Klarinet Archive - Posting 000518.txt from 1997/06

From: "Randall, Stephen/LON" <srandall@-----.com>
Subj: Einstein and Music
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 10:25:53 -0400

Don Yungkurth wrote:

>Albert did play the violin, but I think his skill level was "amateur".

Stand by for a slightly indignant, but not unkindly meant, response from
an amateur:

Is amateur really an appropriate descriptive term for skill level?
Reading between the lines of Don's posting one might even assume he uses
it as a description of a low level of skill. Doesn't "amateur" just
mean that Albert didn't make a living from fiddling, not that he was a
good or bad fiddler. Likewise, the fact that he made a living from
physics doesn't necessarily mean he was a good (or bad) physicist. That
judgment should come from a study of his work.

I class myself as an amateur clarinetist. I make my living from other
(engineering) activities but play (for free) wherever and whenever I can
for my own enjoyment and satisfaction (and a hope that the audience gets
something out of it as well). I play with other people of all skill
levels. Some of them make their living from playing, but again one
could be wrong to correlate their skill level with their chosen
profession.

If I was a touchy sort of chap I could work up a good bit of huff about
my skill as a musician being judged from the way I choose to make my
living rather than how well or badly I play. But I'm not, so I won't.

In my experience there are some very good musicians who have, for a wide
range of reasons, chosen not to make their living from playing. I would
be interested to read list members' opinions of skill levels among
non-professional players - either in general, or with specific examples
(being careful about libel law of course!).

Stephen Randall