Hey, it ain’t my theory, but it does make some sense. Memories fade after time, and musical composition is a sophisticated activity, one where being merely close to recalling what a note sounds like could cause problems. That doesn’t mean that he had to have perfect pitch. If his training as a composer was exceptionally good (highly likely in any case), and he spent a great deal of his time before he went deaf, composing and listening to music (again, highly likely), then it’s entirely possible he could have managed without perfect pitch. I don’t know very much about his life, so I can’t say for certain how likely it may have been.
Yes, and yes. If we’re talking about Beethoven, then we’re not talking about people who are profoundly deaf from birth (and in any case, I’ll still not accept that they are necessarily ‘musically inferior’). Beethoven isn’t the only musician to have coped with complete hearing loss - Evelyn Glennie is well-known, and there’s a violist in the London Symphony Orchestra who is completely deaf.
This brief synopsis of a longer study (warning: PDF) casts doubt on this commonly held belief about Mozart. In any case, the large number of extant sketches certainly suggest that Mozart was not composing in any manner like a savant, but working out ideas in a methodical, rational way.
If by that you mean he couldn’t instantly answer a question like “What is 3089776 divided by 408.008?”, then he wasn’t a math wizard, but then very few mathematicians are going by what I’ve read. But wouldn’t Einstein or any other professional mathematician have been a quick study standard topics like calculus and trig?
Who is it? And what techniques does he (or she) use to play, especially in unison with the rest of the symphony? For example, I take it this musician has to get someone else to tune his violin. And keeping time might not be a problem if you watch the conductor and your fellow musicians closely, but how does he make sure he’s not playing too loudly or too softly? Musical notation isn’t too specific when it comes to volume (ppp, pp, p, mp, mf, f, ff, fff), and different conductors may have different interpretations of what constitutes “piano” or “forte” for any given passage of any given piece of music.
Math is theory. Professional mathematicians don’t just sit around all day calculating.
Liz Varlow (according to Google)
No idea…but…
Playing either the violin or the viola, you’re in direct contact with the resonating instrument, and so feel vibrations as well as hear them.
Even for regular string players, much of the ensemble work is achieved through sight, and, paradixcally, a group of players who rely on aural judgement alone create a cacophony.
Rather than an ability to literally or vicariously hear the notes, couldn’t an advanced understanding of music theory suffice, as well? Just sitting here at my computer, I don’t need to hear the notes to know that C, E, and G, all natural, will sound nice together. Now, that’s a very simple example, but then, I’m no Beethoven. Could Beethoven not have composed just by understanding the relationships between notes, without a sense of how those relationsips are actually expressed in sound?
He could have written a series of harmonies which obeyed all the right rules and systems. But that’s not all it takes to write good music - that involves a whole different, far less tangible, level of creativity.
Name ten more. The key phrase is on average. Out of all the composers inn the world, what percentage are deaf? Out of all the viola players in the world, what percentage are deaf? How does this compare to the percentage of deaf people in the general population?
As to your reference to Beethoven not being dead from birth, it was you who accused Tuckerfan of being patronizing when his comment was about Beethoven. Take it or leave it. Just don’t do both.
“The Red Shift” by Tim Ferris noted that Einstein got help on some of the math used for relativity. (I have it as a book on cassette, so it won’t be easy to look up.) I’m sure his math was way better than average, but not nearly as good as his physics.
I took the key phrase to be ‘musically inferior’, actually. Because I don’t know what this means, or at least how on earth you could quantify it.
And how many composers are female?
Errrrr…firstly, I thought I’d successfully avoided accusing Tuckerfan directly. Secondly, the reason why I was excluding people deaf from birth was to make it clear that I was talking about people who’ve suffered hearing loss, making for a more meaningful comparison of abilities.
My guess is that this is a much greater possibility than that of savant. He was involved with many other interests (e.g. politics), in addition to his musical genius, and it’s debatable whether his antisocial attitudes were a result of his hearing problems.
And I don’t understand the argument that he must have had perfect pitch, in order to compose after he was deaf. He already had several decades of experience, and he knew how each key sounded, as well as the ranges and temperaments of each instrument or voice. Perfect pitch has nothing to do with this.
Well, it’s your phrase. At least, you are the first one to use it in this thread. I suppose it is up to you to quantify it.
I don’t know. I suspect, however, that the subset <deaf female composers> is analogous to the subset <deaf females> of the set <females>.
I’ll ask again. Isn’t the ability to hear an important prerequisite for understanding, appreciating, and performing music? I am sure there are counter-examples, but are they not the tail of the bell curve? Yes, people can get information via, vibrations, motion, etc., but do you assert that that information is as complete and accurate as a hearing person might get?
I mean no offense to deaf people, but it seems odd to me that you would not consider deafness to be a hindrance to musical ability.
Oh, for goodness sake. I was bloody well explicit in saying that I wasn’t accusing Tuckerfan of being patronising, and that my criticism was of the third-hand suggestions being relayed. Can we drop it, unless it’s still relevant in some way?
Nope, you missed the point here, however. Why are female composers, throughout history, the exception? Either because women can’t write music (try defending that one), or situations and circumstances prevent them from doing so, and also from developing the necessary skills.
“Women in general can’t write music, and therefore there aren’t many female composers” is a preposterous statement. I hope we can agree on this, despite also agreeing that female composers are in a minority. Therefore, the lack of deaf people making a living from music is not proof that deaf people are not capable of doing so.
From the evidence, no, or rather it’s not essential.
How do you have a bell curve if you can’t quantify something?!
I cannot answer this. The only people who can are people who’ve suffered hearing loss.
I’m not surprised that is sees odd, but I assure you, it’s not an insurmountable obstacle.
Obviously not. For instance, a famous classical composer, Ludwig von Beethoven, composed after going deaf. Clearly, then, it’s not an insurmountable obstacle.
Nevertheless, the little factual evidence cited thus far suggests that it certainly is a hindrance, which is what Contrapuntal suggested. No one but you brought up “insurmountable obstacles”.
I really don’t want to seem like I’m crucifying Tuckerfan, who I’m sure regrets ever looking at this thread, but
seemed to describe deafness as an insurmountable obstacle, except for a gifted few.
Insurmountable, except by those who surmount it?
Have you been drinking? Because your logic here is, well, not a sort I’m familiar with.
If you’re honestly trying to suggest that composing music isn’t something that’s extremely rare for deaf people, I’d like you to bring some evidence. As it is, you might as well get enraged if I don’t ask Stephen Hawking for advice on cycling.
The definition of ‘exception’ must really bug you.
It’s extremely rare for deaf people, and extremely rare for hearing people. It’s quite likely that circumstances prevent deaf people from having the same opportunities as hearing people, in the same way as my comment about female composers, which got overlooked.
Certainly, which is why I pointed out that I’m far below Beethoven. But is the “less tangible level of creativity” required particularly connected to the ability to hear, directly or mentally? There are plenty of hearing folks who can use the rules and systems to mechanically produce harmonies, but few of them reach the level of ol’ Ludwig, either.