Do you not think it would be good if NPU were to get together a panel of expert teachers and players with a view to forming a standardised method of giving lessons .
If the lessons were numbered and graded it would make it easier for the piper who only gets lessons at tionols and such,and often with different teachers each time. He would be able to say to the teacher that he has got as far as"grade 5,lesson 3" or something like that,and so would progress at a much steadier and clearer pace,making sure all ornaments and techiques are covered with set practise routines .
RORY
I don’t know what it’s like in Ireland, but I’m not sure that what you’re proposing would work in North America. I’ve been to a few tionols and 20 to 30 uilleann pipers is the most I’ve seen. You’ll usually have 2 or 3 pipes instructors and students will be divided into 3 groups - beginner, intermediate and advanced. That means you’ll probably have 10 beginners, 10 intermediate and 5 advanced.
Your typical tionol lasts a weekend or maybe a long weekend. That doesn’t allow for 5 groups - the instructors would be exhausted.
Piping is a tradition and the process of learning a tradition shouldn’t be standardized.
This is something I have to agree with you on. There are so many elements in my piping that I find missing due to a lack of standardized and complete instruction. I don’t know if I would take it to the point of grades, but surely there is enough expertise at NPU to put together a complete curriculum of practice and study to ensure we all get the proper coverage at all levels.
Someone from Ireland who was over here pointed out to me once that what I was missing was to be in the company of really great pipers for instruction and inspiration. Few of us are in a position to get this kind of input on a regular basis. I think that it is time for NPU to start putting some of this knowledge down on paper or DVD to help ensure that all the lessons are learned, not just the few that get brought back by one or two people from a distant tionól.
djm
The uilleann equivelant of these rory?
David
Do you not think it would be good if NPU were to get together a panel of expert teachers and players with a view to forming a standardised method of giving lessons .
Honestly it’s not a bad idea in theory but in practice it could be tricky to implement.
I find teaching at tionols a little different nowadays than say 15 years ago when I thought at my first tionol.
Then, you had pipers that wanted to learn tunes, tunes and more tunes. The more advanced you were, the more difficult tune you get to learn. These pipers would already have access to regular lessons but would want to learn different tunes that their regular teacher may not have.
I would teach how to do a cran or a roll and offer suggestions as to where to put them into the tune. Etc.
Nowadays it seems that there is more accessibility to tunes. We can buy any album we want (most of them anyway) on itunes and/or other music websites and so individual pipers repertoires are getting bigger and bigger so as a result the pipers who come to the group lessons these days want to learn the finer points of the instrument. This is only a good thing.
When I was taking lessons as a kid these finer points were left up to me to discover. By this I mean I was given lists of recordings to listen to and I was encouraged to find out what the pipers were physically doing with their fingers to make the sounds that they did.
Now, the fact that you can go to a tionol and learn this stuff in a class in only a brilliant thing. Especially for the pipers who don’t have access to regular monthly or weekly lessons.
But as a result you can get 6 pipers in a class of varying ability but they can all learn something by the teacher picking a nice handy tune and making it as complex or as simple as he/she wants to suit the students.
Now to get back to your point of a grading system,
Again, in theory it will work but you have the problem of having enough teachers to teach all the levels of classes.
Lets say 20 of you turn up to a tionol in St Louis and your already graded as you suggest. It could happen that we need 7 or 8 teachers to accommodate those grades. Between reed making classes and a slow air workshop we could barely make all 20 pipers happy. And the St Louis tionol is a bigger one. Most tionols in the states and in Ireland have between 2 and 4 guest teachers.
On the other side of the coin, if you have 5 students in each class of the exact same level it can make for a very fulfilling experience for the students and the teacher. Folks can learn more stuff and quicker. But that is in a very ideal world. Eventually you’d have a weekend workshop or even a weekly class when it would consist of one to one classes and you lose the whole ‘gathering’ element.
Again, in principle its not a bad idea but the utmost danger is that it can take from the sharing element of tionols and group classes in general.
Once you start to put standards on any kind of folk music you start to lose a little of what it’s all about.
My 2p
Tommy
Nicely written Tommy!
Based on my own experience of being in the buisness of teaching music, I would simply (and far less eloquently than Tommy) say, “no.”
The downside, however, of any standardization is the loss of individuality/regionality.
Standardised and graded lessons,not playing. If a piper has talent it will come out .
but the majority of us are not super talented and just want to play the pipes well and may need more help than the naturally gifted players out there. My own lessons as a very beginner when I look back on them left alot to be desired,there was no direction or structure to them and as said before,alot was left to figure out for yourself which introduced a level of frustration that was sometimes overwhelming.
It has long been recognised that there is also an elitist snobbery element in piping that resist,out of fear of dilution, any hint of change ,even if it is progress and in their efforts are actually in the long term killing the instrument.
Anything that helps people learn to play is a good thing and should at least be tried
RORY
This is true of any traditional art or craft. It’s not unique to piping.
What you suggest might work where there is a concentration of pipers (Dublin is the only place I can think of which would have sufficient numbers). For the rest of us, it’s a question of taking lessons from the local advanced piper, if you’re lucky enough to have one living locally. Otherwise, you make do with books, online sources and one or two tionols per year (if you’re lucky).
The more I think about it actually, the main stumbling block would be trying to get a panel of experts to agree on —,well anything !
Its a well known fact that uilleann pipers could not agree on the colour of shite .
RORY
I would have to disagree. We only have one tionól a year here, so I only have a few experiences of instruction from high-level players (really only a couple hours shared class time), but in all cases they were able to speak clearly on what needed to be done, how to do, and why. This is the stuff that only filters down out here to the hinterlands in dribs and drabs. I am pretty sure there is a somewhat standard curriculum of teaching directly within NPU itself. I don’t feel any need to be graded, but I would surely like to get the whole of the teaching knowledge that these instructors seem to share on the basics, what is considered intermediate knowledge, and paths for study for the advanced.
djm
my personal feeling is that one can be very particular, even heirarchichal; about the elements of the language (mordents, cranns, pats, cuts, triplings etc)
the structure and nature of the traditional repertiore (double jig, contrasting phrases, dotting, tempo, etc)
and the pedagogy of the instrument (.033mm OD, rolled staple, bag pressure, three scrapes and not ONE more, etc)
but to be particular about the APPLICATION of said elements in performance is a very subjective thing; unable to be judged by one yardstick accross the board..
.
It is surprising to me that so few have bothered to speak out against standardized teaching methods and grading. There is no realistic way you can separate a standardized curriculum from the playing that results from it, because learning music is a wholistic process and how you sound at the end is largely influenced by your approach. As it is now, the Irish music collective is standardised enough without anymore help in that direction.
What I feel is required is not greater standardization in curriculum but a greater emphasis in the musical approach one takes in their music. Intrinsic is the idea that Irish music is ultimately better learnt proactively than it can be taught formally.
I would say the same for mediocre players, only I don’t see why the system should to cater to them more than anyone else.
read my post above.
There seems to be a belief that standardised lessons is in some way going to stifle a piper that may develop a unique style as he progresses,but I dont think this is true. If it was the case than all the pipers that were taught by the same teacher would play the same way and as we know Leo Rowsome taught both Liam O’Flynn and Paddy Moloney and they have completely different styles.
Not all pipers are going to develop unique styles but those with talent and a desire to play in a unique way will not be stifled by standardised lessons.
RORY
Yes, but what you’re suggesting isn’t the same as different pipers learning under the same teacher (out of a selection of teachers), and has more far reaching consequences than that.
What do you think the consequences might be ?
RORY
Classical music has used a standardized grade system for many years in the UK. While the repertoire and performance standards are proscribed, the teaching isn’t as standardized as Rory proposes since there are numerous methods and tutors used.
Over the past 100 years or so, this genre has become very homogenized - some blame the recording of music. Very little regional stylistic variation remains and there is somewhat of an obsession with fixed interpretations of the written note. In the past decade there is a growing realization that considerable regional variation and latitude existed throughout the baroque and classical periods. In the same way a written version of a reel is only a starting point, many ‘composed’ pieces of the period expected the performer to make the piece their own and use knowledge of dance styles to determine the actual rhythm and phrasing.
I do think we could benefit from more comprehensive tutors and ways of capturing the knowledge of great players, but I think a formulaic, standardized approach is a dangerous way to go.
The GHB world suffers from stifling standardization. Even the manner of dress at competitions is proscribed. Too many bands focus on competition entirely and thus are shunted into the narrow interpretations of a handful of regional judges.
DJones
In my own experience, a good teacher will always encourage and emphasize his pupil’s own ideas and abilities, and not force his own style onto him.
I don’t think the comparison with the GHB is appropriate, they have a totally different background. If twenty pipers playing together there is not much space for individuality - everyone has to know exactly what to play or the sound of it will be terrible (after all, there’s very much of a military background). In this case (like in the case of every orchestra), the conductor (or Pipe Major) is the “musician”, the players are “the instrument”.