Re: [Harp-L] RE: no standards of harmonica accomplishment

[Randy Redington <rwredington@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dare I venture a comment?
I understand the value of standards, it's a way to evaluate and measure
progress. My harmonica music interests vary from the old Harmonicats
style,  to Folk, Country, Bluegrass,  Gospel and the Blues. And the many
sub genre's and crossovers within these.
If you want to evaluate standards it has to be outside the realm of style
or genre. Classical isn't any "Better"  than Country or Blues. It's just a
different style.  It doesn't define ability.
Probably the best standard I can hold myself aginst is myself. I look to
those who are considered the Greats, and I let them provide direction and
encouragement to grow, but I can't compare myself to them. Adam Gussow is
one of the many guys I look up to. He says that we learn and barrow from
each other,  but we develop our own style that is unique to ourselves. I
may not have aspirations of becoming a Jason Ricci, but I am grateful that
guys and gals like him are so willing to share and pass on their talent.
And that guys like me can be challenged and encouraged by them.
I recently signed up for a workshop and was asked what my ability level
was. I honestly didn't know where to place myself.  I'm not a beginner,
I'm definitely not advanced, but I'm not sure that I'm an intermediate
either.
I'm not convinced that hard standards are nessisary.  At least, not for me.
But some degree of definition is helpful in finding a level to connect
with. Bottom line is.... I have to be ok with who I am and where I am first.
For me the goal can't be perfectionism, but rather. ..contentment and then
progress.
 On Jun 10, 2014 12:13 AM, "Chris Reynolds" <c_reynolds2571@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

> I'm with Mr. Bee on this one. I don't want to ruffle any feathers but why
> do we need a standard of accomplishment? I started playing because my
> Grandpa's played, and I can say with absolute certainty that they never
> gave a single thought to their level of playing. They played for no other
> reason than the enjoyment and a lot of people enjoyed listening to them.
> Same reason a lot of people play whatever instrument they happen to play.
> So I guess my question is why we need a standard rather than what that
> standard should be. Does it only apply to certain situations? As someone
> who's focused on the guitar for 30 years with some long breaks I can tell
> you I'm no where near the level of those considered guitar greats. Does
> that mean I shouldn't be allowed to perform? Same with harmonica, piano,
> bass, etc etc, I'm not great at any of them, but I play for the enjoyment.
> Do I have to meet a standard before I can enjoy them?
>
> Seems to me that having "standards" would do more to drive a wedge between
> those who want to see the instrument promoted and those potential players
> who will start and then maybe not reach those "standards" and give up. I
> have to say I absolutely love listening to some of you guys play, but
> whether or not I ever reach that level is of no importance to me.
>
>
> Chris
>
>