The Flame: Teenage Years

Close to a dozen years have gone by and we find ourselves seated on folding chairs enjoying the final recital of a private studio of talented piano students. Each year there are a few new eager faces as the younger students deftly work through pieces that seem very complex for such little fingers to play so quickly. We notice the students who have been seasoned through training, now in those tenuous intermediate years. Their intense desire for precision shows maturing musical ideas, but often arrives at awkward adolescence when being on stage has an added gravity of meaning. We search for the advanced teenagers—those students we have seen truly blossom through the long process of talent development. Numbers have dwindled in this studio. One has decided to move out of state and is now studying at a conservatory. Another has decided to concentrate efforts on the oboe, begun in elementary school band, with time restraints easing piano lessons out of her schedule. Academic and parental pressures have caused last year’s shining star, a junior seeking an Ivy League college education, to quit as well. There remains one teenager who ends the program with a flourish, receiving many hugs from young admirers and awards galore following the program. This is our tiny, eager student from the front steps. A senior, having completed a full twelve years of instruction with many competitions and solo recitals under his belt, he bids farewell to this comfortable, nurturing studio. He enters college as a math major. Many private teachers, parents, and music students may recognize this scene as a very realistic portrayal of possibilities in musical talent development. The first years of training are “romance,” with parents aglow when hearing their talented youngster perform with such confidence and flair. The middle years consist of flux and flow, a phase when students search for the “whys” and “hows” beneath the notes that were so easily played in prior years. Musical training now presents persistent challenges. Late-starters may speed into these years with determination. Others may begin a second instrument or composition classes to broaden musical experiences.

Perspectives of Talent Identification

In part I the discussion of talent began with a poetic scene and ended with reflective after-thoughts, befitting the theoretical nature of the subject. The quest to recognize the spark of potential talent in young children brings us into the very real world of the school classroom. Suppose it is your task to observe student behavior in a third grade elementary music class and identify students who show evidence of potential talent. Your attention is drawn to the following students: . . . Student A is playing a melody from her music book on a xylophone. She decides to elaborate by creating a “variation.” Excited, she busily starts notating and revising her ideas on manuscript paper. . . . . . . Observation Notes: Musical training is evident. Performs with ease. Shows curiosity, creativity in musical tasks. An outstanding student. . . . . . . Student B is sitting in a listening center with headphones on, totally absorbed in the activity of circling patterns he hears. He taps his pencil as he listens, quickly working through the ear-training exercise. A quick check shows that his answers are correct. . . . . . . Observation Notes: Fine-tuned listening. Quite perceptive and quick in complex listening tasks. He is rather shy in group activities. . . . . . . Student C volunteers to sing and act out a solo in a cowboy song. He performs with confidence, singing in tune and with expression, obviously enjoying himself. His performance is met with spontaneous applause. . . . . . . Observation Notes: Quite a showman. Comfortable in front of an audience. Clear, clean vocal quality and intonation. Performs with personal flair. Shows leadership skills in group activities. Energy plus enthusiasm. . . . . . . Student D works with a number of Orff instruments, simply “fooling around” with sounds and rhythms. Each repetition shows a bit more development of an imaginative improvisation, which she describes as a “summer storm.” . . . . . . Observation Notes: Sensitive awareness of mood in music. Syncopated rhythms used in improvisation—retained well by ear. Adept at learning by ear. Not comfortable working with notation. . . . . . .

Talent as Performance

The lovely student pianist was bowing graciously to an appreciative audience of music teachers from across the country. She was the junior high winner of a national competition, and her exquisite playing and careful training was apparent. Her performance was no surprise. It was polished and well prepared. As we rustled our programs, searching for the next performer’s name, the junior high cellist awkwardly stepped on stage, tried to adjust the chair and struggled with an endpin that seemed to enjoy sliding rather than sticking to the floor. After a few uncomfortable moments, she nodded to her accompanist and began to play. This performance was a captivating surprise. From the first notes, the audience was caught up in the enthusiasm, excitement, and connection she made with her cello and the music. As she finished, with a flourished release of the bow, the audience spontaneously rose to its feet, shouting “Bravo.” This young teenager, with the simple cotton dress and awkward entrance, stood transfixed. She looked around at her fellow competition winners to see them on their feet as well. She turned, bowed slightly, and gave a shy smile of appreciation. A musician communicates through performance. The recognition of musical talent through performance makes common sense to anyone who is a musician or teacher of musicians. Music aptitude may measure musical potential, but musical talent is realized through performance. We hear it. Musical talent blends the inborn perceptive capacities of the individual with the physical ability to perform with personal interpretation. Quite simply, a musician or music teacher believes that you can determine talent if you just listen to the student play. In fact, the assessment of musical talent by listening to a performance isn’t quite that simple. It poses a number of problems because of its inherently subjective nature. Performance is a process as well as a product. It is phenomenological. The opening performance of the young cellist was captivating. Why? It could have been the audience’s surprise at hearing a brilliant performance from a student who outwardly didn’t have the trappings of a seasoned competition winner.

Final Reflections

As we reach the end of our journey in search of the “spark,” initial perspectives may have been stretched or transformed, resulting in a new level of understanding of the term, musical talent. During the course of writing this book, I found myself acutely aware of the musical behavior of friends, students, and performers. What do I see and hear that describes the “spark”? The process of exploring the enigma of musical talent allowed me to reflect on past aesthetic musical experiences, still fresh in my memory. Hopefully, as you paused between chapters of this book, you found your ears focusing on surrounding sounds and your mind reflecting on past musical experiences as well. There are still unanswered questions to ponder and research to pursue, but the basics of musical talent remain constant. The spark of talent is experienced when someone expresses himself or herself through music, making a personal aesthetic statement to others. We have learned that capacities underlying this personal statement can be measured objectively and that the process of developing this interpretation requires metaperceptive reasoning. Students who show potential talent are motivated to learn, eager to hurdle over the next musical challenge. They may have different technical levels, training, and music aptitude scores, but their desire to express themselves through music is readily observable. Can it really be this simple? In looking back at the hundreds of children, teenagers, and adults I have worked with in my studio and classrooms, I visualize a collage of musical capabilities, each unique in its own way. I remember the sensitive, creative seven-year-old who sought out independent ideas from the first lesson, developing into a highly individual composer and musician as an adult. There was the young boy who arrived at the audition/interview with the Moonlight Sonata under his tiny fingers, self-taught, with nuances closely matching the recording he had used as a “teacher.” He reached his goal of playing the Emperor Concerto as a teenager, still craving more Beethoven.

Unveiling the Spark

Once again returning to that third grade class of music-makers and donning the role of observer, we now recognize the breadth of musical talent we seek, and have a taste of activities that can highlight different aspects of this talent. It is now necessary to know why we are there, what happened prior to our arrival, and what happens next. We are ready to look at the overall process required to recognize musical talent in a school setting and the programing that will serve the needs of these identified students. The rationale behind including musical talent in gifted identification rests on the renewed interest in musical ways of knowing or “musical intelligence” and the broadened philosophy and definition of “outstanding talent” recently embraced in the field of gifted education. Music-related neurological research has drawn interest from the media and general public, which also helps swing the educational pendulum toward the recognition of musical talent as a viable educational necessity. First and foremost, administrators must realize that talent identification is an extension of an existing music program, not a replacement. All children should learn music as a basic part of their education. As discussed earlier, identification is not for the purpose of choosing students for a music program. Its purpose is to provide more challenging and individualized instruction for students who have the potential to develop talents beyond what is provided by the normal school curriculum. Effective procedures for talent recognition require solid understanding of the criteria of potential talent, observation of students in the process of music-making, and multiple stages reflecting local gifted/music program needs. Gifted specialists, who have traditionally relied on the quantitative assurance of test scores for identification, should broaden their scope to include the assessment of musical performance and listening behavior. They should also understand the process of metaperceptive learning in the arts. Music educators, who have traditionally relied on performance-driven assessment as the sole means of talent recognition, must seek ways to include talents beyond performance and consider the option of music aptitude testing in this identification.

Talent as Giftedness

Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart began composing at the age of four. He toured as a prodigy for three years before the age of ten, astounding audiences with his ability to perform on the harpsichord, voice, organ, and violin. He would compose on sight in different styles and on different instruments. He could “most accurately name from a distance any notes that may be sounded for him either singly or in chords, on the clavier or on every imaginable instrument, including bells, glasses, and clocks.” When his father was recovering from an illness, eight-year-old Wolfgang was not allowed to play the piano. He filled his time by composing his first symphony (K.16) for all instruments of the orchestra. When we hear the word “gifted” in connection with music, the musical prodigy immediately comes to mind. The arguments of recognizing talent through performance, creative endeavors, or music aptitude tests seem incidental in comparison to the possibilities and accomplishments of the musical prodigy. There is no question that these young musicians show incredible levels of musical talent, often exhibiting musical capabilities equal to those of a highly trained adult. Mozart remains the preeminent example of the prodigy, described by his father and teacher as a “God-given miracle,” knowing “in his eighth year what one would expect from a man of forty. Indeed, only he who sees him can believe it.” A prodigy is a child who displays extraordinary talent at an early age. Prodigies occur most often in the field of music, exceeding the total of all other fields combined. Musical prodigies show outstanding abilities at a younger age than other prodigies, with some as young as three or four years old. The field of chess is a distant second place in number, with prodigious achievement often seen at five or six years of age. Relatively few prodigies are identified in the natural sciences, philosophy, dance, or plastic arts. Even the field of mathematics, whose young calculating wonders gain media recognition, have few true prodigies capable of original mathematical reasoning prior to their teen years. The literature offers differing opinions concerning age and prodigious talent.

Talent as Music Aptitude

Several years ago, my husband called me into his studio as he was practicing for an upcoming solo violin concerto performance with the National Symphony. As I entered the room, I noticed three bows lying on the floor. Without a word, he motioned for me to be seated on the sofa. He picked up the first bow and began to play a passage of the music. He set this bow on the floor, picked up the second, and played the same passage. He repeated this process with the last bow. When he finished, he paused and looked at me. I motioned to the middle bow. He nodded in agreement. This was the bow he would use for the performance. Musicians communicate through sound. The wordless exchange of musical ideas described here exemplifies the fine-tuned discrimination of sound that is at the heart of music aptitude. While listening to the repeated musical passage, my husband and I were both aware of the subtle qualities of sound that each bow produced as it was drawn across the strings of the violin. The first had a gutsy, robust sound; the second a melancholy, sweet quality; the third a square cleanliness. We listened, interpretively reflected on these qualities, and decided that melancholy sweetness would best match the mood of the Armenian folk tunes within the solo concerto. Words were not necessary. Obviously, this level of musical communication is quite sophisticated. It relies on years of musical training, listening, and interpretive understanding. However, if you layer away the training and skills, we arrive at the underlying discrimination of differences in sound. The discrimination of sound, prior to any formal training, is where music aptitude begins. Music exists through sound. Sound develops into music through combinations of rhythm, loudness, pitch, and the different qualities of these sounds. Music psychologists define the capacity to sense these musical components as music aptitude. The more discriminately one senses subtle differences in these components, the higher one’s music aptitude. Music aptitude combines inherent musical capacities with listening skills that may develop without formal training or education.

The Quest

A point has been reached in this discussion of musical talent and its identification where some concrete questions must be answered. We have examined perspectives of talent across fields and synthesized a simple set of musical talent criteria. Will teachers and musicians agree that these criteria are valid indicators of talent in students they teach on a daily basis? What must be added to define this criteria further? We recognize the need to identify talented students in music; however, we have yet to find an effective procedure to carry out this identification. What is the best way to unveil potential as well as demonstrated talent in a variety of school settings? The research discussed in this chapter sought to answer these pressing questions. This personal quest began with an analysis of data from the National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented (NRC G/T) at the University of Virginia, augmented by data from different specialized schools. This analysis provided a look at the status quo of what criteria and procedures were currently being used in schools across the country. A survey containing criteria and procedures drawn from this analysis was sent to musicians, teachers, researchers, and specialists across the music and gifted fields in over 15 states. My goal was to see which criteria were deemed “absolutely essential” by people who work with talented music students. In addition, what procedures are currently being used and what types of activities will effectively reveal musical talent? The survey also sought opinions about what performance criteria were important to consider on assessment forms. Quantitative results created a list of criteria and procedures that showed their degree of importance according to the mean of the survey rating scales. Numbers on paper provide quantitative results. However, discussions with experts across the music and gifted fields could allow clarification of ideas, substantive qualitative input, and brainstorming of possible procedures for identification that all seem invaluable for answering questions concerning musical talent. Therefore, this research concluded with a set of interviews of experts across the music and gifted fields of education, research, performance, and psychology to gather this vital information.

Reflections

The Grand Canyon scene from chapter one seems a distant memory now that we have examined the perspectives of musical talent from experts across different fields. A synthesis of the ideas gleaned from these opening chapters can be embodied once again in that scene and those four friends. The scientific examiner searches beneath the surface for answers. He analyzes the inner core, piece by piece. The psychometricians who systematically refine the measurement of the capacities of music aptitude believe in analyzing the sensory core of musical talent. From this scientific perspective, we learn that the talented musician listens carefully and can discriminate differences in sound. Music aptitude describes the basic capacities that provide this keen discrimination. A musically talented person is fine-tuned in awareness and differentiation of pitch, rhythm, dynamics, and timbre. Our environmental observer searches for answers revealed in surrounding influences and changes over the course of time. She is more concerned with examining how the ongoing flux and flow transforms the whole. The developmental psychologists who examine music intelligence agree that music aptitude is the sensory base of musical talent. However, there is much more to consider and explore. How do these sensory capacities function while engaged in real musical tasks? What tasks can instill metaperceptive functioning as the child develops? From the perspective of the cognitive developmental psychologist, we learn that musical intelligence is a perceptive/cognitive unique way of knowing. The musically talented student develops musical intelligence by solving challenging musical problems that inventively work across the dimensions of performance, composing, improvisation, listening, and critiquing musical work. Our photographer captures the scene through an artistic eye, ever searching for a personal way to interpret this experience to others through his art form. Many hours are spent in the darkroom working through this creative process. With persistence, time, and focus, that personal visual statement will emerge. The performer realizes musical talent through the same artistic process, with the same persistence, focus, and hours of practice.

Talent as Creativity

It was a few minutes past four on a Thursday, and I knew Andrew had arrived for a piano lesson. He bounded down the stairs, arrived at the piano bench with a thud, propped his dog-eared manuscript book on the piano, and looked at me with his determined “let’s get started” smile—a delightfully talented young man of 15 about to share his latest composition with a welcome audience of one. He asked, “Do you know the speech from Julius Caesar, ‘It must be by his death?’” I was unfamiliar with this bit of Shakespeare. He then dramatically went through the well-memorized speech, turning a bit red in the face as he shared this unfamiliar type of performance with his piano teacher. He motioned to his scribbled score, hands on the keyboard. “And this is also the speech.” He then began his composition, peppering the performance with “this is fate” or “B-flat is death” to explain his motivic creative connections. The piece ended with a low B-flat repeatedly resonating as it died away (smorzando). The musical creative process involves realizing sounds internally and communicating them to others in a unique way. Andrew discovered a personal way to interpret and communicate Shakespeare through the language of music. When we think of creative music-makers, we immediately envision the inspired composer, scrawling creative ideas on paper. We also recognize the jazz musician who jams through the night, improvising at will. On a simpler plane, the young child in musical play is spontaneously creating through sound. These are the generative music-makers, creating music from scratch. In the preceding chapter, we examined the creative-interpretive process of a musician who performs music from a written score. This deliberate decision-making process requires constant internal perceptive/cognitive manipulations (metaperception) to discover how to express a personal emotion through sound. The resulting creative interpretation communicates sounds that describe the expressive intent of the musician. The performer is the creative interpreter of music. If we expand our perspective further, the person who listens perceptively and can communicate the idea of these sounds through words also shows musically creative talent.