Klarinet Archive - Posting 000270.txt from 1996/06

From: Nate Burk <nathan@-----.COM>
Subj: Re: talent vs hard work
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 21:38:03 -0400

>"What is more important: innate ability, or hard work?"

I think a lot of people will agree that both are essential to a highly
successful player. If a player with excellent ability does not put in the
necessary time to improve himself, he will never get any better. He may
never learn to appreciate his instrument because he doesn't have to work
very hard at it. Another consideration is that hard work is absolutely vital
to any ensemble job; players are often given their music only a couple of
weeks before the first rehearsal and are expected to know it -- without the
"worth ethic," even a very talented player would fail at a paying job.

But what value is the hard work without the talent? The question here is
which player "over time" will be a better player. IMO, hours of fruitless
work result in little more than an appreciation for the instrument. If I
heard a bad clarinet player at a concert, I would say, "Geez, what a bad
clarinet player," not, "Wow, they must work very hard at it." Most students
who don't enough natural ability lose interest in their instruments before
too long. Thus, I don't believe hours of hard work with little reward will
eventually result a stronger player. (That's not to say that someone who
isn't good at an instrument should quit..)

I think what makes a strong player is someone with a good amount of natural
ability who commits himself to perfecting his talent. I admire someone who
plays beautifully but still works at improving. It's this "professional"
attitude that we see in those who love music and love playing *for* their
audiences and don't play simply for a paycheck.

--Nate

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Have a nice day.
nathan@-----.com/~nathan
--------------------------------------------------------------------------