A Discussion of Gunther Schuller's Approach to Conducting: Implications for the

Instrumental Music Classroom

Author(s): Janice Waldron
Source: Philosophy of Music Education Review, Vol. 16, No. 1 (Spring, 2008), pp. 97-108
Published by: Indiana University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40327292 .
Accessed: 19/04/2014 02:05

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.

Indiana University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Philosophy of
Music Education Review.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 132.234.251.230 on Sat, 19 Apr 2014 02:05:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
A DISCUSSION OF GUNTHER
SCHULLER'SAPPROACHTO
CONDUCTING
IMPLICATIONS FOR THE INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC
CLASSROOM
JANICE WALDRON
Canada
ofWindsor,
University

Abstract:Whatprofessional musicianssayand do affects theattitudesand

actionsof music educatorsin the classroom.One examplecomes from
influentialconductor /composer,GuntherSchuller,who,in his controver-
sial 1997 book, The Compleat Conductor, defines, espouses, and
recommendshis own "philosophy of conducting. " An examinationof
his
ideas and, moreimportantly, theassumptions thatpremisethem,demon-
stratesthatSchullerfailsto situatehis beliefswithinthe largerhistorical
framework ofaestheticphilosophy.Italso servesas a usefulexampleofhow
we, as conductor/educators,are prone to distanceourselvesfromeduca-
tionalphilosophy as a productofthesystematic examination ofbeliefs.This
is dangerousbecause,through conducting, one necessarily reinforces
a phi-
losophyof music, which is itselfsituatedwithinthe general realm of
aestheticphilosophy. Thispapersummarizes Shuller'sinterpretation
ofcon-
ducting,identifiestheunarticulatedrealistand idealistassumptions within,

ofMusicEducationReview,16,no. 1 (Spring2008)
© Philosophy

This content downloaded from 132.234.251.230 on Sat, 19 Apr 2014 02:05:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
98 PHILOSOPHY OF MUSIC EDUCATION REVIEW,16:1

ofthisprescriptive
and discussestheimplications
critiqueshis "philosophy,"
approachtoinstrumental musiceducation.

Professionalmusicians, throughtheirperformancesand beliefs,can profoundly

affectthe attitudesand approaches of classroom music educators. A particular
case in point can be made froma wind band educator perspective.There are
currentlyonly two professional wind bands operating in the United States;
instrumentalwind band educators who wish to emulate the practicesof profes-
sional musicians are forcedto relyalmost exclusivelyupon the workspresented
by professionalorchestralmodels and, by extension,professionalorchestralcon-
ductors.Because thisis the case, the actions,words,and thoughtsof professional
conductorscan be a significantfactorin shaping the beliefsand practicesofpub-
lic school band directors.
One such influential conductor/composer/musician/educator is Gunther
Schuller who, in his 1997 book entitled"The Compleat Conductor" espouses
his controversialapproach to conducting,which he labels and definesas a "phi-
losophy of conducting." It is not a philosophy in the commonly understood
aesthetic use of the term. Instead, based on his unexamined assumptions,he
presentshis ideas regardingconducting and performancepractice as truthand,
as examples, uses eight classical masterworksto demonstratehow to apply his
philosophy to writtenscores. Schuller makes no attemptsto ground his claims
throughdialectic or othersystematicmethod of examination.To his credit,this
is not his objective because such an examinationwould underminethe idea that
what he presentsare universaltruthsregardingmusic and writtenscores. Ques-
tioningthiswould be unthinkableand irrelevant.
In this paper, I will examine the underlying philosophical claims of
Schuller's conducting philosophy but, more importantly,I will examine the
manner in which he articulatesthese claims. This will be done in an attemptto
demonstratethathis failureto situatehis philosophical beliefswithina largerhis-
torical frameworkservesas an example of how we, as conductors,are prone to
distance ourselvesfromeducational philosophyas a productof systematicexam-
ination or dialectic. Instead, in many cases, it is possible thatsuch philosophical
beliefs are constructedin order to reinforceattitudesthatare grounded in pre-
vailingpractice. It is not my intentionin thispaper to offermy own or any other
alternativephilosophyof conducting,but insteadto use Schuller's book as a use-
fulcase studythatexemplifiesthe problems inherentwhen unreflectivethought
guides a practice,which, in this case, is conducting. I will now brieflysumma-
rize the main ideas in the philosophical and prescriptivesegmentsof Schuller's
workbeforearguing this case. It is worthnoting that his book also contains an
excellent historyof conducting,which will not be discussed here.

This content downloaded from 132.234.251.230 on Sat, 19 Apr 2014 02:05:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 JANICE WALDRON 99

SCHULLERS INTERPRETATION OF THE ART OF

CONDUCTING
According to Schuller, conducting is the most demanding and musically
complex of the various disciplineswhich constitutethe field of music perform-
ance. He claims that it is oftenmistakenlyperceived as an easily acquired skill
by musiciansand a magicallybestowedgiftby audiences, but maintainsthatit is
neither,because it requires "years of hard work, intensivestudyand talent."1
Althoughhe does not define the term"talent,"he assertsthatby itselfit is insuf-
ficientforone to become a conductor, because the art of conducting involves
skillswhich encompass a range of human attributes,including certain physical,
aural, analytical, intellectual, psychological, and philosophical strengths.All
mustbe highlyhoned.
Schuller wiselynotes thatthereis an underlyingphilosophyin everyconduc-
tor'sapproach, but implies that most of these philosophies are misguided for
variousreasons. Further,he maintainsthat,contraryto the beliefsof many con-
ductors, the act of conducting can be specifically defined and prescribed.
Accordingto him, the ideal conductor is deeply devoted to understandingthe
score, humble in her desire to serve the music, an ardent advocate for new
music, and possesses the necessary"technical, intellectualand emotional capac-
ities"2 to translate an appropriate realization via the correct gestures. Most
importantlyhowever,she possesses

a senseofunalterablerespectforthegreatliterature
comprising ourWestern
musicalheritage;a sensethattheartofconductingmustbe seenas a sacred
intoa meaningful
trusttotranslate expressive withas much
acousticreality,
insightas humanlypossible,those musical documents-the scores,the
texts-leftus bythegreatcomposers.3

Schuller is not suggestingthatthe conductor should eschew a healthyego,

but ratherrecommends thatshe possess a sense of humilityborn of a desire to
know all aspects and dimensionsof a work,both notatedand spiritual.By fulfill-
ing this obligation, a conductor necessarilydiscoversthe only suitable way to
perform a piece, thus abolishing the concept of "interpretation"-which
Schuller abhors- and instead institutingMaurice Ravel's concept of "realiza-
tion"- of which Schuller is an advocate. As an example, he quotes Ravel who
advised, "One should not interpretmy music, one should realize it."4
Schuller believes that interpretationis a dangerous practice forseveral rea-
sons. First,because it is a recent development having evolved over the last two
hundred years,the relativenoveltyof the concept of interpretation makes it sus-
pect in and of itself.He argues that the modern interpreter,either through
"arrogance or ignorance, alter[s] the workto suit his own needs or thoughts."5

This content downloaded from 132.234.251.230 on Sat, 19 Apr 2014 02:05:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
100 PHILOSOPHY OF MUSIC EDUCATION REVIEW,16:1

Thus, accordingto him,interpretation

becomesa refusalto let theworkstand
alone. Worse,repeatedexposuresto manydifferent renderscrit-
interpretations
and
ics, musicians,historians, audiences of
incapable distinguishing a "real
work"whenheard.Further, anyonewho has notexperiencedsuch a "truereal-
ization"cannoteven beginto contemplatehow sublimethis"ultimateartistic
achievement"6 could be.

SITUATING SCHULLER'S PHILOSOPHY

I will now discusshow Schullers approachto conductingis rootedin two
schoolsof aestheticphilosophy. Althoughhe does notacknowledgethisin his
I
discussions,believethatan examination ofthephilosophicalrootsofhisbeliefs
is necessary, because itservesto demonstratehowwe,as educators, oftenfailto
acknowledge therootsofourbeliefsystems, therefore
remaining oblivioustothe
resulting impactthattheycan haveon practice.
Closer examinationof Schuller'sideas revealsan approachto conducting
tacitlyrootedin thetwophilosophies ofidealismand realism.In theformer, the
ideal versionofa piece is believedto existonlyin thecomposer'smind.Thus,
thebestthatmusicianscan hope toachievein a performance is a close approxi-
mationto theoriginalversionenvisionedbythecomposer.Realistsbelievethat
thescoreis a literaltranslation of thecomposer'sintent.The twophilosophies
overlapto someextent;theirone commonthreadis thebeliefthata scoreis not
opentomorethanone interpretation. Adherencetothescoretherefore becomes
theultimatestandardbywhichperformances are measured.
Because idealistsbelievethatthematerial(or lesser)worldis constantly in a
stateof flux,theywonderifany groundsforstability are possible.Stabilityis
soughtbyseekingthetruththatlies in theideal,butbecauseitlies in theideal,
thattruthcan neverbe fullyrealized.These ideas tracetheirrootsto Plato,
Hegel,and Kant(whoformulated theconceptof"transcendental idealism")and
are based on thebeliefthatwhatwe experienceis "merelya shadowofreality"
because althoughwe cannottrulytrustour senses,theworldas we knowit is
experiencedsensually.7 Since "realobjectsconstitutingthe externalworldare
not independentof cognizingminds,"8knowledge,reason,and logic then
becometheonlytoolsavailableto us to uncovertruth.
Thereis a strongidealisticstreakevidentin Schuller'swriting thatisbestrep-
resentedbythe mannerin whichhe perceivesmusicas transcendental. As an
example,he statesthat"suchsubtleties ofinterpretationresidein thatfinalhigh-
est realmof reproductive performance whereinexplicable,indefinable-and
unteachable-instincts and intuitionstakeover,whichgo beyondthe musical
notation,beyondthetext,and capturetheessencethatlies behindthenotes."9
Further, he claimsthat"thoseaspectsofa performance thattranscend thelimi-

This content downloaded from 132.234.251.230 on Sat, 19 Apr 2014 02:05:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 JANICE WALDRON 101

tationsof the score, thatexplore the regionsbeyond the scope of musical nota-
tion, should respect the final stages of an interpretationwhich is in all other
respectsand at all other levels wrungfroma faithful,rigorous,intelligentread-
ing of the text."10Thus, Schuller is speaking of universal ideals and truths
because he speaks not of definitiveperformances,but ideal ones.
BettyHanley, in her discussion of the implications that various aesthetic
philosophies hold formusic educators,explains thatteachers with an idealistic
approach to music education employ "a systematic,thorough,and generally
more intellectual studyof acknowledged masterpieces" because to an idealist
these "are the best manifestations of lastingand universaltruthto be found in the
material world."11Music educators with this belief system- and the resulting
approach to practicebased on it- would certainlyseem to be consistentwiththe
views expressedby Schuller.
On the contrary,realistsvalue the world as perceived, because to them the
physicalis what is real and constant.Aristotle,one of the firstproponentsof this
philosophy,maintained thatthe path to truthwas based on empirical observa-
tion because rational conclusions could then be drawn based on practical
evidence.
In addition to his idealistbeliefs,Schuller demonstratesan empirical realist
approach in the manner that he decided what musical textsto include in his
book foranalysis.The eight "acknowledged masterpieces"representto the au-
thorthe definitiveorchestralworksof the last two centuries.Priorto writingthe
book, Schuller listened to everyknown recordingof each piece and then listed
them in descending orderof frequencyof recordings.The numberof timeseach
piece was recorded determinedboth its inclusion in the book and the order in
which it was analyzed. In order,the worksare Beethoven's Fifth,Seventh, First,
and Fourth Symphonies; Brahm's Fourth; Strauss's Till Eulenspiegel; Ravel's
Daphnis et Chloe, Second Suite; Schumann's Second; and Tchaikovsky'sSixth.
Each workis presentedin a separate chapter in which Schuller prescribeshow
to obtain an exact performanceof the masterworkbased on his ideas and these
are reflectedin his readingof the text.Further,Schuller is dismissiveof any con-
ductorwho fallsoutside of his judgmentas to what is or is not a correctrealiza-
tion-not interpretation-of the score.
This homage to acknowledged masterpiecesis also consistentwitha realist's
view of music. Hanley explains that, "for realists,masterpieces are important
because theyhave been identifiedby connoisseursas worthyof study."12 A music
educator with this philosophy therefore believes that it is her purpose as a
teacher to help studentsperceive what reallyhappening being heard in the
is or
music and this would also appear to be consistentwith Schuller. He statesthat
"a consummate knowledgeof the music at hand will alwaysbringout the best in

This content downloaded from 132.234.251.230 on Sat, 19 Apr 2014 02:05:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
102 PHILOSOPHY OF MUSIC EDUCATION REVIEW,16:1

the musicians."13In thisview,the conductor becomes the teacher and the musi-
cians are the students.
This philosophy holds other implications for music educators as well. It
implies that"ifstudentsdon't appreciate a greatmusical work,it is because they
do not trulyhear (that is, understand) what is going on"14 and it therefore
becomes the teacher'sdutyto clarifythe workso thatthe studentswill "appreci-
ate what they are experiencing."15Schuller would seem to concur with this
statement,because he argues that "as a workingmethod, [the conductor] is in
the process of revealing the score to the orchestraand thence the listener,the
specificsof how all the elements of music are used- harmony,melody,rhythm,
dynamics,timbre,formand structuremustbe separatelyadded then collectively
explored and understood."16
Further,Schuller uses realismto bridgethe gap between the material(score)
and ideal worldsby assertingthatthe score contains measurable elements which
are the keyto understandingand thus realizingthe ideal. He statesthatwe must
concern ourselveswith"those aspects of performance- and musical notation-
which are fundamental,which are measurable, and which in turnpermitus to
evaluate a performancein relationto at least those fundamentals."17
Schuller val-
ues the quantifiable aspects of music because it enables the conductor to
uncover truth.

SOME RESPONSES TO SCHULLER

In orderto contrastSchuller's realistconception of the score, it is firstneces-
saryto understandwhatvariousscholarshave to sayabout the value of scoresand
the relationof composers, performers, and music in a performance.Here I am
trying to establish that alternate views exist and for reasons of brevity,do not
believe it necessaryto reviewall thathas been said on the subject. Therefore,I
will now outline the beliefsof two philosopherswho representa dissentingview:
Francis Sparshottand David Elliott, both of whom were chosen because their
ideas are fairlywell known withinthe field of music education.
Sparshottsays thata score is a piece of writtentextwithsigns on it and that
these signsare understoodsyntacticallywithinthe contextof a specificperform-
ance practice. The signs indicate certain sound types,silences, and relations
between them that"correspondto a class of musical performances."18 The score
by itselfdoes not demand how it should be performed,thereforeprovidingper-
formanceopportunitiesforthe practitioner.According to Sparshott,scores can
be used in several ways. They can be executed "straight"(that is, performedas
truthfully as possible) or can be used to formthe basis foran improvisation,or as
a "source of ideas."
Sparshottalso maintains thatthe manner in which a score is employed can

This content downloaded from 132.234.251.230 on Sat, 19 Apr 2014 02:05:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 JANICE WALDRON 103

be analogous to the way in which a tune is learned aurally.This is because when

a performerlearns a song based on another'srenditionone is imitatingthe orig-
inators'versionand thus producing,and not necessarilyre-producing,a copy of
the original.The song can then be varied or used as the basis fora new tune. In
thisway,Sparshottperceivesmusic-makingas a potentiallytalk-likeactivity, thus
renderingrealistbeliefsabout score functiontiresomeand obsolete. He identi-
fies the debate surrounding the issue as political rather than musical in
motivationand maintainsthat,forthisreason, "using a score in one way"19does
not necessarilypreclude othersfromusing it in an altogetherdifferent manner.
Playingfrom a score in
differs another way from a performance learned from
an aural experience. Aurallylearned performancesare based on "one or more
individual performances"while a score answers to a "class of performances."20
There is a belief thatifone wishes to trulyknow a composer's work,then there
mustbe a "subclass of performancesansweringto the waysthe composer envis-
aged the work when it was composed."21Sparshottwonders if such a class is
needed because some, like Schuller, believe thatthereis onlyone trueinnerper-
formanceintended by the composer, which must,by default,be the definitive
one.
Sparshott,however,is convinced thatthisconcept is not only musicallyunvi-
able but also unnecessary.A real performancehas mistakes,but it can also
contain moments of sublime participantinteraction,which do not necessarily
originatefromthe writtenpage. Music-makingis an inherentlyhuman activity,
he argues, and as such to seek the perfectperformanceis futileand misses the
point. For example, in a real performance,unlike an inner one, decisions are
constantlybeing made in responseto a multitudeof unplanned interactionsand
externalevents. Bearing this in mind, the composer's inner performancewould
not necessarilybe more authoritativethan the composer's own actual perform-
ance, because she mightnot be a proficientenough musician to realize her own
composition. A superiormusician, however,could demonstratethat "different
interpretations,both equally defensiblemusically,[could] comply withthe same
score."22
Elliot agrees and expands on thisidea byarguingthatwhat"musical perform-
ers do is analogous to what a speaker does when he uttersa quotation."23A
speakerusing a quote to make a point demands understandingand an interpre-
tativeabilityon the part of the listener.There is, however,more to a musical
performancethan this factoralone. When one says thata musician is perform-
ing a work,a subtle implication is made that the musician is "producing the
precise sounds indicated in the score and deliberatelyintendingthe sounds"24
which are stipulatedby the composer. A requirementof any performanceis a
musical assertionthat can be thoughtof in the same way in which a speaker

This content downloaded from 132.234.251.230 on Sat, 19 Apr 2014 02:05:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
104 PHILOSOPHY OF MUSIC EDUCATION REVIEW,16:1

expectshis listenersto understandand interpreta quotation. It is thereforeinsuf-

ficientmerely to quote what a composer indicates on a score because this by
itselfdoes not qualifyas a performance.
Instead, a performermust "express his/herpersonal understandingof the
composition."25This is an absolutelynecessaryingredientin any performance.It
is not enough to copy or reproducean "audible reproductionof a score."26What
makes a musical experience enjoyable is the special understanding- or interpre-
tation-that existsbetween a particularartistand the performedwork.Sparshott
articulatesa similaridea, maintainingthatthe musician mustdemonstratea per-
formance understandingrelative to the understandingneeded to compose a
piece. The resultingalternative,a performancethat has just copied the com-
poser's understanding,is thereforenot a musical one.
Further, Elliott specifies the ways in which performerscan demonstrate
understandingof a composition withinthe performingcontext.He saysthatone
can perform"what the composer should/could have intended, what past per-
formerscould/should have intended, what performersbelieve their audience
expects,or any combination of the latter."27
The resultis thattherecan be a myr-
iad of possible contrastinginterpretationsand furtherthat these constitutethe
vastarrayof different performancecharacteristicswhich providethe impetusfor
attendingconcerts comprised of music which the listener may have already
heard numerous times.

A CRITIQUE OF SCHULLER'S APPROACH

There are many tacitassumptionsthatunderlie Schuller's writing.Although
I do not personallyshare thisview of music, it has not been my purpose to offer
an extensiverefutationof idealist or realistphilosophies of music here. I have
summarized several alternativepositions in order to demonstratethattheyexist
and thus I have overlookedseveralcogent argumentssupportingidealistviews in
the process. The goal of my previous discussion was to demonstratethat the
potentially dangerous aspect of this work is not the philosophy contained
therein,but the author'sapproach. Specifically,readersare not given the oppor-
tunityto understand Schuller's claims about music within the frameworkof
philosophical discourse because the author does not take us there.
Schuller's book is not a philosophical work in the commonly understood
sense, as he makes no attemptto convince the reader,throughthe construction
of rationalargumentsor dialectic, of the foundationalunderpinningsof his phi-
losophy.The many ideas discussed are simplystatedas factswiththe remainder
of the book resemblingan instructionmanual on how to go about conducting,
based on the assumed truthof the philosophy.This bringsus to the underlying
problem: Schuller, by not attemptingto convince the reader thathis realist/ide-

This content downloaded from 132.234.251.230 on Sat, 19 Apr 2014 02:05:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 JANICE WALDRON 105

alist view is superiorto any other,such as pragmatismor social constructivism,

forexample, servesas a useful case study.Through one's approach to conduct-
ing, one necessarilyconveys a particularphilosophy of music, which is itself
based on some school of thoughtwithingeneral aestheticphilosophy.When this
broader philosophical frameworkremains unidentified,however,the potential
forindoctrinationremains high. Schuller has gone furtherthan many conduc-
torsin that he has articulatedhis belief system;however,he has not situated it
within the frameworkof aesthetic philosophy or even a philosophy of music.
Thus any discussionabout the acceptabilityof his philosophyamong conductors
becomes closed.

SOME IMPLICATIONS FOR INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC

EDUCATION
It behooves the music educator who ascribes to a philosophyof conducting
that leaves its own assumptions unexamined to examine all possible repercus-
sions formusic education. Ironically,Schuller indicates correctlythatconduc-
torshave historicallyavoided examiningthe underlyingphilosophies thatguide
theiractions. Accordingto Hanley, it is a fundamentalhuman characteristicto
behave in a certain way which is consistentwith one's own world view. Such a
belief systemoperates on so basic a level that most people make all of their
choices based on it untilsomeone or somethinghappens to challenge them.28In
a recentresponseto Elvira Panaiotidi,I argued thatthroughthe obsessivesearch
music programsin specificregionsoftendevelop curricula
forself-justification,
thatreflectlocal values and/orrespond to localized pressuresand then backtrack
by constructingtacit philosophies thatare indirectlybased on the social norms
thatgave rise to those curricula.29
This process of constructinga prioriphilosophies (forlack of a betterterm)
in orderto rationalizefirmlyheld beliefsis particularlyapt to occur in the realm
of band performance,according to Craig Kirchoff.30 He believes thatmany tra-
ditional band directorsascribe to a realistphilosophywhile apparentlyunaware
of the historicalrootsof theirbeliefor thatany alternativesexist.This realistphi-
losophy of band directingmay be a resultof the band's historicrelation to the
militaryor it may existbecause of the residual effectsof conductorssuch as Fritz
Reiner and ArturoToscannini. Both were dictatorialin theirapproach to con-
ducting, assuming that there are absolute measurable standards. The ideas
shared by Toscannini, Reiner, and Schuller are influentialbecause they rein-
forcethistraditionalstyleof band directing- or mightthese ideas themselvesbe
derivedfrommilitarypractice?It is difficultto say.
Kirchoffstates that the idea of measurable standardsof performancewith
regardto the score is no more apparent than in the NorthAmerican band con-

This content downloaded from 132.234.251.230 on Sat, 19 Apr 2014 02:05:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
106 PHILOSOPHY OF MUSIC EDUCATION REVIEW,16:1

test.Most band directorsand communities judge a band programbased on its

contest evaluations. There is littledoubt, says Kirchoff,that the "band contest
has helped to raise and maintain performancestandardsin this country."31 He
pointsout, however,thatthese numerous contestsare so connected by theirreal-
istview thatthere is littleor no room forinterpretation.Often,a Division One
(Superior) performanceis the one that has most perfectlyreplicated the reper-
toire in terms of the score. The categories on a standard North American
adjudication sheet include intonation,tone quality,balance and blend, rhythm,
articulation,and dynamics. Because the categoryof musicianship is normally
listed at the bottomof the form,he argues, it inevitablyreceives littleattention.
Thus the goal of a contest performanceoftenbecomes errorelimination,thus
achieving as much musical correctnessas possible or, in Schuller's words,"recre-
ating and reproducingthe masterpieces."32 This is not to imply that the realist
position itself is necessarily negative. The problem is that, when taken to
extremesand in the absence of any otherallowable philosophy,it can preclude
musicalityand innovation in a band performance.Band directorswanting to
achieve a FirstDivision in competitionusually erron the conservativeside both
in programmingand interpretationof the music so that,consequently,there is
no allowance forriskor creativityin music performance.Aimingfora FirstDivi-
sion contest rating also affectshow one rehearses. If achieving correctness
throughduplication is a performanceobjective, then rehearsalsoftenbecome
fix-itsessions,withthe eliminationof erroras the goal. If we substitutethe term
"rehearsal"for"music class," the onlygoal of music education then becomes the
elimination of performanceerror.This is a goal which, at the veryleast, should
be more closely scrutinized.To quote Kirchoff,"correctmusicmakingdoes not
necessarilyequate withgreatmusicmaking."33
One final issue for consideration is that the selection of music which an
ensemble performsforthe band contestis oftennot dictatedby tasteor aesthetic
value, but by what choices will enable the ensemble to achieve a Superior rat-
ing. Schuller's belief thata piece of music should not be attemptedunless it can
be properlyrealized is embraced by many directorswhose entireschool year is
devoted to contestpreparationsand thus theymay avoid introducingrepertoire
ofpotentiallypedagogical value to studentswho have yetto masterthe technique
necessary to execute it. Since band music is rarelytailored to the individual
needs of particularschools, an imbalance of skill withinthe sections of a band
or missinginstrumentationmay resultin some studentsnever being exposed to
repertoirewhich would be artisticallyor pedagogicallyvaluable to them.
Further,the typicalband repertoireat most NorthAmerican universitiesand
high schools still emphasizes classical music (that is, the great masterworks)
because thisis oftenseen as the only legitimatemusic thatone should perform.

This content downloaded from 132.234.251.230 on Sat, 19 Apr 2014 02:05:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 JANICEWALDRON 107

This idealist view discourages band directorsfromprogrammingexperimental

music or music which fallsoutside the hegemonyof WesternEuropean Art.
In my own experience, those involvedin the stagingof contestsare unaware
of the realistand (in the case of adherence to the classics) idealist philosophies
which guide them. Thus it would be highlyunlikelyforteachersor conductors
to consider an alternative.A dogmatic approach is one which creates an atmos-
phere in which it is unlikely that any other guiding philosophy will be
considered,yetan approach to music performancebased on realism mightnot
be in the best interestsofall students.I myselfdid not even begin to question that
there mightbe more than one philosophical approach to music performance
until I began teachingoutside of my nativeTexas environmentfifteenyearsago.
Looking back now, I realize thatI am as guiltyas any of reinforcing a philosophy
throughmyactions as a band director without considering what rationale,ifany,
itwas based upon. I taughtsuccessfullyfora decade in an environmentin which
music education was guided by an unarticulated,performance-basedphiloso-
phy,which was centered on highlycompetitiveand utilitarianvalues. During
this time, I interactedwith several hundred other educators throughfestivals,
competitions,and conferences,not one of whom seemed aware of the reasons
fortheiractions or choices or betrayedan understandingof any alternativebelief
system.This, to me, confirmsthe fact thatthese band directorswere, like me,
reinforcing a prevailinglocal philosophynot because of any systematicexamina-
tion of alternatives,but ratherto strengthenthe pre-existingvalues associated
withcommon practices.
As conductors, we espouse philosophies of music the instantwe raise our
batons or uttera single word in rehearsal.We reinforceour philosophies silently,
even as we elicit sounds fromour students.Hopefully,as conductorsand educa-
tors, we will continue to examine our actions and attitudes in frontof our
ensembles, lookingforsignsthatwe may be silentlyindoctrinatingstudentsinto
belief systemswhich may be based on constructedrationalizationsthatwe have
not yetbegun to articulate- even to ourselves.

NOTES
'GuntherSchuller,The CompleatConductor(New York:OxfordUniversityPress,
1997),3.
2Ibid.,6.
3Ibid.,4.
4Ibid.,7.
5Ibid.,8.
6Ibid.
7BettyHanley,Foundations 1995),62.
forMusicEducation(Unpublishedmanuscript,

This content downloaded from 132.234.251.230 on Sat, 19 Apr 2014 02:05:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
108 PHILOSOPHY OF MUSIC EDUCATION REVIEW,16:1

8RobertAudi, The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge

UniversityPress, 1995), 355.
9Schuller, The Compleat Conductor, 105.
10Ibid.
uHanley, Foundations forMusic Education, 63.
12Ibid.
13Schuller,The Compleat Conductor, 7.
l4Hanley,Foundations forMusic Education, 63.
15Ibid.
16Schuller,The Compleat Conductor, 121.
17Ibid.,105.
18FrancisSparshott,"Aestheticsof Music: Limits and Grounds/' Part III in Philip
Alperson,ed., What is Music? (UniversityPark, PA: PennsylvaniaState UniversityPress,
[1987] 1994), 77-89.
l9Ibid.,83.
20Ibid.
21Ibid.
22Ibid.,84.
"David Elliott, Music Matters(New York:Oxford UniversityPress, 1995), 164.
24Ibid.,164.
25Ibid.,165.
26Ibid.
27Ibid.
28Hanley,Foundations forMusic Education, 63.
29JaniceWaldron, "Response to Elvira Panaiotidi, The Nature of Paradigmsand Par-
adigm Shiftsin Music Education,'" Philosophy of Music Education Review 13, no. 1
(Spring 2005): 111-114.
30CraigKirchoff,"Wind Band Pedagogy in the United States," in J. T. Gates, ed,
Music Education in the United States: ContemporaryIssues (Tuscaloosa, AL: The Uni-
versityof Alabama Press, 1988), 270.
31Ibid.,274.
32Schuller,The Compleat Conductor, 546.
33Kirchoff,"Wind Band Pedagogy in the United States," 375.

This content downloaded from 132.234.251.230 on Sat, 19 Apr 2014 02:05:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions