Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?

Subject: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: Marion
Date: 10 Nov 00 - 12:39 AM

This is probably going to sound like a weird question, but...

My friend is a non-professional music therapist at a big nursing home in Sydney, Cape Breton. She plays piano, but knows that many of the people there have listened to Scottish fiddle music all their lives, which she can't personally provide.

So the other day I went and spent the whole day at work with her, playing my fiddle in the lobbies and tea parties. I did my best, and the residents seemed to really enjoy it. Sounds like that should be the bottom line, eh?

But I had some qualms about doing it, because I'm not a very good fiddler. I describe myself as a dime-a-dozen guitarist, but I have a long way to go before I'm a dime-a-dozen fiddler. I've been playing for less than a year and a half; while there are dozens of tunes that I sort of know there are only a handful that I can be confident of playing through smoothly. So my performances consisted of repeating my good tunes many times, and playing my so-so tunes with plenty of mistakes.

So although people enjoyed it, I felt uneasy, as if I were disrespecting the audience by offering a poor performance. I wouldn't dream of playing so badly in church or at an open mike, so what makes it OK to bring a poor performance to this venue? I don't want to take an audience for granted - it's an honour to have someone listen to you - just because they're very old or because I'm playing for free in a situation where fiddle music is scarce.

On the other hand, if my playing is slightly better than nothing, and if there isn't a better fiddler who would be there playing if I'm not, it seems a shame to wait until I feel good enough to perform.

Oh I'm so confused...

Marion

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: Gary T
Date: 10 Nov 00 - 01:19 AM

Hungry people don't expect filet mignon and lobster, regardless of whether or not you could provide same. Sometimes quantity is more important than quality.

It sounds to me like you did a good thing by being there and sharing what you had to offer.

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: IvanB
Date: 10 Nov 00 - 01:27 AM

Marion, first I think that if I waited until I felt I were 'good enough' before performing in public, I'd probably never do it. And I'd miss out on a lot, because I'm convinced that much of the joy in music is in sharing it with others. And the desire to share with others is also an impetus for constantly striving to improve my technique.

Obviously, you probably wouldn't want to perform a concert for a group of fiddle 'connoisseurs' who were able to regularly hear expert fiddlers, but I don't believe it's belittling your audience to provide them with music they probably have little chance of hearing any more. Having had some experience at playing in nursing homes, I've found that the patients are generally very appreciative, but there are always those who are willing to let you know if they don't think you're spot on. So keep up the good work and best of luck to you!

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: Amos
Date: 10 Nov 00 - 02:31 AM

And if you hadn't come, they would have gotten to play another bloody boring round of cribbage, a game they had perfected ten times in a row and hated deeply, and played only from desperation; whcih would you prefer?

A

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: Clifton53
Date: 10 Nov 00 - 02:40 AM

A bad performance is not only okay, but more than likely, mandatory. Chin up Marion!

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 10 Nov 00 - 03:01 AM

Marion , there is no such thing as a bad performance, only a bad attitude! Stephan Grappelli probably had a few bad gigs, but hey, call it jazz and you get away with murder!!

Did anyone ask you to stop? Did anyone cringe and walk away? No? Well there you go. Hopefully you went home with that warm fuzzy feeling that no-one can describe or predict. Keep going and both you and they will get better.

The Bible (sorry to those who haven't read it) says 'make a joyful noise unto the Lord', it doesn't say anything about it being in tune.

LTS - who once played lead in a pantomime to the patients in the local mental institution (used to be the asylum 150 years before) and had a lady in the front row blowing raspberries all the way through except during 'somewhere over the rainbow' where she got up, dropped her pants and made a rainbow of her own in the front row. Now that's what I call musical appreciation!

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 10 Nov 00 - 03:07 AM

Marion, it sounds to me like you did your best and made a lot of people happy. That is a GOOD performance - keep it up.

Jon

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: Jeri
Date: 10 Nov 00 - 07:35 AM

Marion, the key here is - did the residents enjoy your playing? You said they did.

Let's face it - music can be enjoyable at any skill level. I think if you talked to the residents, they'd be very happy that 1) you put in the work to learn how to play, and 2) you gave them a gift - you played for them just because you could. Your music affects far more than their ears - they probably remember other tunes and other fiddlers when they hear you, or times in their lives that were accompanied by music. Let them judge.

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: sian, west wales
Date: 10 Nov 00 - 08:48 AM

Marion, the *mature* audience listens as much with their hearts as with their ears ...

sian

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: Kim C
Date: 10 Nov 00 - 09:53 AM

It's what's in your heart that counts the most. Some of the best applause I ever got was when I attempted, very badly (because I had not practiced it in awhile), to play a tune that someone requested at a small event. But I was game, and we kept going in spite of me, and got all the way through. I realized then that an audience appreciates a good sport as much as a good performer.

Also I know that I am very hard on myself, and often critical when I don't need to be. I have to remind myself that most of my audience is not going to be musicians or scholars, but people who enjoy listening. I'm sure the folks you played for appreciated your efforts very, very much. :)

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: sophocleese
Date: 10 Nov 00 - 09:58 AM

First of all Marion I think its great that you are thinking about what the audience wants and that you would like to be better for them. However there seems to be no need to agonize extensively after the fact if you didn't reach your standards. The audience liked it, that's wonderful! Now you can work on making yourself more comfortable about performing. Either by attempting to live up to your obviously high requirements for performance or by consciously relaxing them a little bit so that you can be happier. Whcichever way you go good luck and keep playing for people.

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: Jim the Bart
Date: 10 Nov 00 - 10:04 AM

Don't question why an audience appreciates your performance. Just be glad that you brought them some enjoyment. People have lots of reasons for liking what they like. Unless you intentionally half-assed the gig because you knew they wouldn't know any better, there is no reason for second thoughts. And I find it hard to believe, based on the nature of the concerns voiced in your post, that you would have done that.

Congratulations for doing a good thing for some people who needed it.

Bart

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: Mooh
Date: 10 Nov 00 - 10:30 AM

Marion, just being there makes it good. If you didn't do it, chances are nobody else would. Do it enough and you won't be questioning yourself about it. As it is you're doing something most of us can't, and making folks happy too. Mooh.

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: Midchuck
Date: 10 Nov 00 - 10:53 AM

If you give what you consider to be a good performance, and the audience likes it, that's the best of all possible worlds.

If you give what you consider to be a bad performance, and the audience still likes it, you may be being too hard on yourself, or you may have an audience that's not very discriminating - but in either event, you've succeeded from an objective standpoint, regardless of your own feelings.

If you give what you consider to be a good performance and the audience doesn't like it, it could mean that you're not as good as you think you are, or that you have an audience that just isn't into your kind of music and is unwilling to give anything new and different a fair listen, or that you have an audience of the kind of dipshits that have to disapprove of everything to show how sophisticated they are, or that you have an audience of people who are so tired that they can't get enthusiastic about anything (we get this last with some gigs for bus tour groups who've been on the road all day and then had a big dinner).

If you give what you consider to be a bad performance and the audience doesn't like it, either go home and practice, or go out and find gigs with less discriminating audiences.

I think that covers all the permutations.

Peter.

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: little john cameron
Date: 10 Nov 00 - 10:54 AM

Awbody is richt Marion.Jist keep on playin,it probably wisnae as bad as ye think. ljc

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: Ferrara
Date: 10 Nov 00 - 11:32 AM

Agree with all of the above. In addition, you may want to consider this experience a gift to yourself. It gives you a reason to focus on a few favorite tunes you made mistakes on, and practice till you know them inside and out. Then you can go back and play for them again!

Tou may surprise yourself with how good you sound. I played for a group of older people a couple years ago, and they invited me to come back six weeks later. Just knowing I was practicing to play for them was a wonderful motivation and "teacher." I made far fewer mistakes the second evening.

I still make mistakes most every time I play for a group, and I'm clear that their enjoyment of the music far outweighs the bum notes. I don't think they notice most of them, even though I certainly do! What they notice is that they're having a good time.

Music should do that. Never mind the rest.

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: Robo
Date: 10 Nov 00 - 06:04 PM

Pop spent 16 or so years in a nursing home, Ma about six months, before they died.

Play on, Marion, play on!

Rob-o

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: Pinetop Slim
Date: 10 Nov 00 - 06:23 PM

Let the confusion recede and feel great about what you're doing. But don't feel committed to fiddle music. Along with the fiddle tunes, I venture those folks have been listening to the radio and TV all their lives, too. The bet from here is that the audience is open to all kinds of music.

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: GUEST,Marion
Date: 19 Nov 00 - 07:35 PM

Mandatory, Clifton53?

Thank you for the encouragement. I'll certainly go back, and I'll certainly keep practicing; now I just have to decide which is the lesser evil, playing a lot of tunes badly or playing a few tunes competently but over and over again.

That day I thought my friend's piano playing sucked too, so maybe I was just being overcritical.

Marion

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: Naemanson
Date: 19 Nov 00 - 09:33 PM

A bad performance is never OK.

BUT...

If you were trying to give a good performance; if you were giving it your best shot; and if you aren't yet up to the ability or quality of one of the big name performers; then it cannot have been a bad performance.

The only time you could call something a bad performance is when you knowingly do a poor job. And I don't know anyone who would do that.

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Nov 00 - 10:11 PM

"I did my best, and the residents seemed to really enjoy it." - that's the only thing that matters here. Even if you had been terrible, and they'd been enjoying it because they were laughing at you, it'd still be the only thing that mattered, that they enjoyed it.

As it was they probably got a lot more out of it than if you'd been some really experienced virtuoso who was doing it as a chore and didn't really give a damn for the listeners.

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: georgeward
Date: 20 Nov 00 - 03:48 AM

Marion, My 89 year-old mom's in a nursing home. A good one. But even the best are confining. There's a reason why "institutionalization" is a depressing word. Most families (of those residents who still HAVE families nearby) do what they can. So does a good staff. It never feels like enough.

If you go to a nursing home, play the best you can and RELATE to people you are giving them a gift. As you are doing something for those families who can't do more. I'll presume enough to thank you on behalf of the families of those you played for.

And there's this: If you were truly dreadful (which we all seem to think you weren't), the residents would have something new and energizing to bitch about. And THAT would add zest to life. I've been in an institution (even if it was only a boarding school), and I know.

If YOU enjoyed it (and can), go back! - George ::-.--O

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Nov 00 - 07:28 AM

The other thing is, if these are old people you are playing to, and your in Cape Breton, it might be a two-way process. There could well be some of them have songs or tunes they could pass on to you. Some of the best songs we know were collected from old people ending their days in the old workhouses. And even when the memory goes for lots of practical stuff, the songs and the music can remain.

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: mkebenn
Date: 20 Nov 00 - 07:46 AM

Thirty years ago I played in a prison in Rochester N.Y.Lookin' back on it, I sucked....but there were tears streaming down the cheeks of that seventy something black alcoholic when I finished Bo Jangels MB

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: GUEST,Dita
Date: 20 Nov 00 - 11:08 AM

Marion, I,d rather have a "poor" performance played from the heart, than "excellent technique" played with no soul.
Stick with it Gal,
love john.

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: Lyrical Lady
Date: 20 Nov 00 - 11:32 AM

My Father in Law is in a nursing home and every Thursday a lady from the neighbourhood goes in and plays the piano and sings the old tunes ... we are greatful to her for her dedication and so are the residents .. they really look forward to their sessions. I know a lot of musicians who aren't very good but think they are and a lot who are very good and think they're not ... I say 'Who cares' ... anyone who can play anything is a magician to me!

Thank you music makers ... LL

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: Willie-O
Date: 21 Nov 00 - 11:45 AM

I side with the 100% majority in that you did a right good thing there and should not be taking yourself to task for it. But since you feel guitar is your best instrument, and your fiddle repertoire is not extensive enough to play for hours and hours as you were kind enough to do, why don't you take your guitar next time and give a multi-sided performance? You can play a few tunes for the fiddle-lovers then a few for yourself. You're not likely to hear any complaints--unless you don't take your fiddle, then you will definitely hear about it.

I used to feel somewhat similar to what you've expressed when I was a hammered-dulcimer busker. Six to ten hours banging out my fifty tunes left me feeling like I was not going anywhere musically. I felt it was not my best instrument, but it was far and away the most lucrative to play on the street. Then I didn't practice or learn new tunes on it, because I was already playing it so much I was sick of it. Self-perpetuating cycle.

Willie-O

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: Genie
Date: 03 Aug 02 - 03:22 AM

Marion, you say "I wouldn't dream of playing so badly in church or at an open mike, ..." What churches have you been frequenting? Goodness! Some of the most atrocious (technically) renditions of anthems I've ever heard have been in church! (As for open mikes, well ... .")

Don't you think that a lot of "pickin' and singin' on the porch" involves, from time to time, mediocre caliber musicianship? How about camp sing-alongs? Sometimes the POINT of the music is the community, the participation.

Activity directors in nursing homes tell me their residents get much more from a so-so musician who involves the residents than from a virtuoso who just plays in the same room with them.

Pete Seeger comes to mind here. Note: I am NOT saying he's a lousy singer or instrumentalist. I am saying I don't think he's on a par with Les Paul, Chet Atkins, BB King, or Andres Segovia when it comes to playing, or Harry Belafonte, Enrico Caruso, Pavarotti, Ronnie Gilbert, Joan Baez or Jim Reeves when it comes to voice. But what Pete does par excellence is get the audience INVOLVED!

Besides, if your musicianship is TOO awesome, folks are intimidated about singing along with you!

Jeri hit that ol' nail right on the head --did the residents ENJOY your music? A friend once remarked to me at an open mike that "There are musician, there are singers, and then there are entertainers. A lot of the good singers and musicians are NOT entertainers!"

(Remember Tiny Tim, BTW?)

Personally, I have a bad habit of apologizing for my lack of perfection, either before or after I do a number that's not up to my standards. I KNOW BETTER, but it's hard to break free of the compulsion to let my audience know that I KNOW I sucked, when I feel I did! Seriously, though, if the audience enjoyed the "substandard" performance, why spoil it for them by telling them how lousy it was? Aren't you kind of insulting their taste by doing that? And, even if you don't "share" this evaluation with them, are you not kind of disparaging that audience by thinking that it is inappropriate for them to have enjoyed your less-than-perfect performance?

George Ward, you've got a good point there! ;- )

Keep on playing, Marion! Folks will tune in to the joy you bring to the music. If it's technically perfect, that's just icing on the cake!

Genie

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: Marion
Date: 03 Aug 02 - 03:29 AM

Believe me, when I started this thread I would never have thought that I'd be contemplating "going pro."

I got better.

I don't get the Tiny Tim reference.

Marion

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: Genie
Date: 03 Aug 02 - 03:28 PM

Marion, I just mentioned Tiny Tim because folks enjoyed his act BECAUSE it was so bad. That was his shtick.

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: Roughyed
Date: 03 Aug 02 - 06:06 PM

The fact is the majority of most audiences have no idea what is 'good' or 'bad'. What they care about is whether the person up there is connecting with them. The fact that your audience liked you shows that you did. The fact that you are unhappy with your technical performance shows that you will grow and develop and the fact that you went and did this and cared shows that you are a true artist. I wish I had been there.

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: John O'L
Date: 04 Aug 02 - 01:37 AM

Marion,
If you went in there thinking "This'll do for them", that would be a bad performance no matter how well you played. They would know.
You, however, go in worrying that you may not be good enough for them. They know this too.
Most people appreciate someone having a go, regardless of the level of their expertise, and those who don't, well, it'll do for them.
Carry on. I can hear it from here. It's good.

Glenn

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: Mudlark
Date: 04 Aug 02 - 02:41 AM

Have you ever listened to a recording of Ledbelly's piano playing? Often it's like listening to someone falling downstairs. Does that make it any less enjoyable? Not a bit, always makes me smile, there is so much enthusiasm there he just can't be bothered to hit all the notes right.

If they enjoyed your playing you are not only doing something right, you're doing something kind. 2 for 1 aint bad. You go girl...

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: GUEST,greg stephens
Date: 04 Aug 02 - 08:00 AM

looking at the stack of CDs and tapes I have out by the player (ie the ones I actually play) I can safely say that the majority of my current favourites are not particularly"well" played they are just brilliant music. Go for it.

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: musicmick
Date: 05 Aug 02 - 01:35 AM

I'm glad you started this rhread, Marion. I used to worry that my performances were not as good as I wanted them to be. Then, it occurred to me that the people who were most qualified to judge my performance was the audience, and they seemed to like what I did and they hired me for return performances and who the hell was I to demur. You will know if you are not doing an acceptable job. The audience will tell you, and their word is authorative and decisive. I read somewhere that George Bernard Shaw was taking one of those "Author, Author!" bows when he heard one dissident voice booing amidst the cheers. He turned to the heckler and said, "I agree with you, sir, but who are we two against all of them?" If you continue to please your audience, you can do no more.

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: Caz
Date: 05 Aug 02 - 01:45 AM

Marion I have read all the replies to this thread and I can't get over the kindness and encouragement you have received. From my own point of view, I have been playing fiddle for 18 months now and still don't have the courage to do what you did. I think you should play on and on and on and on and.....

Carole - OUTSIDER

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: Big Mick
Date: 05 Aug 02 - 01:47 AM

I have met Marion on several occasions and sang with her and for her, and listened to her playing. I must tell you that she is wonderful. It does not surprise me one whit that she would do this. I am proud to know you, my friend.

You sat with some of the finest musicians in North America and acquitted yourself very well. Just keep following your instincts and playing. You are on the right road. I can't wait to see you and sing with you again.

As to the subject at hand, I would say that your obligation under any code of ethics is to do the very best you can with your performance. As long as your performance meets that mark, you are OK. That is not to say that there are not places that should cause you to stop and think. But in any group of musico's that I know of, if the attitude is what Marion exudes, they will be nothing but encouraging.

Mick

Subject: RE: Musical 'ethics': bad performance OK?
From: Blackcatter
Date: 05 Aug 02 - 02:19 AM

This probably doesn't need to be said, but remember that open-mics are FOR those of us who are rough around the edges and probably shouldn't be doing real gigs. Many wonderfully accomplished musicians also go to open-mics, but they're there to either help/be supportive of the people who are working on their music, to try out new material they haven't polished, because they don't happen to have a gig and just need to get on stage, or (unfortunately) to show how wonderful they are when their surrounded by "people with less ability."

I help run an open-mic - and for the past few months there's a guy who comes and struggles through "Pirate Looks At 40" on his guitar. He can't seem to get the rhythm right, so I've started to help him by playing with him on the tin whistle. He's getting better. That's what open-mics should be all about.

pax yall