Guest post by Julian Leeks, director of Sound World

Imagine a future in which it’s almost impossible for enthusiastic, musically gifted children to reach their potential. A future in which state education is completely devoid of music. A future in which the amateur choirs and orchestras that have flourished for decades in towns, cities and villages up and down the country, have all but vanished.

A future in which the music teachers, the freelance performers and the talented, dedicated amateurs who form the backbone of our country’s musical life, have all become endangered species. What would our musical culture look like then? Every aspect of music would be affected: from Friday night pub bands to the London Sinfonietta and from primary school nativities to Oscar winning films.

How would we fill the void left by the musicians? AI perhaps? The very thought makes me shudder. But we don’t really need to worry about that now, do we?

Well, it may be closer than you think.

At the risk of sounding like a prophet of doom, bellowing “The end is nigh!” at passers by, I believe we may be sleepwalking towards a future in which there are insufficient musicians and music teachers to sustain a viable musical culture. I’m concerned that the status of music has declined significantly in our increasingly visually oriented society. A society which values “output” and wealth generation above an inner life and well-being, and one in which decisions of consequence are made on the basis of quantitive data at the expense of qualitative understanding. 

But where is the evidence to support this warning?

In deference to the prevailing trend, let’s start with the numbers.

Between 2007 and 2013, the number of pupils taking GCSE music has nearly halved. The decline is even steeper at A’Level where a disproportionate number of candidates are privately educated (28% and rising year on year), despite accounting for just 6% of the total school population. Research predicts that A’Level music will disappear from state schools completely by 2033. Just nine years from now.

The most recent ABRSM study reported the lowest ever number of children taking instrumental lessons since records began. Between 2014 and 2020 there has been a 15% decline in the number of children currently playing an instrument and an 11% decline in the number of those taking instrumental lessons. During the same period, the report reveals an increase in the amount of available work for music teachers, suggesting an even more marked decline in teacher numbers.

There has also been a very significant shift towards whole class teaching at the expense of individual lessons, artificially inflating the numbers recorded for overall participation. Data suggests that this method of teaching does not translate into children’s continuing interest in playing music.

So, those are the numbers and they don’t look good. But do they chime with our experience of the nation’s musical life today? Maybe not.

But while music might look and feel like it’s thriving, the wealth of bands, orchestras, concerts and gigs provides only a superficial sheen of good health. What we see today isn’t a predictor of our musical future its a reflection of our educational past. If we want to imagine the future of music we have to think about our educational present. And we’ve seen how that’s going.

Of course there are always a few, super-talented, autodidactic outliers, but the vast majority of working musicians, regardless of genre, had at least some input from a knowledgable, motivating music teacher. It’s how we pass on the wisdom of generations; virtual lessons via YouTube or elsewhere don’t come close.

So why isn’t everyone talking about this?

This kind of generational knock on effect is hard to perceive due to shifting baseline syndrome. For those unfamiliar with this idea it can be summed up as follows: every generation perceives its own experience as representing a normal or acceptable baseline against which subsequent change can be measured. But for each generation that follows the baseline may be quite different, meaning any further changes will be measured against quite different acceptable norms.

To bring it back to music and the numbers described above, if the trajectory continues unchecked for successive generations, even though no single generation will experience any sudden, dramatic loss of music, the outcome – the gradual, inexorable depletion of musical activity – is inevitable.

But even musicians might not be aware of this. Surrounded by musical activity both at work and in the home, whilst constantly meeting a wildly disproportionate number of musical children, their experience is totally at odds with the broader reality and may lead to a degree of complacency.

It may also be the case that a lot of musicians feel they’re doing enough already, just by being musicians. Understandably, they may not wish to become activists or campaigners. But increasingly, many are starting to think that simply being a musician is no longer enough. After all, if musicians won’t stand up for music, why would anyone else?

To return to my main theme, how long could we go on if the number of children learning music were to halve every 15 years or so (and by extension, the number of teachers available to teach each subsequent generation). I don’t know what the critical mass for musicians is, the point below which we really experience the loss of music as described in my opening paragraphs. But if current trends are allowed to continue it can’t be that far off. One generation? Two maybe?

And once it reaches that point the damage would take many decades to repair, even with the very best intentions of a government with very deep pockets.

Which is why, over the past year, we’ve been making A land without music? a podcast series about the value of music and what we can do to safeguard it for future generations.

It’s been a huge privilege to meet some wonderful guests for the series and their insightful and engaging contributions are what make the series; and it seems fitting to note that, as music education becomes evermore the preserve of a wealthy elite, hardly any of the musicians I spoke to came from what might be described as privileged backgrounds.

Unless, that is, we’re talking about a very different kind of privilege; the privilege of opportunity. It’s what gave them the chance to discover music and to grow that seed of discovery into a life-long, life-sustaining passion. Crucially, it was opportunity which was indifferent to the financial or social status of people’s parents. It was there for everyone.

Would they have had such opportunities had they been growing up today? Probably not. To quote Jess Gillam, “So much untapped potential, and so much untapped happiness.”

To listen to A land without music? on Apple Podcasts visit: https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/a-land-without-music/id1773774272

Or search your favourite podcast platform

Statistical sources

1. The Joint Council for Qualifications
2. Royal Birmingham Conservatoire and Birmingham City University: A-level music decline and disadvantage attainment gaps (2021)
3. ABRSM: Making Music (2021)