HARGREAVES, D

MacDonald, Raymond

Miell, Dorothy

English

Edinburgh Research Explorer

Action, Criticism & Theory for Music EducationThe refereed scholarly journal of theVolume 3, No. 1May 2004Thomas A. Regelski, EditorWayne Bowman, Associate EditorDarryl A. Coan, Publishing EditorElectronic ArticleEditors’ Response: The Sound ofIdeologies ClashingRaymond MacDonald, David Hargreaves and Dorothy Miell© MacDonald, R., Hargreaves, D., and Miell, D.  2003 All rights reserved.The content of this article is the sole responsibility of the author. The ACT Journal, the MayDay Group,and their agents are not liable for any legal actions that may arise involving the article's content, includingbut not limited to, copyright infringement.ISSN 1545-4517This article is part of an issue of our online journal:ACT Journal http://act.maydaygroup.orgSee the MayDay Group website at: http://www.maydaygroup.orgAction, Criticism & Theory for Music Education Electronic Article                       Page 2 of 6___________________________________________________________________________________MacDonald, R., Hargreaves, D., and Miell, D. (2003). Editors’ Response: “The Sound of IdeologiesClashing”. Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education. Vol.3, #1 (March 2004).http://act.maydaygroup.org/articles/EditorResponse3_1.pdfEditors’ Response: "The sound of ideologies clashing"1Raymond MacDonaldDavid HargreavesDorothy MiellIn trying to respond to the four different but equally provocative reviews wewere faced with a gargantuan task. On the one hand we want to outline the thinkingbehind the book so as to respond to some of the key points in detail: on the otherhand, we wish to avoid the age old (and some would say hackneyed) debate about therelative epistemological merits and ontological status of psychological / sociological /philosophical and feminist theory.  What the following paragraphs shall do is respondto what we feel are some of the central academic issues raised.In producing the edited text it was our aim to bring together a number ofchapters that highlighted the current research and thinking within the broad area ofmusical identities. These chapters were collected under a very general heading of thepsychology of music - a specialised discipline that has a long academic historythroughout the world, and especially in Britain.  The book was never intended as thefirst or the last word on musical identities, but rather as a contribution to the growingbody of knowledge in this area. For example, many of the concerns raised by thereviewers are dealt with in significant detail by other related texts, such as The SocialPsychology of Music (Hargreaves and North, 1997) and Music and Emotion (Juslinand Sloboda, 2001). Both these texts are referred to throughout Musical Identities,and we hope that our text will be viewed as contributing to recent developmentswithin the psychology of music and music education. These developments advocate amore theoretically eclectic position for academics endeavouring to develop ourunderstanding of the psychology of music.  This multidisciplinary and pluralisticposition is entirely in keeping with post-modern research priorities within the wideracademic community, and so Musical Identities contains chapters by psychologists,music therapists, musicologists, music educationalists and others who can adopt quiteAction, Criticism & Theory for Music Education Electronic Article                       Page 3 of 6___________________________________________________________________________________MacDonald, R., Hargreaves, D., and Miell, D. (2003). Editors’ Response: “The Sound of IdeologiesClashing”. Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education. Vol.3, #1 (March 2004).http://act.maydaygroup.org/articles/EditorResponse3_1.pdfdifferent theoretical stances on the research processes. The text includes chapters thatare qualitative empirical, quantitative empirical, review based and biological in focus.However (and this is a crucial point) it is impossible to include every possibleorientation, and we would hope that reviewers would engage with the content of eachchapter rather than focusing on the absence of what any given individual believes istheir particular speciality.Perhaps an issue of more fundamental importance is that of positioningidentity research within the academic spectrum. The influential sociologist AnthonyGiddens suggests that identity is the key theme for late modernity (Giddens, 1991).We find identity research not only in all branches of the arts and humanities, but alsowithin the much more positivist world of medicine and science. No single disciplinehas exclusive rights to identity research, nor can each identity research project beinformed by all current thinking in identity. For example, Tarrant et al 's chapter isinformed by the pioneering and influential work of Tajfel (1978) and Tajfel andTurner (1979), and as such utilises some basic principles of social identity theory.The key point here is that chapters written within one perspective, with a clear historyand recognised methodology, cannot incorporate all other theoretical orientations.Moreover, reviewers of this type of work should take into account that there is alreadyin existence a set of well-developed key principles that influence such work.  Toreview a chapter such as that of Tarrant et al without recourse to the main substantivepoints raised, but rather by focusing on what is not in the chapter, does a disservice tothe authors. Such reviewing is akin to visiting an Italian restaurant for dinner and thencomplaining that there is no Indian food on the menu.One particular chapter attracted detailed comments from the reviewers, andperhaps warrants further mention. We felt that many of the conclusions drawn byAlexandra Lamont raise the same issues as do the criticisms of her chapter.  Forexample, the children were asked to describe themselves as either ‘musical’ or ‘non-musical’.  She demonstrates, quite emphatically, that the term ‘musical’ is not basedupon the achievement of a set of prescribed technical abilities but rather on a socialconstruction that involves self-assessment with regard to significant others within achild's wider social network.   This brings us on to the status of social constructionistresearch  within the book as a whole.  While the opening chapter acknowledges theAction, Criticism & Theory for Music Education Electronic Article                       Page 4 of 6___________________________________________________________________________________MacDonald, R., Hargreaves, D., and Miell, D. (2003). Editors’ Response: “The Sound of IdeologiesClashing”. Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education. Vol.3, #1 (March 2004).http://act.maydaygroup.org/articles/EditorResponse3_1.pdfsignificance of social constructionist ideas and attempts to integrate them into a rangeof possible approaches that can be utilised within the broader context of identity, thebook does not takes a fundamentalist position on this matter.  Indeed, socialconstructionist theory is positioned within an eclectic psychological perspective inthis opening chapter. It is worth noting that the majority of chapters make no mentionof social constructionist theory.Social constructionist theory does figure substantially in two chapters at theend of book that with music therapy, and music education for individuals with specialneeds. The criticisms of these chapters are provocative for a number of reasons, andnot least because they focus on what the reviewers would like to see in the chaptersrather than what is actually presented.  For example, it is suggested that WendyMagee's chapter (and music therapy in general) fails to take serious account of thecentrality of music listening in everyday life. This does a disservice to the professionof music therapy, which is predicated upon a sensitive understanding of the processesinvolved in musical communication, which includes listening as well as playing.  Thevast majority of introductory texts on music therapy quite clearly delineate betweentwo possible types of music therapy: one involves listening, and the other involvesplaying. There is a vast array of music therapy programmes throughout the world thatutilise music listening, and which quite clearly acknowledge the fundamentalimportance that music listening has within everyday life. Moreover, music therapyinterventions that utilise music making recognise that many people play musicprimarily because they enjoying listening to it (MacDonald and Miell, 2000).This brings us on to a more general point regarding the status of musiclistening within the text. While the majority of the chapters do focus on musicmaking, we would argue the crucial role played by music listening and musical tasteis not neglected. We would anticipate that one of the conclusions to be drawn byreaders of the first two chapters is that we are all musical; every human being has abiological and social guarantee of musicianship. This is not a vague utopian ideal, butrather a conclusion reached by an increasing number of academic researchersinvolved in investigating the foundations of musical behaviour, which is itself ofcourse defined by music listening and music making.  In saying that we all have amusical identity, we are suggesting that the music we listen to plays a crucial role inAction, Criticism & Theory for Music Education Electronic Article                       Page 5 of 6___________________________________________________________________________________MacDonald, R., Hargreaves, D., and Miell, D. (2003). Editors’ Response: “The Sound of IdeologiesClashing”. Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education. Vol.3, #1 (March 2004).http://act.maydaygroup.org/articles/EditorResponse3_1.pdfdetermining how we view ourselves and the image others have of us. The previouswork of Zillman and Gan (1997), which is referred to in a number of places inMusical Identities, shows that music listening is perhaps the most importantrecreational activity in which young people engage.  In addition, Colwyn Trevarthen’schapter highlights that the earliest communications between a parent and a child areessentially musical, and that to respond emotionally to music is a defining feature ofour humanity.  In proposing that we can indeed sing before we can talk, he isemphasising the ubiquitous nature of music making and, in many ways, acts as anadvocate of the notion that we are all musical.In conclusion, it is our opinion that the majority of criticisms raised in thereviews stem from fundamental epistemological differences between the authors ofthe chapters and the reviewers, and not from an informed view of the broad areawithin which we positioned our text.   While the reviewers may wish to assert that anytext focusing on musical identities takes into account their own conception of whatidentity is, each of which are quite different, we would argue that that this isimpossible. Identity researchers and academics in general should be sensitive to, andindeed should embrace this diversity as a point of departure for ongoing and futurework rather than use it as an opportunity once again to turn up the epistemologicalvolume of the sound of ideologies clashing.Raymond MacDonaldDavid HargreavesDorothy MiellNotes1 Billy Bragg (1986)Action, Criticism & Theory for Music Education Electronic Article                       Page 6 of 6___________________________________________________________________________________MacDonald, R., Hargreaves, D., and Miell, D. (2003). Editors’ Response: “The Sound of IdeologiesClashing”. Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education. Vol.3, #1 (March 2004).http://act.maydaygroup.org/articles/EditorResponse3_1.pdfReferencesBilly Bragg (1986) "ideology" from Talking with the taxman about poetry, Go DiscsGiddens, A. (1991) Modernity and Self Identity. Cambridge: Polity Press.Hargreaves, D.J.  and North, A.C. (1997).  The Social Psychology of Music. London:Oxford University PressJuslin, P. N. & Sloboda, J. A. (Eds) (2001). Music & Emotion: Theory and Research.London, Oxford University Press.MacDonald R.A.R & Miell D (2000). Creativity and Music Education: The Impact ofSocial Variables (2000) International Journal of Music Education 36, 58-68.Tajfel, H. (1978a). Differentiation between social groups: studies in the socialpsychology of intergroup relations. London: Academic Press.Tajfel, H.  and Turner J.C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict, inAustin, W.G. and Worchel, S. (eds) The Social Psychology of IntergroupRelations Monterey.  California: Brookes, ColeZillman , D. & Gan, S. (1997)  Musical taste in adolescence. In D.J. Hargreaves andA.C. North Eds.  (pp. 161-188)  The Social Psychology of Music. London:Oxford University Press.

An integrative theory of intergroup conflict, in

Creativity and Music Education: The Impact of Social Variables

Differentiation between social groups: studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations.

ideology&quot; from Talking with the taxman about poetry, Go Discs Giddens,

The Social Psychology of Music. London:

The sound of ideologies clashing

The sound of ideologies clashing

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Edinburgh Research Explorer