A child prodigy musician...
I would like to point out something about this: I have listened to many child prodigies on the piano, and the best I can say about them is that they are excellent in terms of technique; they follow the sheet music exactly and precisely. Unfortunately, in all cases, there is no soul in what they play, and what flourishes, rubato, texture, and variations in dynamics they include in their playing is mostly learned from their teacher. The dramatic movements, the slow raise and drop of their hands, or the way they move their heads; most of these actions are learned behaviours.
True, they might be talented — or they might just have demanding parents and excellent teachers that drill them into perfection.
This isn't to say that they don't feel a wide range of emotions. But the music they produce are incomplete and empty. Compare them with pianists such as Bill Evans, or Rubinstein. They cannot express emotion or feeling at such a young age, which I attribute to immaturity, lack of experience with the world and an inability to express what feelings they have. It is when they grow and develop that their music can truly communicate. Furthermore, I would argue that the same piece played by a child prodigy would sound the same if played by another prodigy, if they shared teachers.
Does it sound good? Why not, since most people only hear and hardly listen to the music. It is enough for them to hear something that sounds difficult to play, or at a dazzling speed, and consider it fantastic. In that moment, they forget the composer, and think the prodigy responsible for everything they feel.
If you consider what a child prodigy adds to the piece other than technical perfection, well, you are left with nothing much at all. They are, in essence, living automatons, trained monkeys with a small spark.
It is the same way in tango; the music is already there, as you have said, and whether it has lyrics or not, it evokes very different or very similar (and anything in between) emotions and feelings in us. But a child prodigy is very much like a kind of technically perfect leader, who can lead anything perfectly, step to the music perfectly, adjust and compensate for the follower's every action. Watching him dance would certainly be enjoyable. But this same leader does not develop much of a connection with a follower, even though his embrace is exactly as she wants it. He can follow the music perfectly, but it is merely abstract for him. He can seem anguished, or in love with his follower, or smiling happily, but he does not convey actual feeling or emotion; it is an act. There is no soul in what he does.
That being said, maybe the follower is very attracted to him, and it is more than enough for her to be dancing in his arms, and she feels wonderful. Perhaps the connection is very much present in her own mind. But whatever the case, it can still be enjoyable, because the music is good and the leader is technically perfect.
In the same way, we can enjoy a Chopin piece with no dynamic variation that is played by a child prodigy, because of its inherent nature. But when we listen to Horowitz play the same piece, then you can hear the emotion, the little mistakes, the variation in tone and texture and dynamics that make it sing, bring it to life, and touch the soul. The former is then markedly superficial.
The child prodigy considers the piano as merely a tool; such a dancer views his follower in a similar fashion.
)
