More Than Mere Movement POI's

POI #1: "The body was conscious of the life and the movement of the music."

This is a quote that I found quite intriguing, and I have no idea why. There is so much that can be said about this statement that it bewilders me. I think that this quote was why Dalcroze came up with eurythmics. Because the body inherently moves, and reacts to music, it must be utilized in conjunction with it.

The other part of this quote that really gets to me is the term life. Music has life. I think that as musicians that we consider music to have a motion, a certain flow or direction to it. I do not think that music is usually thought of as having life. Having life, or being alive, means breathing, interacting, and communicating. Music does all of these things.

Just as our body is conscious to other forms of life, it is also tuned to music. Dalcroze was able to see this connection that the human body has with music and sought to utilize it. This may be the answer as to why I think that this quote is so amazing. It is because the human body is able to experience music the same way as it experience love, hate, and jealousy.

POI #2: An 'inner' sense of music.

Until I took eurythmics, I never thought that I had poor rhythm. I have been holding down bass lines for years before I took my first class. While I was able to maintain a steady rhythm for my ensembles, I had not really found a way to keep a steady rhythm in general. It is eurythmics' goal to develop an inner sense of music in its' students.

This inner sense of music needs many facets to grow. It needs rhythm, tonality, silence, pulse, and energy. When it comes to having good timing, one cannot forget the other facets of music. You have a rhythm, what is its' tonality, its' pulse or energy? What about when the rhythm isn't playing. Eurythmics makes you hone in on skills that develop a full musical sense.

When a musician is able to have an innate musical sense, that is, a musical sense that he does not have to tap into manually, true musicianship can occur. I sincerely feel that this was Dalcroze's purpose. He wanted music students to learn the most basic concepts of music; rhythm, tonality, pulse, silence, and energy. When the student learns these concepts until they are automatic, he will perform his art at a higher quality. His musical sense can take over, allowing a for a better performance.

POI #3: Where's Dalcroze???

This article has made me wonder why a Dalcroze approach is not as popular in an early education setting as say Kodaly or Orff. Why is it that I have seen books dedicated to a combination of Orff and Gordon, but no mention of Dalcroze.

I notice many similarities with Kodaly and Dalcroze in the way that they relate music to their students. Dalcroze chose to educate the inherent musicality of the human body, and Kodaly chose to educate the specific student. While this may seem different, it is not. Both of these styles play to the strengths of the student.

I do understand that Dalcroze is taught, but why is his method not used as popularly as the others? Also, why is it so hard to get certified as a Dalcroze instructor, but a bit simpler to be Orff certified? I am not sure if this last question is true, but it does seem to me that there are far more Orff specialized teacher rather than Dalcroze.

I wish that this could change. I believe that Dalcroze hit the nail on the head when he started to educate the innate characteristic of humanity, music.