Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

What are the differences between Pro, semi pro,writers, performers, and hobbyists


Dr. Ellwood

Recommended Posts

Originally posted by Billster:

...I think you are ascribing motivations to the hobbyist, as if they are buying gear in a poser fashion. ...
The value judgement is yours, not mine. All I ask is that you look at the facts, and few hobbyists stop at a single guitar, effects rig, and amp.. they are constantly changing gear, constantly concerned about the newest/latest/greatest. They talk about it, they study catalogs, the lust for new stuff, just because it is new. That is okay, that is what hobbyists do.. from model railroading to stamp collecting. No harm, no foul.

 

Bill

"I believe that entertainment can aspire to be art, and can become art, but if you set out to make art you're an idiot."

 

Steve Martin

 

Show business: we're all here because we're not all there.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Replies 154
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I can only talk from my personal experiences. Much like BPark I grew up with the attitude of learning to play well enough to get into a cover band. I was shy and waited till I was 30 before actually playing in a bar band. It was quite fun and the extra cash didn't hurt. But I was bored on 75% of the songs we played unless it was a new one. We started adding are own intros, endings and soloes and it started getting to be fun again. Something about makeing my own music just made me feel good.

 

I continued playing cover songs and really didn't have any aspirations to write music but still would mix up and change the songs quite a bit. It always seemed to me that the songs we changed the most were the ones we enjoyed the most. At some point when we were just jamming in the practice room and not really playing songs we decided that we should write are own songs since it seemed we sounded as good or better than when playimg covers. We had a couple people in the band that resisted this change and it eventually caused these people to leave.

 

All I can say is when we reformed and starting writing and recording complete songs it was the most deeply satisfying thing I have ever done in my life. The songs probably weren't all that good but they sure sounded good to us. We couldn't find gigs either but it was still worth it. I wouldn't try to say that writing songs is "better" than playing covers. But if you have that inside of you then you can gain alot of enjoyment from it. If you only play covers you may be missing out on that wonderfull feeling. Its that same feeling as when you made the jump from playing in your bedroom to playing with other people.

 

I've gotten to the point now where I doubt I would join a band where I was asked to play songs exactly like the record. I have to be able to improvise or at least make up my own parts. So this certainly has an impact on the Pro or amatuer question. If you want to play for an audience you have to make compromises at some time in at the very least playing what they want to hear. Even the top established bands or the most innovative musicians in the world have a hard time taking their audiences with them when they change styles. Of course maybe if I got desparate to play out again, I would play straight covers, but where my head is at now keeps me from wanting to try this.

 

Elwood in the other thread I did not mean to say that playing covers is not a valid way to express music. But you can be narrow minded sometimes as I am sure you would admit. It is just discussion and not meant as a right or wrong thing. I just never can keep my attention span up for years listening to and playing the same music. Creativity is such a spiritual experience that everyone should at least give it a try. I think that most people that have written a song, or a poem, or have painted a painting would probably agree. It helps you to discover who you are on many different levels, even if it is not succesfull.

 

There is plenty of room for working musicians to play other peoples music, whether its rock or in a symphony. There is a both a public need for those musicians and just the art of playing an instrument is worthwhile and life enriching. Many world class musicians, especially classical players can't improvise or write music. But if more of them did then maybe that that form of music could grow more than it has in the last generation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pros are people who make enough money at it that they don't have to do anything else. Semi-pros are people who make less money than pros at it. That includes singer/sonwriters. Everybody else has an expensive hobby.

Always remember that you are unique. Just like everyone else.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by ellwood:

For a long time now on this Forum I have seen many different aspects and approaches to playing guitar. In many instances these differences have seemed to cause clashes in philosophical viewpoints. There seems to be a general attitude that players who do not write original material are somehow not complete in their motivations and have missed out on the creative part of their musical experience. What if any is the value in playing cover songs? Is the motivation to work in a cover band a far second to being in a original material band even if the original band does not work? I think a discussion of these attitudes might be a healthy and focused thing to ponder.

Well the discussion didn't seem too healthy or focused. So I thought I would repost Ellwood's original comment.

 

What's the value...? Someone answered it above: it's entertainment. There are many, many people who enjoy hearing a live band perform covers of songs they are familiar with.

 

"Is the motivation" to play covers "a far second to being in a original material band"? It's just different. There are lots of opportunities to play covers and be somewhat successful (my definition of successful: to work as often as you'd like, to be paid an amount of money that you are OK with and to have your audience appreciate you).

 

There are many less opportunities to become successful at playing originals (my definition: being able to support yourself on the income from playing/recording your own tunes). Of course, the are SOME opportunities when playing originals to become WILDLY successful (Definition: mansions, private planes, total economic independence for you are many generations of offspring, etc. It's unlikely that you can have that level of "success" playing covers.

 

Yes some people are snobbish about it, but I haven't seen it displayed so blatantly here on the forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Gruupi:

Many world class musicians, especially classical players can't improvise or write music. But if more of them did then maybe that that form of music could grow more than it has in the last generation.

Yup, I'm w/ you on that one.

"Without music, life would be a mistake."

--from 'Beyond Good and Evil', by Friedrich Nietzsche

 

My MySpace Space

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Billster:

Ellwood, everyone knows you play in a cover band. Read your first post in this thread - in context, it comes off as defensive. Vince saw that line, I just got a kick out of it.

 

Cover vs. original is a legitimate discussion, and I participated in that too, so don't think I'm just here to annoy you.

Ok Bill and this is the gods truth in this: This post was never meant to be defensive. It was pointed at resolving, or attempting to resolve some observations from other discussions over quite a long period of time. It was meant to pull up the shade on some comments made by some guys about doing covers and their supposed lack of creativity. I did frame it in a way that I thought would bring out these conversations in larger detail. Honestly though it was not posted in anger at all. I am very secure in my accomplishments in music and made the decision not to do original music a long time ago. I was interested in hearing the view points of people. I have to say this though, I have never run into as much distain for cover musicians as I have in some of these conversations. It seems sometimes that people develop this opinion by merely trying to do original music, and if none is sold or becomes popular in anyway it is still seen as something to be held in higher regard than cover playing? I think a complement for a song writer would be if someone like me asked to do an original writers material and perform it in front of an audience. I can guarantee that if I did it would be done very very well. I have like most people involved in music written some material and in my opinion it stinks. I have written and sold some commercials and arranged a lot more for lyrics writers. I am still a cover musician in my opinion.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE by Vince: "MIdn you, I guess there must be a certain pleasure in having some guy come up to the front of the stage and ask you to play (say) "Bus Stop" by the Hollies ('cause it's raining just like the day he met his gurl) and yes, you CAN pull out stuff like that and make that guy and his date happy. That must have its own rewards, nein?"

 

This kind of comment seems to me to make playing covers seem very trivial and kinda silly? nein?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For better or for worse, I am like Elwood in that I like to provoke discussions with baited questions. Some people may call it a bad habit but I have always enjoyed debate as long as it doesn't degenerate to the "you suck... no you suck" variety. Elwood has strong opinions and I admire that quality in him. Alot of his posts are quite informative and provide an opportunity to think. Sometimes defending a position helps to clarify your own views. Sometimes when argueing with someone if you listen, then your views can be changed and you are enlightened to a new way of thinking.

 

All of us go to far sometimes, but in spirit this is the best forum, online or otherwise that I have ever been apart of. There is alot of mature intellegent discussion that goes on here with very little trolling and spamming. Every other forum online I have seen is mostly a bunch of cretins who's best arguement is "so and so rocks and kicks ass" or "you suck dude". Even when we disagree it is a lively discussion. Even MR Jazz Guitar Nice Guy presented better arguements than most other forums members did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Gruupi. I like to argue but I like to learn too. I have learned many things here and I like to focus opinions and polarize opinion, it puts things in perspective for me. You are SO right! I have looked at the other discussion forums around the internet and there is nothing close to the combined talent, brains and just plain good writing like we see here everyday! Can you imagine how great it would be if we lived in the same city!! talk about some out of control jams and collaboration not to mention world class sound reinforcement and studio wizards!!! ya its a GREAT bunch isnt it!!! "Listen do ya wanna know a secret"! my guys read this board allot.. they wont contribute because they are not inclined to do internet kind of activities but...many times they say.Lee you are such an ass hole sometimes on there arent you!! or they might say ..ya that guy kicked your ass on that last thing..or We are gonna get on there and tell them your really an nice guy in person !!!!! I SAY THEY BETTER NOT!!!! (remember who gets the money first!) :D
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My decision not to do original music was made for me. Basically, I'm crap at writing my own. Every time I try it, I come up with other people's music.

 

I make more money from playing in a year than I spend on gear but not enough to live on. I've only eked out a living at it for about 5 years. And even then my wife worked.

 

So I guess I'm a semi-pro because I can't support myself at it (at least I don't play enough to do that -- I don't think I can play enough to replace my "day job" salary -- not at what I make on an average session).

 

I consider myself a musician if not really an artist.

Born on the Bayou

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by bpark@prorec.com:

Originally posted by Billster:

...I think you are ascribing motivations to the hobbyist, as if they are buying gear in a poser fashion. ...
The value judgement is yours, not mine. All I ask is that you look at the facts, and few hobbyists stop at a single guitar, effects rig, and amp.. they are constantly changing gear, constantly concerned about the newest/latest/greatest. They talk about it, they study catalogs, the lust for new stuff, just because it is new. That is okay, that is what hobbyists do.. from model railroading to stamp collecting. No harm, no foul.

 

Bill

Fair enough. It was this line that I felt was a little beat-down on hobbyists:

 

A hobbyist spends more money at GC than he makes performing each year, and is usually more interested in buying gear than in performing, as if somehow the gear was going to make him a better performer.
I don't think that's true as far as "somehow the gear was going to make him a better performer". Some people are like that, but some other people know their bag, and have a legitimate pursuit in mind.

-------------------------

 

Originally posted by Ellwood:

[QB]QUOTE by Vince: "MIdn you, I guess there must be a certain pleasure in having some guy come up to the front of the stage and ask you to play (say) "Bus Stop" by the Hollies ('cause it's raining just like the day he met his gurl) and yes, you CAN pull out stuff like that and make that guy and his date happy. That must have its own rewards, nein?"

 

This kind of comment seems to me to make playing covers seem very trivial and kinda silly? nein?[qb]

I think the functional statement in Vince's post is "That must have its own rewards"

 

It's fun to pull a tune out of thin air. I have some pieces that I wrote in approximately the time it takes to play them. I mean the thing just landed in my lap - I played a melody, I played some chords, they match, I remembered them with no need to strain as I scribbled on the manuscript paper - it's a pretty magical feeling, up there with making babies and watching them grow.

 

It's also fun to plunk through "the Wind Cries Mary" with just the right sound dialed on the amp.

-----------------------

 

 

Originally posted by Ellwood:

[QB]Ok Bill and this is the gods truth in this: This post was never meant to be defensive. It was pointed at resolving, or attempting to resolve some observations from other discussions over quite a long period of time. It was meant to pull up the shade on some comments made by some guys about doing covers and their supposed lack of creativity. I did frame it in a way that I thought would bring out these conversations in larger detail. Honestly though it was not posted in anger at all.[qb]

Being provocative is ok, but jumping up and down (in an internet sort of way +1+1+1111!!!!pwnd!!!) when someone says your being provocative is a different thing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by ellwood:

For a long time now on this Forum I have seen many different aspects and approaches to playing guitar. In many instances these differences have seemed to cause clashes in philosophical viewpoints.

I've not really seen these clashes. In any event I don't think we're talking about philosophical view points at all. When someone whips out "The guitar is not really a guitar" or "there is no reason to believe the guitar is there at all" then we'll be talking philosophy.

 

Nope. No philosophy here.

 

Originally posted by ellwood:

There seems to be a general attitude that players who do not write original material are somehow not complete in their motivations and have missed out on the creative part of their musical experience.

Again, I've not see that. Is that something hurled at Segovia or Bream or Jimmy Rainey or Barry Galbraith? I don't see that attitude here and never have seen it either.

 

As an aside, every music theory class I ever took required us to write music to demonstrate understanding of the principles being covered. I know counterpoint is also taught that way, and arranging and orchestration for that matter. Creating music is at least an important part of learning music. I can't imagine someone that plays music that never created music. The premise seems flawed. As for saying that people that don't consider themselves song writers "have missed out on the creative part of their musical experience", well in a sense that is true. It is different to write something than to play something. Just as improvising all night over tunes is different than improvising "free" all night is different than playing a well rehearsed planned down to the note set solo or in a band or any shades of grey in between. They are all different experiences. None is more valid than the other. I'm a fan of figure skating, imagine how different that art would be if they improvised it (besides all the broken bones they'd get).

 

Originally posted by ellwood:

What if any is the value in playing cover songs?

If there is anyone in this forum that can answer that question, it is you Ellwood. Value has two sides in this context, but only one in the "real world". We must be talking about the "internal" value one ascribes to their own performing of "cover songs", which I think we don't do justice defining. I have played in original bands and I've played classical guitar. I've recorded for singer songwriters. In all these various bands I've performed one song that I co-wrote. I've had a lot of live improvisations recorded that then ended up being "co-wrote" by everyone playing on it, but the vast majority of "originals" I've done I didn't write. Does that mean I'm "covering" the song? The distinction doesn't really hold up for me. I've never performed any Jazz for an audience but those are all "covers", as are rock tunes.

 

When I play either rock or jazz I remake the tune in some way to make it my own. There is a distinction made bewteen "note for note" covering of a tune and more freely interpreting it. The internal value of either approach is only definable by the individual.

 

The external value of it is a whole different matter. I think it doesn't matter what music is being played. There are more ways to make money than playing covers at corporate gigs or for a cut of the door doing originals. I know a guy that plays bass on the music heard on day time soap operas (I don't know which soap or soaps). That is his primary gig-- or was anyway. I'm like an aquaintance of a guy that gets his songs (as a singer songwriter) placed on TV shows. His first one was on "Party of Five". I don't know what he gets for it. Music is everywhere you turn: someone is writing it, recording it, arranging it.

 

Music is a lot like figure skating. for every Sasha Cohen and Michelle Kwan there are thousands of others that put all their hearts and lives into it and you'll never hear of them. Some get gigs skating with like "Ice Capades" but even they are the rare exceptions. Some teach. For the rest, external value came and went with their last competition and all it is for them is internal value. It is through this transition from external value to internal value that all the "crap" about "Bushido" evolved in Japanese martial art. Not create a fight over this idea, but as there were more samuri than battles the "high code" of the warrior got "higher" and the base 'art' of killing became something else. I'd say that since the demise of the big band era we've had musicians turning into practicioners of an "internal" art.

 

Anyone that can get paid a significant amount of money playing music should consider themselves lucky. When I first thought about looking for gigs on bass "freelance" I was told to never take a gig I was going to hate. After taking one too many of them, and 'redefining' "gigs I hate" and re-figuring all the different reasons to be tempted to take a gig that are not in fact real good reasons to take it, I kinda think I know why.

 

There is only one external value in this: money. What people think of your playing or the music you play means nothing. It is not a safe bet to always equate the amount paid to do something and the "quality" of the finished product nor an audiences' reaction to it. There are all sorts of reasons for this. The only thing that counts "externally" is the money, and the only thing that counts internally is what you think of it. IN that spirit I don't understand why Ellwood you feel "dissed" by anyone in this forum for playing covers. I don't actually see any dissing, but more importantly I don't know why you feel it.

 

Originally posted by ellwood:

Is the motivation to work in a cover band a far second to being in a original material band even if the original band does not work? I think a discussion of these attitudes might be a healthy and focused thing to ponder.

Movitation is an internal thing. I actually see no reason to discuss it.

check out some comedy I've done:

http://louhasspoken.tumblr.com/

My Unitarian Jihad Name: Brother Broadsword of Enlightened Compassion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Gruupi:

Motivation is an internal thing, but I see lots of reasons to discuss it.

Funny... I don't see any reason at all for discussing publically the motivation that fuels the desire, need, want or cause that drives any art form.

 

It's that individualistic.

 

We'd need a Dr. Phil thread to mamage this and a whole new set of rules governing tollerance or the lack thereof.

 

It would be very inlightening for each of use to modify our BIO thread entry to include "why" we play.

 

IMO

I still think guitars are like shoes, but louder.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by bpark@prorec.com:

Originally posted by GtrWiz:

So, along that line of thinking, would I be a professional-hobbyist?

 

I don't think so. I'm not being defensive, because I feel that I've proven myself, and I'm no longer willing to make the sacrifices that it sometimes takes to be a "full time" or "Professional" musician. For me, it's not a hobby, it's my passion. I spend way more time on my music than I ever will at my day job... ask my wife! ;)

I don't know why you have trouble with thins... just own up to what you have done. It is alright not to be a professional musician anymore. It will be just as alright if/when you decide to make your living from it again. Passion does not describe professionalism. One of the early parts of my original message I suggested that it is important to know the difference between art and commerce. 'Professional' implies (to 99.999% of the western world)the ability to earn a living from what you claim to do. It has nothing to do with passion.

 

 

Bill

Originally posted by Crypt Picker:

Pros are people who make enough money at it that they don't have to do anything else. Semi-pros are people who make less money than pros at it. That includes singer/sonwriters. Everybody else has an expensive hobby.

I just don't think it's that easy, for instance:

 

A friend of mine from college, who recently passed, was the bass player for Duran Duran, when they started their reunion, they let go of the touring band. After DD was over, Wes persued other interest photography, cycling, and hockey. He no longer played for a living, he was, without a doubt, the best bass player I have ever known. Was he no longer a "professional"?

If you knew Wes, you would know that, yes, he most certainly was professional...

www.myspace.com/christondre
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by GtrWiz:

...After DD was over, Wes persued other interest photography, cycling, and hockey. He no longer played for a living, he was, without a doubt, the best bass player I have ever known. Was he no longer a "professional"?

If you knew Wes, you would know that, yes, he most certainly was professional...

First, you are romaticising the hell out of this. That's okay.

 

Second, he was retired. That mkes him a retired professional bass player.

 

Third, you really seem to want to hang on to that moniker "Professional".

 

And, he still made his living from his work as a bassist? These other persuits were basically hobbies to keep himself busy? I can't imagine that he had to work anymore.

 

Bill

"I believe that entertainment can aspire to be art, and can become art, but if you set out to make art you're an idiot."

 

Steve Martin

 

Show business: we're all here because we're not all there.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unions!

 

Now there's one hell of a way to kill an art form for the sake of preserving a job!

 

That's where all that processed cheese comes from!

 

....sorry... ya had it coming!

I still think guitars are like shoes, but louder.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote from Ellwood: I think a complement for a song writer would be if someone like me asked to do an original writers material and perform it in front of an audience. I can guarantee that if I did it would be done very very well.

Well said Elwood. I will go one further. I think it is quite a tribute to the original song writers that have written such great tunes that are worthy of being covered.

 

I've been meaning to ask you a question.

 

I see you have a union card and stuff like that.

 

Do you have to do any paper work for ASCAP to notify them you are playing a certain song and making x amount of money?

 

Do you have to pay royalties?

 

I've always wondered about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From Ellwood: my guys read this board allot.. they wont contribute because they are not inclined to do internet kind of activities but...many times they say.Lee you are such an ass hole sometimes on there arent you!! or they might say ..ya that guy kicked your ass on that last thing..or We are gonna get on there and tell them your really an nice guy in person !!!!! I SAY THEY BETTER NOT!!!! (remember who gets the money first!)
I've suspected as much from comments you've let slip. I've seen a nice guys slipping through on some of your comments. Hey, we all have a good side and a bad side.

 

Kudos to you for acknowleging that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Pappas:

From Ellwood: my guys read this board allot.. they wont contribute because they are not inclined to do internet kind of activities but...many times they say.Lee you are such an ass hole sometimes on there arent you!! or they might say ..ya that guy kicked your ass on that last thing..or We are gonna get on there and tell them your really an nice guy in person !!!!! I SAY THEY BETTER NOT!!!! (remember who gets the money first!)
I've suspected as much from comments you've let slip. I've seen a nice guys slipping through on some of your comments. Hey, we all have a good side and a bad side.

 

Kudos to you for acknowleging that.

Sometimes if it wasn't for lee it would be pretty

boring around here...I like him he's a good guy. :cool:

The story of life is quicker then the blink of an eye, the story of love is hello, goodbye.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Pappas:

Quote from Ellwood: I think a complement for a song writer would be if someone like me asked to do an original writers material and perform it in front of an audience. I can guarantee that if I did it would be done very very well.

Well said Elwood. I will go one further. I think it is quite a tribute to the original song writers that have written such great tunes that are worthy of being covered.

 

I've been meaning to ask you a question.

 

I see you have a union card and stuff like that.

 

Do you have to do any paper work for ASCAP to notify them you are playing a certain song and making x amount of money?

 

Do you have to pay royalties?

 

I've always wondered about that.

Thats a good question, although I dont have to address it, I think what is goig on is the club owner handles it like he handles the Juke box, the tunes we play are covered by a one size fits all charge to ASCAP or the Canadian equivalent of it. Anything played in the club is covered under this blanket and I think it is a one time charge made maybe yearly. We as a group never have had to pay for playing cover tunes and the unions never address it, at least my local has never. I have a travel card to play in other states and countries and there is no verbage that addressess ASCAP. We have to belong to the Union in order to play in clubs that have wait staff that are union members.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Darklava:

Originally posted by Pappas:

From Ellwood: my guys read this board allot.. they wont contribute because they are not inclined to do internet kind of activities but...many times they say.Lee you are such an ass hole sometimes on there arent you!! or they might say ..ya that guy kicked your ass on that last thing..or We are gonna get on there and tell them your really an nice guy in person !!!!! I SAY THEY BETTER NOT!!!! (remember who gets the money first!)
I've suspected as much from comments you've let slip. I've seen a nice guys slipping through on some of your comments. Hey, we all have a good side and a bad side.

 

Kudos to you for acknowleging that.

Sometimes if it wasn't for lee it would be pretty

boring around here...I like him he's a good guy. :cool:

:D
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by bpark@prorec.com:

Originally posted by GtrWiz:

...After DD was over, Wes persued other interest photography, cycling, and hockey. He no longer played for a living, he was, without a doubt, the best bass player I have ever known. Was he no longer a "professional"?

If you knew Wes, you would know that, yes, he most certainly was professional...

First, you are romaticising the hell out of this. That's okay.

 

Second, he was retired. That mkes him a retired professional bass player.

 

Third, you really seem to want to hang on to that moniker "Professional".

 

And, he still made his living from his work as a bassist? These other persuits were basically hobbies to keep himself busy? I can't imagine that he had to work anymore.

 

Bill

Bill, believe me, any romantic notion of being a musician was dispelled long ago. Not saying that I'm jaded, far from it, but I am well aware of the realities of life as a musician.

I posted an example outside of myself specifically to avoid people from thinking that I'm still holding on to any sort of "Glory Days". It simply isn't true.

 

Here's the definition of Professional from Webster.com:

 

Main Entry: 1pro·fes·sion·al

Pronunciation: pr&-'fesh-n&l, -'fe-sh&-n&l

Function: adjective

1 a : of, relating to, or characteristic of a profession b : engaged in one of the learned professions c (1) : characterized by or conforming to the technical or ethical standards of a profession (2) : exhibiting a courteous, conscientious, and generally businesslike manner in the workplace

2 a : participating for gain or livelihood in an activity or field of endeavor often engaged in by amateurs b : having a particular profession as a permanent career c : engaged in by persons receiving financial return

3 : following a line of conduct as though it were a profession

- pro·fes·sion·al·ly adverb

 

for a bit more clarity here's Profession:

 

Main Entry: pro·fes·sion

Pronunciation: pr&-'fe-sh&n

Function: noun

Etymology: Middle English professioun, from Old French profession, from Late Latin & Latin; Late Latin profession-, professio, from Latin, public declaration, from profitEri

1 : the act of taking the vows of a religious community

2 : an act of openly declaring or publicly claiming a belief, faith, or opinion : PROTESTATION

3 : an avowed religious faith

4 a : a calling requiring specialized knowledge and often long and intensive academic preparation b : a principal calling, vocation, or employment c : the whole body of persons engaged in a calling

 

 

In both cases, livelihood and employment, are secondary to knowledge, skill, and the manner to which you represent yourself. My point being monitary gain alone does not make you a professional.

www.myspace.com/christondre
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by GtrWiz:

Here's the definition of Professional from Webster.com:

 

 

In both cases, livelihood and employment, are secondary to knowledge, skill, and the manner to which you represent yourself. My point being monitary gain alone does not make you a professional. [/QB]

Only in the definitions that you chose to cite. (I looked it up, too, in a hard cover version, which has quite a number of scenarios, each of which would need to be specifically applied to given situations...)

 

Forget for a moment that these are old definitions that will not stand much scrutiny in today's world. We all know for a fact that there are 'pros' in many fields who do not have a clue, so our own eyes and experiences put the lie to the idea that to be a pro you have to possess knowlege and act like a pro. And the defining line between pro and amature in any athletic situation, is PAYMENT. This is the metric worldwide, via the Olympic Committee definitions, and nationally, by various collegiate atheltic associations.

 

For 40 years now at least, monetary gain has been the ONLY clear definition of what differentiates a professional that can be accurately applied across the board.

 

Bill

"I believe that entertainment can aspire to be art, and can become art, but if you set out to make art you're an idiot."

 

Steve Martin

 

Show business: we're all here because we're not all there.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...