More 8am thoughts about immigrants: I think the unspoken thing I got from school was that US-born students were expected to work really hard for the things they're passionate about, while students from other countries were expected to work hard at everything because their families wanted an across-the-board work ethic. Are there exceptions to this rule? Yes. Are there exceptional students of all nationalities, both great and awful? Yes. This is anecdotal and generalized, but American students only worked REALLY hard for their passions and society -our parents, our teachers, our peers- accepted that, so it pronounced as I got older. In elementary school, my parents wanted me to get all A's. Usually, I didn't bring home a perfect grade card, but on the occasional semesters when I did, they were impressed because they knew I didn't like certain subjects. It was like, 'Oh, look at you! You had a great semester. Surprise, surprise.' But most of the time, if I brought home A's mixed with B's, they said, 'ok...good enough,' because they knew I didn't like that B subject, so they didn't expect me to try 100%. Gordon's parents were born in China. Gordon was expected to get an A in everything. It didn't matter if Gordon didn't care about English or science. His personal preference was irrelevant to the expectation...all A's. Eff your feelings.
At my elementary, middle, and high school, we got three grades for a class: the first was academic, the second was a number based on effort, and the third was conduct. So the perfect grade was A-1-A. A for academic, 1 for effort, A for conduct. The worst grade is an F-3-F. The numerical 'effort' score was highly subjective, according to each teacher's opinion about your work ethic. My sister loved English: those were her easy A-1-A, and that's what we worked hard at, while her other subjects were B 2 A or a B 1 B or even the rare A-2-B (you got an A, but you could've worked harder and your conduct was just ok, but not great). Occasionally you would get the native student with an A-2-C or A-3-D. A whiz kid with a shitty attitude and work ethic who can pass any test. When we would get our grades, American students would just look at the academic grade and be like, 'whew...I'm safe.' It felt like students from other countries sweated over every point. Their family expected A-1-A's. If there was a '2' or a 'B' for conduct... unacceptable. And of course, the academic grade better be an A.
In elementary school, we had 2 music classes b/c this was before the era of standardized tests, aka utopia. Students were treated holistically and trained to be well-rounded adults who could talk about art, culture, write in cursive, do their taxes, and speak some Spanish. So 2 music classes and 2 art classes every semester...freaky. I learned how to play the violin in a public school, like it was no big deal. I became passionate about the violin so my music scores were A-1-As. I got a cheap violin and a donated viola from a teacher and joined a local children's symphony. I practiced based on my passion for the violin week to week.
We were taught to practice about 4-5 hrs a day. At that level, my violin playing was sharp and clear. But if I was having a bad day or just felt lazy, I would practice 2 or 3 hours. And 3 hours isn't really a lot of time after you tune, do warm-ups, go through rough runs of the songs. 3 hours is serviceable, and you could hear it when I played that week. Cruise control. The students from other countries were PRACTICING...good times, bad times, bad days. It felt like they put in 4-5 hours every day, if not more, whereas the American violin students fluctuated week to week b/c our work ethic was tied to how passionate we felt. Over time, the foreign-born players just beat our asses b/c they were consistent in their work ethic, regardless of their emotions. The American students had a few good weeks, then a few mediocre weeks and some bad weeks. We were 'artiste' who had to be in our feelings, which works for some jobs that require inspiration. But for a children's symphony playing "Marshmallow World" or "Irish Washerwoman" or "Havah Nagilah" at a senior citizen's center, you don't need virtuosity. You just need a violinist who plays loud, fast, and sharp, and in tune. So the population of the US-born violinists dwindled in the symphony. Most of us liked the violin, but we didn't love it enough to spend most of our after-school time practicing in our bedrooms. We wanted to go outside and play video games; our weeks were more fluid, shaped by our passions.
One day the symphony conductor leveled with me. I was good, A minus level, not great. I had perfect pitch and some improvisational instincts which 'could' grow into true virtuosity with time and effort. He said if I dedicated 5+ hrs of practice every day, I could go get a scholarship to a good university...which would mean practicing 6 hrs a day in college. And then I could have an entire career...doing what I loved (ok, doing what I liked). I could get a free education and have a career as a violinist...if I cared enough OR... if I could muster the immigrant work ethic of detaching my emotions from my work effort. I thanked the conductor, went home, and started thinking of an exit plan from the symphony and the violin. I wonder if he sat down the other US-born students and they had the same reaction: "Mr. Violin...I love you, but I'm not 'in love' with you. I think we should see other ppl."
At Juilliard, the weekends were for child musicians. On Saturdays, the lobby would flood with adolescents. Teen violinists, pianists, cellists, all the parts of a symphony. Sometimes I would sit in the lobby and think about my time in a children's symphony and what my conductor told me. The kids in the Juilliard lobby were 80-90% Asian, with their moms, packed lunches, and accents that suggested they were born abroad. Occasionally I would see a Black child or Latino or even white...usually they too were born in another country. And very, very rarely I would find that unicorn: an American-sounding child spending their weekend doing the extra practice. I always wanted to ask them, 'What are you thinking about when you look around? Are you thinking what I was thinking when I was younger...how long until I quit this and find another passion? Or do you have that rare mix: an excellent work ethic detached from temporary emotions, combined with a genuine passion for music? Did your parents raise you to be excellent at everything, or only at the things you're passionate about? Is it a burden to be excellent at math or science when you might hate it? Or do you find comfort in the work itself, even when you're tired, even when your friends are dropping out to play PS2? Do you go to the violin and get lost in it? Or do you get lost in the diligence of a steadfast commitment? Can you have both? Can American children have both, or does our society tell us to only give 100% if we are feeling 100%?' Is that why American kids fall behind their international peers?'
Does our tendency to lead based on passion make us such erratic performers? Is that why more Americans lack the stick-to-itiveness for long-term planning in business, long-term relationships, and long-term spiritual commitments? B/c we're constantly throttling our ethics based mostly on our emotions? Is that why ppl take vows? So that they have a standard to uphold, even when they're not feeling it? And does that make us robots or better adults: to show up and perform at 100% and expect 100% when we're not at feeling it? I could argue both sides.
I've seen ppl run at 100% toward a career and life they hate, but they succeed due to steadfastness before having a mental breakdown. Before realizing, 'I don't even know myself...I don't even like myself...why have I been doing this for so long?' And I've seen ppl drop out before their true genius is revealed b/c they couldn't show up and give 100% because their work ethic was tied to their emotions
No comments:
Post a Comment