I am truly pumped to delve into my subject, the nature of ‘being good’ and talent in the performing arts realm, but I’m at a bit of an impasse in regards to research. It’s difficult to devise a paper championing the validity of everyone’s talent and skill when you also have cultivate your own ethos.
I am currently torn between two different styles of writing for this project. One style is the more objective, news-story based style of the Atlantic. The other style mimics the creative nonfiction-y, less structured style of pieces found in The New Yorker. Both have a number of pros and cons and both would be a lot of fun to write. With the New Yorker style article, I could derive more of the piece from my own experiences. But, in a weird way, I feel like that’s kind of cheating. In all of the hard hitting, longstanding articles I have read that have commented on current social issues there are a variety of sources utilized, rounding out the argument. Yet, shouldn’t my experiences be enough? Isn’t that what I’m arguing anyway: that you should be able to feel valid in your art without lots of awards and accolades? This train of thought has me feeling kind of like this:
I have had some success with finding more empirical articles thanks to the resources at the music library. Turns out there’s a pretty large amount of academic journals dedicated to the study and practice of music! However, this could limit my audience, something I’m particularly concerned about. I’ve also had some success with TED talks, which I did not expect. I’ve never thought of using a video as a source for a paper, but I’ve found certain talks on genius and creativity in a general sense that correspond nicely with my topic.
As I begin to outline (my favorite thing to do), I hope to clarify the style I’m going to emulate for this project. Who knows, maybe I’ll come up with my own funky, pseudo – academic, emotionally riveting type of article that will convey my exact thoughts and feelings.