A New Theory for Music Theory

It is not within the scope of this study to examine the history of music theory and what that entails; however, a perspective is necessary before proposing something new or different. The study of music theory follows the creation of music. When we look at early treatises on music, we realize that music (sound organized) was first created and then studied. This was followed by more music and more studies. We have to study that which has already been created. One cannot study that which does not exist. Consequently we are not studying sound in and of itself but, instead, are studying how someone else has organized the sound into music. Because theory follows practice rather than practice following theory, it stands to reason that music is first created and then studied. Thus music theory as an academic discipline is born out of the need to understand the creation or organization of sound.

Not that there have not been many bold proposals for new ways to create music based on theoretical principles, but the expected study of music theory is based on actual examples of music from history. This is how it should be and generations of music students have been indoctrinated through the system, a system that works diligently to support young musicians in their careers by providing the essential knowledge and skills needed in music. In a type of music foundation curriculum, music theory gives students the tools they need to be musically successful regardless of their chosen field in music. Based primarily on a European model, the study of music theory provides an overview and the analytical skills to understand music, to create music, and to perform music whether that is on an instrument or voice.

As a theory supplement, most schools also require a modicum of keyboard skills that in turn help in the understanding of how music is organized. Keyboard skills are a necessary part of the curriculum depending on the direction of the musical career. Traditional music education requires musical comprehension of at least two clefs which in turn provides an aural and cognitive understanding of harmony.  Rather than emphasizing one set of notes that create a melody, in music theory we work to help students grasp the complexities of more than one tone at a time. Having basic keyboard skills allows to move beyond the melody only and into the world of sound and its variety as well as potential. While the argument continues to be made that having keyboard skills is also necessary from a practical standpoint, ie. the need to play the National Anthem occasionally, or provide music for events or to accompany, that argument is less valid today than in year's past.

A word, however, on the value of keyboard skills is warranted. Recent declines in skilled pianists who can accompany, play church music, provide background music, or entertain for events will ultimately result in significant alterations of current music study including the expectations for applied music. Without accompanists, teachers and students are relegated to unaccompanied performance or performance with technological substitutions, neither of which is entirely satisfactory. Meanwhile, those pianists with the aforementioned skills are in great demand with no end in sight, catapulting their position not only in the musical world but also in communities and churches where pianists are needed. Unfortunately, because the nature of piano skills requires many years of dedicated concentration and practice, taking a few courses in piano, in many perhaps most cases, will not satisfy the need for having "functional" skills in piano. Yet, it does remain true that even basic knowledge of the keyboard enhances musical knowledge for students.

Back to music theory. It is time to reevaluate not only how we teach music theory but also the purpose behind the learning of music theory. When we analyze the goals of creating musicians for the future, we may call into question many of the expectations of what it means to have a working knowledge of music theory. Has the sequence of courses in music theory become a kind of "rite of passage" or does the sequence still have meaning and relevancy in today's world? The answer is probably a little of both, leading me to question the age-old system in music theory. Of course there is no right way nor wrong way, and a student's personal goals should be considered in the process, but if we were to redesign a music theory curriculum by examining the multi-dimensioned world of music and sound, we may find that the fundamental knowledge we treasure and value has changed and needs a healthy injection of modernism.

Although doubtful that changes in music theory need be iconoclastic, any change may require abandoning some old ways in favor of something new. And experiments in new approaches to music theory and rejecting some but not all of the "traditional" curriculum are occurring in our colleges and universities. Yes, something is certainly lost when students do not learn and ultimately love the music of Bach, but there are also inevitable gains when they learn how music in films, on stage, in concert halls, and popular music is created. In the end, I believe it is worth a try.