The document summarizes and compares the philosophies of aestheticism and praxialism in music education as described by Bennett Reimer and David Elliott. Both philosophies view music as a multidimensional human practice involving music making and listening. However, they differ in their approaches with aestheticism being more cognitive and non-participatory, focusing on listening, while praxialism emphasizes the participatory and contextual nature of music as an activity done by musicians. Both aim for all students to be involved in music education.
2. “Aesthetic education as I conceive it, therefore, is
changeable and flexible, attempting to capture the
best thinking about music and to apply it to the
practice of music education.” Bennett Reimer (A
Philosophy of Music Education: Advancing the
Vision, 10.)
…”MUSIC is a diverse human practice and
musical practices pivot on musicianship.
Musicianship is directed toward the practical end
of constructing musical works overtly and
covertly. Music is something that people do.”
David Elliott (Music Matters: A Philosophy of
Music Education, 161)
3. Musical sounds (as various cultures construe what these are)
create and share meanings available only from such sounds.
Creating musical meanings and partaking of them require an
amalgam of mind, body, and feeling.
Musical meanings incorporate within them a great variety of
universal/cultural/individual means (ideas beliefs, values,
associations, etc.) transformed by musical sounds.
Gaining its special meanings requires direct experience with
musical sounds, deepened and expanded by skills, knowledge,
and understandings, attitudes and sensitivities education can
cultivate.
(Reimer, 11)
4. Music is a diverse human practice
Music is something that people do
Music is (at least) a four-dimensional concept requiring
1)A doer (musicer or musicers)
2) Some kind of doing /musicing: Performing, Improvising, Composing,
Arranging, Conducting, Listening.
3) Something done (music)
4) The complete context in which the doers do what they do
(Elliott, 39-41)
Musicing is contextual in nature-the development of musicianship is
intimately related to the authenticity of the musical situations in which it is
taught, learned, and used.
Music is a multi-dimensional human phenomenon involving two forms of
intentional human practice-music making and music listening.
Elliott, (40-43)
5. Reimer and Aestheticism = Cognitive and Non-
Participatory
Elliott and Praxialism = Participatory and Non-
Cognitive
6. AESTHETIC PRAXIAL
Teaching music includes:
All possible ways people interact with
music, including:
Listening
Performing
Composing
Improvising
Listening
Musical creation, in any of its
manifestations can be conceived as a
distinctive “way to know” (Reimer, 103)
All the ways people think about and
know about music, including its history and
its cultural contexts
(Reimer, 10)
Teaching music is a matter of artistic
“knowing in action” and
music requires:
A doer (musicer or musicers)
Some kind of doing (musicing)
Performing
Improvising
Composing
Arranging
Conducting
Listening
Music education is…concerned with
developing musicianship and musical
creativity (261)
The complete context in which the doers do
what they do
(Elliott ,257)
7. AESTHETICISM PRAXIALISM
Any single aspect of the music
program-performing groups, a
general music class, composition
lab, a listening focused course can
be in and of itself a valid instance
of aesthetic education.
The music used in school,
therefore, should be far more
comprehensive than the narrow
spectrum of “school music”…and
should openly reflect the realities
of our multimusical culture. All of
the world’s musics provide
valuable sources for musical
learning and experiencing
(Reimer, 10)
A person learns to compose by
becoming thoroughly acquainted
with the culture-based ways in
which composers develop and
refine their works. A musician
learns by performing with those
who are dedicated to the
development of spontaneous
musical performances that are
cultural specific, such as 12 bar blues
or African drumming.
Musicing is contextual in nature The
development of musicianship is
intimately related to the authenticity
of the musical situations in which it
is taught, learned, and used.
(Elliott, 40-1 and 100-1)
8. Listening is an act of
creation
Each listener must strive
to hear the complexities of
the music and make some
kind of sense of it
Meaning is music is not
something outside of the
music awaiting
expression. It is what
comes into being through
the creative act of
expression (e.g. listening)
(Reimer, 116-20)
Listening is a covert form
of thinking in action and
knowing in action
Like all forms of music
making, it (listening)
depends on practice
specific forms of musical
knowing
Listening, like performing,
is a context dependent
process
(Elliott,80-3)
9. AESTHETICISM PRAXIALISM
Music is
sound
Interacting with music
includes : Listening,
Performing, Composing,
and Improvising
Music
incorporates
all manner of
materials,
cultural
beliefs, and
emotions of
everyday life
Whatever the culture,
music shapes individual
and communal
experience into unique
meanings able to be
created and shared by
those who participate in
that culture.
Aesthetic education is applicable to all
children in school-not just the small
percentage who demonstrate unusually high
competence in music.
Music is
a diverse
human
practice
Music is something that
people do and includes:
Performing, Improvising,
Composing, Arranging,
Conducting, and Listening
The development of
musicianship is
intimately related to
the authenticity of the
musical situations in
which it is taught,
learned, and used.
Music is a multi-
dimensional human
phenomenon
involving two forms
of intentional human
practice-music
making and music
listening.
Musicianship is a multidimensional
form of “sound artistic” thinking.
10. ∆ Praxialism and Aestheticism include music making
(music) as fundamental concepts
∆ Musical, cultural, and social contexts are
fundamental aspects of both aestheticism and
Praxialism
∆ Both philosophies contain the over-arching theme
that all students should be involved in music
education.
11. Elliott, David J. Music Matters: A New
Philosophy of Education. New York: Oxford
University Press, 1995.
Reimer, Bennett. A Philosophy of Music
Education: Advancing the Vision, 3rd ed. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2003.
Editor's Notes
Good evening and welcome to the Live Classroom session on the aesthetic and praxial philosophies in music education. I would like to thank Dr. Mantie for the opportunity to make this presentation and all of you who are here to take part in this discussion, because you are the life-source of education. Let us begin.
A common perception with regard to the philosophies of Reimer and Elliott is that Reimer’s MEAE (Music Education as Aesthetic Education) strictly adheres to the notion of musical study as that which focuses on the elements of music (sound, structure, etc.) and is akin to the eternal verities. In other words, there are certain aspects of music that never do change nor should. Another common misperception is that Elliott views performance as the primary (or only) vehicle for music education. This presentation is an attempt at unpacking some of the essential concepts of both philosophical views and to demonstrate while there are differences between the two, there are perhaps more similarities than one might perceive at first glance. We shall begin with Reimer’s Aesthetic model.
Reimer’s aesthetic philosophy is based on the concept of musical sound and the various ways these can be interpreted, shared, and understood. Musical meanings are at once universal, cultural, and individual. The over-arching theme is that individuals make music meaningful in a wide variety of ways. An example of creating musical meanings is Reimer’s belief that performing ensembles should include “improvisational musics of our own and other cultures.” (Reimer, 284)
Elliott’s praxial philosophy is based upon the concept that music is a human endeavor and is rooted in active doing of musical activities. Music is a contextual (cultural) practice that involves music-making and listening. The over-arching theme here is individual musical activity. An example of such musical activity is composing. A person learns to compose by becoming thoroughly acquainted with the culture-based ways in which composers develop and refine their works. Improvisation is another example where a musician learns by sitting in and performing with those who are dedicated to the development of spontaneous musical performances that are cultural specific, such as 12 bar blues or African drumming.
Although somewhat simplified, the common perception between the two philosophers and their corresponding supporters is that aestheticism is concerned almost exclusively with the cognitive portion of music and that praxialism favors performance to the exclusion of cognition. Let us compare some aspects of each philosophy.
Note the similarities between Elliott’s praxial components (composing, arranging, etc.) and Reimer’s inclusion of the same “doings” of music. Reimer’s aesthetic philosophy would appear to posit a similar position regarding cultural context as well as sharing the precepts of composing, arranging, improvising, performing, and listening as presented in Elliott’s praxial philosophy and vice-versa.
Semantics aside, it would appear that both Elliott and Reimer believe that music making (or musicing in Elliott’s case) requires a contextual and cultural understanding and that all manner of musics should be experienced. Reimer includes active participation in music-making (which is a cornerstone of praxialism) as part of aestheticism, and Elliott clearly posits a cognitive portion to praxialism with regard to understanding music in relation to context, a view shared by Reimer and aestheticism. Additionally, both philosophies include listening as a specific type of musicing.
It is in the area of listening that the two philosophies appear to be most at odds. Elliott claims that listening in the aesthetic model a “is a matter of “immaculate perception” as claimed by Elliott on page 33 of Music Matters. Indeed, this would be the case if one prescriptively accepts the premise that listening is not the act of a musician, as Reimer suggests. Yet there is some common ground between the two concepts of listening.
As noted above, a listener must hear the complexities of the music (instrumentation, rhythm, melody, compositional practices, etc.) as posited by Reimer and understand the practice specific from of knowing (culture, social, instrumentation, compositional practices, etc.) as claimed by Elliott in order to make informed conclusion about the music being heard. When one adds Reimer’s aforementioned belief that musical activities should embrace all the ways people think about and know about music, including its history, its cultural contexts, one might arguable state that the two positions are not as distant from each other as might first appear.
Although the two fundamental statements (Reimer’s “music is sound” and Elliott’s “music is a diverse human practice”) appear to be posit very different philosophies, this dichotomy appears to be based more upon semantics rather than concepts. Both Reimer’s “interacting with music” and Elliott’s “doing” although listed in a different order, nevertheless contain identical musical activities. Both cite cultural influences, unique meanings, and the premise that music is something that should involve all students.
Aesthetic and Praxial philosophies both include music making (musicing) as essential components, and these include: Performing, Improvisation, Composing, and Listening. The fundamental difference between aestheticism and praxialism appears to be the definition of music (Sound or Practice). Yet arguably music does contain sound, and this does not preclude, in the aesthetic philosophy, direct involvement in music making any more than the concept of “music is something that people do,” which is the cornerstone of the praxial philosophy ignores the concept that music does indeed contain sound. Cultural, social, and musical context are emphasized in each philosophy. Finally, both include the concept that all students should be included in music education, and when all is said and done, this would appear to be the raison d’ etre of all music educators regardless of philosophical orientation.
