 sj |
||
|
||
Talented or nice?
|
|
|
Subject: Talented or nice? From: The Shambles Date: 21 Jul 00 - 05:40 AM There are talented people. There are nice people. There are also many talented nice people.
There are talented people who are not nice
Does the fact that someone is talented make it OK for them to be not nice?
It appears to me sometimes that we do have double standards. Almost to the extent of expecting talented people not to be nice, as if their talent excuses them from all the usual rules and social graces. Does this actually encourage some talented people to behave badly? |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: Willie-O Date: 21 Jul 00 - 07:27 AM Oh, probably. Seen in this light, talent is a form of power. Not everyone handles power well, in fact a lot of people don't. Similarly, exceptionally talented people are given some slack to be non-conformists. (I'm not exceptionally talented, but feel relatively secure of my musical abilities. This gives me an entree into some social situations like real redneck country music scenes, which are xenophobic by nature. I've seen roomfuls of people going from hostile stares with the obvious inference 'who is this hippie and what's he doing here?' to 'hey, that hippie can play. Guess he's alright. Where'd you say you're from , son? Are you related to...?' I was mentioning in another thread that music is not a competitive activity, but that most musicians go through a competitive ego-driven stage. Some never get over it, and I agree that that's partly because people tolerate bad behaviour due to "star syndrome", but most mature out of that attitude eventually. Many advanced/successful musicians don't care to jam with beginners, for whatever reason. Or if they do, may be excessively bossy and put the neophytes down (or be interpreted as acting that way). This may be an act of frustration because when you're used to musical communication at a certain level, and others don't respond to those subtle cues, not everyone is diplomatic. And who's going to tell the big stars that they're being assholes?
|
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: kendall Date: 21 Jul 00 - 07:34 AM OK, I have hesitated to mention this, but, in my whole life I have met only one Canadian that I really did not like. Stan Rogers. A loud mouth uncouth crashing boor. In fact, I wish I had never met him because everytime I sing one of his incredible songs I think back to Indian Neck,197? when he insulted a really nice lady. We are both lucky it was not my wife. |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: Gary T Date: 21 Jul 00 - 09:13 AM The worlds of professional and amateur (usually high school and college) sports, at least in the U.S., has many examples of people with talent getting away with behavior that would not be tolerated from most of us. There are also a number of Hollywood stars who manage this. The combination of lots of public adulation and lots of money can produce some real jerks. |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: Jeri Date: 21 Jul 00 - 09:21 AM I can understand someone not wanting to jam with begginers if there are instruments out of tune, people who play chords that don't work, can't maintain rhythm, whatever. It just may drive them crazy, and not be an "I'm better than you" thing. I had a friend who was extremely talented, but wouldn't play in any group setting. I wondered if he wasn't being a snob, until he explained he was scared to death. It's when an accomplised musician treats less accomplished musicians as lesser people that I think they're not nice. Funny, it has been my experience that most people who are extremely talented are more willing to be kind to newbies. It's that interim stage that's dangerous - sometimes when the person's goal is to "make it big." They want to be a star, so they start acting like how they believe stars act. Either that, or they're trying to distance themselves from "the pack." You know what I mean? "I have become better than you, so I no longer wish to play with you or even talk to you. If I'm nice to you, someone may think I'm of lesser skill." People also hear that really good musicians are assholes, so they think they have to develop that side of their personalitiy. In my experience, it's not the extremely talented, well respected musicians who act like jerks, it's a few of the wannabes, and they're a very small minority. |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: MMario Date: 21 Jul 00 - 09:36 AM Ever been to some of the ritzy high class restauraunts. You want rude and obnoxious? Try the waiters... and that is a service position?????? |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: Patrish(inactive) Date: 21 Jul 00 - 09:45 AM I know someone who could have been a professional singer, he has a voice like hot chocolate. He never sings, not even in the house ( I married him dear reader) he says that he hates singing with amateurs and would never consider singing in a singaround or local choir. He is not obnoxious, but arrogant IMHO. It really annoys me to see such a beautiful instrument wasted - I wish it was possible for me to say to him "I'm going to whitby next month, can I borrow your voice?" Patrish |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: Hollowfox Date: 21 Jul 00 - 10:21 AM Enjoying the talent but not the person is a bit like loving the sinner but hating the sin. |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: Bert Date: 21 Jul 00 - 10:47 AM My experience has been just like Jeri's. I have noticed that the better the musician, the kinder and more encouraging they are to those less talented. |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: Rick Fielding Date: 21 Jul 00 - 10:50 AM When I first met George Hamilton the fourth, he was pretty well known for having a huge hit with the song "Abilene". I've never met a nicer man. He was incredibly encouraging, even to the extent of writing me a hand-written letter, saying " your work has value". Same with Gordon Lightfoot, Ian Tyson, and really, most of the talented folks I've met. Sadly, a couple of my real musical "heroes" turned out to be arrogant pricks. C'est la vie. Rick |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: sledge Date: 21 Jul 00 - 11:00 AM I've met several of my musical heroes, Kate Rusby, Show of Hands and Fairport Convention, and it has always been a real pleasure. Questions that they have probably been asked a thousand times were answered as if it were the first time. At the 1999 Fareham and Gosport festival Ric Sanders took it on himself to be our host at a post gig bash, very attentive, our little gang felt completely spoilt. A very nice man, as well as talented. |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: Patrish(inactive) Date: 21 Jul 00 - 11:10 AM I met Joan Collins once when I worked as a cimema usherette (we were previewing "The World is full of Married Men"). She spent most of her time upstairs in a poky little room with us drinking tea and gossiping. The manager of the Cinema was not best pleased. But all us usherettes were Patrish |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: Whistle Stop Date: 21 Jul 00 - 11:34 AM To a certain extent I'm willing to overlook personality flaws in people who are major talents. By most accounts Beethoven could be a very difficult man to be around for any length of time, and Picasso was terribly self-centered and cruel. But I don't have it in me to tolerate too much. "Love the sinner but hate the sin" sounded like a good analogy to me -- I think it's fine to admire people for their talents without necessarily admiring the whole package. And I feel great on those rare occasions when I meet admired musicians first-hand, and find them to be gracious and considerate people (John Renbourne is one such). |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: Rick Fielding Date: 21 Jul 00 - 11:45 AM Which comes first, the arrogance or the fame? Often wondered about that. Rick |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: catspaw49 Date: 21 Jul 00 - 11:47 AM Vaguely related here.......... One of my favorite lines in any play is in "Harvey." Elwood Dowd (the endearing and charming drunk with the pooka) is telling Sanderson and Nurse Kelly something his mother told him. My mother said, "Elwood, in this life you must either be Oh So Smart, or Oh So Pleasant.".......For years I was smart. I recommend pleasant." Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: DougR Date: 21 Jul 00 - 11:55 AM Rick: Hard to tell, but if I were guessing I would say that fame often promotes arrogance in some people. Because of the type work I did, I delt with a number of famous people. My experience was that at least 98% of them were nice considerate people. Wouldn't want to name names though. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: Llanfair Date: 21 Jul 00 - 12:07 PM I have this theory. Being able to nurture a talent really requires a lot of focus on that talent. Having never had the opportunity to do that, because of work and family commitments, I can see that this focus is important. You can't concentrate on refining a song, when people are relying on you for their well-being. Really talented people who can use their talent to make a living need to have the mundanities of life dealt with by someone else. A carer,minder, wife, whatever. A further suggestion is that there is a condition, related to Autism, called Asperger's, and a lot of people have recently had that diagnosis. They present as incredibly intelligent people, who can focus on one skill or subject that interests them to the exclusion of everything else. They have no interest in looking after themselves, have dreadful social skills, because they can't read body language, but are capable of great things. Albert Einstein and Patrick Moore are both said to have this condition, and I suspect a few of the brilliant artistes mentioned may have this problem.,br>Sorry this is so garbled, I am not able to focus on anything for very long!! Hwyl, Bron/ |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: Jeri Date: 21 Jul 00 - 12:11 PM Rick, I think the seeds of arrogance are always there, they just need an environment to flourish in, and a certain unwillingness or inability to stop their growth by the musician, family, friends, and others. My guess is that people's ideas about what's acceptable behavior are formed when they're children, but it's possible they can pick up nastiness as an adult. |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: GUEST,John Leeder Date: 21 Jul 00 - 12:18 PM I don't think it's simply a question of some people not being able to handle fame. Another factor is that in our society (at least the North American part), in order for someone to have a successful career as a musician, it really helps to be self-centred, intolerant, etc. A likeable person who is a successful career musician has become so *in spite of* society's expectations -- a doubly great achievement. I've never tried to be a career musician myself, so this isn't sour grapes... |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: Frankham Date: 21 Jul 00 - 12:31 PM I want to say that Pete Seeger, one of the most talented people I have had the honor to know is every bit as nice a human being as he is a performer. He is generous and encouraging to every talented person that comes along and is forgiving of those who cross the line. Cisco Houston was a great guy as well. He was humble, sincere and memmorizing as a performer. Mahalia Jackson was as warm and full of life, just the way she is on stage. She was called "Haley" by all the folks who knew her. Met her in Chicago. "Pops" Armstrong was a warm, kindly human being who was strong in his convictions. He always played before integrated audiences. He was a strong model for many musicians. Never met him but usta' hear him play with Teagarden, Bigard and Cozy Cole. He was not only nice but he was strong in his convictions and did a lot for integration in this country. Odetta is a lovely lady. Great person. Warm and encouraging. Now Woody was a wanderer, a guy always on the road and couldn't or didn't stay well-married. But he was a great guy, an encouraging human being. He was really nice to me as a snot-nosed kid. He treated people as folks with sincerity and honesty and wasn't mean. He really liked people and you could tell that. I've heard that Paul Robeson was a great human being. Pete usta' tell me about him. Bigger than life but just as big in his humanity. Josh White was warm, encouraging, friendly and sincere and genuinely appreciative of others. His son is a helluva nice guy too. There are these wonderful performers who can act as a model for us all in their talents and humanity. Frank
|
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: DougR Date: 21 Jul 00 - 12:33 PM "In order to have a successful career as a musician, it really helps to be self-centered, intolerant,etc?" I don't agree with that at all, John. Do you really believe that? DougR |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: Rick Fielding Date: 21 Jul 00 - 12:35 PM Jeri. As usual spot on. Frank. Thanks for that. Puts a smile on my face. Rick |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: GUEST,The reject formerly known as Midchuck Date: 21 Jul 00 - 12:47 PM Being a person who is quite shy around people I don't know well, and having regularly had that shyness taken by others as arrogance or standoffishness, I urge you not to jump to conclusions as to which it is in any given case, until you have solid evidence. Peter. |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: Art Thieme Date: 21 Jul 00 - 12:58 PM Spaw, I almost used the same quote from HARVEY in another thread---and then wasn't sure it'd fit the topic so I left it out. I watch the tape of the film over and over just to hear that line. All great minds..., huh? Art Thieme |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: catspaw49 Date: 21 Jul 00 - 01:06 PM I saw the movie on AMC again just last night Art. I don't know whether that's what made me think of it today, but I think not. Its just one of those truly inspired lines and though I love the entire play, I NEVER miss that line. Jimmy Stewart's delivery is simply perfect. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: GUEST,Phil Cooper Date: 21 Jul 00 - 01:29 PM Performers with first class reputations generally have first class chops, I've found when meeting other performers. That aside, if one is arrogant they had better do a perfect show everytime out of the box. No excuses. Because no one will cut them any slack if they slip up. Also, being involved on a concert committee as well, when given the choice of hiring someone talented and nice, or talented and difficult, we generally pick the nice one. Being civil to the volunteers is part of the job. |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: GUEST,John Leeder Date: 21 Jul 00 - 02:36 PM To DougR: Perhaps I'm exaggerating for dramatic effect, but what I'm saying is that society doesn't make it easy for people to have careers as musicians, so people who are tough and, should I say, "nasty" have a better chance at succeeding than mild-mannered folks. I'm thinking of the business end of things, totally apart from the person's talent or skill development. |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: The Shambles Date: 21 Jul 00 - 04:41 PM The mention of Picasso made me think. There was a drama recently, seeing the great man through the eyes of the many ladies that shared his life.
The last of these made a conscious decision, to live in his reflected glory. She was prepared to put up with many trials and humiliations, right up to his death, in order to do this. I suppose this is what I mean by encouraging behaviour that would not be tolerated in lesser talents. Is it a case of the greater the talent, the greater the bad behaviour that will be tolerated? |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: Mike Regenstreif Date: 21 Jul 00 - 05:01 PM Kendall, I'm sorry your encounter with Stan Rogers was unpleasant. Stan was a friend of mine, and in the eight years that I knew him, I can't recall ever seeing him in quite the light that you describe. You mention that he's the only Canadian you've ever met that you did not like. Speaking as a Canadian, I really don't think we're any more, or any less, nice than most folks. Mike Regenstreif |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: kendall Date: 21 Jul 00 - 09:07 PM His behaviour was inexcusable. But, after reading his un official biography, I dont think he meant to be a boor. What's important here is, in my opinion, he was one of the very best singer/songwriters I have ever heard. Thats what I choose to remember. I hope I'm not the only one who thinks of him this way..? |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: Lepus Rex Date: 21 Jul 00 - 09:30 PM The only experience I've had where a talented musician was somewhat rude to me was earlier this year. Two guys from the Finnish band JPP totally ignored me when I greeted them after a concert. OK, so I don't exactly look like someone you might want to talk to on a dimly lit street in South Minneapolis at 11pm. And maybe I'm around a foot taller than them and outweigh them by a couple hundred pounds. And maybe there was no-one but us for a half a block, and maybe I came walking out of a dark alley to greet them. I guess I was still a little hurt. Ah,well. But otherwise, I've never met a really rude musician. ---Lepus Rex |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: Mooh Date: 22 Jul 00 - 04:09 PM It would be unfair to mention names but the point is the same. One very good band I've heard several times and have had the privelege of sharing a beer with, have been consistently denied a slot at a most appropriate festival because of a perceived slight which I think never was intended or even happened. Sometimes it's the receiver who interprets wrongly rather than the transmitter which delivers inappropriately. (Speaking of which, please forgive my English, I drove for 11 hours today and I'm exhausted.) Trouble is, the buying public who may not shive a git, is denied a great concert experience. Having made that point (I think), I agree that all other things being equal, the nice guys get the job. Peace, I'm going to have a nap, Mooh. |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: MAG (inactive) Date: 22 Jul 00 - 05:31 PM Some performers are just rightly concerned about how their work is presented -- like, in a concert, what will the staging, sound and lights be; in a recording; do they retain artistic control. It's a fine line between this and being a prima donna everyone who knew him seems to agree that Gamble Rogers was a Prince; I love the story about him stomping out the footlights when he got cut off (wrongly) at the climax of a story. VERY hard to take. The book Rick recommended way back when on Stan R. is worth seeking out (Unfinished Conversation). |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: Mike Regenstreif Date: 22 Jul 00 - 05:49 PM Sorry, but I have to disagree about that book. Here's my review of it from the Sing Out! Magazine...
An Unfinished Conversation: The Life and Music of Stan Rogers
As a friend, colleague and admirer of Stan Rogers, I looked forward to this book. I've long thought that someday someone will write a great book about his life and music. Unfortunately, despite its good intentions, this book isn't it.
Gudgeon starts well and promises much. In a wonderful two page introduction, he captures much of the essence of the Stan Rogers that I knew. Rogers was a complicated and intense individual. He loved to argue and to be the centre of attention. He could appear to be boorish and insensitive. Those of us who knew him privately also knew of his capacity for great generosity. Arguably, he was the best songwriter that Canada has yet produced. All of this and more is hinted at in the introduction. Regrettably, the book promises much and delivers less.
To begin with, this is a mighty slim volume when you realize that more than a third of the book's pages are taken up with song lyrics, recipes and irrelevant descriptions of some of the author's favourite albums by other people. For some reason, Gudgeon also goes off on tangents of irrelevance at various points in the book with superficial analyses of other performers such as Bruce Cockburn and Stompin' Tom Connors. For example, he spends two pages examining the career of Leon Redbone. Redbone's only connection with Rogers was that they both played at Fiddler's Green, a Toronto folk club, in the early '70s.
In the introduction, Gudgeon makes the case that many of Rogers's friendships were built around one's ability to sustain an argument with him. According to Gudgeon, at the time of Rogers's death, many of those arguments were left unsettled and many conversations unfinished. However, there are virtually no examples of these in the book.
Gudgeon also makes a number of inaccurate statements in the book. For instance, at one point, in explaining the Mariposa Folk Festival, he states: "To discourage any sort of star system from developing, there were no evening shows." The fact of the matter is that Mariposa had evening shows until gate crashing became a problem in 1970 in the wake of Woodstock. It was not because of some sort of traditional purism as Gudgeon suggests.
At another point in the book, Gudgeon makes the case that Rogers became "an immediate hit" in the United States while he toiled for many years before gaining recognition in Canada. Presenting several theories, Gudgeon speculates that Canadians don't recognize their own while Americans seem to instantly recognize stardom. Gudgeon neglects to mention that those years that Rogers worked in obscurity in Canada were spent developing both his stagecraft and his repertoire. By the time he went to play in the States, he had two albums out and was an experienced and skilled stage performer. Furthermore, contrary to what Gudgeon seems to think, Rogers was not an instant star in the U.S. His first tours there were not all sold-out shows. Stan and his band worked long and hard to establish his following in the United States. I know because I was there for some of those early shows and I listened to Stan bitch about some of the gigs that he had to play.
The book's greatest flaw is that Garnet and Valerie Rogers, the two people, other than Stan himself, most responsible for his success are given rather short shrift. Both are treated peripherally in a story in which they should easily have been the second and third most important characters.
As an accompanist, constant travelling partner and virtual alter ego, Stan's younger brother Garnet was crucial to virtually every song that Stan played on stage and in the recording studio. On countless occasions, on stage and in private, I've heard Stan refer to Garnet as his best friend and greatest musical influence.
The importance of the role played by Stan's mother, Valerie Rogers, is barely hinted at in the book. Valerie used her life savings to bankroll Stan's recording career and completely devoted herself to building Stan's independent label, Fogarty's Cove Music, into the successful company that it became. It was a rare Stan Rogers concert when he didn't go out of his way to credit Valerie for much of behind the scenes work that went into his success.
Author Gudgeon is obviously a Rogers fan. One can admire his intentions while decrying the book's shortcomings. However, with all of Stan Rogers's albums available on CD and cassette, any or all of them is a better purchase than this book.
-30-
Mike Regenstreif
|
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: GUEST,Ely Date: 22 Jul 00 - 06:31 PM I've never had someone be really rude to me. My worst experience (mild as it is) was when a well-known dulcimer virtuoso agreed to judge an informal contest at a music festival a few years back. He's not a rude person but he's known for being self-centered. All of the entrants were pretty green, but the point of it was mostly to get tips on what we needed to work on. I was one of the better players so I played two tunes that I had been practicing for less than a week. I know I did pretty poorly--my timing was awful, I flubbed a LOT of notes, and I forgot part of one piece and had to patch it together (and it was definitely noticeable--I think he even knew the tune). He placed me first and said I sounded fine and didn't need any pointers. He hadn't been paying attention to anybody's playing and he couldn't offer any advice beyond "keep practicing", which he told us as if he were bestowing some wonderful secret on us. It was insulting. |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: MAG (inactive) Date: 22 Jul 00 - 07:20 PM thanks for posting your review, Mike. I actually thought the book went into some detail about Valerie Rogers both bankrolling Stan, and, running Fogarty's Cove label out of her home. |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 22 Jul 00 - 07:48 PM I think it is probably true to say that you find a more likeable set of "stars" in the folk world than you do in most other types of music.
In fact I can only think of one act who I've ever seen being positively nasty and arrogant and dismissive of a decent bunch of musicians who were playing with them, and I won't name them, because maybe it was an off day and it was a few years ago anyway.
But generally likeable seems to go with being talented in this type of music. Pete Seeger, Martin Carthy, Norma Waterson, Roy Bailey, Vin Garbutt, Enda Kenny, Alex Campbell... the list stretches on, and that's just a start.
Being a pain doesn't stop people being great songmakers and great performers. There are some people who are screwed up in ways that make them unpleasant to be around, and sometimes that's a kind of survival technique which they need. It's one of the things that shapes the way they make songs and make music, and a lot of the time what comes over as arroagnce is better seen as a kind of panic. If Bob Dylan wasn't so screwed uop we'd have lost some great songs. Maybe we'd probably have had even better ones in their place, but that's not something anyone can ever know. |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: GUEST,jb Date: 22 Jul 00 - 08:08 PM I've often wondered if and when they isolate the genes for each trait, if they won't find it impossible to separate certain desirable effects from the undesirable ones; the creative from the schizophrenic, for example. That's certainly not an excuse but only an observation. When I take Prozac, I'm a much nicer person to be around, but don't feel the emotional highs and lows that so impelled me to create, in the past. This is probably a much-argued question. Would Van Gogh have painted that way, if he'd had access to the anti-depressants and anti-psychotics that are available today? |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: kendall Date: 23 Jul 00 - 02:13 PM would Samuel Taylor Colridge have written Rhyme of the ancient mariner without heroin? By the by Mike, Stan once referred to my best friend, Gordon Bok, as "God" Bok. He pissed off a lot of people with that one. Now that I know what motivated him, I wish I could have gotten to know him..I love a good heated argument! In any case he most certainly was one of the best singer/songwriters on either side of the border. His death is a tragic loss to all of us. |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: Thomas the Rhymer Date: 23 Jul 00 - 03:15 PM Oh! I do like this thread!... It activates my aching head... And wondering why the great are led... is food for thought today-o......................... I'm shy, and clumsy, this be true... And somewhat irritable, nervous too... But I'll do the best that I can do... To help you all today-o.............................. But people with a bone to pick... Alas, with Punchinello's stick... Rejoice in lighting nether wicks... To crowd the stage today-o........................... It burns my mind to feel false ire... Cascading from corrupting fire... Long over due the brodside crier... Still speaks of this today-o......................... And the good are harmonising... While trying not the "all despising"... Conflict hungry? not suprising!... So many are today-o.................................. Thomas The Rhymer |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: Liz the Squeak Date: 23 Jul 00 - 03:32 PM It doesn't matter how high or far you get in any profession - there is never any excuse for bad manners. I work for the IRS. We have tax inspectors (three steps down from god) who do not say thank you. I've worked hard at getting my 4 yr old to say it, I certainly ain't gonna take it from no bloke who has to pee like everyone else..... There are people who get away with it because they are famous. After one particular incident at an event I stewarded (the artist wanted to leave a disabled audience member out in the pouring rain, because she hadn't finished her sound check, as she was over an hour late getting to the gig. The artist was quite rude to the MOP, who told lots of others in the queue. Consequently, most of them left at the first interval...), word got around and she didn't get a booking from a particular (quite large) agency for some considerable time...... Being rude will quite often spring back at you. She started her gig 45 mins late with no apology or explaination, to a nearly full hall and lost half of them at the interval. LTS |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 23 Jul 00 - 03:36 PM "Would Samuel Taylor Coleridge have written Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner without heroin?" - yes, because he did. Heroin wasn't around in those days.
This is threrad drift, but interesting. What Samuel used was Laudanum, a preparation of opium. Dodgy stuff, but a lot less deadly then the modern substitute, heroin - which was introduced in the misguided notion that it was safer, the same way they bring in methadone to replace heroin, where there is also evidence that it is in fact even more dangerous.
As for the Ancient Mariner, I don't think there's much to indicate it owes much to the Laudanum. Kubla Khan maybe, but by no means certain. There's a great book called "The Road to Xanadu" by the Harvard academic John Livingston Lowes, published originally in 1927 (and reprinted a few times since) which goes into the weird and wonderful reading that Coleridge had done to produce both poems. It's really about how the imagination works. |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: kendall Date: 23 Jul 00 - 04:31 PM you are right my friend. It was opium. Just got back from a bluegrass festival, and my brain is still in neutral.. |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: The Shambles Date: 23 Jul 00 - 05:37 PM Is that a requirement for bluegrass festivals or is it just their effect? |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: Micca Date: 23 Jul 00 - 06:00 PM Kendall, I thought you were supposed to PLAY bluegrass, not smoke it!!!**BG** |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: GUEST,kendall Date: 23 Jul 00 - 07:10 PM staying up too late does it. |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: Bill D Date: 23 Jul 00 - 07:56 PM like any profession, there are examples of every type of behavior among folkies who are talented/professional The most common 'flaw', if you want to call it that, is the "I don't really associate with amateurs" syndrome....now I DO cut the pros some slack there, because I KNOW they get accosted by legions of boors if they are not careful...but nice guys like...oh...Martin Wyndham-Read... seem to deal with it just fine, and seem to thrive on mingling with their audience at half-time..etc. Sadly, I have met just a couple who really stuck me as snobs and/or petty & selfish. (No need to name names here) But for the most part, talented folkies strike me as people who really try to be at least decent. I guess being too 'full of themselves' is the other flaw that happens, and I suppose that comes from beig TOLD how wonderful they are too often..*grin* |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 23 Jul 00 - 08:12 PM Yes, Martin Wyndham-Read is another from the long list singers who show how talent and being likeable go together. If I tried to think of people in the folk secne with real talent who are also real pains, it's be a much much shorter list. They are there, but they are rare.
Of course there's a somewhat longer list of pains who think they are a lot better than they actually are. But that's another matter. And they are still a small minority at every level of ability, in my experience. Good role models is what I put it down to. |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: Kim C Date: 24 Jul 00 - 11:23 AM There are lots of different people with lots of different personalities in every professional field on the face of the earth. Some people just don't like one-on-one conversation with strangers, even though they can play and talk and joke and laugh with an audience of 2000. I said in another similar thread, I believe it's important to be nice to the people who like what you do. I have met a lot of people I admire, and I can't say that any of them were rude at all. A couple of them seemed preoccupied, perhaps, but I wouldn't say rude. This past weekend I had the opportunity to meet a living-history musician whose work Mister and I have admired and been inspired by for years. He was very hospitable and most encouraging to us when I told him we had just finished our own tape. I have written to him a couple of times over the years, just asking general questions, and he has always answered me. I think people who realize that music is a gift to be shared, are usually quite happy to meet people and share some more. :) |
|
Subject: RE: Talented or nice? From: Gervase Date: 24 Jul 00 - 12:50 PM Risking thread drift, there's a problem with "niceness" in that you got to have the genuine article. There are plenty of well-known types who come across as "nice" - insofaras anyone to deals with them comes away thinking: Hey, he/she's a nice person" - but you have to ask youself a question. Are they being nice because they are, or because every manager/business handbook/self-help course tells us "If you can't be nice, act nice." I can think of several people in the public eye (in the UK at least) who have\had the aura of "niceness" because they quite cynically decided to cultivate it - either because they needed approbation or because it suited them. However, if they come across as nice even if they're not, what the heck - just count your fingers after you've shaken hands. But Kevin's right - we're lucky in the folk/blues world in that most people really ARE nice, and those who aren't are probably just hungover. |
| Share Thread: |