!!! !! ! !!!!!Title:!From!Tsars!to!Whales:!Dmitry!Kabalevsky!and!Russian!Music!Education!!!Author(s):!Jon!Becker,!Marina!Goldin,!and!Ludmilla!Leibman!!Source:!Becker,!J.,!Goldin,!M.,!&!Leibman,!L.!(1993,!Fall).!From!tsars!to!whales:!Dmitry!Kabalevsky!and!Russian!music!education.!The$Quarterly,!4(3),!pp.!39K58.!(Reprinted!with!permission!in!Visions$of$Research$in$Music$Education,$16(4),!Autumn,!2010).!Retrieved$from$http://wwwCusr.rider.edu/~vrme/!!

It$ is$ with$ pleasure$ that$ we$ inaugurate$ the$ reprint$ of$ the$ entire$ seven$ volumes$ of$ The!Quarterly! Journal! of! Music! Teaching! and! Learning.! ! The$ journal$ began$ in$ 1990$ as$ The!Quarterly.! ! In$ 1992,$with$ volume$3,$ the$name$ changed$ to$The!Quarterly! Journal! of!Music!Teaching!and!Learning!and$continued$until$1997.$ $The$journal$contained$articles$on$issues$that$were$timely$when$they$appeared$and$are$now$important$for$their$historical$relevance.$$

For$ many$ authors,$ it$ was$ their$ first$ major$ publication.$ $ Visions! of! Research! in! Music!Education$will$publish$facsimiles$of$each$issue$as$it$originally$appeared.$$Each$article$will$be$a$separate$pdf$file.$$Jason$D.$Vodicka$has$accepted$my$invitation$to$serve$as$guest$editor$for$

the$ reprint$ project$ and$ will$ compose$ a$ new$ editorial$ to$ introduce$ each$ volume.$ $ Chad$

Keilman$is$the$production$manager.$$I$express$deepest$thanks$to$Richard$Colwell$for$granting$

VRME$permission$to$reCpublish$The!Quarterly$in$online$format.$$He$has$graciously$prepared$an$introduction$to$the$reprint$series.!

Volume IV, Number .3 39

Frotll Tsars To Whales:Drrritr-y Kabalevsky AndRussian Music Education

By Jon Becker, Marina Goldin,and Ludnlilla Leiblllan

Ask which twentieth-century composerscontributed to music education andcertain names come quickly to mind:

Carl Orff, Zoltan Kodaly, Heitor Villa-Lobos,and Leonard Bernstein. These composersdeveloped innovative approaches to musiceducation and the education of music teach-ers which have become influential beyondthe borders of their native lands of Germany,Hungary, Brazil, and the u.S.A. Bernstein'stelevised educational concert broadcasts cer-tainly inspired many in America and abroad.It is unlikely that many Western music edu-

cators would nominate the Soviet composerDmitry Borisovich Kabalevsky to this pan-theon of renowned composers-educators.Born in St. Petersburg on December 30,1904, Kabalevsky is best known in theformer Soviet Union as the composer of op-

eras, cantatas, and vocal works; his reputa-tion in the West is based on the ColasBruegnon Overture, Piano Concerto No.1,and various other works for piano, but healso contributed substantially to music teach-ing and learning. Remeta (974), however,makes only brief mention of Kabalevsky, al-though the composer helped Remeta arrangevisits to various types of music education in-stitutions in Moscow, Leningrad, and Kiev.!Even the New Groves Dictionary of Music andMusicians (980) provides only a glimpse ofKabalevsky as a music educator, with a single,rather understated sentence: "Almost as influ-ential in the USSRare his activities as ateacher, administrator, and writer" (McAllister,1980, p. 761).Kabalevsky had a remarkable and lasting

impact on his country's system of music edu-

About The Authors: The overview of Sovietgeneral and music education was written by JonBecker, who also coordinated the organization andwriting of the entire article. He has served on thefaculty of the Oconomowoc (\VI) Public Schools,Ripon College (\VI), and Westminster Choir College(NJ) and is now an arts/education consultant basedin Interlochen, MI. He delivered a paper on Sovietand American educational theories at the 1990 ISMESeminar in Leningrad.The section entitled "Toward Children Thinking in

Music" and large portions of "Friends and Foes" werewritten by Marina Goldin, a former member of thefaculty in the Children's Music Schools of St. Peters-burg who now teaches music in Our Little Friends ofChildren's Castle Day Care Center and Merkas BnosHigh School in Brooklyn,:\!Y. She also contributedto the section "Three \~hales in the Basement."Ludmilla Leibman, author of the section entitled

"Don't Be Afraid'," was a leader of the Children's andTeen-ager's Music Club (under the auspices of the

Leningrad Composers Club), taught solfeggio andharmony at the Leningrad Conservatory, and alsotaught solfeggio and music history at the City MusicSchool in Leningrad. She moved to the U.S. inOctober, 1991, and is now a resident of Minneapolis,MN. She began doctoral study in music education atBoston University in Fall, 1993-Faina Bryanskaya provided materials for the prepa-

ration of the article and provided helpful criticism ofthe draft version. She teaches piano and pianopedagogy at the Longy School of Music in Cam-bridge, MA. She was a professor of piano pedagogyand a srudent-teacher supervisor for Leningrad Con-servatory from 1967 to 1982. Before that, she taughtat the conservatory's Moussorgsky College and theCentral Children's Music School of Leningrad.The authors give special thanks for the translation

services provided by Victoria Mushkatkol, a memberof Interlochen Arts Academy faculty, and to Julia Zat-sarinskaya, a native of Vol go grad (Russian Republic)who was a student at the academy.

40 Tbe Quarterly Journal of Music Teaching and Learning

cation. He began to reorganize the Sovietsystem in the late 1960s and early 1970s andpursued this goal to the day of his death inMoscow in February, 1987. Kabalevskywrote articles, collaborated with others todevise and test a classroom music teachingsystem, taught demonstration classes whichwere broadcast on Soviet television, deliveredlectures which were recorded by Melodiya anddistributed across the SovietUnion, led teacher-educationseminars attended by thou-sands of music teachers, anddeveloped a syllabus formusic education which re-mains in use today in thou-sands of schools in the for-merly Soviet republics.' ABritish expert on Russian cur-riculum describes Kabalevskyas "an irresistible enthusiast... [who] swept through theworld of Soviet music teach-ing .. , [tlhe resultant ructions... still echoing from the cor-ridors of the Academy ofPedagogical Sciences to class-rooms in remote Siberia andCentral Asia" (Muckle, 1988a;107-108).This article introduces

Kabalevsky as music educa-tor and provides a brief his-tory of Soviet education, both general andmusical, selecting features that best illuminatethe innovative nature of the composer's mu-sic education program. The evolution andmature features of Kabalev-sky's approachwill be described in some detail, with atten-tion paid to the reception it was given bycritics and advocates in the former SovietUnion. The authors draw upon both per-sonal acquaintance with and research intoRussian music education, Kab-alevsky's per-sonality, and the composer's music educa-tion program.

Two Tsars, a Revolution,and a Dictator

It is necessary to have some understandingof Russian and Soviet history to understandthe milieu in which Kabalevsky's programemerged. A thumbnail sketch of that very

rich history is all that is possible within thescope of the present article. The origins ofmodern Soviet education lie in the late 1700sand first half of the 1800s. Whittaker (984)examines this era in her biography of CountSergei Uvarov, an influential Christian liberal.Uvarov was, among other things, a teacherand later the minister of education. He vacil-lated between advocacy of revolt and reac-

tionary tendencies, the lat-ter due in part to his per-ception of a negative"change for change'S sake"attitude in the West.Whittaker argues that Uvar-ov's emphasis on central-ization and loyalty, alongwith his opposition to dissi-dence, helped lay the foun-dations for some of themost troubling aspects ofSoviet schooling.3The period investigated

by Whittaker was one ofpolitical upheaval anddemocratic yearnings inboth the West and Russia.Likewise, the debate aboutslavery, which came to thefore during the 1850s in theUnited States and soon ledto the Civil War, was paral-leled in Russia in the

struggle which led to the abolition of serf-dom in 1861. During this turmoil, however,the schools remained an important concernin Russia. Shturman (988), in her insightfuldiscussion of Russian education before therevolution of 1917, states:

In the 18605,the problems of schools evenrivaled the peasant question in popularity.The subject of the schools, which for a whilehad taken second place in topicality to thepeasant question, greatly agitated Russiansociety after the 1861 reform which abolishedserfdom. If the juridical emancipation of thepeople proclaimed by the reform was to berealised, then cultural emancipation was alsonecessary (p. 3).

Shturman (1988) describes a period ofperfervid and idealistic educational experi-mentation in both public and private schools.Under the somewhat tolerant regime of

Why 'were those'words "Don't beafraid" spoken so

often byKabalevsk:y? Heand other goodteachers spokethese -words 'withreason, becausethe usual Sovietpedagogicalapproach -wasfounded onintirrlidation.

Volume IV, Number 3 41

Ameasure of the Soviet educational system's success can be foundin the nearly total absence of illiteracy in the republics that once were

the Soviet Union ...

Alexander II, this experimentation was at firstallowed, but then banned in 1862; the "tem-porary" ban stood until 1914. AlthoughAlexander II eventually signed a liberal draftconstitution, he was assassinated by mem-bers of the radical group, People's Will, in1881. His son, Alexander III, abrogated thereform-oriented draft constitution, thus settingthe stage for the 1917 revolution. Shturmanpoints out that the liberal forces that advocatedgradual, evolutionary social change wereswept aside by the actions of extremists.Long (1985) identifies an overall "arch"

across Russian/Soviet education. Educationunder the tsar, when it was available, usuallywas heavily authoritarian in nature and em-phasized knowledge of facts through repeti-tion and rote learning. A movement toward"reform" occurred after the revolution, in-spired by Marx's and Engels's educationalideas as well as those of progressive Russianand American educators such as KonstantinD. Ushinsky and John Dewey. A swing backto the tsarist approach took place in the1930s and was solidly ensconced duringStalin's regime.The reform era of the 1920s, led by the

Commissariat of Enlightenment (Narkompros.)and its commissar, Anatoli K. Lunacharskii,emphasized schoolwork organized around"complex themes" such as "Work in theHome" and "My Community." These themeswere intended to be socially significant andrelevant to the children's environment, per-sonal needs, and interests. Each theme wasto be studied under the broad headings oflabor, nature, and society. "School childrenwere to have a voice in running the school,and teachers were to be their friends andhelpers" (Long, 1985, p. 3). By the mid-1950s, however, all the accoutrements of thetsarist, authoritarian approach (e.g., grades,homework, examinations, and textbooks)had once again returned to the classroom,and there was renewed emphasis on the au-thority and control of the teacher.Long also identifies several long-standing

principles of Soviet education that persistedfrom the beginning of Soviet educationthrough the progressive and reactionarycycles described above. These principles re-flected the ideals of Communism, but the re-ality of the schools often either fell short ofor contradicted these ideals. In a recent ar-ticle (Rust, 1992), the current Minister of Edu-cation for the Russian republic, EdwardDneprov, states:

One of the weaknesses of Russians has al-ways been the tendency (0 separate theoryhorn reality. That was the problem duringthe past 70 years of Soviet rule. We had abeautiful theoretical orientation, but it wastranslated by technocrats and bureaucrats intoa totalitarian state (p. 376).

One principle identified by Long was the"combination of ... aesthetic ... educationwith moral education." Another principlewas the equation of moral education with"the communist ethical system delineated byLenin" (p. 7).This latter principle of Soviet ideology is

also noted by Muckle (1988b; pp. 9-11), whocites an emphasis on uospitanie, a wordwithout an exact English cognate, but whichcan be translated approximately as "ethicaland moral upbringing." Moral education wasconsidered "no less important than the aca-demic and scientific" and was to be inte-grated into education; the phrase "unity ofinstruction and upbringing" was often used.Muckle summarizes the situation:

The aim of Soviet education, as any peda-gogue there will confirm, is to create "a newtype of person" who has certain moral at-tributes and ideological attitudes. This is So-viet patriotism, which is not meant to bemindless jingoism, but love for the first coun-try in the world to embrace socialism and tocreate a workers state; proletarian interna-tionalism-support for the workers of theworld in their struggle for liberation fromcapitalist exploiters and respect for their cul-ture and tradition; socio-political awareness,involving strong communist convictions and adialectical-materialist attitude; militant athe-ism; respect for labour and the skills of the

42 The Quarterly Journal of Music Teaching and Learning

It is also true that scime of the ideals and practices of Soviet educationwere fundamentally flawed, contradictory to the Soviet constitution,or distorted in service of political power.

craftsman, the desire to participate in sociallyuseful work and the determination to learnthe skills to be able to do so; a collectivistattitude and avoidance of egotistic individual-ism; strong ethical-moral principles, respectfor the law and the duties of a citizen; accep-tance of the responsibility of bringing up thenext and future generations in the spirit ofcommunism; a conservationist attitude tonatural resources, natural beauty, the environ-ment, historical monuments, and the achieve-ments of culture. A Soviet citizen is ex-pected, moreover, through his or her educa-tion to extend knowledge and mental hori-zons, to improve aesthetic awareness and tokeep physically fit. This embraces every as-pect of an all-round personality as perceivedby Soviet orthodoxy. The overall aim of thesystem is often neatly summarised as the cre-ation of "a uiell-trained work-force of broadgeneral culture' (p. 9; italics added).

Muckle (1988) also states that labor trainingwas part of all Soviet schooling. It was meantto provide students with information about thework world and to prevent prejudice againsthands-on manual work, while providing work-ers for the economy without the need for atraining period after school was finished+What are the connections among the Rus-

sian concepts of aesthetic education, moraleducation, and the ideology of labor? Theanswer can be found, perhaps surprisingly,in the Soviet conception of tuorcbesleiy; theRussian word for creativity, and in understand-ing of the role which the arts were expected toplay in education in the former Soviet Union.Soviet curriculum theorists Kraevskij andLerner (1984) provide an overview of Sovietcurriculum history. They state:

... since its inception, Soviet curriculum hashad more classroom time for humanities (lan-guages, literature, history, social sciences, ge-ography, study of the constitution, elementsof state and law, drawing and music) thannatural sciences (mathematics, physics, chem-istry, biology, astronomy, technical drawing,and natural history) Cp.12).5

Later, in a discussion of the main elements ofa subject and how these relate to curriculum,they reveal one continuing expectation of

Volume IV, Number 3

arts education:Thus the main element of subjects like [phys-ics, chemistry, biology, geography, historyand astronomy] is scientificknowledge,whereas the main element of subjects likeforeign languages, draftsmanship, physicalculture, as well as technology-related sub-jects, will be modes of activity (skills and use-ful habits). In teaching fine arts and musicthe goal is to mold in the pupils a particularvision of reality (p. 80; italics added).

The authors continue:Since the functions of school subjects are as-sociated with the dominant component oftheir content, that component may serve as abasis for their classificationinto: 1. Subjectswith knowledge as a dominant component(physics, chemistry, biology, geography, his-tory, astronomy); 2. Subjectswith modes ofactivity (skills) as a dominant component(foreign languages, draftsmanship, physicalculture, technical disciplines, manual train-ing); 3. Subjectswith an evaluative and emo-tional interpretation of reality as a dominantcomponent (drawing, music) (p. 92; italicsadded)6

This desire to assign arts education to animportant role in the control of the percep-tion, evaluation, and interpretation of realityextends, of course, at least as far back asPlato's Republic. It remained an explicit So-viet educational ideal from the revolution of1917 to the demise of the Soviet Union.Arts education in the Soviet Union built its

rationale on additional general responsibili-ties: to build appreciation for natural andcultured beauty; to foster the development ofgood taste and provide a "defence againstartistic pollution, including art from abroad;"and to pass on the cultural heritage (Muckle1988a, p. 105). Fine arts classes were also toprovide experiences within the realm of the"spiritual" (dukhovnyy), a term that can bedescribed as more affective and aestheticthan religious in nature)Consistent with the Soviet conception of

creativity, absent from Soviet schools Catleastuntil very recently) was any emphasis on"making" or "doing." Instead, creativity was

43

seen as having more to do with the nature ofone's thinking and response to situations(see Muckle 1988a, p. 113) This Soviet em-phasis on what might best be called "imagi-nation" (rather than on the more "active" sortof creativity common to innovative British,Canadian, and American music educationprograms, and Orff-inspired programs every-where), finds company in the writings of theAmerican philosopher Harry Broudy.fThe importance of creativity and imagina-

tion with respect to the workplace is a long-standing Soviet belief. A recent example isprovided by Kraevskij and Lerner (984):

With the gradual development of society, therole of general education has become moreimportant. This is especially true of a newsocialist society. Indeed, it is in the processof education, the process of imparting thecontent of general education, that youngpeople acquire the foundations of science,culture, and art, the principles of a scientificworld view, socially acceptable morals andbehaviour, and basic manual skills and habits.It is thought [that by this processl the pupillearns to think for himself and acquires a cre-ative approach to the work he is doing Cp. 11;italics added).

The Soviets also believed that of all thesubjects, the fine arts were best able to fostercreativity and imagination, qualities whichwere thought to be transferable to the work-place. This belief has provided a powerful,practical rationale for arts education, for itconnected the teaching of the fine arts tothree thoroughly entwined and fundamentalaspects of Soviet educational philosophy:uospitanie, moral education, and labor.Ideals and Necessary Evils

Whatever the faults of the revolution, itrepresented a response to the failings of thetsarist regimes, including failings in the areaof education. One important goal of the So-viets was the establishment of an educationalsystem based on egalitarian principles, withaccess to all. Universal education eventuallywas provided through a system of "second-ary general" schools, with the number of yearsof obligatory attendance gradually lengtheningin response to both needs and resources.? Ameasure of the Soviet educational system'ssuccess can be found in the nearly total ab-sence of illiteracy in the republics that oncewere the Soviet Union, a remarkable accom-

plishment especially when conditions underthe rule of the tsars are considered.It is also true that some of the ideals and

practices of Soviet education were funda-mentally flawed, contradictory to the Sovietconstitution, or distorted in service of politi-cal power. Furthermore, historical develop-ments (economic depression, war, industrial-ization, technological advances) and laborshortages often resulted in bitterly contestedcompromises. One such compromise wasthe development of "secondary specialschools" to meet Soviet society's perceivedmanpower needs for engineers, foreign-lan-guage specialists, physicists, and other spe-cialists. Dunstan (988) comments on thetension inherent in the compromise that re-sulted in the secondary special schools:

Theoretically, and despite the related "contra-diction" of better-life chances, there is everyreason to secure the maximum developmentof abilities provided that in the first placethere exists a societal demand for them.Thus there are no Soviet sports boardingschools specialising in cricket-the very ideais ludicrous-whereas a Moscow secondarygeneral school has been developing the ad-vanced study of aircraft construction. Indi-vidual abilities and needs are to be recog-nized as far as possible, but are subordinateto the requirements of society: this sums upthe Soviet position .... To make mattersworse, during such unpropitious periods thecontradiction of superior-life chances as theprobable consequence of special provisionfor children of high ability is likely to appearparticularly glaring .... The fundamental di-lemma is that from the official Soviet point ofview the contradiction can only be resolvedby making special provisions much morewidely available; but apart from the resourcesproblem, those with whom the contradictioncarries the most weight reject a solutionwhich tbey see as leading-and not necessar-ily in the short term alone-to an exacerba-tion of inequality (p, 59-60).

The existence of the secondary specialschools thus created a conflict with egalitar-ian principles. Special schools were toler-ated, but often as a necessary evil.'?It is not surprising that an ideological issue

so fundamental to Soviet education would bereflected in the music education program.Shortly after the revolution, a "primary" orpreschool/kindergarten system was pro-

44 The Quarterly Journal of Music Teaching and Learning

The Soviets ... believed that of all the subjects, the fine arts were best

able to foster creativity and imagination, qualities which werethought to be transferable to the workplace. This belief has provideda powerful, practical rationale for arts education, for it connected the

teaching of the fine arts to three thoroughly entwined and fundamen-tal tenets of Soviet educational philosophy: uospitariie, moraleducation, and labor.

mated and subsidized, partly out of Commu-nist ideals with respect to child upbringingand partly in pragmatic response to thepressing day care needs of the large number ofemployed parents. Remeta (974) points outthat by the 1960s music was usually a sched-uled experience in the preschool, dependingon the resources of the sponsoring factory oroffice building. That curricular presence con-tinued to the end of the USSR, though thequality of such programs was generally lowbecause many teachers were not graduates ofprofessional music programs.On the one hand, these preschool music

programs had universal educational goals re-flecting Soviet music pedagogy's opposition tothe belief that musical talent is a natural giftpossessed by few. Remeta (974) notes:

The concept ... that musical talent is unique andresponds little to outside influence cannot beaccepted by Soviet pedagogues. Instead, Sovietmusic pedagogy is based on the optimistic viewthat all normal children have the potential fordevelopment in music .... Soviet educators be-lieve that the foundation of a person's futuremusical culture is established during preschoolyears. The primary purpose of the musicprogram at the kindergarten school is to draw allchildren into contact with the simplest forms ofmusical activity and to develop a "good ear" formusic (p. 75)11

These broad goals are no doubt familiar tomodern music educators, who probablywould be in agreement with the "optimism"of Soviet music pedagogues.Another important and seemingly contra-

dictory responsibility of the Soviet preschoolwas the identification of children's musicaltalent, accomplished systematically throughthe use of simple tests administered by teach-ers from specialized music schools. The fo-cus was on tonal memory, rhythmic skills,

Volume IV, Number 3

and possession of perfect pitch. Those chil-dren identified as talented were steered to-ward "children's music schools.vl? whichusually included grades 1 through 7. Chil-dren thought to be extraordinarily talentedwere directed toward "special musicschools," which provided grades 1 through11. The curricula of these two types ofschools included music performance, history,and theory. The children's music-school pro-gram was offered on a daily basis, followingthe regular secondary general school's hours.The special music school was self-containedand allowed much more emphasis on perfor-mance. Graduates usually proceeded to in-stitutions of higher education that preparedmusic performers, conductors, dance accom-panists, musicologists, and other specialists.The vast majority of preschoolers, how-

ever, were bound for the "secondary generalschools." These schools were the focus ofKabalevsky's reform of music education.Three Whales in the BasementIn order to understand how Kabalevsky's

program differed from the traditional Sovietsystem of teaching music in the secondarygeneral education school, and how his pro-gram was accepted, one must imagine thetraditional system. The basic features of thetsarist/Stalinist educational program were notabsent from either the goals or processes ofthe music program. The teaching style wasauthoritarian, instruction was almost entirelyteacher-directed, and there was a good dealof emphasis on memory skills. FainaBryanskaya, a renowned piano pedagogue,taught in a St. Petersburg (Leningrad)children's music school and was a professor/teacher supervisor in that city's MoussorgskyCollege and Rimsky-Korsakov Conservatoryfrom 1958 to 1982. The perceptions of

45

many are articulated by Bryanskaya's (991)critical generalization: "[Tlhe classes were bor-ing and dull" and "didn't develop any musicalliteracy." There were, of course, some musicteachers who taught effectively and with en-thusiasm, but their numbers were few.Classroom lessons usually were limited to

the learning of several musically simplesongs, with emphasis on "required" ideologi-cal songs about Lenin and the CommunistParty, or songs related to Soviet holidays.These simple songs quite often were musi-cally weak. 13 Schools were generally sup-plied with some recorded music anthologiesfor listening-songs were the biggest part ofrepertoire-since most of the teachers couldplay on the piano no more than simple ac-companiments to simple songs. The schools,it should be noted, rarely had good recordplayers.In reality, however, listening was not a part

of music lessons, and the same can be saidof instruction in the understanding of musicnotation. Even if a teacher did explain nota-tion, sight singing skill was not an expectedoutcome. Broad musical literacy was notachieved, and students were left, at best,with a simplistic understanding of notation.Marina Goldin, one of the coOauthors of

this article was a student in a secondary gen-eral education school in Kharkov, one of themost developed industrial and cultural cen-ters of Ukraine, during the mid-1960s. Herpersonal recollection of the situation is thatsinging lessons, which comprised almost thewhole of music in the schools, left no notice-able trace in the hearts or brains of gradu-ates. Furthermore, music was not considereda "serious" subject.Kabalevsky began to speak out on this is-

sue during the crisis of the 1960s, when theinability of Soviet education to achieve theideals of vospitanie became apparent. Thisand other ideals of the traditional Soviet edu-cation system figured in his (Kabalevsky,1973) speech to the International Society forMusic Education (ISME) in Moscow in whichKabalevsky emphasized the ideological foun-dationsl t of his belief in the need to bringmusic education to all students of the sec-ondary general education schools. He addedthat providing music education for only the

46

talented would contradict the most basic te-nets of a socialist people's government. Hepointed our that the fine arts in schoolshould be an important part of oospitanie,and that the main task of music teachersshould not be the teaching of music, butrather attention to the growth of the students'inner lives and their sense of morality.Kabalevsky loved light music and jazz, so

he did not neglect to speak to the place ofpopular music in life of youngsters. He ac-knowledged that youngsters thrived on popmusic, and he did not see this, in modera-tion, as a problem. (He did, however, feelthat Western pop music had its own "policy,"separate from that of Western government orSOCiety: escape from reality.) Kabalevskyfelt that only a good education would bringthe deep insights of great thinkers likeBeethoven and Mozart to students, and hestated that the best songs of the Soviet youthwere those that were ideological, patriotic, orable to instill revolutionary fervor.l>While it may seem that there is not much

new or startling here, beyond a major Sovietcomposer's willingness to give a nod in thedirection of students' musical interests bymaking a connection to uospitanie,Kabalevsky established a strong, ideologicallybased rationale for universal music educa-tion. He linked issues of deep concern toSoviet educators to his own agenda, whichwas the fostering of musical development inyoung students.

Reforming School MusicIn Kabalevsky's 1978 article, "The Main

Principles and Methods of Experimental Mu-sic Programs for the Secondary GeneralSchool," the scope of Kabalevsky's reformsbecame apparent. Also in this article (sum-marized and excerpted in the remainder ofthis section), he stated that he was uncom-fortable with secondary programs as they ex-isted, but that he was an optimist and be-lieved that the time for reform had arrived.Kabalevsky indicated the broader scope ofhis approach by the renaming of musicclasses from "singing lessons" to "music les-sons." Kabalevsky argued that it was neces-sary to keep children interested, use newmethods to build this interest, and take timeto figure out how to involve the students.lv

T7JeQuarterly Journal of Music Teaching and Learning

Kabalevsky-and this ~as his enormous contribution-becaITle

a.ware of the necessity for change in Soviet society, the politicalsystern, and the Union; thus, rnarry years before others becaITleavvare of these pr'oblerris, he offered a peaceful 'wa.yto bring aboutthis necessary change through children, education, and rnusic.

He argued for a method that would empha-size music as a living art, not entertainmentbut a real part of life. He asked: "What arethe pedagogical concepts and music reper-toire which will support this conception?"Kabalevsky stated that part of the answer

could be found in an ancient Slavic myth,which represented the world as resting onthe backs of three whales. He set forth whathe believed to be the three whales of music:song, dance, and march. Kabalevsky felt thatthis simple concept provided an opportunityto unite music with real life and with othersubjects such as literature, thus contributing toaesthetic upbringing and historical knowledge.He saw "Music and Life"as the general themeof the school, the overarching task.Kabalevsky felt that the three-whales con-

cept allowed for the accomplishment of thisimportant task while remaining more ap-proachable than the larger genres such assymphonies or the more theoretical units,such as sonata form. The three whales weresimilar to the foundation of a house, whichjoins the structure of the house with theground on which it stands. The whales con-nected the very rich and ornate "house" of mu-sic to its soil: the folk soul and the masses.Kabalevsky envisioned the lessons of the

first three grades of his program as finishingthe basement of this house and starting thefirst floor, while also providing the basis forbuilding additional floors. Later, the studentwould become aware that there is more tomusic than this foundation, but the threewhales would never be completely absentbecause the essences of song, dance, andmarch are evident at the highest levels of artmusic. Since opera, oratorio, and ballet de-rive directly from song and dance, Kabalev-sky felt that with these forms of music therewas even less need to defend the usefulnessof the whales, but he also argued that thethree whales were to be found in all modern

Volume IV, Number 3

and classical music, including symphonic,instrumental, and vocal music. He noted thateven the music of Wagner and Scriabin,whose "art music" Kabalevsky felt was mostremoved from that of the masses, also in-cluded the three whales.Citing evidence garnered from his experi-

mental program, Kabalevsky claimed thatfirst-year students would have had contactwith song, dance, and march in their homesin villages, towns, and cities. The three-whale story made obvious the connection ofthe children's preschool experiences to theworld of art music; children were delightedto find that they knew something about themain principles of music. Students them-selves were able to differentiate betweensong, dance, and march, so they began tolearn the skills of analysis. It was not a prob-lem if music examples contained qualities ofmore than one whale (e.g., both song anddance), and the class was divided in identify-ing these qualities, for the students thenlearned that the whales could meet. Thusthe children experienced the ambiguity ofthe real music world; creative conflict wasengendered, bringing discovery of a new,larger truth. From the first year, studentslearned the most important concept thatschool music can teach: not only to feel mu-sic or merely listen to music, but to "reallyhear" and to think about it.The teachers in the experimental school

didn't point out the song, dance, or march tothe children; instead, the students were al-lowed to discover these forms for themselvesby listening to simple examples on the pi-ano. This approach built the interest, self-confidence, and self-esteem of the studentsas well as trust in and sympathy for theteacher. Thus, the process was logically un-derstandable and emotionally involving aswell." Furthermore, Kabalevsky pointed out

Continued on p. 50

47

A Teacher's View of the Three WhalesWhat was the impact of Kabalevsky's program

on individual Soviet music teachers? A glimpse canbe provided by this first-person account by LudmillaLeibman, who was a teacher candidate in Leningradwhen Kabalevsky visited to promote his program,

Don't Be Afraid!I remember the day that Dmitry Kabalevsky first

spoke of his new education program in Leningrad.His talk took place in our Composers Club! hall onHerzen Street, Kabalevsky spoke to the audiencefor over three hours, yet we all held our breath andwere afraid of missing a word. \X'hat an excellentspeaker he was' It was clear his ideas had matured.How many years ago did that happen? Fifteen'

Twenty? It was in my college (or post-graduate)days, so merely out of habit I jotted down notes. Ikept these sheets of paper with care. In myteaching I used my synopsis, which I wrote soonafter Kabalevsky's speech, although a draft of hisprogram was published a few months later.The program won both friends and opponents at

once, and of course it had both pluses and mi-nuses. The most remarkable thing about Kab-alevsky's program was the precedent it set as aresponse to centralized authority. It was a newview, an individual's opinion that differed from theofficial view. The directives of the Public EducationMinistry weren't examined before Kabalevsky. Theywere simply issued and implemented without dis-cussion or question. Kabalevsky challenged theusual way of doing things, for he felt the necessityof change. And he offered a course of action. Hisprogram caused a re-examination of teachingthroughout the curriculum and in all subject areas,not just music.To my mind, Kabalevsky began his efforts to-

ward reform of education in the secondary generalschool because, although music classes occurredonly once a week, all Soviet students attended thislesson. He would have avoided a lot of unpleasantarguments if he instead had become involved withmusic education in the special music schools. YetKabalevsky-and this was his enormous contribu-tion-became aware of the necessity for change inSoviet society, the political system, and the Union;thus, many years before others became aware ofthese problems, he offered a peaceful way to bringabout this necessary change through children,education, and music.Kabalevsky made many excellent proposals.

First, he wanted students to believe in their creativepower and to have faith in their musical abilities aswell. Here's how he spoke to children:

If you don't have an ear for music, if you can'tsing-don't wony about this. You reallyhave. You really can. But you don't knowabout yourself. Come here to the grandpiano. Don't be afraid' Please, try to press thiskey which is called "e of the 2nd octave" withthis finger of the left hand and this key, whichis called "e" too, but "of'theSrd octave," usingthe same finger of the right hand ... and dothat at the same speed. Don't be afraid' Yousee, it isn't difficult for you. It is easy. Let'splay together.

After those words, Kabalevsky played duetswith the student, any piece where the teacher'spart was very complicated and the student's partconsisted of only one reiterated sound. "That'sfine! That's beautiful! Well donel," Kabalevskysaid, praising the student.Kabalevsky often praised the children--he didn't

skimp on praise. That was one of his rules, Oh,what "horrible" mistakes he made-· at least fromthe point of view of Soviet dictators and thedidactic ways of typical Soviet pedagogues!Why were those words "Don't be afraid" spoken

so often by Kabalevsky? He and other goodteachers spoke these words with reason, becausethe usual Soviet pedagogical approach was foundedon intimidation. For example, teachers punishedstudents by giving low grades for behavior (not forlack of knowledge), or writing negative commentsin students' notebooks for parents to read, orinviting parents to school for unpleasant conversa-tions about their child, or investigating the stu-dents' actions at the meetings of the headmasterand all the teachers, or .... It is too many "ors", isn'tit? I think you can begin to get a feel for thenumerous restrictions on students' rights and therepressive nature of the Soviet pedagogical ap-proach. There was little positive response tostudents' work in school. 2I knew this Soviet approach very well indeed,

because I was a student myself, a teacher ofstudents, and a student's mother. \XThenI was 17,I began my first job teaching music at a publicschool. This school was not, however, a com-pletely "regular" secondary general school, but theLeningrad Arts Academy School, a special schoolwhere only future visual artists of the Unionstudied. I felt the depressing nature of thisapproach to education, despite my youth. Theschool imitated the model of the state: As thestudent was shaped by the school, so the citizen ofthe state would become. Of course, one's person-

48 The Quarterly Journal of Music Teaching and Learning

ality is formed not only at school; family and.environment are important in this process as well.But it is easier to perceive the workings of arelationship such as that between "man and power"on the. scale of the school. It is safe to say thatSoviet students had neither rights nor freedom untilperestroika began.Kabalevsky tried to emancipate students. He

began teaching music according to his own pro-gram at an ordinary Moscow school. First, theclassroom design and desks and chairs were placedin the shape of an amphitheater, thus breaking upthe traditional, ceremonious rows. The classroombecame like a concert hall, for students took theirseats as music was played by the teacher.Kabalevsky used many simple musical instru-

ments. During his lessons, students listened to themusic, played music with the teacher, and listenedto his stories about composers and their creativework. The charm of Kabalevsky's personality, hisextraordinary gifts as a lecturer, and his love ofchildren worked wonders. Many teachers from allover the country came to Moscow to observe thelessons as the fame of the program spread. Theseteachers watched a miracle each time: Studentsbecame more intelligent and inspired.The Education Ministry responded at last by

allowing other teachers to use Kabalevsky's pro-gram on an experimental basis, making printedcopies of it available. Unfortunately, it is impossibleto print rare gifts. Other teachers studied Kabalevsky'sprogram and watched his lessons, but in theirclassrooms the wonder didn't always happen! Onepart of this problem was that the job of the Sovietteacher traditionally was considered unprestigious,and salaries were very small. The job of musicteacher in the secondary general school was theleast prestigious, Teachers of mathematics, Russian,or biology almost always had received highereducation, while most teachers of music had not.This situation existed because neither universi-

ties nor pedagogical institutes hac! music depart-ments, and higher education at a conservatory orcollege of music was considered too specializedfor teacher candidates. Future teachers of musicwere educated at music-pedagogical colleges, Of-ten they studied at these schools not because theywanted to teach students, but because their gift formusic was small. Thus the teachers of music forsecondary general schools frequently had neitherexcellent musical gifts nor aptitude for pedagogy,and their prestige in the schools was the lowest ofall teachers, Kabalevsky tried to reform the usualorder, and his program demanded knowledge,skills, and soul from the teachers, Maybe thechallenges were too great for most workers of theSecondary General Education Ministry,

Volume TV; Number 3

Kabalevsky's program began implementation 15or 20 years ago, Today, it is not discussed asfuriously as before; economic decline and politicalinstability has postponed consideration of theseproblems, Yet the program has become a histori-cal fact. When perestroika began, teachers under-stood that the country's public education neededto be changed, and reform soon followed, takingdifferent directions, Now children begin studyingat age 6 or 7; that decision is up to their parents, Anadditional obligatory year of schooling was added,for a total of 11, Many different types of schoolssimultaneously appeared, Teachers now mayteach in a more individualized fashion,I left the Soviet Union on October 23,1991, Only

three days before, I stood in the Leningrad Com-posers Club, the hall full of teenagers, I knew thatI might never return, and that I likely would neversee those students again, I spoke to the groupabout the two-hundredth anniversary of Mozart'sopera TbeMagic Flute, In this work of genius, thepositive qualities of light, kindness, harmony, andintellect win, At the same time I thought about reallife, where darkness, cruelty, chaos, and lawless-ness too often seem to win, Will music be thesalvation of those students? Will it be so?

Notes1. Creative professional unions (e,g" artists,

writers, actors, ete.) in the major cities of the SovietUnion sponsored "clubs" that had access to state-provided buildings where meetings coule! be held,programs presented, and business accomplished,The Union of Soviet Composers and Musicologistssponsored a Composers Club in Leningrad which,as those who attended the 1990 ISME seminarknow, meets in an old building, rather unremark-able on the outside, but possessing a beautifulinterior trimmed in wood. Members of the unionand others had access to a restaurant in theArchitects Union's building, located just across thestreet (where, at least during the seminar, food wascertainly more plentiful than in the stores). Theunion also had access to a resort-like retreatlocated in Repino. a suburb to the northwest ofLeningrad on the Gulf of Finland, with individualcabins and a central eating/meeting hall. Thisarrangement continues at present.2, This description may not seem unusually

"repressive" to non-Soviet educators, but pre-glasnostvisitors to the Soviet Union's schools oftenused the word "inhumane" to describe the condi-tions, even when those visitors were familiar withthe usual authoritarian school cultures which exist,unfortunately, all over the world, See Rust (1992)and Brodinsky (1992) for confirmation of theseconditions by Russian educators themselves,

49

that since the concepts repre-sented by the three whaleswere very broad, they werenot limited to specific reper-toire but could be useful inworking with music from allaround the world.

Freedom andStructure

Kabalevsky wanted teach-ers to experience freedom inthe use of his approach, buthe also felt strongly about theneed for a system that wouldprevent aimlessness in themusic classroom. The ex-perimental program was or-ganized around a theme struc-ture." Themes were chosenfor each of the seven years ofthe program, for each semes-ter (two per year), and for each term(four per year). Examples of the themes in-clude "the three whales, their expressive andrepresentational meanings;" "perception andthe understanding of musical image;" "songand dance as musical qualities;" "perceptionand understanding of intonation'? as the seedof a piece;" "some features of music in yournation:" "general and distinct features in themusic of different nations;" and "music's in-fluence on everyday life and its influence onhuman beings."Kabalevsky felt that it was more important

for students to know these broad themes thanto remember the details or particulars of themusic. He recommended avoiding repeateduse of the same musical material (unless doneafter some period of time and from a differentpoint of view), and instead encouraged gener-alization from the themes, allowing students tochoose different music on the basis of theirlikes and dislikes, so long as that music re-mained within the limits of the current theme. 20

Kabalevsky stated that these themes allowedunity in the lesson while permitting varied ac-tivities and different music. (See box above.)"Musical literacy" was not included in the

program in the lower grades. Kabalevskyargued against the prevailing approach to theteaching of musical literacy, which resultedonly in simple ability to use music notation,

Musicexcerpts listed in the program provided byKabalevsky were meant to be examples, guidingthe teacher to the correct level of musical com-plexity for each age level, but not restrictingchoices. He reminded teachers that these choicesshould be made with great care and argued thatthe music employed should:1. be real art;2. be attractive to children;3. provide the opportunity to teach something useful and necessary;4. be pedagogically understandable; and5. have the capacity for playing a role inthetask of uospitanie.

what he called mueilealnaya gramota (musicgrammar). Instead, he called for the teachingof muzilealnaya gramotnost (music culture),achievement of which he argued did not de-pend on knowledge of music notation,though it potentially include this knowledge.Kabalevsky believed that students in the ex-perimental schools reached a very high levelof music culture without necessarily develop-ing the ability to read music.Kabalevsky also argued against giving writ-

ten homework to first-year students.s! In-stead, he encouraged teachers to ask theirstudents to listen to music and then sharetheir feelings and thinking in class about allthat they heard, especially after vacations.

Toward Children"Thinking in Music"

Clearly, there were considerable differ-ences between Kabalevsky's system and theoften disorganized, aimless, and weak systemwhich existed prior to his efforts. At least sixare very important:First, Kabalevsky sought to develop musi-

cally literate listeners with a wide musicalbackground and a closer relationship to realmusic. Quoting Asafiev, a Soviet musicologist,composer, and author, Kabalevsky emphasizesthat teaching music is "not [the] teaching ofsome simplified children's an, but systematicdevelopment of emotional senses and creative

50 TheQuarterly Journal ofMusic Teaching and Learning

abilities" (cited in Abdullin, 1974, p. 30).Kabalevsky stressed the importance of the per-ception of "serious" music at an early age.Second, the most important element of this

approach was active listening and thinkingabout music at class lessons. Kabalevsky, fromthe very first lessons, asked children to think inpurely musical categories, talking about genresand the historical roots of music. This ap-proach was markedly different from his con-temporaries' popular lectures and literatureabout music, in which everything revolvedaround either images that the music containedor extramusical topics such as the composer'slife or the history of the creation of the piece.Third, Kabalevsky's approach required the

music teacher to have both skill in pianoplaying and knowledge of many composi-tions from different genres in order to illus-trate for students technically complicatedpieces and fragments from operas, sympho-nies, and other forms. This was in sharpcontrast to the low expectations that weregenerally prevalent in traditional programs.In addition, Kabalevsky's seven-year pro-

gram was organized not only according toeducational-thematic principles, but musical-aesthetic ones as well. These central themesunited different facets of music into a whole,thus helping students perceive music compo-sition and its elements. Such an approachalso unified various kinds of musical activitythat had been separated in the traditionalprogram. Thus, the program often employedthe same material for listening, singing, andaccompanying.Further, this approach of simultaneously

building skills in singing, listening, and musicliteracy represents a marked break from Rus-sian teaching traditions, not only in terms ofthe old singing lessons, but also from the tra-ditional approach to education in general. Inthe 1960s and into the beginning of the1970s, the Soviet system advocated movingfrom "the detail to the whole," that is, fromteaching separate elements to developing un-derstanding of the whole. Kabalevsky's ap-proach instead begins with the general, orthe whole, and moves towards detail(Barenboim, 1977; p. 75), from emotional im-pression to elements."Finally, another divergence from traditional

Volume IV, Number 3

Soviet pedagogy lay in the fact that each ofKabalevsky's lessons was built upon ques-tions and answers that encouraged childrento discover the logic of the lesson. This wasparalleled by new programs of research onother subjects and came to be called the"problem-solving" approach. After investigat-ing the Soviet schools in the late 1980s,Muckle wrote that due almost entirely toKabalevsky's initiatives, "It is music whichperhaps best of all exemplifies the new spiritabroad in Soviet education" C1988a, p. 107).Muckle's C1988b) description of Soviet edu-

cation in the midst of Gorbachev's reformsprovides further evidence that Soviet peda-gogy continued to follow Kabalevsky's lead.After a discussion of the traditional Sovietemphasis on facts, Muckle described con-trasting efforts to avoid unnecessary repeti-tion of material and attempts to increase "theconceptual, as opposed to the factual con-tent" (p. 16). Muckle states:

It is in the arts, music especially, that some ofthe most encouraging and adventurous workhas been done in recent years, but this hasnot been without controversy and campaign-ing on both sides. Music lessons have beentransformed from dull singing exercises andboring talks on composers' lives into livelyoccasions in which musical perception, emo-tional response, vocal and instrumental per-formance, and, to some small extent, compo-sitional activities have improved pupil atti-tudes and teacher morale considerably.Something of the same is happening in art:much more creative work in several differentmedia and much less drawing of "two appleson a plate" (p, 17).

Friends and FoesKabalevsky's program of reform in music

education was not implemented without con-troversy. Strong support and strong opposi-tion arose, though none of Kabalevsky's op-ponents approached his caliber. Two pointswere discussed a great deal: 1) most teach-ers, because of their limited piano skills, hadneither learned nor could sight read theamount of music that Kabalevsky suggested;and 2) there was strong support for contin-ued emphasis on singing.This discussion generally was not included

in Soviet Music, the official national periodi-cal; instead the battle took place at educa-tional conferences, which by 1978 included

51

But Will It Play InNew Jersey?

Kabalevsky's approach to music educa-tion is alive in the annual school concertsof the Bridgeton Symphony Orchestra'sEducational Outreach Project, now in itsfourth year. In 1993, the project's threeschool concerts were heard by over 1,8001rural, southern New Jersey students, almostall of whom were hearing a live perfor-mance of symphonic music for the firsttime. These students live in two of NewJersey's poorest counties, in which unem-ployment averages 15 percent.In 1990, following the first year of the

orchestra's school concerts, the musical di-rector and general manager invited partici-pating teachers to meet with them and twoeducation consultants (the author and Dr.Lili Levinowitz) to devise program goals, acurriculum for the orchestra's concerts, anda process for evaluating the project's out-comes. At the meeting, each teacher ex-pressed different and equally justifiable ex-pectations of what their students wouldgain from the concerts.It seemed the best solution was a "dy-

namic curriculum," a framework in whichteachers were free to pursue topics relevantto their own instructional plans and to thedesires of students. My task was to buildthat framework, and I felt that Kabalevsky'sideas? would serve some of the specifiedgoals of the Bridgeton project. It was alsodecided that measurement of changes instudent preference for symphonic musicwould be the main focus of program evalu-ation efforts.I presented Kabalevsky's "three whales"

to the project participants. The teachersagreed to use this approach when introduc-ing symphonic music to their students priorto the concerts. The orchestra's directoragreed to search for symphonic music thatincluded song, dance, and march genresand to shape his concert narratives in partaround Kabalevsky's approach, and I sentall participants more information aboutimplementing Kabalevsky's approach.

Kabalevsky's concepts. proved useful indesigning the program. Increasedstudentinterest in symphonic music was deter-mined to be the most important goal of theconcerts, so repertoire having the elementswhich most seemed to appeal to youngpeople (e.g., fast tempos, prominentmelo-dies, moderate complexity, and so forth)was included, especially to open and closeeach concert.Because of the Bridgeton region's popu-

lation characteristics, a multicultural dimen-sion was sought. South New Jersey's majorethnic groups have African and Hispanic(especially Puerto Rican) roots, so sym-phonic repertoire influenced by those cul-tures was selected for each concert. (Infuture years, repertoire influenced or' com-posed by other ethnic groups will be in-cluded, as will music by female compos-ers.) Because many of southern NewJersey's children are the sons and daugh-ters of immigrants, some teachers were cer-tain that their students would be interestedin symphonic music by composers such-asLeonard Bernstein and Aaron Copland, im-migrant offspring who until very recentlyhad lived in nearby cities.In the spring of 1993, the third year of

implementing Kabalevsky's approach, theorchestra provided each student with acopy of a concert guide called Symphony/for use in the school, with friends, and athome. Students could read ontheir ownabout the three whales and see drawingsof the dances which inspired some of theconcert music. The guide included lyricsand notation for songs such as "Baked Po-tato," a Creole folk song which Gottschalkemployed in Bamboula, his version of thecakewalk that was later arranged for or-chestra. Teachers might have their classessing "Greensleeves" 01" "John Henry" beforethe concert and ask the children to imaginehow a composer might treat these songs ina symphonic setting. ThumbnaiIsketchesprovided a social and historical context.

52 TheQuarterly Journal of Music Teaching and Learning

Analysis of the results of a 1991 prefer-ence assessment indicated that studentswho attended the project concerts dem-onstrated a marked increase in their pref-erence for symphonic music.' Evidence"also-indicated that the concerts had in-creased student interest in school instru-mental programs and raised theorchestra's regular season-ticket subscrip-tions.in the participating districts.Kabalevsky's principles, melded with re-search-based approaches to influencingpreference and adapted for the culturalfeatures of southern New Jersey, hadproven its worth.

--Jon BeckerNotes

1. Project audiences have grown from about400 to over 1,800>injust four years. The abilityto meet the demand for school concerts per-formed by a fully professional orchestra hasbeen made possible by generous support fromthe NewJersey StateCouncilon the Arts/Depart-ment of State, the Frank and lydia BergenFoundation, the Geraldine R. Dodge Founda-tion, the Gannett Communities Fund, the Pru-dential Foundation, theMusicPerformanceTrustFund/local 595, American Federation of Musi-cians, school parent-teacher organizations, andsouth ew Jersey businesses and clubs.2, Presentation of a paper entitled "The

'Mozart of psychology' meets Mozart: A Sovietsocial psychological theory, an American theoryofcooperative learning, and some implicationsfor music education" led to Becker's conversa-tionswith Sovietmusic educators and his studyof Kabalevsky'swork. The paper was presentedat the International SocietyforMusicEducation'sseminar "Pacing-theFuture: Contemporary Ap-proaches fora Changing Curriculum,"July 31 -August 5, 1990,Leningrad, USSR.3. For morexletails about the preference

evaluation results, see lili M.levinowitz and JonBecker, "Good Partners: General Music andLocal Orchestras" in the Fall, 1992 issue ofGeneralMusic Today. Fora copyoftheBridgetonSymphony Orchest.ra's 1991 Educational Out-reach Project: Final Report, including informa-tionabout the curricular design, contact AnnGregory,GeneralManager,BridgetonSymphonyOrchestra, PO Box 872, Bridgeton, J 08302;phone (609) 451-1169.4. S. Mencher and R.Singer. (1993). Bridges

in Bridgeton. In Symphony, 44 (1), 45.

Volume IV, Number 3

six All-Russian conferences and one All-Union conference. In the contents of SovietMusic, however, one could detect certainclaims and doubts upon careful reading.Barenboim, a well-known expert onchildren's music and oospitanie, wrote in1977, "There are those who with sympathyand good will and there are those with skep-ticism who call this program 'the tale of threewhales" (p. 75). Here the use of the Russianword for "tale" Cskaz) reveals the skepticismand even sarcasm of the critics; skaz meansboth "fairy tale" and "untruth." Barenboimadded that he anticipated "criticism fromthose who will not be able to understand thisprogram and those who will not want to un-derstand" (p. 77).As for the latter sort of critics, Barenboim

divided them into three categories. Undoubt-edly, he was not predicting future critics, butanswering real critics without naming names:

1. those who are used to teaching exclu-sively "practical"music, mostly singing.This category of teachers "can imaginethat talks and discussion move practicalmusic-making to the back burner" (p.77);

2. those for whom the formal results holdmost importance, for whom the goal is tolearn something impeccably; and

3. those who doubt the "scientific"nature ofKabalevsky's approach because of the sim-plicity of his writing style and the clarity ofhis expression.ci

Barenboim's article would ordinarily be ofsubstantial importance, as Soviet Musicserved as a forum for the powerful Union ofSoviet Composers and Musicologists.s+ AndSoviet Music's editorial board sincerely sup-ported Kabalevsky and advocated the newsystem to the state25The decisive factors in the success of the

program, however, were not the published"votes" in favor of Kabalevsky (Abdullin,1974; Mazel, 1974; Barenboim, 1974). In So-viet culture, only "official" education ministrydecisions allowed (or denied) the promotionof an idea. The success of Kabalevsky's pro-gram in the face of this bureaucracy was dueto various factors. The most important, thecrisis in the Soviet music vospitanie in the1960s, demanded a new program. ThatKabaJevsky possessed personal authority as acomposer, political and party figure, deputy

53

of the Supreme Soviet, and honorary presi-dent of ISMEwas another crucial factor.In 1969, Kabalevsky presented his views in

the report of the Fourth Congress of theUnion of Soviet Composers and Musicolo-gists (see Soviet Music, 1969; No.3). In 1970,the USSR's Ministry of Education's Collegiumofficially admitted: "The existing state of es-thetic uospitanie of school students cannot becalled satisfying. "26 In the same year, Kab-alevsky's book A Story of Tbree V(7halesandMany Other Things was published and pro-vided the general outlines of what eventuallyevolved into a finished program.The Laboratory for Music Education and

Vospitanie opened in 1974 at the ResearchInstitute of the Russian Republic's Ministry ofEducation in Moscow. The head of the lab,Abdullin, worked to develop the new pro-gram and ascertain its effectiveness. The labgenerated new methods books and detailedyearly and daily lesson plans for teachers, asheet-music anthology, and an anthology ofphonographic recordings. Abdullin also es-tablished a connection with the MoscowPedagogical Institute with respect to coordi-nation of a field program and the preparationof teachers. Laboratory personnel includedmusicians and teachers with specialties intheory, history, choir, eurhythmics, method-ology, and psychology. The laboratory alsoorganized special in-service programs forteachers, including a two-week seminarwhich annually enrolled about 500 musiceducators. Additional offerings for localteachers were provided under the umbrellaof Moscow's Central Institute.The growth of Kabalevsky's program was

phenomenal, especially considering the usualrate of innovation in the Soviet Union duringthis period. In 1974, his approach was beingused by teachers in 25 schools of the Russianrepublic; by 1978, 2,500 teachers were in-volved. In 1979, the number stood at approxi-mately 10,000. Kabalevsky's program was in-cluded in the official school curriculum of theRussian Republic in 1981. The EducationMinistry's publishing company Prosvechenie(Education) published 25,000 copies of theprogram for elementary schools. Soviet Com-poser, the official publication of state music,issued the same number of sheet-music collec-

tions, and the state-controlled recording com-pany, Melodiya, pressed 25,000 record albums.Kabalevsky himself was featured during

the implementation of the three-whales pro-gram. Remeta (974) mentions that a seriesof recordings of Kabalevsky's lectures offeredby Melodiya, under the title 0 cbem gouoritmuzyka (Of What Music Speaks), were usedextensively in secondary general school mu-sic programs (p, 95). Kabalevsky also taughta group of students over a period of years,and his presentations, which Bryanskaya(991) called "fascinating ... model lessons forstudents, teachers, and parents" were broad-cast throughout the USSRon a weekly basis bythe state-owned Central Moscow Television.Kabalevsky's program was not only a mat-

ter of research and theory, but also a practi-cal success in real classrooms. It is doubtfulthat today all Russian teachers have been re-trained and all schools supplied with recordand tape players as well as complete albumsof records, even after some 20 years of workwith the program. Nevertheless, the creationof a complete system that generated excite-ment and activity in Soviet education was abig accomplishment.It is difficult to say which factor was more

important: the preparation of teachers to usethe program, or the preparation of textbooks,lesson plans, anthologies, and records. Onemust agree, however, that Barenboim made acorrect prediction when he said, "I am con-vinced that this program, developed underthe direction of Kabalevsky, is destined tostart a new era in the development ofchildren's music pedagogy" (1977, p. 73).

Who Will Feed the ThreeWhales?

Kabalevsky's contribution to Soviet musiceducation was firmly based on the formerunion's ideology, yet his pedagogical ap-proach was also reformist and anti-establish-ment. The results of his efforts may havebeen inconsistent, at least in part because ofthe nature of music teacher education andthe general conditions of the teaching profes-sion throughout the former Soviet Union.But Muckle's (1987; 1988a; 1988b) recent re-ports indicate that the influence of Kabalev-sky'S program was far-reaching and, in manyplaces, made a lasting and valuable differ-

54 The Quarterly Journal ofMusic Teaching and Learning

The rnost remarkable thing about Kabalevsky's pr'ograrn "W"astheprecedent it represented as a response to centralized authority. It

'was a ne"W"vie'w, an individual's opinion, that differed frorn theofficial vic-cv. Kabalevsky challenged the usual "W"ayof doing things,for he felt the necessity of change .... Kabalevsky's contribution toSoviet rrrusic education 'was firrnly based on the former union'sideology, yet his pedagogical approach 'was also reformist and anti-establishrnerit.

ence. Of that much, we can be sure.One can be far less certain about the con-

tinued health of both special and secondarygeneral music education in what was the So-viet Union. Special music schools face thesame problems as other specialized schools.As was pointed out earlier in this article, So-viet special schools were regarded by someas a temporary solution in violation of egali-tarian principles. As part of Gorbachev's ad-vocacy of glasnost, there were signs that spe-cial schools were coming under increasingscrutiny, in part due to increasing economicproblems, concern about "privilege" and "ac-cess," and increasing reports of abuses.Dunstan (1988) states:

... when inequality of access to education iscited at the highest level-by Gorbachov [sic]at the 27th Party Congress in February 1986-under the rubric of social justice; and com-munists are bidden to "observe the norms ofsocialist communal life which are the samefor everyone" and to "judge everythingopenly;" and the top Party leadership of Mos-cow is accused of complacency and that ofUzbekistan of corruption ("violation of social-ist legality"} it is not surprising that some ofthe resented sacred cows of Soviet educationshould be called out for slaughter. True, theyshow no signs of dumbly obeying. But atleast we may see their sheds being put in or-der, unless the priestly stockmen lack the willor the power to act (pp. 60-61).

After referring to several investigative re-pons on special schools in Soviet newspa-pers, Dunstan points out that special musicschools did not escape this scrutiny:

Another enquiry, into the sacking of an alleg-edly incompetent chemistry teacher from theUpensky Music School in Tashkent at the in-stigation of a group of senior girls with thesupport of their Komsomol organiser, re-

Volume IV, Number 3

vealed a dreadful collective egotism in thepupils concerned. This was fed by theschool management's attitude toward chemis-try as a general subject tailor-made for offi-cially permitted absences for concerts or re-hearsals, excessive tutelage exemplified in astaff-pupil ratio higher than one to two, and alack of contact with the outside world apartfrom concerts (which were resoundingly ap-plauded) (p. 58).

The philosophical, pedagogical, and eco-nomic issues raised in the newspapers ofwhat was then the Soviet Union can only in-tensify in the new commonwealth. As theeconomic situation deteriorates, continuedgovernment support for expensive specialschools must compete with other pressingneeds. Furthermore, alternative educationalinstitutions are becoming more available,both at home and abroad.One can be even less certain about the

prospects for Kabalevsky's innovative pro-gram. All fine-arts programs in the second-ary general schools, including music, willhave to justify themselves in the face of aprecarious economic situation and withoutthe rationale provided by communist ideol-ogy. The situation is exacerbated by theoverall quality of the teaching force and thedeparture of many talented music teachersand musicians from the republics. DidKabalevsky have time to lay the foundationfor popular support of universal music edu-cation in any public school system whichmay evolve? Will there be anyone left in therepublics who possesses the talent and intel-ligence to keep such programs alive?Kabalevsky's program was based on

lengthy experimentation and generated mate-rials in several media, including televised les-

55

sons. The apparent success of the programpoints to its probable value to other musiceducators. Perhaps organizations and indi-

viduals from outside the former Soviet Unionshould work with the new republics to pre-serve the record of this enormous effort, es-pecially in light of the perilous period oftransition which lies ahead. Certainly,Kabalevsky's printed program should betranslated into English, a task which can beaccomplished at a relatively low cost. Thethree-whales concept has already been incor-porated, with modifications, into the schooloutreach program of an American symphonyorchestra, yielding very promising results(see "But Will It Play in New Jersey?", pp. 52-53). It is likely that this approach couldprove useful in all countries where study ofthe Western symphonic music tradition ispart of a general music program.It is our hope that this brief examination of

another educational system will illuminate,with the international community, discus-sions about core curricula, pedagogical ap-proaches, reform, equality of access, special-ization versus general education, schoolchoice, fine-arts education, and so forth.While the primary intent of this article is toinform music educators throughout the worldof Kabalevsky's role in the development ofSoviet music education, perhaps more impor-tantly the three authors hope the world com-munity will be alerted to the precarious situa-tion of fine-arts education in the republics ofthe new commonwealth and mobilize to helppreserve the record of Kabalevsky's contribu-tion. Both the celebrated successes of theSoviet special music schools and the enor-mous potential of Kabalevsky's program inthe secondary general schools may be extin-guished in the struggle for survival.

Notes1. During trips made to the USSR in 1969,

1979, and 1972, when Kabalevsky's music edu-cation reform efforts were beginning; see espe-cially pp. 82-84, 95, and 2952. As this article was being written, the USSR

was dissolved and a new Commonwealth ofIndependent States was proposed and ratifiedby several former Soviet Republics.3. This period is also marked by the enor-

mously influential and successful church-spon-sored "choir schools," which were banned afterthe 1917 revolution. The story of this music

56

education program unfortunately lies beyondthe scope of the present article.4. Many others have pointed out that there

were decades-old, deeply felt philosophical andideological reasons for this preoccupation withlabor training. In addition, the availability ofstudents and teachers for labor was a crucialfactor in state-planned agricultural productionand industrial projects, The emphasis on laborcontinues in the new republics; see Brodinsky(1992), especially p. 382.5. The curriculum also included manual

training and physical education.6, On the same page, the authors state:

"There are subjects with two dominant compo-nents: mother tongue, mathematics (knowl-edge and skills); poetry and literature (knowl-edge and emotional attitudes)." Music is notidentified as one of these subjects.7. For a more detailed discussion, the reader

is referred to Muckle's article (1987) or, betteryet, his book on Soviet education (1988a; espe-cially chapters 1-4 and 8).8. Most recently, his Getty Center for the Arts

publications (e.g., Broudy, 1987).9. In the Soviet Union, the adjective "second-

ary" referred to the schooling that took placebetween the preschool or kindergarten leveland higher education (in 1991, grades 1through 11). This should not be confused withthe American use of the term, which refers tothe schooling that takes place after elementaryschool and before higher education, grades 7or 8 through 12. Also, it should be noted thatthe Soviet national dropout rate is high; seeShturman for glasnost-era figures.10. The reader is referred to Dunstan (1988)

for additional discussion of this issue (see pp.29-33 and pp. 58-61). This book will interestarts educators who seek information about edu-cation for gifted and special students, especiallythose want to learn more about how the theo-ries and work of psychologist Lev Vygotsky in-fluenced the Soviet educational system. Itshould also be noted that the glasnost era al-lowed many voices to be heard in the newspa-pers, including the voices of those who sawnegative aspects of egalitarian principles, such asthe neglect of bright and gifted children.11. Goldin investigated kindergarten music-

lesson materials while in the Soviet Union dur-ing the 1980s. The materials (e.g., songs, musi-cal games) used in these lessons were verypoor, with the exception of a few folk songs.This was a factor that affected the quality ofkindergarten music programs.12. Children's music schools became very

popular in the last two decades, and becauseparents paid tuition the schools accepted allchildren, including those who were not extraor-dinarily talented. This caused a problem forthe teachers, because the professionally ori-ented curriculum, established during the 19205

The Quarterly Journal of Music Teaching and Learning

and 1930s, was intended for very talented chil-dren. The approach of Faina Bryanskaya wasrevolutionary in that it sought to meet theneeds of all students enrolled in the children'smusic schools.13. Especially the ideological songs, and

with the exception of some very worthwhilefolk songs.14. Any initiative, small or large, in the So-

viet Union had to be preceded by a formulationof its ideological basis. Teachers had to writeboth "educational" and "moral" goals in theirlesson plans. Even a figure such as Kabalevskyhad to play by the "rules of the game" anddemonstrate that his ideas did not contradictofficial Soviet ideology.15. This is probably another necessary bow

to "the rules of the game." In materials forteachers, Kabalevsky opposed the use of ideo-logical songs in lesson plans, ostensibly be-cause this everyday usage would decrease theimportance of ideological holidays and histori-cal events. But Kabalevsky undoubtedly in-vented this rationale to call for a break withexisting practice while not upsetting authorities.If patriotic songs were musically strong-andsome were-Kabalevsky included them in hiscurriculum.16. This is different from Soviet education's

usual disregard for student interests.17. This too represented a radical departure

from the tsarist/Stalinist authoritarian approach.18. An organizational device reminiscent of

the 1920s progressive approach described ear-lier in this article.19. The Russian word intonazia is similar in

meaning to the English word "phrasing,"though the meaning of the Russian word al-ways includes a dimension of expressive shap-ing. Intonazia has no relationship to the En-glish word "intonation," which is commonlyused to refer to matters of tuning.20. Again, allowance for student choice

marks a departure from usual Soviet practice.21. This too represents a departure from

standard Soviet educational practice and hark-ens back to the progressive reforms of the19205.22. Kabalevsky was not alone in this break

with tradition. There were others in educationwho also called for new approaches; in thepedagogical literature they were calledpedagog-nouators.23. In a 1983 article, Kabalevsky responded

to this accusation in a seemingly unscientificmanner: "The actual practice of this system-meaning, perception, reaction, and responsivebehavior of children-was my criteria of rightand wrong, and was the scientific base of mywork with children from the experimental pro-gram" (p. 25). ,24. Incidentally, Barenboim, who was a fan

of Orff and an ardent supporter of Kabalevsky's

Volume IV; Number 3

system as a whole, diplomatically advisedKabalevsky to increase (strengthen) the Orffelement in the svstem: "I don't doubt that thelogic of Kabalevsky's system will itself bring itto the point where it will broaden practical mu-sical activities of children, making use (as anexample) of high-quality children's music in-struments-melodic and unpitched" (Baren-boim, 1974, p. 77).25. See "From the Editorial Board," at the end

of the 1974 article by Abdullin.26. Quoted by Kabalevsky (1983) in "De-

mand of the Time," in Kabalevsky 0986, p. 23).References

Abdullin. E. & Tsipin, G. (1978) The programthat looks ahead to the future. In Soviet Mu-sic 10. 45-56.

Abdullin, E. (1974) The pedagogical symphonyof Kabalevsky. In Soviet Music 12; 27-36.

Barenboim, L., Ed. (978) Musical'vospitanie' inthe USSR. From the series "MusicalVospitanie in the 20th Century." Moscow:All-Union Publishing Company, Soviet Com-poser.

Barenboim, L. (1977) In order to study joyfully.In Soviet Music 2; 73-77.

Brodinsky, B. (1992) The impact of perestroikaon Soviet education. In Phi Delta Kappan,73 (5), pp. 378-385

Broudy, H. (1987) The role of imagery in learn-ing. No, 1 in a series of occasional papers.Los Angeles: The Getty Center for the Arts.

Bryanskaya, Faina. (991) Personal communica-tion.

Dunstan,]. (1988) Gifted youngsters and specialschools. In]. Riordan, (Ed.), Sooiet educa-tion: T7Je gifted and the handicapped. Lon-don: Routledge,

Long, D. (1985) Educational reforms in the So-viet Union. In the series Special studies incomparative education No. 14. Buffalo,SUNY Comparative Education Center.

Kabalevsky, D. (986) Thoughts on pedagogy:Selected articles and presentations. Moscow:Pedagogika.

____ (1978) Musical 'uospitanieva the SovietUnion. L. Barenboim (Ed.). Moscow: All-Union Publishing Company, Soviet Com-poser.

____ (1973) The ideological basis of musical'uospitanteui the Soviet Union. Proceedingsof tbe International Societyfor Music Educa-tion (ISME) Co11uention, Moscow, July 8,1970. Moscow: All-Union Publishing Com-pany, Soviet Composer. First published inSoviet Music, 1970, No.9.

Kraevskij, V. & Lerner, I. (984) The theory ofcurriculum content in the USSR. In the Inter-national Bureau of Education's EducationalSciences Series Paris: UNESCO.

MCAllister, R. (1980) Dmitry BorisovichKabalevsky. In S, Sadie, (Ed,), Ibe new Grove

57

dictionary a/music and musicians. London:Macmillan.

Maezel, L. (1974) The grandmaster plays withouta queen. In Dmitry Kabalevsky: Creativemeetings, essays, and letters. Moscow: All-Union Publishing Company, Soviet Com-poser.

Ministry of Prosuecbenie of the RSFSR[RussianRepublic]. (1988) Program for the secondarygeneral education school: Music, grades 1-3,primm)! school. Moscow: Prosvechenie.

Muckle, J. (1988a) A guide to the Soviet curricu-lum: What the Russian child is taught inscbool. London: Croom Helm.

Muckle, J. (1988b) The educational experienceof the Soviet young person. In J. Riordan,(Ed.), Soviet education: The gifted and tbehandicapped. London: Routledge.

Muckle, J. (1987) Dimitri Kabalevsky and the

three whales: Recent developments in musiceducation in the Soviet general educationschool. In Britisb journal of Music Educa-tion, 4 (1), 53-70.

Remeta,D. (974) Music education in the USSR.Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Universityof Southern California.

Riordan, ]., Ed. (1988) Soviet education: Thegifted and the handicapped. London:Routledge.

Rust, V. (1992) School reform in the Russian re-public: An interview with Edward Dneprov.In Pbi Delta Kappan, 73 (5), 375-377.

Shturman, D. (1988) The Soviet secondary school.Tr. P. Shimrat, London: Routledge.

Whittaker, C. (1984) The origins of modem Rus-sian education: An intellectual biography 0/Count Sergei Uuarou, 1786-1855. De Kalb,IL: Northern Illinois University Press. ~

Psychologyof MusicDavid Hargreaves, Editor

CONTENTSVolume 21, Number 2, 1993

Jane Davidson Visual Perception of Performance Manner inthe Movements of Solo Musicians.

Louise ButtsworthGerard Fogerty, andPeter Rourke

Predicting Aural Performance in a TertiaryMusic Training Programme.

Luke Windsor Dynamic Accents and the Categorical Per-ception of Metre.

Carla Giomo An Experimental Study of Children's Sensi-tivity to Mood in Music.

Hamid Hekmat andJames Hertel

Pain Attenuating Effects of Preferred VersusNon-Preferred Music Interventions.

Review of Some Approaches to Researchin Music Education, edited by AnthonyKemp.

David Boyle

58 The Quarterly fournal of Music Teaching and Learning