Just a Song Sunday: Transforming Music Into Therapy

The Alive Again movie is making the rounds of social media again. If you are a music therapist and have NO idea what I am talking about, CONGRATULATIONS! You may be one of the only therapists who has escaped this interaction.

I just saw this GREAT movie all about how people respond when they hear music on iPods! It was GREAT! I cried all the way through it!

My response? "I know. That is just a little bit of what music can do. I get to see people respond to music every day. That's just what music listening can do. Do you know what music therapists can do with their clients in addition to the iPod program? It is truly amazing!"

This has been my pat answer for some time now. I'm finally starting to figure out what I actually mean when I say those things - the difference between listening to something and music therapy.

I think that this dilemma is one that is shared by many music therapists and non-music therapists alike. 

It looks so simple, doesn't it? Load up some music on a device, place the headphones on a person, and then watch the miracle happen. Anyone can do that. Why do you need a music therapist when you can just use an iPod? 

Our answer (as a profession) usually sounds something like "there is SUCH a difference between music listening and music therapy," but it is hard to really operationalize that difference. It is something that we (as a profession) and I (as simply me) haven't been able to do well. I'm getting better and writing about my thoughts in a forum that invites the thoughts and comments of others so the discussion gets easier, and we can start to really understand how music therapy is different from what happens in the movie, Alive Inside.

Here's my starting place...

Music is something that almost everyone in the world can access and engage in. We know that there are physiological, psychological, and emotional changes when specific music is present in the environment. These changes on the human being can be positive or negative, depending on the perception of the listener.

We know that people respond differently to music that they have made a connection with - an extramusical association or memory or music from a familiar performer. We also know that music is something that pervades the world - it is difficult to shut music and musical elements out of our experience as humans. 

We also know things about therapy and relationships. (This is the area where I am still refining). Music is often a social experience - presented in areas where lots of people gather and celebrate or mourn or simply listen. Music is meant to be shared - by performer, by musician, and by audience. Without sharing the experience between humans, music cannot be considered therapy. The use of the word "therapy" in a description implies a relationship and that sharing. 

This is what I believe to be true.

Simply giving someone an iPod and then standing back is not music therapy. It is a great use of music to enrich the life of that someone but it is not therapy. Singing a song to a person during a holiday caroling trip is a wonderful way to share common feelings and the joy of a festive season, but it is not therapy.

Music becomes therapy when someone else, someone who knows about music and it's effect on humans, engages with that person listening to the holiday carolers, changes the music to assist the person in calming down or remembering or moving. Music becomes therapy when both parts of the therapeutic relationship - music therapist and client - change the different elements of music to express themselves in ways that they cannot when simply listening. There is a continuation of the music through further processing - verbal processing, musical processing, shared experiences.

That, for me, is the difference between iPod listening to music and music therapy.

(At least, that's what I have so far. I'm sure this will develop further as I think about it more. Please share your own ideas in the comments section. I want to know what others think.)