What Would Jaques-Dalcroze Do?
September Article
Getting Perspective:
What Would Jaques-Dalcroze Do?
“Rhythm, as we have said, is the basis of all art; it is also the basis of human society. Corporal and spiritual economics are a matter of cooperation. And once a society is properly trained, from school upwards, it will itself feel the need for expressing its joys and sorrows in manifestations of collective art…”1
Mr. Everyman: “And so you
dream of democratizing music?”
Jaques-Dalcroze: “I dream only of restoring it to its natural functions, which
are social in their essence.”2
As I was writing this article, the tragedy on the gulf coast unfolded in all its graphically photographed, televised horror. The faces of the stranded indigent, thousands upon thousands of them, haunt all our thoughts, and have cast a deeper importance on my topic. Now, temporarily, we do and contribute what we can to help the victims survive and rebuild their lives, but the contributions we’re capable of don’t end there – we have more to give, our lifetimes to give it, and a nation of children who need it. While work in the arts may seem relatively trivial at this moment of crisis, we shouldn’t underestimate the power of personal experience in music and movement, in creative participation, and in collaboration within a group.
Indeed, far beyond being a music educator, Jaques-Dalcroze was deeply concerned with social progress, unity, and uplift of the individual and the community through music and movement. Yet there is a tendency among many today to view needs in our nation and respond, in essence, “MRE’s and bottled water aren’t good enough. It’s champagne or nothing! Let them eat cake!”
We have something very
special to give, and many ways we could imagine giving it. If we could help 500
teachers to improve the lives of these thousands of children with the best
music/movement experience possible, and provide them the resources to do it,
should we? Or should we say, “No, if those teachers can't come under our
tutelage and sing all the do-to-do scales in order and modulate using all
inversions of each seventh chord espece in all keys, we must ignore them.
Otherwise, we are compromising, lowering standards, and getting commercial. It's
just not Dalcrozian.”
When we think of what it means to be “Dalcrozian,”
perhaps we should think about Jaques-Dalcroze’s wider views of music’s capacity
to uplift society, starting with children in public schools. He wrote:
More than any other art, music has the power to unite
individuals, to instill in them a universal spirit of union and combination, and
to create within the very heart of this organized society a focus of living
enthusiasm and emotional activity.
Up to the present, however, music has been a privileged art,
reserved for a minority of aristocrats in feeling and thought, an art whose
manifestations its followers attempt to direct along the lines of a purely
sensorial specialization which aims solely at the enjoyment of the organs of
hearing. Since, however, a grievous and prolonged war has put all nations in
mourning, it appears as though it has become the role of music to rise far above
that of a ‘prince’s pastime,’ conferred on it by Rameau and tutti quanti.
The new role it is called upon to fill is that of ‘leader of men and nations.’
Its influence consists in revealing man to himself, instilling into him a
powerful and subtle magnetic influence, and then inspiring in him an
irresistible desire to join in communion and fellowship with all his
fellow-creatures who are alike conscious of lofty and noble human feelings,
distributed and expanded by the magic of sound and rhythm.3
Such goals are still valid here and now, and require a wide reach. Yet the method in America today has become stagnant – few children in our society even have the opportunity to experience it, and most adults have never heard of it. So what happened?
By the time of his death in 1950, Jaques-Dalcroze had achieved great success in spreading his method – it was well-established in Switzerland, had traveled and taken root in many countries, and probably reached more people than he could have dreamed in his early years. But his books fell out of print decades earlier; and over the next 55 years in America, his work influenced, and then fell to, scholastic publishing, early modern dance, creative movement, Laban Effort-Shape, Orff Schulwerk, Alexander technique, and a host of other methods, publications, and means of experiencing movement accompanied (more or less) with music.
What did they have that his method didn’t? They certainly weren’t “better.” And Jaques-Dalcroze wasn’t less concerned with seeing his method spread widely.
Various reasons have been postulated for the limits of the method’s reach and the oft-lamented decline in teachers’ skills. Some cast Jaques-Dalcroze as an unfortunate victim – of dancers, of solfege teachers in the conservatory, of his Hellerau successes, of wars, of politics, of financial problems, etc. Another rationale is that “lowered standards” in teacher education is the problem.
Certainly, there are built-in aspects of the method that have created limitations, including:
I suggest the third reason above is the most problematic today. The method has lost its power to reach a wide range of students because it’s become bogged down on the level of teacher education -- and not in a way that makes it more effective in the classroom.
Historically, Jaques-Dalcroze
began the “experiments” that developed his method while he was a professor at
the Geneva Conservatory. Naturally, his goals then were to develop the highest
possible levels of musicianship. He expanded his work toward children and
amateurs, and teachers became trained to propagate the method; yet it seems the
training standards become fixed within the confines of his work at the
conservatory.
At the time, that worked. The use of movement in music study (and in togas)
incorporated fashion and novelty; and Jaques-Dalcroze himself was apparently a
great improviser, a wonderful showman at public lecture demonstrations, a
successful producer of large-scale public ‘festival’ performances, and a
prolific writer. The teachers he taught, having reached success as his students,
were skilled disciples. For many others, Geneva wasn’t so far from home, the
language was understandable, the costs were affordable, and the stiff
requirements in music theory were either fairly familiar from standard European
music training of the time, or else perhaps skirted in cases (note that dancers,
too, received certification.)
Here and now, many aspects of the method in Europe a century ago do not apply – many things that made it novel then aren’t so novel anymore; other means of music/movement education have supplanted it in terms of reach; and teacher-training in this method is still very rooted in Jaques-Dalcroze’s Geneva of 1905 (with the exception of those that may, as we hear, ignore Jaques-Dalcroze solfege and improvisation altogether, in which case the name simply shouldn't apply at all). It seems to me that it's still bound by its origins as a means of teaching European conservatory students to become better musicians 100 years ago. Jaques Dalcroze stated, “Children need – above all else – masters who love them and make a point of getting to know them.”4 He did not say, “Children need – above all else – masters who love augmented 6ths chords and make a point of getting to know their various types and resolutions.”
If the goal is a method that exists in higher education for the sake of higher education – training professionals in esoteric skills to train more professionals in those skills who then train more professionals – it misses the broader goals Jaques-Dalcroze espoused for wide educational reach, reform, and results. And if the goal is to spread the impact of a sound music experience by sending forward as many effective teachers as possible, we are surely missing the mark. The question is: Is the goal a broadly valuable educational movement, or an ivory tower, open only to a rare few?
WORKING TOWARD JAQUES-DALCROZE’S GOALS
One of the tenets of the method is that it’s based on the teacher’s own
experience. In theory, teachers of the Jaques-Dalcroze method must become highly
skilled musicians, artists of music in movement, as well as having excellent
command of pedagogical tools and educational philosophy. But if teacher-training
becomes stuck on the teacher’s own personal, technical skills on a formidable
level of sophistication, we may spend too much time on teaching them to straddle
peculiar hurdles, leading to an inward focus that results in a little world
of navel-gazing self-scrutiny and stagnation rather than outreach. Teachers
can emerge from such training with fine skills and theoretical knowledge, but
without any sense of how to relate to others and impart their experience to
students.
Jaques-Dalcroze wrote:
One cannot cure the disease of ignorance by increasing one’s own knowledge. It is a question of taking precautionary measures for future guidance, of influencing the outlook and disposition of the coming generation, and so molding it as to ensure the transmission to future generations of a strongly social instinct and more intense love of truth.5
Too often, our teacher-trainers stay in the realm of “higher education,” and brag about the teachers they’ve taught – and many of those teachers go on to teach yet more “higher ed.” Children don’t seem to exist except in theory; indeed, some experts teach others how to teach children without demonstrating any ability to do it well themselves. I would go so far as to suggest that if we looked at success from Jaques-Dalcroze’s other paradigm – in terms of reach within society – it’s the preschool and elementary teachers who are in “higher education,” and the collegiate and professional teachers whose influence is “lower.”
One large effect of focusing on “increasing one’s own knowledge” in the esoterica of some aspects of Jaques-Dalcroze teacher-training is to erect a formidable screen that eliminates a great number of people from joining us. But does “difficult” always equal “better?” (What if we made everyone play the flute, or perform 36 fouette turns?) The point is not only that this approach denies Jaques-Dalcroze's goals for social inclusion, but also that traditional requirements don't necessarily lead to more effective work overall. A significant effect of making the method difficult and obscure is that it makes those of us who can do it well "special." Indeed, "experts" are most powerful as key-keepers when entrance to the club is difficult, with access to concrete applications vaulted as mysteries requiring a secret handshake, keeping the whole method limited in its span to a chosen few. It lends itself to authoritarian teaching, with a subtext that says, “I have the wisdom, and if you submit yourself to me indefinitely, you just MIGHT absorb it.”
Moreover, the results of our current approach aren’t always terribly successful. Unfortunately, we do have teachers, even famous ones, who can’t improvise well and/or move well and/or teach well and/or relate well to others. We have quite a few who do some thing(s) well, but it’s no use to improvise magnificently, for example, if one doesn’t connect music with movement, or turns off students with lack of rapport, or has difficulty creating a logical pedagogical sequence.
Teachers who do well in advanced solfege and advanced piano improvisation and advanced Eurhythmics, and who know movement technique, and who are creative, and who understand and love children and others, and who know how to connect music and movement in pedagogical sequences, are very rare indeed. Some would say that that’s just as it should be. It’s “Dalcrozian” to be rare and special. He wanted it that way.
Is that the same Jaques-Dalcroze who wrote of “the permeation of the altruistic qualities necessary for the establishment of a healthy social order?”6 Is that the same Jaques-Dalcroze who espoused broad goals for self-awareness, communal connections, spiritual elevation, and cultural development? Is that the same Jaques-Dalcroze who was grounded in reality enough to write words like these:
No doubt at times we have to give ourselves up wholeheartedly in certain directions, to respond to enthusiastic ideals which carry us, as on pinions, beyond the bounds of ordinary life, to powerful impulses and appeals that remove from our minds all petty calculations and prudent self-interests. But we should also be able to recover our balance when this becomes necessary; after wandering astray on the wings of fantasy we must return to the solid realities of existence…From the very beginning we must be able to limit our desire for progress, and not exact from ourselves more than we are able to give out or expend. The one essential point is that we should know clearly what progress Nature enables us to effect, and not stubbornly insist on attempting as much as those who possess greater ability and powers than ourselves. Nor must we forget that inequality in gifts or talents also involves balance…7
Or do we excuse ourselves by saying it’s just that everyone else is wrong somehow?
STUDENTS
Joseph Campbell, in The Power of Myth, once explained a common,
ancient theme: Once you have children, your life is essentially irrelevant
except as it nurtures them. A similar idea applies to teaching: our
musicianship, our teaching skills, our understanding of a teaching philosophy is
meaningful only as we are actually able to apply it to students, effectively
impart music experience and understanding to them, and sow the joy and meaning
for future generations.
Instead of viewing the method selfishly from the teacher’s perspective, let’s look at how it works from the students’ point of view.
From the students’ point of view, the teacher’s piano improvisation is a tool for their own learning. From the students’ point of view, the teacher’s ability to sing seventh chord resolutions on solfege pitches may not matter one bit. From the students’ point of view, a teacher’s own virtuosity matters only to the extent that they affect him or her. Poor skills, no skills, or self-focused skills – the result is the same.
From the students’ point of view, what is the difference between the teacher improvising music for prancing, or playing Kabalevsky’s “Clowns?” What is the difference between the teacher playing "Clowns" at the piano, or playing a CD of the piece and moving with the class? Spontaneity is lost at each step, impacting quick reaction exercises, and the ability to adjust tempo and articulation, for example. On the other hand, if the teacher can only play three chords anyway, little is lost; and if the teacher has no piano at all, a recording is a vast improvement. Such is reality.
(Ironically, the very idea of using recorded music is criticized as “commercial” by people who’ve produced and sold such recordings!)
From the students’ point of view, what is the difference between individual and group activities the teacher him/herself invented, and ideas acquired from others, as long as they are sound in purpose and implementation? From the students' point of view, what, exactly, is the value of a teacher's training in the "Jaques-Dalcroze method," whether in accord with applications for another culture a century ago, or weakened to the point of studies in nebulous "feeling?"
TEACHERS
There is no shortage of teachers with excellent abilities in music and
movement, love and understanding of students, and creative imaginations. In my
view, these are the teachers we need, and what they need are not “lowered
standards,” but different standards – ones that are effective in the
classroom, and can be propagated realistically. To begin with, they need
respect and resources – two things they often don’t get enough of in
American Jaques-Dalcroze education today.
This doesn’t mean a big
Silver Burdett enterprise; it doesn’t mean another cookie-cutter preschool
program; it doesn’t mean compromised skills or teaching. It means breaking down
distance barriers, language barriers, financial barriers, and the barriers
erected by hurdles that aren’t essential to good work in the classroom.
M.U.S.I.C.
Let’s consider five fundamental
requirements for effective teaching of music through movement:
These are broad-stroke qualifications that can be met by different teachers in their own ways, with the goal of impacting students’ experience. Yes, “it all comes from the teacher’s own experience,” as we often say, but that experience can and should be varied in a diverse nation, and should not remain focused solely on the teacher’s capacity to conform to a different time and culture. It must reach out and connect.
A few more words from Jaques-Dalcroze:
…(T)he idea underlying the conception and
construction of my whole system is that the education of tomorrow must, before
all else, teach children to know themselves, to measure their intellectual and
physical capacities by judicious comparison with the efforts of their
predecessors, and to submit them to exercises enabling them to utilize their
powers, to attain due balance, and thereby to adapt themselves to the
necessities of their individual and collective existence.
It is not enough to give children and young people a general
tuition founded exclusively on the knowledge of our forbears’ activities.
Teachers should aim at furnishing them with the means both of living their own
lives and of harmonizing these with the lives of others. The education of
tomorrow must embrace reconstruction, preparations, and adaptation…
More than ever in these times of social reconstruction, the
human race demands the re-education of the individual. There has been endless
discussion as to the inevitable effects on the social and artistic atmosphere of
the future of the present unsettled state, in which it is impossible to look
ahead and prescribe the necessary measures for the safeguarding of our
civilization and culture. In my judgment, all our efforts should be directed to
training our children to become conscious of their personalities, to develop
their temperaments, and to liberate their particular rhythms of individual life
from every trammeling influence…8
I will go along with those who say that if we skirt some of the complexities of Jaques-Dalcroze solfege, sidestep intricacies of advanced keyboard harmony, or breach the mystery of creating sound lesson sequences, we are no longer “teaching Dalcroze.” As things are, there's no choice but to adhere to that particular definition of Jaques-Dalcroze’s purpose, and ignore his many fervent writings about social influence. Purists clinging to the ivory-tower may rest assured that I’ll apply the label of strict “Jaques-Dalcroze Method” only to the part of my work that meets their prevailing definition.
But I encourage those reading this to keep an eye on the faces of children who need water, not champagne; bread, not cake. Keep an ear to Jaques-Dalcroze’s words about social reconstruction, the human race, and liberating children "from every trammeling influence.” In many ways, our culture does indeed find commonality with Jaques-Dalcroze's: war, insecurity, social friction, cultural upheavals, politics and pain.
To achieve Jaques-Dalcroze’s goals today, I believe we need to unlock the doors of our ivory tower and step outside the confines of a rarefied environment. We need to cease hoarding our own stones on the riverbank, counting them like proud misers, and start tossing them as far and deep into the waters of our culture as they can go, in a mighty effort to create circular ripples that end up transcending life far, far beyond ourselves. In my view, that is the real essence of being "Dalcrozian."
1. Rhythm, Music and
Education. Reprint, 1980, The London Dalcroze Society, London:“Eurhythmics
and Moving Plastic,” p. 167 (1919).
2. Eurhythmics, Art and Education. Reprint, 1985: Ayer Co. Publishers,
Salem, New Hampshire:“Waiting for Reforms,” p. 261 (1922).
3. Ibid, pp. 257-258.
4. Ibid, “The Nature and Value of Rhythmic Movement,” p. 13 (1922)
5. Rhythm, Music and Education:“The School, Music, and Joy,” p. 94 (1915)
6. Ibid,“Eurhythmics and Moving Plastic,” p. 168
(1919)
7. Eurhythmics, Art and Education:“The Nature and Value of Rhythmic
Movement,” pp. 12-13 (1922).
8. Rhythm, Music and Education: Foreward, pp. ix-x (1919).
Photos: AFP