Arts & Ammo

The UK’s Music Manifesto

“There is no truer truth obtainable / By Man than comes of music.” – Robert Browning

Frank Furedi compares Browning’s conception of music to current attitudes rooted in skepticsm and moral insecurity.

For example, the UK government-sponsored Music Manifesto pays lip service to the idea that ‘music is important in itself’ but only as a prelude to treating music as a means to an end. So, after praising its alleged educational and therapeutic benefits, the authors of the Music Manifesto assert that ‘we believe that music is important for the social and cultural values it represents and promotes, and for the communities it can help to build and to unite’. Apparently music is also good for business and economic wellbeing - as the Music Manifesto declares: ‘We also recognise music for the important contribution it makes to the economy.’ The manifesto has little interest in music as such; instead its energy is devoted towards promoting the political, social and economic merits of music.

Music has utilitarian value, but the Manifesto misses the larger point when it views music simply as a means to an end. Furedi explains some of the problems that arise from taking this narrow view of the arts.

First, there is the tendency to judge art by the audience it attracts.

[Culture Minister Hodge] observed that ‘the audiences for many of our greatest cultural events - I’m thinking in particular of The Proms - is still a long way from demonstrating that people from different backgrounds feel at ease in being part of this’. In essence, she was arguing that one should judge the merits of a concert on the basis of who’s in the audience. . . .

For Hodge, and other supporters of the politicisation of culture, the value of classical music is called into question by the fact that apparently the ‘wrong’ people listen to it.

Second, seeing that classical music appeals to societal elites, the government irrationally concludes that it is not suitable for the disadvantaged.

Paradoxically, the most inflexible elitist snobs turn out to be those members of the educational and cultural establishment who have so little faith in the ability of children to appreciate and learn about classical music. Their anti-elitism is a populist gesture designed to flatter ordinary folk and reassure them that not much is expected of them. Sadly, such a populist orientation does little to overcome the disadvantages suffered by children in economically deprived areas. On the contrary, the provision of so-called ‘music-making opportunities’ instead of music education only serves to consolidate disadvantage. These children are being denied the opportunity to undertake the voyage of discovery that can sometimes occur when one is exposed to an education in music.

“Music-making opportunities” used to mean playing an instrument or singing in a choir. Music making was an important component of music education. Furedi notes that “music making” now means pretending to be a DJ. Manipulating knobs does not teach kids anything about music, but it points out how we have moved from a culture that makes music to one that merely consumes music.

It’s hard to imagine what societal benefits could accrue from acquainting kids only with second-rate music and encouraging them to take only a passive role. It would be the same as trying to interest kids in playing football by giving them video games.

April 24th, 2008 Posted by Fitzroy | Music, Politics | no comments