Should music schools continue to gnaw at the past instead of catching up with modern times?

Without a past there can be no future. This is the premise that most schools of music base their required curriculum around. It is the theory that music majors need to spend the majority of their collegiate life learning about music that was written before we were even born; music written by composers such as Brahms, Beethoven, Josquin, Leonin, Bach, and Debussy. Many critics argue that dwelling in the past is keeping the music profession from evolving, and making today’s music educators oblivious to what is popular in today’s culture. They also say that music schools and conservatories are blinding students to what they term “the future of music,” and confining the students education to only learning about outdated music. Such ideas are absurd, for if we forget the past we cannot be expected to evolve and advance musically as we venture further into the twenty-first century.

Today’s music is the product of thousands of years of musical evolution. Music started with the early humans and became more and more complex as time progressed. This was due to innovative thinkers taking what they already had and modifying or augmenting it with something to make it different and new. For better or worse, this is how new things come about. If we do not spend most of our time learning the music of yesterday we will not have something to build upon and make something new out of. A good example of this process is how a jazz player might learn to improvise. One could go on stage without any training and improv whatever they feel like playing based on intuition alone, but the best way to do it is to learn your jazz scales and practice those every day. Then you can go on stage and give a great solo. Schoenberg invented the concept of serialism and was one of the first composers to write truly atonal works, but even he started off by having a formal musical training in the music that came before him. You see evidence of this in his chamber symphony where he keeps a key signature even though most of the work is atonal. A musical education without a proper background in all music from all the musical time periods is a like having a house without its foundation. Without that the whole structure crumbles. Without the proper background in early music you cannot become a proper musician.

Many would argue that applied professors spend too much time teaching their students “the same old Paris Conservatory nonsense” that is played over and over again to the point of redundancy. However, they don’t realize that learning that type of music is a necessary pedagogical step on the way to virtuosity. Aside from the obvious reason of building a good repertoire list, learning the “standard” repertoire builds many skills in a young performer. A piece from the Paris Conservatory for a flutist can help the student learn better technique, provide a lyrical melody line and clear phrases to build interpretation skills, develop musicality, and more. These skills are crucial for a budding performer, and necessary for someone to tackle today’s music. If a teacher gave a student a 20th century work in hopes of building those skills, chances are that the student would not know what to do and would be discouraged. This is not the type of attitude you need in a student trying to study music at the collegiate level.

On top of the many reasons why old music is necessary, we often forget about how much we enjoy listening to it. The purpose of music is for people to listen to it, and yet we so often forget how much we enjoy doing just that. Though many people these days are adamant about chucking old music out the window and only embracing the new music, there are also many people who still adore the old classics. For them, the music written centuries ago touches their heart in a way that is unique to music of that time. There is something about the sweet melody of the third movement of Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony or dense chord’s of Stravinsky’s Rite of Spring that stirs up emotions that cannot be replicated by anything else. Or how many times have you laughed at the pranks of Till Eulenspiegel depicted in Stauss’s tone poem “Till Eulenspiegel’s Merry Pranks?” It is for this reason that we have to keep “gnawing on the past,” because if we do not the music of that time has the chance of being forgotten. I hope I never live to see the day when such a tragedy occurs.

While some believe “outdated” music is wonderful and some believe that the only music is new music, there are still those who hold the opinion that music is music and that we should leave it at that. Many people believe that music schools spend too much time studying the music written by long dead composers, and that we should spend the majority of the time learning about music written in the 20th century and beyond. However, we can’t just neglect the other music just because it is older and does not go along with the trends of today. The music of yesterday is just as valid as the music of today, and therefore we cannot just throw it out. If we did not put an emphasis on this older music then we would be without the majority of our orchestral, chamber, vocal, and solo music.

In the end, it is prejudice that drives the argument to stop “gnawing on the past.” Those who argue this point tend to not like the music written before the 20th century. For this reason, they want out with the old and in with the new. They are like the anarchist of the musical world. Instead of down with organized government these “revolutionaries” want down with conventional form and chord progressions. As progressive and innovative as this may be, you cannot just destroy centuries of musical evolution and progress because of a personal preference. If everyone only played music they liked and enjoyed then no one would be able to grow as musicians and become the best possible performers they could be. Without proper musicians performing around the country, the musical world would not be able to grow and thrive. If we throw out our past then the future of the musical profession is doomed.