I wrote a post last
year here about looking at talent through your own lens and how that lens can
warp where you see talent. But what are you seeing when you see "talent"?
Imagine a group lines
up a bunch of naname (slant stand) drums in a row and plays them in a line of
people, moving down that line. They
strike well, but they look uncomfortable, both unfamiliar with the song and
with the kata. Are they talented?
The twist here is that
this happened when Kodo came to our studio a long time ago and played one of
their member’s local songs. Most of them
didn’t know it and were picking it up quickly, but naname isn’t a style that
Kodo does much (if at all).
So if you see someone
who’s not dazzling you on a particular instrument, does that mean they’re not
talented? And does talent, in terms of
performance, only apply to the in-your-face stuff like spins and twirls and
jumping about?
If someone doesn’t
have the fastest hands or the flashiest moves, are they less talented than the
people that do? What if that person
holds a really steady tempo and/or never gets off the beat? It may not wow the crowd, but it’s equally
impressive. That’s a talent. There’s also a talent in recovering after a
mistake, either so the audience never notices or showing poise under pressure.
Is remembering how old
songs used to go a talent? Is being able
to play a different solo each time a talent?
Is making people smile when you make eye contact with them a talent? Is inspiring people through being genuine on
stage a talent? Of course these are
talents, but do we recognize them?
Next time you watch a
performance, can you see what talents people have that aren’t readily apparent?
No comments:
Post a Comment