The
Value of Mistakes
By Jeffrey Agrell
Did he say value of mistakes? Has he been nipping at the
cooking sherry? What possible value could a mistake have?
Don’t we spend our musical lives in a relentless pursuit of
mistake-free performance?
That’s right, I know what you’re thinking. But hear me out.
There is a method to this mad thesis.
What do you feel when you make a ‘mistake’ when you playing
– either practicing or performing?
Is this a trick question? Yes, given conventional thought
patterns, but it shouldn’t be. Usual answers to this
question include a garden of reactions such as
disappointment, anger, alarm, agony, guilt, frustration,
distraction, panic, tension, nervousness, and so on.
Here’s what you should feel after making a mistake:
Nothing.
Did he say nothing? (It’s a definite on the cooking
sherry!) So I’m not supposed to care about how I play? So I
can just miss every note and that’s just fine? Huh? Huh?
Whoa, horse. Consider this: making mistakes is not about
feeling something. Neither is not making mistakes. Rather
than looking at a mistake as a crime that we perpetrate
against ourselves, our instruments, and our art, how about
a more useful definition of what a mistake is:
A mistake is information.
Mistakes can have much value for us if we acknowledge it
and make use of this information. Conversely, our progress
on the instrument will be severely curtailed if we
substitute guilt, denial, or panic for learning from this
information. Simply said, a mistake is an unexpected result
that tells the player that something needs changing in some
way. When (not if) such surprises happen, the proper
reaction is isolation of the problem, analysis of possible
causes, and construction of possible solutions. Not
irritation or tension.
By the same token, when things go exactly as planned, this
is also information; it means remember (kinesthetically)
what this feels like and do it again the same way next
time.
Remember the quote from the Kipling poem If?
If you can meet Triumph and Disaster and treat these two
imposters just the same…
It may come as a surprise, but playing ‘perfectly’ can be
hazardous, too. Have you ever been halfway through a
concert or recital and had the thought, “Hey! So far I
haven’t missed a single- oh, crap!”. Pride from perfection
is just as much a distraction from focus on the job at hand
as any negative emotional reaction to a mistake. Either
kind of reaction is an involvement of the ego, and personal
egos are not useful in getting a job done.
Sometimes the biggest difference between pro and amateur
players is that pros have learned the ability of instant
amnesia – when something unexpected happens, let go of it,
stay in the present moment, maintain calm and acute focus
and not let prior results (perfection or imperfection)
influence how you play what comes next. (Amnesia is perhaps
not the proper word, as it implies denial. The answer is to
quickly store information on unplanned occurrences in a
‘clam file’ for attention the next day; during performance
is not the time to digest the information the way you must
do during practice sessions.)
This same process holds true in many professional pursuits,
notably sports. As they say, in golf, the only thing that
will screw up your swing more than a bad shot is a good
shot: the problem is trying to force a good shot because
you just shot well/poorly rather than approaching each shot
with dispassionate focus and calm regardless of the
previous results. Written in big letters on the blackboard
in my office is the complete list of the most important
aspects of performing: 1. Calm (no tension) 2. Focus and
alertness and 3. Ego detachment.
Play. Observe closely. Isolate the problem. Make an
adjustment. Try again. Simple as that, and removing ego
reaction from mistakes saves much wear and tear on the
nervous and circulatory systems as well as making the
learning process much more efficient.
William Westney has written a splendid book all about this
subject entitled The Perfect Wrong Note. He says that
honest mistakes are a natural part of the learning process,
and that “if you take the time to immediately process the
mistake, your learning will be pure and lasting.” He goes
so far as to say that it is a good idea to produce as many
honest mistakes as possible for the sake of producing a
large amount of information that we can use in solving our
problems. “They save us a lot of time,” he says. “They
reveal the underlying specific reason for a particular
glitch.”
Children are able to assimilate the world so quickly
because they don’t worry about making mistakes. They
proceed with a spirit of endless adventure, persistence,
and enthusiasm. Adults learn much more slowly because they
have heavy ego attachment to results and have been schooled
to value product (perfection) over the process that allows
them to learn efficiently, which includes making lots of
mistakes and learning from them.
Westney is careful to distinguish between honest mistakes,
where attentive exploration is a natural part of efficient
learning, and careless mistakes that stem from
inattentiveness, where we may not even notice our mistakes
and/or where we don’t process the information we receive
from mistakes. In these cases, mistakes are likely to lead
to no progress and bad habits. Here, such a player may
rationalize sloppy playing with vague spronouncements:
-“Oops. Well, that never happened before.”
-“Hey, nobody’s perfect.”
-“Well, I missed a couple things, but it was pretty good on
the whole.”
-“I don’t know what happened. I can play this piece.”
As Westney says, this is just narcissistic thinking:
justifying one’s efforts and denying the useful information
to be gained from careful identification and close
examination of the mistakes. Most useful is gleaning
specific information from a missed note: instead of saying,
‘I messed up,’ say ‘I aimed too low on that Bb.’ A need to
keep a highly polished ego leads to denial of anything that
doesn’t fit the picture and thus drastically curtails
learning. Westney gives the example of why Korean women
learn much faster than men: women have lower status, and
are thus ‘allowed’ to make mistakes. He quotes a Korean
woman: “When a man makes mistakes, it is an affront to his
masculine pride. I could make a fool of myself, so it was
easy to learn English.”
Much of our performance anxiety stems from our
nonacceptance of making mistakes, as William Scharnberg
pointed out in “The Importance of Failure in Artistic
Development.” He says
The
mechanical aspects of preparation seldom pose
insurmountable obstacles to efficient practice. The more
difficult takes is often dealing with our self-esteem
(self-image, self-concept).
Scharnberg
recognizes that society builds in pressures to succeed
(conquer failure) from early on and at all costs. Since
trial and error is a natural part of the learning process,
we need to face and embrace the mistakes and ‘failures’
that we encounter along the way, and learn from them, use
them to do better the next time.
The measure of a performance is not that absolute note
perfection is achieved. Performances are chances to
validate how we are progressing on the continuum of
artistic development, which includes alert, focused, and
ego-free playing and learning from our mistakes.
Here’s a revised version of the original (trick) question:
how should you feel after a practice session where you were
aware of your mistakes and you remained calm, curious, and
ego-free as you eagerly used the information they contained
to inform and refine your efforts?
Very good indeed, I think!