We are all equal

[tbdana]

When it comes to making music there is no such thing as better or worse musicians, there is only different.

I don't care if you've only been playing for a year, or if you're universally recognized as a virtuoso on your instrument. The newbies are not less than, and the top pros are not better than. Music is not hierarchical. It is cooperative, conspiratorial, and communal. It is beautiful human souls coming together to magically turn air vibrations into art.

Sure, people have different skill levels, different goals, different limitations. That doesn't make us unequal, it just makes us different. And difference is the foundation of art.

I'm so tired of pros strutting around like peacocks, and community players feeling insecure. None of us should do either of those. We're all just people who love trombone and music, and we all equally get to contribute a phrase to the Eternal Universal Symphony. Every person who plays an instrument is equal to every other person who plays an instrument.

Let's stop with the hierarchical bullpuckey. Pros, don't look down on students and community players. Students and community players, don't be intimidated by pros. That defeats art. We ALL have something to offer the rest, and we ALL have something we can learn from each other.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

[tim]

Bravo!!

[harrisonreed]

You are right!

[StephenK]

We certainly all should get respect.
Story given to me at the weekend by a euphonium player who had been studying at a well known conservatoire in the UK, with an internationally well known player. He was getting very upset as he was being bullied. Took it to the management who said, we aren't taking any action - this guy is really famous. So, he said if that's your attitude, I'm leaving, and he did. It was quite a few years ago, but still could be happening in his opinion.

[BrassSection]

Exactly! Had a professional 20 piece brass band in church for a Veterans program. They followed our worship band. Several players said to me afterwards “No way could we do what you do without music!” One trumpet player can…but on trumpet only, not multiple horns. My response was “I can’t do what you guys do!” I know outside of euphonium I fall far short of their playing abilities. Every pro treated our volunteer group with respect…except for the drummer. Drummer also pro tuba player known to the group, he was being ribbed in good nature for playing drums. Bottom line, respect was shown for fellow musicians.

[JTeagarden]

The men and women in the full-time symphonies of this country can play rings around me, and can probably do so when pulled out of their beds at 4 am.

This is why I especially enjoy their level of craftmanship, because I actually know a little something about how exceptional they are: I know exactly what they are doing, I just can't do it as well, and I applaud their dedication to the craft.

Do I like how much better they are? Actually yes, because I get to enjoy their playing, and when all the stars align, the music they make is astonishing.

So too for dozens of jazz and commercial players I and each you could name.

I am inspired because they show me just what is possible, and other than getting rudely dissed by David Waters during a lesson roughly 45 years ago, I always felt that my teachers at least throught my playing was redeeemable.

I suspect the musical circles OP moves in are a bit higher up the food chain than mine, where we're talking about trying to play for a living: Dana, do you actually experience this kind of attitude among the established players, or those on the rise, seeking their spot in the food chain?

We're not all equal, but I'll be damned if I don't try my best!

[hyperbolica]

I get what you're trying to say, but I don't agree. Everyone has value and deserves respect, but that value isn't necessarily in musical realms. We have engineers, writers, accountants, brick layers, machinist, painters, construction people, etc. Everybody should find a combination of what they are good at and what interests them so they make their maximum contribution to society. And then "work" is no longer work. So many people look forward to retirement because they hate their work. I think you should be able to love your work.

For many of us, music has been a better avocation than main job. I tried music as a main job for a while and it just didn't work. I made a better contribution as an engineer / writer. I'm ok with that. Other people are definitely better musicians than me. I enjoy doing it whether I'm great at it or not.

[JTeagarden]

I get what you're trying to say, but I don't agree. Everyone has value and deserves respect, but that value isn't necessarily in musical realms. We have engineers, writers, accountants, brick layers, machinist, painters, construction people, etc. Everybody should find a combination of what they are good at and what interests them so they make their maximum contribution to society. And then "work" is no longer work. So many people look forward to retirement because they hate their work. I think you should be able to love your work.

For many of us, music has been a better avocation than main job. I tried music as a main job for a while and it just didn't work. I made a better contribution as an engineer / writer. I'm ok with that. Other people are definitely better musicians than me. I enjoy doing it whether I'm great at it or not.

Amen! I'm a great tax lawyer if I do say so myself, and took that fork in the road long ago, I have never regretted it.

[JTeagarden]

There is, however, the wise admonition from Duke Ellington: The wise musician plays what he has mastered, there's a lot of music out there that doesn't require pyrotechnics, a lot of emoting that doesn't require you to play everything.

So while we may not all be equal, there's a lot of music to express at many different levels.

Lawrence Brown could never play like Joe Alessi, but then again, Joe Alessi could never play like Lawrence Brown, but both great in their own way.

Working within technical limitations is a hallmark of art: nothing less interesting than listening to a virtuoso who can play a thousand notes!

[harrisonreed]

I get what you're trying to say, but I don't agree. Everyone has value and deserves respect, but that value isn't necessarily in musical realms. We have engineers, writers, accountants, brick layers, machinist, painters, construction people, etc. Everybody should find a combination of what they are good at and what interests them so they make their maximum contribution to society. And then "work" is no longer work. So many people look forward to retirement because they hate their work. I think you should be able to love your work.

For many of us, music has been a better avocation than main job. I tried music as a main job for a while and it just didn't work. I made a better contribution as an engineer / writer. I'm ok with that. Other people are definitely better musicians than me. I enjoy doing it whether I'm great at it or not.

It's complex. This is well meaning and possibly truthful/practical sentiment that is dangerously close to the philosophy of "a place for every man, and every man in his place".

Plato argues in The Republic that "each individual should be put to the use for which nature intended him."

Marx says “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”

I think it is innately human to oppose this kind of philosophy to the maximum extent. For better and for worse




...oh the irony at the very end there...

[hyperbolica]

It's complex. This is well meaning and possibly truthful/practical sentiment that is dangerously close to the philosophy of "a place for every man, and every man in his place".

Jesus, no, I'm not saying each person should be "put" in their place, but rather each person should "find" their place. Big difference. People find work based on the wrong reasons (income, misguided recruiting, etc), so a lot of people are unhappy with their work. I think the schools and colleges have let us down in this respect. There should be more apprenticeship programs available - bring your dog to work day sort of things. The college I went to offered a workstudy year along with your degree. This helped me find a couple areas of engineering that I definitely wasn't interested in. Kids are expected to join the workforce without knowing what to expect or even what their options are.

My parents both elected to retire early because they hated their jobs, and that has other consequences. Ironically I love my work, but have been kind of pushed into retirement.

[harrisonreed]

Oh I agree, and I know that's not what you meant. I know there was the subtle difference there, that's why I said it was close. The first quote I put craftily leaves out the verb (put vs find) altogether. It's the never ending circle. You gotta work to eat, the job you want to do doesn't pay or doesn't exist or you can't do it. What's the alternative, hunter gatherer? That sucks even more.



Apprenticeships -- yes! People don't even know that they might like making things or doing skilled labor because it's nearly impossible to get exposed to it unless you just make the leap.

[JohnL]

...the job you want to do doesn't pay or doesn't exist or you can't do it.

Or the job you thought you wanted turns out to be a whole lot different than you expected it would be...

[tbdana]

The thing is, music isn't engineering or lawyering. Music is expression. It is art. It is communication. It is culture. We lose something when we think of it merely as craft and judge others by their craftsmanship. Music is not craft.

10,000 years before writing was invented, humans used music as their way of passing on knowledge from one generation to the next. It wasn't about who played the hollow log with greater facility, it was a communal expression shared by a culture. It passed on feelings, experiences, knowledge, and a sense of shared identity. It didn't matter how "good" someone was, it mattered what they had to say.

When we strip away commerce and ego, that's still what music is today. And each and every one of us is equal to that effort, though in our own unique and beautiful ways, and with the expression we each bring to it.

Our songs no longer teach us the path to the well to use in the summer and the path to the other one when if the first well has run dry, but they still impart emotions and commonly shared experiences. Music still tells us stories. It still serves as a way to commune together in sameness, and a way to stand out from the crowd. All the original purposes of music still exist, and not a one of them requires comparing one person's craft to another's and judging them for it. Instead, music requires our respect for each person's contribution.

I'm not eloquent or smart enough to put this the right way, but I feel it is connected to Walt Whitman's famous poem, "O me! O life!" in the despair and redemption about our participation in life, and can be applied to music. Forgive me for that odd statement, and I'm just going to leave the poem below for you to conclude that I'm a nutjob. Or, perhaps, to find the parallel I'm feeling. Here is the poem:

Oh me! Oh life! of the questions of these recurring,
Of the endless trains of the faithless, of cities fill’d with the foolish,
Of myself forever reproaching myself, (for who more foolish than I, and who more faithless?)
Of eyes that vainly crave the light, of the objects mean, of the struggle ever renew’d,
Of the poor results of all, of the plodding and sordid crowds I see around me,
Of the empty and useless years of the rest, with the rest me intertwined,
The question, O me! so sad, recurring—What good amid these, O me, O life?

Answer.
That you are here—that life exists and identity,
That the powerful play goes on, and you may contribute a verse.

You are a musician. Music exists, and identity. The eternal symphony goes on, and you will contribute a verse. A verse just as important and just as perfect as every other verse.

[JTeagarden]

I think of technique/craft as the "table stakes" required to actually make music that expresses something, and if I hear something that merely sounds well-crafted, it doesn't move me.

This is where Eliington's admonition comes in handy: Play what you have mastered, where the craft you have is sufficient to not even be noticed.

[Savio]

I think that was a good post from Dana. I teach children and young players, and have regularly concerts where they perform. I can certainly say they can indeed express music! Not in a high technical way but still. And I must say I have listen many high level musicians with no musical substance. You can deliver a musical point with limited technical skills, same sa you can deliver no point at all with the highest technical skills. Art is in your heart.

Leif

[Savio]

At the same time I have noticed there is much more focus on the musical aspect today then it was 20 - 30 - 40 years ago. It has changed the direction among us trombone players and teachers. I listen a lot both concerts, recitals and performances. There is a change. As a teacher I would say nearly all people have lot of music inside. Some people say they dont but I believe they stil have it.

I listen to Charlie Vernon, he always sing through the trombone, so I try to get the "singing approach" George Roberts always give a story/message in his recordings. Even when playing only two notes. I think it's much more focus among high end teacher to give a musical message than just some few years ago.

[hyperbolica]

The thing is, music isn't engineering or lawyering. Music is expression. It is art. It is communication. It is culture. We lose something when we think of it merely as craft and judge others by their craftsmanship. Music is not craft.

I think this is very much up for debate, interpretation, and maybe even the difference between roles in the musical world. I know a guy who teaches at a big university and plays lead in the local regional orchestra. We talked about this. He says he doesn't feel like an artist at all. He feels like a technician, interpreting literature according to a prescribed direction. I can see where a guy who plays classical music all day might feel like that. He is interpreting according to the conductors plan. In orchestral music especially there is the expectation to execute predictably, the same way every time, the same as the person next to you.

I can see where someone who plays a lot of free-style solos might feel differently about music. You're still interpreting, but you're doing it within a wider tolerance for individualism. Playing in an orchestral section doesn't leave a lot of room for that. If everyone is emoting on stage, it becomes chaos. The rest of the band has to march in step or the soloist can't do their thing. So you might be seeing things from that soloist point of view, which most of us don't get to experience.

You judge potters by how they execute technically as well as how they express artistically. They are two different aspects of the same thing. If you don't execute well, it's hard to express very well. I think there is a spectrum that runs from technical to artistic aspects to music, and different roles or kinds of music lend themselves to one end of the spectrum or the other.

[Kbiggs]

Nice posts, Dana.

I think this is very much up for debate, interpretation, and maybe even the difference between roles in the musical world. I know a guy who teaches at a big university and plays lead in the local regional orchestra. We talked about this. He says he doesn't feel like an artist at all. He feels like a technician, interpreting literature according to a prescribed direction. I can see where a guy who plays classical music all day might feel like that. He is interpreting according to the conductors plan. In orchestral music especially there is the expectation to execute predictably, the same way every time, the same as the person next to you.

Well, that sounds boring and uninspiring. I wonder whether the orchestra’s performances (or perhaps his) are equally boring and uninspired.

Even when we’ve played something 1,000 times, and we’re bored by it, we need to remember that music is for the listener and the performer. If there is an audience member who hasn’t heard that piece yet, and they listen to a boring and uninspired performance/interpretation, I couldn’t fault them for wondering why musicians bother to show up. Regardless of our feelings about a piece, composer, time period, etc., if we’re paid to play in a group and someone else is responsible for the programming, well then, we are obliged to do our best and sound our best.

It’s gotta mean something every time you play.
— too many attributions out there (thanks AI)

I can see where someone who plays a lot of free-style solos might feel differently about music. You're still interpreting, but you're doing it within a wider tolerance for individualism. Playing in an orchestral section doesn't leave a lot of room for that. If everyone is emoting on stage, it becomes chaos. The rest of the band has to march in step or the soloist can't do their thing. So you might be seeing things from that soloist point of view, which most of us don't get to experience.

You judge potters by how they execute technically as well as how they express artistically. They are two different aspects of the same thing. If you don't execute well, it's hard to express very well. I think there is a spectrum that runs from technical to artistic aspects to music, and different roles or kinds of music lend themselves to one end of the spectrum or the other.

Perhaps it’s not a spectrum, but a horse shoe or perhaps a circle. Technical execution and artistic expression aren’t mutually exclusive.

[sf105]

I'm wondering what triggered Dana to start this topic, it sounds unfortunate. I've seen most combinations of welcoming-toxic vs. low-high skill dimensions, although the higher status of top players can create higher impact than intended.

I agree that everyone should have a place in music. I also have a right to prioritise who I play with. To me, unskilled but open is better than a skilled player who doesn't listen (I have a couple of those who I avoid). And playing with a section that I can rely on (especially for tuning) makes the effort to find the right players worth the trouble.

[tbdana]

The thing is, music isn't engineering or lawyering. Music is expression. It is art. It is communication. It is culture. We lose something when we think of it merely as craft and judge others by their craftsmanship. Music is not craft.

I think this is very much up for debate, interpretation, and maybe even the difference between roles in the musical world. I know a guy who teaches at a big university and plays lead in the local regional orchestra. We talked about this. He says he doesn't feel like an artist at all. He feels like a technician, interpreting literature according to a prescribed direction. I can see where a guy who plays classical music all day might feel like that. He is interpreting according to the conductors plan. In orchestral music especially there is the expectation to execute predictably, the same way every time, the same as the person next to you.

I can see where someone who plays a lot of free-style solos might feel differently about music. You're still interpreting, but you're doing it within a wider tolerance for individualism. Playing in an orchestral section doesn't leave a lot of room for that. If everyone is emoting on stage, it becomes chaos. The rest of the band has to march in step or the soloist can't do their thing. So you might be seeing things from that soloist point of view, which most of us don't get to experience.

You judge potters by how they execute technically as well as how they express artistically. They are two different aspects of the same thing. If you don't execute well, it's hard to express very well. I think there is a spectrum that runs from technical to artistic aspects to music, and different roles or kinds of music lend themselves to one end of the spectrum or the other.

Why did you quote only my first graph, and not the second, which was...

10,000 years before writing was invented, humans used music as their way of passing on knowledge from one generation to the next. It wasn't about who played the hollow log with greater facility, it was a communal expression shared by a culture. It passed on feelings, experiences, knowledge, and a sense of shared identity. It didn't matter how "good" someone was, it mattered what they had to say.

When we strip away commerce and ego, that's still what music is today. And each and every one of us is equal to that effort, though in our own unique and beautiful ways, and with the expression we each bring to it.

On second thought, maybe you're right. It's all craft. And if that's the case, then anyone worse than me sucks and shouldn't play music. And anyone better than me...well, there isn't anyone better than me at this craft, so nothing to say there.

Yeah, music is like that. Riiiight...

I can dig your friend feeling like a technician, because that's all he is. Basically just a robot. Same with potters. We have machines that make that stuff.

I think we've lost sight of what music and musicians are.

[imsevimse]

When it comes to making music there is no such thing as better or worse musicians, there is only different.

I don't care if you've only been playing for a year, or if you're universally recognized as a virtuoso on your instrument. The newbies are not less than, and the top pros are not better than. Music is not hierarchical. It is cooperative, conspiratorial, and communal. It is beautiful human souls coming together to magically turn air vibrations into art.

Sure, people have different skill levels, different goals, different limitations. That doesn't make us unequal, it just makes us different. And difference is the foundation of art.

I'm so tired of pros strutting around like peacocks, and community players feeling insecure. None of us should do either of those. We're all just people who love trombone and music, and we all equally get to contribute a phrase to the Eternal Universal Symphony. Every person who plays an instrument is equal to every other person who plays an instrument.

Let's stop with the hierarchical bullpuckey. Pros, don't look down on students and community players. Students and community players, don't be intimidated by pros. That defeats art. We ALL have something to offer the rest, and we ALL have something we can learn from each other.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

I agree. In certain circles, there’s this mentality of trying to outdo each other in how good you are. It can be about how in demand you are, or how high you can play, or how fast. It has nothing to do with music.
What I’ve noticed is that the fully engaged musicians don’t do this. I think it’s because they know their place. They feel more at ease and don’t need to defend their position. They don’t need to elbow their way forward. They have confidence. They know why they’re making music. They’re not insecure.
During my years of education, that was when I experienced this the most—being graded and judged, maybe dismissed as inferior. Maybe just ignored. The “better” ones wanted to secure their place and position themselves.
This has absolutely nothing to do with music—it’s just foolish.
In my experience, this doesn’t exist among well-established musicians. This is behavior you find among those who are almost there, the ones who haven’t quite made it yet. Those who feel insecure and, for some reason, doubt themselves—and are dissatisfied.

But...

When I listen to my heroes I do grade them too. I do not just think of them as different. I might not like a vibrato, or a particular sound. I know it's me and what I prefer, but still I think some are better of expressing themselves musically.

/Tom

[Nemo]

[In certain circles, there’s this mentality of trying to outdo each other in how good you are. It can be about how in demand you are, or how high you can play, or how fast. It has nothing to do with music.

There was a post recently in tuba land about how Arnold Jacobs wasn't really all that great because he couldn't play uber fast and uber high and he chipped a few notes once. "Why are we idolizing someone who doesn't have the chops to play the music I can play?", or something to that effect. Checking out this person's online recordings, it was pretty evident they didn't put much thought to anything except technique

[Macbone1]

As a demographic, most musicians don't get paid; the participation, socialization and music making are their own rewards.

But when precious dollars are actually set aside for performing/recording music, the mood gets very austere very fast. Only those who can read like a mofo, get in and stay in the groove and have a good sound can hang. There simply isn't the time or money to tolerate any shortcomings. The dollars are what creates the hierarchy you dislike so much.

[blast]

If it's your job, it's your job ,end of. You turn up to work with all the others and do the best job you can. We are all in it together to create something bigger than ourselves. No room for strutting there. We do simple things stupidly well, or at least, try to.

[Macbone1]

No argument here

[JohnL]

As a demographic, most musicians don't get paid; the participation, socialization and music making are their own rewards.

Even so, you'll still find "attitudes" among unpaid musicians, while "equal" treatment is often the Orwellian "some are more equal than others" type.

[Digidog]

I'd guess much of what people look for but too often cannot distinguish, in terms of equality, is the fuzzy border between what is situational and what is universal.

Situationally viewed, we humans are definitely not equal; an educated, skilled surgeon is not equal to a nurse in the theatre, with regard to the patient's immediate needs. However: At the same time the nurse is equal to the surgeon in the respect that assistance is vital to the performance of the procedures. The relative value of the two different roles depends on what is deemed strictly necessary for a desired outcome.

Universally viewed, it can never be said that anyone is more important or valuable to any greater, overlying measurement whatsoever, because it can never in advance be determined which person will affect what, and what any single person can be said to mean to any meta-measurement laid onto a single person's life.

I think most of the debates about equality miss the fact that if equality socially is a given from a universal standpoint, the situational equality becomes less subjective and more focused on providing people with the right skillsets and the confidence and self-reliance needed to take part in a situational context of individual valueing. The fact that too many people focus solely on personal, situational value and equal that to a universal value as well, is because of the prospects of personal, physical gains; resources, money, property, that either are directly appropriated, or the results of capitalizing on the social positions gained from that hierarcical struggle of positioning both themselves and others.

With music, the distinction between situational and universal to me is quite clear: I cannot from a universal standpoint judge a beginner's music, or a total dilettante's music, to be inferior to what I produce. I can never know if my playing or the beginner's playing will have any lasting, or wider effects on anything. Situationally, on the other hand, I can most definitely determine that a beginner can't play or can't produce what I can on my instrument. If someone cannot play a G5 when required, it's the same situation as in the operating room; a nurse that isn't capable of handling the tools for a heart surgery is not equal to the surgeon that can.

I think the whole discussion needs a wider perspective, and a clearer view on the different layers of measuring and value that it moves between.