There are basics to almost any field of endeavor. Let’s take
a look at basketball, for example. I’m certainly no basketball player, so that
makes me uniquely qualified to write about it.
I am fairly certain that things such as dribbling, throwing
a ball, catching it and being able to get a ball into the hoop (I do remember a
thing called the ‘layup’) would all qualify as ‘basics’ in basketball. There
are probably at least fifty or more other things that are basics that I’m
unaware of, not being a pro basketball player, as I’ve said.
I would guess that, when basketball players practice, they
drill some of these basics, especially if they are newer to the game. Then,
having all these basics under their belt, that is to say these basic skills
have become more or less second nature, the players play the game, using each
of the skills where needed with intention and focus now on playing and winning
the game.
What do you suppose the reaction would be to a player who
only dribbled the ball up and down the court during a play-off game? Well first he’d have a red-faced coach
yelling at him to ‘pass’ and ‘shoot,’ among other things and then he’d find
himself warming a bench pretty quickly.
The coach would ask what the heck was wrong with him and
he’d say ‘well, I thought dribbling was the game.’
No, dribbling’s not the game.
I use this example to try and show what happens when people
fail to take into account how a particular skill applies to what they are trying
to accomplish.
This is quite a problem, especially in music. Very often,
especially in past times, people have tended to make a sort of Holy Grail out
of music theory. It’s true that some musicians of the snob variety have piled
complexities upon complexities to try and show superiority in their genre of
music and this is all just silliness.
This has damaged pedagogy (music teaching) in the recent
past and people and society in general have suffered for it. The diverse
musical genres are not that different because they all use the same musical
system.
The trick is not to make a separate study out of theory but
to see how it applies and use just enough to get the ball down the court to the
hoop.
Let’s take note reading, for example. You ask any high level
musician ‘what are notes?’ and they will tell you that notes are just symbols
that literally point the direction you go to play a piece of music. Notes are
not like the hieroglyphs in the Egyptian Book of the Dead.
Now because certain pedagogues were content to leave note
reading almost purely over in the realm of theory, people struggled with this,
looking at a note, figuring it out and then finding it on the instrument and
this is all extra thought processing that is not part of playing music. Students
became frustrated and gave up.
In answer to this, people came up with ‘new’ teaching
systems that did away with theory. Well, this is ‘throwing the baby out with
the bathwater.’
Whether you like it or not, putting notes down on a printed
page is still the most prominent way of conveying music.
The answer, as I’ve said, is seeing how to apply music
theory. In the case of note reading, it’s just there to point the direction up
or down (the only two directions in music,) and also to let you know how many
beats a note should get.
Of course you should also look at how much you are going to be using note reading. If you intend to go into jazz, you might not be using note
reading that much, but you will need to know about chords and scales.
People make a big deal of how famous artists such as The
Beatles didn’t read music, but this shouldn’t lead one to think they were
musically ignorant as they had a very large chord vocabulary that they worked
from.