To not understand why parents encourage music

[angryeumigrant]

when classical musicians earn so little.

The real money in music is in music production, composing, DJing, club nights, breakthrough bands, etc. Even that is not what it was in say the 1980s. There is next to no money in classical music performance.

I'll all for children learning to play an instrument for pleasure, read music, music theory, etc. However, I do wonder why parents would not actively discourage their children from spending too much time playing an instrument during GCSE / A-Levels. I think it's one of those things that is considered a "good thing" without it ever getting looked at objectively.

I would much rather my child was composing electronic music or sounding a computer game than reaching a top level playing the violin, because frankly the former is not only more creative but also more career-enhancing.

It's really sad that you have this attitude op. Pp have pointed out the many benefits of learning music. There is also another benefit in that learning music in that it creates pathways in the brain which help with maths and languages. Most of all however music creates its own kind of joy.

I am a bit confused by this question as, from my (admittedly limited) experience, I thought parents encouraged their children in all sorts of areas these days depending on interests and what they enjoy/have a propensity for.

Classical music has some benefits (creative, mathematical, linguistic etc etc as per the above) and there are chances for getting involved in social groups ie orchestras, bands etc.

Computer programming (I'm thinking Raspberry pi scripting for example) has loads too and is very popular with kids these days isn't it? Although less collaborative/social I'd guess.

Maybe parents encourage the former more as they know more about it in some cases?

angryeumigrant Sun 17-Jul-16 23:11:03

""All the very best classical musicians at my son's 6th form are doing brilliantly academically too."
But it's cause and effect, isn't it? Are they the best classical musicians because they are brilliant academically rather than the other way around? Most likely the same qualities contribute to them being good at both. "

As a university teacher, my experience is that music students have simply developed a different attitude. Pupils who only do the academic subjects tend to have everything "jazzed up" for them by the teacher and seldom have to spend week after week learning something tedious by heart. Even language teachers don't expect you to learn much grammar these days. When they get to university it comes as a shock to them. Except to the classically trained musicians. If you have done scales on the piano night after night for the last 10 years, a few hundred irregular verb forms aren't going to come as a nasty shock.

I know exactly what you mean. I have a good friend who has made his career in classical music and his parents were fairly horrified - "oh, yes, we encouraged you to do it for fun but surely you should go and get a proper job?". The same goes for theatre - middle class children are encouraged to go to the theatre lots but friends who made careers out of it were not so encouraged.

for your opinion.

Do you really not see the importance of the link between science and the arts. Without imagination and creativity we would never have evolved to where we are today, you can't invent with no imagination/passion.

True, it's just that governments don't seem to value the arts. In fact, German universitites don't even get funding for subjects that are not in demand in the workplace.

One could be of the opinion that governments, or society at large, should be made to feel the effects of such policies, instead of people sacrificing their own wellbeing to bring great art to the world.

"I have always found that those of my undergraduates who have reached a certain level of proficiency on an instrument tend to cope better at university than other students: they are more disciplined and quicker at learning new things and don't expect every single thing they do to be entertaining or immediately accessible. They are definitely over-represented in the Firsts I hand out."

This was very much NOT my experience during my limited time in academia. Those who were into music were often quite highly strung and found my use of the socratic method somewhat stressful. I would use the term perfectionistic to describe them - I think you are right about them believing that effort was necessary and important. I suppose the relative merits depends on the subject - what I was teaching didn't have a "right" answer and what was important was argumentation.

Because by playing my viola, loudly, i can drown out certain people's tedious waffle.

(I chose the viola aged 7 because i thought the violin was prissy

Ah - so this is a class thing is it, OP?

Because it is immensly life enhancing in so many ways

Eh? Not everyone encourages their children into things in the hope that they will make loads of money further down the line. It's called a hobby, something you do for fun, to learn new skills, to keep your brain stimulated.

Learning to play an instrument, along with many other hobbies are a positive thing.

I have to admit to not encouraging my kids in music in the slightest. I don't have a musical bone in my body although DH is very musical. Eldest is starting drums and middle one did a term of guitar but it's not really on my radar if I'm honest and they don't really have friends who play instruments either. We encourage sport, reading, theatre and travel but perhaps as it doesn't interest me, to the point that I don't even listen to music radio and find music quite irritating much of the time, I love silence , it just never occurred to me to make it a thing

We manage to get by OP and a million in our hands wouldn't stop my family.
Some people are born to be musicians, it's a calling that you take if you can't live without making music your life.
So not many people choose it anyway.
It's hard work, you have to be resilient, driven, motivated and above all not driven by money because as a musician you are poor.
It isn't helped by every tom dick and harry thinking they can have a go either.
It keeps the fees down for those who actually do live on the money received from performance.
You just learn to cut your cloth accordingly and can't afford to want material possessions. It is quite a humble profession, even for those at the top of their field.
So no YANBU it's the last thing you should encourage, musicians don't need their families to encourage, a decent parent discourages as much as they can.

I divide my teaching time between two subject: one such as you describe (requiring argumentation) and one requiring lots of old-fashioned learning. I would say the main problem I (and many of my fellow tutors) see across the line these days is lack of staying power, of hanging in there once things get boring. Perfectionism is far less of a problem.

Have no experience of sciences or maths, but friends who do swear by music as a means of developing mathematical and logical ability.

And if you are exclusively thinking about money, then encouraging something that gives you an edge in maths, science or languages might not be a bad thing.

I agree let's just teach kids how to use tills, the less bright kids to dig up roads. Also art what a waste of time

So are you saying your child will only be allowed to partake in activities where you can see a direct correlation to them making money from them directly or indirectly in the future and forbidden from activities that are purely pleasurable with no future earning application ?

By your logic Elton John's mother should never have let him take piano lessons
Daemon Hurst's father should have taken away his art supplies
Etc

Is this an actual, serious AIBU question? OP do you actually believe there is no value in something unless it brings a good salary? I honestly can't work out if you're just being provocative

That's just your mother (and any others similar) honey

My DM was a classically trained musician. She recognised early on that she wasn't good enough to go professional, but enjoyed and actively participated in music (solo and as part of a group) until her death. My uncle, her brother, is a conductor/composer and has made a very successful living out of it.

It's one of my greatest regrets, that I didn't apply myself to the many different instruments I was given the opportunity to learn. I've inherited my DM's grand piano and I'm hoping that our next house will have enough room to house it so I can take it up properly.

We are a society who has evolved enough to give worth to activities which are only for pleasure - either for the self, or others. Why would you see that as a bad thing?

dodobookends: I had a very middle class upbringing, probably more upper middle than middle. My impression is that the proper upper classes aren't that fussed about music, classical or modern.

Incidentally, tennis is probably in a similar category - the Royals don't really do Wimbledon apart from the Duchess of Kent and Kate Middleton, who are probably the two Royals with the most middle class backgrounds.

I played tennis from 8-16 and learnt piano from the age of 7-15. (At one stage I had three different piano teachers.) So a fairly middle class upbringing.

David Hasselhoff sold millions of records in Germany...

My DS was easily distracted at school and hated it because he wasn't good at writing. Verbally he was right up there but not being able to do what the other kids, siblings and classmates, made him feel worthless. However, he was good at the guitar and playing it gave him confidence. Later he learned drums when he was diagnosed with dyspraxia because it meant he had to learn how to co-ordinate with his arms crossed which is very difficult for dyspraxic people. It helped lay down the neural pathways which helped in other areas of his life. He would never have got 'A' levels so went on a Music Performance Course which gave him transferable skills. Yes, I was terrified he'd end up on drugs, gigging for nothing but when he got his Grade 8, he was just so proud. Why would I not have encouraged him?

OP I'm confused
Your title just says music
You then talk of classical and mention areas you feel are profitable in the music industry
Surely many of those will have classical music backgrounds? You've got to start somewhere. Music encompasses millions of things, thers got to be a starting point and there's so much crossover. Think of composers like Clint Mansell, or the Pet Shop Boys and Mark Ronson performing at the Royal Opera House.

also part of education. Maybe I've misunderstood, are you saying loads of parents think their child will make a good living from classical music only?

But it's cause and effect, isn't it? Are they the best classical musicians because they are brilliant academically rather than the other way around? Most likely the same qualities contribute to them being good at both.

That's a very good question.

I'm not sure of the answer really, but the majority of them started learning an instrument in year 5 primary school, so perhaps too early to know if they were academically brilliant.

My guess is that it's a bit of both. They all seem like very disciplined, very determined students - hence getting this far in their music. The same discipline and determination has probably helped with their studies.

Interestingly, none of the students I'm talking about are middle class. In fact this area is one of the highest in the UK for child poverty, unemployment and drug addictions.

It hugely enhances mathematical ability, academic self discipline, confidence and social skills, cultural awareness and appreciation, historical understanding, communication, etc etc

I have just returned from a full day in a recording studio with my two musical teens. The teamwork, skill, positive social interactions, enjoyment, and achievement they have experienced today makes it about the most productive weekend day I could wish for them.

Participation in music is one of the factors most closely linked to high scores on happiness indices.

In no sense could it be compared to computer programming. I think it is odd for you to say this is never looked at objectivley. Most of us do objectively consider what would be the best thing for our children, and most would come to the conclusion that a child who experiences live musical participation positively is statistically more likely to be happy and successful than one who doesn't. I would consider a child hood without instrument lessons to be very impoverised, although it matters very little what form those lessons take, or which instrument.