Counterpoint 1: If you don’t learn any technique or practice discipline, it is much harder to come back to it later when you want to.
Counterpoint 2: I’ve met tons of adults who regretted quitting music lessons in their childhood. I still haven’t met one who took lessons all the way through high school and wished they had quit. (I suppose you are all going to come out of the woodwork now.)
I think this gets to a difficulty Ted elides in his essay: namely, anything worth doing will have at least some stretches of not particularly pleasant hard work. I suppose it is a matter of finding balance, as milquetoast as that sentiment may be.
I realized early on that I needed to balance leaning into learning newer and more challenging musical tasks with having musical fun. And fortunately (it turns out now, though it didn't feel that fortunate at the time, since it often got me into trouble) I had a penchant for playing my own thing a lot of the time when I was supposed to be practicing something else. Fun is the fuel that makes any long musical journey possible. When I taught music, I always tried to make sure my students were spending at least as much time working on things they felt were fun as things they might not have had much fun with.
I always tried to tie the less fun tasks to specific goals the students had rather than the idea of practice for practice's sake. Like you were saying, things seem to go better for students when they're they ones who want to practice. If they don't learn to drive their own development engine, they're going to quit anyway, so you might as well teach them to pilot the ship.
Also, at least in my experience, they don’t teach the kids the type of music they want to play. If you’ve got a little metal head teach him metal please, even if he’s been signed up for clarinet.
In 2006, at the tender age of 48 I was in a terrible car accident and spent 20 days in our local emergency hospital. I told myself if I ever get out, I would pick up my favorite instrument {because of Eric Dolphy}, the bass clarinet! 19 years later I am still playing it quite often and happily and remain totally self taught. Regularly join in local jam sessions (even if I will never be mistaken for the immortal Dolphy!) VIVA MUSIC!
Something which was omitted is that the child may sense he has little if any ability. This should not be overlooked. Children are desperate not to be laughed at.
Maybe the environment isn't right. John Lennon never showed any interest in learning to play an instrument until Elvis showed up. Keith Richards and George Harrison said the same thing, and one was probably stealing from the other to answer an interviewer's question: one, at least, was knocked off his bicycle by the sound of "Heartbreak Hotel" coming from someone's house.
When I was still three my mother said, "Bobby, sit down beside me at the piano." I started to sob. The only man I knew of who played piano was the then spectacularly famous Liberace, whom I knew most men scorned as a "sissy." I didn't want to be a sissy.
Jessica Williams was a strange person. I have a friend, now eighty - five, who if life had gone differently for her, could have had a career singing in clubs. I don't remember the circumstances, but many years ago, Jessica Williams telephoned her about something. In the middle of the conversation Jessica Williams had a question for my friend, who is an alto:
As a private maths tutor, I see the exact same dynamic play out. Many parents arrive with expectations shaped by outdated ideas: repetition, worksheets, compliance — as if tutoring should mimic the rigid classroom their child is already disengaged from.
But real learning, especially one-on-one, is alive. It’s collaborative. It’s tailored.
When I shifted to designing co-produced sessions — where students help shape how and what they learn — everything changed. My goal is not to perform “maths at” them, but to light the fuse of their own understanding.
Yes, I lost a few clients early on. Some parents wanted structure without spontaneity, output without exploration. But those who stayed? They saw their kids reconnect with learning. They became my biggest cheerleaders.
Maths can be playful, creative, even joyful — if we let it be.
And music, such a powerful platform of exploration and expression ❤️
One of my favorite essays of all time is "A Mathematicians Lament", comparing how Math is taught to music lessons where you don't get to actually play an instrument until you reach graduate school.
Both of my daughters had piano lessons for brief periods in elementary school. It was not a high pressure venture, just something their mom and I thought they might like and benefit from. I was particularly enthused about my younger daughter's prospects because she loved just sitting at the piano, playing away and getting lost in it. And being a life long musician myself, I was blown away by some of the things she came up with—inventive and inspired, truly special. This, of course, was all BEFORE the piano lessons. Once those started she completely lost interest, never to play—or play at—the piano again.
My solution was to expose my kids to social music making from a very early age. This meant me playing guitar around the house, with friends, around the campfire each summer. This showed them that music was something that adults did for fun. Then they only got lessons if they expressed an interest. I never made them practice, and they could quit at any time. Both did quit. But now, both are excellent musicians as adults, and music is a big part of their lives. I was fortunate that most of my friends are professional musicians, so my kids were exposed to great playing in informal settings since they were very young. But the general approach of exposing kids to music as an everyday thing adults do for fun is what I think had the biggest effect.
I hate to say it, but screens and addictive apps are also part of the problem. As a music teacher myself, I can easily see this. The problem lies in instant gratification. With today's apps, you can basically get easy gratification all around the clock. Even to sit just ten minutes in front of a musical instrument then becomes a pain. The gratification of practising comes so much later that it's almost impossible for many kids today to find the right motivation. Remember that many TikTok users start to feel uneasy if a video is longer than 30 seconds.
While i agree wholeheartedly that the phones are fucking everything up, i think what teds describing existed well before phones came on the scene.
I think phones are the (current) culmination of a trend our society has been developing for quite some time, the trend of useless diversion. In fact there was a time when books were seen by many to be just that(and in the context of cheap novels made to be consumed, they werent wrong).
So yeah, today its the phones(its always the phones), but theyre a product of a deeper societal flaw.
The dislike kids have for music lessons in the 70s to 90s and 00s is nothing like the 10x disinterest they have for music lessons today - due to "screens". There are many music teachers on YouTube who lament seeing the total change to their students attitude in the last one and a half decade. The lessons haven't changed, the students did.
Ah well we cant refute the youtube evidence! Tell me you at least appreciate the irony of citing youtube testimony as your evidence screen time is ruining everything lol.
But even if it is 10x worse, as you claim, thats still a matter of amount. And no doubt, thats how trends work. They get progressively, in this case, worse. My point is the same, phones didnt create the situation. Yes they amplified our ability to engage in useless distraction, and made it even more addictive. But the cause is in us.
I see what you're saying, but I think it's a qualitative difference. Books were very far from the instant gratification culture we see today. But sure, the development started already with TV and computer games. But I remember reading a report saying the problems have increased a lot only the last ten years. Will link here if I find it...
As someone said "Quantity has a quality all of its own". If someone changes enough in quantity, the impact changes dramatically, how it affects society or persons changes dramatically too
Do you doubt what I said is true, or just my sources? Because it's 100% true. You can talk to music teachers in real life too (I have friends who teach guitar and piano), and you'll get the same answer. I mentioned YouTube because it's an easily accessible resource one can check those for themselves.
> appreciate the irony of citing youtube testimony as your evidence screen time is ruining everything lol.
That's like the common argument "You complain about capitalist exploitation but live in a capitalist society". Yeah, I live in screen-time society too. It's those experiencing an issue on themselves and around them that usually complain, not some guy living pastorally in some remote tribe without a connection. If anything, the irony of citing youtube testimony would corroborate the point even more.
> But even if it is 10x worse, as you claim, thats still a matter of amount.
And homicide rate of 1/100.000 to 100/100.000 is also "a matter of amount", but a very important difference. Amount matters, not just the absolute absense vs presense, or some qualitative metric.
How MUCH phones/social/etc "amplified our ability to engage in useless distraction, and made it even more addictive" is very important, and can be the difference between a healthy society and a declining or doomed one.
That's regardess if "the cause is in us" (which doesn't mean anything. All kinds of causes are "in us" like violence, dislike of study, prone to eating sugary stuff, etc). But external factors that make them worse or much worse are still worth of consideration and handling.
No i dont doubt what you say, i see it all around me too. But i disagree with your conclusions, that the problem lies ANYWHERE other than with the collective "us", or that we are somehow victims.
We choose these things. We choose them everyday and then complain about the results. Oh did they sell us some bullshit? Yeah they sure did. Did people want to listen to the voice of caution, then or now? Well maybe just a little, now. But they still dont want to change their choices. "I NEED social media, or my phone, or wtf ever". If thats true then that person is screwed. Bc all they have is their choice. But if they keep choosing to use the shit?
The world is a dnagerous place. Part of being an adult is making hard choices that are "right". If people arent willing to do that, then they deserve what they tolerate. And they dont deserve to have what they freely give away, every single day.
And thats my point. The phones like a drug. You choose to use that drug, you accept the consequences. And you can try to "fix" the drug all you want, but if you continue to use it, why would you expect anything different?
And no, you cant trust yt or the shit posted on it. I mean, you can, but i cant. Trusting yt, the platform or the content creators, requires too much assumption that im not willing to engage in. Its easy to think you can take things people say or show you on there at face value, but the results dont justify that stance. Things on the internet in general, but also specifically platforms like yt, are never what they seem. Thats good enough for me to not consider it a credible source of information. I believe in real results.
And its not the same as you complain about capitalism yet live in a etc etc. Its more like you complain about capitalism yet run your business like a capitalist. You live in a "screen time society" but you still choose what and how much you consume your "feed" from that screen. So yeah i scoff at "screen time is horrible and heres some yt videos you can watch that prove my point" lol. I mean, come on dude. Its just another in a long line of excuses as to why you need more screen time.
Another problem I've noticed from my bf being a guitar teacher is that children don't even listen to music anymore (or so they say). They tell him of having no clue whenever he asks them, which I find absurd. Even though the music industry in on the decline, one can still hear it everywhere from the TV to social media, including oldies, plus their parents grew up in a more music-aware environment so they should listen to some tunes at home, trying to expose their children to it. I just can't imagine someone saying they don't listen to music. Most of these kids are forced by their parents, though, and I couldn't understand why, they don't seem to expect their child to be a professional nor to give them a nice hobby. It could be a remnant of the increased social status/bragging about their kids potential talent to their friends, but I feel it could also be a cheap way to get time off from taking care of them. A lot of those kids have a huge need to talk to their teacher because their parents aren't interested and/or don't have the time in this day and age, so it turns into another aspect of teaching, a therapeutic/parental one.
I think they HEAR music all the time, but they don't LISTEN to it. I realized the difference for myself a few weeks back as I was working my way through Ted's reading list (that includes music and art). I remember listening to music a fair bit when I was a kid. But now it's just a never-ending soundtrack and I forget to pay attention.
As a musician and piano teacher, I agree with most of the article (not all, but the core point definitely), which is brilliant as always.
What I’m saddened to read though, is the perpetration of the belief that professional music is just play, and not a job like the others.
I’ve been in different fields than music as well, and I find this idea not matching reality, and detrimental to the state of the art.
Yes, we keep the aura of how special music is - but, as a byproduct, we get the devaluation of music professionals. Then we can’t complain about the current state of the culture.
I agree. I enjoy most of what Ted writes, but for a wordsmith, he can be quick to set up straw man arguments. To play an instrument is a very different use of the word play than to play at something. This usage is not universal. For example, in Portuguese, the verb used to describe “playing” an instrument is tocar, literally, to touch.
Not only that, but going from being a casual to a professional musician can take a huge part of the fun out of music making. The pressure is incredible.
I love this piece soooooo much. And am ferociously glad you got to #6. Because it's the slavishness to THIS NOTE AND NO OTHER, PRECISELY LIKE THIS, that snaps joy in half like a pencil in an angry hand.
In school, I felt the same way about books. Reading for pleasure was always one of my great loves. But FUCK if they didn't try to suck every speck of delight from the process. It's like they WANTED us to hate reading. (Or, for that matter, thinking.) Fortunately, I didn't give a shit about grades. So I just read what I wanted, and taught myself to write songs and stories and plays about whatever the hell I wanted. Because writing is ALSO play, if you do it right!
Can't wait to see your recommendations! THANKS, MAN! This is great.
250lb & sweaty Mrs Petrokovitch's massive hands pressin' down on mine "to show me" wuz the nightmare of EVERY lesson with 'er; whatcha call this "technique" I dunno but as a 7 year old I'd already named it misery!
2. boooooring puerile music...
I mean if yer three then the ABC song & Hot Cross Buns might be okey-dokey but by the time most kids are outta diapers they'd prefer sumthin' a bit less insultin'! (years later they'll discover composers like Ives who weave back in their nursery rhymes but fer young players...the books all suck...lots)
3. drills (no splainin' needed) drills are awful fer soldiers & kids alike...
There's a start! Also addin' that Suzuki was a CULT. Seriously, every parent that had ta attend an' play too dreaded it! Twinkle Twinkle over & over again wuz like Abu Gharaib fer the ears--at least as I heard tell it from parents who wanted ta say "if you play that effin' thing one more time" (but didn't...b/c investment, b/c the future of their wee prodigy) The repetition may have created sum tee-riffic players over time but many parents I knew full out admitted it was torture an' most of those kids GAVE UP too.
my remedy (I got an older teen that digs this!) JAM sessions! Play along, figger it out, foller the old tymers (an' indeed she plays with real old timers--some in their 80's!)
You've described the fundamental fault of the entire U.S. educational system.
When I saw this post, I was immediately reminded of the similarly titled Why Don't Children Like School? by the cognitive psychologist Daniel Willingham.
Thats a pretty narrow view of the work/play relationship. You dont think fighter pilots turn play into work? Screaming around the atmosphere, shooting rockets and doing barrel rolls.. things i often played at as a child.
Or my own job, climbing trees, swinging on ropes, sending huge pieces of tree crashing to earth.. it sure feels like i get paid to play to me. And while i dont "play" my chainsaw, i do make it sing.
Tis rare, to be sure, to get to turn work into play or vise versa, but not so rare as our use of the word "play" to describe what some people do.
Outstanding essay. Such a great essay that I subscribed again. I also wanted to offer a comment. I'm 55 and hated piano lessons as a child. I have a good memory and became famous for being able to memorize songs but run through them at breakneck pace because I wanted to get them over with. I found Suzuki and classical violin lessons about as enjoyable into my teens. I think I played out of tune without caring because I just wanted to get it all over with. But then I missed playing an instrument after a number of years in a very stressful law career and started noodling around. I tried ukulele which wasn't demanding enough. I tried clawhammer banjo because I love the airy sound, but I'm not interested in putting the time into studying that stroke movement. I tried cello which I loved but it's too ungainly to transport (and expensive to buy). So I'm back to classical and also Scottish and Irish tunes on the violin! And I love it and I'm practicing of my own will. I found a great instructor for weekly lessons and we are simultaneously going through the Wohlfart classical exercises and learning tunes, sometimes by ear. So I think you've hit the issue right on the nose.
Counterpoint 1: If you don’t learn any technique or practice discipline, it is much harder to come back to it later when you want to.
Counterpoint 2: I’ve met tons of adults who regretted quitting music lessons in their childhood. I still haven’t met one who took lessons all the way through high school and wished they had quit. (I suppose you are all going to come out of the woodwork now.)
I think this gets to a difficulty Ted elides in his essay: namely, anything worth doing will have at least some stretches of not particularly pleasant hard work. I suppose it is a matter of finding balance, as milquetoast as that sentiment may be.
I realized early on that I needed to balance leaning into learning newer and more challenging musical tasks with having musical fun. And fortunately (it turns out now, though it didn't feel that fortunate at the time, since it often got me into trouble) I had a penchant for playing my own thing a lot of the time when I was supposed to be practicing something else. Fun is the fuel that makes any long musical journey possible. When I taught music, I always tried to make sure my students were spending at least as much time working on things they felt were fun as things they might not have had much fun with.
I always tried to tie the less fun tasks to specific goals the students had rather than the idea of practice for practice's sake. Like you were saying, things seem to go better for students when they're they ones who want to practice. If they don't learn to drive their own development engine, they're going to quit anyway, so you might as well teach them to pilot the ship.
Also, at least in my experience, they don’t teach the kids the type of music they want to play. If you’ve got a little metal head teach him metal please, even if he’s been signed up for clarinet.
In 2006, at the tender age of 48 I was in a terrible car accident and spent 20 days in our local emergency hospital. I told myself if I ever get out, I would pick up my favorite instrument {because of Eric Dolphy}, the bass clarinet! 19 years later I am still playing it quite often and happily and remain totally self taught. Regularly join in local jam sessions (even if I will never be mistaken for the immortal Dolphy!) VIVA MUSIC!
Something which was omitted is that the child may sense he has little if any ability. This should not be overlooked. Children are desperate not to be laughed at.
Maybe the environment isn't right. John Lennon never showed any interest in learning to play an instrument until Elvis showed up. Keith Richards and George Harrison said the same thing, and one was probably stealing from the other to answer an interviewer's question: one, at least, was knocked off his bicycle by the sound of "Heartbreak Hotel" coming from someone's house.
When I was still three my mother said, "Bobby, sit down beside me at the piano." I started to sob. The only man I knew of who played piano was the then spectacularly famous Liberace, whom I knew most men scorned as a "sissy." I didn't want to be a sissy.
Jessica Williams was a strange person. I have a friend, now eighty - five, who if life had gone differently for her, could have had a career singing in clubs. I don't remember the circumstances, but many years ago, Jessica Williams telephoned her about something. In the middle of the conversation Jessica Williams had a question for my friend, who is an alto:
"Are you trans?"
> The only man I knew of who played piano was the then spectacularly famous Liberace
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0c8OjWfx88g
Jessica Williams was trans, so not exactly a "strange" question, I think.
Loved this!
As a private maths tutor, I see the exact same dynamic play out. Many parents arrive with expectations shaped by outdated ideas: repetition, worksheets, compliance — as if tutoring should mimic the rigid classroom their child is already disengaged from.
But real learning, especially one-on-one, is alive. It’s collaborative. It’s tailored.
When I shifted to designing co-produced sessions — where students help shape how and what they learn — everything changed. My goal is not to perform “maths at” them, but to light the fuse of their own understanding.
Yes, I lost a few clients early on. Some parents wanted structure without spontaneity, output without exploration. But those who stayed? They saw their kids reconnect with learning. They became my biggest cheerleaders.
Maths can be playful, creative, even joyful — if we let it be.
And music, such a powerful platform of exploration and expression ❤️
One of my favorite essays of all time is "A Mathematicians Lament", comparing how Math is taught to music lessons where you don't get to actually play an instrument until you reach graduate school.
https://worrydream.com/refs/Lockhart_2002_-_A_Mathematician's_Lament.pdf
Both of my daughters had piano lessons for brief periods in elementary school. It was not a high pressure venture, just something their mom and I thought they might like and benefit from. I was particularly enthused about my younger daughter's prospects because she loved just sitting at the piano, playing away and getting lost in it. And being a life long musician myself, I was blown away by some of the things she came up with—inventive and inspired, truly special. This, of course, was all BEFORE the piano lessons. Once those started she completely lost interest, never to play—or play at—the piano again.
My solution was to expose my kids to social music making from a very early age. This meant me playing guitar around the house, with friends, around the campfire each summer. This showed them that music was something that adults did for fun. Then they only got lessons if they expressed an interest. I never made them practice, and they could quit at any time. Both did quit. But now, both are excellent musicians as adults, and music is a big part of their lives. I was fortunate that most of my friends are professional musicians, so my kids were exposed to great playing in informal settings since they were very young. But the general approach of exposing kids to music as an everyday thing adults do for fun is what I think had the biggest effect.
Yes, this exactly. Music making is fundamentally communal.
absolutely, curate the environment!
I hate to say it, but screens and addictive apps are also part of the problem. As a music teacher myself, I can easily see this. The problem lies in instant gratification. With today's apps, you can basically get easy gratification all around the clock. Even to sit just ten minutes in front of a musical instrument then becomes a pain. The gratification of practising comes so much later that it's almost impossible for many kids today to find the right motivation. Remember that many TikTok users start to feel uneasy if a video is longer than 30 seconds.
While i agree wholeheartedly that the phones are fucking everything up, i think what teds describing existed well before phones came on the scene.
I think phones are the (current) culmination of a trend our society has been developing for quite some time, the trend of useless diversion. In fact there was a time when books were seen by many to be just that(and in the context of cheap novels made to be consumed, they werent wrong).
So yeah, today its the phones(its always the phones), but theyre a product of a deeper societal flaw.
The dislike kids have for music lessons in the 70s to 90s and 00s is nothing like the 10x disinterest they have for music lessons today - due to "screens". There are many music teachers on YouTube who lament seeing the total change to their students attitude in the last one and a half decade. The lessons haven't changed, the students did.
Ah well we cant refute the youtube evidence! Tell me you at least appreciate the irony of citing youtube testimony as your evidence screen time is ruining everything lol.
But even if it is 10x worse, as you claim, thats still a matter of amount. And no doubt, thats how trends work. They get progressively, in this case, worse. My point is the same, phones didnt create the situation. Yes they amplified our ability to engage in useless distraction, and made it even more addictive. But the cause is in us.
I see what you're saying, but I think it's a qualitative difference. Books were very far from the instant gratification culture we see today. But sure, the development started already with TV and computer games. But I remember reading a report saying the problems have increased a lot only the last ten years. Will link here if I find it...
As someone said "Quantity has a quality all of its own". If someone changes enough in quantity, the impact changes dramatically, how it affects society or persons changes dramatically too
Do you doubt what I said is true, or just my sources? Because it's 100% true. You can talk to music teachers in real life too (I have friends who teach guitar and piano), and you'll get the same answer. I mentioned YouTube because it's an easily accessible resource one can check those for themselves.
> appreciate the irony of citing youtube testimony as your evidence screen time is ruining everything lol.
That's like the common argument "You complain about capitalist exploitation but live in a capitalist society". Yeah, I live in screen-time society too. It's those experiencing an issue on themselves and around them that usually complain, not some guy living pastorally in some remote tribe without a connection. If anything, the irony of citing youtube testimony would corroborate the point even more.
> But even if it is 10x worse, as you claim, thats still a matter of amount.
And homicide rate of 1/100.000 to 100/100.000 is also "a matter of amount", but a very important difference. Amount matters, not just the absolute absense vs presense, or some qualitative metric.
How MUCH phones/social/etc "amplified our ability to engage in useless distraction, and made it even more addictive" is very important, and can be the difference between a healthy society and a declining or doomed one.
That's regardess if "the cause is in us" (which doesn't mean anything. All kinds of causes are "in us" like violence, dislike of study, prone to eating sugary stuff, etc). But external factors that make them worse or much worse are still worth of consideration and handling.
No i dont doubt what you say, i see it all around me too. But i disagree with your conclusions, that the problem lies ANYWHERE other than with the collective "us", or that we are somehow victims.
We choose these things. We choose them everyday and then complain about the results. Oh did they sell us some bullshit? Yeah they sure did. Did people want to listen to the voice of caution, then or now? Well maybe just a little, now. But they still dont want to change their choices. "I NEED social media, or my phone, or wtf ever". If thats true then that person is screwed. Bc all they have is their choice. But if they keep choosing to use the shit?
The world is a dnagerous place. Part of being an adult is making hard choices that are "right". If people arent willing to do that, then they deserve what they tolerate. And they dont deserve to have what they freely give away, every single day.
And thats my point. The phones like a drug. You choose to use that drug, you accept the consequences. And you can try to "fix" the drug all you want, but if you continue to use it, why would you expect anything different?
And no, you cant trust yt or the shit posted on it. I mean, you can, but i cant. Trusting yt, the platform or the content creators, requires too much assumption that im not willing to engage in. Its easy to think you can take things people say or show you on there at face value, but the results dont justify that stance. Things on the internet in general, but also specifically platforms like yt, are never what they seem. Thats good enough for me to not consider it a credible source of information. I believe in real results.
And its not the same as you complain about capitalism yet live in a etc etc. Its more like you complain about capitalism yet run your business like a capitalist. You live in a "screen time society" but you still choose what and how much you consume your "feed" from that screen. So yeah i scoff at "screen time is horrible and heres some yt videos you can watch that prove my point" lol. I mean, come on dude. Its just another in a long line of excuses as to why you need more screen time.
Another problem I've noticed from my bf being a guitar teacher is that children don't even listen to music anymore (or so they say). They tell him of having no clue whenever he asks them, which I find absurd. Even though the music industry in on the decline, one can still hear it everywhere from the TV to social media, including oldies, plus their parents grew up in a more music-aware environment so they should listen to some tunes at home, trying to expose their children to it. I just can't imagine someone saying they don't listen to music. Most of these kids are forced by their parents, though, and I couldn't understand why, they don't seem to expect their child to be a professional nor to give them a nice hobby. It could be a remnant of the increased social status/bragging about their kids potential talent to their friends, but I feel it could also be a cheap way to get time off from taking care of them. A lot of those kids have a huge need to talk to their teacher because their parents aren't interested and/or don't have the time in this day and age, so it turns into another aspect of teaching, a therapeutic/parental one.
I think they HEAR music all the time, but they don't LISTEN to it. I realized the difference for myself a few weeks back as I was working my way through Ted's reading list (that includes music and art). I remember listening to music a fair bit when I was a kid. But now it's just a never-ending soundtrack and I forget to pay attention.
As a musician and piano teacher, I agree with most of the article (not all, but the core point definitely), which is brilliant as always.
What I’m saddened to read though, is the perpetration of the belief that professional music is just play, and not a job like the others.
I’ve been in different fields than music as well, and I find this idea not matching reality, and detrimental to the state of the art.
Yes, we keep the aura of how special music is - but, as a byproduct, we get the devaluation of music professionals. Then we can’t complain about the current state of the culture.
I agree. I enjoy most of what Ted writes, but for a wordsmith, he can be quick to set up straw man arguments. To play an instrument is a very different use of the word play than to play at something. This usage is not universal. For example, in Portuguese, the verb used to describe “playing” an instrument is tocar, literally, to touch.
Not only that, but going from being a casual to a professional musician can take a huge part of the fun out of music making. The pressure is incredible.
I love this piece soooooo much. And am ferociously glad you got to #6. Because it's the slavishness to THIS NOTE AND NO OTHER, PRECISELY LIKE THIS, that snaps joy in half like a pencil in an angry hand.
In school, I felt the same way about books. Reading for pleasure was always one of my great loves. But FUCK if they didn't try to suck every speck of delight from the process. It's like they WANTED us to hate reading. (Or, for that matter, thinking.) Fortunately, I didn't give a shit about grades. So I just read what I wanted, and taught myself to write songs and stories and plays about whatever the hell I wanted. Because writing is ALSO play, if you do it right!
Can't wait to see your recommendations! THANKS, MAN! This is great.
100% Eggzactly re:..."but not how it's taught"
Lemme count sum'a the ways...
1. hand over hand
250lb & sweaty Mrs Petrokovitch's massive hands pressin' down on mine "to show me" wuz the nightmare of EVERY lesson with 'er; whatcha call this "technique" I dunno but as a 7 year old I'd already named it misery!
2. boooooring puerile music...
I mean if yer three then the ABC song & Hot Cross Buns might be okey-dokey but by the time most kids are outta diapers they'd prefer sumthin' a bit less insultin'! (years later they'll discover composers like Ives who weave back in their nursery rhymes but fer young players...the books all suck...lots)
3. drills (no splainin' needed) drills are awful fer soldiers & kids alike...
There's a start! Also addin' that Suzuki was a CULT. Seriously, every parent that had ta attend an' play too dreaded it! Twinkle Twinkle over & over again wuz like Abu Gharaib fer the ears--at least as I heard tell it from parents who wanted ta say "if you play that effin' thing one more time" (but didn't...b/c investment, b/c the future of their wee prodigy) The repetition may have created sum tee-riffic players over time but many parents I knew full out admitted it was torture an' most of those kids GAVE UP too.
my remedy (I got an older teen that digs this!) JAM sessions! Play along, figger it out, foller the old tymers (an' indeed she plays with real old timers--some in their 80's!)
I'm pretty sure your Mrs. Petrokovitch had a sister in Minnesota named Mrs. Brandenburg.
You've described the fundamental fault of the entire U.S. educational system.
When I saw this post, I was immediately reminded of the similarly titled Why Don't Children Like School? by the cognitive psychologist Daniel Willingham.
Thats a pretty narrow view of the work/play relationship. You dont think fighter pilots turn play into work? Screaming around the atmosphere, shooting rockets and doing barrel rolls.. things i often played at as a child.
Or my own job, climbing trees, swinging on ropes, sending huge pieces of tree crashing to earth.. it sure feels like i get paid to play to me. And while i dont "play" my chainsaw, i do make it sing.
Tis rare, to be sure, to get to turn work into play or vise versa, but not so rare as our use of the word "play" to describe what some people do.
I completely agree! Btw, your job sounds very fun!
Outstanding essay. Such a great essay that I subscribed again. I also wanted to offer a comment. I'm 55 and hated piano lessons as a child. I have a good memory and became famous for being able to memorize songs but run through them at breakneck pace because I wanted to get them over with. I found Suzuki and classical violin lessons about as enjoyable into my teens. I think I played out of tune without caring because I just wanted to get it all over with. But then I missed playing an instrument after a number of years in a very stressful law career and started noodling around. I tried ukulele which wasn't demanding enough. I tried clawhammer banjo because I love the airy sound, but I'm not interested in putting the time into studying that stroke movement. I tried cello which I loved but it's too ungainly to transport (and expensive to buy). So I'm back to classical and also Scottish and Irish tunes on the violin! And I love it and I'm practicing of my own will. I found a great instructor for weekly lessons and we are simultaneously going through the Wohlfart classical exercises and learning tunes, sometimes by ear. So I think you've hit the issue right on the nose.