This book focuses on the reflexive critique of formalism of music education and is part of a rich empirical and theoretical work unpacking the self-reflective sociological approach. The importance of self-reflexive critique has long been acknowledged in the history of music education and associated fields (Smith & Hendricks, Reference SMITH and HENDRICKS2020). Similarly, Jorgensen (Reference JORGENSEN2010) reflects on change within school music education in the United States and suggests methods for educators to be more broad-thinking, inclusive and humane as they practice their profession. Such a focus on educators in music is brought into focus in this book. Formalist discourse has been under discussion as far back as the work of Meyer (Reference MEYER1956) with the notion of a distinction between formalists and expressionists. Meyer argues that formalists contend that the meaning of music is through our perceptions and is intellectual, while expressionists contend that the meaning of music is emotional. It is within this broader context that this volume sits. Unfreezing self-reflexive music learning is an impressive volume for researchers across philosophy and music education, post-secondary music educators and others interested in cultural studies, critical theory, sociology of music and music education.
Paul Louth documents meanings of reflexive critique as habits of mind, unquestioned values, pedagogical methods and ways of communicating about music. These approaches by Adorno and other critical theorists are called critical formalism (p. 37). It is important to explore music’s socially constructed origins, and Louth argues that students will think more critically about music if greater awareness is encouraged. The book debates the various conflicting meanings of music. It aims to help readers understand why these debates should be more critical thinking in music teacher preparation programs and formal music education. Louth contextualises this book within one of the theories of the Frankfurt School, critical formalism, which is a belief in critically interrogating formal structures. Thus, Louth explains that applying critical formalism to music teaching contextualises it historically. One of the book’s essential contributions is the author’s reference to Rosemary Kellison, who insists that authority and tradition are not in a dichotomous relationship with reason and freedom.
The book consists of seven chapters: (1) Introduction; (2) Why Form?; (3) Music Education and the Objectivity Problem; (4) From Consumptive to Critical, Productive Listening; (5) Creativity, Critique and the Freedom Problem (Improvisation, Composition and Interpretive Performance as Reified Forms); (6) Form and Content: Some ‘Higher Altitude’ Examples and lastly, (7) Critical Formalism and Music Teacher Preparation. The introduction discusses eight topics, and the rationale for critical formalism and self-reflexive music learning is formed. The topics range from ‘Reification: A Necessary Byproduct of Thinking’ to ‘Pursuing a Non-Binary Way of Thinking about Music and Music Education.’ The three interrelated arguments to approach music education are, first, Western art music is formalised in schools and contributes to social inequalities because it reinforces the idea that it is superior; second, the products of musical creativity are reappropriated by consumer culture and third, social justice will be addressed by teaching about reification. Chapters 2 to 4 form the theoretical context of the book, and critical formalism is the approach that is not a traditional theory. Ideology is vital in this section, and objective knowledge viewed as static and not dynamic is problematic and should be removed and placed as a counterpart to subjective knowledge, such as the emotional and cultural connections. Teachers, students and the public often misunderstand musical meaning, and this is where the counterparts should be linked through dialogue. The author’s ethical obligation in this part is to assist students in becoming critical readers. For example, Louth’s strategy is for students to “hear as” in exploring different meanings associated with a particular set of music sounds and to emphasise reification, which provides contact between the scientific world of cold, hard facts and intuitive musical meaning. The third and final section includes chapters 5–7, which synthesise ideology in music and negatively impact composition, improvisation and interpretive performance because students may be unaware of the ideological forces in an open process once creativity becomes reified. This formalism could be extended through teaching music after the reified musical, expressive features and not in isolation from them. It could also be done through a democracy resisting authoritarianism and an engaged citizenry. For instance, Louth argues that social movements, groups and individuals could change individual problems into public concerns.
The book’s literature encapsulates and articulates existing and older publications with added recent work, which is helpful for scholars and teachers. What is particularly evident in the literature discussed by Louth is the crisis in historicity in music (remix culture), art and architecture from the late twentieth and twenty-first centuries. This era gave cultural products a free-floating quality for amusement; anyone could interpret them as they wanted to. On the other hand, this era could reduce a post-modern cultural product, including music and other art forms. The Philosopher Scott Goble (Reference JORGENSEN2010) is critical of the formal music of Western European classical traditions as authentic and suggests that the word ‘style’ is not applicable across traditions. The author explains that music’s content and its form will always be a manifestation of one another. Randall Allsup (2008) critiques this and argues it goes beyond training. Allsup extends his argument and calls it what behavioural psychologists call conditioning. Louthalso shows convincingly that traditionalism, those who uphold traditions and resist change, is the problem and not tradition. Another strength of the book is the interrelated arguments and open-ended analysis, which explain how music powerfully influences people’s consciousness, how ideas about music education become reified and how the musical meaning is justified in the music curriculum. The discourse highlights multiple areas. Firstly, music’s delineated meanings through formal schooling and the idea that Western European culture is superior, and this, in return, perpetuates inequalities in society. Second, consumer culture, often presented as aesthetic taste, contributes to the vulnerability of students, and because of this, students deserve access to tools and skills to guard against it. Thirdly, the pedagogy of music reification may add more value to social justice within music education. One such goal of the social justice phenomenon could teach students to question assumptions about ideology. A gap in the book is a comparative study between the West and other developing countries about how social justice is achieved within music education and reflecting on the processes.
In conclusion, the road ahead for readers who wish to pursue critical formalism for self-reflexive music learning is presented in a realistic context in this book. Given the challenges during the exploration of unfreezing music education, the author highlighted the global challenges and the role of teachers in looking at possibilities for self-reflexive music learning. The author’s interpretation in the concluding chapter about the highly conservative music teacher preparation is of concern if teachers will be inspired. Louthfurther concludes that it is sometimes easier for teachers to accept the status quo than question it, especially when there are budgetary, security and morale problems in teaching. Nevertheless, these reflective approaches will inspire and challenge teachers to allow the context of this book to shape their practice. Academics and readers will also find the volume useful in supporting the shaping of education, philosophy, psychology, music, art and teaching pedagogies. This is a welcome addition to the continuous contextualisation of music education, critical formalism and possibilities for self-reflexive music learning.
