权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

Whatever happened to Community Music?

社区音乐出了什么事？

基本信息

批准号：
AH/K005723/1
负责人：
Mark Rimmer
金额：
$ 3.06万
依托单位：
University of East Anglia
依托单位国家：
英国
项目类别：
Research Grant
财政年份：
2013
资助国家：
英国
起止时间：
2013 至无数据
项目状态：
已结题

来源：
https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=AH%2FK005723%2F1
关键词：
Whatever happened Community Music

项目摘要

This research network proposal takes forward a number of core concerns issuing out of a recent AHRC 'Connected Communities' scoping study on community music (McKay and Higham 2011). The purpose of the network is to improve understanding of the historic, current, and potential roles that community music (hereafter CM) can play in promoting community engagement, within the terms of the AHRC's 'Connected Communities' initiative. Given that CM activity in the UK is currently negotiating a period of relative austerity, the network organisers see this as a crucial moment to critically reflect on the contemporary condition of CM and to revitalise understandings of its (potential) role in connecting communities. Such a revitalisation of understandings of CM stands to benefit not only the AHRC's 'Connected Communities' initiative but also to connect with the 'Big Society's emphasis on localism, voluntarism and community empowerment.In the UK, CM has undergone significant shifts over recent decades. Undoubtedly, these shifts have been due - in no small part - to what Everitt (1997) has termed the 'subsidy revolution' facilitated by the funding opportunities made available by the National Lottery. One key development accompanying the upsurge in state funding has taken the form of 'increased expectation and an emphasis upon 'outcomes'' (Price 2002: 3). This has brought important changes in the ways those involved in facilitating CM activities both go about and think about their work, something perhaps most evident in the 'noticeable shift in focus...from collective to individual outcomes' (Matarasso 2007: 449). Such a shift is also indicative of a more subtle yet significant move away from CM's longstanding concern with issues of community empowerment, participatory processes and democratic decision-making practices (including learning about community-level decision making and grass-roots organisation processes). Such concerns, articulated within a broader philosophy of empowerment and reflected in the work of writers such as Saul Alinsky, Carl Rogers, Ivan Illich and Paolo Friere, were central to community development theorists and the burgeoning community arts movement of the late 1960s/early 1970s alike. Over time however, their centrality has been diminished for a CM movement which, as a recent AHRC 'Connected Communities' scoping study notes, has been primarily 'resource-oriented rather than actively reflexive' (McKay and Higham 2011: 6).To date, this resource-orientation, on the part of CM managers and practitioners, has served to inhibit a productive dialogue between the former and those commissioning, funding and developing policy relevant to CM activity, with the result of obscuring the potential contribution of CM activity to community development. The formation of this research network, comprising of academics and researchers with expertise in the areas of informal music education and community cultural development (including the authors of the aforementioned AHRC scoping study), established CM funders and commissioners, experienced managers and respected practitioners will provide a forum within which to both explore the potentially valuable dimensions of CM for community development and formulate a future research agenda through which to respond to a series of core concerns facing CM initiatives in the UK.The network organisers have developed a series of structured network events, engaging key stakeholders at appropriate junctures, in order to address issues including: - Individual and collective motivation to participation - CM participation as a pathway towards community engagement/activism - Evaluation of different models of developmental practice and community engagement - Community as a site of democratic expression and/or oppositional critique - Freedom and control in community engagement - Relationships between intent, process, and outcome in CM activity - Ethical issues in CM practice

该研究网络提案提出了一些核心问题，这些问题来自最近AHRC关于社区音乐的“互联社区”范围研究（McKay和希格姆，2011年）。该网络的目的是提高对社区音乐（以下简称CM）在促进社区参与方面的历史，当前和潜在作用的理解，在AHRC的“连接社区”倡议的范围内。鉴于英国的CM活动目前正在谈判一个相对紧缩的时期，网络组织者认为这是一个关键时刻，可以批判性地反思CM的当代状况，并重新认识其在连接社区方面的（潜在）作用。这种对CM的理解的复兴不仅有利于AHRC的“连接社区”倡议，而且还与“大社会”对地方主义，非自治主义和社区赋权的强调相联系。在英国，CM在最近几十年经历了重大转变。毫无疑问，这些转变在很大程度上是由于Everitt（1997）所称的“补贴革命”，这是由国家彩票提供的资金机会促成的。随着国家资助的激增，一个关键的发展是“期望值增加和对”成果“的重视”（Price 2002：3）。这给那些参与促进CM活动的人带来了重要的变化，他们都在思考他们的工作，也许最明显的是“重点的明显转变”。从集体成果到个人成果“（Matarasso 2007：449）。这种转变也表明，CM长期以来对社区赋权、参与进程和民主决策做法（包括了解社区一级的决策和基层组织进程）的关注有了更微妙但重要的转变。这种关切在更广泛的赋权哲学中得到阐述，并反映在扫罗·阿林斯基、卡尔·罗杰斯、伊万·伊里奇和保罗·弗里埃尔等作家的作品中，是社区发展理论家和1960年代末/1970年代初蓬勃发展的社区艺术运动的核心。然而，随着时间的推移，他们的中心地位已经减少了CM运动，正如最近AHRC的“连接社区”范围研究所指出的那样，主要是“资源导向，而不是积极反思”（McKay和希格姆，2011年：6）.迄今为止，CM管理人员和从业人员的这种资源导向阻碍了前者与委托者之间的富有成效的对话，资助和制定与社区管理活动有关的政策，结果掩盖了社区管理活动对社区发展的潜在贡献。这个研究网络的形成，包括在非正式音乐教育和社区文化发展领域具有专门知识的学者和研究人员（包括上述澳大利亚人权委员会范围研究的作者），既定的CM资助者和专员，经验丰富的管理者和受人尊敬的从业者将提供一个论坛，在这个论坛上，我们将探索CM对社区发展的潜在价值，并制定未来的发展方向。研究议程，通过该议程对英国CM倡议所面临的一系列核心问题做出回应。网络组织者已经开发了一系列结构化的网络活动，在适当的时机与主要利益相关者进行接触，以解决以下问题：- 个人和集体的参与动机-社区参与是社区参与/行动主义的途径-发展实践和社区参与的不同模式的评估-社区作为民主表达和/或反对批评的场所-社区参与中的自由和控制-CM活动中意图，过程和结果之间的关系-CM实践中的伦理问题