Scott Jeppesen

Abstract

Throughout history, the importance of improvisation to the development of music is undeniable. While improvisation is known to be key to the continuation of the aural traditions surrounding folk music, it was also a driving force behind the treatises that defined our very system of music notation. Outside of jazz curriculums, however, improvisation has become increasingly rarer in music education since the early eighteenth century. Looking at music as a language, this causes some serious problems. Without a strong oral tradition, languages become less creative and cease to evolve. Western classical musicians have placed such a strong emphasis on the written and read aspects of music that they have neglected the aural tradition that created the tools they use to create it. The shift in focus within an ensemble from performer to conductor has removed much of the creative input of the music student. As a language, music must be spoken to endure. As such, incorporation of improvisation into the daily practices of younger musicians is vital.

Keywords: improvisation, aural, instrumental teaching, language, music literacy, music fluency, creativity, listening

Where Have All The Improvisers Gone?: A Look At A Neglected Tradition

The importance of improvisation in music is ineffable. There are traces of improvised music throughout history. Because of its nature and the relative youth of recording technology, however, improvised music does not leave behind as lengthy a record as that of printed music. Improvisation was an important part of musical life up through the Baroque era yet saw a dramatic decline in stature at the dawn of the Classical era in favor of fully composed music. It was not until the early part of the twentieth century in jazz that improvisation, once again, became prevalent in western art music. This prolonged absence is peculiar because improvisation continues to be important in almost every other culture. In India, music is mostly improvised using a system of pitch (raga) and rhythmic patterns (tala) much the same as the iso-rhythmic motets (colour and talea) of the early fifteenth century. Improvising musicians during the Renaissance were often featured as a part of a larger ensemble, adding improvised lines above a written composition. These improvisers held to the same strict melodic and harmonic rules as composers. Whereas jazz musicians follow guidelines defined by the harmony of a given form, improvisers of the Renaissance would have followed the rules of counterpoint as defined by the current treatise¹. However, due to the lack of a written part, improvisers possessed more rhythmic freedom than that of their composer counterparts. Composers adhered to the boundaries of a lesser evolved system of notation.

Music was passed on almost entirely in an aural tradition. Until the late fourteenth century, and even into the Renaissance, most musicians performed without written music². The absence of notation made early music a much more performer-centric art as opposed to modern composer and conductor focused ensembles. As such, it was the performers who were driving the evolution of notation systems. Composers’ desire to notate what improvising musicians were already doing is what led to the revisions of treatises and further development of notation. It wasn’t until treatises of the early 18th century that composers were able to notate most of what improvisers performed. At that point, Western music fell under the semi-exclusive control of composers and conductors.

If improvisation has played such an important part in the development of music, why has it been relegated to a novelty role? How is it that a skill that was so widely practiced by musicians of the Renaissance has become a peripheral practice only regularly used by musicians in jazz and popular music? Unfortunately, the composer-centric mantra surrounding most western art music has pushed improvisation aside and deemphasized the aural tradition that existed within music throughout its history. Furthermore, the very idea of improvisation is often viewed as a threat to the ideology surrounding our western classical music and those in control³. This deemphasis has manifested itself in our music education system creating a cycle of students deprived of learning how to improvise and teachers unsure of how to teach it.

Creativity

Unlike every other discipline in the arts, music is arguably the only one that is not synonymous with creativity⁴. Students studying writing, dance, or visual arts are almost always asked to produce a creative product of their own. In music education, curricula focus almost entirely on music literacy, or the ability to read music. Students are taught to regurgitate the same repertoire time and time again⁵. Composition and improvisation are the only practices within music where the sole goal is to “make” new music⁶. A study of music, as art, is incomplete without the holistic approach that implores students to explore all aspects of the discipline including those of creation.

An exclusive focus on reading is detrimental to students in that it serves as a barrier to creativity. Requiring students to only play what exists in written form removes any personal aspect and discourages listening⁷. Performing written music does require a certain level of listening to maintain balance, intonation, and phrasing. However, so many compositional elements are dictated by the written work and do not require that musicians listen for and make judgments on melody, harmony, dynamics, and articulation. That is not to say that they should not, but it is often considered an advanced skill for pre-college level students. Additionally, when musical judgments are required for a given performance, those decisions are made by the conductor, or teacher, removing most, if not all, creative participation from the musicians causing music to become “re-creative” instead of “creative”⁸.

Providing students with a creative outlet increases their sense of ownership of the material⁹¹⁰. Added personal investment in the creative product helps students to achieve a state of “flow” adding to their engagement in the subject and their enjoyment of the overall experience. Students participating in improvisation are far more accustomed to creating flow¹¹. Improvising gives students a sense of presence and importance in an activity. As such, students develop a stronger feeling of responsibility for the output¹². Furthermore, it demands that they listen to everything going on around them¹³. Nurturing the students enjoyment and engagement in their musical studies is of utmost importance to foster a culture of student-centered learning¹⁴. Providing them with avenues for creativity and self-expression does exactly that.

The encouragement of creative exercises helps to develop further creative thinking in students through the use of experimentation and reflection¹⁵. Improvisation is the only musical activity that allows students the opportunity to experiment freely. The aspect of improvisation that creates such value is that students have the ability to assess and reflect on the success of such experiments immediately. Composition, while certainly creative, is not as immediately open to assessment as improvisation. Many attempts have been made to categorize the creative activities existing within music¹⁶¹⁷. I feel that most link improvisation too closely with the act of performance. Viewing improvisation as laying at the cross-section of comp and analysis illuminates the vast skills required of such an endeavor.

Composition

A composer, at any level, must imagine different combinations of sounds. The combinations of sounds group to form a new composition. With the most definitive creative product of any musical activity, the composition can be passed from musician to musician.

Analysis

Almost every musical activity outside of composition lies solely in the realm of analysis. Analysis is the act of listening and thinking about music. Everyone does this to some degree when receiving music. A performing musician must also listen and consider the music happening alongside the performance. The act of pressing keys or hitting an instrument is not creative. It is only how those actions fit in with the music that makes them creative. Emotional elements of performance are primarily driven by the sound in which they exist. For example, if a piece of music instructs the performer to play at a forte, the performer must imagine how loud that forte should be to achieve the desired effect.

Improvisation

Reimer argues that the creation of an improvisation is “the very act of performing it”¹⁸. The creative product, to the listener, may appear to be that performance. But, as I will discuss later in this article, the cognitive skills employed in the creation of the improvisation occur before the performance. It is true that the performance and the creation are happening simultaneously but to indicate that the performance and the creation are the same is to negate any of the creative thought that went into the performance. Improvisation is the marriage of two distinctly different categories. First, improvisations bear most of the same elements as a composition; the same rules of harmony, melody, and rhythm apply. Improvisation varies from composition in that it also requires analysis. The performance aspect of the improvisation is, instead, the beginning of the analysis phase. At this point, the composition-like participation is complete and the improviser can now see, and witness, the fruits of their work.

Cognition

Improvisation is essentially spontaneous composition¹⁹. The improviser has at their disposal the same tools as a composer: rhythm, melody, harmony, dynamics, and articulation. The primary difference between an improviser and a composer is that the improviser’s creative process must be done spontaneously and without the option for review or edit. In other words, while a composer may spend weeks or months on a piece of music, the improvising musician gets mere fractions of a second. It is precisely this trait that forces students to engage in the moment while performing an improvised piece of music; it demands heightened levels of focus, listening, and cognition. We can identify several cognitive skills that are present in all scenarios involving improvisation: (a) decision-making, (b) anticipation, and (c) structural thought²⁰. Additionally, divergent thinking and risk-taking can be argued as complimentary traits to this list that apply to multiple skills²¹.

Decision Making

Performers make many decisions during an improvisation. The improvising musician is in control of all aspects of the music. Good decisions must always take into account the other factors participating in the experience. If there are other musicians, then decisions about what comes next should be based on what the improviser has experienced or is currently experiencing²². The improviser’s perception of these events is what guides their ability to make decisions.

While making decisions, there is always some degree of risk-taking involved. The real question here is in how comfortable an improviser is in taking those risks. Improvising can help to build confidence over time in students’ willingness to take risks further adding to the benefit by providing students the experience of learning through failure.

Anticiptation

Improvisation demands a high level of anticipation. Especially while performing with other musicians, the dialogical nature of improvisation requires that musicians, at least, attempt to anticipate how the current musical moment will evolve. Judging by the music that has been created so far, what can the improviser infer will be the next direction for the music? To this, the improviser should employ divergent thinking to consider the many pathways the music could take.

Structural Thought

Incorporating notions about cultural expectations of music, the improviser must take into account notions of form, cadence, and harmony. Improvisers are responsible for determining how a musical event will commence, develop, and conclude. On a much smaller scale, improvisers must become aware of every musical unit from the most diminutive motivic element to the overarching structure of a piece. The ability to breakdown and define formal elements is further beneficial to students in that they can begin to develop a stronger understanding of the role that structure plays within music.

Music As A Language

Many claim that music is a “universal language,” a claim often disputed. Reimer stipulates that to be classified as a language, a message must first be created. The originator of that message must then encode that message into a set of symbols and give that encoded message to another person. If that person can decode the symbols and understand the message, then the form of communication can be called a language²³. It seems a common theme amongst philosophers that music communicates but is not a language. However, improvisers use sounds as their system of symbols to communicate their message²⁴. Diminishing music’s legitimacy as a language shouldn’t occur because of the certainty of interference in the transference of the message. We should rather consider the notion that the language is merely transmitting a different type of message.

In his dissertation, Resonances: Exploring improvisation and its implications for music education, Jared Burrows notes that music does not contain the same level of functional use as most languages. For example, in most languages it is quite simple to state something like, “It is cold outside. Bring your coat.” Transmission of a concrete message is not so easily done with music²⁵.

Music carries the same challenge that comes with most artistic works: interpretation. Most functional languages are relatively concrete. If two people understand the same language, they can usually communicate with little confusion. With music, this is different. Two accomplished musicians, who may have played together for years, can attempt to communicate with drastically varying degrees of success. Understanding the same language does not guarantee conceptual understanding. The problem is that music doesn’t possess enough consistency or reliability to offer the same level of functionality as most languages.

While music may not serve the needs of literal communication as well as other verbal vocabularies, it is undeniable that music can be used to communicate. As Burrows states, “language and music can help us to bring outside what is inside”²⁶. Languages, like English, are literal languages while music is an emotional language. However, without asking students to improvise, we aren’t giving them an outlet to communicate their emotions with the language.

Continuing with the emotional language analogy, composing is writing while improvising is speaking. If this is true, then the absence of improvisation from most music curricula is even more perplexing. More specifically, improvisation is a dialogue. Improvisation allows musicians to reveal spontaneously inner thoughts and feelings in a collaborative activity with others²⁷. The dialogical aspect of music is what helps to develop divergent thinking so that students can handle the individual and “inherit imperfection” of improvisatory situations²⁸.

Music Literacy

Music Literacy, as defined by Lois Choksy is “the ability to read, write, and think music”²⁹. Strangely omitted from this definition is “speak” or “play.” In a practice entirely based on sound there is no mention of sound in this definition of music literacy. There are, of course, some severe problems with this.

In her 2007 article, Toward a New Understanding: Music Literacy and Orality in Music Education, Marlene Nolet notes some issues with the omission of any oral element within the concept of music literacy. By placing written music above all others, we create a separation from the human connection between the song and the performance removing the experience and the emotion from the music. We may, in repeat performances, add our interpretation of the emotion behind a piece but it can never be the same as the original connection between the composer and their experience that inspired the piece. That connection can only transfer aurally. By placing such an emphasis on the literary aspect of music in an attempt to preserve those works that are of most importance to us we have risked severing them from their very soul.

Music Fluency

Choksy later points out that the foundational skills of music literacy are much broader than the initial definition involving reading, writing, and thinking music. These skills include singing, moving, musical memory, inner hearing, reading, writing, and improvising³⁰. It is in this new view that we find that the elements of creation (singing, writing, and improvising) receiving more emphasis. These, in turn, help to create a better foundation for music fluency. Music fluency is essentially the ability to fully anticipate what music will sound like while playing an instrument³¹. Music fluency is significant because the concept now begins to tie together multiple elements of performing music, rather than just reading. To gain better fluency, a musician must develop their listening capabilities alongside the physical requirements of their instrument. With a trained ear, musicians are better performers, listeners, and readers. Gaining the ability to forecast what a given piece will sound like can aid in their capacity to read that music accurately thus increasing the musician’s musical literacy. Acknowledging the importance of such audiation reveals that the best way to improve a student’s abilities concerning musical literacy would be to focus on their fluency: writing and improvisation. These skills help to increase music fluency because they require the musician to account for all of the aspects of music while maintaining an accurate image of the music before it has become a reality.

Curricula that is more inclusive of the creative aspects of music would bring it more in line with other language-based disciplines. Language classes would never consider a student fluent who could read but not write. Sadly, most discussion about music fluency is remiss of including discussion of writing and speaking. Esther D’Agrosa defines fluency as “the ability to read a text accurately and quickly”³². While continuing to discuss the practice of reading aloud, there is no mention of the ability to formulate new ideas in the language. A conversation, which is improvisatory in nature, is crucial to language acquisition³³. Much more satisfactory, Jan Steele argues there are four basic requirements for fluency in music or other second languages:

1. Imitation

2. Development of a vocabulary

3. Understanding of syntax

4. Personalization of one’s speech

The first three in this list can develop through reading. However, a student cannot possibly develop a personalized voice without exposure to improvisation or composition³⁴.

Thinking Music

The other aspect of music literacy that we have yet to address is that of thinking music. Thinking music connects more closely with the elements of creation than it does with reading. When a child learns a language, it is almost always learned as a spoken practice first. In fact, one does not usually learn to read a language until they have been speaking that language for years. However, for some reason, most musicians experience a drastically different approach when learning music. Beginning music students are usually taught to read music before they are ever actually taught to “speak” it. In fact, many students go through their entire music experience without ever learning how to “speak.” It is possible that neglecting the spoken, or conversational, aspect of music, adversely effects the other elements of the language.

The value of context is a cornerstone of the famed Suzuki Method for music education. The Suzuki Method teaches music to students in a manner mimicking the way that students learn any other language. Students are first introduced to music aurally from birth. The method adheres to the concept that familiarity with the sound of a language facilitates the progression to speaking and reading the language. Suzuki students first begin playing instruments at two to two and a half years old. Reading is not a skill that is studied until the student has achieved an acceptable level of proficiency³⁵. The premise surrounding curriculum for Suzuki students encourages listening and creativity in a non-competitive and positive environment³⁶.

Problems And Implementation

Why is it that students are so rarely taught improvisation once they have reached more advanced levels of music? There are several reasons:

1. Band classes are too big. It is challenging to keep students involved.

2. There is not enough time in rehearsal.

3. Educators aren’t taught to improvise and therefore cannot teach students the skill.

4. Students are afraid of playing by themselves.

While all of these points provide definite hurdles, they are not insurmountable. Music educators can incorporate improvisation into the daily warm-up routine. Instead of playing the traditional unison major scale, the class can participate in exercises utilizing improvisation. Students and teachers are wary, however, of jumping into a free improvisation. At school, students are entrenched in a system of structure and answers that are dualistic. Asking them to shed that without practice would be setting them up for great difficulty. Instead, the teacher can create a structure surrounding the improvisation that limits the number of possibilities for the improviser but also enhances other musical skills essential to their repertoire³⁷.

Adding Boundaries

A director might provide the students with a set of pitches but allow the students to improvise the rhythm. Or, the rhythm is provided, and the students can improvise the pitches. Extensive use of call and response techniques can also prove very beneficial to creating a structure around the improvisational exercise. Examples of these are:

Echo - In an echo exercise, the teacher, or another student can improvise a rhythm or melody and another student can play that figure back by ear.Echo exercises promote greater listening and create a connection from sounds to physical actions on the instrument.

Call and Response - In a question and answer activity, an individual can play a melodic or rhythmic figure, a “call,” which can then be answered by another student. Then the same “call” is repeated but answered differently by the next student. A practical approach may be to define the “call” using a melodic fragment taken from a piece in the students' repertoire.

Question and Answer - This activity is very similar to “Call and Response” but in reverse order. In this instance, it is the question that changes while the answer remains constant.

Drone Improvisation - Have the band hold out a tonic pitch. Above that pitch, students can take turns improvising. The students who are not currently improvising would be playing the drone. This approach achieves several things. It encourages listening for intonation, awareness of who has the current melodic part, and eases fears of playing alone since the improvising student is now accompanied³⁸.

Ostinato - Similar to drone improvisation, the teacher can suggest parts for all but those currently improvising. The parts should serve as a background and offer consistent rhythmic, harmonic, and/or melodic support. This activity is beneficial to students in that they don’t feel so exposed further building their confidence.

Improvising on Scales - The teacher provides a scale for students to use for improvisation. Common scaled for beginning improvisers can be major scales, minor scales, pentatonic scales, or collections of notes from a piece in the ensembles repertoire.

Improvising Over a Piece - Utilize an excerpt from the group’s repertoire eliminating all melodic lines. Effectively, this leaves just the “backgrounds.” Have those instruments play their parts while allowing the others to explore improvisation with it. This approach can be modified to blend with the ostinato exercise.

These examples are a small starting point that can begin to incorporate some improvisational activities into the ensemble’s daily routine.

Groupings

Depending on the age of students, they may possess anxiety over the thought of improvising alone in front of their friends. Dealing with this is not at all difficult and can lead to some wonderfully creative moments. Discuss the idea of musical conversations and dialog with your students. Point out the way that verbal conversation occurs and note the way that the same interaction is achievable in music. Starting with small groups, ask your students to have a musical conversation. The size and instrumentation of the groups can vary. From my experience, it often helps to pair the most apprehensive students with instruments of extremely different ranges. This approach provides them with support, so they avoid feeling swallowed up by an instrument that sounds too closely to their own. The technique also gives them comfort and allows the teacher to hear the individual sounds better.

Use this concept to form an entire piece by adding and removing instruments mid-conversation. Perhaps begin with students on flute, tuba, and snare drum. After they have dialogued for a time, introduce a saxophone and a French horn. Even the students who aren’t playing become engaged in the activity as they wonder when it will be their turn.

With any of these exercises, it is imperative that a discussion happens afterward. How did the students feel about it? What could they have done differently? Ask them to find parallels between their musical conversation and a verbal dialogue.

Conclusion

While the importance of improvisation throughout the history of music is apparent, it is not clear why the omission of such practices is standard in music education. Despite the role that it could play in helping to further students’ abilities in all aspects of music literacy and music fluency, improvisation is still viewed as a peripheral skill by many in conventional music education. Educators still receive little to no training in improvisation. We must remedy this deficiency before we see significant change³⁹. The culture surrounding most band and choral programs throughout the United States focuses on winning competitions and scoring high on festivals. As such, pressure from parents and administrators on music educators will do nothing to encourage a change of mentality towards a more creative classroom.

As much as music advocates resist arguments for music education that focus on how music will improve students’ achievement in other disciplines, improvisation should not be solely looked at as a means of improving a student's abilities in other areas of music. However, improvisation can, with the right effort, be used to play a significant role in the development of young musicians and show direct benefits to their abilities to listen, read, write, and think music. Improvisation should be considered an essential part of a holistic approach to music education instead of relegated to a peripheral role.

While this article has focused on reasons for the inclusion of improvisation in music curricula based off of music as a language and music literacy, there is much more research that can be done to show the benefits of developing improvisatory skills concerning social behavior, confidence, and overall musicality. It stands to reason that treating music as we would any other language, either literal or emotional, would facilitate its retention and encourage further imagination and creativity. Incorporation of improvisational techniques into the daily routine can help build individuals confidence, create more of a collaborative team atmosphere, and, most importantly, provide a fun and interactive way of exploring music.