Some people seem to have it, others do not.
I am thinking of general musicality, the ability not only to listen, but to, in a deeper sense, read and understand music. And among those who could be named musical there are wide differences between those who are very musical indeed, and those who belong to a normal sector: they could sing a song, but they do not play any music instrument, they like to dance and to listen to the ordinary sortiment of daily pop tunes, but they are not that very interested in going to the opera house and listen to Wagner or Verdi or other classical hit makers.
And then we have the bunch of people having almost no ability at all concerning music. They could not fall into a proper rhythm and they are not able forming their vocal cords into any precise musical threads.
There are several interesting questions about musicality: what forms it, which parts of the brain are occupied transforming motor physiological activities into tunes and complete music pieces, and why have some people an ease for this complex matter while others have absolutely nothing of it; some are in fact completely tone deaf.
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1756 – 1791) belongs to the giant European composers, so very loved by so many all over the world. He started to learn how to play the violin and the piano already when he was three years of age, composing his first small pieces of music when he was four.At the end of his life he had composed around 600 pieces including 22 operas.
What qualifications are needed for such great success?
It is hard to tell.
Researchers within this area are pointing at general perceptual ability as one major factor, and a deeper comprehension of musical patterns and structures in combination with how certain humans experience specific movements in different tunes. Some neurologists have also found that the right part of the brain have centra for pure music, tunes, while the left part of the brain has centra for experiencing rhythm. Most musical people seem also to have a greater ability to rather quickly learn different languages than those who are not that musical.
And now to horses and the interaction between horse and man. As within the fields of music there are wide differences between those people that have a natural talent in communicating with horses (and probably also other animals) and those who have absolutely no talents at all for that kind of interaction. By communicating with horses I am not thinking of primarily verbal try-outs, but more of how you as a rider on the horseback almost make the man and the horse to one, a unity, where the horse is responding by “reading” the rider’s intentions, not so easily visible for the spectator. The communication “flows” through the rider’s body, focusing her or his buttocks, legs and feet. The horse transforms this body talk directly to the small but important horse brain. But it looks like some people have no or rather small abilities to smoothly communicate in this sense with horses, nor with dogs or cats or birds or any other animal. It seems as if horses can not “read” some people the ride becomes just a mess.
Summing up: I think that sensitivity is the correct word if you want to discriminate in between those who have it and those who lack this kind of human ability. We humans are not equal in our internal mechanisms.
I will be back with some more reflections regarding this matter.