Quote:

If we just take into account the conversations we’ve had on the “Off Topic” forum about what constitutes a “musician” and the willingness of so many forum members to call people “musicians” when they can’t even play an instrument, is it any wonder that the general public devalues people that actually have the ability to play “live” music without electronic aids?



I imagine early man saying that people who hunt with guns aren't real hunters. REAL hunting involves the skill of getting close enough to score it with a knife or bow. And certainly, that would take some different skills. The gun hunter forced into the bow hunter paradigm might not do as well, but the same is true in the other direction.

This gets back to my definition of talent/skill being the ability to do something that can't be duplicated easily. As possibilities expand, people tend to develop expertise in ever-widening directions.

What makes a purist different from other thinkers is that purists usually reduce the definition of something to one very specific application... such as, only one who plays acoustic instruments is a musician. Free thinkers on the other hand, don't deny the specific application... but they also look for ways to expand a paradigm into new territory.

The Blue Man group fascinates me. They play nothing in a traditional way, but their performances combine sight, sound and theatrics into a presentation that is far more interesting to me than watching a guy play an acoustic guitar for two hours.

Each person gets to decide for him/herself what entertainment means.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ey71h8ep047758h/AAC12jNM0Hz9Q8zsh5iDeqNHa?dl=0