Music: for education or political gain?

Music has always served political functions, from fanfares announcing the splendour of great rulers to monkish chants inspiring religious awe to the heart-swelling anthems of radical movements, not to mention the simple bonding effects of collective singing and dancing. But New Labour’s more prosaic flirtation with Cool Britannia in the 1990s was an example of a more cynical relationship between politics and music, with politicians hoping to use the popularity of fashionable bands to align themselves with British youth.

This kind of opportunism has become far too pervasive in our understanding of the arts. Even the ‘instrumental’ use of music as a political tool has become less about its power to inspire than its supposed ability to make social policy goals relevant to the kids, using their interest in music to engage them in everything from recycling to healthy eating.

No doubt good music education is good for children and young people: a deeper appreciation of music and how it is made enriches their lives. Venezuela’s El Sistema initiative, which trains young people from deprived backgrounds to play in classical orchestras, is rightly admired worldwide. It changes lives as well as producing excellent musicians, and similar schemes are already under way in the UK. But the instrumentalisation of the arts makes it important to be clear about what such initiatives are doing, especially in the context of spending cuts.

It is a common tactic in arguing for arts funding to pile on justification after justification, imagining that the more benefits can be named, the stronger the argument. The reverse is often true. The first problem is that claims made for the social benefits of the arts can strain credulity. Do music education projects really reduce crime, tackle social exclusion, and prevent teenage pregnancy and childhood obesity? This sort of thing plays well in certain policy circles, but it is unlikely to convince sceptics. The appearance of grasping at straws is never persuasive.

The second and more important problem is that we lose sight of the value of the arts in their own terms. If music is reduced to an ‘X factor’, however vital, for achieving social policy goals, then its value will be measured in terms of those goals. In that case, does it matter whether kids are exposed to music that is new and challenging for them, or simply enticed to participate in music they already know and like? Might difficulty even be an obstacle?

El Sistema works by introducing young people to the discipline of classical musicianship and inspiring them with the beauty and excitement of music. Even if there were no knock-on benefits, this would be worthwhile in itself. The same is not necessarily true of a social inclusion workshop disguised as a music lesson. Let’s make sure music education is about musicians inspiring young people and not politicians ingratiating themselves with the kids.

Throughout October and November, The Independent Online is partnering with the Battle of Ideas festival to present a series of guest blogs from festival speakers on the key questions of our time.

Dolan Cummings is the editor of Culture Wars http://www.culturewars.org.uk . He is speaking at the Battle Satellite event “Opera, dead or alive? Relevance and value in the arts today” taking place at Folkoperan, Stockholm, on Saturday 16 October and “Instrumental music: should music be a tool of social policy?” at the Battle of Ideas festival on Saturday 30 October. The Battle satellite “X-Factor: singing in the same of quality?” is taking place today (Thursday 14 October) at the Royal College of Music, London. Photo: PA

Recent Posts on Battle of Ideas

• 'Abortion industry': A slur on the women who support their choice
• Opera for the masses, by the masses?
• Twitter trolls and the Health Bill
• The bitter taste of sugar prohibition
• Welcome to the age of bespoke cultural identities