Some time ago, I wrote about my dislike of the veneration of genius, and
the need to value more highly the mediocre.

The context was a debate about the film "Hilary and Jackie", which provoked
quite a response amongst list members.

I've been off the list for several weeks, so I don't know how the debate
developed in my absence.  However, two experiences over the past two
weekends have prompted me to return to this theme.

On 20 March, I attended a concert by my local amateur orchestra.  I
have never before been moved as I was that evening by the Funeral March
of Beethoven's Eroica Symphony.  The out-of-tune playing gave this music
a fresh poignancy that I was surprised and delighted to experience.
There was also a marvellously gloomy rendition of Rachmaninov's Second
Piano Concerto.  The performance lacked the sharpness and polish which
characterise all professional orchestras nowadays.  Instead, the work was
given a more generous, because more frail and thus more human, aspect.

Yesterday (28 March) I went to see Hilary and Jackie.  Why were so many
music lovers affronted by this film? It was a very good piece of cinema.
It was also eminently believable.  Why are so many ordinary people not
prepared to believe that those we venerate as "geniuses" possess feet of
clay? Getting to the top is by definition ungenerous in a competitive
environment.  We should not be surprised that in many cases, those who
succeed in arriving on the heights should prove to be so manipulative and
unappealing in character.

Music is wonderful.  But don't leave it to the professionals.  We need
more amateur performances, especially those like that Slow Movement form
Beethoven's Symphony No.3 I heard last week.

Ian Foster
[log in to unmask]