<p>"Theres a widely held conception that people who earn degrees in the fine arts painting, sculpture, dance, music, theater, among others are throwing money away on a degree that can reap no long-term benefits. But the fact is that a fine-arts degree is no real hindrance to making a decent living in the real world." ...</p>
<p>Busting</a> The Myth That Fine-Arts Degrees Lead To The Poorhouse ? Consumerist</p>
<p>Thank you! Just sent to a couple of music teachers I know, and will share with guidance counselors. Hope this gets to many parents as well as students.</p>
<p>It’s just a very very hard dream to give up, and those who refuse to give it up usually find themselves in glamorous, glamorous poverty for many years or even their whole lives. So the problem is not that you come away unemployable but that a seed is planted that grows into a flower which is very, very hard to keep alive, and makes you very sad when it dies.</p>
<p>[A</a> fine-arts degree may be a better choice than you think - WSJ.com](<a href=“A fine-arts degree may be a better choice than you think - WSJ”>A fine-arts degree may be a better choice than you think - WSJ) is the original article. </p>
<p>What this article says contradicts what you are saying, they said most people with fine arts degrees end up doing okay, whether it is in the arts or in something else, which says that people don’t spend a lot of years starving away, the way the popular myth says.</p>
<p>They did a study of graduates of Juilliard, a long term study, and what it showed that was within 10 years of graduation many had moved out of performance or out of music entirely, which says most don’t slave away at a dream that isn’t working. Given the nature of music, it becomes pretty evident pretty fast if there is a hope of making it, however you want to classify that, and many drop it or find a way to make it work. On the violin the type that thinks they are going to be a soloist and think anything else is beneath them find that out the hard way, they come out and hit brutal reality, it takes others longer, but real life does hit, and pretty quickly. Friend of mine at work has a rock band he does on the side, he realized within 5 years of graduating colllege with a music degree he wasn’t going to make a living at it…and that is common. </p>
<p>I think the most valuable part of this reinforces what others have said, that music degrees are not a waste, despite all the gnashing of finger nails and teeth from parents insisting kids study something ‘useful’, that employers find skills in them that they like. It is interesting with investment banks discovering this, they were one of the most narrow focused employers around, you didn’t have the business or economics degree from an ivy or near equivalent…have a nice day, sounds like they have woken up, which is pretty amazing.</p>
<p>I don’t think that you can say a music degree only has value if you “make it.” What does “making it” really mean anyway? ( A spot in an orchestra? A solo career? Film work and fame? Published scores? )There are lots of ways to keep music in your life, and lots of ways to make a living, and they may or may not intersect. Many musicians today, whether professional or not, are quite entrepreneurial as well, making their own opportunities.</p>
<p>Majoring in music demonstrates hard work, discipline, cultural literacy, maybe courage 
It can be more impressive than many other majors and certainly brings similar opportunities to any other humanities or arts major, including med/law/business or grad school.</p>
<p>I agree, i think when people say "make it in music’ they mean as a performer or teacher or some combination of the above. Some BM students go on to do arts administration and such, or do a combination of things.</p>
<p>For me the point of the article should be whatever the kid ends up doing, they likely will be fine, that majoring in music isn’t a waste, it doesn’t lead to a life of dead end jobs, etc, whatever they do, and I would be the first one to argue that music training itself has value other majors don’t. </p>
<p>It is funny, my wife was reading something on a fitness site, written by a guy who is ex special warfare (navy boat operator, the guys who work with the SEALS), and he was talking about performing at peak and so forth. Basically, what it pointed out is the guys in special forces and such have to train in such a way as to deal with stress and to do things repetitively until they can do it automatically under stress (they put it in terms of heart rate and such)…in one test they had soldiers who were through vigorous physical activity pushed into this range, and they couldn’t close a zip tie they use for prisoner’s hands, as simple as that is.</p>
<p>Well, with music students, it is much the same. As a musician, when you perform, in recital or in an ensemble or even playing in studio class or for your teacher, you are under stress, and you have learned to overcome this by practicing and practicing to make the skills automatic, so you can perform. One of the wisest things an old teacher of his told him about auditions is that you need to get to about 110% of playing level to put out 80 or 90% of best at an audition. So they have learned to deal with stress and how to function under it, something a typical person may not have. Not to mention interpersonal skills, dealing with emotionally wacked out people, difficult people, and yeah, putting it all together to be able to carve out a way. </p>
<p>More importantly, it also exposes the kids to something different, that there is a world out there that isn’t totally looking at ‘the practical’ and I think that is valuable, too. Show me a person whose whole life has been spent with the idea that if it isn’t practical, it isn’t worth anything, and I’ll show you a pretty miserable excuse for a person, haven’t yet found any counterexamples.</p>
<p>I am getting a degree in Public Administration, and I definitely make music a part of my life. I sing in an a cappella group, I sing in a Renaissance group, and I am a paid section leader for a church choir.</p>
<p>My town and all the towns that border my town has a town chorus, with paid directors. Nearly ever church has a choir, mostly with paid directors/music ministers. My life is richer for having music in it, even though it’s mostly an avocation rather than a vocation.</p>
<p>When I saw this post, I thought, “Duh… what about all the other liberal arts degrees that don’t have a practical path to employment”. Older son’s girlfriend is a psychology major who is very nervous about the job market when she graduates. At least the music majors can gig, teach lessons, and work at churches (or be a substitute teacher) to bring in some money.<br>
My bass playing son some works at an historic site in the summer and his direct supervisor and the executive manger both have music degrees, one in early music and the other in classical piano. He has a standing job offer after graduation with them if he can’t get a job as a music teacher. We have first hand knowledge that the music degree is recognized and respected in different venues outside of the music field.</p>
<p>I was misconstrued. Yes, a musical education is valuable. Yes, its value is independent of “making it”. What I’m saying is that for us Generation Y psychos, the damage is in the process of not making it. Certainly some come away unscathed, others can be quite badly messed up. It would be nice if musical education at all but the top conservatories actively discouraged notions of “making it” and focused on a liberal arts education- learning how to think and communicate with the topic of music as a shared interest, as it is in other majors.</p>
<p>
An interesting point about the focus of liberal arts education “learning how to think and communicate with [topics of shared interest].” I agree there are too many conservatories churning out musicians who will have a hard time supporting themselves through performance. (However I’ve noted graduates of “lesser” conservatories doing well with teaching studios, hard work though that is.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That is exactly what I was going to say.
I was a fine arts major and a quick look around the classroom very soon convinced me that I could keep my love for the arts but that I needed to find another career.</p>
<p>That being said, I do think there is a possibility that highly talented people may still keep the dream alive longer than I did. Unfortunately, there is just so much chance and serendipity involved.</p>
<p>TesIII, I think there are many environments that foster expectations of life that are too high. It may be especially difficult in fields like music, art, theater and dance, because young people have heard about their “talent” for many years. In our household, I avoided that word! I am sorry that it the process of adjusting expectations is painful, and I did not mean to minimize that at all. I am watching my own kids in this transition to reality. However, as you can see, there are, ultimately, ways to make compromises that allow you and yours to eat well but still do music, at whatever level satisfies. Good luck!</p>
<p>"What I’m saying is that for us Generation Y psychos, the damage is in the process of not making it. Certainly some come away unscathed, others can be quite badly messed up. It would be nice if musical education at all but the top conservatories actively discouraged notions of “making it” and focused on a liberal arts education- learning how to think and communicate with the topic of music as a shared interest, as it is in other majors. "</p>
<p>I hear what you are saying, and like GH I think there are a lot of hopes being raised that aren’t necessarily true, that there are schools selling the idea that students going there will come out and be ready to compete as musicians, and in a lot of cases it may be a pipe dream (as a hypothetical, kid gets into an non-audition program on violin, and they sell him on the idea he will be a top soloist, odds are greater an NFL team would sign me at my age to play). Even at the top conservatories, there are unrealistic dreams driving kids, talented kids going there with the attitude they are going to be a star soloist, that they will waltz into a major orchestra, etc…from what I am seeing, though, the schools have been a lot more realistic with the kids, with required classes talking about how a musician works, the reality, so I think some of the attitudes are changing (the teachers, on the other hand, well, I wonder what planet some of them live on…). </p>
<p>That said, I think the idea that liberal arts core classes are going to get rid of the angst and so forth is a bit unrealistic in of itself. I know universities spread the gospel that the core courses make people broader, it turns them into lifelong learners, etc, and I think that has been oversold, to be honest. I am not saying colleges should be trade schools focused on ‘practical’ knowledge, what I am saying is the core course structure is such that a lot of it is about kids simply doing the classes to get through a roadblock, like “well, that course is pretty easy, I hear there is a midterm and a term paper and it gets me out of my non western civ requirement”. </p>
<p>To be even more blunt, if kids have unrealistic expectations and get into the angst and damage like that, the problem is in no small part on them as well, because it means they went into this without looking at the reality. In this day of the internet, with sites like CC and all that is out there, it doesn’t take a lot to find out what it is like for music students out there, what the reality of making it is. Read anything about orchestra auditions, and you will hear for any kind of decent program, 150 people are auditioning for that slot; read about being a pianist, and read about the influx of incredibly talented people into the field playing at incredible levels…</p>
<p>What is interesting to me is I have talked to kids who think they want to go into music, when I ask them their take on ‘making it’ in rock or pop music, they say “oh, that is so difficult, it means a lot of years of frustration, playing gigs in dingy bars, etc, etc”…but yet because unlike rock/pop music classical music has college level programs, they can’t see it is the same thing. Maybe the difference is that kids who go the rock/pop route, because they don’t have the degree, don’t assume they will make it, and when they see they aren’t going anywhere say “ya know, time to pack it up and find something I can do to live”. Whereas maybe the kids who are so damaged are so because they have the degree from the music program and believed that would be the magic ticket (btw, this doesn’t matter whether it is Juilliard or a generic school of music someplace) and then face the reality, I don’t know. </p>
<p>It is why I stress when kids write on here about chances of making it in music, that getting a music degree, while valuable, doesn’t guarantee much, and that if going into they see something they might rather be doing, that that might be the better path if they cannot face a really tough road. If they have that kind of passion for music, know what they are getting into, then try it, but always have an eye on reality, too, and have some thoughts of a gameplan if your original plan doesn’t work. I think what concerns me is this idea that the angst and damage is somehow special to music, or that people don’t face brick walls doing other things, that is the reality even if you have done the liberal arts route or even went for a specific field. I had lunch the other day with an old friend, who is a business analyst working in a large financial firm, and she is facing issues with dealing with corporate life and how dead that can be, but having the reality of kids and a mortgage to pay…the idea that the problem is because music schools are too narrow or set the kids up to fail, while has grains of truth, is also the reality of most things in life, and in reality, what the kids who face that angst or whatever have is with life skills, like recognizing futility, recognizing where something isn’t working and changing direction, and that is true across the spectrum. Thoreau wrote many years ago that most men led lives of quiet desperation, and in large party this is what he referred to.</p>
<p>"…is also the reality of most things in life, and in reality, what the kids who face that angst or whatever have is with life skills, like recognizing futility, recognizing where something isn’t working and changing direction, and that is true across the spectrum. Thoreau wrote many years ago that most men led lives of quiet desperation, and in large party this is what he referred to."</p>
<p>aaaaand why did I have to exist.</p>
<p>Thoreau lacked social skills, had no family of his own, and lived in a cabin while his mother brought him meatloaf. He did not like people. He was not a happy person. This quote was a critique of the society around him at a time when industrialism was new and, compared to the agrarian lifestyle that preceded it, dehumanizing. Let’s not take it out of context.</p>
<p>TessIII, life works out fine, if imperfectly. By the time you get to be my age, and look back, even the worst parts had meaning and led onward. Even more so with music in your life.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/11/07/the-cost-of-being-an-artist[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/11/07/the-cost-of-being-an-artist</a></p>
<p>NYT / Updated November 15, 2013 4:23 PM
The Cost of Being an Artist</p>
<p>Where is that like button for Compmom’s last post?</p>
<p>My boss has a degree in music and we are far from a fine arts business.</p>
<p>I agree with changing the definition of making it but I would add that we need to expand the definition of art.</p>
<p>My S is studying illustration yet made fun of a children’s cartoon as being stupid. I thought that was odd (maybe elitist) for someone whose art is constantly critiqued to give such a harsh critique of another.</p>
<p>I reminded him that art must connect. The most successful artists are not always the best at drawing or writing or playing. They are the best at connecting. My S could draw SpongeBob and Bart Simpson easily in Middle School. Drawing them was not the talent. Creating stories that connect is. Criticizing art is really critcism of the people who appreciate that art. I think artists should be protective of their fans in that sense.</p>
<p>There are so, so many graduates who end up working in a field that’s different from the discipline they studied. There are currently overloads in the legal and medical professions. There are MBAs who have been laid off and have had difficulty finding new work. On the other hand, liberal arts majors are often trained to think outside the box and have been able to use their college courses as foundations for success in other fields. I really believe it’s the rare person who found his or her niche in college as a 20 year old and 30 years later is still working in that same field.</p>