Steve Marcantonio visits CMAS

It is very hard to quantify this week - one that seemed to have, to say the very least, both extreme highs and lows, but I wanted to take a moment to "publicly" mention one of the very high points. In fact, one of the high points of any week: The visit of Steve Marcantonio to CMAS.

The most obvious point is easy enough for sure. To have some one of Steve's expertise willing to spend as much time as he did with me and my students is still unreal to me. He was unbelievably gracious with his time. He was kinder to me than I could ever possibly deserve. The impact he had on me and CMAS is invaluable to say the very least. I need to write more about it all at some point soon, but, for now, I wanted to just share one thought that I think sums up a lot of it....

At one point Steve was talking to the students about his start and how when he was young he got a chance, via a cousin, to meet a very significant music engineer/producer. He said that as soon as his cousin said the producer's name he (Steve) immediately got very excited. (Paraphrasing) "I've seen this guy's names on so many albums that I love! Of course I want to meet him!"

What struck me later, is how Steve is very much the same for me and my students. For many people. Steve has no ego so I cannot imagine he would have ever made the obvious parallel for us by saying it out loud, but the fact is that Steve is a monumentally important and influential MUSICIAN (he claims he is not one, and I will forever disagree - he is an Artist is the truest sense of the word, but I digress...) and getting to meet him is, for the rest of us, just as it was for him to meet one of his idols. He is that good at what he does.

I learned a lot from Steve in the brief time I got spend with him. Not just things to improve my production technique, or my teaching methods with my students; but I got to see, first hand, a true example of how to be a gifted genius while simultaneously building up others, just for the pure joy of doing so. And though I will certainly never be the former, I can certainly say that I am going to redouble my efforts on the latter.

Thank you, Steve. You are, truly, the best

Scratching The Surface, My #NewMusic #Studio Project

I suppose I could have called it "My Glorified, Self-Indulgent, Demos Project," but that seems a bit too on point.  Haha! Anyway, the truth is that the root of this whole thing is my desire to finally put some of my own music out into the world after many years of being consumed by other, granted incredibly wonderful, music related projects (see www.ArcadiaCMAS.com as a primary example) if only to keep my own Creative Process evolving.

Trouble is, if I am being honest, I am never fully convinced that what I am creating, much less how I am capturing it, is up to a high enough standard.  Yeah, I know that I am far from alone in that, but, regardless, I've learned that, at least for myself, if I don't find some way to push myself past that concern, I'll never release anything.  No, I'm not saying that I'm looking to just put anything out with no standards, but I, at least for now, want some kind of flexibility in this.

So "Scratching The Surface."  It's the "scratch" part actually that's key.  Scratch as in Scratch-Track.  This way I can continue to refine without the pressure of "perfect." Will this matter to my limited (exclusive?  yeah, that sounds better! LOL) audience?  I have no idea, but, like everything else I do, it would seem this is a work in progress, and the truth is that I kinda like that.  I feel like I am at a point where, while I still, of course, want the best results I can possibly get, but more than that I love the idea of my Creative process moving forward, and even more so, documenting that movement by creating and releasing as much music as I can.

You can check out some of the music here:
https://soundcloud.com/richard-maxwell
https://richardmaxwell.bandcamp.com/releases
https://www.reverbnation.com/rchrdmxwll

"Whiplash" My Review Part 2 - What I Missed

     So, after my last rant about "Whiplash" I had the most humbling and amazing experience.  Somehow the Executive Producer, Gary M. Walters, found it and we briefly had a "conversation" via Twitter.  No, I'm not pretending that he and I are friends, or anything like that, but here's someone who is very successful, very good at what he does, and he took the time to incredibly kindly acknowledge my opinion.  Why?  I have no idea.  Sure, I've gotten a bit of attention recently for my work in Music Education, but let's not kid ourselves, Mr. Walters does not need to worry in the least about what some oddball music teacher in Phoenix has to say about his work.  And yet, he made a point to tell me that he respected my passion for both music and my comments about his movie.  It was kinda of startling.  Moving.  Inspiring.

I learned a lot in those couple of very simple tweets he sent me.  The most important was something I shared with my own students afterwards:  The truly Creative person understands that not everyone will want what they create.  Simple enough to state, really tough to actually live.  It's clear to me that Mr. Walters does.

And so, I kinda felt that I needed to take another look at Whiplash.  He's been incredibly gracious to me, when he had no need to - I'm wondering if it's just in his nature - and so I felt I should take another look.  Why not?

The truth is that I am a fan of movies.  I love them. But outside the elements of scoring a soundtrack or Foley work, I have no real sense of their production process, beyond the very cursory basic.  My point is that I am no expert by anyone's standard.  But I do admit that when I have any real block of "free time" - particularly on "date night" with my quite lovely and exquisite Michele - we are pretty much guaranteed to go see a movie.  We just really enjoy them.  Anyway....

After my first review, along with the tweets with Mr. Walters, I also talked a bit about the film with my friend Eric L.  Eric, to be fair, is what I would call an expert on movies.   And he said something to me that truly got me thinking that I had missed something critical.  He said that one of the things that he loved in Whiplash was the element that the student was just as flawed in many ways as the teacher.  And suddenly a light came on in my head.

I had made the assumption that the student was "good."  I don't actually know why, but in retrospect, I clearly did.  I am guessing now in hindsight that it was to balance the clear "bad" of the teacher, but the truth is that there is no obligation as such for the student to be good.  And maybe that was the whole point.  Maybe the ending wasn't a battle of good versus bad but more of a comparison of two takes on bad.  If that is the case, which I am rather inclined to believe now - at least for myself - it is, then I totally missed the point of the film the first time.

And here's the thing, in the end, that's on me.  Not the film makers.  Maybe Whiplash isn't really about Music at all.  Maybe it's about how people approach life, with music simply as a creative vehicle to tell the story.  As I thought more about it, it started to make sense to me.  In the same way the words "Feel" and "Groove" are never part of the script, there is also nothing that ever tells us that the student was ever actually any good.  Yeah, he got into the school, but the way he listens to music is all wrong.  Every scene I can recall is of him listening to a lot of flashy playing but never anything of finesse. Never looking for the pure musicality.  I assumed he was "good" and deserved to be there, but perhaps he wasn't and didn't.  After all, just one example, he treats the girl like crap for the most awful and selfish and arrogant of reasons.  True, he later, kinda figures it out, but you almost get the sense that he got to that point from desperation, not from a new sense of self after a journey.  Maybe, as Eric says, he's just as bad as the teacher.  In a different way, but bad none the less.  And if that is the case, then the ending wasn't about the "Victory," it was about the casualties of bad people and their actions.  Sure, the student played a song, and played it well I suppose, but that doesn't make him a musician in the true sense of the word.  Whatever they were at the start, his goals by the end were not really about the music, or "making it."  They were really about proving himself to the teacher. And like I said a teacher that he should have known by then did not deserve to matter.  Certainly not with regard to what defines him as a musician.  On my second viewing it seemed like there was nothing that pointed to the student even wanting to get truly inside the Music.  Absolutely nothing.  This kid is no more a musician than the teacher.

And so the more I watched again the more I got convinced that the movie is not about Music at all.  I was so caught up in the superficial elements of the script that I missed the bigger picture. (Pun intended).  As I said in my first review, it was all about arrogance.  I just missed the possibility that that was the film's whole point.  I guess my own arrogance got in the way a bit.

I don't know.  Maybe I'm just trying to find a way to rationalize my newfound respect for Mr. Walters.  Or I'm "fan boying" or whatever.  I have no idea.  What I do know is that when I watched Whiplash again and did not think of it as a movie about Music as such, it seemed to make a lot more sense.  It's a tragedy on all sides.  And all this got me to think.  To take another look at something.  To go beyond my own expectations and my own bias.  Ironically, that is something I work with my own students on all the time.  It seems I am not always a very good student myself.  I need to work on that.

And all this just from a few kind tweets from someone who clearly does see a bigger creative picture.  Will Mr. Walters read this?  I have no idea.  Will he care? Again, no idea.  Is my new theory on the film correct?  I don't know.  I deliberately have not researched it in order to not color or bias my new thoughts about it.  What I do know for certain is that while I've been very lucky in the recent past to have been acknowledged on a very large scale for my innovations in Music Education - I'm not gonna say the specifics here, Google it if you really wanna know - I was absolutely "schooled" about Creativity by Mr. Walters.  And though part of me is a good bit embarrassed, especially given my supposed "expertise," honestly, pretty much all of me is grateful for it and completely thrilled.

Finally Saw The Movie "Whiplash." It's Awful.

    OK. So I know I'm way late to the party on this, as they say, and it's been a while since I've posted anything here, and I know that I am not the first person to express this thought, but having finally watched the movie "Whiplash," I just wanted to vent a bit, because I have to say, as so many other have before, it's absolutely terrible in terms of the message it says about how to truly make music.  Part of me wonders if I waited so long to see it because I knew inherently from the trailers that something was very wrong.  Who knows.

Don't get me wrong, the acting is incredible.  I mean, wow!  Amazing performances.  Really. And the sound track is absolutely unreal.  So well played I don't even know how or where to begin to describe it.

But the message, after all the truly remarkable performances, about what makes a musician truly a musician is just, I am sorry, about the worst thing I can imagine.

Now, let me be absolutely clear.  I have only watched the film one time.  It is possible that I missed something.  And perhaps the ending is supposed to be some kind of metaphor for earning another person's genuine respect, but even then, I'm sorry, it's bad.  It's just wrong.   I'll try to be as succinct as I can in my explanation - something I am generally not good at.

First, let's talk drumming.  Endless shots of the student working to play faster.  Self imposed physical (as well as emotional) abuse and suffering all for the completely non musical goal of more notes in less time.  As far as I can tell the words "Feel" and "Groove" do not appear even once  in the script.  Certainly not in a musical context.  And that is rather concerning to me.  I don't care what the style, or what the person's background, any substantive conversation - or lecture - or in the style of this movie, screaming abusive mandate, that relates to drumming has to ultimately deal with feel and groove.  Has to.  'Cuz, simply, if it doesn't feel good, and if it doesn't groove, it's not music, it's just time.  And that is not the same thing.  Moving on...

Music is about Joy.  Pure and simple.  Not necessarily fun.  Joy.  Those are not interchangeable.  The entire atmosphere in that rehearsal hall was entirely without Joy.  This does not mean no sadness or mournful quality to the Music when called for, it means that at it's heart, regardless of the style or compositional intent of the piece, if there is no Joy the result can only be sterile.  Just because a piece comes from a place of great sadness, does not mean that it is without Joy.  Just one example, a traditional New Orleans funeral.  Absolute sadness.  Total grief.  The coming to terms with the most disheartening of realities.  And yet...there is Joy.  Joy in the celebration of the life.  Joy in the remembrance.  Joy in the cherishing of the memories and the pain and the sorrow and the guilt and whatever else there might be.  Why?  Because in the end, after all is said and done, what it's really about is the Joy of Love.   Even at it's worst - coming from a place a pure hate - Lord, I despise that word and the notion of it, but I digress - it is still cathartic.  And in that catharsis, in that process, at the end of it, there is still Joy.  In fact all that is left is Joy.  Anyway, another rant for another time...

But in that rehearsal hall, there was never any Joy.  There was no true life in the music.  Notes and rhythms are not inherently music.  In this case there was sound.  Not music.  The sound you hear from that ensemble - yes the soundtrack of the movie is amazing! - but in reality, that group never makes music that sounds like that.  Never.  Not possible.  I am not even certain that anything that resemble makes can truly be called music based on they way they are made to work.  Not in rehearsal, and certainly not in competition.

And why in the world is the ultimate goal the competition?  I don't care what it might lead to, you cannot be Musical and competitive at the same time.  I've talked about this before, so I'll spare you all from that rant here, but those two are inherently at odds against each other.  Always.  Competition, by definition. breeds conformity.  Conformity destroys Creativity.  And without Creativity there is no Music.

And this idea that in the end the student stands up for himself by essentially "bullying the bully" so he was ultimately victorious, is absurd.  And therein is the heart of what concerns me most about the message of this movie.  Anyone who is not a musician is getting a terribly unmusical message about what makes a successful musician.  "Bleed for the part."  "Want it more than anything."  "Stop at nothing" etc.  Come on.  What a load of crap.

Work hard?  Absolutely.  In fact, work so hard that your definition of that term changes each time you think you're working as hard as you can, so that you are always pushing yourself to go beyond your self-proclaimed and perceived Creative limits.   Even so far as to lose yourself and your soul, as it were, to the Art?  Sure!  Go for it.  Really.  But to lose it to things nonmusical? Pointless. Worse, in fact.  Creatively destructive.

The movie essentially ends with the notion that whoever can be the most arrogant wins in music.  Not so.  The goal should never have been to "show the teacher" (or really anyone else, for that matter) "I can do this!  I'm the best."  It should be to show yourself.  Music lies within. At least at its start.  From there it can connect to what is outside.  It can even, from within, receive what's coming from the outside.  But if it's not present on the inside, then it really doesn't matter what's coming in.  You won't receive it.  And the whole of the movie's ending is all about the ultimately nonmusical, superficial outside, not what's really within.   That last scene was not about self-assuradness. Not about overcoming something.   It was about proving to someone who absolutely did not deserve it, that the student was in fact "good enough."  And it was absolutely not a pure motivation for the student.  If it was, the student would never have relinquished control of the moment as he clearly did with the single stroke drumroll (fast-slow-fast).  Once that happened it was all absolutely about arrogance. Not being a musician.  I am not saying that he should have retained control over the moment purely for the sale of control. That would be arrogant.  I am saying that when he gave up the control to that teacher, in that circumstance, he was allowing that teacher to define who he was musically.  Sad.  Tragic, in fact, in my view.

And, sorry, the idea that at that point the teacher and student were on the same level (or even not the same level) so that was a moment of collaboration, is terribly flawed logic.  There was no evidence ever in the film that the teacher was even capable a truly respecting his students.  Or anyone it would seem.  No, that was not collaboration at the end, that was acquiescence.  That was the student giving in to the teacher.  A teacher who did not deserve it.  Not that any true teacher would even want it.

I suppose there is some merit in the idea that it was about how the student was rising above his past experiences and forgiving the teacher, becoming truly the better person, but it just doesn't feel that likely to me.  What seemed more likely was that the student was still grasping for the approval of someone who just should not matter.  Who clearly does not deserve, under any circumstance, to matter.  You wanna forgive the teacher? OK.  That's fine.  But to give that teacher any kind of power over what defines you Musically?  No.  Not even a little bit.  If nothing else, the student knowing the lie that was told about the former student dying in a car accident pretty much closes the door on all that.  But, who knows, maybe I'm wrong.  It wouldn't be the first time.

Now, after all the ranting I just did about it, I do reserve the right to later change my mind about "Whiplash," so here's hoping I've got it all wrong. Seriously, I hope I do.   Like I said, I am not saying it's a bad movie.  Honestly, I really loved it.  I LOVE THIS MOVIE!  The acting, the soundtrack, all of that element are beyond reproach.   But the musician in me, sorry, not so much.

There Are Only Two Kinds Of Music...and "Good and Bad" Are Not Them...

So, a few days ago I asked for comments on this notion and promised to share my own thoughts on the subject.  I should start by saying the rather obvious - that this is just my sense of this, NOT any kind of claim to being "right." Anyway....

This subject was actually brought up by one of my ASU Music Education Interns, as we were talking about the creative process of my students and how I go about evaluating their overall progress towards creating effective music.  (Note that the term "effective" is in itself a troubling term, but I digress...)  Anyway, my intern mentioned that an ASU professor - key here is one who, at least on the surface, might seem like an ultra-traditionalist (a very incorrect label I personally feel, and my intern wholeheartedly agreed) - made the comment that the two types of music are "honest and dishonest."  The reference was in terms of a musician's interpretation of a piece in performance, but I feel it applies far more universally, and having nothing do to with genre, instrumentation, technology usage or anything else that in may ways is all just superficial to me.  (Another commentary for another time..)

In any case, this was one of those "aha!" moments for me.  One of those times we all have on occasion where we think, "wow!  I wish I had thought of that!  That is brilliant!"  And so this idea of "honest and dishonest" music really got me thinking about the whole process of music and creativity and what constitutes an honest process and what makes up one that is false.

The flaw, if I can use that word for it, in the "good and bad" line of thinking is that it ultimately is 100% subjective.  That's not to say that it is not an important distinction, it very much is important, but as I thought about it, I realized that "good and bad" can never be perfectly aligned for anyone other than the individual experiencing the music.  It's just too circumstantial.  Too wrapped up in variables that can only apply to one person perfectly and to all others imperfectly.  Too subject to the moment, moods and other countless elements.  Too inconsistent.

But "honest and dishonest," have none of those issues.  Honest and Dishonest is all about the creative process.  Really, they have nothing to do with the listener.  As a listener we are still free to interpret, still free to like or dislike something based on whatever personal experiences and preferences we have have.  But that is not he same as the creative process.

The process is not good or bad.  It simply is.  And if that is true then the question is really about  whether or not the process is genuine. Honest or dishonest.  This has nothing to do with the actual result.  Nothing to do with the resulting sound.  Just the intent of whomever created the sound.

Sure, we want the result to "work." To reach and impact and effect the listener in a way that matches our intent, but if for any reason it does not, that does not mean we were dishonest with the process, just ineffective.  "Effective" is the "good v bad" concept.  It is rooted in result, and is 100%, as I said open to interpretation.  How often does one person have a different taste or preference with regard to music?  Or movies? Or books? Or art? Or food? Or fashion? Or on and on and on and on?  All. The. Time.

But the intent is what really matters.  How people interpret is on them.  Certainly in today's world there are countless ways people can be influenced towards a particular interpretation, but that is still on them to react to those influences.  It does not change the intent -the honesty (or not, I suppose) of that intent.  That's what matters.  In fact, as I continue to explore this concept, I suspect that the honest process more often yields the interpretation of "good" anyway.

And for those still struggling to "make it" - to break through - keep your process honest.  In the end I am certain that is all that really matters.

Certainly, there is far more to this, and I am just starting to get me head around it, but I can already tell it is have a significantly positive impact on my own process and that makes it all the more fascinating, interesting, and worth it.

Listen Deeper: Digging A Bit More Into The Creative Process

This is another of the "Maxwellisms" that are part of the CMAS experience, though once again I cannot really take credit for it.  This one is from David Maslanka, a musician I have long admired and was able to work with just a tiny bit a number of years ago. (see earlier posts...)

Recently I was able to reconnect a bit with him and within a conversation regarding how technology applies to music, he told me how he always does his best not to force his students, but rather to"listen as deeply as I can" to help them move their creative process forward.

I am, of course, paraphrasing his words, but the key here is that his words really stuck with me.  David Maslanka is one of those people who you can tell right away has such a great perspective on so many things.  I used to find that intimidating, and something that I felt I had to somehow prove I had as well.  That never works out by the way, but that was my mindset.  In any case...

"Listen deeper" in a lot of ways relates to "nothing forced endures" which I talked about recently as well.  In my case, "Listen deeper" currently is about not getting too caught up in the educational world of music and focusing more on the pure creative element.

If a student presents me with something they have created and it does not work for me, one approach is to essentially say, "you need more training, more advanced skills, more practice, etc."  And that may well be true but it misses the bigger creative point, which is, "what is the student trying to say with their creative efforts?"

Maybe they do need more training and skills, and practice; but maybe not.  Maybe they just need to reframe the sound to better fit their end goal.  So focus on articulating the end goal.  The process of getting there.  Not forcing a particular path to a particular end, that is not derived from the student's pure intent.   Easier said than done, I'm afraid, which is why I don't see it as often as I'd like, even within myself; but that does not in any way diminish its truth or importance.

In my quest to establish CMAS as a legitimate music education tract, I find that I on occasion (more frequently than I might like to admit) I am essentially way too judgmental. This is not intentional, and it is something that I honestly am ashamed to have to admit to, but none the less, there it is.

Self-depricating comments aside, the even more important point is this notion of "it doesn't work for me."  That really says far more about me than the quality of the work.  Who am I to judge?  Seriously.  The arrogance of the very assumption is enough to make me ill.  And don't fall into the trap of thinking that the very role of a teacher is to do just that: evaluate and assign value. It is not.  Certainly not for me.

My job is not to teach creativity.  That is not possible.   My job is to foster creativity.  There is a huge difference and it's an important one, and even if I could teach it, I wouldn't.  Then it would only be my creativity, not my students, and that is not doing justice to them or the creative process in general. Besides, the absurdity of me being an expert in all the styles my students work with every day...you must be kidding.  I go with my gut, sure.  I am honest - some might say to a fault; but you can keep your "expert" label.  I am just hoping I can be musical for them.

And so for me I have no option but to listen deeper.  Actually, it is a choice.  One I am truly happy to have made.

Nothing Forced Endures: Another Thought For CMAS

Continuing on with my notion of explaining a bit about each of the "Maxwellism" signs on the walls of the main room in CMAS.  To be truthful, most, if not all, are not mine, but rather ideas from others that, over time, I have found to have particular, let's call it...resonance (pun intended) for not just the work done in CMAS, but for my overall sense of music just generally.  At any rate, all that said, I think it's good to share these with CMAS.  Not to preach to or "convert" anyone - though I am sure it can come across that way to some - but rather to try, at least in some small way, to open up the creative process just a bit more.  Maybe it helps some in CMAS, maybe not; but they have all helped me, so I feel a certain obligation to at least share.  Anyway...

"Nothing forced endures."  This one has meant a lot to me since I first heard it at the University of Arizona more than 15 years ago.  The credit goes to a brilliant poet, Richard Beale.

I was lucky enough to be very tacitly involved with the premier of David Maslanka's "Mass" a the time.  Truth is that I had no real appreciation for the project.  Not the religious elements, but just the real...music, of it all.  Gregg Hanson the conductor, Maslanka the composer, Beale the lyricist, all of them and all those involved - I just did not quite see it.  Perhaps that is why "Nothing forced endures" has stuck with me.  Even now it still breaks through pretty much all else, no matter what my state of mind (musical or otherwise) in might be in.

So.  What does it mean?  Well, I suppose you'd have to talk to Richard Beale to be certain (unless he's similar to Freddy Mercury, and similar artists, who prefer to refrain from any specific details about their art in order to allow the audience the opportunity to develop their own, hopefully more meaningful connection than one forced on them, even if by the artist themselves.  I fully agree with this approach by the way, as much as I do my best to follow it...but I digress....) but to me it has always meant that truly lasting art, in any form, needs to be organic.  Natural.

Actually, I find it amusing that I still have a hard time even after all these years finding a way to fully articulate this one.  Probably means that I don't have it down myself, but that's part of the journey too, no?  I always find it funny how people (audiences perhaps more so for that matter) generally think that just because you are lucky enough to be considered by some an "expert" or to have had some success as an artist, that you don't still learn (I like the work explore better, but...) more about your art.  It's like it gets forgotten.  "We don't wanna hear the new stuff.  Just play the 'classics."  It's all symptomatic, but again, big surprise, I digress...

Ok.  So let me try to give an example of how I view "nothing forced endures."  I spend a good deal of time working with students on how to explore their creative process.  How to open themselves up to the honesty of their own art.  A lofty goal to be sure, and one I am not at certain I am qualified to attempt, but none the less let's assume for a moment that I require, as just one example, them to write in a particular style.

Now, sure, there is a tremendous value in learning the details of particular style in order to better understand it and how it works and how to better reach an audience through that style and so on.  But what if that style does not appeal to the student?  What if that student is simply not open to the possibilities the style offers.  What if the student just cannot see the opportunity in front of them.  S much so that they get so caught up in the style not working form them that it shuts them down pretty much entirely creatively.  Seems extreme, but think about it.  It happens all the time.  Not just in art, but life in general.

So now that student is lost.  Maybe we get them back maybe we don't, but in the meantime, time has been lost.  Lost for them.  Lost for their creative process to move forward.  Sure we can make everyone do the same thing, and after a while it'll be the norm, and everyone will be ok with it, but in the long run, overall, it lacks truth.  It lacks real artistic integrity.  In the end, and it may be years, or decades, or lifetimes, I believe that art of that nature (not really sure it should be called art - another digression, for another time...) does not last.

Let me be clear.  This is not able the style.  Not at all.  The creative process is not simple.  And for some it is even scary. Coming round to it by any means other than self determined is just not going to be true.  At best its artificial, worse its really just a surrogate for someone else's process.  Think about that.  What a truly horrible disservice.  To make someone else create in a manner that is not their own.

Yes, show then the way.  Yes, open them up to all the possibilities.  But at some point you have to let them be their true selves.  One way or another it has to happen.  But if it does, well, wow!  Imagine the art.  Just imagine.

Nothing forced endures.  Not in music.  Not in life.  And, apparently, not even in blogs.

The Writing's On The Wall. A New Year For CMAS

As the countdown inevitably starts for the upcoming school year, and I turn my attention in a more focused manner towards CMAS, I have been considering how to continue not just the evolution of the program into an even more effective recording and production label, but also my role in that evolution.

One of the things that I am doing for next year is to try to play the role of producer more than just teacher.  It's fairly easy to say that, but the educational system sometimes makes that tougher than I would prefer.  More on that another time...

Another change that I want to initiate is to try to reenforce more directly several of the key tenants or philosophies that have guiding me as I created, advance (I hope) and facilitate the program just generally.

This is a bit tricky in some ways as I don't want to overstep my role, but at the same time I would like to also give the CMAS students more opportunities to be open to greater creative possibilities.  So, for now, while not then end-all-be-all solution, I have decided to post a number of key, let's call them "Maxwellisms" in the room to help reenforce the concepts.

I also thought I might comment here on them as well.  I have no idea of any of my students read this blog, but figure it's worth getting the information out, even only for my own sense of what it means.  Anyway....

"Arrogance is the enemy."  This has actually been posted in the main CMAS room for some years.  In fact as you walk in it is positioned on the wall in such a way that despite all the other posters and things up it should be one of the first, if not the first, things a person sees when entering.

This one can be tough.  While helping to give students guidance on their own creative process it is very necessary to let their egos take hold a bit.  Ego matters.  It's important to the process.  Otherwise no one would ever get on stage, or present a recording, or even explore an idea they came up with.

But arrogance is something different.  Something musically dangerous.  It blinds one to advancing musical ideas.  It can cheapen the impact of those ideas.  And, perhaps, worse of all, it limits the opportunities to explore even greater musical possibilities with others, be they through collaboration or just in reaching an audience.

For a student in CMAS, it might be their unwillingness to follow the creative process honestly - taking short cuts rather than doing the heavy lifting.  Or it might mean refusing to really be part of the behind the scenes work for their own show - making the excuse that someone else can do it (even if better than they) when the truth is they really just don't want to take the responsibility.  There are countless others examples, but you get the idea.

The point is that while we all need ego to do our jobs, when it turns to arrogance things never work out.  If you are difficult to work with on any level - even if you are well intentioned - there will come a point where no matter how talented you are, people will stop coming to you.

Arrogance is not just the enemy of those around you.  It's the enemy of yourself.  It's the enemy of all things creative.

Covers Aren't What They Used To Be

As usual I'm late in posting this, but that said, I wanted to share a recent educational revelation.  Well, perhaps "revelation" is not quite right.  At least it was not a revelation of mine, but rather that of my students.

CMAS has a long standing policy of no cover material.  If you wanna perform you are going to have to create all the material for that performance.  Again, no covers.  There are any number of reasons for this.  One is the more obvious issue of copyright.  While it technically falls to the venue to provide the proof a licensing, there is a greater principal of respecting other artists and their work that I feel cannot be over emphasized.  After all, how can you possibly expect any to take your art seriously if you don't respects the art of others.

Now some have argued that it is actually a complement to cover another artist, and to a great degree  I would say that is true.  Others have claimed that learning the proven material of other artists is the best way to develop your own. This is also true to a point, but it is also a very slippery slope.

Here's the thing:  Covering an artist is fine when you make the song truly your own.  The response of an audience though that is along the lines of "wow! you sound exactly like..." well, that's actually not a good thing.  If your motivation is that kind of reaction then that's fine, but that means it's more about your ego than anything else.  Follow the logic through and the best you can possibly get is living vicariously through someone else's talent.  There is nothing wrong with covering someone else, but if you don't actually yearn to truly speak with your own voice, well then, I'm not certain you are not missing the bigger musical picture.

And there is something else.  Something far more significant.  The reaction you get from an audience for a cover will never exceed the reaction you will get for a well written and well performed original.  Never.  Walk the logic through, it's just not possible.  No matter how well you cover another artist - even if you make the song truly your own - it will never exceed the connection you can make by creating something totally new.  Something that your audience can only experience from you.

Ok, so that whole bit would be long series of blogs in and of itself, but going back to the very start of this one, the revelation, was from several of my current CMAS students.  We just did a show at  the Phoenix Hard Rock with another band from the east side of town - not a CMAS group.  They are a phenomenal  cover band.  I mean just amazing - particularly for their ages, all being teenagers.  Very similar in that regard to CMAS.

It was very interesting to talk with several CMAS students at the show.  I need to be clear here that their comments, and mine for that matter, have nothing to do with the band from Gilbert.  This article is about CMAS, not anyone or anything else.

As the show progressed several of my students commented that they saw no point in playing covers.  Not given the response they got from their own material.  It was very particular, their view.  Each kept commenting how impressive the cover band was but that it was kind of disappointing that they were not speaking musically with their own voice.  Proof of their view was when the cover band did a couple of originals in their set.  There was a kind of "ah ha, there it is" feeling.

Now, look, there is nothing wring with covers.  CMAS has very different goals than most high school bands.  Maybe all.  Point is the students themselves, in growing numbers appears to be starting to really understand this.  Speaking with your own musical voice is slowly starting to take real hold.  To become a real priority.  It's something I want to further foster.  Further write about.  Further explore.  The best part is knowing that it appears CMAS students want to do the same.

Ok, off soapbox.  For now...

Moving Music Education Forward One Small Step At A Time

Over the recent years I have to admit that I have gotten used to the notion of the Contemporary Music And Sound (CMAS) program (www.ArcadiaCMAS.com), I am fortunate to have created and get to facilitate, push the boundaries of Music Education.  I know that statement can come across as a bit arrogant, and I apologize for that, but it is not at all how I mean it, and more importantly, it is true.

This past weekend we partnered once again with our friends in the Technical Theater program at Arcadia and produced a complete, full scale musical called "The Arcadia Project." (see the plot synopsis below) And when I say "produced" I mean they students wrote it.  The script, the music, all of it.  Designed and built the sets, executed the technical production, made the program, etc.  EVERYTHING.  It was stunning.  I need to get some pictures up.  In any case...


From the press release: 

“The Arcadia Project” musical’s plot was written by Arcadia’s theater students, and is an epic story of discovery, love, and loss through the eyes of a group of high school students, their teachers, and community, as they come to terms with the fact that their original school, now remodeled, was actually designed to safely house a previously covered up alien invasion force from a distant planet. Part suspense thriller, part comedy, as the story unfolds, we learn that the new school’s design inadvertently freed the outer-space menace, now bent on revenge. As the plot progresses, through moments of deep emotion, humor and intrigue, the students learn that sometimes life is what you make of it, and that every moment counts.

The music for this all original, student production was written entirely by students in Arcadia’s acclaimed CMAS program. Not just a sound track, but a complete live musical experience, this show, with a cast that even boasts a few local Arcadia celebrities, promises to be a great evening’s entertainment for all ages.

Part of the Career and Technical Education department of the Scottsdale Unified School District, the Arcadia High School CMAS and Technical Theater programs have a long and proven history of successfully pushing the boundaries of arts educational opportunities for students, and this musical is certainly no exception. At a time when all the arts are in jeopardy across the entire state of Arizona, the students at Arcadia are hoping to show that the Technical Theater/CMAS/CTE methods they are using to create this amazing event can transform Performing Arts education into something that goes well beyond just performances, but can actually lead to real jobs in the fields they love, all while keeping the programs’ overhead costs below those of the standard Performing Arts approach. It’s a lofty goal, but one they are keen to achieve; so join us at Arcadia on April 18th, 19th, and 20th, and see for yourself just what the arts can be.



I'm going to include the program notes, and other commentary below just to give you an idea of what they did.  And I could certainly go on for quite a while about the entire project, but what matters most to me right now is the notion that we can change education for the better.  Waiting on the politicians to do it is a fools errand, so we gave the kids the ball as it were and just told them to run with it.  This show cost practically nothing to produce in comparison to a standard school musical, but the educational benefits were vastly superior. Vastly.  And the show worked.  It was legitimately a great show.  I should also mention here that as much as I am proud of CMAS, it was my friend, Richard Fairchild (Tech Theater and Drama) who really deserves the credit for coordinating the entire event.  Yes, this was a partnership, but someone has to be in charge overall, and thank goodness it was him and not me.  Also, we did bring in Michele as a bit of a ringer to help with vocal coaching the cast, so that was also a huge advantage we had.  Anyway...

If you missed it the good news is that we are just getting started.  There will be more.  Lots more.


Here's how one school board member described it:

"I had the pleasure last night of seeing The Arcadia Project, and wanted to let you know how much I thoroughly enjoyed it.  It was great fun, and the songs were just terrific.  I’m so impressed that everything was written and composed by these incredibly talented students - you could see that that their hearts and souls were in this production."  

- Barbara Perleberg, Governing Board Member, Scottsdale Unified School District



Here are the program notes and commentary:

Program Notes

One behalf of the entire cast, crew, writers, composers, musicians, and everyone involved, thank you for joining us for this performance.  It’s a lot to produce a school musical – any school musical.  This one has proven to be not just a fantastic challenge, but also incredibly rewarding.  We are immeasurable proud of all the students who have taken part in this process.

School musicals are fraught with countless issues.  Which show can we afford the rights to?  Which show do we even have the students to effectively cast for?  Which show can we afford the production costs of?  Which show will be interesting to the students?  To the audience?  Which show will give the most opportunities for real learning? And so very many others that it got us thinking: Why can’t the students write their own musical?

The truth is, they can.  In fact, as we are now on the other side, we can tell you, it’s not just that they can, the fact is they should.  Just on the practical side, so many issues go away instantly. 

This project is really something new.  Not just a new show, but a new approach to the Arts as a whole.   In truth it’s an approach we’ve been fostering in the Technical Theater, CMAS, and the Career and Technical Education (CTE) department in general for quite some time.

So thank you again, to everyone involved in this process that has lead up to this performance.  We are so very proud of every single student; humbled to have been able to play a small part in their success here; and truly glad you could join us for this event.  And now, on with the show!

Why CTE?

Career and Technical Education is designed to help prepare students for careers straight out of high school.  The CTE courses at Arcadia require that students meet not only a rigorous curriculum based on academic and practical competencies, but also that they demonstrate their skills in projects like the one you will see tonight.

Right now there is a push, nationwide for something called “Common Core.” In its simplest terms Common Core is the idea that underneath all the educational opportunities and experiences a student gets, there are a set of fundamental skills and concepts that are essential to their success, no matter what field they ultimately go into.  Right now, those fundamentals are focused nationally on English, Math, and, to a large extent, technology.  From those stem all kinds of things. Science.  The Arts.  And more.

But the Arts integration can get tricky, and the world of education is changing.   This is a fact.  So why can’t the Arts change too?  The truth is that at the heart of pretty much everything CMAS and Theater do at Arcadia lies that simple truth.  We approach everything we do with the mindset of “Just how far can we push the limits of Arts education?  How ‘real world’ can we make this? 10 years from now, can this experience directly impact and help a student be gainfully employed in a field they love?”

Essentially, to us, it means that while you must maintain a strong appreciation for the past, the real goal is to create something new.  Something of your own.  In pretty much every educational theory model the idea of “creation” is always – always – the highest level of learning, and we always aim to give our students every opportunity to do just that: create something of their own.  Hence, we now have a student written musical.

The Process

How does a show like this happen?

Arcadia CMAS incorporates real world musicianship with songwriting, live audio production and recording studio skills. As an aspect of that process, each song you will here tonight was solely written by students, and many were released on the first two CDs available free through the CMAS website, www.ArcadiaCMAS.com.

Part of the curriculum for the Arcadia Theater program involves scriptwriting, and so in early January a group of writers sat down with an outline, access to songwriters, and began to tell a story.  At the core of this musical, beyond the spectacle and larger plot, is a story about very real teenagers.

In the process of creating this show the students used a number of current and advanced technologies – a hallmark of CTE - and many of those technologies are present in their application this evening.  From the recording studios in CMAS to the scriptwriting collaborations of the Theater students via online script writing and communication tools, to the set design, and a host of others, this show happened not just because the students wanted to do it, but because they received the training to actually make it happen.   The entire show had to be completely written in under 3 weeks in order to ensure there would be enough time to cast, build the set, execute the technical elements, and rehearse. 

Everything in this show came from the students. Everything. The music, the script, the design of the show tonight - costumes, props, even the fliers on the doors – all of it was created by students working together using professional equipment and industry standard practices, built using online technology and modern media, meeting cross curriculum goals and thinking at the creative level.

The notion that these students have worked hard simply does not even come close to describing what they have all put in to this production.


So now that this show is over, what's next?  Well, for starters we have several more CMAS shows coming up.   Then there is the vol. 4 CD  of our "Works in Progress" series to be released in May.  And there will be more shows like the one we did this weekend.  Even as this one was in production we were mapping out a way to do this as an annual event.  A totally original show every year.  beyond it being cool, the fact is that the clear educational opportunities this provided the students, honestly mandate we do it again.  More soon...