There have been so many "next mozart" or "child prodigy" threads around here lately I was thinking about what that actually means.

I was watching some of these children's video and a lot of them play beautifully, but i wanted to see everyone's opinion on whether or not these kids are natrually musical genius' or if they are just so good because of their investment into playing?

I really don't think it's a coincidence that most of these kids have the means to learn or the skilled players around them.

I remember when I was a child...I would never have had the discipline or desire to play piano. I wanted to play and be a kid. It wasn't until I gained a more mature outlook and an appreciation for music that i was interested in it. I think this is the real difference between these kids and normal kids. whether their parents push them or they naturally are interested, that motivation is all the difference in the world.

look at mozart the quintisential child prodigy...

would he have been such a talented piano player and composer if he didn't have his father to teach him?

i remember a story of mozart when he was given the sheet music to a work of bach's and he laid it down spread all around him and wouldn't talk to anyone until he finished looking through it.

that is not a normal child behavior, but it sounds like he was an extremely hard worker and loved it very much...

look at beethoven...

would he have been such a wonderful piano player if his father didn't force him out of bed to practice all night?

and we all know that he labored over his works extremely hard.

what is talent if not a result of time invested?


i don't know what i'm trying to say, i just think it's interesting topic. I admire young people that have the ability to work harder than others and master their skill.

A beef of mine:

Look at the Mozarts, the quintessential child prodicies? Would they have been such talented piano players and composers if they didn't have their fathers to teach them.

Mozart had a sister. She was taught and performed just as he did, as a child prodigy. She was retired when she hit puberty.

It may be part of this same question.

What I've read about great pianists, they usually weren't pushed, but they had a musical environment around them which inspired participation. They grew up amid lots of fascinating music, and grew to understand it simply by listening to it with their young, absorptive ears and mind. They saw family members playing such music with real instruments, their attempts at imitation were encouraged. And of course they had the genes, the talent. Pushing is generally much better than nothing, but it's usually not how geniuses are made (and they aren't made at all without excellent genes).

I'd say it might be a mixture of the two.

Beethoven certainly grew up in not the pleasantest of musical environments. Other people did (eg Mendelssohn, Saint-Saens)

If I think of modern times, the brutal drilling methods of what became known as the "Jacksons five" certainly would speak for the argument that natural talent can be coupled with brutal forcing of the very same talent with, musically speaking, excellent results (although with catastrophic results on some of the people involved as very clear in that case).

It is more a question of human rights than of efficacy, I'd say. I have read of a couple of other examples in tennis, where these children were never asked where they liked it, they had to do it and amen and do it at a very forced speed.

On the other hand, a child will never transmit the emotional complexity of an adult, which is what makes the "real" talent. So it is fair to say that lots of these children will grow up to discover that they have dexterity, but real artistic talent is a different matter.

For some of them, I suppose it will be a blessing and the beginning of a true life.

The senior Paganini and the senior Beethoven
apparently stood over their famous sons
with a steel rod in hand and used it without
hesitation if they ever played at anything
less than "genius"-level.

This is my first post on this forum by the way. Im a bit confused about that rating thing there 1/5. Is this a really bad post or something? Just kidding...

Ok I am of the philosophy that I dont really care too much about WHOs actually playing the music but rather how good the music is. I think too much emphasis is placed on the artist in many situations and not the art itself. Well take pop music and the top 40 for a start - that does not need explaining really, does it?

I am sure there are many great piano playing kids out there and I appretiate that people want there children to be great at... well great at everything. In all honesty I dont care if the pianist is 4 years old or 104, if they play well they I love to listen - listen being the operative word.

To stay on the topic (because I have steered off a little) I am very sceptical about the usage of the word "prodigy" when people refer to music. I can develop music in my head and it would be great if I could just write it down directly onto a sheet of paper. With practice I could maybe do that but I'm an adult and I have other things to do with my time. Many children absorb things well when it comes to education and their surroundings and home atmosphere contributes to this. One thing I can be sure of however is that, if that family can not afford a piano and their child has no access to one, its pretty unlikely that they are going to become a prodigy at playing a piano. (Its ok I'm not stupid - it was said with toungue in cheek ) Bare in mind that there are many pianos in the world and many kids. When the 2 link up some of them are going to become very good, very quickly. I would be very economic in the usage of the word genius or prodigy however.

VIN

I think you've answered your own question. I have no doubt that these children have a huge investment in playing well. I would be willing to bet that most of them play the piano obsessively.
The question is - can that be forced on a child?

This leads to the age old parental dilemma (one I've faced now twice) of whether forcing a child to practice an instrument is a productive process or an exercise in futility. Without getting into my personal conclusions on that issue, let me say that I believe that the key to a child excelling on an instrument is an innate drive or love of the instrument. I think anyone can reach mediocrity with the right environment and tools, but I think it's only the gifted child that can become a prodigy, and I suspect that is most often driven by the child's love for the instrument. This sort of ties in with behavioral psychology - positive reinforcement works much better than negative in producing a change in behavior. This could extend to music - the satisfaction of producing beautiful music is a much more powerful incentive than a stick held over the head.

Finally, I have to mention my own kids. As a musician, I I decided that music was a critical component of my children's education. I gave each of them opportunity to learn an instrument. With two of them, it was an ongoing struggle in which I had to coax, cajole and threaten to keep them practicing. Those two, in spite of the regular protests and complaints have become reasonably competent musicians. My other child, however, glommed onto the piano before he ever started taking formal lessons. When he's home from college, I often race each him to the piano to get a little piano time for myself, as some days, he'll literally be there all day. I taught him the Bach organ toccata in d by rote on the piano - start to finish - measure by measure when he was 6 or 7. He had a fairly slow start at formal music lessons because of some issues in our lives at the time, and his tendency to want to play what he heard made note-reading a challenge. Once he got over that hurdle, he soared and progressed amazingly fast. By the time he was in high school, he was playing beyond my ability as a college student, performance major. He hasn't majored in music, but continues taking lessons. He just recently picked up the cello and within a three months, he is playing Bach cello suites. So - he is my living proof of that special something that only some people seem to possess that makes an exceptional musician. With him, though, it's not only an ear but it's also a drive that permeates other aspects of his life - it's almost an obsessiveness.

Everyone is different with different strengths and weaknesses. I do think, however, that prodigies all have a special inner drive that is integral to their success.

PS: I wonder about Mozart's sister. Just because she stopped being in the limelight doesn't necessarily mean she quit music. At that time in history, it was frowned upon for women to perform. I'd be curious to know more about what became of her and her musical talents.

Welcome VIN!