Abstract

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:EditorialIris M. YobDoing better. Two familiar, and rather bland terms that hold great potential for us as we think about our work as educators, musicians, and philosophers of music education. The words suggest we do not live in stasis—we and everything around us is organic, constantly changing, growing or dying, expanding or shrinking, doing better or doing worse. The words also suggest progress. As we look back, we see things were not as good as they are now and when we look forward in our imagination we see things getting better than they are now. This is the kind of optimism that propels us forward, shoring up our willingness to be researchers, risk-takers, dreamers, advocates, activists, even revolutionaries, certainly idealists reaching for the ultimate Good. The words are also redolent with a modest realism. We are doing better but we know that counter-action, resistance, maybe red-tape and bureaucracy, current conditions, injustices, flaws in ourselves and those around us, lack of funds, lack of time, lack of incentive, lack of support, lack of courage, and lack of skill slow us down and limit progress. We are doing better but we could do even better yet. At the very least, doing better urges us forward despite the setbacks.In reading the articles in this issue of Philosophy of Music Education Review, doing better seems to be a common theme across the various viewpoints and arguments our writers offer. The articles are honest and discomforting, acutely discerning and hopefully encouraging.We begin this issue with the keynote address given by Estelle Jorgensen at the Ninth International Symposium for Philosophy of Music Education in which she celebrates the achievements and contributions of philosophers of music education and suggests ways we might do better as we look forward. Her suggestions [End Page 1] are practical and include taking a broad view of the role of philosophy, finding one’s personal perspective in that breadth, constructing a relevant vision and applications from that perspective, and having the courage to speak to the vision and its application to create an empowering music education for all.Paul Woodford, in his response to a paper in which David Elliott challenges music educators to find ways to bring about positive social change through music, proposes that we would do better in meeting this goal by also considering the threats to democracy and social justice inherent in curricula and the historic methods of indoctrination they embody. (Incidentally, Richard Colwell also responds to Elliott’s paper in In Dialogue in this issue.) Woodford takes his cue from John Dewey who spoke of the eclipse of the public to serve the oligarchies of wealth and power. Exposing the sacred myths and traditions around music and the implications of celebrating specific heroes and accounts of the musical past, he argues, is based on a real understanding of the inherently political nature of education and are necessary precursors to empowerment and equity.Sean Steel, in the first of a two-part series, proposes that we could do better in music education by implementing a more Dionysian philosophy. Schools are characterized, he suggests, by a lack of festivity with their focus on the achievement of measurable learning outcomes and exclusive attention to rationality and utility. Following the god of wine and ecstasy in intoxication and bliss, he argues, would allow a shattering of the individual self and an experience of the oneness of all things as the ground of being—the antidote to what ails contemporary humanity.Leonard Tan draws on philosophies from the East and West to address a predominant criticism of contemporary bands and wind ensembles, namely that they are inherently undemocratic organizations for making music since authority rests in the conductor who imposes his or her will on the players. We can do better in understanding bands, he proposes, by rethinking this scenario. Using the metaphor of the boat (the conductor) floating on the water (the players), he explores the relationship between the two around the themes of the power of the people, participation, equality, cooperation, and conflict. In the final analysis, he envisions the band as a setting for learning about and practicing the skills of...