I'm reading the posts since I last posted and all I can say is: Did I not put the definitions of Prodigy in my post? Yet, people still trot out the "prince plays 200 instruments" myth...

Now, Patrice Rushen, for instance, was considered a prodigy. She showed advanced technical capabilities at an early age and was placed in a program for gifted musicians.

From Wikipedia: Rushen demonstrated her musical potential at a young age; she was regarded as a child prodigy. In her teens, she won the prestigious 1972 Monterey Jazz Festival.

From VH1: Born September 30,1954, in Los Angeles, CA, Rushen's parents enrolled her in music classes at U.S.C. when she was three. In her teens, she won a solo competition at the 1972 Monterey Jazz Festival.

That is the definition of a prodigy.

The only ones who seem to have any sense of objectivity on this board are people who actually play instruments (and realize the hard work put into musical development) or those who don't see Prince as some super human being who came out of the womb playing guitar.

Prince had a natural affinity for music and worked at it and developed into a monster creative force. Let's leave it at that.

JesseDezz said:

Spoken like a true technician. By definition it's pretty open and closed. But it seems that many here stepped outside the box to explore this one.

Try it.

JesseDezz said:

I would think that Patrice Rushen's "child prodigy" status would point favorably to Prince's similiar status. They both are about the same age and played together a few years after her Monterey Jazz Festival win. They definately had musical chemistry and played together hours in the studio. I do not think she developed musically as complex as P. Too much of this thread centers on technical skills and virtuoisity. There is no doubt that Prince has an unbelievable musical mind and this is attested to by great musicians, engineers and musical academics. This talent was fostered at an very young age. His mother recalls the musical instincts of Prince as an infant. He was self taught on several instruments by the age of 12. At this time, Prince was also composing from several instruments and leading a band.

People forget that P was the youngest artist in the history of the music business to produce himself on a major label debut. Just think of what that represents! Prince was one in a million. There is no doubt he was a child prodigy.
[b]

2 a: an extraordinary, marvelous, or unusual accomplishment, deed, or event b: a highly talented child or youth

According to the definition in the dictionary, the answer would be a simple yes.

adorable2 said:

He wasn't a highly talented child or youth, though - he was a very, very hard-working one. Anybody who says that's second best is an idiot.

prodigy



Main Entry: prod·i·gy
Pronunciation: \ˈprä-də-jē\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -gies
Etymology: Middle English, from Latin prodigium omen, monster, from pro-, prod- + -igium (akin to aio I say) — more at adage
Date: 15th century
1 a: a portentous event : omen b: something extraordinary or inexplicable
2 a: an extraordinary, marvelous, or unusual accomplishment, deed, or event b: a highly talented child or youth
Seems like he fits the definition to me.

ReginaCarman said:

What did he accomplish at an early age ?
[Edited 3/15/07 19:30pm]

I think that while Prince's primary gift began expressing itselve as a child,
the enormity of his a talents(s) didn't really "explode" until after puberty
& manisfested not only in the form of an advanced musical ability,
but also
as a big ass afro.

Illustrator said:

So instead of a growth spurt, Prince experienced a growth in musical ability.

anon said:

There's no need to "try it". And don't be a smart-ass. When it comes to Prince on this board, objectivity in the form of intelligent discussion doesn't seem to exist, for the most part. People will find a way to make Prince seem all-knowing, all-powerful, no matter what the facts state. Dude's human - it's no knock against him if he wasn't a prodigy. The guy's still special. But I've stated this before...

coolcat said:

Rome wasn't built in a day and Prince didn't jump out of his crib, fully-formed as a musician. He developed over time. Child prodigies, as I stated earlier, usually demonstrate VIRTUOSITY on a given instrument. Prince is not a virtuoso on any instrument, in a technical sense. He's "simply" a gifted, self-taught,musician who carved out a special niche for himself.

Speaking of prodigies/gifted young musicians, check out Stevie: http://www.youtube.com/wa...SCZv7786KY

I recall Prince's high school mentor and teacher saying that he wasn't that impressed with Prince's ability and thought that if anyone had the talent to make it, it was Andre Cymone not Prince. Most people who do end up being really great at something don't show early signs of it. Takes time to really develop for most people, I know, that absolutely no one pays attention to you when you aren't any good, and so, when you do become really good, people think it happened overnight. They don't see that not only did you have to work at a craft, you also had to have more dedication than average to develop to that degree. That is one thing a "prodigy" may not have. As you can see, I see nothing good in being a prodigy and see it as a set up for a fall.

mozfonky said:

Exactly.

JesseDezz said:

There's always need to step outside the box. And perhaps you're right that some want to make the man into a god, but could it be that you are so intent on refuting this that you don't see that it might not be what they're doing at all?

There's validity in the argument that, despite the textbook definition, "prodigy" should also include the creative process. After all, this is what later separates the side show acts from the "true prodigy"...The one that grows up to become the Mozart...

It's hard to imagine that anyone could emerge at such a young age, the way Prince did, without having advanced musical inner workings at an even younger age.

Come on out and discuss with us. The air is nice.

JesseDezz said:
There's no need to "try it". And don't be a smart-ass. When it comes to Prince on this board, objectivity in the form of intelligent discussion doesn't seem to exist, for the most part. People will find a way to make Prince seem all-knowing, all-powerful, no matter what the facts state. Dude's human - it's no knock against him if he wasn't a prodigy. The guy's still special. But I've stated this before...

[/quote]

I still have the quote from P's teacher and you can find it in Poplife, where he says these things about Prince and stated that the only remarkable quality he had was that he would work on something until he got it.

mozfonky said:

Exactly. People seem to think there's something bad about that - like having to work at something is artificial or second best. Absolute bullshit.

I was very talented when I was a kid, but now I'm fucking nowhere because I'm a lazy bastard - I'd give anything to have swapped whatever talent I might have had for a good work ethic.

mozfonky said:

10 people working just as hard, or harder, won't necessarily develop into a "Talent" or a Prince. It has to be there to begin with. Yes it's understood that he did not display prodigy talent but is it possible that it's very much like Helen Keller, it was there but because it wasn't nurtured early, the technicality wasn't realized young?

There's validity in the argument that, despite the textbook definition, "prodigy" should also include the creative process. After all, this is what later separates the side show acts from the "true prodigy"...The one that grows up to become the Mozart...

It's hard to imagine that anyone could emerge at such a young age, the way Prince did, without having advanced musical inner workings at an even younger age.

Come on out and discuss with us. The air is nice.[/quote]

I don't know, my take on Prodigy is that it's not creative at all. Not impressive to me for the most part. In classical music, you have them, but pop and rock and soul is different, even the best don't have to be highly conforming to "technique", just a whole different game and a whole different set of skills. the european way of thought and teaching is much different and in so many ways the opposite, that I really don't know if prodigy can even be applied to american music. I hate how the classicists try to change my shit when I work under there tutelage and find it frusterating and boring too! I'm sure Prince wouldn't be able to escape even basic correcting, I've seen him play our instrument (piano) with his fingers doubled over and using the joint of his second knuckle, a classical teacher would shit on himself over that one. But hey, it works for our man why should he change it?

anon said:

Of course it has to be there in potential form, but I'm telling you as someone who was ignored in music and in boxing/martial arts as a beginner, and know full well that without the self sustaining faith, love, and dedication I had to both, I would have never gotten to the point where people thought I was special. And moreover, in my studies of great men, most of them were pretty inept at the start of their careers, Sugar Ray Robinson (my avatar there) was horrible as a young boxer, Duran was also, it usually takes time to tell whether someone is special or not. That is my take, I usually look at young people differently than the others around me because of this, you don't know which ones will develop into something and which ones won't, so I've always tried to treat them equally. I can think of plenty of people who started off strong and petered out for one reason or another. Like i say, the one quality of perserverance cannot be replaced by talent, Mike Tyson for example was a true boxing prodigy, but he never ever learned to cope with real struggle and cracked every time he faced it, so did Roy Jones Jr., like I say, without those intermittent struggles you are headed for a breakdown somewhere along the line.

mozfonky said:

I actually agree with very much of that. "Prodigy" as it is, is almost synonymous with technician. There's so much it doesn't factor in. Perhaps what gives it such a bad name are all those that manage to slip thru the cracks because their parents started them on at instrument, in the womb.

I also agree, that with classical music, it's so much easier to get by on technique and little else.

So is there a word that encompasses it all? Because after this thread, I don't want to see the word prodigy again, for a very long time.

mozfonky said:

Wisdom.

anon said:

I can't think of a good one that would blend the ability to perform at such a high level along with great creativity and hard work. I can't think of that word. maybe we should coin one.

mozfonky said:

I don't know, my take on Prodigy is that it's not creative at all. Not impressive to me for the most part. In classical music, you have them, but pop and rock and soul is different, even the best don't have to be highly conforming to "technique", just a whole different game and a whole different set of skills. the european way of thought and teaching is much different and in so many ways the opposite, that I really don't know if prodigy can even be applied to american music. I hate how the classicists try to change my shit when I work under there tutelage and find it frusterating and boring too! I'm sure Prince wouldn't be able to escape even basic correcting, I've seen him play our instrument (piano) with his fingers doubled over and using the joint of his second knuckle, a classical teacher would shit on himself over that one. But hey, it works for our man why should he change it?[/quote]

I understand your point of view but why must we view the definition of Prodigy from a strict European perspective. It's possible to be a child prodigy outside the western constructs of classical music and idioms. Haven't we moved past this mindset. And the possibility that an inner city public school music teacher did not immediately recognize the particular unique brilliance of Prince does not suprise me. I believe that there is alot of talented children that aren't propped up through expensive music forums. Don't forget that Prince spent a majority of his childhood between several households not exactly the type of environment conducive to button down recitals and classical school scholarships.

The executives at WB were willing to place their money on the youngest self produced debut in music history. Just think of how many talented youth he beat out from that talent pool.

peterfalconer said:

I'm just going to go ahead and assume u were NOT calling me an idiot.

adorable2 said:

No, not at all - just people who think that getting somewhere through hard work is second best to getting there through "natural talent".

anon said:

Yes Indeed, hee hee

The sad thing is, (at least here in the American schools), whatever prodigies we may have aren't getting any help to develop their skills, since many of the schools don't even have music classes anymore. I see it all over, especially in the inner-cities (where I'm from). To play an instrument is a rare thing nowadays. Even in the black churches, where you'd find at least two ten-year old drummers. It's not the same

JesseDezz said:

Yeah, people have changed so much, I really believe it is a major reason for the art of hip hop. People just don't have time to help out anyone even if they have the heart, which most people don't anymore. Any "help" I got as a young willing musician was really nearly useless and with very little attention. To make matters worse, between jobs and life, I really couldn't take it up as a craft until I was 23 and that is a ridiculous age to be beginning music. But, like anything else, if one has a strong desire there are ways even if they aren't very easy.