It is said that truth begins as heresy and evolves into fashion. There is so much importance in questioning and straying from the status quo. Challenging these accepted values that are viewed as indelible; especially in the creative arts. In the case of jazz music, and music in general, there is a specific "language" that is meant to be learned. A certain set of ideas and sounds that are meant to be learned and assimilated.
For the record, learning the "language" of your respective musical genre is extremely necessary. It teaches us about the past and gives us perspective about how musical thought has developed over the years. It also gives us tools to communicate with other musicians and technique to express ideas. But, the pursuit of "language" can become a threat to creativity and individuality.Â
It becomes an issue when the ghosts of the past begin to haunt the student and blind them to the point where they believe that "the only valid music is music that sounds like (insert name of famous jazz musician here)". In other words "language" and tradition can very easily become the end all be all. This need for "language" acquisition can create a dangerous obsession with the sounds of the past. This need to honor tradition can water down the players creativity and eventually replace it with old, cliche ideas.
Nowadays, it seems more and more students and young musicians get obsessed with learning the "language". There are tons of players that can play transcribed Charlie Parker lines note for note, know all about chord scale theory and have a strong harmonic foundation. On paper these players would seem like formidable forces but in many cases they simply lack creativity. They spend so much time learning someone else's solos and when they improvise they simply regurgitate these ideas in "their" solos. They learn a language but don't say anything with it. They essentially read from a list of predetermined phrases and outcomes and when they perform it sounds like they are in karaoke mode.
Now this isn't their fault entirely. A big part of the issue lies within the culture of music education within the conservatories.Â
*Disclaimer* I myself am a Berklee graduate and all of the following commentary is based on my personal experience as well as feedback I have heard from colleagues and even faculty.
When the vast majority of students arrive at a conservatory they have been students their entire life. Throughout elementary school and high school they have been taught everyday by an authority figure whose word was not questioned. Whose instructions were to be followed. The teacher would teach and the students would scribble down their words and in a week there would be a test and their performance would be graded.Â
When they arrive at a music school this "thou shalt not question the teacher" and "I will be graded on my adherence to the curriculum" mindset is still very much in tact. Students want to please the teacher to get good grades. But in music school it is very different. In music school, pleasing the teacher could mean eschewing creativity to get good grades.
Of course being an academic institution music schools need to have a curriculum and a set of values that they grade their students on. That's simply how a school works. However, music institutions, such as Berklee, tend to present the curriculum (the "language") as the end all be all of musical expression. Now the students, with their natural student mentality, take to this like fish to water and believe that "in order to please my professor and get a great grade and be a killin' jazz musician I have to learn and adhere to this language."
The majority of students will adhere to and embrace this "language" because it soon becomes associated with "good musicianship" and if one wants to be a great musician one must learn the "language". But in the real world this idea of "good musicianship"; is extremely abstract and subjective. But music institutions manufacture a specific set of values, ideas and techniques that they view as "good musicianship" and if a student strays from these values their grades suffer. These students, with their student mindset and wanting the best grade, naturally adhere to this language and after 4 years of intensive studies and constant exposure to the "language", they identify the "language" as their own sound when in fact they do not have their own sound at all.
In addition to this, many of the professors, like any person, have their own musical taste and will often scold and correct students simply when the student plays something other than what the professor enjoys. Now this is not true in the case of every professor at all, but it is something that happens.
When the student expresses creativity through experimentation and their professor smacks their hand like a child reaching for the cookie jar, this is creates negative reinforcement. Creativity was expressed, the teacher didn't enjoy it, labeled it as invalid either due to the need to adhere to curriculum or to their personal music taste, and reprimands the student. This happens all the time. I myself while at Berklee have been called a "know-nothing" by a Berklee faculty member when I experimented using different scale sources.
It is only natural for the student to listen to the authority figure after all they have been students their entire life and as a species humans are very responsive to authority figures and societal rolls (see the Milgram experiment and Zimbardo's Stamford prison study). More often times than not, schools like Berklee, churn out player after player that are extremely proficient in technique but, simply put, have no originality. There is a reason why Berklee is called "the factory".
The big schools actually inspire this culture of stagnation. This idea of "perfection through learning tradition" infects most of the student body. Adherence to tradition becomes admired and all of those students who experiment and pursue the sounds they hear in their head are sidelined by the students and even the school itself. Once out in the professional music world these students will find even more validation to stay true to their course of uncreative regurgitation of a tradition from long ago because even the music industry encourages stagnation. The industry want acts that the public will enjoy, acts that will sell tickets or get views on YouTube, not acts that push the boundaries of music itself. This even can cause many brilliant minds to move towards playing more accepted music to survive financially.
So what can be done to inspire creativity in the students who will become the next generation of musicians?
Take a look at these people: Allan Holdsworth, John Coltrane, Miles Davis, Frank Zappa, Arnold Schoenberg, Eddie Van Halen, John Zorn. What do these people have in common? All of these musicians were/are truly original. They spent time learning and appreciating the past but they never let the past compromise their personal expression. They felt free to experiment and let their creative muse operate unperturbed by the music school manufactured doubt and expectations that permeate the psyche of the modern young musician. They questioned the language and by doing so created a new language. They started out as "heretics" by questioning the status quo and by doing so created "truth".
Music schools need to support their students and their students creative desires and visions. They should not amputate large portions of them in an effort to mutate the students original vision and devolve it into a more "traditional and safe" mind set. Professors and teachers need to leave their personal inclinations at the door and yes, stress the importance of tradition but even more so stress the importance of the future. As a whole, the jazz world needs to look towards the future and get out of the past.
All it takes is that one teacher that embraces the students creativity and unlocks their potential that would have been otherwise stolen by the conservatory implanted compulsive need to practice cliche 2-5 licks over Giant Steps.
Let me be absolutely clear, music institutions are not villainous organizations sucking the creativity out of musicians. Like every institution they have good and bad aspects. What makes places like Berklee great are the teachers. Professors that, rather than force feed tradition and turn a deaf ear to anything that happened after Charlie Parker, inspire students to think creatively and help them embrace the "what if?"
" what if I play this chord over this chord? What if I play it like this? What if I give this part to the guitar instead of the piano?" etc.
If all you know is tradition there are no "what ifs" there is only "when".Â
"oh okay I play a Lydian over the a major chord when it is a 4 chord" etc.
Lastly, think about the first time you heard music. How amazing was it? To me, what made that moment so special was the confusion. The fact that I had no idea what was going on but nevertheless was still captivated by the sound.
When one studies music this feeling is systematically chipped away at. What we gain in knowledge we lose in ignorant wonder.
As humans we naturally crave control and understanding. Eventually everything in our music becomes predictable. "Oh he's playing the altered scale there" "now she's playing a -9 chord". There are no more surprises. To create that feeling of youthful wonderlust, we must seek it.
We must seek confusion and engage in so called "heresy" in order to find a new truth.Even when a player breaks through and does something truly creative a "cult" of followers swarm the new language and attempt to copy it.
It is a cycle.
There is stagnation. Someone breaks through. People learn and imitate the new language. Stagnation occurs again and so on and so on...
We need to break the cycle. We certainly have no shortage of amazing musical minds that have so much potential. The world doesn't need another Coltrane. We don't need another cover of "Closer" by the Chainsmokers. The world needs your music and you are the only one who can make it!