Week 9

Hughes

Hughes mentions that in the case of Mozart, "the connection between" his "talent and creativity is not straightforward (Hughes 80)." Leopold Mozart could have influenced his son, or the proper "opportunity, motivation, and hard work" could have been the overriding factors contributing to Mozart's success. All of the above most likely contributed in some way to Mozart's musical output, but his natural ability probably overshadowed any peripheral influences in his life. Wolfgang began composing his own music at age six, drafting complete sympohonies at age ten, and finished an entire opera by age fourteen. This type of natural talent seems to avail any influence exerted by marginal forces, figures, or social factors. He wrote to his father that " I pay not attention whatever to anybody's praise or blame...I simply follow my own feelings." Mozart's surviving manuscripts attest to his unparalleled ability, exhibiting not amendments, smudges or mistakes at all (unlike those of Beethoven). They are quite literally flawless compositions. Joseph Hayden, a great classical composer, exclaimed to Mozart's father that "I swear before Almighty God that your son is the greatest composer I know either in person or by reputation."

Walsh

The Walsh reading was an arbitrary and ambiguous commentary on shamanism. Walsh probes the claim that shamans were epileptics, and concludes that some may have been but most probably were not. Hysterical shamans probably existed too, but most probably were not. A lot of shamans were indeed tricksters, but some were not (which is debatable). How much accountability should those individuals have to bear, or do we simply reject them as isolated incidents of exploiting social and political power? Additionally, he notes that some shaman's hallucinations and delusions could have been legitimately diagnosed by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual IV, yet others merely dismissed as examples of cultural ignorance. Futhermore, Rorschach results are highly inaccurate, yet sometimes their results merit further examination. While trying to leave no stone unturned, Walsh's discourse seems to sway back and forth like the motion of a pendulum. At any rate, I was initially looking forward to reading about some specific data that may have been done on this topic, especially given Walsh's scientific background. A combination of unscientifically trained ethnographic accounts and a void in contemporary scientific information impedes any conclusive or comprehensive understanding of shamanism, which seems to imply that that sort of information may not ever congeal. Finally, Walsh demonstrates why we should not solely let the initials M.D. and PH.D dictate how we listen to a person's argument.