# I found my definition of Genius



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Genius is nothing more than finding a deep sense of happiness and having good coping skills for when things turn sour. You should also be able to defend yourself against an attacker either physical or emotional.


Feel free to add to it, take away from it, disagree with it or even agree with it. Or other!


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

I feel free to move this to the Community Forum, as the link to Classical Music looks feeble.


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

Thank you for noticing  Glad you found it helpful.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Captainnumber36 said:


> Genius is nothing more than finding a deep sense of happiness and having good coping skills for when things turn sour. You should also be able to defend yourself against an attacker either physical or emotional.
> 
> Feel free to add to it, take away from it, disagree with it or even agree with it. Or other!


I think that is a definition of robust and healthy cheerfulness, not genius. Kurt Gödel was an acknowledged genius but the very antithesis of your definition.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Genius (deserves a new thread)
Genius
Btw, I like your new avatar; looks great (don't ever change it!)


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Captainnumber36 said:


> Genius is nothing more than finding a deep sense of happiness and having good coping skills for when things turn sour. You should also be able to defend yourself against an attacker either physical or emotional.
> 
> Feel free to add to it, take away from it, disagree with it or even agree with it. Or other!


You're on the right track, but instead of Genius it's Talent. Talent evidently comes from experience. It's not inborn. You have talent when you've had enough experience (at any age) to find a deep sense of happiness in the subject you have talent in. It's confusing.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Luchesi said:


> You're on the right track, but instead of Genius it's Talent. Talent evidently comes from experience. It's not inborn. You have talent when you've had enough experience (at any age) to find a deep sense of happiness in the subject you have talent in. It's confusing.


added : Anyone can play piano like Glenn Gould if they have ten healthy working fingers. But they need the talent. The talent includes the mysterious muscle memory systems (like remembering how to ride a bike). It can't be explained in words. It's there when you come to that section in the music. There's also other major parts to talent, such as being able to conceptionalize beginnings and endings well in advance.


----------



## TxllxT (Mar 2, 2011)

Somehow 'Genius' seems IMO to be something a typical American preoccupation and something that defines the Americanness of Americans.


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

"Genius"? No, what you have defined here is "survivor."

Not all geniuses had "good coping skills" and not all survivors are geniuses.

My own definition of "genius" would be something more like, somebody who sees connections nobody else sees.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

NoCoPilot said:


> "Genius"? No, what you have defined here is "survivor."
> 
> Not all geniuses had "good coping skills" and not all survivors are geniuses.
> 
> My own definition of "genius" would be something more like, somebody who sees connections nobody else sees.


Yes, clearly there's a talent for that. And it only comes from experience.


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

Experience, and unconventional thought.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

I’m not understanding why, apparently, the meaning of the word ‘genius’ is some kind of mystery.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Captainnumber36 said:


> Genius is nothing more than finding a deep sense of happiness and having good coping skills for when things turn sour. You should also be able to defend yourself against an attacker either physical or emotional.
> 
> Feel free to add to it, take away from it, disagree with it or even agree with it. Or other!


You're a few days too early for April 1st.


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

Captainnumber36 said:


> Genius is nothing more than finding a deep sense of happiness and having good coping skills for when things turn sour. You should also be able to defend yourself against an attacker either physical or emotional.
> 
> Feel free to add to it, take away from it, disagree with it or even agree with it. Or other!


Personally, I'm happy with



> 'attendant spirit present from one's birth, innate ability or inclination'


But whatever floats your boat.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

present from one's birth?

How can anyone believe that? Some youngsters concentrate a lot more than others, in all the different ways, and they have different distractions, experiences and environments. Some would seem 'obsessed' even - to the average person, like perhaps the young JsB or Mozart and Chopin (he was so self-critical).


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

DaveM said:


> I'm not understanding why, apparently, the meaning of the word 'genius' is some kind of mystery.


It is not a mystery, but under a certain regnant ideology "genius" has connotations of the sort of elitism that makes some people feel inadequate. The "mystery" now becomes one of how the word was ever allowed! Surely "genius" is in urgent want of redefinition if it is not to be permanently banned.

So let's hop to it and change the meaning so that everyone can be a genius, or at least claim they would have been one if the system had not prevented them. Indeed lots of people could have composed the Goldberg Variations if they'd been given a bit of encouragement, had harpsichord lessons, or known Mr. Goldberg.


----------



## KevinW (Nov 21, 2021)

Captainnumber36 said:


> Genius is nothing more than finding a deep sense of happiness and having good coping skills for when things turn sour. You should also be able to defend yourself against an attacker either physical or emotional.
> 
> Feel free to add to it, take away from it, disagree with it or even agree with it. Or other!


Oh Captain? When I saw this post by you I thought you were going to talk about Mozart again... :lol:


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

Roger Knox said:


> ... everyone can be a genius,


Ummm, have you MET people??? Most of them would drown in the rain from looking up with their mouths open.


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

Luchesi said:


> present from one's birth?
> 
> How can anyone believe that?


How indeed. It's a funny old world, but you wouldn't believe the variety of opinions here on everything fromWagner to the best flavour of ice-cream.

Me, I just like to check out what the dictionaries say before I decide what words mean to me. Making up your own meanings is madness - communication can be hard enough as it is without English being distorted as the OP has done.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

I seem to remember reading somewhere that in the earlier periods, i.e. prior to the 19th century, the word "genius" was applied to works, not people; "a work of genius."


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Forster said:


> Me, I just like to check out what the dictionaries say before I decide what words mean to me. Making up your own meanings is madness - communication can be hard enough as it is without English being distorted as the OP has done.


Indeed ... I'm still trying to figure out how being able to defend yourself managed to be included.


----------



## Ariasexta (Jul 3, 2010)

Well, to defend oneself from wild beasts would not be necessary if you are not into some psychic mysteries of communicating with random ghosts. Of course, in terms of self-defense, there is always some point of corneredness like in Will Smith`s case, in front of his own collegues and his own family...We humans are not as sanctified as most believed to be, I learned that in some point, you just need to be a beast too, better than to be a hypocrite. I just say, it does not take a genius to defend oneself from hypocrites, just a real beast.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

KevinW said:


> Oh Captain? When I saw this post by you I thought you were going to talk about Mozart again... :lol:


I love that man!  Still my favorite composer.


----------



## Ariasexta (Jul 3, 2010)

Friend philosophy is also full of garbages, it dopes peoples mind. One just needs to fight, nothing else. For socialization, the nobilities just live their formalist ways of life as philosophical rituals, modern socialization norms come from ancient nobility codes, many of them were cultists and poisoned from the mind. I am here to liberate people from these social illusions, in real life, I adviced and helped a lot of people from social frustrations too. If you good enough as a fighter or thinker, you do not need to try to befriend anyone at all. I am not good enough in both arts though.


----------



## Ariasexta (Jul 3, 2010)

I always tell people to get more friends and get easier life. I am so grateful, yet I know much strange ideas will corrode peoples mind too. I have studied the minds of people, and now I am trying to prove my theories through all kinds of socializations, there will be a lot of hardships also happiness too. So do not be worried. It is sure that everybody will need some friends however strong one can be, but the very nice friends that one can really weep and concern for almost homosexual romanticism. That is an idealism of friendship not those preached by some old farts as moral obligations. Friends as moral obligations will distort peoples mind, making you miss the right encounters for the right people, and one needs a strong mind to see through the fog of moral illusion to make true friends. Since I have gone to far ideologically, I will have to stand behind people most of the time without stabbing in the back.


----------



## KevinW (Nov 21, 2021)

Congratulations to Ariasexta! That was your 1000th post on TC!


----------



## That Guy Mick (May 31, 2020)

Captainnumber36 said:


> Genius is nothing more than finding a deep sense of happiness and having good coping skills for when things turn sour. You should also be able to defend yourself against an attacker either physical or emotional.


So true. All well-heeled, narcissistic politicians with their retinue of aides and consultants, lawyers, and body guards will completely agree!


----------



## BachIsBest (Feb 17, 2018)

NoCoPilot said:


> Ummm, have you MET people??? Most of them would drown in the rain from looking up with their mouths open.


I believe the post was satire...


----------



## Ariasexta (Jul 3, 2010)

KevinW said:


> Congratulations to Ariasexta! That was your 1000th post on TC!


Hahah, already have surpassed, the indication and some other functions of this site strangely stammer for me.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Posts in the Community Forum are not taken into account in the displayed Post count.


----------



## Ariasexta (Jul 3, 2010)

The situation is a bit different between China and the rest of the world, I can not claim gross applicability for all people of the world then, therefore all my ideas have to be redesigned carefully from top to down. I can not publicize botched things so. It was a bit surprising people outside China would like them though.  But my own standard of serviceability however is top world class, this is what I can vouch for, once I decide that it is OK, it will be truly fine.


----------



## Ariasexta (Jul 3, 2010)

Art Rock said:


> Posts in the Community Forum are not taken into account in the displayed Post count.


Thanks, I have been used to semi-dysfunctional internet, never think much for such little issues.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Ariasexta said:


> Thanks, I have been used to semi-dysfunctional internet, never think much for such little issues.


I think of them as the result of some blissful twenty-something programmer making arbitrary decisions for some efficiency or another.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

BachIsBest said:


> I believe the post was satire...


I believe your post is satire, no? Clever satire.


----------



## Ariasexta (Jul 3, 2010)

Luchesi said:


> I think of them as the result of some blissful twenty-something programmer making arbitrary decisions for some efficiency or another.


Probably compatriot programmers under badges of honor.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Does Tom Hulce personify the genius of Mozart on his deathbed? He puts a lot into it.

Confutatis scene in Amadeus movie - with scrolling score.


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

Ariasexta said:


> ...We humans are not as sanctified as most believed to be, I learned that in some point, you just need to be a beast too, better than to be a hypocrite. I just say, it does not take a genius to defend oneself from hypocrites, just a real beast.


This sounds to me like Social Darwinism: survival of the fittest; nature red in tooth and claw. But I don't want to live that way. The problem is I would have to keep fighting to stay fit, and then sooner of later I would run into an opponent fitter than me and lose. Aren't there just some times one needs to fight, and others where one needs to back off?


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Roger Knox said:


> This sounds to me like Social Darwinism: survival of the fittest; nature red in tooth and claw. But I don't want to live that way. The problem is I would have to keep fighting to stay fit, and then sooner of later I would run into an opponent fitter than me and lose. Aren't there just some times one needs to fight, and others where one needs to back off?


But never back off if you or your significant other is insulted at the Oscars!


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

DaveM said:


> But never back off if you or your significant other is insulted at the Oscars!


Ha-ha-ha! Good one! Despite what I wrote, it's probable that an instinctual action would kick in before I could make a calm, reasoned decision between fighting and backing off.

In the past I've made some dumb remarks (don't ask!) in pressured situations where I was up in front of a lot of people. But face-slapping isn't isn't in my repertoire, nor is stoic standing my ground when being face-slapped. Do some people actually practice doing that stuff?


----------



## GMB (10 mo ago)

Genius is immediate understanding or knowledge of something,without having to think it through. The light bulb affect, as Americans call it. 
Inspiration or intuition are similar ideas.
Ancients used to believe it came from heaven or some other source.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

GMB said:


> Genius is immediate understanding or knowledge of something,without having to think it through. The light bulb affect, as Americans call it.
> Inspiration or intuition are similar ideas.
> Ancients used to believe it came from heaven or some other source.


According to that, do you think humans are correct more than 50% of the time using their intuition etc.? No? so why pile importance on these, which I suspect are merely 'good feelings after-the-fact' anyway?


----------



## GMB (10 mo ago)

Luchesi said:


> According to that, do you think humans are correct more than 50% of the time using their intuition etc.? No? so why pile importance on these, which I suspect are merely 'good feelings after-the-fact' anyway?


We are talking about works of genius, not guesses! These are inspired pieces which seem to come from a different world, and artists who can and do produce such works, albeit not all the time!


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

GMB said:


> We are talking about works of genius, not guesses! These are inspired pieces which seem to come from a different world, and artists who can and do produce such works, albeit not all the time!


Yes, I've heard fans say that Beethoven's music is so powerfully effective, like the forces of nature. Reminding us that he reached up and pulled the whole works fully-formed right down into his scores (starting during his late middle period). I have no qualms about teaching my kids that. They can argue back..


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Genius might be defined as the ability to see a pattern in phenomena before anybody else does. Often the phenomena are either there all along but not fully understood, or new phenomena are discovered that lead to a conceptual breakthrough by the first person to do so and that person gets the credit for something that will be elucidated sooner or later by someone. Darwin and Wallace are often used as examples, as are Einstein and David Hilbert. Feynman, Schwinger, and Tomonaga are another example, and mathematics is replete with sudden breakthroughs by X while Y and Z were working toward the sme end. This definition works well in the sciences; it is difficult to establish this as a useful criterion in the arts, where all is a matter of opinion.


----------



## Ariasexta (Jul 3, 2010)

Roger Knox said:


> This sounds to me like Social Darwinism: survival of the fittest; nature red in tooth and claw. But I don't want to live that way. The problem is I would have to keep fighting to stay fit, and then sooner of later I would run into an opponent fitter than me and lose. Aren't there just some times one needs to fight, and others where one needs to back off?


Moral wise, human beings are still beasts, many people are just being doped to believe illusions, but nature does not have unnecessary bullies except for african hyenas. One thing I notice in human society is that many serial criminals have sound social backgrounds, compulsive liars also are proned to gruesome crimes as well. Deception and violence are correlated in human society, this is unique to human beings. But in nature, good beasts like lions, tiger, even bears, they tend to swiftly terminate their preys and their carnages come off as natural rule. Deception and the cowardice of packs of hyenas and human society underline cruelty. I mean if we follow the truth of human mind, competitions will be far less cruel in all possible ways, also bring about many positive effects. If cruelty can be alleviated, then this justifies a fight then, that is why there are match events like MMA, UFC, K1 etc. Then, cruelty refers to un-proportioned violence against the disadvantaged ones.


----------



## Ariasexta (Jul 3, 2010)

I frequently use nature as corroboratives to my theories, I might have discover a mechanism that can be called as "Natural Syllogism". Syllogism was established by Aristotle first, refering to using two established facts to corroborate a doctrine. But I always like to use natural creatures especially animals as parallels of human condition in mental states. Also, not without using all possible members of objective natural existences like plants and bacteria and inanimate substances. 

For example, for evils and illusions, I use species of flies, the evolution of parasitic insects will strengthen their parasitic traits; however butterflies and other benevolent insects do not have any noticeable evolutional traits, because the good evolutions are invisible...Many more facts too, lion as the token of nobility, cobra as endless life energy, eagle as the messenger of God, these are the usage of this natural syllogism to imply a hidden evolutional traits in the good way. Obviously we can expand this syllogic system into all other mental states of humanity compared to all species of animals and plants and substances. More interestingly is, radioactive elements can be parallelized to religion, fission and fusion--Creational Bingbang and Entropy; but how does the syllogism of lion works? lion-patriachic, socialization(lions are social packs), charisma, justice, bravery(skillful engagement, swift termination). But when comes to hyenas, they bite at the an-al parts, scrotum first, causing huge pain that last for a long time when even work as packs, they also cannibalize their members. Nature gives hyenas uglier looks, a bit unbalanced body build, which do correspond to their ways of hunting and social ethics. This is how nature applies syllogism on its own ways, and we human beings can learn and reflect on our own existences based these natural examples. Eagle: flying high, lonely, bravery, wisdom, dominating over the wolves in packs and lone ones, especially terrifying the rats, rabbits such minor land mammals which tend to overbreed in numbers. All their looks and their ways of life correspond each other, each correspondance establishes as a natural syllogism of beauty and nobility. Can you find a beautiful parasite? no, never.

Evolution in a good way: butterfly and other beautiful insects like dragonflies. Butterfly is the symbol of revival since ancient times, greeks use the word "psyche" to designate human spirit in evolution. Good. This is the ancient example of natural syllogism. But how this syllogism actually works? then we have to look into other darker sides of human spirits, evil profiles of our spirit can be parasites, but due to ancient philanthropist tendency, they did not mention it. But in our times, I have to mention it since we have overtly overrun all ancient constraints of self-control today. Butterflies all have a same stage of transformation, from caterpillars to winged butterflies, in the stage of butterfly, their lives attain the final goals of mating and spreading the pollens. The variation of species can be taken as evolution, but there is no much functional evolution among the butterfly species since the transformation, no one specific species can spread more pollens or try to mate more spouses and breed more. There are local cases of certain species of butterfly that swarm an area, but they quickly die out, making the scene very imposing to human psyche. 

The uniformity of species in natural functions and survival skills implies an unseen pattern of evolutional direction：the balance. Like eagles, we have vultures, falcons, golden eagles, sea eagles, bald eagles, we can not tell much variation of any family of the species to stand out from the survival and natural capacities besides their looks. Vultures are flying the highest but they are the slowest ones too. But comes to parasites, some species will cause huge endemics and epidemics, or overbreed to endanger the natural balance. Even in regional senses, overbreeding will become very ugly, spiders, roaches, rats all can overbreed in local terms, but that is how they expose the weakness as a species and at the same time they tend to become carriers of epidemics. After all, we probably can use all our scientific discoveries as terms of natural syllogism to apply to our moral and rational processes. So far biological syllogism does sound well, it is shocking beause we share a similar biosphere. This syllogism establishes comprehensive philosophical correlations between humanity and all objective existences, and help us look into our selves deeper. In short, nature is like a mirror that reflect all our mental conditions, however we try to hide. I have been thinking, by destroying our natural environment, someone is trying to hide this truth from us, like we all have the tradition of scaring the evil ghosts with a mirror, how evils would fear a mirror. The true evolution should not be purposefully designed to achieve any form of expediency, any form. I can even state that, the true evolution is to stay in balance with nature forever, if we fail in balance, we are overbreeding in ideas or biological senses, this is the evolution of parasites, problems will backfire. 

By natural syllogism, we can also rebute Darwinism, a sort of expedient evolutionalism, although taking millions of years to achieve, but the cost of time and this expediency are not consistent with each other, if time can be disposed for the favor of expedient evolutions, why our life span is still so short, also are all the rest of species which are older than us? there are countless inconsistencies can be expose by natural syllogism against Darwinism, how come the genetic similarities between humanities and other animals remain predominant across the millions years? how to measure our expediency against the chimps in evolutional terms? by destroying nature? killing animals? why we still are in needs of natural foods? how our forms and proportional biological symmetry develop through the evolution? if it is just a matter of time and probability. 

By simply stretching the time span, as if any miracle will happen that is what Darwinism tells you, after billions of years, in billions of years, and you will believe in all nonsenses, like a promise never mean to happen. The paradox of time in human conception is an illusion and key to all Darwinist nonsenses. While we believe that we are different as living creatures from other animals in terms of evolution, but refuse to believe we can die just like all animals, right? 

Because by y Darwinism, death should be equal. Animals die without the fear of hell and heaven, without the fear of karma, yet humans are unable to do this, as contrary to their atheistic claims. These atheists are not dying like animals without fears of heaven and hell, they have their own cults, they have to worship their chairmen, or something illusional. Another natural syllogism. If humankind is truly an evolutional peak at cost of millions of years, our short life span does not agree, nor our biological dependency on natural environment. How comes nature can provide nutritions to our body so perfectly? we should have evolved beyond their supplemental providence, if nature is just a primitive and laten environment; did we creat nature? why our evolutional skills can not creat a wholely self-sustaining human biology? Oh yes, we are tryting, by killing off nature and enforcements.

Therefore by the law of Natural Syllogism, it states that proper human rational thinking is dependent on natural environment or reflective to it, if our natural environment gets worse, people will not be thinking better than the past, as it becomes more ill and unbalanced, peoples minds will also become ill and distorted without being self-aware.


----------



## Ariasexta (Jul 3, 2010)

Therefore, my beast theory can also be consider as a part of natural syllogism, a continuation of classical syllogism of using lion, eagle as the tokens of nobility. The beast, is not that of hyena nor of parasite, but noble beast. Human condition can be correlated to nature in all its varieties, an established fact, but our modern world is so much doped in its own illusions. A transformation of human mind into natural nobility, surely can protect you much.


----------



## Ariasexta (Jul 3, 2010)

Nature can teach everyone to protect ourselves, do not destroy it, but destroying nature, we will only have parasites and hyenas amongs us. Another application of Natural Syllogism. We will turn into monsters if we destroyed nature. Ancient wisdom will help us so much.


----------



## Ariasexta (Jul 3, 2010)

Labor VS Natural Syllogism

Darwinism underlines labor as the cause of evolution and labor is underlined by objective or purpose. If this is true, think about it guys, if humanity can evolve through purposeful labors in millions of years, why other animals which according to Darwinism, also evolve in their competitive environments, have not evolve to be capable of escaping human capture? Natural syllogism dictates that there is nothing that is not reflected in the existential backgrounds, our evolution should also force the other animals to evolve too, right？ take Newtonian Laws as another term of NSL（natural syllogism, since the laws of movements also deal with nature):

What are Newton's Laws of Motion?
_
1-An object at rest remains at rest, and an object in motion remains in motion at constant speed and in a straight line unless acted on by an unbalanced force.
2-The acceleration of an object depends on the mass of the object and the amount of force applied.
* 3-Whenever one object exerts a force on another object, the second object exerts an equal and opposite on the first.*
_

So, if humanity evolved through working on nature and the rest of lesser animals, why should nature not work in is own favor against human evolution and help itself to evolve too?


----------



## GMB (10 mo ago)

Luchesi said:


> Yes, I've heard fans say that Beethoven's music is so powerfully effective, like the forces of nature. Reminding us that he reached up and pulled the whole works fully-formed right down into his scores (starting during his late middle period). I have no qualms about teaching my kids that. They can argue back..


Odd that you choose Beethoven for your example! I understood he had to grind out his works with blood,sweat and tears.Not exactly genius! I think Mozart more fits the bill as a genius for you to teach your kids!


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

Art Rock said:


> Posts in the Community Forum are not taken into account in the displayed Post count.


Nice to know.

Why is that? A post is still a post.

I usually visit the site using the "NEW POSTS" link, and usually I'm not really cognizant of what FORUM I'm in.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

pianozach said:


> Nice to know.
> 
> Why is that? A post is still a post.
> 
> I usually visit the site using the "NEW POSTS" link, and usually I'm not really cognizant of what FORUM I'm in.


It could to encourage people to post more in the music forums; i.e. assuming people are invested in the number of their posts.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

GMB said:


> Odd that you choose Beethoven for your example! I understood he had to grind out his works with blood,sweat and tears.Not exactly genius! I think Mozart more fits the bill as a genius for you to teach your kids!


 The description which might be more helpful for young piano students is;

Mozart took dictation from the heavenly plane,

while Beethoven 'erupted' (less often) with perfectly formed works from on-high.

...There's been some argument from historians about Mozart's work abilities.


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

GMB said:


> Odd that you choose Beethoven for your example! *I understood he had to grind out his works with blood,sweat and tears.Not exactly genius*! I think Mozart more fits the bill as a genius for you to teach your kids!


Not that old canard


----------



## Ariasexta (Jul 3, 2010)

If I were to choose, I am not interested in born genius rather I would like to be a diligent serendipity. I am sort of diligent person myself. To try to be more manly and out-going, try a magic, use some lion, tiger, bear motifs in your room decoration. I bought a small tiger sticker in my hardest times, and I got several new friends.


----------



## Ariasexta (Jul 3, 2010)

Oh I never had tattoos. Tiger sticker was a small piece of cloth to be clipped with a clipper unto the backpack.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Ariasexta said:


> Oh I never had tattoos. Tiger sticker was a small piece of cloth to be clipped with a clipper unto the backpack.


You reminded me;
_Tattoo You_ is the 16th British and 18th American studio _album_ by the English rock band the Rolling Stones, released on 24 August 1981

I always thought it was a clever title!


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Forster said:


> Not that old canard


I get the impression that Beethoven composed differently than Mozart. Long themes, singing to himself on his walks, and then he worked tirelessly weaving the ideas all together in a challenging logic (with his own sound and styles, also). This is Beethoven.

Mozart was more trusting of his own 'talent'. He played his youthful games in his composing mind, trying to satisfy his own high standards, his idealistic forms, exuberance and innocence(?). He was quite naughty.


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

Luchesi said:


> I get the impression that Beethoven composed differently than Mozart. Long themes, singing to himself on his walks, and then he worked tirelessly weaving the ideas all together in a challenging logic (with his own sound and styles, also). This is Beethoven.
> 
> Mozart was more trusting of his own 'talent'. He played his youthful games in his composing mind, trying to satisfy his own high standards, his idealistic forms, exuberance and innocence(?). He was quite naughty.


There have been several threads covering this issue. I'm no expert, but there is less truth to the idea that Mozart found it all so easy than is often claimed.

Whatever is the case, either both are 'genius' or neither are. Differences in their modus operandi do not justify ruling one in and one out.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Forster said:


> There have been several threads covering this issue. I'm no expert, but there is less truth to the idea that Mozart found it all so easy than is often claimed.
> 
> Whatever is the case, either both are 'genius' or neither are. Differences in their modus operandi do not justify ruling one in and one out.


So, there's two or more kinds of geniuses?

They weren't the same kind of genius, were they?

I think the word genius dissolves away and we're left with the old "99% perspiration".

added: They might have deficits, but kids who get started very young in any field are far ahead of normal people. Not just more years, but magnified many times because of what occurs in the all-important developmental years.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Luchesi said:


> So, there's two or more kinds of geniuses?
> 
> They weren't the same kind of genius, were they?
> 
> ...


So anybody, given the right up-bringing and exposure to music at an early age can be a Beethoven? As someone who started listening to classical music and played an instrument at a young age, I'm feeling short-changed. 

Edit: On the other hand, there was, according to my family, objective evidence of my incompetence as a violinist..


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

DaveM said:


> ... Edit: On the other hand, there was, according to my family, objective evidence of my incompetence as a violinist..


But maybe you were experimenting precociously with different tunings when playing your pieces. While they pedantically insisted that if a piece was composed in, say, a major key it must be played using the pitches of that key. That should be a matter of opinion, of course.


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

Luchesi said:


> So, there's two or more kinds of geniuses?
> 
> They weren't the same kind of genius, were they?
> 
> ...


Two kinds? No, I don't think so. I cited earlier my preference for the origin of the word 'genius' as its meaning, rather than something ordinary like 'exceptional creative power'. Not literally of course - I don't actually believe in spirits - but the idea that someone's creativity is inhuman: it's as if the individual is possessed or has other transcendent assistance.

'Genius' is overused, rather like the fashion to use 'literally' when all that is meant is 'very'. I'm reminded of teachers I've watched who encourage their children with the words 'brilliant', or 'fantastic' regardless of the level of achievement being praised.


----------



## Ariasexta (Jul 3, 2010)

Luchesi said:


> You reminded me;
> _Tattoo You_ is the 16th British and 18th American studio _album_ by the English rock band the Rolling Stones, released on 24 August 1981
> 
> I always thought it was a clever title!


Western folks are tattoo races, especially those tourists in developing countries, really tough. But in China, they are like professors and good passengers. That album sounds nice, tried it a bit, look forward to getting a copy.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Roger Knox said:


> But maybe you were experimenting precociously with different tunings when playing your pieces. While they pedantically insisted that if a piece was composed in, say, a major key it must be played using the pitches of that key. That should be a matter of opinion, of course.


Yes, apparently pitch was the main problem according to their opinion. On the other hand, I was quite happy with it or maybe totally unaware of it.  Couldn't do the vibrato thingy either, something rather necessary for classical violin..


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

DaveM said:


> So anybody, given the right up-bringing and exposure to music at an early age can be a Beethoven? As someone who started listening to classical music and played an instrument at a young age, I'm feeling short-changed.
> 
> Edit: On the other hand, there was, according to my family, objective evidence of my incompetence as a violinist..


"So anybody, given the right up-bringing and exposure to music at an early age can be a Beethoven?"

Nobody would be a Beethoven without it all. Also being born at a lucky time in music history. And usually siblings figure in somehow, in the early years.

Remember how little you worked at it compared to Beethoven as a youngster.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Forster said:


> Two kinds? No, I don't think so. I cited earlier my preference for the origin of the word 'genius' as its meaning, rather than something ordinary like 'exceptional creative power'. Not literally of course - I don't actually believe in spirits - but the idea that someone's creativity is inhuman: it's as if the individual is possessed or has other transcendent assistance.
> 
> 'Genius' is overused, rather like the fashion to use 'literally' when all that is meant is 'very'. I'm reminded of teachers I've watched who encourage their children with the words 'brilliant', or 'fantastic' regardless of the level of achievement being praised.


Creative power yes, kids who get started very young in any field are far ahead of normal people. So we label it transcendental, possessed, inhuman, as in the traditional superstitions.


----------

