Aesthetic and Praxial Philosophies of Music Education Compared: A Semiotic Consideration

Author(s): Maria B. Spychiger

Source: Philosophy of Music Education Review, Vol. 5, No. 1 (Spring, 1997), pp. 33-41
Published by: Indiana University Press
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/40495411
Accessed: 08-08-2019 16:32 UTC

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/40495411?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Indiana University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access
to Philosophy of Music Education Review

This content downloaded from 116.14.17.154 on Thu, 08 Aug 2019 16:32:55 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Aesthetic and Praxial Philosophies of Music Education Compared:
A Semiotic Consideration

Maria B. Spychiger
University of Fribourg, Switzerland

I feeling through music education - is illogical.

The community of readers of Philosophy of
Music Education Review will by now be familiar
with David Elliott's praxial philosophy of music
education.1 He first presented his approach ten
years ago, in 1987, after realizing that the philo-
sophical foundation in traditional western music
education is difficult to apply to jazz education.2
In the ensuing years, he further developed his
ideas and published them most completely in
1995 as a book titled Music Matters. The subti-
tle tells us what Elliott claims to provide: A New
Philosophy of Music Education.3
If there is a new philosophy, there must be
an old one. Elliott doesn't say "old," rather, he
uses the terms "traditional," "conservative," or,
more provocatively, "past" and "obsolete." He
labels this philosophy "MEAE," which is an
abbreviation for "music education as aesthetic
He proposes even more emphatically that MEAE
falsely regards music as identical with works of
music and thus declares music to be an object
external to the individual. As a matter of fact,
reacting to this underlying philosophy of music in
general is Elliott's starting point for his own phi-
losophy of music education.
Contemporary music philosophers6 are
moving to a view that brings music closer to the
music-making subject. In doing so, they arrive
at a definition of music as a human practice or,
more precisely, a diverse human practice.7 Tak-
en as a base for music education, this new view
leads Elliott to a philosophy that focuses on the
child's musical activities and music making.
Accordingly, the goal of praxial music education
philosophy is to develop the child's musician-
ship, while MEAE is focused on aesthetic expe-
rience.

education." James Mursell, Harry Broudy,
Charles Leonhard and Robert House, Abraham
Schwadron, Keith Swanwick, David Peters and
Robert Miller, and, of course, Bennett Reimer
are mentioned as the most prominent promoters
of MEAE.4 If we follow Elliott, MEAE is an
approach to music education that centers on the
aesthetic experience, an experience that is pro-
duced mainly by listening to musical artworks.5
Elliott identifies fundamental problems in
MEAE' s philosophy; for instance, he says that
the assumption of a genuine association between
musical structure and human emotion - and
The aesthetic approach to the philosophy of
music education has indeed been the prevalent
philosophy of music education in North America
throughout the past thirty-five years or so. Pres-
ently, Elliott's "new philosophy" is seeping into
university programs for music education and into
the practice of music education. It should be
welcomed and embraced, but since its demeanor
seems on some occasions somewhat arrogant and
at others even hostile, this philosophy also has
the potential to evoke confusion or to polarize
the professional community. Discussion is need-
ed.

consequently, MEAE' s intention to educate Identifying the specific approach and major

© Philosophy of Music Education Review 5, no. 1 (Spring 1997): 33-41.

This content downloaded from 116.14.17.154 on Thu, 08 Aug 2019 16:32:55 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 34 Philosophy of Music Education Review

against Cartesianism.
topic of this paper - a semiotic He rejected René Descart-
consideration of
the differences between the "old" and
es' assumption the
that the world"new"
is divided into
philosophy - however, maysubjects
tempt and objects, that is, there
readers to isturn
one world
outside and another inside
pages and look for a more exciting theme in this the individual, and the
issue of PMER, because papers idea that human
and beingsbooks
as subjects are capable of
that
deal with semiotics in music are sometimes thinking independently of the object-world.
bewildering or boring. Probably this has to do Peirce did not believe that there is an indepen-
dent human thought process. He observed that
with the fact that semiotics was initially a disci-
pline of linguistics and, therefore, it happenedthinking is always based in former experiences,
and since these experiences occur within an
that the questions asked in music were for a long
time derived from those asked in linguistics, environment - the object- world - human thought
such as, What does a sign represent? and, Whatis always dependent on, in the sense of related
is its meaning? When it became evident that into, an actual situation. Knowledge is based in a
history and accumulated through former experi-
music it is difficult to come to grips with repre-
sentation and meaning in semiotic terms, it was ences. From this perspective, the Cartesian view
even questioned whether music qualifies as of
a two different worlds - an active and, therefore,
sign system. Some attempts to find answers superior subject-world versus its surrounding,
have been lost in definitions that describe music passive and, therefore, inferior object-
as "a sign system without an object."8 Other, world - breaks down.
more interesting endeavors have addressed music A non-Cartesian view has implications for
with regard to different levels of the sign, or semiotics, which, in Peirce's day, mainly ad-
types of sign (such as the icon, the index, and dressed the semantic relationship between an
the symbol).9 object and its sign. Peirce called this semiotics
dyadic, since it investigates the relationship
II between only two members. He then relocated
the semiotic functions by putting the sign in a
The semiotic theory we shall examine here mediating role and introducing a third party
was developed by Swiss psychologist, Alfred which he called the "interprétant," the result of
Lang, who broadens the ground of semiotics.10 the semiotic process. In this approach, the term
He understands semiosis to be a general psycho- "subject" no longer appears, the person-subject is
logical and cultural principle, and does not indeed removed, and the semiotic process is
engage in traditional discussions about different viewed in terms of action, including these out-
kinds or qualities of signs. I will apply Lang's side of human action. The evolutionary or
theoretical framework to musical semiotic pro- developmental component Lang later decidedly
cesses and define music and music-related activi- claims is already intimated in Peirce's analysis
ties using his semiotic terms. My purpose in when he describes how the interprétant can
applying the method and specific terms of this initiate a subsequent semiotic process, and so on
approach is to identify and evaluate the differ- ad infinitunu
ences between the aesthetic and the praxial The rejection of the object-subject dichotomy
philosophy of music education. The results will leads us directly back to Elliott's criticism of the
suggest whether the differences we are dealing MEAE philosophy with its view of music as
with are significant. being an object outside of the individual. One
Lang's approach is closely related to Charles should add that in the domain of art-objects, the
S. Peirce's (1839-1914) triadic semiotics. Peirce division between subject- world and object- world
developed a triadic understanding as a reaction is not unfavorable toward the object; it may even

This content downloaded from 116.14.17.154 on Thu, 08 Aug 2019 16:32:55 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Maria B. Spychiger 35

be the opposite, in
A characteristic that
of Lang's theory is that thethe
regarded as sublime. Elliott,
traditional semiotic term "object" is not accept- ho
ly opposed to able
an in a strictattitude
non-Cartesian approach, because that
from the individual.
of its static character, and, even Thus,
more important, he
because of the implication that an object
non-Cartesian standpoint for is a f
of music education.
something material Non-Cartesia
and something "out there."
borne out inLang replaces "object" with
praxial the term "referent."
philosophy,
tion and Referents
goal, "music can be fleeting in character,
issuchsomet
as
tightly spoken words, gestures,
links music and and music, theas well as ind
Developmentslasting,
in such assemiotics
material things. Further, refer- aft
ents can be
up his triadic concept, for eperceived through different channels,
Morris's well e.g.,
knownauditory, visual, or tactile. Thesemiotic
referent is
Peirce' s termswhatwere
the interprétant refers notto - Lang's termyetfor th
enough, Morris the former
falls subject. It is important
back to understandinto
that unlike Peirce, Lang's interprétant holds
he calls the components of the the
mediating role;
ject," "subject," and "sign," an it is the interpreter of the referent
mines Peirce' s and creator of the sign, but instead of standing
transformatio
subject into a independently
general and managing things instance
from outside
process in (as in a Cartesian
favor of view), the it serves as old
a linkage dich
object and between the
subject, with itsother two semiotic components, the sep
world three together forming a triadic semiotic unit.
and subject-world, and
hierarchy. Lang also replaces the term "sign" with expres-
Now, one hundred years after Peirce, semiot- sions such as "présentant," sometimes "resul-
icians are no longer burdened with having to tant," and in older versions of his writings
justify a non-Cartesian view and do not have to "représentant." One could say the présentant
sort out as many theoretical confusions as earlier shows or carries the result of an encounter
thinkers had to;11 for instance, Lang can start between an interprétant and a referent. With this
directly from a non-Cartesian view and triadic we come to Lang's general definition: "Semiosis
semiotics. He applies Peirce' s functional idea of is the process of interpretation of a referent into
semiotics to the relation between organisms and a (re)presentant."13
their environment. As a first step, he creates two Lang calls the accumulated result of semiotic
categories of semiotic processes which specify processes, "structure formation." In the case of
the relation between the organism and its envi- ExtrO-semiosis, the formed structure is cul-
ronment:12 IntrO-semiosis for the impulses that ture,14 while in the case of IntrO-semiosis, we
come from the environment to the organism, and are speaking of knowledge, memory, emotion,
ExtrO-semiosis for the impulses that the organ- mood, inclination, or experience. In this frame-
ism gives to the environment. With respect to work, musical culture and musical knowledge are
human semiotic processes, and psychologically nothing more than and nothing less than the
speaking, IntrO-semiosis represents the area of outcomes of a special group of semiotic pro-
perception, while ExtrO-semiosis represents the cesses - musical semiotic processes. It also
area of action. Regarding musical semiotic becomes evident that there is no clear-cut differ-

processes, these categories identify listening as ence between musical semiotic processes and
an IntrO-semiotic process and musical ac- other semiotic processes, since an interprétant
tions - such as "Elliott's five" (performing, con- refers in most cases to sources that are not of

ducting, composing, arranging, improvising) - as pure origin. Rather, the sources are somehow
ExtiO-semiotic processes. mixed - a sound is combined with a word or a

This content downloaded from 116.14.17.154 on Thu, 08 Aug 2019 16:32:55 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 36 Philosophy of Music Education Review

related
gesture, or is shaped through devices, such environ-
a specific as music instruments,
concert
ment or technical device, and is halls,
thus musicnot libraries,
purelyagencies, music-
musical. I, therefore, prefer not to speak of
related technique, etc.
musical semiosis, but of musicLang believes thatsemiosis.
involved the four basic types of
semiotic thought,
This agrees with contemporary processes tend to such
form a genetic
as series,
as follows:
Wayne Bowman's suggestion "thatfromthe
IntrO-semioses
bound- (perceptual
aries that demarcate music processes) from various to IntrA-semioses
things-(psychological
not-music are not fixed, clear, or
processes in the stable," and
proper sense - cognition, emo-
"do not constitute autonomous, discrete do- tion, motivation), to ExtrO-semioses (generative
mains." or interpretive actional processes) to ExtrA-
There is a total of four categories, which semioses (cultural processes). Arranged this
Lang considers to be the basic types of semiotic way, the four types form a circle, "the semiotic
processes, or elementary semioses. To summa- function circle," around which the semiotic
rize: (1) IntrA-semiosis is what occurs within the processes move in their different phases: percep-
person (his or her psychological organization; tion-person-action-culture (and back to percep-
cognitive processes that account for motivation, tion). The ExtrA-semiotic phase has a special
emotion, plans, and ideas); (2) ExtrA-semiosis is place in that it is person-external. It is under-
what occurs outside of the person in the culture stood that the circle can unfold and close at any
(in the environment, including living beings and phase, according to the need and the nature of
their actions). Musical culture fits the category the analyses being undertaken. The four phases
of ExtrA-semiosis, and musical knowledge are the basis of evolution17 and the functions of
qualifies for the category of IntrA-semiosis. (3) life itself, as well as of learning, whether under-
IntrO-semiosis and (4) ExtrO-semiosis are the taken by individuals, groups, or cultures.
processes that intertwine the person with the The four types of semiosis have structural
culture or the environment. In psychological differences regarding the locality of referent,
terms, perception is an IntrO-semiotic process interprétant, and présentant. For instance, in
and action is an ExtrO-semiotic process. IntrO- IntrO-semiosis, the referent or source of the
semiotic or perceptional processes move from the semiotic process is outside (i.e., a sound, an
environment to the individual and accumulate as
object, a gesture), while it is inside in ExtrO-
development and knowledge, while the ExtrO- semiosis (i.e., a plan, a desire, an idea).18 It is
semiotic or actional processes move from the reversed with the présentant: IntrO-semiosis
individual to the environment and accumulate as
culminates inside the person as personal knowl-
culture.
edge and experience, while ExtrO-semiosis
In classifying16 the various meanings of culminates outside as culture. The most difficult
music within these four basic types of semioses, determination is the locality of the interprétant,
ExtrO-semiosis is the music that goes "out," that in the case of ExtrO-semiosis, it is at the pe-
is, all kinds of musical actions in the sense of riphery of the person, i.e., the hands that play the
generative processes, while IntrO-semiosis is the clarinet, the mouth and tongue that produce
concept for music that goes "in" by perception: musical vocal expression, the feet that push the
listening to music and listening for musical organ pedals, and so on, while in IntrO-semiosis,
sounds. What is processed and stored within the the interprétants are localized in brain structures
person, due to IntrA-semiotic processes, is that become active during musical perception.19
usually called musical experience, or musical Based on these theoretical elements, Lang's
knowledge. Finally, ExtrA-semiosis is represent- idea of semiosis as an omnipresent and ongoing
ed in the musical culture as musical works and
flow of présentants becoming new referents (in
their performers, as well as the many music-

This content downloaded from 116.14.17.154 on Thu, 08 Aug 2019 16:32:55 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Maria B. Spychiger 37

the case of IntrO-semiotic pr

musicianship provides "flow experience"25 and
interprétants"self-growth."
(in the These goals case of
are actually very
processes) for farther semioses
similar in their nature26 and are semiotically cen-
ent. "Zeichen tered
werdenin the same domain - the domain
aus of IntrA-Zeic
erzeugen ihrerseits semiosis: the person is addressed, and the pro-
Zeichen!™ -
from signs, they cesses that take place within the and
cause person, that is,cre
endless chains the and student's development.
nets.21 Thus, both philoso-
It is
Lang extends Peirce's phies qualify as being educational
evolution- they do not
Understanding say, for instance, that the goal is to increase
semiosis as thea ge
logical principle, quantity of musicians in our likes
Lang society, or growthto
and simple scheme and employment in the to music business.
psycho
A living being Oneis could expect
under that in the opposite some
area,
from its environment; it is "touched" or ExtrA-semiosis, more difference between the two
"moved," and this impact causes the living being philosophies would appear. ExtrA-semiosis is
to adjust, to order, to restructure its current the domain of musical culture, and Elliott criti-
organization. New actions result from this cizes MEAE for reducing musical culture to
reorganization.23 It is perfectly easy to put this musical works (preferably classical), which
general principle in semiotic terms: the impact, students of music education first have to admire
"a mover," is the referent (R); it finds "some- and to appreciate. Praxial philosophy, by com-
thing movable," an interprétant (I); this meeting parison, looks at musical culture as diverse
results in "being moved," the présentant (P). musical practices from which students in music
Sooner or later, P can become R or I for further learn interactively and to which they contribute.
semiotic processes. Everything is a potential Regarding this last point, Elliott surprisingly
source for semiotic processes, if, and this is does not follow through. From a decidedly
important, there is an interprétant. Lang calls performance-oriented music education we can
this basic structure of semiosis dialogic; the mi- . expect a considerable enhancement of the musi-
lieu in which semiotic processes occur is condi- cal culture - certainly a value worth mentioning.
tionally an affine milieu: a referent needs an What is the outcome of the comparison in
interprétant, otherwise it cannot be a referent. the person-culture intertwining processes - which
In summary, the semiotic principle is evolut- are the areas of ExtrO- and IntrO-semiosis, and,
ive-dialogic. Semiosis is a general principle on in a philosophic-educational context, those that
the level of the semiotic function circle as well are most in question? Elliott declares that
as on the level of the single semiotic process. MEAE, while focusing on listening to music,
leaves out the crucial part of making music. In
m terms of the semiotic circle, only IntrO-semiosis
is considered, while the category of ExtrO-
The aesthetic philosophy and the praxial semiosis is dismissed. If this is true, the MEAE
philosophy of music education can now besemiotic circle would be breached and, therefore,
compared in semiotic terms and located within could not function; it would only reach from the
Lang's semiotic function circle. culture into the person and then be stopped there.
Let us first return to the declared goals of the No wonder, says Elliott, that under this condition
two philosophies: aesthetic experience in MEAE music education struggles in public school
and musicianship in the praxial approach.curricula - the failure of the discipline was
Reimer specifies the outcomes of aestheticinherent in the philosophy of MEAE.27 In
experience as the experiences of "vitality of life"contrast, the semiotic function circle of praxial
and "beyondness,"24 while Elliott says thatphilosophy is complete. While giving a prior

This content downloaded from 116.14.17.154 on Thu, 08 Aug 2019 16:32:55 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 38 Philosophy of Music Education Review

going
weight to ExtrO-semiosis, the toward twelve
praxial on our imaginary clock
philosophy
face, moves "in" - since the next station in the
does not overlook IntrO-semiosis for Elliott
states that the development of listenership is ansemiotic circle is IntrA-semiosis, which is the
integrative part of enhancing musicianship. In place within the individual. By comparison, the
this sense, the circle unfolds from the child's or
praxial approach, which starts at three and heads
student's musical action to the musical culture, toward six, moves "out," toward culture and
environment. This configuration and the terms
goes on via listening to the child's inner musical
world, and from there in a new ExtrO-semiosis"IntrO" and "ExtrO" remind us of the old psy-
back into the culture. chological concept "introversion versus extrover-
It is at this point that a decisive correction sion," a concept that describes an individual's
must be made. Instead of looking at MEAE orientation either toward the inside or toward the
through the glasses of its challenger, we must outside, giving rise to two basic psychological
hear its own voice. Reimer says in his most types. The semiotic difference between an intro-
recent comment: "Elliott . . . succeeds in creat- verted, perceptive state and an extroverted,
ing a grotesque caricature of MEAE and pro- actional state is due to the different location of
grams of instruction built on it."28 In taking a the result (the présentant) in the semiotic pro-
look at MEAE practice, it indeed turns out that cess: inside the person in the case of an IntrO-
the image of an MEAE practice room in which semiotic process, outside - delivered to the envi-
children, for the most part, listen to music per- ronment - in the case of an ExtrO-semiotic
formed by someone else or sit at their tables process.
learning to write and read music and finally Reimer himself questioned the aesthetic
study scores, is totally inadequate. Instead we concept after he was confronted with Elliott's
find practice books of all kinds (songs, music criticism.29 Realizing that the label "aesthetic"
plays, dance) from the same authors who wrote for a philosophy of music education led to the
MEAE philosophical contributions, and school false attribution that music education would be
rooms with children who listen to music and limited to perception, he considered whether "to
actually perform. This means that we can readi- suggest that it is time we abandon the beast as
ly attribute ExtrO-semiosis to MEAE and close being moribund."30 But after summarizing the
the semiotic circle. MEAE also functions as a essential characteristics of aesthetic education he
whole. just could not do that. His strongest argument
The semiotic function circle of aesthetic for maintaining the concept - including its
philosophy can now be compared with that ofname - is that it is open toward the future and is
praxial philosophy more fairly. Using the meta-able to incorporate new developments, musical
phor of a clock face for orientation on the circle,as well as educational. Its true value is its agen-
I put IntrA-semiosis/musical experience atda, not its name, Reimer says,31 and in the final
twelve, ExtrO-semiosis/musical action at three, analysis: Music is an aesthetic topic.
ExtrA-semiosis/musical culture at six, and IntrO- Another perspective, the perspective of
semiosis/musical perception at nine o'clock. philosophy of education in general, should be
Clearly, the two philosophies focus on differentconsidered in comparing the two music educa-
places: at nine o'clock/IntrO-semiosis in the tional philosophies under discussion. While
aesthetic view, at three o'clock/ExtrO-semiosis inadopting a progressive educational spirit with
the praxial view. Both philosophies in practicerespect to their own approach, praxial philoso-
then move clockwise through all the functions, phers tend to attribute an essentialist approach to
accomplishing all four types of semioses. MEAE, but I believe there is little evidence of
Aesthetic philosophy, starting at nine and essentialist convictions in MEAE. Examining

This content downloaded from 116.14.17.154 on Thu, 08 Aug 2019 16:32:55 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Maria B. Spychiger 39

the praxialfind
Reimer again, we semiotic circleshim
- on the clockcon
face,
one starting at
ing his educational nine o'clock, the other at three
elaborations
writings, whereas
o'clock - are completethinkers
as they function in educa- s
Bagley or Robert
tional practice. Hutchins
I am afraid that this outcome does not de-
references for conservative vie
do serve the
not figure as label "significant difference."
sources inWhile Reim
think we are Elliott's
safe in
contribution saying
is original, up-to-date, and
education-philosophical
as such, welcome to the discipline, it doesorie not
aesthetic andqualify
the praxial
as a new philosophy. A major mislead- ap
contradict eaching other
factor in his theoretical
at construction
all, is thesin
assumption
also a frequently that the specific musical experience
employed sour
al principles inand Elliott's
educational goals for music education
book.32 (which
This brings us are
to not really
a different
further in aesthetic philosophy
aspec
and praxial philosophy)
rather than divides the can be reached
two only by ph
making music.
ing educators and researchers i A look at empirical materials
does not confirm this. Strong
taken an increasingly musical experienc-
progressiv
throughout the es can be made
past by listening todecades.
music as well as
by performing. We intuitively about
teaching is orientated know this from s
personal experience. For
nication, and action. example, there
The are re-
princi
become a generalports of studentseducational
who during their childhood had
unenjoyable or very
applied to all kinds of negative experiences in
academic
a philosophy making music
of music - say, in taking piano les-
educat
contemporary sons - and quit performing
unless it altogether
isandbased
forev-
er, but whoElliott
of doing. Indeed, nevertheless demonstrate
hasa love for no
but he seems to have
music.35 They developedoverlooke
their listening skills
classroom hasand also not
have strong musical experiences denied
by continu-
ments. ing to listen to music. It seems that there is not
necessarily a clear independence between IntrO-
IV and ExtrO-semiotic musical processes - music is
a verb and a noun.
If it is true that "music education is impor-
It turns out that we are not left with as many
tant
differences between the two philosophies as because music moves,"36 then the preceding
Elliott wants us to believe. The remaininganalysis of Reimer' s and Elliott's philosophies
difference is indeed philosophical: as Reimer' s has shown that this takes place on the way "in"
last word is "music is an aesthetic topic," Elliott as well as on the way "out" - IntrO-semiotically
says "music is a diverse human practice." To and ExtrO-semiotically, respectively. The semi-
repeat this in semiotic terms, the aesthetic philos- otic framework applied in this analysis helps us
ophy has its home in IntrO-semiosis, the praxial to think "around the clock." This, I hope, might
in ExtrO-semiosis.34 This is the essence of
also help to alter the kind of mindset that elabo-
rates concepts while ignoring the trivial fact that
difference between the two philosophies. As
shown earlier, however, both the aesthetic andpractice by far exceeds them.

This content downloaded from 116.14.17.154 on Thu, 08 Aug 2019 16:32:55 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 40 Philosophy of Music Education Review

NOTES

1. The term "praxial" was first introduced by Philip Kulturwissenschaft," in P. Rusterholz and M. Svilar,
Alperson, ''What Should One Expect from a Philoso- eds., Welt der Zeichen- Weh der Wirklichkeit (Bern:
phy of Music Education?" The Journal of AestheticPaul Haupt, 1993), 55-84, and A. Lang, "Non-Carte-
Education IS (1991): 215-242, and was accepted and sian Artefacts in Dwelling Activities: Steps towards a
adopted by David Elliott Semiotic Ecology," Schweizerische Zeitschrift für
2. David Elliott, "Structure and Feeling in Jazz: Rethink-Psychologie 52 (1993): 138-147.
ing Philosophical Foundation," Council for Research 1 1. Although there is still much struggle since we inherit
in Music Education Bulletin no. 95 (1987): 13-38. Indichotomic thought guiding our perception and infor-
the final paragraph of this initial paper, Elliott con- mation process, but also represented in our verbal
cludes that "it seems reasonable to suggest that, in the organization, that is, in language itself.
important case of jazz, music education's current 12. In the case of human semiotic processes, the organism
axioms of musical structure and musical affective is a person, and the environment is his or her cultural
experience require rethinking. Recall, however, that environment The terms "environment" and "culture"
axioms which are insufficient in any important case are sometimes used synonymously throughout this
are usually insufficient in general. Moreover, the paper.
axioms isolated for criticism and remodeling in this 13. Lang, "Non-Cartesian Artefacts," 143.
paper are not, in fact, independent Rather, they are 14. In one article, Lang calls culture "the external soul"
interconnected threads in a single philosophical web. and makes a key statement for a psychology that is
Thus, philosophical reconstruction may be the real task aware of this, that is, for a psychology that looks at
before us," 32. human beings as cultural beings. Lang, "Kultur als
3. Elliott, Music Matters: A New Philosophy of Music 'externe Seele' - eine semiotisch-ökologische Perspek-
Education (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995). tive," in C. Allesch, E. Billmann-Mahecha, & A. Lang,
4. Ibid., 27 ff. eds., Psychologische Aspekte des kulturellen Wandels
5. More in detail, aesthetic experience addresses an (Wien: Verlag des Verbandes der wissensch.
experience that is expressive of life, an intrinsic, Gesellschaften Österreichs, 1991), 9-30. It is a Ger-
disinterested, and distant perception, reaching into man paper with an English abstract.
deeper layers of the personality. A successful aesthetic 15. Wayne Bowman, "Sound, Society and Music 'Proper'"
perception causes an aesthetic reaction, which is Philosophy of Music Education Review 2 no. 1: 15.
involved, outgoing, responsive. An aesthetic experi- Bowman even considers that "there may be no such
ence is characterized by beyondness, that is, it goes 'thing' as music, only a constellation of doings with
beyond the actual situation and thus has intrinsic value sound we find convenient to loosely call music." This
and a transcendent quality. Bennett Reimer, A Philos- standpoint, on the other hand, questions in a way
ophy of Music Education (Englewood Cliffs, NJ.: Howard Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences
Prentice Hall, 1989). (following this theory, the distinct intelligenc-
6. Elliott refers mainly to Nicholas Wolterstorff and es - among them the musical intelligence - are reflect-
Francis Sparshott ed as distinct brain processes).
7. This is so because there are many cultures and peoples 16. This is the goal of this paper, but I want to make sure
and within these numerous groups of people who have that it is also understood that this semiotic terminology
developed innumerable musical practices. is also an excellent means and method for
8. This state of semiotics in music is represented in P. investigating all kinds of music-related processes
Faltin and H.-P. Reinecke, eds., Musik und Verstehen cultures.
(Köln: Arno Volk Verlag, 1973), and also in W. 17. With regard to the evolutionary element, we s
Steiner, ed., The Sign in Music and Literature (Austin: speak of a function spiral rather than a function ci
University of Texas Press, 1981). 18. The referent in ExtrO-semiosis in an individual's idea
9. Vladimir Karbusicky, Grundriss der musikalischen or a plan that derives from an oriented, intentional
Semantik (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesell- state of mind in general. Thus it becomes very
schaft). Cf. also Maria Spychiger, Mehr Musikunt- obvious that and how semiotic processes occur in
erricht an den öffentlichen Schulen? (Hamburg: Verlag chains, or in a series: it is likely that orientation is the
Dr. Kovac, 1995). result of an IntrO-semiotic process, where the referent
10. Alfred Lang, "Zeichen nach innen, Zeichen nach was outside (in the sense of a stimuli).
aussen - eine semiotisch-ökologische Psychologie als 19. A neuronal control and tuning function is, of course,

This content downloaded from 116.14.17.154 on Thu, 08 Aug 2019 16:32:55 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Maria B. Spychiger 41

also active in ExtiO-semiosis,

31. Ibid., 213. Interestingly, Reimer's vision is truewhic
for
interprétant is not exclusively
the circumstances local
in Europe: the aesthetic concept for
ery of the person, but
music education also
incorporated inside
the development toward
biologically given, as
more action-orientationwell
in teaching and aslearning. refi
The
and learning processes. Also,
actual paradigm in music education in
is "action-oriented t
semiosis, the locality of
teaching and learning" and stands asthe inte
such within the
complicated than frame
I ofexplained
aesthetic education philosophy. This inframe th
the neuronal has been moved by the same
processes in peoplepercepti
who established
stimuli situation.it two
For decades ago. As an example I mention we
example,
ently (on a fullyChristoph Richter, "Das musikalische Kunstwerk als
unconscious lev
whether we have Gegenstand
only der Musikpädagogik"
the in S. Helms, R.
acoustic s
we also have the Schneider,
visual & R. Weber, Kompendium
stimuli der Musikpädag-
(list
listening
and seeing ogik (Kassel: Gustav
it,Bosse Verlag, 1995).
respectivel
the
interprétant 32. Also can,
Mihalyi Csikzsentmihalyi.
partly, be l
IntrO-semiosis. 33. For example, foreign languages. Before this change of
20. Lang, "Eine paradigm, students were taught tofur
Semiotik read, write, anddie
Psychologie für learn the grammar,
die while speaking was often neglect-in
Semiotik," L
über den 38. ed. Contemporary teaching,
Kongress der to the contrary,
Deutsch focuses
Psychologie in on speaking actions
Trier 1992 from the very beginning of the
(Götting
666. class.

21. This shows us 34.from

Reimer, in his comment on Elliott CDavid Elliott's
another side
is inadequate in a 'New' Philosophy of Music Education"),
semiotic created the
theory,
that human beings term MEPEas to label this philosophy "music education
interprétant
are for the most as performancepart
education." conside
selves - they are35. A very
theinteresting results
collection of materials regarding
of this for
cesses. Scores, musical
topic was done by Erna Ronca, instrume
published in part in
"things" of Ronca, Fis, Schätzchen,
whatever 6 Klaviergeschichten (Einsied-
degree of co
virtual objects, eln, Schweiz: Daimon
such asVerlag,music1995). scho
in an opera, are36. not
Spychiger, "Rationales
separatedfor Music Education," The obje
more the result ofJournal accumulated
of Aesthetic Education 29 no. 4 (1995): 53-63. hum
actions, each partI still
of stand by this
this statement, although it may, outside
accumulat
a semiotic Drocess.
-
of the context of the paper, sound a little simplistic.
22. T
even
of v
23.
cent
24. R
25. O
Mih
26. Both intend "to stretch the self." The latter are
Elliott's words, in a speech on March 14, 1996, at the
University of Louisville, Kentucky.
27. Maria B. Spychiger, Mehr Musikunterricht an den
öffentlichen Schulen?, 235, note 130.
28. Reimer, "David Elliott's 'New' Philosophy of Music
Education: Music for Performers Only," Council for
Research in Music Education Bulletin no. 128 (1996):
59-89.
29. Elliott, "Music Education as Aesthetic Education: A
Critical Inquiry," The Quarterly Journal of Music
Teaching and Learning 2 no. 3 (1991): 48-66.
30. Reimer, "Essential and Nonessential Characteristics of
Aesthetic Education," The Journal of Aesthetic Educa-
tion 25 (1991): 193-214, 206.

This content downloaded from 116.14.17.154 on Thu, 08 Aug 2019 16:32:55 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms