", , , ever since I first heard the cello I wanted to play it."
A Naples Daily News profile of 13-year-old cellist Jared Blajian. “I think it’s something I was meant to do” he says, “because ever since I first heard the cello I wanted to play it.”
The cello is Jared’s lifeblood, his release. If he has a stressful day at school, he’ll come home and, within a half hour, he let it all out in through the vision of master composers.
. . .
Jared practices almost three hours a day, every day. He sits in the study and plays, barefoot, in a T-shirt and shorts with brown hair falling lazily across his forehead. He methodically works his way through at work, tilting his head slightly toward the strings as if he’s listening to words no one else can hear. Hours later he emerges from the room to grab a bite to eat or to watch a video of an orchestra performing. Then he returns to the study.
2 comments:
I have played some or another instrument as an amatuer since I was 12 and it's been an important part of my life, and I've spent many enjoyable hours doing it. Yet I question whether practicing cello 3 hours a day, by himself (so that doesn't count orchestral practice with others), is a healthy thing for a 13 year old. There's so much else to learn and experience.
While I'm in a non-PC mood, I also question the worth of a college degree in instrumental performance. Is it right to train kids into finely-tuned but otherwise inexperienced and uneducated instrument playing machines?
The article does point out how his mom works to make sure he has an at least somewhat balanced life.
OTOH, sometimes one finds one's calling early. 3 hours a day is actually good, and pretty normal, for a kid with professional aspirations. I'm sure his total musical involvement is no greater than a serious swimmer, for example, based on my son's experience.
And college instrumental degrees, particularly at schools like DePauw, Oberlin, Lawrence, etc., have significant liberal-arts components even in the most performance related degrees. As a matter of fact, all NASM-accredited Bachelor of Music degrees must have a minimum of 25% of non-music courses. Especially at the shcools I mentioned and other similar ones, our students graduate as competent writers, speakers, critical thinkers, and people who have had exposure to a range of non-music subjects. Many of DePauw's performance majors even complete a second major in a non-music subject.
The sort of blinders-on-all-the-time educations you speak of is of dubious value, in my opinion as well. As is the classical-only nature of most conservatory education, and the lack of training in real-world career skills.
Post a Comment