 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Alfred
Date: 2009-08-18 05:19
That's right, people, I'm not speaking Engrish. This isn't about humidity. I was reading an archived post here from someone, whose name won't be mentioned, about how he was cheated at All-District, despite having a "perfect audition" and being quite sure he was the best. He didn't get first and was quite angry.
Some people here assured him that if it was a mistake it could easily be corrected. However, others told him that it wouldn't hurt to be a tad more humble. People mentioned how all the pros are humble, and how it does one no good to brag about his or her skills.
I do wonder though, is there a point after which you're not giving yourself enough credit? I have a friend who is, quite frankly, an amazing saxophonist. He's the best in the state at his age level, and his playing's very advanced for his age and he learns very quickly. He takes flute transcriptions and make them sound better on his tenor. You would never know it by the way he speaks of himself, or rather, doesn't.
The only problem is that I'm not sure he can be called "humble" in the traditional sense of the word. He's hypercritical of himself and swears that he "sucks" and on any given day whilst practicing, he'll pause out of frustration and then resume. Anyone near him will be asked to "describe [his] tone," or will have to listen to him berate himself. He doesn't accept that he plays well and he beats himself up for no reason.
Perhaps this is how he gets so good; he's so hard on himself that he has to live up to his own high standards, but I feel that he's too hard on himself, and does not give himself credit.
Perhaps I'm naïve when it comes to this, because even though I don't like to brag, I will admit that for my age I am very good. But can one be to hard on oneself? Can one not give oneself enough credit? Can this be counterproductive?
It'd be interesting to hear what all of you, especially anyone who plays professionally, have to say.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ned
Date: 2009-08-18 05:46
''He's hypercritical of himself and swears that he "sucks" and on any given day whilst practicing, he'll pause out of frustration and then resume''
and
''Perhaps I'm naïve when it comes to this, because even though I don't like to brag, I will admit that for my age I am very good''
It seems that we have two ends of the confidence scale here. It's not unusual really all is all quite subjective. I guess we'd have to hear the both of you to draw any real conclusions.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Alfred
Date: 2009-08-18 05:53
Exactly. I'm still humble, but I acknowledge my ability, I just don't openly brag. He's humble, but he refuses to acknowledge his own ability.
My question, however, is is there a such thing as being humble to the point where you have no confidence? And is that still being humble?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: EEBaum
Date: 2009-08-18 07:55
If someone is humble to the point of no confidence, or confident to the point of no humility, I might think other issues are at work. I used to get worked up about who was the best at something in music, or about how good I was compared to others, or about whether I played well or sucked. I've ridden the spectrum from being convinced I was really good at it (when I wasn't) and that I really sucked at it (when I didn't, and probably sometimes when I did). What I realized later, though, was that the very existence of these metrics in my self-criticism toolbox belied a lack of musical perspective and opinion.
I'm convinced that there is no way to achieve absolute musical perfection, and that there are infinite possibilities in how to approach any piece of music. If I'm going by any notion whatsoever of "good" or "bad", aside from a description of how accurate my technique is (which is a small part of the picture), then I am quite obviously devoid of musical opinion on the matter and would be better off not playing.
With musical opinion, "I suck" becomes "I was blowing chunks at that today", "I'm pretty good" becomes "That was a great run through that piece." Declaring myself globally good or bad ignores the huge realm of other possibilities.
When I approach a piece of music now, I have little concern about how well I will play it, but rather with how I can explore the music.
As for comparing myself to others, I will mostly get on an ego trip if it seems to me that the person on stage is simply going through the motions, offering nothing of themselves other than a mimicry of the notes on the page. That, to me, is when a person sucks, regardless of their technical ability. Anyone who thinks they have had a "perfect" audition is, to me, not a musician. Technically flawless, maybe. Perfect, no.
-Alex
www.mostlydifferent.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mrn
Date: 2009-08-18 08:31
I think your friend probably has very high standards for himself and feels frustrated sometimes. Or perhaps he lacks some measure of self-confidence and seeks validation from others. Who knows?
What he probably doesn't realize is that putting himself down harshly in front of his peers can hurt the feelings of his peers. If the guy is really the best around and everybody knows it, his going around saying he "sucks" is going to get interpreted by his peers as that he thinks his peers "suck" even more than he does. Obviously, it seems to be bothering you, otherwise you wouldn't have posted about it.
If I were you, I wouldn't worry about it. One day he'll figure out that putting himself down isn't helping him win friends and influence people.
Concentrate on yourself and being the best YOU can be. You don't have to put down yourself in front of others or promote yourself in front of your peers to do that (and, indeed, you shouldn't).
As for that archived thread, I know the one you are talking about. I think that the admonition to be humble that was made in that context is about more than just not getting a big head. It's about recognizing that what matters is what you did and how well you did it and how you can do better next time, none of which has anything to do with whether someone else chose to recognize you for it. That's a hard lesson to learn, but a good one.
I can empathize with the guy who started that thread. I made All-State once in high school--in 9th grade. I never made it after that. As far as I could tell, the competition didn't get any stiffer and I didn't play any worse--I just never made it again, for whatever reason. I stayed first chair in my high school band the whole time while the 2nd and 3rd chair players in my band made All-State multiple times. I even made 1st chair region orchestra one year (thus beating out all the clarinets in our region who made All-State that year on the same All-State tryout music), but didn't make All-State that year. My band director and I were just as confused about it as the guy in that thread. I don't think I was angry about it so much as I was disappointed and confused--but it was very disappointing, especially since I felt I played better in later auditions than I had as a freshman.
I think the lesson to be learned from this sort of experience (and we've all had these experiences, whether in auditions or job interviews or what have you) is that you have to learn to be happy with the job you do and not worry about what other people think or do in reaction to it. If you did a good job, you should give yourself permission to feel good about it, regardless of the outcome. At the same time, whether you win or lose, always have enough humility to recognize what you could have done better (there's always something) so that next time you'll do an even better job--yet, don't be so hard on yourself that your self-confidence is shot. (After all part of doing better next time is having the self-confidence to do it.)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ned
Date: 2009-08-18 09:43
MRN's last paragraph sums it up, in my view...............it's hard not to worry about what other folks think though.
I guess if you receive acclamation from those players whom you admire and respect, that's about all one needs.
If they genuinely believe you're playing well (or whatever other positive they choose to use), then you probably ARE, and the fact should be accepted.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Arnoldstang
Date: 2009-08-18 12:05
We all develop habits in life. It's pretty common to see the "apologizer" or the "deprecator". This type of modesty can be annoying when it is repetitive. We don't need to know you could do way better or you intended to sound like Larry Combs but it came out like a squawk.
Modesty for me is someone who doesn't talk about their own playing alot. Even those who are name droppers and refer to the "greats" continually are in my mind edging towards immodest. ps I am still digging Evan Christopher!!
Freelance woodwind performer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2009-08-18 13:03
Then again, someone is constantly denying his abilities, despite what others may say, is ultimately discrediting those whose opinion he wants, and (unconsciously?) trying to fish for as many compliments as possible, seeing how high the "reviewers" may go.
IME one way of dealing with those is to actually agree with them, saying "yes indeed, you suck...maybe because you constantly try to figure out how you sound and forget about the others who play with you. Don't make yourself so important; you will suffocate under your own weight."
(I do not say that all this is the case with the person described in the initial post)
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mrn
Date: 2009-08-18 15:19
David wrote:
<<btw - how did a player cheat at all districts? (I don't remember that thread>>
It wasn't that a player cheated, it was that the guy who started the thread and his director felt that he had been unfairly treated by the judges (or at least the scale judges--according to his director, he was the only kid to earn a perfect score from the solo judges that day). Since he felt he had nailed the scales, too, neither he nor his director could understand why they didn't award him first chair. One of the other participants in the competition posted in the thread that he didn't understand the outcome, either, and thought they might have mixed up his scores with someone else's.
Post Edited (2009-08-18 15:41)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2009-08-18 17:31
The original query in this thread seems to ask if one's self talk (internal or otherwise) can have an effect on that person's ability.
I would hasten to add that though I have NEVER run into a stellar professional player that "puts himself down," there are MANY examples of those who manifest confidence to the point of boorishness or hubris.
So I ask, is it even possible to become great without confidence to precede it?
.............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mrn
Date: 2009-08-18 17:55
Paul Aviles wrote:
> I would hasten to add that though I have NEVER run into a
> stellar professional player that "puts himself down," there
> are MANY examples of those who manifest confidence to the point
> of boorishness or hubris.
I can think of some examples of famous musicians who didn't care for some of their own work, particularly composers. Tchaikovsky is reported to have hated the 1812 Overture and the Nutcracker. Ravel called Bolero "a piece for orchestra without music."
I think that's a bit different from putting one's self down, though.
> So I ask, is it even possible to become great without
> confidence to precede it?
I don't think it is. I think you have to have a least some level of self-confidence to put the effort in. With as much work as it takes to become a good musician (even for highly talented people), it's hard to imagine anyone having much success in music (or anything else) without at least some latent degree of self-confidence.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2009-08-18 19:18
There are alot of players out there who are nut jobs and have no humility to booT!!!
David Dow
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fuzzystradjazz
Date: 2009-08-18 20:32
Life isn't about first chair...and music isn't for musicians - its for the audience. As long as the musician remembers why he/she performs (exists), then the rest will fall into perspective. Without an audience, there is no musician...there is no humility or lack thereof.
I was very self-critical for most of my life (much like your friend). Then, I met a friend who had taught herself how to play clarinet the summer before college (after having signed up for marching band). She had never played an instrument, and had never read music. She did phenomenally well. She always invited me to go down to the park to play with her - I was petrified. I finally went, and it was the most liberating musical experience I had had up to that point in my life...she didn't have the years of experience I did...she didn't have the technical ability of her peers...but she understood something - she understood that music was FUN, and that not every person in the park was there to criticize her (something I had missed up to that point in my life). She also understood that most people would enjoy hearing her...that she was offering something to them, and that they would be receptive to that offering.
Since that experience, I've played in the heart of New Orleans, New York, around Europe, and in my hometown...maybe not being the "best" out there...maybe not being critically aclaimed, but never-the-less receiving applause, thumbs up, receptive audiences, wonderful verbal compliments, and making people smile - its about the audience and your love for them, and the love and support they provide in return. I found that by making music less about "me" and "my" perspective, and even forgoing what my peers think about me - and instead focusing on the audience...there really isn't room for pride OR overt self-critisicm...it is a sharing experience between you and your audience. You give your all to these people, and if it is enough, they will give back...it is a sharing experience, not a dominating one. Humility as an issue dissapeared for me - both sides of it. A gift to me from a friend who taught herself clarinet one summer.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Arnoldstang
Date: 2009-08-18 21:23
Somehow my involvement with music is different than that. Perhaps it isn't healthy but that's how I'm built. My music is with me and the musical environment. I try to function and express myself within that context. I really enjoy doing it. It involves relating to other musicians and creating and interpreting music. The audience is many times very important and I don't ignore them. I program accordingly and try to please but in the end for me it is a personal experience.
Freelance woodwind performer
Post Edited (2009-08-18 21:25)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mrn
Date: 2009-08-18 22:12
Arnoldstang wrote:
> Somehow my involvement with music is different than that.
> Perhaps it isn't healthy but that's how I'm built. My music is
> with me and the musical environment. I try to function and
> express myself within that context. I really enjoy doing it.
> It involves relating to other musicians and creating and
> interpreting music.
I don't think that's unhealthy. I think that's really what it's all about--it's the collaboration or relationship between you, the composer, and other musicians to create good art. If you've got an audience that loves to hear you, that's great. And don't get me wrong, I love performing for an audience. But I think classical music is really more about service to the music, not the audience, per se--in fact, I think classical music listeners actually expect that from us, at least to some degree.
And while we're on the subject, I might add that although I enjoy a good competition, one of the unfortunate side-effects of the emphasis on competition and technique in school music is that students (and being a former student-competitor I will confess to this as well) can often mistake technical showmanship for musicianship. Music is an art, and as Alex pointed out, it's quite possible to make music that is both technically perfect and artistically lackluster. (in fact, this problem is not limited to students and amateurs--it's a problem of professionals, as well) Although at these competitions and in chair tests, etc. technical perfection is often the criterion for a successful outcome (because it's objectively measurable), in the real world and at the end of the day, it's the art that counts--and that's subjective: there is no "perfect" art. The good artist is one who makes good art from whatever technical abilities they have; technical abilities are not themselves the hallmark of good musicianship (important as they may be for playing the repertoire).
So to the original poster, I would like to say that what is important is the relationship between you and the music. Competition has its place (and I can empathize with the feelings of competitive high school players and their ups and downs, as I mentioned), but what really matters is that you make good art that you feel good about making (because it's true to what the music is saying). If you can feel satisfied with making good art, nothing else matters.
Post Edited (2009-08-18 22:17)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
