The first is that teaching seems to be much more effective if
the teacher does it in a "guided discovery" sort of way. Part of
the discovery is how the person's hands and physical structure
works. Part of the discovery is the logic of the harp. To simply
teach a technique is misguided. On the other hand, I find that
SOME things don't vary too much, they are pretty consistent.
I spend a lot of time in the beginning getting the student to
listen critically to the sound of the pluck. I think self-taught
people come to this eventually, but then have to adjust after the
habits are instilled. I think some of the self-taught people don't
listen critically because they are so excited by the physical
sensations of playing and making music.
I agree with Robin Beecher when she said:
> You can learn to do nearly anything on your own, but it will almost
> always take longer. Even a few lessons can help.
Yes, you can learn a lot on your own. But a teacher will help
you do it faster without all the chaff. A teacher will be able
to guide you through the exciting discoveries of the harp,
challenging you at just the right moment.
Lastly, taking lessons is a two-way street. The student should
give input about what is working, what they are frustrated about,
what direction they want to take. As a teacher, I want my students
to be both frustrated and challenged and successful and curious; I
will never know if they just sit there saying,"Yes, Ma'm." I agree
with Christina Tourin, getting a good teacher that you are
comfortable with is critically important. Be prepared to take a
couple sample lessons, or to drive an hour or two once a month.
Work out something, but get the teacher you want.
Happy New Year! Sue Richards