Loose Language?

In an article for The Wall Street Journal by Barbara Jepson concerning the 13-year-old musical prodigy, pianist Conrad Tao, we find this:

Reed-slender and affable, this Illinois native studied piano, violin and composition from an early age, giving him multiple options for a musical career. Since 2004, he has won awards in several noted competitions for young composers. Last October, he performed a Tao triple-header, playing the premiere of his piano concerto, "The Four Elements," with the ProMusica Chamber Orchestra in Columbus, Ohio, followed by taxing encores for piano (Liszt) and violin (Bach). Google his name + YouTube + Prokofiev for a sample of his firepower at age 12.

Such exceptional talent doesn't spring fully formed from the womb. It requires years of expert training, effective practice and performing experience to compete with adults — one commonly cited definition of a prodigy.

It may have been nothing more than a loose use of language to declare that, “[s]uch exceptional talent doesn't spring fully formed from the womb,” but given the postmodern horror of anything that smacks of the transcendent or elite we suspect not, not even in The Wall Street Journal. The fact of the matter is that talent such as displayed by this young musician is very much something that “spring[s] fully formed from the womb” as does, say, blue eyes or red hair, all of which are determined genetically. The difference is that unlike blue eyes or red hair, such innate talent can never be fully realized absent “years of expert training, effective practice and performing experience.”

Perhaps that’s what Ms. Jepson meant to say, but as we’ve above remarked, we suspect not.