I'm not sure that what passes for music education in those places where school instruments are gleefully battered into oblivion is really worth that much. (I'm sure I'll take a beating for that statement).Ryan_Beucke wrote:In all fairness, the equiptment is never free of charge. It's either payed for by the taxes the parents pay, or in the case of many schools including my High School, you have to pay a fee every year or summer that you use a horn. And if the students had to buy their own instruments, music education as we know it would pretty much cease to exist.
School instruments should be durable, simple, and cheap. And the students who play them should be grateful for the privelege of doing so.
But my reason for responding is that there is a difference between "free of charge" and "free". It's free of charge to the student (and $40 a semester is small enough change to be nominally free, in my view), but not free to those who pay for it. Society at large picks up that tab, and it seems to me that in too many places they get too little for their investment.
Rick "thinking music should be a noble pursuit but is treated like a sports program by too many band directors--hence filling their program with jock-types" Denney