Musicking as education for social and ecological peace: a new synthesis

Abstract

The aim of this article is twofold: first, to confirm the multi-level linkage between the ecological and social realms in terms of violence, peace, and education, and second, to explore what light ecological thinking can shed on musicking as a potentially effective tool in peace education. The effects of violence in the ecological and social realms are clearly linked, but so are the causes (patterns of thought and behaviors) that lead to violence in each realm; these common causes (which Galtung refers to as ‘fault-lines’) are what need to be addressed, holistically, in peace education. The second aim requires two steps. First, based on meta-analysis of work by ethnomusicologists in diverse cultures, I propose a way of conceiving of human musicking as essentially an ecological behavior, one that has emerged to support the essential process of connecting us to our environment, connecting our inner and outer worlds. Beginning from this conception, I apply recent work in various ecology-related disciplines to show that this characteristic function of musicking makes it well-suited for addressing the root causes of violence in both social and ecological realms. Finally, looking at the challenges and goals of peace education through the lens of ecological thinking, I propose some practical applications, supporting ideas, and suggested models for implementing musicking activities in this endeavor.

Keywords:

• Music
• peacebuilding
• ecological thinking
• violence
• fault-lines
• ethnomusicology
• musicking
• Santiago theory

Notes

1. These correspond to the “fault-lines” outlined by Galtung (Urbain 2016, this issue), and I will use the terms largely interchangeably throughout

2. I borrow this term from its more common application in biology to highlight the fact that the underlying structures and relationships in these thought patterns are the same.

3. It is not my purpose to critique his work; because I am using the same term and expanding its meaning, I feel the need to acknowledge his contribution. I should also clarify that I developed this definition several years before Small’s work came out, and so am happy with the apparent compatibility of the two concepts.

4. These three realms correspond with the types of relationships in Small’s discussion. It is not the case that every culture will specify all three domains, and may not be the case that any one functional domain will be specified in all cultures.

5. I cannot include every human culture, nor do justice to the depth of these scholars’ work in these cultures, but trust that this survey will nonetheless serve its intended purpose.

6. Education is another of the arenas in which the Santiago theory is getting a lot of attention (Proulx 2008; Semetsky 2008; Maturana and Poerksen 2011; Francesconi and Tarozzi 2012; Francovich 2015).

7. While Maturana is not happy with what he perceives to be the careless application of autopoiesis to human social systems, for example (Maturana and Poerksen 2011, 105–110), the Santiago authors do discuss the remarkable diversity of emergent behaviors among species from social insects to primates that function in this way.

8. This often-quoted phrase is probably an oversimplification of work on the brain as a dynamic system by Donald Hebb, dating from 1949 (Rauscher 2011, 248). Edelman, himself a musician and neuroscientist, mentions one particularly interesting example; the neural maps ‘corresponding to tactile inputs from the fingers’ change their boundaries, depending on individual finger use (2000, 84).

9. See Maturana and Poerksen 2011, 114–122, for discussion of the theory as applied to psychiatry.

10. Maturana and Varela (1998, 247) write, ‘Every emotion … is a biological dynamic which is deep-rooted …’.

11. Panksepp and Biven note that learning and memory connected with our deepest ancestral affective systems are the strongest and longest-lasting, writing, ‘Emotional “flashbulb” memories are automatically consolidated within our brain networks because of, we would suggest, the power of the neurochemistries accompanying affective arousals’ (2012, 211).

12. In this context, Sauvé and Orellana (2004, 107–117) illustrate the effectiveness of the learning community approach through their own experiences. This practice seems a particularly good fit with the ecological models explored earlier.