ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/bagpipe/archive/v01.n066

Internet Message Format | 1999-09-14 | 40KB

From: [e-mail] (bagpipe-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: bagpipe-digest V1 #66
Reply-To: bagpipe-digest
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


bagpipe-digest      Wednesday, September 15 1999      Volume 01 : Number 066




----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 15 Sep 1999 15:14:40 GMT
From: [e-mail] (SENDMEMORESPAM)
Subject: (bagpipe) Re: Teaching method (old dropped a month ago thread)

>I had worked as hard as this kid is when I was starting out, and I wish I had
>been
>exposed to all of the various styles and options in technical piping when I
>had
>started out.  Hindsight is great in one way:  it helps me teach to others
>what I
>wish had been available when I was learning myself.
>
>Bentley

Interesting post Bentley! I wonder what might've been...
Bill
Mar a bha, mar a tha,
mar a bhitheas gu brath,
ri tra'ghadh's ri lionadh.


- -
 To unsubscribe to bagpipe, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe bagpipe" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: 15 Sep 1999 15:13:17 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Ccc31807)
Subject: (bagpipe) Re: Flag Protocol

>From: "Screecher" <[e-mail]>
>Date: Wed, 01 September 1999 11:08 AM EDT
>Message-id: <pjbz3.7057$[e-mail]>
>
>I am a true BRIT......
>
>

Thank God!

- -
 To unsubscribe to bagpipe, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe bagpipe" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 15:39:48 +0100
From: "Peter Anderson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (bagpipe) Re: air stream valve - sorry

Ignore my post - that was for the Universal blowstick.



- -
 To unsubscribe to bagpipe, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe bagpipe" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 10:28:35 -0400
From: Bentley Wall <[e-mail]>
Subject: (bagpipe) Re: No such thing as "Natural Talent"

Todd, In your previous post you mentioned that you took objection to my saying
one of my piping students excelled depsite the fact that he has no natural
talent for pipes.  You say, with many examples, that there is no such thing as
natural talent.

I disagree.

There is such a thing as natural talent, and for being naturally poised for
excellence in advance of learning.

Obviously no one is good at something until they have been taught how, but
physical attributes and powers of the brain allow some people to be naturally
better at things than others.  You cited many examples of people that worked
very hard to be good at what they do.  So what?  I said the kid did not have
apparent natural talent to be a bagpiper because his hands are slow and his
fingers are short stocky and sluggish.  Everything he has accomplished has been
by brute force and huge numbers of repititions.  I have had students that
accomplished the same things without practicing at all.  I know pipers who take
months to memorize one new 4-parted march, and I know pipers that can have it
memorized by the time someone has finished playing it one time through.  I am
sure Michael Jordan would have been described as having natural talent, but
that does not mean that he did not work his ass off to get to be the best.
Many people have natural talent, which may just mean that preliminary skills
come easily to them versus others, but piss them away.  Some people are told
outright that they are going down a road that is going to be very difficult
since they don't seem to take to it well, no natural talent, but continue
anyway and end up becoming quite good by force.
Someone with natural talent does not necessarily become great, someone without
it can become so.  But if both of these people start at the same time with the
same teacher, and work the same number of hours, the one with the natural
ability will progress farther in the same amount of time.  What does this
mean?  Nothing.  But, to simply throw out, "there is no such thing as natural
talent." as if this is some sort of revelational truth is just silly.  No gets
to be good at something unless they work at it.  Some people learn easier and
faster than others.  When [I] use the term 'natural talent' I use it to mean
how easily a person takes to a new thing.

I have no natural talent for solving those damn Rubics Cubes, yet there was a
kid in my high school (way back when) who was mentally retarded who could solve
the frigging things in less than 60 seconds no matter how badly we misarranged
it.  I would say he had a natural gift for being able to see the solution, and
he did practice all the time too.

Some people's brains allow them to take to certain things more easily
like sports, music, rocket science, etc.  Some people's physical builds and
assets like strength or endurance allow them to be suitable candidates for
distance running or shot putting, or basketball (no short people).  The
coupling of physical and intellectual proficiencies does make for certain
people to have 'natural' abilities.  This does not mean that they do not have
to practice or work hard to achieve higher goals in those things.

I guess I am not saying anything that people do not already know too.

Sorry.

Bentley


- -
 To unsubscribe to bagpipe, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe bagpipe" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 16:19:16 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Royce Lerwick)
Subject: (bagpipe) Re: THE ONTARIO CHAMPION SUPREME BALL

On Wed, 15 Sep 1999 00:16:57 -0400, "Lindsay Kirkwood"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

>Tm8gLGp1c3QgcHJvYmxlbXMgd2l0aCB0aGUgSVANCjxtYXJrYWxlZUBteS1kZWphLmNvbT4gd3Jv
>dGUgaW4gbWVzc2FnZSBuZXdzOjdybXI3dSRlZGEkMUBubnJwMS5kZWphLmNvbS4uLg0KPiBJbiBh
>cnRpY2xlIDw5MzcyOTY0MTUuNTY5NDY4QG5ld3MudmF4eGluZS5jb20+LA0KPiAgICJMaW5kc2F5
>IEtpcmt3b29kIiA8a2lya3BpcGVAdmF4eGluZS5jb20+IHdyb3RlOg0KPiA+DQo+IFYyVnNiQ0JT
>YjNsalpTQnZiR1FnY0dGc0lIbHZkU0JvWVhabElHWnBibUZzYkhrZ2NtVnpkWEptWVdObFpDRWhJ
>UTBLVjJVZw0KPiBZV3hzDQo+ID4NCj4gSUd0dVpYY2dlVzkxSjJRZ0lHSmxJR0poWTJzZ0xIUnZi
>eUJpWVdRZ2VXOTFJR1JwWkc0bmRDQjBZV3RsSUdFZ2NHVnliV0Z1DQo+IFpXNTANCj4gPg0KPiBJ
>RVJwY25RZ1RtRndMaTR1SUEwS1FYTWdJRWtnWlhod2JHRnBibVZrSUhSdklFbGhiaUJOYjJseUlI
>Um9aWEpsSUhkaGN5QmgNCj4gSUhCeQ0KPiA+DQo+IGIySnNaVzBnYzJWdVpHbHVaeUJ3YjNOMGN5
>QjBhSFZ6SUhSb1pTQnlaV0Z6YjI0Z0RRcG1iM0lnZEdobElISmxjR1ZoZEhNdQ0KPiBJQTBLDQo+
>ID4NCj4gU0c5M0lHUnBaQ0I1YjNVZ1ptRnlaU0JoZENCMGFHVWdSMjlzWkNCTlpXUmhiQ0JwYmlB
>TkNrUnBjMjVsZVd4aGJtUS9EUXBYDQo+IFlXbDANCj4gPiBhVzVuSUdadmNpQjViM1Z5SUdGdWMz
>ZGxjaXdOQ2t4cGJtUnpZWGt1RFFvPQ0KPiANCj4gUGFraSBrZXlib2FyZD8NCj4gDQo+IE1hcmsN
>Cj4gDQo+IA0KPiBTZW50IHZpYSBEZWphLmNvbSBodHRwOi8vd3d3LmRlamEuY29tLw0KPiBTaGFy
>ZSB3aGF0IHlvdSBrbm93LiBMZWFybiB3aGF0IHlvdSBkb24ndC4NCg==
>
If you insist on using that sort of language, please post it off the
group via private email.

Royce

- -
 To unsubscribe to bagpipe, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe bagpipe" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 16:42:09 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Royce Lerwick)
Subject: (bagpipe) Re: No such thing as "Natural Talent"

On Tue, 14 Sep 1999 23:44:49 -0700, "Todd" <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>ehh Bently,
>
>Bentley Wall <[e-mail]> wrote in message
>> This student doesn't have particularly natural talent for this
>> instrument         [gee, what an inspiring teacher]
>
>No such thing as "Natural Talent"
>
>The notion of 'Natural Talent' is a bit of a laymen's misconception, I'm
>afraid.  What some people have more of than others, is the love of a thing
>and the tenacity to pursue excellence in it (or parents who have either or
>both of those things).

Oh God! Now you've just come out and exposed yourself as a total
environmentalist. You Pavlovian/Skinnerian Neanderthals are only a
step above the Godless, centrally dictated socialist model. It doesn't
work, I think we've proven that. Some people are in fact more talented
than others and the truth is, you people who claim otherwise just
aren't naturally talented, otherwise, people like you would be using
you for an example of natural talent and attempting to prove to you
how you aren't.
>
>Every artist whom I've admired and read or spoken with;  when asked, has
>honestly told that they have had to WORK HARD for every bit of technical
>ability they have.  For years I did not believe this.  One day I asked an
>artist, "how in the world can you render an image of someone's face or a
>scene, so sublime as to rival a photograph or capture an emotion?"  His
>reply:  "I had very good training!!"  We learn how to do things.  No one is
>born knowing how to write a cantata.

And that's bullshit because every hack who's struggled for decades to
copy the pirate on the back of the matchbook cover and doesn't get any
better proves you're wrong.

Besides, Buddy Holly could neither sing nor play guitar, and didn't
practice all that much or for many years and used his natural talent
to originate to create a music form in which he excelled independently
of others or other conventions or other trainings. Start the list.
You'll lose. You don't get Mozart writing concertos at 7 based on
years of instruction from *lesser* "masters."

>Speaking of Cantatas:   Bach, slaved for years writing whole cantatas  --
>every Sunday  -- hours of music.  Eventually, he became a great composer.
>Beethoven strained over every note!  "Mozart" you say, "a natural genius".
>Well come on, the kid had an accomplished musician  for a father.  One who
>drove him at a very early age to ACHIEVE excellence.

And for every one of those you have literally thousands who had the
same fathers and the same training and even better, who put in the
same labor of love, and frankly they sucked and amounted to nothing.
>
>When Sara Brightman (Stage Singer/Actress)  was told, in a BBC interview,
>what a "wonderful natural 'gift' she had",  she was clearly annoyed at the
>comment.   Indignantly proclaiming:  "I've worked very hard for many years
>to get this so called 'gift'"!

No, gifted singers use hard work to become great singers. Ungifted
hacks use hard work to become tolerable singers. It's the facts of
life.
>
>I have never met a world-class artist that has not practiced and practiced
>and practiced to get where they are.   Think about it.  There is nothing
>'natural' about practicing something 2 to 10 hours a day!

And your simple minded logic suggests to you of course that anyone who
puts in the same time and has the same training will assuredly become
a great artist, and at best sheer hard work will make you an
acceptable craftsman, or even a performer, not an artist.

> What these hours
>do, is *create* the natural-ness.  People that do something this much
>LOOK/SOUND Natural to those who do not!  I read that Tiger Woods hits
>something close to 3/4 million balls a year (that's about 2,000 per day
>average)!!!

And there are duffers who lob more balls than that around and they're
no good.

>
>The only thing that comes 'natural' is the LOVE of whatever they pursue.
>
>I notice this misconception runs rampant among pipers.
>[see my earlier thread about Pipers flat out lying about how long they've
>been playing]

And you just made that bold assertion and nobody backed you up on it
and the fact is, those who responded indicated that they did in fact
make rapid rise into open class the moment they put their minds to it,
over the course of a few years, not your mindless claim of decades of
hard work.

You see Todd, for you to be right in this, anyone who loved piping and
practiced hours a day would be playing in open.

And then of course, since most pipers are just trained monkeys on a
little folk instrument anyway, and not real "artists" who do anything
but reproduce by rote what they've been conditioned to
reproduce--perhaps you'r entire concept of "talent" is warped by your
own piping association?

Royce

(When's the last time you wrote a "great" new piobaireachd?)

- -
 To unsubscribe to bagpipe, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe bagpipe" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 16:23:14 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Royce Lerwick)
Subject: (bagpipe) Re: High A trouble

On Wed, 15 Sep 1999 00:44:18 -0300, "dnimmo" <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>
>Royce Lerwick wrote in message <[e-mail]>...
>>>>in terms the newbies will understand (that's what
>>>part of this NG is all about I hope)
>>>
>>>David
>>
>>Heres a simple response: FO.
>>Royce
>
>Thanks Royce.........you have plagerized page one of my "Book of Original
>Quick Retorts"
>
>You fail "originality" as well.................................David

You didn't specify originality, you specified concise. Sorry, I mean
very clear and short. But then, you see how one word like concise,
could have actually been concise if you'd only been capable of
understanding it. As it is, two syllables I think is pushing your
limit so I guess we see why brevity (damn, three syllables) is wasted
here.

Royce

By the way, let's just start up the whole "high A crow" debate again
for your sake.

- -
 To unsubscribe to bagpipe, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe bagpipe" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: 15 Sep 1999 16:52:57 GMT
From: [e-mail] (SENDMEMORESPAM)
Subject: (bagpipe) Re: funeral idea

>Hey people, did it ever occur to you that the reaction is to the WORDS of
>Amazing Grace, rather than the tune?

Not to me! I knew the tune long before I ever heard the words. The words took
on significance later after I learned them, but the music was there first.
Bill
Mar a bha, mar a tha,
mar a bhitheas gu brath,
ri tra'ghadh's ri lionadh.


- -
 To unsubscribe to bagpipe, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe bagpipe" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 16:49:28 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Royce Lerwick)
Subject: (bagpipe) Re: Teaching method (old dropped a month ago thread)

On Wed, 15 Sep 1999 08:06:12 -0400, "Richard W. Brice"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

>You missed the whole point....
>most westerners are not motivated at all compared to asians.
So that's why the Japanese market is in the sewer while we lazy
Americans laugh our unproductive, unmotivated asses off at them?

Royce

- -
 To unsubscribe to bagpipe, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe bagpipe" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 10:19:29 -0700
From: "Corey Keller" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (bagpipe) Re: Low G on PC

I'm just picturing my  pipe majors' expression when he attempts to tune with
my p/c and I explain that it sounds that
way because it's adjusted for pheasants...(LOL)

Corey Keller

Bob Cameron wrote in message <[e-mail]>...
>There you go, Chris- what his  practice chanter needs is a full choke!
Gee,
>maybe one of those adjustable choke devices could be adapted to proivo ide
>precise tuning, , setting Low  G at anything between Cylinder to Full. I
>suspect my Cushing would work best at modified, but only with a 100 grains
and
>a #7 reed.
>




- -
 To unsubscribe to bagpipe, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe bagpipe" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 17:17:44 GMT
From: Bill Carr <[e-mail]>
Subject: (bagpipe) Bill'S Piping Corner Update

The Gilmour Pipe Chanter Reed page is updated.

You can now access my page with the following:

http://go.to/piping.corner

Or the usual address of:

http://business.fortunecity.com/newhouse/855/billpg.html

The For Sale and Wanted page is a bit slow so if you have anything to
buy or sell then check it out.

Cheers


Bill Carr




- -
 To unsubscribe to bagpipe, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe bagpipe" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 13:10:47 -0400
From: Chris Hamilton <[e-mail]>
Subject: (bagpipe) Re: No such thing as "Natural Talent"

On Wed, 15 Sep 1999 10:28:35 -0400, Bentley Wall <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>Todd, In your previous post you mentioned that you took objection to my saying
>one of my piping students excelled depsite the fact that he has no natural
>talent for pipes.  You say, with many examples, that there is no such thing as
>natural talent.
>
>I disagree.
>
>There is such a thing as natural talent, and for being naturally poised for
>excellence in advance of learning.

I agree with Bentley.  I've seen some players with incredible talent,
and they get better and better without a lot of guidance, while others
struggle endlessly despite weekly lessons.

Chris
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Chris Hamilton -- [e-mail]
City of Washington Pipe Band
http://www.serve.com/cowpb/chamilton.html

- -
 To unsubscribe to bagpipe, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe bagpipe" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 11:15:39 -0700
From: "Todd" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (bagpipe) Re: No such thing as "Natural Talent"

I never said that shear stupidity or lameness couldn't impede an otherwise
willing prospect.  I've seen many people that simply don't know HOW to
practice;  so, it didn't matter how long they tried.   If you want to recast
the argument from "Natural Talent" to "Minimum level of Intelligence" AND
"Basic Dexterity", that would be fine.  Also, in your example;  how do you
know how much effort each is putting into the venture?

Cheers
Todd
"When love and skill work together, expect a masterpiece." - Ruskin


Chris Hamilton <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:[e-mail]...
> On Wed, 15 Sep 1999 10:28:35 -0400, Bentley Wall <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
> >Todd, In your previous post you mentioned that you took objection to my
saying
> >one of my piping students excelled depsite the fact that he has no
natural
> >talent for pipes.  You say, with many examples, that there is no such
thing as
> >natural talent.
> >
> >I disagree.
> >
> >There is such a thing as natural talent, and for being naturally poised
for
> >excellence in advance of learning.
>
> I agree with Bentley.  I've seen some players with incredible talent,
> and they get better and better without a lot of guidance, while others
> struggle endlessly despite weekly lessons.
>
> Chris
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Chris Hamilton -- [e-mail]
> City of Washington Pipe Band
> http://www.serve.com/cowpb/chamilton.html



- -
 To unsubscribe to bagpipe, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe bagpipe" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 11:45:09 -0700
From: "Todd" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (bagpipe) Re: No such thing as "Natural Talent"

Bentley Wall <[e-mail]> wrote in message

>  So what?  I said the kid did not have
> apparent natural talent to be a bagpiper because his hands are slow and
his
> fingers are short stocky and sluggish.

Ahh, another cop out  -- the "doesn't have good fingers" cop out!  oh
brother.  'Ever looked at wee Allisdair Ghillie's fingers?  Like STUBS!
Short fat little fingers,  that FLY!  I don't know where the piping comunity
picked up the (heretofor piano player) notion of long fingers=great piping.
I can't stop thinking of Gordon Walker's wee little fingers refuting this
emphatically.    I take the 'Natuarl Talent' cop out much the same way.  Oh
I'll never be that good because I don't 'HAVE' natural talent.

>  Everything he has accomplished has been
> by brute force and huge numbers of repititions.  I have had students that
> accomplished the same things without practicing at all.

Sure,  me too.  But no one's getting great without a lot of practice.  My
Mum told me I learned to talk really quickly, and used really big words when
I was 2 years old.  But that doesn't mean I'm James Joyce now!   Just
because someone picks up some of the basics more quickly doesn't mean they
have natural talent.  It means that they have a kean intelect  --  they
would probably pick up anything they had an interest in.   If you want to
call basic intelligence "Natural Talent" then I guess I understand where
you're coming from.  Everything Beethoven wrote was by BRUTE FORCE.  This
just doesn't have anything to do with talent.


>  I know pipers who take
> months to memorize one new 4-parted march, and I know pipers that can have
it
> memorized by the time someone has finished playing it one time through.

So this guy's good at memorizing music.   Cool?  yes.  'Natural Talent'?
Please!  How'd he do at Inverness?

>  But if both of these people start at the same time with the
> same teacher, and work the same number of hours, the one with the natural
> ability will progress farther in the same amount of time.

I would argue that whoever wants it the most and figures out how to 'get
there' (practicing) will be the best over time.   Not whoever had the
'spice'.

> to be good at something unless they work at it.  Some people learn easier
and
> faster than others.  When [I] use the term 'natural talent' I use it to
mean
> how easily a person takes to a new thing.

OK.  I thought you meant these people are predisposed to Bagpipes naturally;
and there is no such thing in my opinion.

Cheers
Todd
"When love and skill work together, expect a masterpiece." - Ruskin





- -
 To unsubscribe to bagpipe, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe bagpipe" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 14:56:32 -0400
From: Bob Cameron <[e-mail]>
Subject: (bagpipe) Re: Low G on PC

Corey Keller wrote:

> I'm just picturing my  pipe majors' expression when he attempts to tune with
> my p/c and I explain that it sounds that
> way because it's adjusted for pheasants...(LOL)
>
> snip

Well, you'll just begiving him something else to grouse about (groan)



- -
 To unsubscribe to bagpipe, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe bagpipe" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 15:15:34 -0400
From: Chris Hamilton <[e-mail]>
Subject: (bagpipe) Re: No such thing as "Natural Talent"

On Wed, 15 Sep 1999 11:15:39 -0700, "Todd" <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>I never said that shear stupidity or lameness couldn't impede an otherwise
>willing prospect.  I've seen many people that simply don't know HOW to
>practice;  so, it didn't matter how long they tried.   If you want to recast
>the argument from "Natural Talent" to "Minimum level of Intelligence" AND
>"Basic Dexterity", that would be fine.  Also, in your example;  how do you
>know how much effort each is putting into the venture?

'Cuz I know them ...

Chris
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Chris Hamilton -- [e-mail]
City of Washington Pipe Band
http://www.serve.com/cowpb/chamilton.html

- -
 To unsubscribe to bagpipe, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe bagpipe" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: 15 Sep 1999 19:23:45 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Raistlin88)
Subject: (bagpipe) Re: No such thing as "Natural Talent"

Amen Bentley and Royce, I was about to respond, but you've pretty much said
everything I was going to.
Casey

>Todd, In your previous post you mentioned that you took objection to my
>saying
>one of my piping students excelled depsite the fact that he has no natural
>talent for pipes.  You say, with many examples, that there is no such thing
>as
>natural talent.
>
>I disagree.
>
>There is such a thing as natural talent, and for being naturally poised for
>excellence in advance of learning.
>
>Obviously no one is good at something until they have been taught how, but
>physical attributes and powers of the brain allow some people to be naturally
>better at things than others.  You cited many examples of people that worked
>very hard to be good at what they do.  So what?  I said the kid did not have
>apparent natural talent to be a bagpiper because his hands are slow and his
>fingers are short stocky and sluggish.  Everything he has accomplished has
>been
>by brute force and huge numbers of repititions.  I have had students that
>accomplished the same things without practicing at all.  I know pipers who
>take
>months to memorize one new 4-parted march, and I know pipers that can have it
>memorized by the time someone has finished playing it one time through.  I am
>sure Michael Jordan would have been described as having natural talent, but
>that does not mean that he did not work his ass off to get to be the best.
>Many people have natural talent, which may just mean that preliminary skills
>come easily to them versus others, but piss them away.  Some people are told
>outright that they are going down a road that is going to be very difficult
>since they don't seem to take to it well, no natural talent, but continue
>anyway and end up becoming quite good by force.
>Someone with natural talent does not necessarily become great, someone
>without
>it can become so.  But if both of these people start at the same time with
>the
>same teacher, and work the same number of hours, the one with the natural
>ability will progress farther in the same amount of time.  What does this
>mean?  Nothing.  But, to simply throw out, "there is no such thing as natural
>talent." as if this is some sort of revelational truth is just silly.  No
>gets
>to be good at something unless they work at it.  Some people learn easier and
>faster than others.  When [I] use the term 'natural talent' I use it to mean
>how easily a person takes to a new thing.
>
>I have no natural talent for solving those damn Rubics Cubes, yet there was a
>kid in my high school (way back when) who was mentally retarded who could
>solve
>the frigging things in less than 60 seconds no matter how badly we
>misarranged
>it.  I would say he had a natural gift for being able to see the solution,
>and
>he did practice all the time too.
>
>Some people's brains allow them to take to certain things more easily
>like sports, music, rocket science, etc.  Some people's physical builds and
>assets like strength or endurance allow them to be suitable candidates for
>distance running or shot putting, or basketball (no short people).  The
>coupling of physical and intellectual proficiencies does make for certain
>people to have 'natural' abilities.  This does not mean that they do not have
>to practice or work hard to achieve higher goals in those things.
>
>I guess I am not saying anything that people do not already know too.
>
>Sorry.
>
>Bentley
>
>
>
>
>
>
>



- -
 To unsubscribe to bagpipe, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe bagpipe" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 12:21:54 -0700
From: Andrew & Kristen Lenz <[e-mail]>
Subject: (bagpipe) Re: Hemp - what's up with that?

It's actually pretty easy. I recommend using the black waxed hemp (looks
good and I find it works great) my humble directions for which follow:

Just remove the old stuff (cut if necessary), then wind on some new
hemp. Start with the end of the help perpendicular to the winding
direction (parallel with the drone), put a few wraps around over the
perpendicular end piece then pull it snug. Then wrap up and back keeping
the hemp tight next to the previous wrap until you are about half way
done, then press the hemp tight on the edge of a table or some flat
surface. Then wrap more until you are about done (don't cut the hemp
yet), munch it down then slide the drone over it and see how it fits. If
too much, remove some, if not, add and munch. You may need to remove
some then wrap keeping some amount of distance between the wraps to get
a snug fit. There's a certain amount of trial and error. Try not to cut
the hemp until you are completely done otherwise you'll have to go back
and remove some of the original length to keep the separate length from
sliding around.

To make the drone slide a little easier, I'll take a knife and scrape
off some of the wax (parallel to the drone), put the drone back on slide
it around then scrape off more if necessary.

For the stock end, do the same, but I finish off the "fine tuning" by
using dental floss. It's thinner and no one's ever going to see it,
unlike on the sliders.

Andrew
- --
Andrew & Kristen Lenz
[e-mail]
Santa Cruz, California U.S.A.

- -
 To unsubscribe to bagpipe, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe bagpipe" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 19:13:22 GMT
From: Brian Counihan <[e-mail]>
Subject: (bagpipe) Re: Piper needed for wedding

In article <[e-mail]>,
  [e-mail] wrote:
> OK, we know when , but not where...
>

Staten Island, NY

- --
Brian C.
http://www.stcolumcille.com/
"If you ever reach total enlightenment while drinking beer, I bet it
makes beer shoot out your nose." - Deep Thought, Jack Handy


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

- -
 To unsubscribe to bagpipe, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe bagpipe" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 13:01:37 -0700
From: "Todd" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (bagpipe) Re: No such thing as "Natural Talent"

Royce,

I'm no liberal (if that is what you're implying)!  To the contrary:
everyone is NOT equal  --  no way!  I clearly point out in my post *where*
the inequality lies.  People are UN-equal in how well actualized they are in
the education and love of their pursuit;   *and* by who can figure out how
to achieve it.   The smart people usually excel quickly at the start because
they have figured out how to apply themselves.   Or, they simply are in
familiar territory.  I also pointed out that every 'great' Piper I've asked
divulges that PRACTICE is what did it.  *THAT* is the single most important
thing they've 'figured out' along the way (along with some cool reed and
maintenance tricks).  Meanwhile all you pansy whine-babies cry about not
'having the natural talent' or the 'long fingers'  etc., etc.  Instead of
getting off your asses and practicing!  Hard work (you Royce don't like
that?).

Royce Lerwick <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Oh God! Now you've just come out and exposed yourself as a total
> environmentalist.

Absurd.  No one who knows me considers me an environmentalist.

> You Pavlovian/Skinnerian Neanderthals are only a
> step above the Godless, centrally dictated socialist model. It doesn't
> work, I think we've proven that. Some people are in fact more talented
> than others and the truth is, you people who claim otherwise just
> aren't naturally talented, otherwise, people like you would be using
> you for an example of natural talent and attempting to prove to you
> how you aren't.

I never said some people aren't more talented than others.  Only that so
called 'Talent', in every corner I have found it, has been acheived.  Not
something you're born with (it's the classic Nature vr. Nurture argument, i
guess).   Usually, I find the 'Natural Talent"  argument is a COP OUT for
those who aren't musically proficient.
Yes some people are smarter than others  --  let's just come right out and
say that!   They LERAN faster.  However the mythical notion that someone
would be born predisposed to play a bagpipe, or any other musical
instrument, is rediculous.  Moreover,  most accomplished musicians recognize
this as a myth and laugh.   Go to any College music Dept or Conservatory and
you will find that  "Committment" is synonmous with "Genius"

> And that's bullshit because every hack who's struggled for decades to
> copy the pirate on the back of the matchbook cover and doesn't get any
> better proves you're wrong.

I'm not talking about idiots  --  doing the same thing over and over
expecting a different result.  I'm talking about Learning craft.  When
learning, you need something/Someone to learn FROM.  If anything this proves
MY point that someone is going to have to teach this guy how to draw the
pirate;  it isn't going to just 'happen' magically.

 > Besides, Buddy Holly could neither sing nor play guitar, and didn't
> practice all that much or for many years and used his natural talent
> to originate to create a music form in which he excelled independently

Well, to use that analogy, I could start my own 'style' of piping (god
forbid) and even though I may suck as a highland piper, if it was hip enough
(and the kids liked it) I'd be called a genius.  If this is what we're
refering to by "Natural Talent" then yea,  Buddy Holly definitely had it.  I
call it  Intelligence, Capitalism and being responsible for your own social
relevence  --  not  'Natural Talent'.  He plain WANTED to do something with
that guitar  --  so he did.  Proves my point again!

> of others or other conventions or other trainings. Start the list.
> You'll lose. You don't get Mozart writing concertos at 7 based on
> years of instruction from *lesser* "masters."

When you show a young child how to do something, they  ***OFTEN*** become
better than their 'lesser' masters!!  I would argue that simply by virtue of
knowing what a conterto *IS* at age 7, puts Mozart way ahead of the game
(that's the 'actualizing' stuff I spoke of earlier).

> And for every one of those you have literally thousands who had the
> same fathers and the same training and even better, who put in the
> same labor of love, and frankly they sucked and amounted to nothing.

Name them!

> No, gifted singers use hard work to become great singers. Ungifted
> hacks use hard work to become tolerable singers. It's the facts of
> life.

Not according to the greatest singers alive.   (BTW, didn't you say a moment
ago that Buddy Holly was essentially one of those hacks?)

> And your simple minded logic suggests to you of course that anyone who
> puts in the same time and has the same training will assuredly become
> a great artist,

No, people are not equal.  I never said 'the SAME time'!  But that doesn't
mean that the mediocre ones should devise some entire mythology about
'Natural Talent' being the cause of all success.   Because often you'll find
that those who succeed -  EVEN in MUSIC  -- are the mediocre ones who worked
hard.

> > What these hours
> >do, is *create* the natural-ness.  People that do something this much
> >LOOK/SOUND Natural to those who do not!  I read that Tiger Woods hits
> >something close to 3/4 million balls a year (that's about 2,000 per day
> >average)!!!
>
> And there are duffers who lob more balls than that around and they're
> no good.

NOT!  I've never seen a 'duffer' hit 2,000 balls a day!  What a bullshit
argument.  It really proves my point:  the duffer THINKS he worked hard
duffing 400 balls once;  then, at the end of the day complains that Tiger
must have some "Natural Talent"!!  This is exactly what I find so lame about
the 'Natural Talent' argument!

> And you just made that bold assertion and nobody backed you up on it
> and the fact is, those who responded indicated that they did in fact
> make rapid rise into open class the moment they put their minds to it,
> over the course of a few years, not your mindless claim of decades of
> hard work.

I never claimed 'decades of hard work'!  But again the "moment they put
their minds to it" part, proves my point again!

> You see Todd, for you to be right in this, anyone who loved piping and
> practiced hours a day would be playing in open.

No.  I am by default 'right in this' by Ocamm's Razor.  In order for YOU to
be right in  this, you will have to locate and isolate the 'Bagpiping Gene'.

> And then of course, since most pipers are just trained monkeys on a
> little folk instrument anyway, and not real "artists" who do anything
> but reproduce by rote what they've been conditioned to
> reproduce--perhaps you'r entire concept of "talent" is warped by your
> own piping association?

Perhaps!

Cheers
Todd
"When love and skill work together, expect a masterpiece." - Ruskin






- -
 To unsubscribe to bagpipe, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe bagpipe" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: 15 Sep 1999 20:11:11 GMT
From: [e-mail] (BGRAHAM001)
Subject: (bagpipe) Re: funeral idea

Those lyrics (Amazing Grace). can also be sung nicely to the theme song from
the Mickey Mouse Club. Try it.

- -
 To unsubscribe to bagpipe, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe bagpipe" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

End of bagpipe-digest V1 #66
****************************

-
 To unsubscribe to $LIST, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe $LIST" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.