It is all social conditioning. Positive and negative reinforcement. Allowing others to have power over your dreams and your life. Talent/no-talent. Talent is saying: "you'll be good, keeping working hard at that." No talent is saying: "you stink, give up your ambitions you will amount to nothing". This is why it's most important to rid of believing in talent: Don't let those opinions or ideas control you. All that matters is what you think of yourself and believe you can do. You wouldn't let/don't have to let someone affect your self-esteem would you? It's only something you can give to yourself.
Last Edited by on May 11, 2010 12:48 AM
Simply put, Chris hasn't yet met an eleven-year-old who reached performer's diploma standard on the violin after 9 months, or an oboist who got grade 8 after 3 months. (I've met both)
Chris's stance is admirable if he is trying to persuade people that they can do whatever they want to do (it's always good to tell them they can, even if it's a lie or an impossible dream), but he's merely twisting words if he wants to turn it into a philosophy. One approach he might take is to say that people have different learning speeds and that talent is only definable if there's a break point - like a sonic barrier. If there's a continuum of learning speeds, then talent doesn't exist. That's just sophistry. For example, say everyone, no matter how slow they learn, is capable of singing like Maria Callas or Pavarotti or play guitar like Hendrix if they practice for 600 years. There's that little thing called death that intervenes and slows down their progress to a standstill. Or Chris might brush that one off by saying that genius exists, talent doesn't. Whatever! It's sophistry. ---------- Kinda hot in these rhinos!
"I'm pretty convinced that lots of aesthetic activities, lots of sports, lots of verbal activities, math, whatever, you don't need talent to get good at them. But you do need confidence that you can learn them, even in the face of discouraging early results, and you do need to be intelligent and persistent about how you study and practice."
That's been my experience with Arabic. First I sat an aptitude test that said I could learn difficult languages but that I WOULD find it a challenge. Also that I am a visual learner - which means spoken comprehension was going to be the challenge - not reading and writing. So, no illusions going in.
Second, I spoke Chinese and Malay as a child (but forgot all of it) so I kind of figured maybe that would help in some way. I do think that experience gave me a good ear for mimmickry and that's how I spent about 5 years in radio doing voice over work and impersonations. In hindsight, this has meant that I pick up on body language immediately and absorb it rapidly (visual learner, again). So while I may not "hear" every word spoken to me in Arabic, I judge the situation immediately and read the person. Although now I do speak and understand it well, I think this skill gave me confidence to keep going and take risks.
Third, I am fearless. I don't care about screwing up in public. I am always looking towards the end goal.
And, still, today, I am always asking others about their personal study methods, in the hope that I will find the key to easy success. That quest and my own hard work has helped me develop study methodologies that I think are working, but there are always frustrations.
On the other hand, when it comes to sleight of hand, I could do the hard stuff immediately and never had trouble learning anything - while I know thousands of others interested in the same field will never get beyond a rudimentary stage, no matter how much they burn to be able to master the tough stuff.
I only really thought about this when I started giving paid lessons to magicians. I became frustrated that many could not grasp the simple details immediately. So I set myself a challenge to learn right-handed card moves for a left-handed person. In other words to learn how to catch and throw with the wrong hand. I mastered a range of card and dice cheating moves using the "wrong hand" and it opened my eyes because it put me in the position of someone facing seemingly insurmountable obstacles to progress. As with anything, I overcame those through sheer determination and hard work.
So, "talent" is relative.
(This video is the sort of stuff that comes easy to me - using a normal pack of cards and a range of slieghts I invented myself... when it comes to Arabic and playing the harp, on the other hand, I really have to work on it - it's no easy road).
Ev: I do sleight of hand magic as well...ala Jeff McBride card manipulation. i saw something when i watched worlds greatest magic on tv years ago... i thought it was a mistake. i saw when it was on again and recorded it. i replayed it on my vcr over and over again till i realized what he was doing. and i spent almost a year doing it. it was only when i was at the end of all that i wanted to know that i learned he had educational vids out explaining what he does in detail. buying them was a waste of time, id taught myself almost verbatim, everything explained in the vids...
the talent, if there is one, was being able to close my eyes and visualize myself doing that kind of magic. granted it wasnt easy going at first... full of complications and unanswered questions, but i fought thru it quickly and got where i wanted to be.
talent IS relative, but no one will EVER convince me that it doesnt exist.
MAL its okay to repeat your opinions.. even if you say they are based on fact, the fact is, its repeating someone elses opinion that they say is fact. again, just because you dont believe in it, doesnt mean it doesnt exist. your "talent/no talent" statement above couldnt be more off...how you explained that would be an indication of skill, not talent... ---------- Kyzer's Travels Kyzer's Artwork
Last Edited by on May 11, 2010 4:06 AM
I agree Kyzer, and my definition of talent aligns with htownfess, above. It's about how you're wired physically and/or mentally - but it doesn't guarantee mastery.
I know other people who have a talent for learning language but NIL talent for social interaction or cultural dynamics. As a result, those people are often less effective than someone who struggled to get to the required level and may technically occupy a lower level.
The same is true in music. Some guys will master everything but not be able to create music that is memorable. Others may learn 3 chords and start a revolution. Maybe one has a talent for absorbing information and the other a talent for communication. They're both talented.
I believe in talent. Maybe genetic Karmic or both. Good karma being born into a family with good musical genes. My father had more talent than most people on the planet perfect pitch and starting his music degree at the Royal Conservatory of Naples at age 14. This was a scholarship won competing with 45 other kids. He was an American to boot. My Uncle on my mothers side was a famous philly sax player having the alto chair at the legendary Latin Casino.
My great nephew is an incredible drummer at age 16. after only two year of study he blew away every kid at the school of rock.
My great niece is the National Top dance champion for the last two years runner up as over all dancer. You gotta have rhythm for that.
Their parents are supportive. Spending more money per year than most people spend on college.
"For example, say everyone, no matter how slow they learn, is capable of singing like Maria Callas or Pavarotti or play guitar like Hendrix if they practice for 600 years."
This is the deal, you can't work to sing or play like anybody else, but you can work to be yourself at your optimum level or above.
I do believe Genius exists but in my book talent is a label created by people who think they can not do what others can.
I truly believe everybody is capable at being great at something. For me, I assume all of you want to achieve greatness at playing the harmonica which is why I share what I can to help you progress. I worked harder than most of you to get to where I am with the instrument so you don't have to and can instead use your energy to go further in the harmonica world than I possible could.
I think it's bullshit for people to think that things come easier for me than for others. Ten years ago, I orchestrated the largest and the best harmonica event ever. At the same time I also created one of the top metropolitan jazz festivals that is still going strong today. I had zero experience in special event planning yet I still accomplished in four months what some will never ever attempt in their lifetime. Did I suddenly gain a talent for special event planning? NO I worked my ass off. I literally spent 15-20 hours per day thinking, researching, planning and manifesting the festival. By the end of the Festival, I was physically ill and collapsed, that's how much effort I put into it.
When I played football in college, I would often push myself until I puked and then would continue on. I was always told that I was unfortunate to be so short because I had the proper attitude to make it in the NFL. Then I got my pelvis cracked and shoulder dislocated at the same time and being physical at a high level was over for me.
All I want, all I expect is for me and you to be the best that you can be. Singing like Pavoratti or playing like Hendrix can not be achieved by any of us because we are not them and this is the problem with the talent label. People FOLLOW too much, people COVET too much and do stupid things like try to be like Pavarotti or play like Hendrix when what they should be doing is trying to play like themselves.
@thegloth "When I think "talent", it has nothing to do with technical skills or virtuosity, but more with tastefullness and creativity."
That's what you're conditioned to think. I spoke earlier about being "connected" to the universe. You have to create pathways in your physical being so you are able to do what you think. Mentally disabled aside, ALL of you already have this ability if you know how to write with a pencil. If you can think a word and write it down on paper then you are doing the same thing as playing music but in a different context. If you can think of a word and then SPEAK it, then you are doing the same thing as playing music but in a different context.
Writing, speaking and playing music are all the same thing. You hear about people like me working extremely hard to play music but that's only because I haven't been submersed in a musical world since the moment I was born. Think about it. From the moment of birth we were being talked to, we heard words and after about a year or so we developed the pathways to mimic those words. Then mama starts giving you big markers to draw with where even the slightest mark on a piece of paper draws great praise.
Simply put, the creative arts are just another form of communication. The problem is, that most of us weren't started out at birth so we have to work at an obsessive level to "catch up" to where our other communication levels are.
When I see somebody who can't do something, I think one of two things, they work on too many things at once or they are lazy.
I read some of EV630's posts who really isn't much different from me. Where he spent time learning multiple languages, card trick, harmonica and who knows what else, I was focused solely on harmonica. EV is not a bad harmonica player but his playing reeks of a person who was not supremely dedicated to the harmonica. In short, I can tell he took short cuts to get to his current result. And that's the issue with most people, they want the end result but are not willing to put in the time and effort to do it correctly. There is no substitute for hard work and experience other than hard work and experience.
---------- "The privilege of a lifetime is being who you are." - Joseph Campbell
I've tediously scrolled through this entire thread with great interest. I'd love to generate a thoughtful and considered response because I feel I have a lot to say. However, I am limited to typing with my thumbs on a 3 inch keyboard. Egads.
I can read Das Boota's point very clearly. And, I can easily envision him saying it in his voice. I can also understand each point and position taken by several others. This is a very captivating thread for me on a personal level for many reasons that are too large to expand on for the reason stated above.
In short, it is possible that there needs a definition of nomenclature and an agreement on semantics.
Could it be that we need to better quantify the words "talent", "skill" and "aptitude"?
thanks Diggs, but that's not it, anybody can do that. Most people are conditioned to look for reasons why they can't do something, I believe I and everybody else can do anything they set their minds on. Gussow will fight me on that point but when a person has an idea and then makes a decision to do then you've created a goal for yourself. You now have point A and B in your head and on an unconscious level, you will work to get from point to point.
Whether or not I/we actually can achieve all goals doesn't matter. Any bit of doubt means you haven't really made a decision and it means that you have severely lessened your chance to achieve anything. As Leo Burnett used to say, "Reach for the stars, you may not get one but you won't come up with a handful of mud either."
---------- "The privilege of a lifetime is being who you are." - Joseph Campbell
Last Edited by on May 11, 2010 8:02 AM
"Whether or not I/we actually can achieve all goals doesn't matter. Any bit of doubt means you haven't really made a decision and it means that you have severely lessened your chance to achieve anything. As Leo Burnett used to say, "Reach for the stars, you may not get one but you won't come up with a handful of mud either."
@ Buddha, EXACTLY.
Hence my real world definitions:
Talent: A defense mechanism used to prevent one from acquiring skill.
Skill: A specific set or subset of abilities that starts with an initial goal and that one achieves through dedication and hard work.
Aptitude: An irrelevant pre-determined measure of a persons skills before they have put in their 10,000 hours.
Last Edited by on May 11, 2010 8:38 AM
"EV is not a bad harmonica player but his playing reeks of a person who was not supremely dedicated to the harmonica. In short, I can tell he took short cuts to get to his current result."
Now you've done it. I'm off to go swimming in my money vault to make me feel better.
Ev630: Just give me the word and I’ll take Buddha out for you! He doesn’t know what I look like so when he goes to SPAH this year, when he least suspects it, I’ll sneak up on him and throw an up-close 10 hole, Whammer Jammer blowbend that will make his eyes cross! If I do it correctly and channel enough energy…. Who knows what could happen! (Maybe he’ll just feel sorry for me and offer me a free lesson.)
Totally not a threat Buddha. I was obviously just trying to keep things light. I hope you can understand that. I'll introduce myself when we meet so you will know who I am.
Chris and MichaelAndrewLo, you are committing a logical fallacy, and I think that pride (in your work ethic) is blinding you to it.
I agree with whoever said that genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration (having read many biographies of geniuses), but I do feel that talent exists at least.
The person who asserts that he has no talent is merely (usually) in denial that he's a lazy bum, and that's not sufficient for you to believe that talent doesn't exist at all in anyone! "Talent doesn't exist" may suffice as a scornful retort to such a person, but it isn't a true statement.
But for me talent and aptitude are synonyms. It may be that you are redefining talent to suit your own purposes. ---------- Kinda hot in these rhinos!
"Totally not a threat Buddha. I was obviously just trying to keep things light. I hope you can understand that. I'll introduce myself when we meet so you will know who I am."
Fine but your words speak otherwise. Announcing that you're prepared to take somebody out is not light humour.
@Andrew, I don't consider myself talent but how can you call me lazy? Do you believe I was born with the ability to play harmonica?
Talent is a label given to relatively successful others by people who are seemingly lazy.
---------- "The privilege of a lifetime is being who you are." - Joseph Campbell
Last Edited by on May 11, 2010 9:29 AM
Chris, when I said I was going to throw a 10 whole overbend at you... My family hates that note when I play it! Really, you like to push peoples buttons a bit...I really just wanted to give you a little crap...I only give crap to people I like. More a peace offering than anything. I'd rather be getting positive energy out of all this you know...
"@Andrew, I don't consider myself talent but how can you call me lazy?"
I didn't realise you would misread me. I should have written more explicitly, it seems, "The person who achieves nothing and asserts that it is because he has no talent is merely (usually) in denial that he's a lazy bum, and that's not sufficient for you to believe that talent doesn't exist at all in anyone!"
"Do you believe I was born with the ability to play harmonica?" You can see in my postings that I don't.
---------- Kinda hot in these rhinos!
Last Edited by on May 11, 2010 9:39 AM
@Andrew, I understand now and agree to a portion of it. Likewise a lazy bum will call somebody talented as an excuse for why he can't do what the talented person does.
Seems we're at an impasse with this one.
---------- "The privilege of a lifetime is being who you are." - Joseph Campbell
Last Edited by on May 11, 2010 10:54 AM
Buddah- I think you were stepping over the line with your comment to EV630. I usually agree with you,but I have to take exception to that one. I interpreted Joch's post as a good natured poke and not a threat. You can do no permanent damage with the ten hole blow.
Back to topic: MAL- So what you are telling me is if I decide to learn physics,if I eat,live and breathe physics-dedicate my whole life to it,I will become the next Einstein. If that were the case,there would have been several by now. Sorry,I can't buy that. I do believe in the power of positive thinking,but it can't make you an Einstein.
Last Edited by on May 11, 2010 9:46 AM
Chris....peace then. I actually spent an hour or so last night playing along with your SwingThing, stray cat strut, Pink Panther tune in 3rd position. I had been playing along with Jasons "When I Hurt Myself" song in 3rd position for a while to learn the position better. That' one of my favorite Ricci tunes. Your tune has some nice changes and I'm learning a lot. My wife even smiled when I did the Pink Panther part.
@tuckster, was it an insult or reality? EV is clearly an intelligent person and I merely said, in other words, that he could be a great harmonica player IF he wasn't focused on card tricks and speaking other languages.
EV630 takes pride in his abilities and rightly so however he's somewhat delusional in where he really is on the harmonica. I think he has what it takes to be great and it's clear he would like to be but he's taken many short cuts with his playing to get to the end result as evidence by many of his foundational holes in his technique.
Using the words "take out" and indicating he might ambush me is NOT light hearted humour nor is it good natured. Now you're comments are very good natured which is why you get the instant respect from me and I note your comment about me being over the line. Perhaps you're correct. ---------- "The privilege of a lifetime is being who you are." - Joseph Campbell
I remember back in school I had a conducting class. To the left and right of me were two friends both had perfect pitch and were monster keyboard players. They never worked at conducting and both sucked. I worked my ass off and was way better than both of of them getting an A in the class. They didn't flunk because of their talent but didn't excel either.
MAL, you're using loaded definitions. If you choose definitions to suite your cause instead of trying to reach common consensus on definitions you don't get honest exchange of ideas. I think the other side of the argument is using talent to mean a baseline skill or aptitude that wasn't acquired through work.
Since harmonica seems so near and dear to everyone's heart, let's use another example, one Buddha eluded to. Footballplayer Americanus. Footballplayer Americanus tends to be a big fellow. Having genes that get him to at least average size is important. Bone structure can be augmented by large doses of calcium, but only within limits. Caloric intake, well, most people can put on weight, but some people just can't (unless they are willing to resort to steriods.) FBPA needs high natural levels of testosterone to help build the muscles he'll need to be fast and strong. Testosterone levels can be augmented by certain behaviors, but different prospects will have different base levels. His first coach will probably sort kids out by size. The tiny kid my aspire to be a center, but he can't will himself to be taller (although there are drugs for that!) and if he doesn't have high levels of testosterone he won't be able to add muscle mass as fast as his teammates. To give you an example of how much humans very when it comes to testosterone levels there are essentially two testosterone bell curves in our species, one for men, one for women. And let's not forget that maybe 1/32 people fall into the 'other' category and may have different levels altogether. (Numbers from my friend who was a Woman's Study Major).
Some will have deformities in their knees that allow the kneecap to slide painfully out of place even during simple no-contact turns. (Been there, done that.) The brain chemistry will be different as well. Some will have bi-polar disorder. For others that will be the result of years of punishing collisions. Unless properly medicated the bi-polar types will likely only practice some of the time and will over do it the rest of the time. They may not learn the restraint needed to understand complex offenses or defenses.
FBPA Subject 1 may be in a car accident while Subject 2 is not. (It wasn't either one's fault, they were both kids at the time it did or didn't happen, sitting quietly in their car seat.) This suggests a third factor, luck, may be involved. Luck can also be seen in the case of Subjects 3 and 4, two identical twins who were separated at birth, one going to an affluent suburb, the other to an abusive home. Ironically, the affluent Subject 3 was discouraged from playing violent sports while Subject 4 was encouraged. In fact, only when his team won did he get any signs of love and attention. Still, both subjects got to choose their actions. 3 wasn't prohibited from violent sports, just discouraged. We'll call that effort.
Studies have shown that different populations have different frequencies of genes for slow twitch or fast twitch muscle. Of course the 'race' of those subjects actually doesn't matter, just the presence of the gene. There is another gene, only seen on a couple of occasions, but common in certain breeds of dogs like the bully whippet, that stimulate the production of both types at extremely exaggerated rates. The NFL is hoping for more people with the bully whippet gene. The slow twitch muscle gene creates distance runners. The fast twitch gene creates sprinters. Athletes who specialize in the wrong gene are unlikely, despite all their work, to be great. If they work hard and smartly, taking advantage of the genes they are given they are likely to excel.
The athletes with poor eyesight don't do as well, although glasses and surgery can help. There is less hope for the small handed athlete. Not only can't he eat a Whopper without feeling self conscious, he will have difficulty getting his hands around a large football. He may be OK at catching, but his career as a QB is probably finished. (I was a great quarterback with a Nerf football, but with a real football I couldn't get my thumb around to control the ball.)
Subject 5 has huge hands, but suffers from a trick knee, as mentioned before, and early onset arthritis. By the time he is 23 he is washed up. He takes up harmonica and his huge hands give him great wah, at least until the arthritis takes even that joy from him.
No FBPA's were hurt during the writing of this post. All characters are fictional, except where specific mentioned.
The point is every person has thousands of data points on their DNA. Any one of them could turn out to be a bane or a boon. Fortunately, the sheer number means that usually for every couple bad genes you get a couple good ones too. They roughly balance out. Bad ones in particular can really mess things up. A bad gene in your heart can be fatal. There are always going to be curve busters though. I've loved music my whole life. I made a mistake by picking the baritone as my first instrument, it discouraged me. I tried guitar and piano, but I got bad genes. I get tendinitis really easily. I suffered through carpal tunnel and had to have surgery for arthritis in my shoulder before I was 30. Happily I finally gave harmonica a chance and am progressing.
I'm not arguing that most people can't get good at something if they try really hard, but people who have a strong work ethic can fall into a trap of believing that it is only hard work that got them there. It's hard work, a little luck and some talent. When you follow your logic to it's conclusion you start making moral judgments on people's worth based on whether they are successful or not. I have no problem that you feel you deserve to be as good as you are. You know what, you do. You did the hard work part. But there are other people out there who have done the hard work part too who will never get to where you are, even if they study using the best techniques. (Mind you I'm not claiming to work that hard on harmonica, but I have on other things. I was lucky enough to get some good genes in with the bad genes (curse my tiny hands). I'm pretty good at some things I didn't work hard at. I'm very good at some things I did work at. And I'm also not so good at some things I worked really really hard at.
Chris. I grew up in Frogtown too! From the 60's to early 70's. On 581 Van Buren. It got too rough then and we moved up to the Midway area. The white kids lived north of University and the black kids, south of University. The influx of the Asian kids was just starting when I was older.
There would be big fights from time to time. When I was smaller, I thought they were just like snowball fights and we used to rub popsical sticks on the ground to make them sharp and be more like the older kids. When I got older, my cousin went to Central High. He was a smallish white kid and had to carry a switchblade so he wouldn't get picked on. I was too afraid to go there so I paid my own way to go to St. Agnes HIgh...a private school. My grandparents both lived on Thomas Ave. by Dale street. It was not a good place to go to visit. I can understand how you feel. We can talk more at SPAH.
With all due respect,I've had a gun to my head, been in a wide variety of violent situations, I still don't scare easy or overeact to obvious jokes nor do I feel the need to have a dumb animal protect me. I think maybe Bubbha is a little paranoid and should speak to a professional.
"And I'm also not so good at some things I worked really really hard at."
Perfect practice makes perfect. I assert you didn't work properly, working hard on the wrong things will note make you great.
You can work hard learning all of the harmonica techniques and all the music theory in the world but you'll never be a great musician if you don't work on the things that really make the music.
Jason Rosenblatt can play circles around me. His technique is phenomenal but I can't stand most of his music but it lacks the other major parts of music...many of the things I listed earlier in this thread.
---------- "The privilege of a lifetime is being who you are." - Joseph Campbell
"Tell your story of when you struggled to live while buckets of blood are pouring out of you as a child."
I'm sure I couldn't match that, I soaked a towel once, but I don't think it would have filled a bucket! I'm not one to want to re-live certain parts of my past (especially childhood) let alone share it on a public forum.
By the way I do respect your obvious hard work and technical abilities for what that's worth. Although your music is a little too "heady" for me.
Also I am a dog lover and my dogs are one of the most important things in my life. I have never understood why the world needs attack dogs. To me it is abuse of the dog. You obviously love your dog and take care of him, I can like a person a lot for that alone.
I would expect that anyone that has experienced the kind of humiliation and agony you have, would have a great feel for the blues. JD
Last Edited by on May 11, 2010 10:57 AM
"I have never understood why the world needs attack dogs. To me it is abuse to the dog."
It's not abuse. Not even close. Its actually one of the best things you can do with your dog. I don't do it for personal protection, I'm into French Ring, Schutzhund and Mondio. These dog sports tests the dog and you as a trainer and handler. These dogs are trained to much higher levels than typical police and military dogs.
Ill treated and otherwise abused dogs can not and will not perform as a bite trained dog. You probably have the typical low-life definition of attack dog in your head where a dog is taught that all people are a threat and the dog reacts out of fear. Lots of drug dealer dogs are trained for that. There is only one way to train it, get a dog, muzzle it, tie it in a corner and have have everybody the dog sees except the owner come and kick, punch or whack the dog with a stick. THAT'S ABUSE and something I don't condone.
My dogs are trained in a very positive way and they are taught that people are nothing more than a tug toy. They are also trained to a very a high and very strict level of obedience. In short, it's something that is very very fun for the dog because it's uses their natural abilities to their fullest extent.
Watch these vids. The dogs may seem vicious but if you know how to read a dog all they want is the equipment. Does your dog ever bark at you for a treat or ball? It's the same thing. The intensity you see in these dogs has more to do with the breed (Malinois) than anything else. They are the considered the ultimate working breed but they are very hard to handle for the average person. Malis are crazy and if you know how to channel their energy it will be the best dog you've ever had. I highly suggest you investigate a Ring or Schutzhund club in your area. It's highly addictive and you'll learn more about dog then you ever thought possible.
---------- "The privilege of a lifetime is being who you are." - Joseph Campbell
This is my Rottweiler, you can see here that all my dog really wanted was the bite jacket. I didn't worry one bit that he might reattck the guy on the ground.
This is my Mali. He's not as advanced as my Rott because he's three years younger but he sure is talented!
---------- "The privilege of a lifetime is being who you are." - Joseph Campbell
"You probably have the typical low-life definition of attack dog in your head where a dog is taught that all people are a threat and the dog reacts out of fear. Lots of drug dealer dogs are trained for that."
Now that I'd take a much stronger stand on. That is blatant cruelty.
No, I certainly am a little better informed about dog training than that. (I don't use or deal drugs, including alcohol, either) I am all for working dogs having jobs, bird dogs getting to do what they are bred for, I have an aussie cattle dog that really needs a herd.......etc. I just have a problemn with the attack dog thing, my friend that trains dogs for law enforcement certainly has argued the point with me, but I would not have a dog do my bidding. I'm fine with dogs doing non violent jobs, all for it. I'm sure my dogs would of their own choice jump to my defense if I were in danger, but I wouldn't choose to have them do that. I'm not saying I'm certainly right, it's just how I feel about it personally. I guess it's that I would rather put myself in danger than my dog. Not campaigning, but before I said I like that you handle dogs and care for them, I wanted to say I don't care for the attack aspect so much. I will consider what you say and I have to admit you've influenced my thinking a bit on the subject. regards, JD
I could seriously devote several years to drawing or painting and my grandaughters stick people would still look better than mine. My singing sucks. Go beyond changing a flat tire and I'm lost when it comes to car repair. Many more.
On the other hand. Math is easy for me. I have competed at the national level in pocket billiards. Harmonica thing is coming along.
If you watch ten 10 year olds, trying to learn to play basketball, in just a few minutes you will know which ones have talent.
Find your talent, apply a hard work ethic, and who knows.
Don't think of it as attack dog, that's where you're slightly off. It's a sport and dogs trained this way have far more control and stability to them. Unstable dogs can't work.
The other fallacy you carry is to think your dog would jump up to protect you in a violent situation. 99% of untrained dogs aren't going to do anything in the face of violence. I can't tell you how many knuckheads have come out to the club with their "badass" pit bulls We tell then they are not good protection dogs and they fight you on the matter so we bet them lunch that their dog will do nothing if the owner is attacked. So one of us puts on the suit and yells at the owners, we grab them and wrestle to the ground. What happens? The dog usually runs or barks like an idiot.
I trust my bite trained dogs around children and people that don't look or smell like buzadero. ---------- "The privilege of a lifetime is being who you are." - Joseph Campbell
The two I have now, not sure, doesn't matter, I'm quite capable of taking care of myself, even at 59 and I prefer that. But I had a Great Dane, one of the most docile breeds I know of, in my twenties, he attacked twice in my defense, once when a friend tried to throw me in the river just clownin' around at the swimming hole, and another time when a state trooper approached the drivers side window of my car a liitle too fast. He almost got the troopers arm, could have been ugly. Later we had a lab/shepard mix that was so defensive of the family he was a constant pain in the ass.
BTW I don't attempt to measure talent, and I have spread my work over too many instruments to ever achieve your level of ability playing harmonica. I play six instruments and it's about the music to me, not the instrument. I haven't had any desire to be a proffessional musician since I was very young, it just wasn't the kind of money I was after. I play because I need to, just like my aussie needs to herd.
You mentioned Jim McLaughlin in a post a while back. Do you know Jim? He went to the same Highschool I did, he's three years younger than me, lives about a mile away. We hung a little years ago, he certainly does spaz out! He's a generous guy though, ole crazy Jim. JD
Last Edited by on May 11, 2010 12:36 PM
i know ive mentioned it before, but my cousin has a mastiff. hes probably 200 pounds, maybe more. if theres one thing i know for certain about that breed, it is that no one messes with his master in his presence. in ANY fashion...to do so is a fools folly. to hear his growl would strike fear in any human...i think it is part of their heritage and long-standing reputations as guardians that drives him to do so....if strangers are around, the dog instinctively puts himself in between his master and the stranger until the master acknowledges a friendly connection. they are very regal beasts, and i look forward to owning one as soon as i get a place of my own...
heres a good vid of a mastiff about 200lbs and his master that looks to be about 250 or so...
99% of untrained dogs aren't going to do anything in the face of violence.
My dog when I was young was a Rat Terrier mutt mix. Very protective of me in the face of danger. I was getting robbed while collecting for my paper route (happened more than once) and the guys were shoving snow down my back. My dog knew the paper route and usually walked ahead a ways. Somehow he knew I was in trouble, flew around the corner and got ahold of one of the guys hands....blood flying in the snow! The were going to catch him and kill him but he stayed just far enough way that they couldn't and they finally said they better get out of here. Just a little dog but fearless.
I still think my guys would try to defend me, they might not fair well, but I don't think they'd stand by and watch the guy that buys the dogfood get hurt! JD
i think the comparison of athletes that have talent, (football) as posted earlier, has much more to do with genetics than anything else. the talent for a genetically superior human who plays sports could lie in his or her ability to predict the moves of thier opposition or to have a touch (MJ or Gretsky) that just cant be learned...or to have a more finely tuned focus to the task at hand. (perhaps being more constantly in the "zone") ---------- Kyzer's Travels Kyzer's Artwork
"That's profiling. It doesn't matter if it's coming from you or the Canine Americans. Pointing out the hygienically challenged is way out of line."
Whatever, I'm in AZ and it's legal to do that stuff here.
@JDH- I met Jim originally in 1991 and I caught his attention because I could OB. He truly is nuts and I love that. One year at SPAH he comes running in during the middle of a jam, he had a sack full of harmonicas and dumped them all over the floor. "I need my mouth organ to play on this one" It was a huge dildo with a cutout for a harmonica. All of those old guys turned white as a ghost.
I like ACDs and they certainly can do schutzhund. You live in Washington? Go to this club, it's one of the best in the US. http://dogequipment.com/csc/ ---------- "The privilege of a lifetime is being who you are." - Joseph Campbell
That club would be perfect for my ACD, unfortunately it's 87 miles through the worst tradffic in the state away. Thanks though.
The Jim Mc story is a classic, I can't wait to run into him. I should give him a call, he hasn't been well, you may not know, but he was diagnosed with hepC several years ago. I guess I haven't seen him since the last Hummel blowout, been a while. JD
Tuckster and Joch, thanks for the support but it's not necessary. I don't think anyone who understands Buddha's idiosyncrasies can really take offense at them. I don't - even if I sometimes press his buttons for the fun of it.
@tuckster, was it an insult or reality? EV is clearly an intelligent person and I merely said, in other words, that he could be a great harmonica player IF he wasn't focused on card tricks and speaking other languages.
That's very kind. Thanks Chris.
EV630 takes pride in his abilities and rightly so however he's somewhat delusional in where he really is on the harmonica.
No, I think that interpretation is wrong, Chris. I consider myself a competent blues player, technically - but with solid tone. Nothing more. I have never represented myself as anything more than that. My vids are about demoing amps I like, and supporting my opinion that a classic guitar amp is all you need for good tone. I do not consider myself a technical player but I also do not agree that every technique is required to communicate in music.
I think he has what it takes to be great and it's clear he would like to be but he's taken many short cuts with his playing to get to the end result as evidence by many of his foundational holes in his technique.
You may be right. I mean about the holes in my technique, not about the potential to be great. When I hear Dennis Gruenling and Kim Wilson and Rick Estrin play, I know I'll never be great.
But then, it's not a priority for me right now. My current priority is to master Arabic. Music is just an escape valve from the agony of undertaking that goal.
"I consider myself a competent blues player, technically - but with solid tone. Nothing more."
That's accurate and I have nothing else to say. Knowing where you are with your instrument is necessary for improvement if one is choosing to improve. ---------- "The privilege of a lifetime is being who you are." - Joseph Campbell
