"Wonder-Children" as Pianists
My child of five years of age shows signs of great talent for music. He has a keen, true ear, and plays rather well for his age. Does this justify me in hoping that something out of the ordinary will become of him? They say that so-called "wonder-children" never amount to anything in later life.
That "wonder-children" never amount to anything in later life is not borne out by history. If some are disappointments it is either because they astonished by mere executive precocity, instead of charming by their talent, or because they were ruined by unscrupulous parents or managers who confounded the promise of a future with its realization. But, aside from these few, all great musicians were "wonder-children," whether they became composers, pianists, violinists, 'cellists, or what not. The biographies of our great masters of the past centuries as well as those of more recent times (Mendelssohn, Wagner, Chopin, Schumann, Liszt, Rubinstein, and all the others), will bear me out in this statement. If your child shows more than mere precocity—if, for instance, he does not merely play in his fifth year what others play in their tenth, but shows qualities of musical superiority—then you may with a fair degree of certainty feel hopeful of a fine musical future for him.
The Value of Going to Concerts
Shall I attend orchestra concerts or shall I give preference to soloists?
By all means attend orchestra and chamber-music concerts! For these will acquaint you with those works which are, after all, of the greatest importance to the student. Besides, you will usually hear more correct interpretations than from soloists. The latter, with some luminous exceptions, overestimate their own authority and take such unseemly liberties that in many cases you hear more Smith, Jones, or Levy than Beethoven, Schumann, or Chopin. Individuality in a soloist is certainly a great quality, but only if it is tempered by a proper deference to the composer of the work in hand. If you cannot hear a soloist who is capable of sinking his individuality in the thought, mood, and style of the composer he is interpreting—and this is given to only the very greatest—you do far better to prefer to the "individual" renditions of a soloist the "collective" renditions of the orchestra or string quartette. The synthetic nature of the orchestra forestalls the extravagances of so-called individuality and insures, generally speaking, a truthful interpretation. The very worst conductor imaginable cannot do as much harm to a composition as can a mediocre soloist, for an orchestra is a large body and, therefore, not so easily moved and shifted from the path of musical rectitude as is a single voice or an instrument. A really great soloist is, of course, the finest flower of the garden of applied music, for his touch with the instrument is immediate and he needs no middleman to express the finest shades of his conceptions; while the conductor—and even the best—has to impart his conception (through the baton, facial expression, and gesture) to other people before it can become audible, and on this circuitous route much of the original fervour and ardour may be lost. But there are more good orchestras than great soloists, and hence you are safe in attending orchestra and chamber-music concerts.
Books That Aid the Student Working Alone
Compelled to study without a teacher for two years before I can go to a conservatory, what method should I study for my technique and what pieces?
You fail to say whether you are a beginner or already somewhat advanced. Still, I think it safe to recommend Mason's "Touch and Technique," Sternberg's Etudes, opus 66; and select your pieces from the graded catalogues which any publisher will be glad to send you.
Music as a Profession or as an Avocation