Saturday, August 20, 2016

It always starts with Bach, but should it?

Our music curriculum more or less grows out of a Bach framework. Johann Sebastian Bach, often regarded as one of the greatest of composers, set the standard whereby we tend to judge music and how we reference foundational knowledge. We have arbitrarily chosen a single composer and his music to dictate or at least be the springboard for all of music knowledge. In a way, this is not unlike drama where Shakespeare reigns supreme or art where DaVinci seems to own the medium, but is it entirely fair or right? Is excellence in art and music not a compendium of determined quality over a period of time, an amalgamation of styles, expert opinion, public demand, and respect for variety?

As an aside, my love for the music of Bach is difficult to express. Through brilliant crafting of musical line, harmony, complexity, balance, and emotional depth, Bach's music demonstrates unequaled beauty and form. It is certainly understandable why trained musicians would gravitate toward the music of Bach and use his craft as a model example of music excellence. This makes logical sense as well to point to one of the finest historical composers who has made and continues to make an impact on the musical world.

Yet there are problems with these assumptions. No doubt there is a place for Bach in our music curriculum, but should Bach's music be the absolute? Have we fallen into a trap of treating his music as the end rather than the journey?

What would happen if we landed on the music of Stephen Foster instead? Using his melodies, his lyrics, and his musical form as a springboard and model example for excellence, could we trace the lines leading to his music onward to music of today? Or would this, God forbid, take us on a pathway to popular and commercial music? Or were we to build our music foundation on the sounds of folk music of the past or perhaps give a nod to the past and land on the music of Aaron Copland, George Gershwin, Leonard Bernstein. Maybe a radical departure from art music and use the Beatles as the model. Or embrace the philosophy of the juice of life through sound and use Far Eastern music as the almost mystical example.

The central problem of relying on the music of Bach as the model for excellence and the catapult for all of music training, is that only a small sliver of the population looks to Bach for musical meaning. Maybe it smacks of a populist position, but should not the masses have a right to determine quality in the arts? Do we as trained academic musicians retain the sole rights to decide what kind of music is to be studied and what kind of music should be foundational? Granted, we trained musicians would like to be respected for our ability and our knowledge, but by the same token, should we in turn respect those without the skill or training, at least to an extent.

We must be mindful about the problems of denigrating artistic taste since our own artistic taste would then deserve the same treatment. Therein lies the problem of starting music training based on the music of Bach. Are we in fact preparing our students for a world that does not really exist except for in a small sliver of the population? Frightening thought.


Sunday, August 07, 2016

Jealousy and Hatred: Othello

The oft told tale of Othello, masterfully told by William Shakespeare, is a powerful story of lies, betrayal, hatred, and jealousy. Manipulated to the point of murder followed by suicide, Othello reminds us to seek the truth and avoid the misdirection and falsification that tends subvert honesty and redirect people into hatred, bitterness, and ultimately pain. Can it be that the Othello effect is just as rampant today in our complex culture as it has always been?

Nearly everyday someone says something to me that is not accurate and is based on feelings, impressions, suspicions, and misinformation. I believe this is due to the idea that creativity and imagination are much more interesting than reality. Throw in a mix of paranoia, hatred, weakness of character, and a strong dose of limited vision and it all forms painful dishonesty and gross deception. Granted much of this is, of course, self-deception and not intended as anything malicious. Certainly there are those inflicting lies with the decided goal of causing pain and suffering, but my experience in general is that most people have the best of intentions. But often they simply lack in accurate information or, in some cases, prefer not to know the truth.

Most of the time this is due to fear, hatred, and/or jealousy of someone or something. Knowledge is the acquisition of truth and the application of wisdom. When we know and understand, we usually acquire a healthy respect or even disdain for the situation, person, or animal. Regardless of the emotional response, it should be based primarily on knowledge and truth rather than irrational conclusions based on falsehood.

Rather than share criticism, negativity, lies, and dishonesty, we should all be mindful of how our words and our actions are being accepted. Even a small lie about another person can compound into serious pain for others.


Monday, August 01, 2016

Arts and Personal Tension

Just read yet another syrupy justification for the arts in society and the value of musicians in the community. I am no longer convinced we can justify the arts based on nebulous and subjective emotions. We in the arts must provide concrete evidence of why and how the arts are a significant economic force in our culture. We cannot arbitrarily decide that our own preferences for something automatically make it valuable for others or for society. Just because I have a strong preference for the music of Mozart and his Horn concertos in particularly does not give me the right nor the power to force others to support my preference. Should I lobby in Washington for more tax dollars (your money that I am taking out of your wallet and your purse) to provide more performances of the Mozart Horn Concertos, simply because I want this to happen?

We cannot continue to fabricate an economy and a market that is obviously in decline. If the Mozart Horn Concertos are that important to me, I am welcome to gather musicians, form an orchestra, rent a performance hall, hire recording engineers, and make a recording or have a performance. Since I do not have the financial resources for such an endeavor, I have to make some choices. I can buy a recording and listen or I can find an orchestra somewhere who happens to be performing a Mozart Horn Concerto or I can write impassioned letters to politicians asking for public funds to support my desire.

The absurdity of coercing others to love what I love reminds me of the personal tension that lives in me everyday. So many things that I enjoy are not popular enough to be economically supported by others. Such is true of everyone. We make decisions all the time about what to support, what to attend, what to buy, and ultimately what to value. This morning I am having a medical procedure that will be expensive because I value my health and my quality of life. I attended a Frank Sinatra tribute concert on Saturday night because I was willing to spend some money to hear the music. Fortunately for the singer, the band, and the venue, the concert was enjoyed by over 300 people all willing to pay for the experience.

Please do not misunderstand. I love the arts and "classical" music in particular. I find great joy in the music of Brahms, Wagner, Beethoven and Mahler. I am often moved by a phrase in the music of Bach and am thrilled by the power of the music of Sibelius. But, again, while I thoroughly love art music, that love does not make it economically feasible to transmit into live performances. Joy is intangible and infectious but it cannot be codified in and of itself. It can, however, be demonstrated through the marketplace.

All the "love" in the world for a professional orchestra and all the respect that can be mustered for a "classical" performer cannot pay the light bill nor put food on the table. It is the invisible hand of the market that advances or rejects the arts. It is not labor unions, poor management, bad performances, poor halls, bad parking, low wages, lack of knowledge, bad marketing, poor programming, out of tune oboe or weak percussionists, poor seats, inadequate lighting, boring concerts, more pops concerts, less pops concerts, or any number of things on which to place the blame. It is the market that determines the success or failure of the orchestra. While this may be shaped by the factors mentioned above, it can only be measured by ticket sales.

Love the arts, support the arts, but do not expect your love alone to shape or even save the arts. In the end the people will decide what remains, what disappears, and what grows. For those of us who love the canon of great literature, let us hope and pray the people will share in that love and demonstrate it.