childbloom

<< What do you think?
Richard Spross

Richard,

I think that teaching subjects that people don't want to learn is nigh on to
impossible. I do think more can be done in the direction of exposing younger
students to compositional techniques - certainly the language and theory of
music is fundamental - but even that is age-appropriate. I find that those
young people who have a compositional gift show it in spite of what they don't
know. Such proto-composers seemed to be compelled to create. It is among those
rarities that compositional study would have the most value. One way to
discourage children from developing and growing their motivation is to require
that they learn composition along with the applied music study. Some of the
instrumentally motivated will love it, some will hate it. I would just as soon
have them grow into it as they mature and are engaged in the technical and
performance aspects (the "Stockholm syndrome" approach to composition?).

Your larger concern of the integration of guitar into the mainstream of
composed music has been addressed before on this newsgroup. But it is a worthy
discussion. It is happening slowly. Probably too slow. But I see it happening.
In the last three years there have been at least 6 additional high schools in
Texas that offer classical guitar and are filled to capacity. What other solo
instrument has such response in the high school? There are programs like this
scattered all over - Florida has many, New Mexico, Virginia had a number (are
they still there?). However the problem is how does a teacher teach 35 kids
with guitars in one class. There is no real classical curriulum for such a
thing and thus it tends to be ineffective in producing skilled players in any
numbers. Ensemble curriculum offers a hope, but there is not an academic
tradition of guitar orchestra that universities value. The university classes
may provided a model, but the management issues are different in the public
school.

Another problem is that those guitarists who are in high school who can
actually play with a modicum of technical skill and artistry are rarely
recruited by all the devoted university teachers. There are at least two
reasons, I think: one, there is little significant scholarship funds for these
talents; two, there are very few venues in which these kids can be seen by the
major academics - a few camps, one radio show, fewer festivals. The GFA is
missing out in this important function.

Michael Quantz had made an effort with AMT, and I suppose a top down approach
may have some merit, but I think more is bubbling up from the grass roots. The
problem is that academic guitarists, after years of complaining that there were
no good Bachelor students, now have them, but are not making any real effort at
contacting them. Imagine the impact of a recruitment letter from a university
guitar professor sent to a promising ninth grader! Thus, without this
attention, these young players go to other careers and change their
motivational direction.

I cannot imagine any high school pitcher throwing an 85 mph fastball on the
corners who would not get recruited by a university. Those athletic departments
have their act together. The music (guitar) departments do not.

As to your desire regarding guitar ensemble being a more natural occurance: I
see it is slowly happening in the US, moreso in Europe. I think composers will
not shun commissions if they are lucrative enough. To that end I think that
would be an incredibly productive direction for foundation money. Contrary to
some opinion, I do believe it is possible to create fine, original, music for
guitar orchestra or guitar choir with other chamber instruments, although, with
a very few exceptions, I don't think it has yet been done.

Kevin Taylor
The Childbloom Co.
www.childbloom.com