[Dixielandjazz] Re: reality/truth cum genius/jazz
Thu, 1 Aug 2002 08:21:03 -0400
Genius and Jazz
Mozart's talent was both natural and learned. Remember, he was the son of a
musician of rather good credentials and the music was all around him daily
from birth to age 4
It takes an infant a number of years to acquire the physical skill to do
many things, a mechanical development of hand, eye coordination. Infants do
not, for example, walk from birth, assemble things by hand, and do other
tactile operations until their body catches up with their mind. And some
take longer than others for their genius to develop and blossom, and again
adding the learning process to the equation.
There is also the factor of defining genius. By I.Q.? Many have I.Q.'s off
the chart and never add much to the basic advancement of man's knowledge (or
woman's). Others who may not qualify for Mensa may create things to advance
our knowledge, ease our lives, enrich our culture.
Yet may never meet the so-called rank of provable genius.
Mozart -- genius yes, but also the added exposure to music early on helped
develop the innate talent.
Genius is not a carryover, either, to other areas. One may note that
Einstein was, by his own admission, a poor student of math, and in fact
flunked it in his early schooling. Math was something he had to learn to
express his concepts of the universe, but his math skill was a mechanical
process rather than a gifted one. His genius was in his concept, not his
manner of expressing it.
We all know jazz players who display awesome talents in this genre, yet away
from the horn or stand, seem unable to display any great skills in other
areas. Are these true geniuses -- or merely talented players within a skill
area in which they found a niche to match that skill? Not for me to judge.
But I am uneasy with hanging the title of genius on people as we may
overstate on some and neglect to display respect to others.
Interesting thread...and it does, in a round about way, have a jazz
connection. It doesn't take a genius to figure that out!<G>
Don Ingle (I.Q. at college tested level, 139.DAMN! Missed it by a couple
points!! Duh! Back to the primeval ooze.)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Gunter" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: <email@example.com>; <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 5:22 AM
Subject: Re: [Dixielandjazz] Re: reality/truth
> Hi Charlie and all,
> Charlie writeth . . .
> > Music, for example and to legitimize this thread, is conveyed by
> >physical means, but the Idea of Music is not physical, does not proceed
> >the physical but only by means of the physical.
> I think I gotta take issue with this position. The idea of music not being
> physical is like saying a beautiful rainbow and or sunset is not physical
> . . The thought occurs to me that the relationship of frequencies (for
> example doubling a frequency produces an octave) to one another ultimately
> produces music as we know it from a western point of view. Music as a
> harmonious sound to our ears is a combination of frequencies which blend
> (just as sunsets are beautiful for the same reason).
> I'm presently in an internet cafe in Edinburgh and wish I could spend more
> time developing this thesis but I'll amplify on it when I get back home.
> Respectfully submitted,
> Bill "Love Them Harmonics" Gunter
> Mozart at age 4 was a
> >physical kid; but where in the Heaven did his genius come from? Kepler,
> >mathmetized the "music" of the spheres, the motion of planets (and showed
> >they weren't spherical) had a mercenary private soldier father and a camp
> >follower mother and no education. His genius came from someplace.
> >Charlie (the anti-Nominalist) Hooks
> >PS to whomever complained about topics that may interest the writer but
> >which have NO place on a jazz-oriented list, this message just in from
> >proctologist: they found your head. [Oh, not really: I'm just being an
> >Dixielandjazz mailing list
> Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
> Dixielandjazz mailing list