Klarinet Archive - Posting 000309.txt from 2004/03

From: Jayna Cline <jayna@------.com>
Subj: Re: [kl] Libby Larsen Interview
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 13:40:42 -0500

I went to two of Libby's lectures last spring in San Antonio when she
brought up these same points from the side of the educator and composer.
She's a very energetic speaker who conveys that she solidly believes in
what this article touches on.

>Rhythm is taught in subdivisions of the quarter note. This ignores
>forms of music that don't use duple structure. [I'm not sure what she
>means here. Is it music that doesn't use a regular pattern? that uses
>triple patterns? that uses changing patterns (e.g., Bulgarian)? that
>depends on repetition rather than patterns (native American and African
>drumming)?]

In proof of this, she used the example of two speeches-- the Gettysburg
Address and Bush's 9/11 (only as example...). During the lecture she set
each to meter.Gettysburg was 4/4 and 9/11 was in many meters--
simple,compound and asymmetrical. Her point is that we don't talk like they
did in the mid 1800's much less listen to similar noises. Our music
reflects both of those areas--except for how we teach it.

>Music is taught primarily in ensembles, which ignores forms that are
>done by only one or a few people. [But how can this be taught in
>schools? How can we involve everyone other than in ensembles?]

I see her point but don't agree. I see lots of music taught in the large
ensembles. In all things, more than one medium is important. You can't
thoroughly learn something from just one perspective. Music, math or sports...

>As a matter of fact, I think she understates the crisis. (even here in Texas
>"band land") The educational system is failing...and forget this
>"accountability" crap.
>Forest Aten

I agree that there needs to be a change. I have been using a different
approach to scales with my students. We talk about who used that kind of
scale and what else is out there. How about what Miles uses or Debussy or
Bach? I believe we limit our music studies. I think we could teach from the
more familiar conservative approach while lending to a view of what else is
beyond.

My example:
I have a son who has a love for plunking out keys on the piano. So, I put
him in lessons with a marvelous teacher. Well, I stressed out about
spending good money, etc, ( and didn't hide it well) and he wouldn't work
out of the standard books. He hated it.( We stopped lessons.) Still, he is
creating great sounds at the keyboard. After a year of de-stressing, we
are working on music lessons with scales that include pentatonic, modes,
blues and bebop--all formed around a traditional note (ie:this week is
based on G or whatever) and he is doing well. The lessons are formed from
what he hears. The standard books fit in because that's just the tools we
have to work with, but he knows that there is more out there and he
tolerates it.

>P.S.
>"How necessary is it to answer her?"
> We need to support her position!
>"What should we say?"
> We need to burn down the barn! It's time for change!

Another point that Libby brought out is that 'digital' music is to today's
youth as the 'piano-forte' was for Bach's life. He had to help sell people
on an instrument that didn't have to be tuned for each new key. Digital
music could possibly be the only music used in the future, if you look at
what kids are exposed to now. It's an interesting point of view.

> Where are the chamber music programs in
>our schools? Marching band??? Where does that lead to later in your musical
>life? -0-

Good points, Forest. Glad you brought this up, Ken.

Be seeing you,

jayna cline