This leads me to wonder how much of violin playing is or ought to be visual. When I go to a concert, it's primarily for the visual experience, whereas my husband frequently closes his eyes; for him it's mostly an enhanced auditory experience. And while excessive movement can be distracting (like in the case of Joshua Bell, even though I love him), in gypsy works and such I feel like the grand movements are a big part of the performance. What does everyone else think about this?
My lesson was last Wednesday, but tonight was the first time I've practiced since then. Not for lack of wanting to, but other things took precedence, like work and practicing piano for the church service I was playing in this morning. The latter was a waste, though; I still performed badly, partly due to insufficient practice and partly due to my husband (and page-turner) arriving late with our two-year-old, who insisted on sitting in Mommy's lap on the piano bench when I wasn't playing, then spit water out all over the floor and shrieked while she was removed from the sanctuary. Ah, motherhood. :)
I'm slowly building up my practice time. It was hard just to do half an hour when I started violin again a few months ago, but tonight I went for 45 minutes without too much difficulty. Yes, I'm aware of all you young ones out there who are logging 4+ hours a day, but progress is progress and accomplishments are relative. While I have lost---wasted---many years, I also know that I'm playing violin now for all the right reasons. Every moment I can spend with my instrument is a gift to myself. Being a violinist is no longer a burden, but a privilege.
Anyway, good luck and I hope you stick with it!
This entry has been archived and is no longer accepting comments.
Violinist.com is made possible by...
Discover the best of Violinist.com in these collections of editor Laurie Niles' exclusive interviews.