Musicality: Natural vs Learned, Simple vs Complex

Tinymavy15 said:

Indeed. I think that is where so many fans see Yu-na as "musical" when actually is just very skilled at performing choreography well. If she never misses a beat of music, and "everything is timed to the music" this means that her choreographer, i.e. David Wilson created the program that way, and she skates the choreography as planned. There are skaters who are given equally great programs but deviate from it or lose the proper timing due to their lack of confidence, skill in the elements being performed or disregard for the music or the choreographer's work.

A skater's true musicality would be tested in something they have to improvise or choreograph themselves. Personally I can't see yu-na being a great choreographer.

Click to expand...

I feel the same way about her skating. Somehow she never really reached me because I always felt her performance was on a more superficial level relying on a combination of good choreography, good timing, trained expression, complete confidence in projection and technique, and ease of movement. It's exciting and vastly enjoyable to watch, but I don't really "feel" it. I don't feel that she really lets the music float through her or sink in.

Tinymavy15 said:

Indeed. I think that is where so many fans see Yu-na as "musical" when actually is just very skilled at performing choreography well. If she never misses a beat of music, and "everything is timed to the music" this means that her choreographer, i.e. David Wilson created the program that way, and she skates the choreography as planned. There are skaters who are given equally great programs but deviate from it or lose the proper timing due to their lack of confidence, skill in the elements being performed or disregard for the music or the choreographer's work.

A skater's true musicality would be tested in something they have to improvise or choreograph themselves. Personally I can't see yu-na being a great choreographer.

Click to expand...

First of all, it means she has musicality. Without musicality, you can't do it. Many other skaters including men who used his programs couldn't do her level. As MK described, YuNa listens to music. Her being musical does not necessaily mean that you have to like her though. Nobody denies that Beethoven had musicality but not everyone likes his music.

I don't know if she will be a great choreographer. But, she once made her ex program (with her coach then) when she was 14. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4M6FAzzzEc8 I don't think it is a great program but I think it is enjoyable.

I agree that Sasha is naturally musical and like her programs in genberal. But, her flow and movement looked to me a bit discrete (not smooth). (But still thinks she has musicality).

Tinymavy15 said:

Indeed. I think that is where so many fans see Yu-na as "musical" when actually is just very skilled at performing choreography well. If she never misses a beat of music, and "everything is timed to the music" this means that her choreographer, i.e. David Wilson created the program that way, and she skates the choreography as planned. There are skaters who are given equally great programs but deviate from it or lose the proper timing due to their lack of confidence, skill in the elements being performed or disregard for the music or the choreographer's work.

A skater's true musicality would be tested in something they have to improvise or choreograph themselves. Personally I can't see yu-na being a great choreographer.

Click to expand...

Actually Yuna has choreographed program herself, it is called Ben which she co-choreographed at age 14/15
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4M6FAzzzEc8

As for improvisation, check out this short clip where you see she runs her routine with the Bell of Moscow music during the Olympics warm up,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6WdkqZc088

look at the natural ease which she articulate her steps to the music, particularly her arm movements and the subtle differences to the Gershwin music, you can instantly see the articulation and rephrasing of the choreography by someone who is musical adapting to their environment. (Leave the fan wars aside please...I beg.)

Like Olympia's great points about instrumentalist, I really must disagree with your opinion. A musically gifted person can express musicality through anything, being the way they walk, talk (think of learning new sounds, new language - different pitch, intonations, accents etc.) move, dance, clap, beat, sing/rap, air conducting the music with their fingers etc. (Which Yuna has them in spades, her arm movements up to her finger tips) In this case, skating is the musical instrument skaters used to perform, so skater is no different than someone playing a musical instruments, except their body is their instruments.

Choreography is like a music score or incomplete film script. Words and notations are dead without someone to perform it, interpret it, embellish it and make it their own, make it alive and even better than what is on paper. Chopin does not make LanLan a great pianist, it is because LanLan is musical, he makes Chopin's music even more amazing than just another good technician playing. Part of that musicality certainly INCLUDE timing, to say someone who's not musical because they are just skilled at perform within time of the choreography is absurd.

A superb pianist is more than just another great technician who is able to plays the piece of work EXACTLY to the music score, it is the subtle differences which they instinctively react to the music, which are not routine and are variable to environmental factors, mood, a wide range of things beyond the scope of this internet post. David Wilson has choreographed for a number of world class skaters and he is obviously musically sensitive, yet why are majority of the master pieces fully realized are the likes of The Lark Ascending, Danse Macabre, Bond, Gershwin, Homage to Korea (WC version), all widely diverse are applicable with only one skater? Why?

Robeye has made an excellent/incredible analysis to identify, define, and describe all the areas which qualifies someone being musical. On top of that, for every pointers I listed, if I really look for it, I am sure I can give examples where Yuna has demonstrated musicality beyond her choreographed programs, such as her ability to singing note and pitch perfect, able to learn and finish recording a theme song in an hour, how she stand out from the crowd performing to the same music etc. where she is more on time and shows more flairs than others, even they learnt the same routine at the same time etc.

os168 said:

Actually Yuna has choreographed program herself, it is called Ben which she co-choreographed at age 14/15
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4M6FAzzzEc8

As for improvisation, check out this short clip where you see she runs her routine with the Bell of Moscow music during the Olympics warm up,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6WdkqZc088

Click to expand...

interesting how her step sequence goes so well to Mao's music. Yu-na was not improvising here, she skated the choreography to her own program, it went very well, and yes maybe she made it appear a little less lighthearted and a little more dramatic. She shows a musical ear here and an interest in expressing another piece of music other than her own.
"Ben" was very nicely done for a 14-year-old. I am beginning to think Yu-na can be musical, but usually is not in competition because she relies on her training of Wilson's choreo and does not permit herself to emote too much or think about the music... she turns into machine.

Tinymavy15 said:

interesting how her step sequence goes so well to Mao's music. Yu-na was not improvising here, she skated the choreography to her own program, it went very well, and yes maybe she made it appear a little less lighthearted and a little more dramatic. She shows a musical ear here and an interest in expressing another piece of music other than her own.
"Ben" was very nicely done for a 14-year-old. I am beginning to think Yu-na can be musical, but usually is not in competition because she relies on her training of Wilson's choreo and does not permit herself to emote too much or think about the music... she turns into machine.

Click to expand...

Do you think YuNa emote too little? Well, she will never emote as much as some western skaters, partially because of her nature (shy, internal) and also partially because of her cultural background. However, to her many fans, her level of emoting would just be right. Emoting too much or too little is really subjective and cultural, I think. Musicality is a different subject from emoting and we are discussing on musicality not on emoting.

I don't really understand your post. Other skaters don't rely on training of choreography? Do they perform differently from training?

We never know that her performance we see on ice comes completely from David's idea or from mutual discussion. We don't know how much her own idea is melted in the program. It is quite usual that choreographer and skater discuss on the program, isn't it? You try to describe her as a robot programmed by David. Really? YuNa was a shy girl but she was very opinionated from the beginning.

However genius David may be, I don't think he can program musicality into a robot.

Tinymavy15 said:

interesting how her step sequence goes so well to Mao's music. Yu-na was not improvising here, she skated the choreography to her own program, it went very well, and yes maybe she made it appear a little less lighthearted and a little more dramatic. She shows a musical ear here and an interest in expressing another piece of music other than her own.
"Ben" was very nicely done for a 14-year-old. I am beginning to think Yu-na can be musical, but usually is not in competition because she relies on her training of Wilson's choreo and does not permit herself to emote too much or think about the music... she turns into machine.

Click to expand...

I think it depends on what you call improvisation. In my opinion if you are able to take the same basic notation of music and able to perform it to a particular variation, style, key, rhythm or to another bass or accompaniment with out rehearsal on the fly then it can be considered as improvisation. It is like the ability to playing say a piece of the same music sadly, happily, jazzy bluesy, rock version at any given moment to any mood and make their own decision that is not part of the routine.

As for turning into a machine, I have always felt that is what the current COP has groomed it skater to be. As commented by Robin Cousins (1980 Olympic Champion) on the BBC, there are just too many program components sequentially skater now days must hit list. If you hit it, you get it, you score, you win. It has resulted in so much contrivances. I actually wonder if you ask any of the so called musical skaters of the golden era and ask them to hit 11 jumps, 6 triples, 7 in combination including 2 x 3/3, a 2A/3T, would that affect their musicality and interpretation? Today's sport simply wasn't the beautiful sport skating once was where the Free skate really was Free skate and actually musicality count for something. To quote some of his comment about Yuna Kim:

“It ticked all the boxes, continuously throughout every beat of the music. There isn’t one moment where her body isn’t moving…It is just wonderful to watch because there’s nothing contrived about it. It has to be contrived because you have to make the boxes, and you have to tick all the boxes to make the points, but you watch her, it is like watching the old school, it is like watching something that has been put together. Beautiful… just beautiful.”

Robin Cousins, BBC commentator Word Championship 2009 on Yuna's Scheherazade FS

"It was great to see at the end that she wasn't a robot but a human being as tears welled up. She has obviously been carrying the weight of her nation and also in a way a home country favourite as she's trained here by a great Canadian Olympian (Brian Orser) who is beloved by his nation.

"At the end of the event last night, to see her guard come down a little bit and for her to allow herself to express what has been building was fantastic. It was a flawless performance."

"If someone asked me who they should look at (across the generations) I would say Janet Lynn, Dorothy Hamill, Katarina Witt and definitely Yuna. There isn't a move Yuna makes that doesn't give her points,"

Robin Cousins on UK Reuteur commenting on the Olympics Gershwin.
Source: http://uk.reuters.com/article/2010/02/27/olympics-figure-skating-yuna-idUKLDE61Q00520100227

Given Robin created one of my favourite program last year with Cheltzie Lee, and with a back ground in Ice Dancing and a very successful career producing ice shows including Dancing on Ice in Britain, I think he knows what his rhythms, musicality expression into performance art pretty well.

There are many great posts in this thread. Especially thanks to os168 and Robaye's long, excellent posts, I learned a lot.

Anyway I found an article from December, 2006 and want to share with you. Yuna was 16 then. She had just entered the senior competitions and won GPF. (Sorry, most Yuna fans may already have known this interview but as for me, I have seen this for the first time.)

Well, this is what she said in an interview with SBS in December, 2006.

"(It seems like I will keep on meeting Mao at the competitions.) Her strenth is that she can land difficult jumps easily. I envy that."
"But I think my musical expression is better than hers. When I perform listening to music, that kind of expressiveness naturally comes out without being aware of it."
"I know the strengths and weaknesses of other competitors - Ando, Fumie, Sarah Meier as well."

The first thing that came to my mind was 'a smart girl.'
She was not that well known in Korea, not well supported at that time, I believe. She had a major disadvantage as a skater from a country without any significant figure skating tradition. Neverthless, she was already confident of her musical instinct and ability to express it. I think she wanted to master 3A and practiced but suffering several injuries, she may have given up the difficult jump and instead, consciously focused on other side of skating - artistry and musical expressiveness that she believed she had strengths on.

I appreciate other opinions about this theme. But it is fun to see this 'unsubstantiated' confidence from pre-Orser Yuna. (Orser became her full time coach in March, 2007)

Robeye said:

As in viewing any artistic project, however, fullest appreciation of interpretive selection requires some knowledge of both the musical program and the performer's history.

Click to expand...

It is certain to me that Yuna was/is always conscious of musical aspect of figure skating. She also seems to do thorough research about the meaning and the background of the music she skates to.

cosmos said:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4M6FAzzzEc8

Click to expand...

Do you happen to know who this Japanese female commentator is?
What she is saying makes me curious. She is certainly not Arakawa, Yaginuma or Midori Ito but someone whose voice I don't know of.
Maybe Yuka Sato? She is jokingly saying, "I am not supposed to praise a skater from other country (laugh) but this girl has a really good potential."

Tinymavy15 said:

I am beginning to think Yu-na can be musical, but usually is not in competition because she relies on her training of Wilson's choreo and does not permit herself to emote too much or think about the music... she turns into machine.

Click to expand...

Wow. She turns into a machine? I completely, utterly, astonishingly disagree. I'm not saying she's the most musical skater out there, but at her best, she's so much more than a soulless robot - I'm think Roxanne at Worlds, Danse Macabre, Bond, Gershwin, Lark Ascending, Arirang (even flawed). You could have said "I think Yu Na Kim is from Mars" and that would be more comprehensible to me. Wow.

Really, why would we be talking about musicality at all if it weren't for YUNA's musicality? Obviously, the world revolves around YUNA. And all debates should be about YUNA.

But still, I hope I am excused for not talking about YUNA's musicality and posting a video that is not of YUNA:

Stephane Rosenthal 2006 LP:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMwXYdkSK4g

I think, that this is musicality.

shine said:

I hope I am excused for not talking about YUNA's musicality and posting a video that is not of YUNA:

Stephane Rosenthal 2006 LP:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMwXYdkSK4g

I think, that this is musicality.

Click to expand...

And here I thought it would be Stephanie's Rockit SP! I do admire the originality and the performance as a whole; I don't know how musical I'd consider her, but it's always nice to see skaters taking risks with the music and the concept of the program.

I do hope this thread will not stay so Yu-Na focused; she's an interesting example for sure, but it would be nice to discuss skaters who don't get as much attention but whose musical expression is nonetheless strong.

ImaginaryPogue said:

What a post! Thanks Robeye, for your erudition. I'm not quite sure I agree with your comment that it is a distinction without a difference, but it's also more fun to disagree anyway.

And a nod to Buttercup, who was the one who suggested we bring this conversation out of the private into the public realm!



Agreed. Though I almost want to take back my initial comment because I think Carolina Kostner can be very musical but I'm not convinced she's that expressive.

Click to expand...

Hi ImaginaryPogue. First, thanks to you and Buttercup for another interesting topic. Just goes to show that the forum is like the tip of an iceberg; so much that is interesting seems to go on behind closed doors. I sometimes wish I could be an internet fly on the wall .

Regarding natural vs. learned: I will not offend intuition (not to mention common sense) to say that there is no such thing as a natural talent for musicality. I guess what I was trying to say (though clearly not doing a good job at it) was that natural talent vs. acquired ability for musicality is more obviously visible for younger and/or less accomplished skaters, in my view. When we turn our eyes to the higher levels, however, the performances are at such a burnish, that the seams between what seems, can only be seen...behind the scene. p)

For performers at the highest levels, we can possibly identify when we first recognized their musicality. If he/she was young enough, we are tempted to say that the skater was "naturally" musical, as compared to a skater whose musicality seemed to develop later. I would suggest, however, that this is not necessarily the case. Two skaters may both be genotypically musical ("talented"), but one may phenotypically bloom later than the other, depending on a myriad of triggers, the differing developmental clocks of their talent, or environment, or, indeed, learning. What we do know, however, is that the mature performance is beautiful, and that it required talent and effort both together to get there. At maturity, the dichotomy becomes a distinction without a difference, is what I was trying to say. As a corollary (and specifically for those performing at the highest artistic level), the resulting performances themselves are, prima facie, proof of natural talent, because all the effort in the world, by itself, is never enough.

BTW, I would generally agree that expressiveness is not CaroK's long suit, and I have questions about her basic musicality as well, but I'll save my powder for another day .

shine said:

Really, why would we be talking about musicality at all if it weren't for YUNA's musicality? Obviously, the world revolves around YUNA. And all debates should be about YUNA.

But still, I hope I am excused for not talking about YUNA's musicality and posting a video that is not of YUNA:

Stephane Rosenthal 2006 LP:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMwXYdkSK4g

I think, that this is musicality.

Click to expand...

Would you be similarly irate if there were a dozen posts on Stephane Lambiel ? (Who I happen to like, by the way)

People write about what they want to write about (and that privilege extends to you as well, as I understand it, so type away. I won't complain).

Although there are rumors that Gaddafi is looking to make a career change...was I asleep when he purchased this forum and changed the rules?

evangeline said:

They might not have been intricate as some of her competitive programs and did not feature many jumps, but the sheer beauty, the expression and connection to the music, her (excuse the cliche) ability to take the audience on an emotional journey with her--all this was made possible or at very least facilitated by the superb control permitted by her mastery of the blade. She (and Kurt, for that matter) could really interpret and emote and do so many interesting things precisely because they can control their edges so well.

Click to expand...

Technical mastery is indeed a prerequisite to expression and performance on ice. People often like to think of technique and expression as two discrete fields, with some skaters proficient in one and not the other, but I like to think of the two as inextricably bound. A program comes down to a laundry list of point-garnering elements woven into the artistic fabric of choreography. My distinction between a skater who performs well and one who can barely express comes down to exactly how well the entire bundle is put together - not just how well a skater can act a character in between scored elements, but the integration of every bit of the program. The elements themselves are embedded into the story-telling that unfolds as jumps accentuate beats, spiral sequences establish a stirring climax and spins set the tone. Stellar skating with deep edges, effortless crossing and curving and quick generation of speed can also set the mood. The greatest, most moving skates have been delivered in their entirety - with every single movement on ice building into the delivery.

Now this can be done by only the most skilled technicians. Michelle Kwan and Kurt Browning are perhaps two of the best possible examples possible because there isn't a single part to their skating that one could call a flaw. At their best, they transcend the judging.

For me, at least, a program that breaks apart fails to be a piece of art anymore. It degenerates into a contest of skills. It's like I come to realize that scores are being attached to these elements and that's when the elements fail to serve an artistic purpose.

What elevates a program to greatness is the perfection I've mentioned above (the one that allows programs to transcend technical bounds) and the emotions expressed by the skaters themselves (something that comes within). Of course, every move is learned and I'm sure choreographers teach their skaters just how they should feel on this part and that, but the addition of the skater's own emotions make moments particularly special (Lyra Angelica Nationals vs. Nagano). So for me, a program is essentially a learned piece with embedded elements and what makes a good skate is the perfect technical execution of it, complete with expression of the choreographer's projected vision (the right emotional outbursts at the right time) and, to add to that, to really make it special, an emotional input from the skater himself.

Well that's enough with my digression. To bring it all back to musicality, I don't see how other posters are detecting this "innate understanding of the music." That seems all very vague and subjective. Perhaps I've yet to train my neophyte's eye, but all I see is well-practiced choreography. I'm guessing some posters are referring to the "nuances" of a program - something that sets these "naturally musical" skaters apart from the rest of the pack - you know, a special tilt to one's head here or a wonderfully extended hand here, but I don't see how that's not choreography as well. It just comes across as better executed choreography. I see beautiful and better use of the body, but nothing that can't be taught by a skilled choreographer. If musicality is to imply an innate understanding of the music, how can a skater express this to learned choreography if he faithfully abides by what's prescribed (no clear improvisation)? Couldn't it just be a better understanding of what the choreographer wants? I would understand if a judgment on musicality was reached after a show of improvisation (with completely new music), but how can one judge what's innate and not when the material one's given to begin with is not the product of the skater but the choreographer? Yes, it is the skater who must make the choreography his/hers, but the interpretation of the music itself is the choreographer's. About the talk of being more "natural" in the use of body and face, how is that not more a judgment on one's bodily abilities? Some skaters are gifted with better and more fluid control of one's body, while others move more gracefully on ice because they have been trained in different dances, like ballet or jazz. How can you conclude that these more "natural" movements are not themselves a product of learned effort?

In other words, how do you determine what's a show of innate understanding of the music and what's a better show of technique - a more graceful and balletic way to position one's arms or to skate across the ice with fluidity? I sure can't tell them apart.

I don't mean to be aggressive with my questions. I just don't understand how everyone is deciding who's musical and who's not, except with the more obvious cases of skaters who are definitely miles away from musicality since they barely even listen to the music and just skate through it. I mean, if I had to choose, I would definitely put Daisuke as a musical skater because he melts into the music and lets everything come together to express it, but another poster says his musical expression is forced. Really. I just don't understand.

Well, now, please don't condescend (e.g. look here at THIS skate. The difference is OBVIOUS). I look forward to someone who will kindly elucidate on how they detect this innate musicality. I've been able to follow discussions on artistry and everything technical, but musicality still greatly confounds me.

Paradox of a question due to incomparable observers

"It is not the figures that lie, but the liars that does the figuring"
- Mark Twain

Reading these discussions on the abstract notions of musicality and artistry, I can't help but think the above is perfectly suited for this discussion board, except of course that the 'figures' are not the same (but are just as valid)

The chances are each poster's overall musicality are likely to be on different levels to begin with, largely conditioned by our own grooming/national/cultural/academic grounding and biases, with different levels of sophistication, appreciation and understanding AND prejudices.. to have resulted in

"I'm not upset that you lied to me, I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you."
- Frederich Nietzche

...It is therefore useful to share a comon framework to identified components in order to articulate what is musicality and compare with selected skaters as a matter of principled argument. Different environment tends to groom its best skater to compete differently anyway.

However I do think it would be a mistake to consider there's only one type of good musicality; the one that spoke to you, to your liking, and how you would have interpret it. To me, that is not musicality, it is just your own musical preference. Musicality is not one thing, but encompasses whole range expertise at master level where natural born quality can only take you so far without practice and refinement, yet they definitely help when things are outside the routine or outside the scope of development which should be consistently improving. Particularly in a sport as laboured as figure skating where it is about defying the element, push human physics against vastly complex near impossibilities to attain near perfection at key times - as well as ties in 'naturally' with humanity subjects like art, musicality, creativity etc.

There's another saying (I can't remember the source, might have been a Chinese saying) which I will try to paraphrase:
"Genius does not triumph over the Practiced, Practiced cannot triumph over Persevered, and the Persevered cannot triumph over the Stubborn. The Stubborn one is a fool, but he/she is the last one laughing."

Given the thread title is a paradox itself, the one that triumphed in the argument is likely to be the most stubborn. And that Geniuses are highly over rated without the right sort of nurturing in life, in art and in sport (and a lot of stubbornness), and I 'd even say a little bit of luck.

If this is not using the music, Than I don't know what is.

Nicole Bobek
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0j5MWIAog_s

Very interesting discussion! I would say that the artistic aspects of performance come naturally for some skaters, as they have an ingrained sense of style and artistry, while for others it's a learned aspect of their performances. You can spot skaters who truly connect with their music, make a statement, and skate "from the heart" and other skaters, who are certainly talented, but who more or less "connect the dots" when they compete -- skating from one element to the other, with little in between.

Carlo Fassi once said of Dorothy Hamill - (sic) "When I saw her skate as a young teenager I knew this was a young woman who had great technical skills and a special quality that cannot be taught."

Artistry can also be a learned commodity, as in the case of Brian Boitano, who as a young skater had the well-deserved reputation as a great technical skater, but not a great performer. He and his coach Linda Leaver wisely solicited the the assistance of Sandra Bezic, whose choreographic skills and musicality were passed on to Boitano, just in time for the 1988 Olympics. In my opinion, Boitano made great strides in presentation, yet his real strength remained his outstanding jumping ability.

A true artist was John Curry, the 1976 Olympic champion. He did all of the triple jumps of that era, and I believe he had three of them in his winning long program. The rest of his routine was packed with stunning spins, spirals, positions, and just beautifully flowing skating.

Peggy Fleming was another skater who was a master at both the technical and artistic aspects of the sport. She was the class of the field during 1966-1968.

I know many people would not consider Beatrisa Liang to be a musical skater. People forget that she had good piano skills as well as skating skills. If you look carefully at her 2005 nationals performances you see a skater who is technically at her best as well as a skater who skates her programs with so much intent that the audience can't take their eyes off of her skating. On top of her skating skills she is hitting the music perfectly. These programs unfortunaly have been removed from youtube.

Here's an interesting case for your discussions.

Timothy Dolensky wrote the music for his SP (called Windfall) this year, and performed it on the piano.
Here it is, performed at JGP Riga.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pnwa6LdQHM&feature=feedu_more


It is a case like this that has made me very uncomfortable using the words "musical" and "musicality" to describe skaters. I like Timothy's piece of music. Clearly he is a musician, is musical, and has musicality. However, his skating to his own piece needs some more work, although there are some very nice touches.

There is musicality, and then there is the physical ability to move to music. Just because you have one does not mean you have the other.

dorispulaski said:

Here's an interesting case for your discussions.

Timothy Dolensky wrote the music for his SP (called Windfall) this year, and performed it on the piano.
Here it is, performed at JGP Riga.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pnwa6LdQHM&feature=feedu_more


It is a case like this that has made me very uncomfortable using the words "musical" and "musicality" to describe skaters. I like Timothy's piece of music. Clearly he is a musician, is musical, and has musicality. However, his skating to his own piece needs some more work, although there are some very nice touches.

There is musicality, and then there is the physical ability to move to music. Just because you have one does not mean you have the other.

Click to expand...

Hooray for Doris! Yes, we can't get too literal about what "musicality" is. Being able to create music, let alone choreograph to it, isn't a prerequisite for being a musical skater. What Doris aptly calls being able to move to music is an interpretive gift, and it's what matters in this case.

Here's another parallel: years ago, Leonard Bernstein used to do wonderful TV specials for young people about music. Once he demonstrated an A-B-A structure in a Lennon-McCartney tune, I think "And I Love Her." He played bits of it on the piano and sang along to demonstrate. He had the most awful voice I've ever heard. This is the guy who wrote West Side Story, folks, not to mention one of the main powers in reviving Mahler's symphonies for the American public. And if you want to feel exalted about the potential of humanity, listen to his monumental performance of Beethoven's Ninth Symphony in honor of the fall of the Berlin Wall, with choirs and intrumentalists from all over Europe. But the guy couldn't carry a tune in a bucket. So he's not musical? Hrrrmph.

Related to that, Ethel Merman no less once said that Cole Porter had a voice "like a hinge." Listen to his music sometime, sung by others, of course.

A musical skater is musical while skating. The rest is not relevant, though it's wonderful when skaters also have other musical talents or, like Sandra Bezic or Alexander Zhulin, turn out to be dynamite choreographers.

And yes, a lot of it is subjective. But the general consensus is that there are some skaters who make the music come alive and other skaters who don't.