Genius (Part II)

Genius is when someone does something amazing that you could never ever do in your life. Because their genius is theirs, and yours is yours. Each can only be like itself. When we put them all together we will have found all the missing pieces of the jigsaw again. But your piece can only ever be completed by you - that is why you are you. That is why we need you. That is why you have your own genius to guide you.

It's fruitless to try to reproduce someone else's achievement. It was theirs - any copy would be imperfect. It's pointless to covet someone else's ability - just an excuse for delaying our own development.

But it is fruitful to emulate genius. When you do not know where to look or where to begin, you could always begin by examining the path of someone who arrived to a useful place. Don't you think? I like to read stories from great people. I heard what Paderewski said. I heard what Michael Jackson said. I heard what Marcus Garvey said. All imperfect examples and none of them the same as me, but somehow knowing about them helps me to arrive. Don't you think it's good to know there is somewhere to arrive to?

Let's forget about TV talents and news stories. Real ability is not newsworthy. "I Fought Cancer Battle to Play Harmonica". "Dog With 3 Legs Plays Football for Blackburn Rovers". That's the news. "Man of 60 Realises Goal of Life Without Noticeable Fuss"? You're not going to hear about that one, folks.

Genius can be a painful condition that tears at the raiment of life because the two are always in contradiction. It can be painful and confusing for precocious genius that seems not to know the ways of the world but knows the paths of the stars. But it is never painful itself. It's nice. And if it has been hard getting there, or if it is difficult now you are there, you're not likely to talk about it. Who would know what you mean anyway.

So that kind of story's not getting in the news either.

But we are not concerned with the news. We are concerned with the truth. If all we have done is what we truly were able to, what we truly saw and heard, what we truly believed in and what we always truly were, then: we will have done a good thing. And that thing was not yet genius, but it might become like it...

We will see some further steps you need to take next time.

A frog grew up. A silkworm took to the skies. A rose grew where only darkness once was. Good night my budding geniuses! Sleep well, don't forget your fertiliser!

Genius (Part I)

Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see.

(Schopenhauer)

Laugh Cry or be Serious - **MARI ARAKI**

Hello my dears!

People can be a bit serious.

Why is that?

First of all everyone has to pretend to be grown up. That's one reason.

Why is it? It must be because of our training - I can't think of any real reason to be serious like that.

Also sometimes people get a bit gloomy in their life. Then they do gloomy things.

What about artists? Do they write happy music or serious music? Do they paint happy or sad pictures?

The same thing can seem sad to one person but not sad to another person.

--

Look at what I have written today, for example. It's serious! It's serious because I was trying to understand something.

People maybe prefer to have another Martini? Or make chit-chat.

--

Once upon a time, everything was whole. Things worked well and people smiled. You all remember it.

Let's bring it back.

If something is serious and important, we will listen quietly and think hard.

Otherwise we will enjoy ourselves and dance and sing - because we know a bigger thing.

Why do we do anything? To make the world whole again.

Did you know that? Of course you did!

Some things, places, and people are important and we must look after them.

Everybody brings a talent to the world. Most people are still learning their skill. Some don't know about what they can do.

What you can do? It is a happy coincidence - it's the thing you enjoy doing! You enjoy it because you were always meant to do it.

And when people follow their talent...and let the light come through the window....and open the front door for visitors....and protect their treasure and their friends...they will be very important to us.

When you use your talent you are keeping the world in one piece. That is why we have talents.

When your talent brings a special message from far away (but very near), something we needed to know, but something it was impossible to know before you said it...that's called genius.

It's talent-plus-impossible.

I like the impossible. It's possible! Let's do it!

Today I would like to introduce a talent-plus-impossible person.

There are not many, this is the first one I have introduced to you so far.

She is an artist. Her work appears simple, normal, or sometimes even cute. But it is a trick! There are messages in there for us. Sometimes it might be uncomfortable for you to see the work. Don't worry, you don't have to look! If it gets uncomfortable it's because she looked deep inside and said a true thing to us.

Then on the other hand, it makes me laugh too. Why is it not looking serious but it is really being serious? Because it is telling the truth.

We could all create a system called something-ism. Then give lectures about our system. And make work that fits the system. We would all be serious. We might get an award! But it's bad luck for us if the truth was different all the time.

The really serious person knows that some things are difficult. But they don't try to make it worse for you. They tell the truth and you can recognise the truth because it is still true even if you make a joke about it.

So my artist I am introducing is a bit like that. That's what I think anyway.

You can see it for yourself. Look at her website.

Her name is Mari Araki. Be nice to her.

Buy her work!! Now!!!


---

He who knows not and knows not he knows not, is a fool - shun him.

He who knows not and knows he knows not, is simple - teach him.

He who knows and knows not he knows, is asleep - wake him.

He who knows and knows he knows: he is wise - follow him.


~~Where are we in this? Who knows!!

Hahahahahahaha!!!!!!!

Integrity

Integrity means: doing what you believe is right, and sticking to it.

You should always do the right thing, but you don't always have to tell everybody what you think - sometimes being quiet is the best thing to do. "The tallest tree is the first one to fall".

It's really OK to do the thing you are interested in.

It's really OK!

Yes you can do it!

You can always pretend you are normal, if you would like to.

It will be our little secret!

Enescu Lives

I'm saying this is a "must-hear".

Sometimes, listening to a performer of the past play something of the "standard repertoire" seems strange, because each age has its own "standard" way of playing. Fashion is always fashionable until it ceases to be so. That's why the way we play today will one day be seen as strange (I hope, because it sounds rather strange to me now). Yet to hear someone of any age play his own music poses no cultural problems for the ear. Every part of the style is perfect and perfectly appropriate.

Here is Enescu! He's playing some of his magic music for you.

I'm afraid I can't work out which Sonata this is he's playing here - but there are only a few so we should find out eventually.

Pianoforte

I don't know if people realise how much skill it takes to play, not just the wrong notes, but the right wrong notes - and to play them at the right time.

No, my dears, I'm not talking about my piano-playing...

One of Many Herzog Interviews

Anything by or to do with Werner Herzog is interesting. I recommend it to you. Here is one interview.

Read it if you have a moment!

I've only seen three films by him - Nosferatu, Fitzcarraldo, and The Enigma of Kaspar Hauser. There is always a unique feeling to them which isn't present in any other work. It doesn't matter what they are about; if you find something as strong as this you have to at least take notice for a while.

He once promised to eat one of his shoes if Errol Morris ever finished his film Gates of Heaven. He finished it, and Herzog ate the shoe in public. You may think that's not a very good thing to do, but it's really quite a small thing when you consider what really unpalatable things people have to do all the time.

Then during the filming of Even Dwarfs Started Small, one actor was run over but escaped unhurt. Then the same actor caught fire and Herzog had to run over and put the fire out. So he told them all that if there were no further accidents, after the end of filming he would jump into a cactus patch and they could film him doing it.

I mean, these aren't things that I would necessarily do, and some people will certainly find them strange, but what is good about it is some visionary power of his is providing an incentive for other people to achieve something. Couldn't that be said of his films too?

It's also important to note that he does what he promises. I think you have to have integrity if people are going to believe what you're doing.

The Great Interpreters

People think they have to discover something about themselves that they then put into the music they play. They think they have to have something to say, or some special way of saying it.

Maybe they think that because they see "the great interpreters" playing and see that it's very distinctive. There is some unique character there that you would recognise immediately no matter what they were playing.

Now, a good player has learned how to play well - they were not always able to play as well as that, they had to learn - but the basic character you hear was always in them from the beginning.

So what does somebody do who thinks they are not one of the great interpreters? How can they improve?

As I said, one way people try to do it is by "putting themselves into the music". But is that really what Glenn Gould or Sviatoslav Richter were doing? It's obviously them playing, you know immediately with no doubt. And the uniqueness comes from them. But the reason for it is that that's the way the music flows through their system. It's not something they add, it's a live connection to the music direct. On a bad day, they would tell you they were not connected, but on a good day the difference is that there is less of "them" and more of the music.

So the answer is not to add more of yourself. That is adding more ego. What is important, you or what you are playing? What is more important, telling the audience something you already know or discovering something new? Showing your heart or just pretending?

If you don't feel you are great, don't worry because the great people weren't great either. They thought they were rubbish. I'm telling you.

If you think you are good, you are wrong. If you think you are bad, you are wrong too. The only answer is to keep looking. Even if it's going well, there is still more to find. And if it is going badly, that's an excellent sign because you know you have got somewhere to go.

How to get better? How to get great?

Don't try to add things. Take things away. The more you put in, the less of the composer we are hearing.

Can you control your beating heart and the allocation of hormones and adrenalin and blood and electric communications in your body? I don't think so. So don't interfere.

The little "I" is not much help. All it can do is be selfish, which gets it a few advantages but only in the short term. The big "I" is a genius and you find it by being interested in what is not you.

For example the music. You have the score - read it! Enjoy it! The composer had a special reason for writing it and that reason still exists but we have to discover it. He saw something special and important. Now you have to show people where to look to find it themselves. Point in the direction. Or even carry them there. It's all in the music. READ IT!

And you know if you get it right or wrong, and you know if you don't know enough, and you know what you have to practise. You are the one who learns to get better, nobody can tell you how to be good. But people will help you. Everybody knows something nobody else knows - that's why there's more than one person in the world. That's why we need you!

Don't try so hard, try LESS HARD! But try your best! Your improvement will depend on how hard you look for the answers. Plus, bear in mind that you already know all the answers....if you look....

Blank

Mel Blanc, voice of Bugs Bunny for 49 years, lived from 30th May 1908 to 10th July 1989. Known as the Man of a Thousand Voices, he admitted he could only really lay claim to about 850.

Chain of Command

Godowsky was a genius. A self-taught genius - the only kind there is, of course.

He learned how to do anything at all on the piano, and invented some new things too. If you want to have a lesson with Godowsky, try playing any of his music. It has lots of fingerings and helpful comments written in, so it's very instructive as playing music by a great pianist always is. Of particular note are his Studies on the Etudes of Chopin, which, since they are more difficult than Chopin's originals, raise the standard of piano playing in a rather helpful way.

Heinrich Neuhaus was Godowsky's student. There was a great teacher for you. And he was a great player too, though he spent most of his time teaching. You can learn a lot from his book The Art of Piano Playing. What he says seems obvious though, so you have to keep coming back to the book over many years to appreciate its value.

Then Neuhaus had a student called Sviatoslav Richter. He was good too!

Each of these people had their own talent, but it was helped by meeting one of the others. Destiny somehow allows people to look after each other.

Godowsky set off one day to find out how to play the piano, and look what happened!

Richter wasn't really a teacher but look what he did for us. If you can't learn from any of that, there's a problem somewhere!

Thanks very much to those three men, then. Thank you!

Teachers

There are many teachers. One could look for a long time without finding the right one. In a state like this someone could go from teacher to teacher, changing for a variety of reasons.

Every teacher has something to give a student. But some have only a little. Even by virtue of the fact that the teacher is older or more experienced than the student, they may know something useful at least.

Going from teacher to teacher will produce, at the very least, a succession of these lesser relationships, and will at least ensure some progress in learning. I never heard of anyone getting worse! Though for certain some people do not get much better!

However, the right teacher is always available. But sometimes the path that should lead to them is very busy with distractions.

A good teacher knows you and knows what your weaknesses are. Though they may not show it because not all teachers give everything away for free in the first lesson. Sometimes they feel their wisdom is valuable and you have to study for a while before it starts to come through. But how much you learn is not up to the teacher, it is up to you. If the teacher is limited, then what you learn is certainly limited by that. But a true master is not limited.

A teacher is often old. Because wisdom comes with age. Even doing very little for a long time can produce wisdom! Definitely, though, someone who has looked hard for wisdom could well have found a little more of it as more years have passed by.

But your teacher could be any age. There is nothing to say they can't be younger than you! It's the soul that guarantees the result, not the age of the body.

Many people find a good teacher. They might perhaps go to a college to study with someone they admire, and they improve and enjoy it. They look back and say how important it was for them. That's positive! Yet others have not flowered in any significant way, so they feel like they never arrived anywhere...and they don't know where they were going!

The journey of learning is complicated, but only if it has become complicated. Remember how well you learned in the first years of your life. That learning continues all through life, but life takes a long time and it is easy to lose track of what you were doing. The plan of finding your talents and developing them to help everyone goes on, even if it only goes on a little way. I wonder, though, how far it could go?

How much you learn is up to you. The student is the one who listens or chooses not to listen. The teacher is prepared to give everything...to the right person. But the student has to be open to the guidance. The trouble is that many people do not listen and do not realise they have got things wrong. They, of course, do not know they need to be guided.

Yet most people are looking to improve, and they listen to help from outside. I think this is wise.

Finding the right teacher is possible. Then learning from them is possible too. But a guide is only guiding you. They are telling you to hold the map the right way up. That should help!

They are guiding.

But you are the one who has to arrive.

But the right teacher would love to help you as much as you will let them. You may have to ask though. Sometimes.

The Language of Music

It's hard to explain impossible things to you.

But the reason one person writes to another is that there is something he needs to tell that person, something which he thinks the other person doesn't know. The only problem is that when a fact is an unknown fact, it is hard to understand. In fact it may be impossible to understand - it will take a lot of problems and hard work to finally see what it was. Sometimes, indeed, you can't just tell someone the answer they need, because they won't understand without actually discovering the answer for themselves. That's why we have symbols like mazes and spirals. Labyrinths were popular in ancient art. Popularity comes when something resonates with many people, no matter what the intention behind it. In this case, the Labyrinth is a journey you must follow until it is solved - there is not normally a short way through.

The Labyrinth is a part of the ear, too.

When we hear music we can identify patterns. Without them, it would probably be noise. But as long as we can fit the sound to a pattern we feel there is some sense behind it. We keep creating possible patterns to fit to the stimulus, trying to find a match for one or more templates that we have stored, or creating a new one based on the incoming material. So although I said we try to find a fit, really we are creating the pattern that we hear. The sound is what it is, but the pattern is our own. Listen to noise and see how soon you start to hear words. They may not be there as such, but we are looking (listening) for them.

So we may find there is sense at the first hearing of a piece of music. That depends on what experience we have. Whatever the case, we will try and we will find something. But you might end up saying, no, I just couldn't make anything of it. Like the ladies in the Wigmore Hall who laughed at the 'wrong notes' in a Webern piece - which was written in 1899! I was there, you can believe me.

There are "dissonant" cases where the music is too different from the listener's internal templates and antagonism results. Of course, the dissonance is not necessarily a question of some dissonance in the music's harmonic idiom - I was referring to the dissonance between what they are hearing and what they might expect to make sense, or what they have heard before and got used to. But on the whole the music one hears is mostly more or less familiar - you tend to recognise it as music, and more particularly as "our music". Statistically we are more likely to hear music we already recognise, of course - because statistically we will stay in more or less the same place.

Recognition comes then, somewhat or a lot. You can tell there is a loud bit coming up because it starts getting louder. It started quiet so you know it will be quiet for a bit. Or after learning a bit more, you know that if it is quiet, it might stay quiet or might SUDDENLY get loud. You start to learn what the options might be. And if you know a bit about music you might here where the harmony is going. You might recognise the sort of "subject" the composer is thinking of. Of course there is not a subject, it is music not words, but there are associations and special patterns we notice. It might be something clear like the sound of a bird (the cuckoo in Beethoven's Pastoral Symphony) or something ambiguous like the sound of water or wind in a Schubert song. It might be a topic like "military" (Chopin Polonaise) or "exotic" (Debussy Pagodas) or "academic" (Handelian fugue in Mozart or Beethoven). Whatever it is, you learn, and then finally you understand. It can take repeated hearings to get there though - although most do not try after the first attempt. And sometimes there is no attempt! (What are the chances of success there I wonder?)

All of these insights come with practise and understanding. Some come with learning and knowledge.

They say that a child's mind is a clear mind. They say a child will see the obvious when everyone else convinces themselves otherwise or trips themselves up in tangles of thought and blind guesses. That's why there is the famous story of The Emperor's New Clothes. Maybe it's funny, I don't know. I'm sure no-one believes it could ever really happen. But that's the shock you get when you realise it's happening all the time. Look at what people are doing around you now. A little or a lot, helping or un-helping, but they are certainly taking a lot of different approaches to the maze of their life. Certainly the mazes are different, but can all the people be right? The child says: I thought you had to get to the centre. (Does that mean it is easier than it seemed?)

Yes, you try to hear some sense in the sound coming in. But we are in luck, because the person who created it all - the composer - put sense in at the beginning. So we are in with a fighting chance!

I am convinced that we can understand music purely by paying attention to what the composer has put in it. That's the approach I took when I wrote about Evryali, and it's how I try to understand music on a daily basis. The significance of this is that it doesn't matter how much you know before you get started. Knowledge came down to us because other people noticed things; that means we can notice them too. But it will take a long time if we try to understand the knowledge AS WELL as the music. That's two jobs, you see. Fortunately I have tried to understand the music, afflicted with only a slight knowledge of the technical processes involved. (That's not a joke, I really don't know much!). That's why I'm here today to tell you where to look.

The first time I noticed something important about music was in a Mozart symphony last year. It wasn't a good performance (maybe that's why I noticed it). The symphony was called "The Jupiter", but I don't think that matters because I don't like the "I know it all" approach to music: Ah, The Jupiter, yes, of course. Beethoven's second Razumovsky Quartet, yes. Opus 106, a masterpiece. It does annoy me rather, you see this is talking about music without mentioning the music. Perhaps it is not talking about the music? I know it's helpful to use labels so we can know what is being discussed, but these are the names on the filing cabinet. They are the names on the files. They are not the contents of the files. Inside are lovely golden sounds without names. Songs without words that sing in my heart.

I forget exactly what it was in that Mozart symphony. I think it was a movement in the harmony. I realised he was doing something really funny, moving somewhere no-one could have predicted. I wondered why no-one was laughing. I think it was because they were hearing "A Mozart symphony" - the one in their heads, perhaps. You don't need Sherlock Holmes to tell you that the best Mozart symphony comes from Mozart, not from us. By some twist of fate, that was actually what I was hearing. Yes, no incompetence on the part of the conductor or players prevented me from hearing what the composer had put into the music. It was all there, and it always is in any piece or performance.

Music is highly cultural, you know. There is a lot to learn about. But as it happens you don't particularly need to learn any of it. If you are responsible and care about the music and why it exists then I think it won't hurt to try learning a bit. But you have to listen first.

I listened, and I am now telling you this:

A master composer knows his job and tries to get better at it.

The best composers didn't stop when they had had enough, or when they thought they were good enough. They continued changing.

In these cases, the golden secret inside centre of the music was what led the creator - it was what they were trying to communicate! In the other cases, the composer got tired and his forms started writing themselves, though there could still be flashes of inspiration. It could never dry up completely (some music leads me to doubt this but it is true)

The secret was called ecstasy. Did the composer want to be a composer, or could he not stop being a composer? "Ecstasy" is a word that means being outside yourself. What is outside? Whatever we don't already know. Other people. Other places. Other ideas. Mistakes. Answers. Genius.

Whatever you think about music, I think we all have to agree there is some kind of vision involved in it. Someone wants to communicate something, and that is their vision. It can be predictable, clichéed, or previously impossible - a surprising thing of brilliance and power. With skill, the vision becomes clearer.

That vision is present in every part of the work, and through the opposition between the parts we can appreciate what it is. (The word for an arrangement of parts is composition)

You won't at first know what a piece of music is saying. It's important to remember that it isn't saying anything. As long as you can say it in words, you are not there. You can talk about it but you have to live it to see it.

With repeated slow careful exposure to music you can learn to feel what it really is. Your mind is not understanding it, your heart is not feeling it, but these senses may be involved.

Remember what I am telling you: it is real. Music is real. There is a real reason for it. It is not something in a book or on a CD, it is something outside you, coming in. Also remember that if you were lost in a labyrinth, you might forget your journey. The outside might seem dark and unfriendly. Think then of what it's like to find the way through the maze. Find the end, and you see you were the one who had gone outside. Really the music is inside. People who don't listen are stuck outside. When we hear it truly, we are all joined up again. Or starting to be.

Primo Levi was in a prison camp. Then he sent us a message through his books so that the world would change. James Clavell was in a prison camp. He did the same. He did a good thing too, because he loved the people who imprisoned him. That is how he was set free. Any others who still hated them were still prisoners, weren't they? And Ronald Searle was in the same camp. He had to carefully hide his drawings while he was there. He sent us messages too.

There is a well-known analogy that life is like a bird flying through a lighted hall. It is light for a moment, then it is dark again. That's silly, because although I can see what it means, I think they are looking at it from the wrong side. Think what the other birds are thinking. Wot is that bird doing stuck inside that dark hall when we are all out here?

I spoke of prisoners because when we are stuck or lost, what we need most is a way out. Sometimes it is all we can do just to survive. There isn't much sign of life outside the prison. But one day a message comes.

To understand the message is all we need to do.

It is not obvious. But it is there. If you can love it, then you are hearing it.

This is the language of music.

Charles Rosen is Here

Charles Rosen was born on May 5th 1927. On February 2nd 2007 he will play Beethoven's Appassionata Sonata and Diabelli Variations at the Queen Elizabeth Hall, London. This is his eightieth year and tonight he was giving a talk in a funny room in the "newly refurbished" (i.e. not finished yet) Royal Festival Hall complex. He stood in front of the conference table and spoke from memory following a quite precise mental map of his hour-long discourse, interrupted only by anecdotes, reminiscences, and interesting facts. Behind the table was an upright piano that said "Welmar". Behind that was a door that said "Toilets". Mr Rosen didn't seem to mind. The main thing was that he was here.

Charles Rosen knows an awful lot about music and culture. I very much recommend to you his book "The Romantic Generation" which is a never-ending compendium of insight into the Romantic vein of music. He is an important man in the musical world but doesn't seem self-important. His only admissions of his own importance were a few jokes such as saying that when he had to move away from the microphone to the piano people at the back might not hear what he was saying, "But then, not everything I say is so interesting" - pause for laughter (which did come) because he obviously knows that everything he says is interesting. That's fine because he's right!

The talk was called "Beethoven's Ambition" and weaved its way through the territory of 18th century musical Europe at a time when although there were accepted great masters of art or of theatre (Raphael, Michelangelo; Aeschylus, Euripides, Aristophanes etc.), there were none of the new instrumental style of music in which Mozart, Haydn, and Beethoven hoped to make their way.

I made notes when I got home and what I remembered best were the anecdotes. Is this because of limited brain power, or is it just that Mr Rosen produces wisdom in a form that is useful and can be remembered?

Here is what he said:

When Stravinsky said he wanted his music played "without expression", that was wrong - Stravinsky never conducted his music that way. It wasn't expression he didn't like, it was Koussevitzky's expression!

Haydn was asked to send an opera to be performed in Prague. He replied that the operas he had written for the court at Esterhazy would not be suitable because they were written for a more provincial setting. He also said he couldn't send a new opera because he'd just heard The Marriage of Figaro and didn't care to try his luck at doing better!

The Magic Flute was the most varied opera (in terms of different forms and techniques used within the opera) written from its time until Alban Berg's Wozzeck.

E.T.A. Hoffmann was the greatest music critic ever.

George Bernard (pronounced here BerNARD) Shaw said that we would be shocked by the music of Mozart if it were not for its lovely melodies.

The Minuet finale of the Diabelli Variations shows Beethoven's lyrical genius - something little considered, and something that came a lot easier to Mozart than to Beethoven.

OK that's all for now. I might add more as I remember them. Tomorrow is a busy day with a Pierre Laurent Aimard masterclass in the morning, a lecture by Christopher Elton on the piano sonatas of Haydn at 6.30 then dash off to hear Charles Rosen play! It sounds like I am back at college again with all this to do. But I will never think I am too important to learn things, from anybody, famous or not. That's why hopefully one day someone will write about some interesting facts I said. While I was standing in front of a door saying "Toilets".

Protect This

I went to a concert last night - it was pretty good, you know.

The last time I was in that hall it was to hear Maxim Vengerov playing Paganini's violin.

I was thinking about the sound of different violins, expensive ones and normal ones (which are still expensive). A quick footnote about the miserable scratchy sound of contemporary music violins (often, not always) which may be due to the playing or may be due to the financial potency of said violinists. I remembered the sound of the Paganini violin. What would Paganini have sounded like? This violin is part of what we have left of his playing...This violin! Then I imagined Vengerov pretending to break the violin for a joke and then bringin on the real one. I know, it's unlikely, but my brain thinks about a lot of things many of which may be even more unlikely. Genius answers come from considering the unlikely and the impossible - that's why we have to entertain unlikely thoughts. Because the ideal solution to a problem may be impossible and unthinkeble at this moment. Probably that is why it is a problem.

The next thing I thought was what if he really smashed the violin? But, you see, that is not possible because music is creative, not destructive. When there is a war we can go to a concert and be healed a little bit. Even if the music is not too good, or the playing indifferent, it is still music. There is still a special feeling of learning about something bigger than each one of us, something that involves all of us, and stops us from hurting people. A little bit.

I prefer concerts that don't take place during wars, though.

OK? Remember that - no wars please!

Reader Response Reply

Andrew writes in a comment to "Teaching and Learning":

This is very wise and true. But if you can't make enough money from doing what you really want to do, what should you do? Can you (ie. Philip) make enough money from doing what you really want to do, and if you can't, what else do you do to earn it?

3:33 PM GMT+01:0

Hi Andrew, thanks for asking! Although your question is rather penetrating as it involves interrogating me about my finances! :)

There is (as usual) more than one way of looking at this.

1) If I can't make money out of my chosen job, is it really useful to people? People pay for useful things...(of course they pay for useless things too!)

2) Creativity and imagination are very important in helping you find a good job. For example, if I say I want to be an acrobat, then that's fine. I could be a) mad or b) a talented acrobat. OK let's say I am a good acrobat. I could stop there and say, oh, but there is no work for acrobats, so I have to do something else. Or somehow my imagination and creativity could help me see a way to make it work.

Saying

you can't make enough money from doing what you really want to do

...means just that so far you haven't made money from it. Or that you have decided it is not possible and stopped trying - perhaps even before you started!

Now, it is also true that some jobs are not very lucrative. Perhaps they are not useful? But if someone has a helpful talent and they have developed it then there must be a place for it in the world. And you know you are doing the right thing when it makes you feel happy.

So, how to get your dream job: dream it, define your goals, train for it, discover who wants you to do it, aim at them, get money. (Very simple, eh?)

3) OR you can say, look, I love doing this thing, so I'm just going to do it, and not try to get any money from it. But you will have to get money from something, and the other thing you do to survive on needs to be something you enjoy as well...so it is a similar situation.

We all had dreams once, but school often teaches us that we are not good enough to do anything, that we have to make the best of what we have, and living in Britain often teaches us that everything is awful and grey and nobody wants you! (AAArggh!)

Not a pretty picture. And if it is not pretty, leave it! Paint your own!

It might be very daunting to imagine leaving your present path to find a more fun one. You have to be brave. But it will be more colourful and lively! I recommend it.

Myself, I know that everyone has talent. I also know that it could turn to genius with enough commitment. Anyway, regardless of that, we're just looking at talent here, skills, aptitudes, abilities. We all have skills - if there were really people without any skills it would be STUPID. I can't believe it's possible. Perhaps that is more a philosophical-type question - here we are just talking about the people reading this now. Hopefully some skills to be had among them...

If something is valuable then it is needed, somewhere. If I thought I had no value then I would admit it and either live in a hole in the ground eating stones or try to get more useful fast.

It is easier, at the time of writing, for me to make money as a pianist than as a composer because people recognise e.g. a Beethoven sonata or a Xenakis piece. They do not know what a piece by me is like (since I generally do not know either!) so it is harder to get them to "buy" it. It takes a bit longer to develop as a composer so I am not expecting to earn millions out of that yet! If I never get money for composing that's OK (actually I already did get a bit) because I will still get paid to use my skills. But I have not finished yet so it is possibly not the end of the story for me as a composer...

I recognise where there is a demand, and that plays some part in the way I direct myself. Somehow I can think of marketing potential yet still stick to my own interests. Odd. Strangely though, anyone can reproduce existing success, but something really distinctive is rather more memorable, and that's what I am going for. It is me, my personality, doing the things I am interested in. Even if I play a piece by Chopin, I know that it is potentially popular (people have done it many times before) but I also know that I am meant to play it (if I decide to) and that my way is different from the other ways. So that's what makes me think there could be some demand.

The other point is about "making enough money". What is enough? Perhaps some lifestyles have very high costs. It could be nicer to sell the 35 sports cars and grow apples instead. If you see what I mean. Doesn't mean you have to set lower standards. But it is worth thinking about.

And if you can't make enough money yet at your chosen thing, it's OK to try other things for now. You need to eat. But, one step at a time, you are learning how to make some money being you. It might not be ultra-profitable, but you will have enough.

Being rich is easy anyway (I'm not telling you how to do it!) although it is not very nice sometimes.

To answer the question, if you can't make enough money from doing what you really want to do, you should

Admit it.
or
Do something else.
or
Try harder.

Even to pick something a bit more common like banker, solicitor, etc., they all require training and so on, so success would not be instant. To get a good job you need to be good though. That's probably the key.

Thanks!

Teaching and Learning

People often ask me, "So what are you doing now, teaching?", and the answer is always no. I never have done any teaching. It seemed to me that many college-leavers who teach do it because they have to do something to make money and not particularly because they have a calling to be teachers. Of course, I think it's fine to do a bit of teaching to see what it's like, if you haven't thought about it. It's difficult! Also, people who want to become teachers will have to learn how to teach, and I suppose a good way to do that is to start practising.

But the idea of teaching instead of doing what you really want to do is not very appealing to me. Or you, I hope!

So, who is a teacher? Someone who can help.

Someone who can help a bit is a bit of a teacher. Someone who can help a lot is a better teacher. Someone who can guide you and help you find your way home is truly a teacher. I said find your way home because I feel that while learning is partly about gathering new techniques and bits of information (like a jigsaw puzzle), the important part of learning is finding out how to be really creative in the way that only you can be. All of that was always in you, as a potential, and somehow you have to find it. When you find it, it is not something new. It is you, the real you. (After that, perhaps you can make something new...)

Anyway, that is your genius. A real teacher knows that you have it, even though you may doubt this, and may even laugh if you hear about it.

He who knows not, and knows not that he knows not, is a fool. Shun him.

He who knows not, and knows that he knows not is simple. Teach him.

He who knows, and knows not that he knows, is asleep. Wake him.

He who knows, and knows that he knows is wise. Follow him.

(Persian proverb, translated by Richard Francis Burton)

Paderewski's Parrot

Paderewski had a parrot. He got it in New Zealand. It would scratch at the door when he was practising. Then when it was let in, it would perch on his pedalling foot. At certain moments it would exclaim,"Lord, what beautiful music!"

I read this in The Paderewski Memoirs. There is no mention of the parrot on the Internet, which is why I had to tell you the story myself. If you ask me, there is something wrong with people. Fancy not knowing about this parrot!

Why waste time?

When I'm composing a piece, the first thing I need to know is what sorts of things are going to be in it. I don't mean will there be octaves, glissandos, E flat minor, etc, I mean what are the ideas that I will be considering in the piece.

Now, perhaps you don't know what I mean by that. I wouldn't be too surprised, because the normal way is to think of music as sound, i.e. that good music is something that sounds good. I don't think that's right because I know how easy it is to make something that sounds good. Yet it is more difficult to make good music.

Anybody can invent good sounds. I'm not going to tell you how to do it, because if I do you will go away and become famous and popular composers whom everybody likes and who are very rich!

But this sort of approach is just moving notes around on the page, in my opinion.

To say briefly what the alternative is, I would suggest that it is more about moving ideas around the page. Then what happens when the ideas all hit each other and agree or, more likely, disagree, is what we call music.

So much for that! What I really wanted to talk about is what happens after I have found the ideas. Perhaps this is when I should be writing something down, but I don't.

I can see the music in my head, and that is where the ideas move themselves around on the page. Then they keep moving around, getting thrown away, or just being tried out in case they are helpful. I don't see that I should have to write all this stuff down, since I will only throw it away!

Then when I do write music down, I mostly keep it. Sometimes it takes a long time to get from the start to the writing-down part, but I have several pieces on the go at once (they are cooking!).

When the music is ready, it will demand to be written down. There is no alternative. What would happen if I didn't? I don't know, I would explode or something...

Anyway, it does take time before the piece appears, but that time is being used in instant recomposition (faster than on paper). Why waste time?

Inspiring

Over the years, lots of people have stolen ideas from me! I don't mind; it is probably not really stealing, exactly, anyway.

I once had a special idea in a piece. It was only about another week before someone else had suddenly had the same idea. Then they later passed on this interest to a friend and soon there was a whole 'school' based on my idea!

I don't regard it as my idea, though. I don't own ideas. Even if I am the first to do something, I don't feel like I create anything. It just comes to me. I have to find it, I am the fisherman. I have to focus it. But that is just my brain working. But the brain is quite a limited wrinkly little organ without the magic special ingredient called...inspiration!

Inspiration is often spoken of, rather lightly or jokingly I feel. An estate agent told me I would appreciate living near the park because it would inspire me to create music. I found that a little bit far-fetched, since it came from an estate agent - someone whose main job is to take my money as quickly as he can, not to advise me on matters of the soul.

But it seems he was right after all. Today I went in the park to find out what kind of piano piece I am writing (for Michael Finnissy's sixtieth birthday) and it was very good to be somewhere more natural to do it. I'm sure there is a special reason for that. Anyway, it helped me to get my idea.

There have been other ideas before. Some of those, people "borrowed"! Sometimes it was a theft, sometimes an influence, sometimes a tribute. Really it is fine.

I suppose I should not be too harsh about this. I was inspired by certain things once - or shall we say, I admired them, and then copied them a little bit for a while, until one day I didn't need to copy anything any more. Maybe it is the same thing at work when I find something a little...familiar...about someone else's work. I suppose that is true. Why they picked me I do not know!

The thing is, if somebody genuinely stole something I came up with, it would be a little bit annoying, but it would not be a hopeless situation. Because I can get another idea. I know where to find inspiration - though I could still forget how, I suppose - and I can go there to find something else useful. But it might seem easier for someone to just borrow what is already existing. It probably is! But it shows a lack of confidence in themselves. Also it is a little bit mean or ungenerous. They are trying to get the maximum result for the minimum effort. If they believed in themselves more, they could contribute a lot! But I suppose they think they have to "fight their own corner", form their own style, make their own money, etc etc.

Well, I could say to them - hey! It's not your money, ideas, style, etc. It is OURS! We should be sharing it! If we like your idea though, we will be nice to you! So you don't have to worry that there will be no reward!

The word "inspiration" comes from Latin. It means to breathe in. I'm not sure why; I didn't invent the word. But it could be worth finding out what it means.

I guess some people already know there is no such thing.

But you and me, we know something different, don't we? My little friends!

Weather, oh!

I have been checking the weather forecast for a few weeks.

Always it says that in two or three days the temperature will go up higher by a few degrees.

Then when the day arrives, nothing has changed - in two or three days the temperature will go up higher by a few degrees! Oh, why do they torture me so?

But, as you know, the weather is not predictable over longer than two or three days on the whole.

Seemingly the weather forecast is entirely predictable!

Rain is good but I do prefer the sunshine. Which I am unlikely to see in London very often!

Where else should I go? Any suggestions? You could form a Philip Howard Escape Committee. Those who want me further away, send in the name of a suitable place. Those who want me nearer, write in with the name of the place where you live.

I wonder where I would end up like that? Anyway, I know you are too polite to make suggestions like that. You will just have to wait and see.

Now, which way is the sun going? I should follow that.

I heard that Alexander the Great went to see the Greek philosopher Diogenes. Diogenes lived in a barrel and was lying down next to it when Alexander came. He said to Diogenes,"I am ruler of half the world. Whatever you ask of me, it shall be done. Now what do you wish?" and Diogenes said please could you move a bit to the right, you're blocking my sun...

You know, a barrel rolls. It must be a good way of following the sun. I wonder if that's a possibility?

What did the barrel have in it before Diogenes? Wine? Fish? Heraclitus? It makes all the difference to the internal ambience.

But I guess the sun is always the same, eh? When you can see it.

Takk and tak

As part of my travel plans for the future, I'm back to learning Polish. There is this word, 'tak', which means 'yes'. So far so good, that's all quite clear (in some pronunciation you can even hear a bit of a 'd' sound at the start, so you can think of 'da' in Russian and know for sure that this word means yes). But in Norwegian (which we discussed at length, starting on 25th June) the word takk means thanks. I get just a little bit confused as I try to decide whether I'm saying yes or thanks. Solutions: get focused into speaking Polish and not have any other options for the 'tak' sound in my mind; or, concentrate on the different sounds between the two words - which are very different, if you get close enough to see all the differences - and associate different pictures and feelings with each one which will always be there when I use the words.

It may seem a small thing to be talking about. But once you know bits of a few languages, some of the bits can fall into some of the other languages, so I'd like to know what you do about that.

One great linguist (polyglot, or by definition, hyperpolyglot - speaking more than six languages fluently) - the first that I think of - is Richard Francis Burton, the great English ...well, there isn't a word for what he was, he was everything - and everything England was not, so we can be thankful for having him (1821-1890). He was one of the first Westerners into Mecca - he went in disguise, linguistically as well as everything else (you can read about this in Personal Narrative of a Pilgrimage to Al-Madinah and Mecca). He translated the Arabian Nights (the Alf Laylah Wa Laylah, or "Thousand Nights and One Night") and the Kama Sutra of Vatsyayana - among others. Burton, who was supposed to know 29 languages, was an incredible man who went everywhere and did everything - fantastical, unlikely, impossible, but he did it. He even discovered the source of the Nile. Read something by him or about him. Then have a think about what you have to do to qualify as 'being alive'. Lord Derby said of RFB: "Before middle age, he compressed into his life more of study, more of hardship, and more of successful enterprise and adventure, than would have sufficed to fill up the existence of half a dozen ordinary men".