about conversational solfege
(taken from www.feierabendmusic.org)
Conversational Solfege is yet another permutation of the “hearing eyes-seeing ears” axiom. It synthesizes the logical, practical and philosophical issues raised by earlier music literacy advocates while integrating contemporary thinking and research. Merging true music literacy skills with the conviction that the finest quality music should be used in the process leads to an exciting and effective curriculum.
From a philosophical perspective, Conversational Solfege is greatly influenced by Kodaly philosophy and the Whole Language Approach in that it is a literature driven curriculum. As recently as two generations ago beginning reading texts taught children general reading skills through contrived stories such as:
See Tip. See Mitten. See Tip and Mitten. See the ball. Tip sees the
ball. Mitten sees the ball. Tip and Mitten see the ball.
Whole Language advocated the development of reading skills with “real literature”. The love of reading is more than a just skill. It is an affection for the wonder of books, developed through immersion in quality literature. Reading should not be taught simply for the thrill of being able to decode the printed page, but for the hidden messages that are to be found below the surface of the printed page. Those messages are only buried in quality literature that genuinely reflects the pathos of people and artists.
For generations there has been a subclass of music literature introduced in general music classes. This contrived “school music” was developed for every imaginable reason; thematic unit, rhythm pattern, formal structure, scale passage, suitability to the beat, meter, tonality, harmonic function or because “the kids liked it.” Conversational Solfege is built on the natural folk music of people and artists rather than artificially contrived “school music.” We must be sure to develop in our students an affection for the subtle expressiveness that only quality literature can embody. Zoltan Kodaly often wrote about the shallowness of the artificially contrived “school music” that permeated the Hungarian schools through the mid-twentieth century.
So by communicating only inferior music, the schools cut off the way to a higher development of the musical sense. In the name of good taste and of the Hungarian spirit alike, school literature generally used today must be protested against. I include in this the greater part of unison school songs, too. Some writers of textbooks consider Hungarian children idiotic by tutoring them with such little verses and songs as could be improvised much better by any sound child given the chance.[3]
And in another presentation Kodaly stated:
It is not advisable to peruse (these) collections. At first one laughs, than one becomes annoyed and finally one despairs and cannot imagine that in a country where such things are printed and even sung aloud, there may still be room for anything better. And what about the masses for whom this remains their only music? Can we be surprised if, by the time they grow up, they cannot get further than the music of the trashiest hit?
Most music educators are aware that Kodály considered folk music to be a good source of quality music. But he also cautioned, however, there is much second rate music masquerading as folk music.
But nothing is as harmful as a distorted Hungarian folksong. The child will become bored, in fact he will come to loathe the hackneyed outward trappings of the superficial Hungarian character before he comes to know the genuine one. It is the greatest crime to fill the child’s soul with that sort of thing instead of the traditional songs.
Kodály was equally concerned that children have the opportunity to experience exemplary composed music, both historical and contemporary examples. But, again, he cautioned against composed children’s music that was childish rather than child-like.
…but bad taste in art is a veritable sickness of the soul… No one is more instinctively susceptible to pure art than the child, for as young people recognize in their hearts, in every great artist there is a survival of the child. Indeed, the superstition should be completely reversed; only the best art is good enough for children, anything else will only do them harm.
Kodály was greatly concerned about the inferior quality of composed music that was frequently used in music education classrooms.
Nobody can be forbidden to compose melodies-if he keeps them to himself. But what about someone who uses the authority of his official position to spread his worthless rubbish?
If, nevertheless, something new is needed, let it be written by talented and qualified composers-there are plenty of them.
Nobody is too great to write for little ones; indeed, he must do his best to be great enough for them.
Conversational Solfege is yet another permutation of the “hearing eyes-seeing ears” axiom. It synthesizes the logical, practical and philosophical issues raised by earlier music literacy advocates while integrating contemporary thinking and research. Merging true music literacy skills with the conviction that the finest quality music should be used in the process leads to an exciting and effective curriculum.
From a philosophical perspective, Conversational Solfege is greatly influenced by Kodaly philosophy and the Whole Language Approach in that it is a literature driven curriculum. As recently as two generations ago beginning reading texts taught children general reading skills through contrived stories such as:
See Tip. See Mitten. See Tip and Mitten. See the ball. Tip sees the
ball. Mitten sees the ball. Tip and Mitten see the ball.
Whole Language advocated the development of reading skills with “real literature”. The love of reading is more than a just skill. It is an affection for the wonder of books, developed through immersion in quality literature. Reading should not be taught simply for the thrill of being able to decode the printed page, but for the hidden messages that are to be found below the surface of the printed page. Those messages are only buried in quality literature that genuinely reflects the pathos of people and artists.
For generations there has been a subclass of music literature introduced in general music classes. This contrived “school music” was developed for every imaginable reason; thematic unit, rhythm pattern, formal structure, scale passage, suitability to the beat, meter, tonality, harmonic function or because “the kids liked it.” Conversational Solfege is built on the natural folk music of people and artists rather than artificially contrived “school music.” We must be sure to develop in our students an affection for the subtle expressiveness that only quality literature can embody. Zoltan Kodaly often wrote about the shallowness of the artificially contrived “school music” that permeated the Hungarian schools through the mid-twentieth century.
So by communicating only inferior music, the schools cut off the way to a higher development of the musical sense. In the name of good taste and of the Hungarian spirit alike, school literature generally used today must be protested against. I include in this the greater part of unison school songs, too. Some writers of textbooks consider Hungarian children idiotic by tutoring them with such little verses and songs as could be improvised much better by any sound child given the chance.[3]
And in another presentation Kodaly stated:
It is not advisable to peruse (these) collections. At first one laughs, than one becomes annoyed and finally one despairs and cannot imagine that in a country where such things are printed and even sung aloud, there may still be room for anything better. And what about the masses for whom this remains their only music? Can we be surprised if, by the time they grow up, they cannot get further than the music of the trashiest hit?
Most music educators are aware that Kodály considered folk music to be a good source of quality music. But he also cautioned, however, there is much second rate music masquerading as folk music.
But nothing is as harmful as a distorted Hungarian folksong. The child will become bored, in fact he will come to loathe the hackneyed outward trappings of the superficial Hungarian character before he comes to know the genuine one. It is the greatest crime to fill the child’s soul with that sort of thing instead of the traditional songs.
Kodály was equally concerned that children have the opportunity to experience exemplary composed music, both historical and contemporary examples. But, again, he cautioned against composed children’s music that was childish rather than child-like.
…but bad taste in art is a veritable sickness of the soul… No one is more instinctively susceptible to pure art than the child, for as young people recognize in their hearts, in every great artist there is a survival of the child. Indeed, the superstition should be completely reversed; only the best art is good enough for children, anything else will only do them harm.
Kodály was greatly concerned about the inferior quality of composed music that was frequently used in music education classrooms.
Nobody can be forbidden to compose melodies-if he keeps them to himself. But what about someone who uses the authority of his official position to spread his worthless rubbish?
If, nevertheless, something new is needed, let it be written by talented and qualified composers-there are plenty of them.
Nobody is too great to write for little ones; indeed, he must do his best to be great enough for them.
