Musicing

Happy MayDay! I was just thinking of the MayDay Group today. For anyone reading this, it’s a group of/for critical theorists in music education. I learned about the group from my mentor, the late Steve Paul, during my doctoral studies at the University of Arizona. I have since chatted with a number of the group members and founders on the MayDay website and have attended two MayDay conferences (Vancouver and Princeton). I have met some wonderful people through this group and have learned a lot. I encourage anyone reading this to check out the website link to the group. In my mind, we really are involved in a “labor of love”–pointing out how formal music education might become more responsive to the needs of people. I had a conversation with a prominent researcher in music education a while back who said that the MayDay Group really doesn’t contribute anything–that it’s all just a bunch of talk. From my perspective and in my experience as a music teacher, all the so-called research in the world about what works best in teaching and learning music doesn’t amount to a “hill of beans” if what works best has no real connection to human needs. That’s where critical theory comes in; it points out practices of discrimination and exploitation. It’s a labor of love on behalf of and in fellowship with the oppressed. Seriously, check out the MayDay website; I think you will find it valuable.

We need an elementary and middle school music method that reflects the rich and complex American musical heritage without making it subordinate to elite European classical traditions. I am envisioning a method with American Roots Musicing and American Popular Musicing at the heart of instruction. Students might choose to explore elite European classical music, but hopefully with the understanding that there were also European folk traditions that contributed more deeply to the American musical mix. Students might also be encouraged to explore diverse musicings from around the world–those that may have contributed to American music and those that might not have yet. Music, in this method, would not be understood as a collection of musical works to be studied and revered, but a vibrant and evolving social practice. In order to reflect the give-and-take and everyday-ness of American music, the method would be loose collection of practices and musicings rather than a strictly ordered and unquestioningly adhered to sequence.

I’m really quite serious about this and have begun outlining an American Music Method and envisioning what it might look like in practice. Please send your thoughts if you are interested.

In his comment on a previous post, Joe wondered how to define “country” music. As I understand it, country music never has been clearly separated from other popular musics and it has always been evolving. Rather than a presentation of country music’s history, country music education might involve more of an “exploration” and “discovery.” In my “Enjoyment of Music” course, for example, I give a music genealogy assignment that goes something like this.

Step 1: Choose a favorite current musical artist.
Step 2: Research this individual on the internet (wikipedia and youtube)
Step 3: Choose someone who influenced the music of the individual in Step 1
Step 4: Research the individual from Step 3 . . . choose one of their influences . . . and so on until you can’t go any further.

I have really enjoyed seeing the reports (some excellent slide shows) from these projects. The point here is that I think this would be an excellent way to approach the history of country music. There are no country music history textbooks as far as I can tell and so a country music curriculum would have to be developed from scratch (and maybe that’s appropriate relative to the “make do with what you have” spirit in much of country music) and, from my perspective, this is not necessarily a disadvantage. For some students this type of project can be a real eye-opener as they “discover” the diverse styles that contributed to country music.

We had a meeting of the GRIME (Gender Research in Music Education) SRIG (Special Research Interest Group) here at MENC in Milwaukee today. Patti O’Toole, the first chair of the SRIG, spoke a little bit about its history. I enjoyed her discussion very much and felt that it alone was worth the $225 conference fee (yes, it is rather steep!). She suggested to feminists in music education that it’s time to be “good” rather than “strong.” This was (as I interpret her talk) tied to the idea that we need to create a more civil dialogue within GRIME. She also asked a number of times something like, “What have feminist researchers in music education accomplished?” From my point of view, feminist research in music education (as with feminist research in other fields) has provided a good foundation for inquiry into additional areas of social justice research. My own interest in social class and music education, for example, has, I feel, been informed by feminist dialogue. And, much of that dialogue has been and is rather strident. So, I’m not sure where to stand on this issue–strong or good. Can I choose both?

I grew up listening to country music–Hank Williams, Loretta Lynn, Tammy Wynette, Merle Haggard, Willie Nelson, Jim Reeves, etc. Of course, we also had a good dose of American folk music. Mom played the guitar and sang; Dad played the accordion. My brothers and sisters all learned guitar and I, being the rebellious one, learned accordion. We played and sang together as a family (and we still do play together a bit at family reunions). This music helped to shape who I am and how I view the world.

Now, as I have reached the ripe old age of 40, the musicing I enjoy most is playing guitar (I’ve been playing guitar for 7 years now) and singing country and folk music. It “takes me back” and reinforces my sense of identity.

Theories about basic human needs agree almost universally that belonging is a basic human need. Country music, for me as well as many of my students here at Northwest Missouri State University and music students throughout North America, provides a source of identity as it has been interwoven with everyday life and significant life events (funerals, reunions, weddings, graduation). These students have a right (basic needs=rights) to explore the rich heritage of country music and to have it placed on par in their music classrooms with rock, jazz, and classical traditions as well as other folk and popular traditions from around the world.

Barb wrote a comment on a previous post, Kids and Microphones (thanks, Barb!) and mentioned that some colleagues disapprove of Karaoke in the music classroom. The aversion some feel towards karaoke in North American–that it isn’t considered ’serious’ music–may be related to class bias. Consider the following research article abstract:

Drew, R. (2005). ‘Once more, with irony’: karaoke and social class. Leisure studies, 24/4: 371-383.

“Abstract: Karaoke’s mimetic character can provide a conduit for personal growth and interpersonal empathy. Yet, karaoke is not always understood this way, and one factor determining how it is understood is social class. Karaoke’s class markers have been clear, though very different, in Eastern and Western cultures. Whereas in Japan karaoke first became popular among the upper-middle class, in the USA it was popularized by the working and lower-middle classes. As karaoke gained a following among working-class Americans it was often shunned by the urban middle class. Yet by the late 1990s an alternative aesthetic of karaoke, characterized by an ironic performance style, developed among middle-class urbanites. This essay describes these opposing styles of mimetic and ironic performance, explains the motives behind them, and considers what happens when they come into contact.”

I came across this blog today (http://kidsmusicthatrocks.blogspot.com/) while searching for quality music for kids. There is some great stuff there. “Music for kids that doesn’t make adults want to rip their hair out.” Excellent!

In MENC’s February edition of Teaching Music, there’s an article about a Harris Poll “making the case” for music in the schools. I have tried to keep the posts very positive on this blog, but this article is hard to spin in that direction. Of course, the tenor of the article is that the Harris Poll’s finding that higher household income and higher levels of education correspond positively to involvement in music education is a wonderful justification for music education. Music makes you smarter AND wealthier. “‘These results are fantastic,’ says Regina Corso, director of the Harris Poll/Harris Interactive. ‘If we were trying to make them up we wouldn’t have made them this good because no one would believe us.’”

I feel a mixture of anger and nausea. Higher education and higher income actually correspond most strongly to parents’ education and income. (See the statistics put out recently by the Economic Mobility Project–http://www.economicmobility.org). Wealthier parents can afford private lessons for their children and parents with higher levels of education tend to value and encourage formal music education. In fact, formal music instruction is part of the cultural capital that allows the perpetuation of class inequalities. Rarely (maybe when someone becomes a popular music star, for example) does music education lead to social mobility. This article is very misleading.

I read some old news (50 days ago) in USA today (http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2007-11-11-van-zandt_N.htm) about Steven van Zandt’s rock curriculum that he is promoting (in partnership with MENC) for schools. Here’s a blog link to his description of the curriculum: http://blog.thehill.com/2007/11/14/bringing-rock-n-roll-to-the-classroom/

I have to admit that I have mixed feelings. I like the idea of children exploring their cultural roots which, of course, includes rock and many other musics beyond the traditional focus on elite European traditions. Should we focus on rock? I also wonder whether this (with its focus on ready-made lessons plans) will foster ‘learning about’ rather than learning in and through music. How much singing and playing is involved? Finally, I wonder why this is attached to MENC’s “save the music” agenda. Does rock need to be saved?

At any rate, I’m curious, and I’ll include some notes here in the future as I explore it further.

This morning our new baby was propped up in a chair and the other three kids and I were dancing around trying to get her to smile. It was working. I noticed that as they were dancing the kids were making up their own music (each their own tune). So was I. I thought of traditions in which people sing to accompany dancing and wondered if there are any revivals of these practices in North America. I see contra-dance clubs advertised here and there; I wonder how a play party club would fare. At any rate, dancing and singing simultaneously seems to be a “natural” human expression. Music is inextricably connected to the body, whether in the “aesthetic” realm in which movement is conceptualized/remembered or in “real-time” where the body moves with the music (or the music moves with the body!). Of course, I sincerely doubt that the kids were thinking about this kind of stuff and for me it was just a passing thought–we were just enjoying dancing for the baby.