The European music profession is rapidly changing and suggests more flexible career patterns and a need for transferable skills and lifelong learning strategies. Musicians collaborate increasingly with practitioners in other arts and societal cross-sector settings. This reality holds challenges and implications for higher music education (Smilde 2009). This state of play was point of departure in 2006 for the development of the collaborative European master ‘New Audiences and Innovative Practice’ (NAIP) by five European conservatoires. Five schools, from Iceland, the UK, the Netherlands and Finland, devised an innovative two-year master programme, helping students to develop and lead creative projects in diverse artistic, community and cross-sectoral settings, thereby creating new audiences and developing their leadership skills in varied artistic and social contexts. The programme aims to provide future professional musicians with the skills and knowledge to become artistically flexible practitioners able to adjust to new contexts within a wide range of situations of societal relevance. This particular chapter entails a case study of the first summer school of this programme which took place in Iceland. It details the heart of the programme, the artistic laboratory and reflective practice.
DOCUMENT
“If you do what you always did, you will get what you always got.”Evert Bisschop Boele challenges this idea and thinks about new audiences for music in changing times. Evert is Professor (‘lector’) of New Audiences at the Prince Claus Conservatoire, Hanze University of Applied Sciences, Groningen in the Netherlands.
DOCUMENT
Music can touch people deeply, and lead to wellbeing as an all-encompassing word for everything that makes life worth living, or at least can make it liveable. Musicians can play an important role in these processes, not as pseudo-therapists, but from their own artistic identity, with an approach in which they profoundly understand the social contexts to which they respond. In essence this is about connecting as a musician with those who, due to whatever circumstances, are vulnerable, and/or those who do not easily get into contact with live music.This requires new qualities and skills from such “new audience musicians” who want to engage with people in contexts beyond the concert hall, jazz club or church, like schools, hospitals, nursing homes, prisons, or e.g. the corporate world.Underpinning engagement with those new audiences is first and foremost a set of values that implies that music can work as a catalyst for communication between various groups of people from different cultural and social contexts, and can bring about social change, no matter how small (Smilde 2018: 673). Point of departure is the idea that artistic processes can have transformative potential which can bring about a sense of community, inclusion and collective identity.In this chapter, research into musicians’ engagement with new audiences will be explored through examples in the field of music and healthcare. I will do that from a biographical perspective, where the musicians’ personal and professional development is strongly influenced by their experiences in their artistic practice. Here, biographical learning processes are at the core of what we might term, musicians’ “professional performance” (Lombarts 2010).Two examples are discussed in this light, a research into the project “Music for Life”, on music and dementia, taking place in elderly care homes, and another, termed “Meaningful Music in Healthcare”, which is on music in the hospital. After that the chapter will address what everything learnt means for learning and teaching in higher music education, embracing the idea of engaging with new audiences and the potentials of Musikvermittlung.
DOCUMENT
Mata Haggis-Burridge's keynote addresses the surprising overlap between the interface design, storytelling tools, and the way in which we (can) reach diverse audiences.
DOCUMENT
Paper for the Pop and Jazz Platform 2017 of the European Association of Conservatoires AEC, London, 18-2-2017
DOCUMENT
Despite increased attention since 2015, there is little consensus on why audiences believe or share disinformation. In our study, we propose a shift in analytical perspective by applying the concept of resilience. Through a systematic literature review (n = 95), we identify factors that have been linked to individuals’ resilience and vulnerability to disinformation thus far. Our analysis reveals twelve factors: thinking styles, political ideology, worldview and beliefs, pathologies, knowledge, emotions, (social) media use, demographics, perceived control, trust, culture, and environment. By applying the results to the socio-ecological model (SEM), we provide a comprehensive view on what constitutes resilience to disinformation, delineate between different levels of influence, and identify relevant gaps in research. Our conceptualization contributes to an under-theorized field, in which the term resilience is much used yet rarely sufficiently defined.
DOCUMENT
Dit essay werd uitgegeven ter gelegenheid van de installatie op 25 juni 2014 van Evert Bisschop Boele als lector ‘New Audiences’ van het lectoraat Lifelong Learning in Music, Kenniscentrum Kunst & Samenleving/Prins Claus Conservatorium, Hanzehogeschool Groningen.
DOCUMENT
In media audience research we tend to assume that media are engaged with when they are used, however ‘light’ such engagement might be. Once ‘passive media use’ was banned as a reference to media use, being a media audience member became synonymous with being a meaning producer. In audience research however I find that media are not always the object of meaning making in daily life and that media texts can be hardly meaningful. Thinking about media and engagement, there is a threefold challenge in relation to audience research. The coming into being of platform media and hence of new forms of media production on a micro level that come out of and are woven into practices of media use, suggests that we need to redraft the repertoire of terms used in audience research (and maybe start calling it something else). Material and immaterial media production, the unpaid labour on the part of otherwise audience members should for instance be taken into account. Then, secondly, there is the continuing challenge to further develop heuristically strong ways of linking media use and meaning making, and most of all to do justice, thirdly, to those moments and ways in which audiences truly engage with media texts without identifying them with those texts.
DOCUMENT
Audience studies is not the vibrant field it was in its 1980s and early 1990s heyday. Cultural studies today has a more balanced interest in production, audiences and texts. A renewed focus in audience studies on everyday meaning production, identity and relations of power could benefit from recent developments. Theorization of power especially has benefited from recent work on governmentality. In accord with recent work on ‘affect’, there is an opportunity for renewed vitality and urgency. Was audience studies damaged beyond repair by the charge that it is a populist field that celebrates rather than interrogates everyday media culture? Could a concept such as cultural literacy provide a bridge to help re-establish the critical credibility of audience studies or would it burden this field with its implied notions of standards, distinction and cultural exclusion? The article discusses recent work with youth audiences to inquire into the possibilities of ‘critical literacy’. It proposes taking up questions and insights raised by affect theory, to merge appreciation, criticism and understanding of the forces that drive (the possibility of) change, and to embed critical literacy in cultural studies’ ongoing interest in the construction of (cultural) citizenship.
MULTIFILE
