Why we don’t just teach rock and roll classes in public school instead of band and orchestra is a question posed to me this afternoon by our fearless leader, coordinator and supporter of all things art and music in our school district. She was asking because of ongoing conversations she is having with potential funders of our local public school music programs. The obvious answer has to do with the rigor involved in learning a band or orchestra instrument, working both sides of the brain, responding to written stimulus in real time and all that. But it got me thinking: What else? I know the answer to the question she posed has to do with more than cerebral calisthenics.
For one thing, rock-n-roll has always been the go-to medium for the rebellious teenager. This is what kids do to establish themselves as NOT their parents. The less the parents like it, in some cases, the more the kids do. If we make rock part of the “establishment” by including it as part of a regular school day, we risk institutionalizing the very impetus which allows kids to come to the music of their generation on their own. Of course, I know that as a 60 year old classically trained musician I am never going to be cool enough to run a rad rock program. There are younger, hipper teachers who could for sure, and as facilitators and mentors and critical ears those teachers are invaluable. But kids will learn how to rock on their own, if they are bent that way. Nothing will stop them, and in this age of youtube and so many other online resources there is plenty of help.
The real reason we don’t, and shouldn’t, focus on rock and roll for our music departments (and I know I sound like a fuddy-duddy even uttering that phrase) is this: We cannot create a meaningful ensemble experience for 900 children at the elementary level and close to that at the secondary level unless we are teaching classes that allow 50 kids at a time to make music together. A marching or concert band or string orchestra is enhanced by big numbers of participants--the more the merrier. Whereas with a rock and roll- oriented class, unless you have 100 soundproof rooms and 20 teachers per school, you are not going to be able to service all the students who want to play. At best a rock band might have 7 or 8 kids in it, but usually there are more like 4 or 5. And they are loud, so you can’t really have more than one group rehearsing at a time. On the other hand, if you have 50 kids with violins or band instruments in their hands, you will slowly but surely have an orchestra or band that makes music together. This “together” is the best part of music, and yes, rock musicians play together, but not in the numbers that will thrill you if you are part of a 200-member marching band on parade day. Kids in rock bands become fast friends, no doubt, but your orchestra and band friends are a giant family, working toward a common goal. There is, to the extent that we can put instruments in the hands of every kid who wants one, a democracy to band and orchestra class and in this light, a five-piece rock band begins to look like an elitist cordoning off of talents. Not to pursue this chance for children to learn what it feels like to be part of something so big and wonderful with greatest vigor would be a disservice to our students, and this is why we need to support band and orchestra programs.
Addendum: Since writing this, I have seen several videos of classes of 20-30 kids playing together in a pop music setting, multiple keyboards, guitars, amps, drum sets all working toward a common goal. This is inspiring and at the classroom level can be managed and give everyone something to do to be part of the whole. When I think of our district level events where we are able to hear and see hundreds of students at a time either marching or playing on a stage, this is where the band and orchestra program excels, and it is wonderful to have both experiences available to students at every grade level.
