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.

Oh we cross posted
Looking at your latest post about class and royalty I have a feeling we live on different planets.

GSA research recently published has shown that we should be dispensing with STEM and encouraging STEAM. The research showed that children who participated in the arts achieved higher than their peers who did not.
Participation in music has also been shown to have tremendous mindfulness with those who participate being more able to cope with stress and in many instances helping to improve mental health. Research also shown that those who participated in music activities had more resilience and great self esteem.

Definitely there should be more woodwork at school here - but also more classical music, they are both good for developing brain and hand-eye coordination. I think most kids who learn an instrument probably don't end up playing it professionally, it's hard to be good enough, but it's a great skill to have and essential even if you want to make computer 'music' later.

In my opinion it's more about developing personal excellence at something - that has outstanding value and classical is very challenging.

OP, do you think it is your very middle class upbringing that makes you worried about your children possibly not being able to maintain a lifestyle you see as necessary? Just wondering.

Dh, whose parents were badly off for most of his childhood, still chose a career which was hardly possible to make a living from at all in his young days and hasn't made him rich since; he is still very supportive of his dd's acting dreams. I have a very niche specialism and have often struggled to find work; again, this does not make me any more inclined to interfere in dd's plans.

Basically, we are quite good at living on not very much at all in this family, and we are also extremely pig-headed: put those two together and you can see that a) there is no point in trying to influence any daughter of ours b) she will probably cope.

"Exactly this could be said about computer programming. However, I don't see much attention / encouragement being paid to it."

But I wouldn't discourage my children from computer programming either. In fact DS2 enjoys both computer programming and playing the trumpet. I doubt he'll actually end up making a living from either. And computer programming isn't quite so useful for entertaining the grandparents on Christmas afternoon

I happen to know quite a lot of people with classical music degrees and they all predominantly earn their living teaching other people to play musical instruments. In other contexts we'd call it a pyramid scheme

OP, your last post made me guffaw

If your "upper middle upbringing" made you realise that the "proper upper classes" had little interest in classical music then I think your ancestors must have dwelled in the hooray Henry society

I think for students, music and sport are two massive stress busters.

Around exam time, my DS2 lost himself in his instruments to 'let his stress out' and my DS3 did exactly the same with playing football/rugby.

Incidentally, I also have a close relative who has made a perfectly decent living out of computer programming. But he is self-taught, like so many of the people who actually make a go of it.

My OP was making two distinct points:

(1) Why so much emphasis on music rather than other things?

(2) Why so much emphasis on learning how to play an instrument rather than other areas of music that are more creative and more likely to lead to a career? I acknowledge that learning an instrument is important as a foundation.

I noticed nobody took me up on my suggestion that woodcarving and perhaps other physical crafts could be as beneficial as music. However, in Britain (although not necessarily elsewhere) such crafts are not regarded as middle class in the way that music is.

OP, my mother activity discouraged me from art (not music, but similar idea) specifically because of the lack of economic benefit.

I've spent a great deal of my adulthood winding my way back into managing to get some artistic expression into my life, and am still dissatisfied by my career, but basically trapped by logic and the current economic climate. In the meantime, three of my four cousins (mother's sister's kids) are succesful professional artists. I always wonder what would have happened had my cousins been the elder and not the younger - perhaps with an example of older cousins following their dreams I might have had the gumption to stand up to my mother and pursue art.

So, I get wondering why parents would encourage or even force kids into classical music (as I've heard can happen). But activity discourage a child who wants to pursue it? No, don't do that.

Hmm. My 3 have done a lot of music over the years. By doing that it's certainly taught them lots of transferable skills - how to work hard in a concentrated way to a dead line , how to fit things in and organise your like , how to look confident when you don't feel it, and to get there and perform when you'd rather be asleep or down the pub !

Dd2 may take music forward at uni in some way , her siblings haven't. Mind you a choral scholarship -singing the same services that you have since you were a kid ( some new some old repertoire) has given them an easy " job" doing something they enjoy that runs alongside uni studies ( see above reference to organising self and working to deadline - they've both thrived academically , and have had an excellent social life too!). It is a much better earner than flipping burgers or working in a pub for the hours spent.

I also share the observation that many kids making music at grade 8/diploma level at 16-18 at their schools were not career musicians. They were academic high flighers too - serious mathematicians and scientists as well as those going to arts subjects in the future.

DH and I did a lot of music at similar level as teens too. I still play / sing averagely well. He now uses it professionally though certainly didn't tend to in his " first career !

You're talking bollocks OP.
Many classical musicians earn above average wages.
Should we only encourage our children into extremely well paid careers?Or should we encourage our children in what they are good at and enjoy?
I'm a professional musician (in a London orchestra).
FWIW my parents know nothing about music and and have always fully supported me.
I would be happy if my children didn't follow my path,but not because of financial reasons but because it is extremely competitive like many other of the arts. Moreso ballet dancers and actors.

"OP, do you think it is your very middle class upbringing that makes you worried about your children possibly not being able to maintain a lifestyle you see as necessary? Just wondering."

Not worried about this right now. Fortunately, I was 100% state school educated. If you're not paying school fees the extra-school music lessons and tennis lessons are relatively affordable.

My answer to

1. because it teaches discipline in a way that very few other subjects do

2. I'd be all for wood-carving too; I grew up in a country where this was the norm. I suspect in the UK it is a question of facilities: it is easier (=cheaper) to find a temporarily empty room to shove the itinerant violin teacher in than to set up a whole wood-carving workshop

conkerpods: You are clearly of a very high level if you are a professional musician in a London orchestra. However, I have read for a decade of how little professional classical musicians earn. Were all these stories tissues of lies designed to soften the public for greater government arts spending?

Lol at Germany and woodworking - I have never met anybody German who has woodworking as a hobby.

Because not everything is about money.

The ability to make beautiful music needs no external validation. In our school the musicians are like a secret magic club. They really support each other (and support younger musicians, too). They are so full of joy when they play together. The best bit is before performances, they sort of jam together for fun.

Lonecatwithkitten: Could you provide a link to something showing that those who participate are more able to cope with stress and have more resilience and great self esteem? I'm not trying to call you out but am genuinely interested in reading the studies because my experience is rather the opposite, e.g. www.pastemagazine.com/blogs/lists/2011/05/brilliant-musicians-whove-battled-mental-illness.html

Increase IQ, English and maths skills. UCAS Points for exams somthing to work for. Encourages listning, if in bands encourages friendships outside of school..... need i go on. It dosent have to land in carer. Why do parents allow/encourage DC to do dance or sport as there "no money there" and its not carer enhancing

I encourage music because my DDs love it. They have other hobbies too, none of which are particularly transferable to the workplace. I suppose being able to swim well might help them get lifeguard jobs but that's not going to pay very much really.

I suppose we're middle class, which is fine by me. I'll encourage any hobby my girls enjoy, and discourage any that are done because they think they should, or because they think they should only be learning marketable skills. Both of my girls are doing well academically, but dd2 is only 6 so it's a bit early to tell really.

If it's all about money I am not sure what most of the stuff kids learn at school is all about. No job has ever asked me about history or geography.

OP, you seem to be also ignoring the point that people derive a lot of pleasure from music in a way that is not so evident in (to use a previous example), computer programming. And whilst electronic music is more potentially lucrative, it's not cross generational in the same way that being able to play the piano is.

Not only do musicians take enjoyment from the act of being able to play, but it also provides entertainment for others - hence classical concerts (on the largest scale), small operettas put on by local am dram societies, even singing carols around a piano at Christmas.