About a year ago, I joined a local guitar group that I met through meet-up.com in order to get more guitar practice in a fun and communal way. I’ve always been a fan of this website as it brings together individuals within the community regardless of background who have a common interest and wish to share that interest with others. My first meet-up was at the group organizer’s home where I was warmly greeted and sat down to join a circle of about seven other guitarists (acoustic and electric) and a bass player who has just started playing. Most of the members were of middle-age and older, although I suspect the bass player was possibly in his 20s. I was told that they have about ten classic rock songs that they do as a warm-up and then everybody takes a turn going around the circle leading the group in a song of their choice. They said it wasn’t mandatory to lead but they encouraged everybody to do so. The song lyrics as well as their chords were projected on a large screen in front of everyone. As we played through the all of the songs, varying levels of musicianship became apparent. Some people were known to take a guitar solo in the middle of a song and so they did. Others who led a song would sometimes struggle with finding a starting singing pitch or strumming pattern that would appropriately fit the song. Group members would sometimes offer advice when this happened and other times leave it up to the person and/or group to figure out as we strummed along. Regardless of ability, however, everybody was encouraged, welcomed, and supported with what they brought to the session.
One of the things that I love about community music programs such as my local guitar group is that non-musical goals are often as important if not sometimes more important than the musical ones. The notion of friendship, camaraderie, mutual respect, and support all seem to coalesce as people join together to share their love of music and music-making during this one place in time. But the idea of “place” can move beyond a simple interpretation of location. Estelle Jorgensen (1995) suggested that place in relation to community can imply a sense of boundedness, rootedness, interconnectedness, feelingfulness, and empowerment. I would like to delve into these facets in the hopes of providing some perspectives on community in popular music education and as popular musicians.
Boundedness and Rootedness
Things that are bounded in our society are, ideally, meant to stay together. Whether it is something tangible like a bouquet of flowers or intangible like being bound by marriage, there is an intention of togetherness. Things that take root such as trees, plants, or even people moving to a new location offer a stable structure that grows stronger as the roots go deeper. From my perspective, boundedness and rootedness suggest shared ideas, beliefs, and practices that keep a community together. For example, as members of the Association for Popular Music Education, we are bound by our passion for popular music education within various contexts across the lifespan. Our organization serves as a rooted place where we can articulate, affirm, challenge, or modify our viewpoints as a whole regarding popular music education. As I get to know the various members of the organization, I feel a sense of welcome and camaraderie as I know that I’ll have a space to share my perspectives and learn about others.
Perhaps by now you may have noticed that I’ve painted a somewhat rosy picture of factors that keep a community together such as shared values and beliefs. But what about the flip side? What happens when there is disagreement? Doesn’t rootedness also imply stagnation? What if Bob (sorry to all the Bob’s out there) can’t keep a steady beat while singing and he’s messing the whole group up? I’d like to continue a little bit further before I go down that path.
Interconnectedness and Feelingfulness
Whereas boundedness and rootedness focuses more on like-minding thinking, sharing, and stability, interconnectedness allows for differences and to see how they are related to one another. Going back to my guitar group, we were bound by being members of the group and our shared goal of wanting to play with members of the community. But the reality is that we all had different musical backgrounds and levels of musical ability. The notion of interconnectedness allows space for one’s individuality to be welcomed, accepted, and included while maintaining individual integrity. In other words, assimilation is not an expectation unless the individual chooses to do so. My preference for playing singer-songwriter tunes by artists like Ingrid Michaelson was accepted within the same space of another member’s desire to play a guitar solo to Johnny B. Goode by Chuck Berry. And while Bob (you knew he was coming back) might have been frustrating Susie next to him, other members of the group were able to provide rhythmic support thus helping Bob improve his skills. Although Susie may sit in a different seat during the next meet-up, the emotional affect or, feelingfulness, of having a safe space to express one’s individuality in connection to another’s through a shared love of music is quite powerful.
Empowerment
I’m always fascinated by society’s notion of who is “sanctioned” to make music and where is it acceptable for them to do so. Is it the person who wins the American Idol competition? Or perhaps the person who holds a degree in music? What about the guy who’s always playing saxophone on the corner near the subway? Or the people singing karaoke at the local bar on a Friday night? Do all of these people hold the right to make music in their desired venues? Barring a musician who has been hired with the intent of providing a certain level of service for a particularly venue, what about the rest of the population who enjoys making music with others? Is this where our boundedness and rootedness enables us to band together as those who are allowed to make music and judge others for not being within our constructed community?
And this is where we run into a potential paradox of community. Although having a strong sense of shared values and beliefs can serve to unify and empower those within the fold, it can also isolate and exclude others who either self-identify or are labeled as not being worthy of making music within a community simply because they aren’t good enough. Within the context of building a community for/with/through music, one needs to recognize the fluidity of the sense of place. Without a perspective that is open to change and accepting of others, popular music runs the risk of becoming the new elite form of music rather than remaining true to its more inclusive definition, “music of the people.” Instead of adopting a perspective in which all levels of musical engagement are welcome, we foster disheartened individuals who don’t feel worthy of making music.
I recognize there are many complex factors at play within this topic and I’ve only scratched the surface. Jorgensen’s (1995) idea of community as a place that contains boundedness, rootedness, interconnectedness, feelingfulness, and empowerment helps us to understand factors that contribute and detract from community. But it is ultimately up to us to be aware of these factors and decide whether or not we wish to take action. I would like to close with a question that a professor of community psychology once said that helped guide my thoughts and actions in cultivating relationships and building community, “who’s feeling left out?” And to which I’d like to add, “what am I going to do about that?”
Jorgensen, E. R. (1995). Music education as community. Journal of Aesthetic Education 29(3), 71-84.
An interesting point you make about community and labels. We often like to assign labels to ourselves and our “groups” in order to promote a feeling of belonging, but at times it’s to the detriment of what the whole idea of “being in a group” (here, a community) is supposed to be. I think the point that everyone needs to be aware of, as you mentioned, is that the label of “community” should always be forefront; we don’t need to hate or exclude someone because they don’t fit our preconceived “label”!
Thanks, Athena! And yes, labels are always so problematic, but perhaps a necessary evil. I completely agree with you in keeping the whole unifying purpose at the forefront before getting wrapped up in the label itself. Thanks for adding to the conversation!
Looking forward to reading more on your blog!