I seem to be the only person commenting here who has read anything more about this case than the linked newspaper article (some of you clearly haven't even read that at all carefully) – and you are all missing the point.
Nobody, including Tony Cicoria, is claiming there's anything remarkable about his
musical abilities as a performer - the account by Oliver Sacks in
Musicophilia is about Dr Cicoria's startling change in
personality and behaviour following the lightning strike. Never having had any particular interest in any kind of classical music, he developed (very suddenly, a few weeks after the accident) a major musical obsession (which is just as strong after 14 years) – first a craving to listen to a particular genre of classical piano music, followed by equally strong drives to learn to play, and to compose (to record the music "playing in his head").
"suddenly, over two or three days", there was this insatiable desire to listen to piano music.
"I would get up at four in the morning and play till I went to work, and when I got home from work I was at the piano all evening.
...
I was possessed."
I'm not sure why people here think he was "
returning to a pleasant pasttime he
used to enjoy", or "a former child musician" - the article says nothing of the sort, and neither does Dr Sacks's book:
He had had a few piano lessons as a boy, he said, "but no real interest." He did not have a piano in his house. What music he did listen to tended to be rock music.
...
"I could hardly read the music, could barely play, but I started to teach myself."
The story may seem implausible to people who know nothing about neurology, but it really isn't. Read the paper in paximperium's link about cognitive and behavioural changes resulting from lightning strikes and electric shock. Quite profound changes are not unusual, and they don't necessarily occur immediately. I've just had a quick look at some other literature on this subject, and all of it discusses the brain function changes in terms of deficits only. But neurological damage can also produce a paradoxical
heightening of specific abilities, or interests, or emotions (temporarily or permanently) - and that is very much Dr Sacks's field. I'm prepared to accept his judgement (barring future disconfirming evidence) that this is such a case.
Nothing supernatural about it, of course. As for whether it's 'mysterious', in neurological terms, it depends what you mean. There are quite a few recorded cases of similar phenomena, many relating to music and some of them very well studied, and in some of them the pathology is known (e.g. the site of a tumour, or of damage due to a stroke). This case fits well with the general literature on the subject (including some much better documented cases in Dr Sacks's book), but:
- It's particularly dramatic and newsworthy!
- There seems to have been no gross damage, and insufficient testing to detect more subtle damage, therefore we can't be completely certain of a neurological basis.
However, there's no doubt that the phenomenon (sudden 'musicophilia', sometimes with musical hallucinations, following brain damage) exists. Dr Sacks's judgement tells him it's the likely explanation in this case, and I'd say that, as a clinical neurologist of nearly 50 years' experience, with a special interest (and expertise) in this type of case, he's probably right. You know, when I am confronted with a statement or opinion from someone whose knowledge
in the relevant scientific field is orders of magnitude greater than mine, my initial reaction is to learn rather than to dispute (and, unlike the 'debunkers' here, I have at least read all Dr Sacks's books and some of his papers, as well as other popular and more technical literature on the subject).
In fact, the 'debunking' tone of most the posts is quite inappropriate - why on earth does anyone want to debunk
neurology??!!
chillzero and others seem to think that Dr Sacks's opinion is some hasty, ill-considered conjecture - again, not so. He conducted a very lengthy interview with Tony Cicoria – several hours at least (Cicoria says "all day") – far longer, no doubt, than Cicoria spent with the doctors who treated him after the accident. Dr Sacks doesn't explicitly say whether he had access to Cicoria's neurological test results (EEG, MRI) from the time of the accident 12 years previously, but he mentions briefly that they didn't show any significant abnormality. He suggested further investigations, with newer brain function tests that are capable of detecting more subtle lesions, but Cicoria was unwilling (my guess is that, as we know he considers his musicophilia to be 'spiritual', he doesn't want any physical basis to be discovered).
I suggest that, before anyone else ventures an opinion on the interest and significance (or otherwise) of the case, or of Dr Sacks's expertise and qualifications to hypothesise on it, you inform yourself of the necessary minimum of facts.
It's a shame no-one seems interested in discussing the science of the case – this thread would have done much better in Science and Medicine.
