It’s true that this very sentence has been ingrained in me by my Pace Piano teacher, Yoko Jimbo since I was a wee young one. But yesterday I realized that the idea that Suzuki is the wrong way and that Pace is the right way was never logically bridged in all that time.
First, a quick intro:
As it’s been explained to me by the anti-suzukists—the suzuki method was born out of an attempt to understand the process by which musical prodigies learn music. It was observed that they didn’t rely on music notation but instead had a more intuitive understanding. Suzuki imagined a world where we learn music like we learn language, immersed in the experience of it which in music he believed the hearing of it. He thought knowing music notation too young diluted this experience.
In the pace method, you begin learning notation systems as soon as possible. Starting with piano-roll notation at about age 3 and 4, you slowly transition to traditional western notation. Dr. Pace prioritized music literacy above music virtuosity.
For years I was told this narrative. Music literacy above all else. Yesterday over brunch I came upon the following analogy:
We would never design an education system around any other kind of savant. If it was suddenly discovered that the most eloquent poets could not actually write, and instead just spouted poetry from their lips, we wouldn’t discourage people from learning how to read and write. Similarly, it makes no sense to eliminate the potential for greater musical understanding that can be achieved by becoming literate in its notation system. Statistically, not every one of Ms. Jimbo’s piano students are going to become the next great pianist. What she hopes for her students instead is that they will always love music and have deeper insight into its nuances and complexities to enrich their lives. And really, what more could you ask for?
