Music Education: Closed or Open?

Author(s): Keith Swanwick

Source: Journal of Aesthetic Education, Vol. 33, No. 4, Special Issue: Musings: Essays in Honor of
Bennett Reimer (Winter, 1999), pp. 127-141
Published by: University of Illinois Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3333725
Accessed: 27-09-2015 10:32 UTC

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3333725?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents

You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

University of Illinois Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Aesthetic
Education.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 141.216.78.40 on Sun, 27 Sep 2015 10:32:25 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Music Education:Closed or Open?

KEITH SWANWICK

Institutionalizing Music Education

Music educationis not so obviously problematicuntil it surfacesin schools
and colleges, until it becomes "formal"and institutionalized.If we want to
strum a guitar,get into the plot of a Wagneropera, play a sitar,or sing in a
chorus, then finding a teacher, reading a book, or joining a performing
group may be all we need to do. Thereis no need to form a curriculumcom-
mittee, produce a rationale,or declarea list of objectives.The informalmu-
sic "student"can copy jazz riffs from recordings,ask friends about finger-
ing or chord patterns,learn by imitation-"sitting next to Nelly," or widen
musical experienceby watching television, listening to the radio, or explor-
ing record shops. Formalinstructionmay not be necessary. Yet for some,
the formalsystems may be crucialpoints of access. Forothers,the contribu-
tion of educational institutions to their personal music education will be
negligible and could even be negative in effect. In Britain,there is certainly
a history of researchreportingnegative attitudesto music in the curriculum
comparedwith other subjects.1
Unlike most if not all other school and college curriculumsubjectareas,
in the case of music many alternativeavenues of access are open. The easy
accessibilityof music from the ends of the earth, high levels of music-spe-
cific informationtechnology-including sound generation,recording,and
reproduction;these developments along with the rapid dissemination of
popularmusics compete with conventionalcurriculain schools. One conse-
quence is that students may have very little time for "schoolmusic"and are
likely to see it as a quaintmusical subculture.
Very early in the twentieth century,EmileJacques-Dalcrozedrew atten-
tion to this tendency of music education to detach itself from mainstream
culture.

Keith Swanwick is Professor of Music Education at the University of London Institute

of Education.Among his recentpublicationsare TeachingMusicMusicallyand articles
in Research
Studiesin MusicEducation,
the BritishJournalofMusicEducation,
and Music
EducationResearch.

JournalofAestheticEducation,
Vol. 33, No. 4, Winter1999
?1999 Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois

This content downloaded from 141.216.78.40 on Sun, 27 Sep 2015 10:32:25 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
128 Keith Swanwick
Before everything else, always make sure that the teaching of music is
worthwhile. And there must be no confusion as to what is under-
stood by "music." There are not two classes of music: one for adults,
drawing rooms, and concert halls, the other for children and schools.
There is only one music, and the teaching of it is not so difficult a matter
as scholastic authorities are apt to suggest at their congresses.2

Dalcroze might not have thought the matter quite so simple had he and
his students been exposed to the plurality of music that now surrounds
us. In principle though he is surely right. School and college music educa-
tion can become a closed system that leaves behind, or gets left behind by,
ideas and events in the wider world. It is not difficult to demonstrate this
phenomenon.
For example, beginning in the 1950s, the introduction of Orff instruments
into school music classrooms resulted in the creation of a musical subcul-
ture, characterized by decorative glissandi and circling ostinati, played on
specially designed classroom instruments and based on pentatonic materi-
als. This was music designed for children, music bearing little relationship
to music elsewhere, except when it begins to approximate the Indonesian
gamelan. In the late 1960s came the influence of modernism. In Britain and
elsewhere, we teachers encouraged children to become performers and
composers of "texture" pieces and to use repertoires of aleatoric devices,
randomized lists of numbers, and so on. Pulse, tonality, and modally de-
fined pitch relationships were suspended while students made sound col-
lages, recorded "found" sounds in their environments, and constructed
graphic scores. The word 'music' was frequently dropped altogether from
books for use in schools and the word 'sound' was substituted: for instance,
New Sounds in Class, Sound and Silence, Exploring Sound, Make a New Sound,
Sounds Fun, and Sounds Interesting.
Here was an attempt to begin again, to make a new start without the
clutter of inherited classical traditions which are so easily seen as opposed
to the popular music industry and the alternate musical preferences of
many students. And here was an opportunity to link up with the attitudinal
world of contemporary experimental composers. Metrical rhythms and
tonal pitch relationships were discarded, and attention was switched to lev-
els of loudness, texture, and tone color. But in the evenings, after these dis-
tinctive school experiences, the students went home and played the Beatles
and the Rolling Stones, or perhaps they taught themselves to play the music
that really mattered to them, where metric rhythms and tonal tensions were
the norm.

Many teenagers for instance elect to teach themselves to play a musi-

cal instrument-the drums perhaps or the guitar. What do they do?
They usually know already the kind of sound they are interested in.
They insist on the right equipment. They listen to their mentors and
try to emulate them, running into problems of sound production and

This content downloaded from 141.216.78.40 on Sun, 27 Sep 2015 10:32:25 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Music Education:Closedor Open 129

control, figuring their own way through them, comparing notes with
fellow practitioners, following the example of preferred models.3

More recently and in an attempt to recognize the reality of this music

"out there," certain elements of popular music have indeed entered the for-
mal education scene. But in order to make itself respectable and to become
appropriately institutionalized, popular music has to be modified, abstracted,
and analyzed to fit into classrooms, timetables, and the aims of music edu-
cation. The volume (and impact) is reduced, dancing is out, and the cultural
context is shorn away. During this process it often becomes what M. Ross
would call "pseudo music."
Another way of creating a school music subculture is evident in North
America and takes the form of the High School Band, especially when given
over to marching at ball games with a purpose-made repertoire, uniforms,
parade-ground routines, and majorettes. Yet on graduating from school or
leaving the band, a large proportion of students appear to put it all behind
them. There appears little sign among adult communities of continued en-
gagement with instrumental music. The same appears true for the choral
programs. The main aim of these classes is often to get a program of music
in shape for public performance, rather than provide a rich musical and
educational experience. The teaching methods accordingly tend to be very
directive, and there may be considerable repetition in rehearsal of a very
small repertoire, often giving rise to boredom. The real musical interests of
students in these settings are likely to lie elsewhere.
Reservations about performance programs in North America have been
raised by several writers. These include Charles Leonard and Robert House,4
Craig Kirchhoff,5 and Bennett Reimer,6 who warn against placing an over-
emphasis on performing ensembles and a concentration on technique, which
works against musical understanding. The relevance of such activities has
also been questioned. The band movement, with its old military connections,
hardly reflects the contemporary world of music "out there."
The result has been that students spend an increased amount of time
performing on instruments that are foreign to the mainstream of mu-
sic making in this country and abroad.... The increased emphasis
upon marching band and marching band contests has meant that
greater numbers of students are leaving high school band programs
literally overloaded and burned out. They have been victims of an
educational curriculum that has placed its entire emphasis on the
short term reward of winning.
... The marching band is not the only group that stands in the way of
students' achieving an aesthetic music education. The jazz ensemble
and the concert band have also been guilty.7

This critical stance toward instrumental performance has a long history.

Boethius, writing in the sixth century, distinguished between performers,
composers, and those who listen in audiences and appraise the music.

This content downloaded from 141.216.78.40 on Sun, 27 Sep 2015 10:32:25 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
130 Keith Swanwick
But the type which buries itself in instruments is separated from the
understanding of musical knowledge. Representatives of this type,
for example kithara players and organists and other instrumentalists,
devote their total effort to exhibiting their skill on instruments. Thus,
they act as slaves, as has been said: for they use no reason but are
totally lacking in thought.8

Against this somewhat polemical background and alongside the tension

between music in schools and music "out there," a recent debate has re-
kindled the alternative claims of the daily round of "music for all" (in gen-
eral classes) and the greater public status and higher musical rewards for
teachers of performance activities.9 In an attempt to "situate" the formal
music curriculum in relation to what he calls "viable music cultures,"
David Elliott urges us to affirm the centrality of performance in music edu-
cation.10 In this he chimes with most actual practice in North American mu-
sic education. To make his case, he feels the need to counter what he sees as
an inadequate philosophy of music education-music-education-as-aes-
thetic education-a philosophy articulated most consistently in the United
States by Bennett Reimer. Elliott sees as his initial task the demolition of
this deficient "philosophy" which, he believes, is characterized by four
common, basic, and profoundly wrong assumptions:
-that music is a collection of objects or works;
-that these musical works are for listening to and that there is only
one way of listening, aesthetically and with attention to the structure
of the work;
-that the value of these works is always intrinsic, internal; and
-that if we listen correctly to these pieces, we may achieve a distinctive
aesthetic experience.1l
This is, of course, a caricature of the views of Reimer and, in making his
case, Elliott misrepresents several other writers whom he clusters together
as promoters of the "aesthetic concept of music education," including the
present author. It is not my intention to enter the fray between Reimer and
Elliott but to focus briefly on a couple of underlying conceptual problems.
Elliott seems to confuse an aesthetic perspective with musical formalism,
and I would certainly want-as would Reimer-to disassociate myself from
any extreme version of such a theory. Indeed, in an earlier book I was criti-
cal of the formalist view taken by Leonard Meyer and aware of its limitations.

The problem is that it fails to connect musical experience with other

experience in any direct way. Music has once again been removed
from life, turned into a kind of game, if of an intellectual kind. It
seems more likely that expectation and surprise are part of the mecha-
nism of engagementwith the work. It is how we are kept interested and
involved, is how we are brought into action with prediction, specula-
tion and ideas about what is happening and what is likely to happen,
and in all this there is obviously likely to be a trace of excitement. But

This content downloaded from 141.216.78.40 on Sun, 27 Sep 2015 10:32:25 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 MusicEducation:
Closedor Open 131
it is not the prime source of high aestheticpleasure.The peak of aes-
thetic experience is scaled only when a work relates strongly to the
structuresof our own individual experience,when it calls for a new
way or organizing the schemata, or traces, of previous life events.
This experienceof seeing things by a new light is called by Koestler
"bisociation."It is a "eureka"experience,what Langercalls the tri-
umph of insight: we discover in the work a "point of view" that
seems to us at the moment to be a kind of revelation.12
If this is an instance of Elliott's "distinctiveaestheticexperience,"then I
plead guilty to finding it desirable.Seeing arts activities as part of the aes-
thetic in such lofty terms offers a much needed educational rationale for
subjects that easily become marginalized. Even so, we should recognize
that most artisticmoments are less revelatory,though still valuable in that
they offer elements of insight, alternativeperspectives.However, my point
here is that it is too easy to conflate the aesthetic with the artistic,a well-
known confusion that Elliott rightly castigates. Among other problems,
such conceptual slippage tends to essentialize artistic experience into a
single entity rather than recognize the distinctive forms of discourse that
define the activitieswe call the arts.

Aesthetic versus Artistic Education

The "aesthetic"is defined in a multiplicityof ways and is often an unsatis-
factory mingling of several differentconcepts, including the aesthetic,aes-
thetics,the artistic,and the affective.Forexample,MalcolmRoss character-
izes "aesthetics"as "the general field of sensuous perception"ratherthan
the study of this field,13while Reimer sees the "aesthetic,""artistic,"and
"intrinsic"as interchangeable.14Peter Abbs views aesthetic experience as
signifying the memorableor overwhelminglyaffective,which leads him to-
ward the idea of a "genericcommunity"of the arts.ForAbbs, this aesthetic
community has three shared characteristicsthat distinguish it from other
areas of human activity.15
1. All the arts "create forms expressive of life."
2. All of their meanings "depend upon their formal constructions that
cannot be extracted or translated without significant loss."
3. They require "not a critical response but an aesthetic response-a
response through feeling, the senses, and the imagination."
Thus baldly stated, the problems become clear. The first and second of
these defining statements must surely apply to all forms of discourse, unless a
very restricted meaning is placed upon the phrases "expressive of life" and
"formal constructions." The third condition-the idea of aesthetic response-
seems more distinctive, if part of a somewhat circular argument, although it
is difficult to imagine artistic participation-let alone arts teaching-di-
vorced entirely from critical response. There is also more than a suggestion

This content downloaded from 141.216.78.40 on Sun, 27 Sep 2015 10:32:25 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
132 Keith Swanwick

of the old and unnecessary division between the "affective" and the "cogni-
tive" lying here beneath the surface. This pulls against the idea of symbolic
forms, a concept that is also important for Abbs. Symbolic forms develop
within traditions of use and must inevitably involve cognitive elements;
among these being proficiency in making connections and comparisons, the
facility to read expressive conventions, and the ability to recognize struc-
tural exceptions and deviations. The division is of course false. As John
Dewey reminds us: "The odd notion that an artist does not think and a sci-
entific inquirer does nothing else is the result of converting a difference of
tempo and emphasis into a difference in kind."16
At a fundamental level, it would be possible to show that all three of
Abbs's distinctive aesthetic characteristics appear to be shared with other
forms of human discourse. The aesthetic is only a strand of artistic experi-
ence, a necessary but not sufficient condition for artistic understanding.
Furthermore, aesthetic response is often an unlooked-for gift having little at
all to do with the arts; the flash of light on water, a sunset, a fine shot in a
ball game, an elegant experiment, a tight argument-all these may qualify
as partaking of the aesthetic. Ross stretches the concept of the aesthetic even
further until it becomes a kind of generic life-force. "A good aesthetic edu-
cation, a healthy aesthetic development, will, by definition, increase the life-
force, empower the life-drive, release all our instincts and savor life and live
life to the full. It will be strengthening-virtuous."17
For Ross, aesthetic education should not be an induction into what he
calls the "artistic predilections of a privileged social minority."

The classes would be jam sessions and the public events community
happenings. Arts lessons would generate an artistic dimension in the
school's life-not merely function as yet another variation on an aca-
demic or vocational theme. There would be room for cartoon, comic
strip, food, film, make-up, D.I.Y., clothing, the fairground, muzak,
Boots Art, pop, electronic games, cars, bikes, hair, graffiti, advertising,
entertainment, politics. The esoteric practices of the studio, the the-
atre, the concert hall, the gallery would be replaced by an altogether
more robust, more plebeian, more ephemeral range of activities-all
imbued with what I have called the vernacular spirit.8

It may be very rewarding and encouraging for arts teachers to see aes-
thetic experience as celebratory, illuminating every corer of life, vitally
pulsing through the curriculum and communities of schools. But this vital-
ity is not necessarily confined to the arts since all lively and significant ex-
perience can be seen as aesthetic. Here again it is a difference in degree
rather than in kind. To the extent that artistic experience includes the aes-
thetic, there can be an intense celebratory quality that runs counter to some
versions of schooling. The emphasis by Ross on day-dreaming, cordiality,
and the vernacular principle is certainly in opposition to educational "stan-
dards," vocational attitudes, subject classifications, student assessment, and

This content downloaded from 141.216.78.40 on Sun, 27 Sep 2015 10:32:25 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Closedor Open
MusicEducation: 133
all the other baggage and clutter of the school curriculum.I would guess,
though, that even in the context of contemporaryschools we would all
want to promote eventfulness,if only as an antidote to the low-intensity se-
quences of dull routines.We look hopefully to our institutionsfor evidence
of the aestheticin this wider sense, as indeed did JohnDewey.
The aestheticis a necessarybut not sufficientconditionfor the artistic.In
whatever way the concept may be construed,and certainlyif it centers on
sensory awareness,aestheticexperiencehas to be seen in a dialecticalrela-
tionship with the traditionsand conventionsin which any artworkor event
is located.19This relationshipis not simply a matter of transmittinga cul-
ture or a set of culturalvalues. Thereare of course obvious connectionsbe-
tween the music of particulargroups and their life style, age, and social po-
sition. But this is not to say that music in some way embodies a social order.
As Peter Martinputs it when writing on popular music, "Thereis a rela-
tionship between social class and the hierarchyof musical styles, but this
does not mean that the latter is determined by the former."20Distinctive
musical styles are maintainedand developed through give-and-takein an
interpretive community.Musicianswork in a multilevel dialogue with other
musiciansand with their audiences.
Artworksare the productof activitiesshaped by a constantprocessof
decision-making, of innumerable choices through which their cre-
ators imaginatively take account of the likely responses of others.
This does not imply that artistswill simply conformto such expecta-
tions-on the contrary,they may consider their whole purpose to be
the challengingor subvertingof establishedconventions.21
Music can be seen thus to take its place interactivelywithin a cultural
environment without necessarily being culturally determined. Herbert
Gans also rejectedthe dichotomy of mass culture versus high art and con-
ceived instead of "tastecultures"and "tastepublics,"a multitude of plural-
istic value groups ratherthan a heterogenous society or a simple cleavage
between "mass"and "high"cultures.An individual subscribesto any num-
ber of such groups at the same time and may change allegianceover time.22
This resonateswith the work of JiirgenHabermas,who sees the importance
of culturaldivergence for survival and development. On this culturalanal-
ogy of the Darwinianview, variations occur that change the survival and
developmental potential of individuals and communities. "In the case of
social evolution the learning process takes place not through changes in
genetic makeupbut throughchanges in knowledge potential."23
This margin of maneuver is kept open by systems of discourse that fa-
cilitate the growth of knowledge for any individual and community. For
music this margin consists in being multilevel, engaging us from the par-
ticularityof the sensory, through expressive metaphors,to structuralrela-
tionships.At any of these levels, the interactionof aestheticsubjectivityand

This content downloaded from 141.216.78.40 on Sun, 27 Sep 2015 10:32:25 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
134 Keith Swanwick

artistic traditions is potentially rich in bringing about what Habermas calls

"divergent phenotypes." We can transpose this idea to the massive and al-
ways shifting range of musical idioms and to the multitude of distinctive
individual musical voices where, within a nexus of cultural conventions,
the interchange of musical discourse invites individuals to make their unique
contributions. "As civilised human beings, we are the inheritors, neither of
an inquiry about ourselves and the world, nor of an accumulating body of
information, but of a conversation, begun in the course of centuries....
Education, properly speaking, is an initiation into the skill and partnership
of this conversation."24 Music is one way of joining such a conversation,a very
different concept from seeing music teaching either as aesthetic education
or music education as performance teaching. Neither of these paradigms
will suffice. Both are incomplete. The first leaves out the context of musical
traditions, while the second has severe curriculum limitations.

Getting into Musical Conversation

What then are the major educational activities that sustain and develop mu-
sical discourse? The pivot of the British secondary classroom is composing,
whereas Elliott lays his stress on performance, a stance that matches the status
quo of North American curriculum practice, where the actual production of
music-rather than its reproduction-is pushed into the background.

Composing is also an important way of developing musicianship and

immersing students in musical practices. But unless or until students
come to know the essential nature of music works as performances,
composing should not be the primary way of developing musician-
ship. Instead (and time permitting), I suggest that composing as a rea-
sonable and important supplement to the development of students'
musicianship through performing and improvising.25
It could be argued that composing gives more opportunity for decision
making than performing does. It also allows more scope for cultural varia-
tion and personal choice, and since the activity tends to be more process
than product oriented, it is more likely to avoid the trap of treating music as
"object." This ought not to be a question of "time permitting," but instead
be an educational necessity, giving students an opportunity to bring their
own work into the microculture of the classroom. In this way, individual
differences between students can be respected. Work in large performing
groups can often stifle personal initiative and the repetition of a limited rep-
ertoire in rehearsal in preparation for public display can induce mindless-
ness or boredom. The larger and more centrally directed is the performing
group, the more likely this will be.26 In many of the best British class-
rooms-and not all are good, of course-composing is a highly developed

This content downloaded from 141.216.78.40 on Sun, 27 Sep 2015 10:32:25 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 MusicEducation:
Closedor Open 135
musical process having the potential to involve students in musical idioms
of their choice and to work to some extent in their own way and at their
27
own speed."
Both the activitiesof composing or performingby themselves will inevi-
tably limit our musical experience to what we can ourselves play or sing.
Composing, performing,and audience-listeningeach have their place, and
individuals will find their own balances and preferencesamong these ac-
tivities.If formalmusic educationis to help students into "situated"musical
discourse,it has to offer more than one single entry point.
Thereare many potentiallyopen avenues both within and outside of the
school setting. Fromthe world beyond classroomswe can hear the buzz of
musical "conversation"from many times and places. Access to this should
also be partof the experienceof students in formaleducation.How is this to
be achieved?Therehas to be a radicalrethinkingof how time and resources
are used. I can only hint at them here. Smallergroups ratherthan the whole
class, whole band, or whole chorusare essentialfor student interaction,mu-
sical decision making, and individual choice. Therehas also to be openness
to wider musical encounters,a recognitionof the plurality of musical dis-
course. Curiously, on this issue there are two paralleland apparentlycon-
tradictorystrandsemerging in contemporaryeducation.One is the imposi-
tion of prescriptiveNational Curricula,Guidelines,or Standards;the other
is the growth of ad hoceducationalprojectsinitiatedfairlyunsystematically
by free-enterpriseagencies working outside of the formal educational
framework.

Representedhere are two distinct approachesto curriculuminnova-

tion which appear to be in tension-the one a nationallyengineered,
standardized approach to a curriculum devised in non-school set-
tings and imposed with the force of law; the other a locally diverse
basket of activities devised in collaborationsbetween professional
musiciansin school and joined on a voluntaristicbasis.28
For example, childrenvisit centers outside of schools to work alongside
musicians, including visiting composers and performersfrom opera com-
panies or members of orchestras. Saville Kushner's point is that these
events are negotiatedfor particularchildrenin a specificlocalityratherthan
nationally imposed. These are potentially rich educational activities, per-
mitting children to engage with music in their own way and at their own
speed. Thereis no curriculumsequencingtowardprespecifiedlearningout-
comes. These events tend to be broadlyprocess based ratherthan geared to
narrowly defined and standardized "products."Kushnernotes that com-
plex music may be "deconstructed";for example, involvement over time
with an opera productioncan have differentlevels of meaning for different
individuals. This is unlike the supposedly cumulative and incremental

This content downloaded from 141.216.78.40 on Sun, 27 Sep 2015 10:32:25 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
136 Keith Swanwick

teaching that characterizes a specified curriculum, with attainment targets

focused on particular age groups. These "authentic" musical activities are
increasing in scope and availability, and new forms of collaboration are
emerging between musicians and young people that take professional
performers and composers into classrooms and bring students out of school.
I think it worth giving a brief illustration here. Between 1994 and 1996,
we have been studying one such scheme involving secondary schools work-
ing alongside musicians connected with the Royal Festival Hall in London;
a three-year program.29 The second of a number of projects had as a focus S.
Reich's composition "City Life."30Classes from six secondary schools heard
"City Life" in final rehearsal and had previously composed and performed
their own music using rhythm loops, city noises, and word sounds, some-
what as does Reich himself. In this work they were helped in school by
members of the London Sinfonietta orchestra and two composers.
It was then the "real music" of Reich that they came to hear in final re-
hearsal. Reich himself responded openly and engagingly afterward to ques-
tions from the children, which ranged from why he wrote such a piece to
how much he was paid for it. Reich said later, "The biggest surprise for me
was how much I enjoyed the educational activities." Although at the time
of writing we are only halfway through the sequence of projects, significant
differences are emerging between the attitudes to music in school of those
involved compared with those having the regular music education pro-
gram; there is a positive difference for the "experimental" group. These
classes not only rate formal music education more highly but have main-
tained a greater degree of homogeneity or lower variance; their attitude
scores are less scattered.31
Over their first eighteen months in secondary school (ages 11 to 13), stu-
dents have found a focus that unites them in a shared perspective. What
seems clear is that focusing on music beyond the classroom has brought
children together in a unity of purpose not so evident among children hav-
ing the "normal" curriculum. It has also raised their musical "game."32
One implication of this study is that we consider seriously what might
happen if music were to be associated with schools rather than always tak-
ing place in them and if formal education were considered to be more a se-
ries of encounters than a chain of instruction. Of course, formal education in
schools is a central plank in the platform of musical opportunities for all
young people. But it is far from being the only educative influence. One role
of schools in the future may be as coordinating agencies facilitating access
to music across a range of settings, some in school and some outside. In any
case, we would do well to think of music classes as opportunities for musical
encountersand be sure not to let a prespecified curriculum mechanize teach-
ing, dampen response to music, or deter opportunism in responding to
musical events in the wider world.

This content downloaded from 141.216.78.40 on Sun, 27 Sep 2015 10:32:25 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Music Education:Closedor Open 137

Make Sure the Teaching of Music Is Worthwhile

In a world where music teaching means so many different things, it seems

necessary to hold in mind the exhortation of Dalcroze to make music teach-
ing worthwhile and identify some working principles to hold in mind, what-
ever the educational setting. I would start from the basic premise that music
educatorsrespectand promotemusic as a form of discourse.33The vitality of this
discourse depends upon both aesthetic engagement and artistic develop-
ment, and it is essentially plural. This has a number of consequences that
can be summarized here in the form of four principles for formal music
education that have regard for the nature of discourse. On the way, I will
point out some resonances in the work of those who have been called
"great" music pedagogues.
Carefor Music. By "care" I do not mean some very generalized concern
for the subject "music" or for music as a "good" thing or for "aesthetic edu-
cation" as uplifting. I mean that when music sounds-however elementary
the resources and techniques may be-the teacher is receptive and alert, is
really listening and responsive and expects students to be the same. This is
to have respect for the medium of the conversation.
Carefor the Pupil, for His and Her Achievementand Autonomy. Discourse-
musical conversation-is not a monologue. Each student brings a realm of
musical understanding with him or her into an educational institution. We
have to try to organize for this to have room for various modes of articulation,
respecting all participants in the conversation.
Always Workfor Expressiveness. The phrase rather than the pulse or the
measure is the smallest expressive unit.34 In the work of the best educators,
including Kodaly, Orff, and Dalcroze, there is never a moment where a
phrase-an expressive gesture-is not looked for. The conversation is not
empty "talk" but significant discourse. Music has a unique expressive
power.
Promote Fluency before Literacy. The position of Orff, Dalcroze, and
Suzuki, among many others, is that musical utterance has precedent over
musical reading and writing. I think it should be remembered too that for
Kodaly a rich background of singing "by ear" is assumed beforechildren be-
gin to read music in the ChoralMethod. Literacy is not the ultimate aim of
music education, it is simply a means to an end in some music and is often
unnecessary. In any case-on an analogy with language-the order of de-
velopment is listen, articulate, then read and write. We might consider how
this would affect the first few piano lessons, classroom instrumental work,
choral and band rehearsals, composing, appraising the work of others.
We can see how these simple and perhaps obvious working principles
might inform current developments. For example, we might take the neces-
sity of broadening the cultural range of music teaching, of engaging in

This content downloaded from 141.216.78.40 on Sun, 27 Sep 2015 10:32:25 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
138 Keith Swanwick

intercultural work or "world musics." The first principle-that we care for

the particularity of musical experience-will help us steer clear of seeing
multicultural resources as a kind of musical world "coach-tour." Having
fairly recently escaped from the clutches of propositional knowledge as-
sociated with the history of Western classical music, we must be careful not
to replicate this state of affairs with the history of music from India, the
Caribbean, Africa, China, or the Pacific region.
If we are to stay close to music and to the principle that we should work
for music's expressiveness, then we shall sometimes have to cut off cultural
labels and help shift the barriers of tribal possessiveness and exclusiveness.
One strategy is to recognize that, in spite of the apparent diversity of much
of the world's music, we can still identify elements that, though they may
appear in quite different contexts, are common to much music. We can
think of repeated melodic or rhythmic patterns, the use of scales or modes,
of chorus or antiphonal effects, call and response, dance rhythms, drones,
effective changes of texture or timbre. We can extend our idea of what Orff
called limited structures, to take in ragas, whole-tone scales, note-rows, jazz
and blues chord sequences, and so on. In these ways, we can extend our
expressive range and in handling these elements come to have a better un-
derstanding of the minds of other people by entering into their musical pro-
cedures. We understand a culture through its music, and any history of mu-
sic can be approached only through the doors and windows of particular
performances.
Music from outside the Western classical tradition has a great deal to
offer us in terms of the fourth principle, of musical fluency taking prece-
dence over what is sometimes called musical literacy. It is precisely this
fluency, the aural ability to image music coupled with the skill of handling
an instrument (or the voice) that characterizes jazz, Indian music, rock mu-
sic, music for steel-pans, and folk music from anywhere. These musicians
have much to teach about the virtues of playing "by ear" and the amazing
possibilities of memory and collective improvisation and composition.
Finally, what are we to make of the emerging world of music technolo-
gies? How do these stand the test of our principles? We can see the contri-
bution of technology in two broad areas. One obvious development is the
extension of individualized learning. The second is the extension of instru-
mental resources in a radical way, giving us instant accompaniments, quite
new tonal effects and undreamed-of combinations of sounds, the use of
computers to assist in the processes of musical composition and perfor-
mance. And this can be without the high-wire act of bringing it all off in real
time.
The first of our principles, care for music, is at hazard only if we forget
that technology is a tool and not an end in itself. The principle of expres-
siveness seems most at risk. It is very easy to mechanize human diversity

This content downloaded from 141.216.78.40 on Sun, 27 Sep 2015 10:32:25 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 MusicEducation:
Closedor Open 139
out of existence and to use prerecordedloops and patternsthat, while they
may serve the purposes of instant music making, certainlydo not develop
expressive range. But the computercan also be used to stimulatecomposi-
tional processes, can translatevisual metaphorsof music into sound. Tech-
nological progress may also release teachersand students from drudgery,
leaving people free to create lively events,promoting conviviality, and ex-
tending sensibility.
In summarythen I am saying that
- formal music education runs the risk of isolating itself from the
wider world of music;
-discourse is pluralratherthan monolithic;
-discourse is multidirectional;and
-amid this diversity music education should hang on to the prin-
ciples of care for music, respect for students, and the prioritizingof
expressivenessand fluency.

Conclusion
In conclusion,and returningto the issue of institutionalmusic education,I
cite an instanceof my own writing that, I think, still picks up something of
my own perspectiveand suggests where we might focus in working out the
futurerole of formaleducation.
(The)first and unique aim of music educationin schools and colleges
is to raise to consciousness and purposefully and criticallyexplore a
number of musical procedures, experienceddirectly through the real-
ity of various inter-culturalencounters.A second aim is to participate
in creatingand sustainingmusical events in the community,events in
which people can chooseto be involved and thus contributeto the rich
variety of musical possibilitiesin our society.
In these ways, we avoid transmittinga restrictiveview of music
and of cultureand may help to keep prejudiceat bay. Human culture
is not something to be merely transmitted,perpetuatedor preserved
but is constantlybeing re-interpreted.As a vital element of the cul-
turalprocess,music is, in the best sense of the term,recreational;
helping
us and our culturesto become renewed;transformed.35
This idea is also capturedby MargaretMead, who also worried about
the separationof educationfrom the world of communitiesoutside of insti-
tutions. There is a positive side to schooling! As she says, "Outof the dis-
continuitiesand rapid changes which have accompaniedthese minglings of
people has come another invention, one which perhaps would not have
been born in any other setting than this one-the belief in education as an
instrumentfor the creationof new human values... the use of education
for unknown ends."36

This content downloaded from 141.216.78.40 on Sun, 27 Sep 2015 10:32:25 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
140 Keith Swanwick

I believe this aspiration is part of what lies behind Bennett Reimer's in-
sistence that music education is aesthetic education. There may have been
some underlying conceptual confusion, and perhaps now the paradigm
may have done its main work. But the emphasis on responsiveness and
openness embodied in his view finds resonances in all who care about mu-
sic and their students. One thing is for sure, the replacement model for mu-
sic education will not be built on any monolithic performance tradition but
will have much more to do with promoting varieties of musical discourse in
diverse educational settings of which schools will be but one.

NOTES

1. For examples, see SchoolsCouncil,EnquiryOne: "TheYoung School Leavers"

(London:Her Majesty'sStationaryOffice, 1968);LeslieJ. Francis,"TheDecline
in Attitudes towards Religious Educationamong 8-15 YearOlds," Educational
Studies13, no. 2 (1987);and MalcolmRoss, "What'sWrongwith SchoolMusic?"
BritishJournalofMusicEducation12, no. 3 (November1995):185-201.
2. Emile Jacques-Dalcroze,Rhythm,Music and Education,trans. H. F. Rubinstein
(1915;London:RiversidePress,1967),p. 93.
3. Ross, "What'sWrongwith SchoolMusic?"p. 196.
4. CharlesLeonhardand RobertHouse, Foundations andPrinciplesof MusicEduca-
tion(New York:McGraw-Hill,1959,1972).
5. Craig Kirchhoff,"TheSchool and College Band:Wind Band Pedagogy in the
United States,"in MusicEducationin the UnitedStates:Contemporary Issues,ed.
TerryJ.Gates (Tuscaloosa,Ala.:Universityof Alabama.Press,1988).
6. BennettReimer,A Philosophy ofMusicEducation (EnglewoodCliffs,N.J.:Prentice
Hall, 1970,1989).
7. Kirchhoff,"TheSchooland College Band,"p. 265.
8. See citationin JoscelynGodwin,Music,MysticismandMagic:A Sourcebook (Lon-
don:Routledge& KeganPaul, 1986),p. 48.
9. whereas in
In Britainand elsewhere these activitiesare usually extracurricular,
North Americathey are more likely to be curriculumelectives.
10. David J. Elliott,MusicMatters:A New Philosophy of MusicEducation(New York:
OxfordUniversityPress,1995),p. 99.
11. Ibid.,p. 23.
12. KeithSwanwick,A BasisforMusicEducation(London:Routledge,1979),p. 36.
13. MalcolmRoss, TheAestheticImpulse(Oxford:Pergamon,1984).
14. Reimer,A Philosophy ofMusicEducation, p. xiii.
15. PeterAbbs, TheEducational (London:FalmerPress,1994),p. 92.
Imperative
16. JohnDewey, Artas Experience (New York:CapricornBooks,1934),p. 15.
17. Ross, TheAesthetic Impulse,p. 65.
18. Ibid., p. 46.
19. This is part of the argumentin my book MusicalKnowledge:
Intuition,Analysis
andMusicEducation(London:Routledge,1994).
20. Peter J. Martin,Soundsand Society(Manchester,U.K.: ManchesterUniversity
Press, 1995), p. 180.
21. Ibid., p. 193.
22. HerbertJ.Gans,HighCultureandPopularCulture(New York:BasicBooks,1974).
23. Jiirgen Habermas, Communicationand the Evolution of Society, trans. by Thomas
McCarthy 1984, from the original, 1976 (Cambridge, U.K.: Polity Press, 1991), p.
171.

This content downloaded from 141.216.78.40 on Sun, 27 Sep 2015 10:32:25 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 MusicEducation:
Closedor Open 141
24. Michael Oakeshot,Rationalismin Politicsand OtherEssays(London:Methuen,
1992),pp. 198-99.
25. Elliott,MusicMatters,p. 173.
26. Elliottrecognizes this and advocatesbreakingwhole classes and chorusesinto
smallergroups to encouragethem to identify and solve performanceproblems
for themselves.
27. Where"composing"amountsto no more thanplaying aroundwith sounds, this
activityalso becomes hardto justify.
28. Saville Kushner,"AgainstBetterJudgement:How a CentrallyPrescribedMusic
CurriculumWorksagainstTeacherDevelopment,"International JournalofMusic
Education, no. 23 (1994):34-45.
29. The scheme is being evaluatedover threeyearsby myself and a colleague,Dor-
othy Lawson. Six classes are being followed around the activities over three
years, and their attitudes and musical work is being monitored.Six "control"
groups are also being observedin parallel.
30. This work had been premieredrecentlyin Franceand Germany.
31. The variancelevels are 1.16for the controlclasses and 0.85 for the experimental
group, significantat p<0.01.This compareswith no significantvarianceat the
outset.
32. As they watched the stage being set up with a mix of acoustic and electronic
instrumentsand beforeanyone played anything,one girl remarkedthat she did
not like this kind of music-"opera and jazz!"Afterward,though,she thoughtit
pretty good. The outlook of a thirteen-year-oldhas realignedsomewhat.
33. The concept of music as discourse is furtherdeveloped in my book Teaching
MusicMusically(Londonand New York:Routledge,1999).
34. I define "phrase"very broadly. It is a discerniblemusical gesture. By this ac-
count, the single "A"that opens Wagner'sRienziOvertureis a phrase.
35. KeithSwanwick,Music,MindandEducation (London:Routledge,1988.),pp. 118-
19.
36. MargaretMead, "OurEducationalEmphasesin PrimitivePerspective,"Ameri-
canJournalof Sociology48 (1942):633-39.

This content downloaded from 141.216.78.40 on Sun, 27 Sep 2015 10:32:25 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions