Community music: Australia’s silent partner
Community music is a lively and pervasive force throughout Australia, improving the lives of millions from busy urban districts to isolated outback settlements, with people joining in remarkable numbers. Despite this energy, much of this work stays hidden from external view. That low profile seems to come from community music’s greatest asset: deep local commitment and self-reliance, which often reduces reliance on outside forces.
To dig deeper into this often overlooked but vital dimension of Australia’s musical landscape, the Queensland Conservatorium Research Centre launched Community Music in Australia, a two-year research project funded by the Australian Research Council, run in partnership with Music Council of Australia, Australian Music Association, and the Australian Society for Music Education. The project team came with extensive histories in community music and music education. It included Professor Huib Schippers (Queensland Conservatorium Research Centre, Griffith University), Associate Professor Peter Dunbar-Hall (Sydney Conservatorium of Music, University of Sydney), Dr Richard Letts (Music Council of Australia), and Research Fellow Dr Brydie-Leigh Bartleet (Queensland Conservatorium Research Centre, Griffith University).
The research aimed to expose how community music works in Australia and what models it offers for music learning and teaching in both formal and informal contexts. The team picked six active music communities, spanning multicultural suburbs, largely monocultural country towns, rural networks, and remote Indigenous communities. They interviewed and observed more than 400 participants in those settings, while an additional 200 people took part in a nationwide survey on the same topic. The final report was released as a book on 10 May 2009 at a Community Music Symposium co-hosted by the Queensland Conservatorium Research Centre and Music. Play for Life.
The 250-page report offers a rich snapshot of musical activity across Australia and puts forward targeted suggestions for building a lasting environment for community music in this country. Internationally, it also stands as the first study to look at six very different practices using a consistent framework, allowing conclusions about both site-specific features and broader tendencies in community music activities. This article offers a short overview of some of the most important findings from that report.
The case studies
At the outset, the possible subjects for case studies were staggeringly broad: across Australia there was an overwhelming assortment of activities, ranging from tiny independent initiatives that barely register to sizable well-known groups. From this rich pool of possibilities, with input from Music. Play for Life, the partner organisations, and their extensive networks, six communities were chosen from a shortlist of more than 20. These communities included a middle‑class suburban location (Dandenong Ranges, Victoria), a large established regional city (Albany, Western Australia), a small rural town (McLaren Vale, South Australia), a culturally diverse urban city (Fairfield City, New South Wales), a remote Indigenous setting (Borroloola, Northern Territory), and an urban Indigenous setting (Inala, Queensland). Each case study provided insights into how community music functions across varying environments, places, methods, and results.
The Dandenong Ranges Music Council (DRMC) case study demonstrated a lively model of creative and innovative community partnerships, both through their ongoing work and flagship projects such as the Fire Cycle Project, Composers Connecting Community, and the Water Cycle Project, among many others. That dedication to building ties also reaches into education, where the DRMC has a proven record with school‑community collaborations that happen on both an everyday basis and on a larger scale. At the center of many of these efforts is a clear commitment to backing activities and events that focus on local issues, developed through careful conversations with the wider community. The programs offered by the DRMC show a commitment to social inclusion and equal chances to take part regardless of age or ability. As Bev McAlister (DRMC Executive Officer) described: “The DRMC’s philosophy is about creating the opportunity for people of all ages and abilities to make music, and for music to be performed and integrated into the lifestyle of the community” (personal interview, 14 September 2007). Overall, the creative and inspiring leadership of Bev McAlister and the DRMC team is a standout element in its success, particularly how they foster sustainability and autonomy among the organisation’s various parts.
The Albany case study provided useful insights into how community music functions in an Australian regional city. There was a noticeable community‑minded spirit in this regional center, which turned into a commitment to join and support collective music‑making. Owing to Albany’s scale and tight‑knit feel, the interaction and links between community groups were very high, and that in turn created a creative climate and lifestyle that strongly appealed to locals. Sheena Prince (Senior Music Teacher, Albany Senior High School) observed this shared approach to music‑making: “In Albany I’ve been really impressed with the number of people who’ve wanted to get better at their craft and share it with other people” (personal interview, 15 October 2007). This creative environment was also strongly encouraged by community leaders and philanthropists, who are part of a long and important tradition of backing the arts in Albany. From an educational standpoint, engaged teachers played a key role in nurturing a vibrant community music scene in Albany. Similarly, very effective models of informal and non‑formal music teaching and learning were present, such as the popular music program Recipe for Jam and the Celtic music program Just Fiddling.
The McLaren Vale case study provided a concrete example of how a school‑based community music program can develop. Tatachilla Lutheran College is nurturing several lively school‑community collaborations, which show a dedication to intergenerational learning, and in turn enhance the school’s curriculum and students’ learning experiences. These projects, like the Community Carols, also create important music education openings for parents, grandparents, and the wider community. Greg John (Head of Performing Arts, Tatachilla Lutheran College) explains the value of this inclusive approach to community music‑making: “It’s about community building and relationship building and the underpinning thing in all of this is the music. That’s the thread that goes through all this community building around here, where you can get people from the stiff accountant through to the hippy performing together” (personal interview, 9 December 2007). Clear structure, support, and key leaders were also identified as critical factors in making these events work well. Still, the energy of community music in this region was not limited only to Tatachilla Lutheran College. In fact, a range of other important venues and places were fostering community music activities both in McLaren Vale and nearby towns like Willunga. Throughout the region, people tied this energy to the attractive lifestyle and location, which seems to draw creative individuals.
The Fairfield City case study looked at how community music programs work in a culturally diverse urban area in Australia. In this case, there was compelling evidence linking community music and cultural identity, particularly for migrant communities. Many credited Fairfield City’s musical vibrancy to that cultural variety and the strong dedication musicians feel toward preserving their cultural customs and traditions. As Tiffany Lee‑Shoy (Senior Policy Advisor, Cultural Planning, Fairfield City Council) suggests: “One of the things that you’ll notice is the use of traditional forms of art, particularly music and dance, to be that conduit of adjusting to life in Australia where there is a leaning on homeland culture to be that connection socially, and to be that connection toward culture as well in Australia” (personal interview, 18 February 2008). They also pinpointed the essential role community music plays in linking generations within particular cultures, and the somewhat complex situation that arises when second and third‑generation migrants focus on defining themselves relative to their parents’ and grandparents’ cultures. This case study pointed toward the possible role community music could play in drawing these cultural groups closer, though this is still to reach its full promise. For now, the strongest cultural links are being established in schools and through various community music education programs, which are having a very positive effect on the lives of young people in this area.
The Borroloola case study revealed how community music operates in a remote Indigenous context. It showed that in such places, ideas of culture, kinship, and land are deeply tied to Indigenous concepts of community, and by extension community music. In other words, music‑making in this particular context cannot be understood separately from its relationship to people and places. Liz Mackinlay (a long‑standing researcher in the community) explains the weight of these connections: “Everybody relates to each other as family, but that family relationship is inherently linked to country and where people live is about country. People are really strong about keeping these relationships to country in place, but those relationships aren’t divorced from family. So I think that’s partly what community is about here; country and family. Music is one of those very powerful and potent ways that those two things come together” (personal interview, 25 April 2008). In this case study, the strong ties between ‘traditional’ and ‘contemporary’ ways of creating music, singing, and dancing were visible through energetic women’s culture and the restating of traditional cultural messages through popular music in the four local bands. From an educational angle, many identified the important capacity of music to link young people with their culture, and the possible benefits of school‑community partnerships to make that happen were being examined at the time of fieldwork. It was also observed that somewhat controversial external forces, particularly a recently established local mine’s community benefits trust, have the potential to positively affect music and arts provision in the community.
The Inala case study showed how a community‑driven program, strongly backed by a local council, can be used to draw in young Indigenous people in an urban setting and allow them to feel a sense of pride about their cultural identity. As seen in the case of Stylin’ UP, a thorough community consultation process is needed to build that strong sense of community ownership and engagement. Generally speaking, the consultation process is effective but it is not without challenges with intergenerational and intercultural interactions. The complex balancing act of meeting the needs of council, community, and schools in organising the workshops and event day was also noted. This model consequently relies heavily on sensitive and excellent organisers, negotiators, and facilitators who can run the skill‑building workshops, coordinate with schools, and work closely with the local community to tackle such issues. Finally, the case study pointed out the value of choosing a musical genre that interests its intended audience, in this case hip‑hop and R&B. The case study also uncovered compelling evidence demonstrating how such genres can foster a sense of cultural identity, community, and empowerment among Indigenous youth at the local level. As Chelsea Bond (Community Crew member) says, “Stylin’ UP is our corroboree for today and that’s what I think has pulled people in over the years and attracted people to it. It has imagined us very differently to how we’re frequently talked about” (personal interview, 16 June 2008).
The survey
The nationwide survey was designed to back up the case study findings and measure them against national impressions and views. The survey was built in consultation with the partner organisations and distributed online to a broad range of music educators, community music facilitators and practitioners, music therapists, and arts administrators, mainly via their mailing lists. Over 200 people answered, representing every state and territory.
The results highlighted several important tendencies, especially regarding success factors, learning and teaching models, and school–community collaborations. While people from different styles and cultural traditions responded, school teachers made up the largest proportion (60.3%), and a large share of those respondents were working in choral music (48.6%) at the time they answered.
The survey identified a range of critical success factors in Australian community music, the top five being: inspiring leadership from an individual (64.7%); careful planning (62.8%); location, venue, and facilities (62.2%); support from the broader community (61.5%); and choice of repertoire/style/genre (59.6%). These top factors were all strongly visible in the case studies, confirming the significance of engaging practice and pedagogy, providing infrastructure and organisation, and forming ties to the wider community in active community music‑making.
When it came to learning and teaching in community settings, survey respondents noted that one‑way instructional teaching and peer or cooperative learning were both prevalent. Many answers pointed toward the necessity for music directors and conductors to be flexible, responsive to participants’ needs, and to accept that skill levels vary in some cases. A focus on the process, the joy of gaining skill, and the social aspects of playing music together were also pointed out. The single most striking discovery from the online survey, however, concerned the connections between community music and one other theme that ran throughout the research data. This connection underpinned much of the activity, and continues to represent a strong principle driving community music throughout the country.
Only 74.3% of respondents believe that connections between schools and community music are not reaching their full potential. This significant response illustrates the importance of not only examining this issue further, but finding positive models for how these connections can be initiated and developed more effectively.
Research team members were impressed by the loose yet often very effective organisational structures found in the six case studies and nationwide survey. These structures have in most cases evolved from a bottom-up process, are highly adaptable to change, challenges, and new opportunities, and are frequently led by a single visionary individual. Related to this is the array of learning and teaching approaches encountered, ranging from what would be termed informal to highly formalised, but in most cases with considerable sensitivity to context and fitness for purpose. The case studies and nationwide survey indicated that the potential of music education in schools for creating synergies with this powerful and self-energising force is great and far from being fulfilled.
Given that each of the six case studies was selected to represent very different circumstances and environments, many of the characteristics observed in the community music activities were unique to their specific participants, facilitators, sites, contexts, aims, and infrastructure. However, there were also strongly shared underlying characteristics between the activities. These were identified under nine key domains (shown in the figure below): 1) Infrastructure; 2) Organisation; 3) Visibility and public relations; 4) Relationship to place; 5) Social engagement; 6) Support and networking; 7) Dynamic music-making; 8) Engaging pedagogy and facilitation; and 9) Links to school. The most important characteristics of almost any community music project can be described under these headings.
The identification and exploration of these nine domains allowed the research team to juxtapose six widely different practices through a single methodology, and may well constitute the most significant outcome of the research. This nine-domain framework has achieved this without forcing diverse practices into a single definition or by establishing value judgments, but rather by creating a practice-based, demonstrably successful instrument to describe and gauge community music activities in and between settings. This framework has also enabled a better understanding of how community music operates in a range of different contexts across Australia, and has highlighted
the need to further develop connections between such community music activities and music education in schools.
Recommendations
The report outlines a number of concrete recommendations based on the nine domains identified and designed to create a sustainable environment for community music to flourish in Australia now and into the future. Some recommendations are aimed at practitioners, others at cultural officers, policy makers, music educators, or other stakeholders. Many can be used and implemented at a local level. However, the most significant recommendation on a national scale was to initiate a community music network in Australia. Wasting no time, Music Play for Life stepped up to the challenge and acted upon this recommendation within minutes from the 10 May 2009 launch. Australia’s Community Music Network is now up and running. Meanwhile, the Queensland Conservatorium Griffith University is investigating how it can integrate community music training into its undergraduate and postgraduate offerings. The research team hopes that these initiatives, and the implementation of the other recommendations outlined in the report, will ensure a sustained and growing engagement with the vibrant realities of community music in Australia in the years to come.