involved doing something creative.  Just saying that he is mentally unstable (which is what that ugly word means) is destructive, and none of us is in the position of knowing the mental stability of a stranger.

I'm done with this.  It is useless and negative.  Telling people what is involved is useful.   Labeling people's initial plans isn't.

[m1469]

Oh, and PS - As far as I know, nobody in this thread has actually heard the OP play.  For all we know, he's a genius with an unfortunate circumstance and the genuine need to see his true potential  . 

[nyiregyhazi]

Niye:  Everyone STARTS with an idea.  The next thing to do is tell this person what is involved.  Then he decides what to do with his idea.  You do NOT say abstract negative things like "you are delusional" -- language of psychiatrist (the kind nobody should ever visit).  You inform him of the craft.  You invite him to learn as much as possible about it.  Then it's up to him to decide what to do with it.  Maybe the original impulse only involved doing something creative.  Just saying that he is mentally unstable (which is what that ugly word means) is destructive, and none of us is in the position of knowing the mental stability of a stranger.

I'm done with this.  It is useless and negative.  Telling people what is involved is useful.   Labeling people's initial plans isn't.

There are all kinds of levels of delusion. As it turned out, the poster here was indeed mentally ill. However, plenty of relatively sane people develop bizarre expectations that I would categorise as delusion. I'm sorry if you find pragmatic realism negative, but after reading a number of outrageous responses I think it's essential to add some balance. When people start saying "yeah, you'll probably be able become a concert pianist" to a person who is already harboring a potentially unhealthy level of expectation, a voice of reason is needed.

I think it's far more dangerous to add fuel to unjustifiably excessive expectations rather than to be pragmatic. Can you imagine if teachers were to actively encourage all of the students who watch the X-factor to feel that they might as well stop trying academically and devote all of their energies to being a pop-star? To encourage optimism is not always a positive and to be pragmatic is not always to be negative. There's a difference between someone starting late and wanting to become an excellent pianist and someone starting late with the aim of being a concert performer.

[keyboardclass]

Mentally ill in the sense he refuses to read any more of your posts?

I've lost interest and haven't even read this. I dig my own grave. I'll move on.

He's just got good sense that's all!

[nyiregyhazi]

How could I possibly reply to such an incisively witty (not to mention entirely off-topic) ad hominem, other than to use this image once again?



You really must put your own volume together and self-publish it.

[keyboardclass]

And you accuse the OP of mental illness?

[nyiregyhazi]

And you accuse the OP of mental illness?

He openly stated it in another thread.

[keypeg]

The title I'm reading says "Starting over as a beginner, but serious about a career".  This thread stopped being about the original poster weeks ago so I don't know why only he is being addressed when he's not even in the picture.   There are plenty of people here who for one reason or another could not begin music when they were young, or had to stop when they were young, or were grossly undertaught or mistaught when they were young.  Some of them may dare to consider doing something more than dipping into it shallowly as a hobby.  Again, this is where you START.  You dare to think "I'd like to do something more."  EVERY dream begins unrealistically because we literally know nothing about what we're talking about when we start.  The little kid who wants to be an astronaut probably will never set foot in a rocketship in his life.  But that is his starting point.

Again, for the third time, the correct response to someone who wants to be serious about a career in music, is to tell him things about a career in music.  You mention what kinds of skills have to be gotten, and how to get them.  What kind of work is involved.  What kinds of careers there actually are in music.  What the politics are.  How long it will take.

The next thing that may happen is that those people (note the plural in this) may do different things.  Some may start working seriously and doing what needs to be done.  They might end up simply being excellent amateur musicians.  Some may end up being teachers.  Some may do nothing more than inspire others.  It is a very narrow way of thinking to take the initial wish literally and immediately not only say "no you can't", but for heavens sake, put the label of a psychiatric illness on it?  This is what I object to very strongly.  Nobody here knows any of the people posting.  The only person qualified to give that kind of diagnosis is an actual psychiatrist who has worked personally with somebody for a sufficient amount of time, and even those folks can be wrong - and would never state such a thing publicly.

This is seen way too narrowly.  Just consider how many things "career in music" spans.

[nyiregyhazi]

"Again, for the third time, the correct response to someone who wants to be serious about a career in music, is to tell him things about a career in music.  You mention what kinds of skills have to be gotten, and how to get them.  What kind of work is involved.  What kinds of careers there actually are in music.  What the politics are.  How long it will take."

He didn't say "career in music". He spoke of being a concert pianist. To omit to convey the honest improbability would be to mislead a person. If an adult who has never broken par speaks of winning the US Open, you start with what an improbable dream that is. Then you start talking about how to simply improve and aim as high as as possible. You don't start with how to go about winning the US Open. There are goals and there are fantasies.


"The next thing that may happen is that those people (note the plural in this) may do different things.  Some may start working seriously and doing what needs to be done.  They might end up simply being excellent amateur musicians."

If they're happy, great. What if they are also penniless, unemployed and unhappy? What if they don't even achieve a level that they can take great pleasure in? They need to understand the odds before starting on such a late venture. That's why it's best to be honest. To progress considerably and become very good is a sensible goal. To hope a concert pianist (without having demonstrated prior excellence) is a delusional fantasy.

 
"Some may end up being teachers.  Some may do nothing more than inspire others.  It is a very narrow way of thinking to take the initial wish literally and immediately not only say "no you can't", but for heavens sake, put the label of a psychiatric illness on it?"

Who said that? To point out that something is unprecedented in known history is not to say "no you can't". To tell someone that the odds of winning the lottery are miniscule not to say "no you can't" win. It's to keep them up to date with reality, if they start expecting to win. As for "delusion" I do not see that as implying mental illness. However, the guy said he is schizophrenic in another thread. It's no surprise- as his posts were clearly those of a complete fantasist, who wanted to protect his fantasies from anything grounded in reality. Hence his rude responses to a number of different posters. I'm no expert in mental health, but I do not believe that giving fuel to fantasy is wise.

[keypeg]

There is no "he".  The OP disappeared a long time ago.  I am not talking about this he.  The boat is being missed.

[nyiregyhazi]

There is no "he".  The OP disappeared a long time ago.  I am not talking about this he.  The boat is being missed.

Whether we're talking about a hypothetical person on a real one, stoking the fires of unrealistic fantasy does not help anybody. Those who have attained a good solid level are ready to think about concert playing- although even they need to understand the slim odds. Those who have not even achieved a solid level can only be fantasists, if they seriously ask questions about professional playing. Sustainable positive thinking comes from setting challenging but realistic goals, in a bid to achieve excellence. Not from having the deranged idea that there's a special path that takes you to the top of the pile and that all you have to do is find it.

The thing about "the sky's the limit" thinking is that we only tend to see the successes of blind optimism. You don't get a lot of TV programmes about the fruit-loops who invest their life-savings in trying to market clockwork dildos or glow-in-the-dark luggage and end up unable to feed their family, thanks to a foolish dream. If we saw more the sadness and failure that steps from ill-thought out optimism, people would value the worth of pragmatism a good deal more highly. Grounding yourself in reality and having negative values are totally different issues. Great businessmen frequently owe their success to knowing the right times to get out of situations and accept a loss. However, this has nothing to do with suggesting that adults should feel defeated and give up. What it shows is what a gulf exists between the foolish dream of concert playing and the simple dream to progress for your own satisfaction. If you're reading negativity here, you're simply not reading the message I'm putting across. I'm talking about how unhealthy delusional expectations are. I am not arguing against striving for self-improvement in general.

[keypeg]

I am looking at the title, not at the posts by the OP in this thread or elsewhere.  A career in music can mean many things.  Are we not saying the same thing?

[m1469]

Today there has developed a kind of stillness in me where I start to think or feel only of most beautiful musical moments, and it's as though these effortlessly expand into my entire memory and my entire being, and become my all as though that is all there is to have life even be.  I can't help but wish in some way to perpetuate and develop this music throughout my life.  It sometimes seems to me that this kind of life is perpetuated in what we call a career in music, but really what I want, all that really matters, are those musical moments.  And, I am deeply grateful for them.

[keypeg]

Thank you, m1469, for some sanity, and a perspective that I can understand.  Goals is not where it is at.  It is where we are, what we can do with it, and how far we can expand "just because".

Our life on this earth is not perpetual, and our enjoyment of the bodies that we inhabit is ever changing so if you were truly "realistic" in terms of goals, you would not start anything.  It is NOT about goals, or what you will "become" as a career title.  It is what you can do and will be able to do, and what you will do with what is in front of you and within you.  Practicalities are part of the equation.  Right now I'm learning to do a smooth descending scale.  But that is not what it's about, and that is not the pleasure even in that little exercise.

This is totally off topic. This morning I was playing a little ditty on an instrument of mine and didn't realize the window was open.  When I stopped I heard a child's voice outside, "Oh, the song stopped!  Please, PLEASE!  More."  I played another ditty, and this time when it ended, the child skipped away, singing.  It was a real and lovely thing.

[m1469]

Thank you, m1469, for some sanity, and a perspective that I can understand.  Goals is not where it is at.  It is where we are, what we can do with it, and how far we can expand "just because".

There are unfortunately too many indefinables by words in this subject for me and I find myself resisting almost anything put into words and endlessly wishing them to be defined so those involved can all understand each other and have some common ground.  What I can say is that I don't want to live my life without purpose, and I don't wish to be limited to the concept of a label.  My life does include goals and I may or may not reach them, and some of them are what we might consider career oriented.  But, I can tell you for sure, I don't want to live any of that without real music, and doing something like playing emptily on stage even if it looks like a career is not my goal.  I want to perpetuate music, and I want that to be my career, and it's my right, just as much as it is anybody's to experience musical satisfaction in ways that are truly satisfying for me.  I see that as absolute truth which has its own path, and my life is about living that path which is witnessed by what I learn, but I am only following where it leads.

[nyiregyhazi]

I am looking at the title, not at the posts by the OP in this thread or elsewhere.  A career in music can mean many things.  Are we not saying the same thing?

I've simply been responding to points as raised in the thread- not basing in on the title (especially as the person who chose the titel made it clear that by career he was referring to concert pianism). Of course there are many other jobs available in music. But this has a been a thread about the likelyhood of attaining professional competence as a performer- not a thread about getting any old job that has something to do with music.

[keypeg]

I've simply been responding to points as raised in the thread- not basing in on the title (especially as the person who chose the titel made it clear that by career he was referring to concert pianism). Of course there are many other jobs available in music. But this has a been a thread about the likelyhood of attaining professional competence as a performer- not a thread about getting any old job that has something to do with music.

I think that you are talking about the professional competence of this one individual as a performer.  What I read in that thread showed unrealistic attitudes that would not likely lead to anything in that direction.  But OTHERS who may be considering performance as late starters may have different results because they have different backgrounds, different abilities, and different attitudes.

[nyiregyhazi]

"Our life on this earth is not perpetual, and our enjoyment of the bodies that we inhabit is ever changing so if you were truly "realistic" in terms of goals, you would not start anything."

This only serves to show that your personal definition of "realistic" inherently assumes totally negative thought patterns. If a person who has never achieved even a basic level of excellence is to think of focussing everything on a concert career, they are deluded and need to be realistic. If a person thinks they can run across a crowded motorway or jumpy off a tall building, they need to be realistic. Realism is a part of healthy being. A person would have to be staggeringly pessimistic to feel "realism" tells them not to start anything. You are referring to pessimism, not realism.


"It is NOT about goals, or what you will "become" as a career title.  It is what you can do and will be able to do, and what you will do with what is in front of you and within you."

That's exactly what I've been saying in each and every post. To improve you set yourself real goals. Not fantasies.

[nyiregyhazi]

I think that you are talking about the professional competence of this one individual as a performer.  What I read in that thread showed unrealistic attitudes that would not likely lead to anything in that direction.  But OTHERS who may be considering performance as late starters may have different results because they have different backgrounds, different abilities, and different attitudes.

]

Sorry, but I really don't understand where you're coming from. I made it absolutely clear that what I was stating that someone who has not yet achieved a standard of excellence is not ready to contemplate career as a performer- without it being total fantasy. Anyone else who would consider becoming a professional before actually improving themself is equally deluded.

Anyone who starts late and thinks "I'd like to try to become extremely good at this" is in an entirely separate category. I don't understand why you're superimposing my views on the former onto the latter. I have made an extremely explicit distinction between the two- and repeatedly so.

[mcdiddy1]

I would just love to see one of many posters who create topics like" Do you think I can have a career as a concert pianist at age___" actually go off and prove everyone who says they can wrong.

Is it unrealistic for someone who did not start playing piano in their diapers to be a "concert pianist"? Yes, but there are outstanding young pianist who study less than 3 years and play wonderful concertos performances. I think it would be better to fish for evaluation from people who are in the field and hear you play rather than posters on piano street with their own conceptions of what it takes to be a performer. Taking a visit to a local university and signing up for lessons and getting a professional opinion is the best way to go. If you feel you do not have the skills to impress someone of that stature then it would be better to get to practicing and get to a level you feel would be acceptable. 

Rather than throwing out statistics about how many hours you have to practice and the odds of making it , I think it would better for you to get real world experience and join a piano studio and performs some recitals and see how it goes. There are exceptions to every rule and some people just have the physical facility, mental synapes, and determination to learn quickly and achieve extraordinary results. Nobody here (hopefully) wants to crush your dreams or at the same time give you false hope but the true barometer is the success you have in front of an audience not a handful of post on a forum.