Theory and philosophy in music therapy

Michael L. Zanders (2024). Philosophy and Theory in Music Therapy. Navigating the Labyrinth.Barcelona Publishers, 274 pages (e-book).

Reading Zanders’ book inspired me to reflect on some theoretical and philosophical aspects of music therapy. Therefore, I must warn you about my somewhat undisciplined and associative discussion of the text along the way. At my age, many things surface, longing to be documented and commented on. One might say that I got lost in this labyrinth, found myself in a dead-end, reflected for a while, and then tried to find a new way out—or in—toward the center.

Zanders also warns against reading the book from cover to cover or clicking through all 270+ pages of the e-book. It might be wiser to read it selectively, as the text at times has the character of a compendium, providing an overview of most theories and philosophies influencing music therapy.

Music Therapy Theory

When I visited Katowice, Poland, last year, I had the opportunity to become more familiar with Simon Procter. He leads the Nordoff-Robbins training program in London and has made significant contributions to a sociological understanding of music therapy through the theory of "music as social capital." Procter asked me how it could be that so many strong theoretical contributions to music therapy come from Norwegian music therapists. After all, we are just a small country in the world, as the saying goes, with only a few hundred music therapists.

I replied that it was because we have so many talented people and music therapists—which is true! 😊 Another answer could be that we were early in introducing a course called "Music Therapy Theory" in our education. This allowed for multiple perspectives on music therapy, critical examination of theories, interdisciplinary insights, and the inclusion of scientific theory and ethics in the curriculum. Additionally, many of the music therapists Procter referred to were rigorously trained in the master’s program developed in collaboration with the University of Oslo—particularly through encounters with a wide range of international lecturers. Early on, we also had people earning doctorates, often in collaboration with Aalborg University.

With these thoughts in mind, I opened Michael Zanders' book and saw that from his time teaching at Texas Woman’s University, he had engaged students in such theoretical discussions—to mutual inspiration. Reading this, I couldn’t help but think of my own professor in music therapy, Donald E. Michel, who eventually moved from Tallahassee, Florida, to this university in Texas. It is possible that Zanders succeeded Michel in this position. If so, he introduced a curriculum that, as I recall, Michel was not particularly concerned with. The lack of meta-theory in my own education was likely an inspiration for both my master’s thesis and my later work on curriculum development and teaching in music therapy studies.

Music Therapy as a Discipline and Cultural Movement

My master’s thesis (Ruud, 1973), which was later published and translated into several languages, was also released in Germany in collaboration with Wolfgang Mahns. There, it was given the telling title Meta-Musiktherapie. Wege zu einer Theorie der Musiktherapie (Ruud & Mahns, 1992). With this revised edition, I had the opportunity to incorporate parts of my doctoral dissertation. The final chapter was thus titled Die Beziehung von Musikauffassung, Menschenbild und Therapiebegriffen in der Musiktherapie, or The Relationship Between the Concept of Music , Concept of Humanity, and Therapy Notions in Music Therapy. In other words, this was an attempt to connect music therapy and philosophy through theoretical reflections on music therapy practice, particularly improvisation.

Looking back nearly 35 years later and refreshing my German from that time, I see that my attempt to show how music therapy could contribute to a concept of "the human being" remains relevant. In the afterword of the German edition, we refer to my article Der Improvisierende Mensch (Ruud, 1988a) as well as another article I wrote for the journal Music Therapy—"Music Therapy: Health Profession or Cultural Movement?" (Ruud, 1988b). In these articles, I explored connections between philosophical anthropology and improvisation in music therapy, alongside the vision of music therapy as an active cultural force in society.

In the conclusion of the German edition from 1992, we wrote (translated into Norwegian by Chatbot):

"Thus, beyond its role as a treatment profession, music therapy can also be understood as a central part of a cultural movement—a movement aimed at developing a new concept of humanity based on individual processes of understanding and realization. Even though there is no guarantee that, for example, an increased integrative capacity in individuals and groups—as a result of individual change processes—will ultimately lead to a change in the quality of political-economic systems, this nonetheless appears as a necessary counterbalance to our current situation. A situation marked by nearly depleted energy resources, environmental destruction, and growing disparities between rich and poor, North and South. Is this perspective a real alternative to widespread apocalyptic visions? Or is it merely a utopia on the brink of human civilization’s collapse?"

Enough about that. The point was to document that there have been concrete attempts to integrate philosophy and theory into music therapy since at least the 1980s, if not earlier. I was somewhat surprised to see that issues such as energy crises, environmental destruction, and the divide between rich and poor—North and South (colonialism)—were also addressed in this afterword. In the present moment, with an unstable world undergoing massive militarization, those apocalyptic visions suddenly feel uncomfortably real.

That said, Norwegian music therapy has incorporated scientific philosophy and ethics from early on, giving ontological and epistemological questions a place within the field.

Theory and Philosophy—The Glue of the Discipline

Returning to Zanders’ book—it consists of three parts, with the first section addressing general questions such as "What is philosophy?" and "What is theory?" Zanders clearly distinguishes between philosophy, which deals with broader, more fundamental questions, and theory, which seeks to provide systematic and coherent explanations for more specific phenomena.

Influenced by Ken Bruscia’s writings, Zanders makes good use of his mentor’s foundational work in music therapy. One question that arises in the text is the risk of "music therapy" as a discipline fragmenting and splintering. Considering the expansion into new fields of practice in recent music therapy history, this is indeed a timely concern. Adding to this the diversity of methods and treatment ideologies, one might imagine a scenario where international music therapy conferences, which traditionally bring together all orientations and models, would cease to exist. What holds the discipline together? How should it be described? What metaphors can we use to characterize music therapy?

Recently, I read Leslie Bunt and Brynjulf Stige’s introduction to music therapy, Music Therapy: An Art Beyond Words (Bunt & Stige, 2014). They propose describing music therapy as a hybrid discipline, with reference to cultural theorist Homi Bhabha. Curious about the term "hybrid," I asked my AI Chat for an explanation and received the following:

"A hybrid is something composed of elements from different sources, systems, or types."

The response included examples from biology, technology, education, art, and culture. What stood out to me was the idea that being a hybrid means "benefiting from the strengths of different components to achieve a broader or more effective result."

This seems like a fitting metaphor for interdisciplinary music therapy, where both art and science play a role.

Wilber’s Quadrant Model

However, it is Ken Wilber’s philosophy and his quadrant model that serve as the "glue" in Ken Bruscia’s framing of the music therapy discipline. Zanders also employs Wilber’s quadrant model to illustrate philosophy and theory in music therapy (Chapter 2).

For those unfamiliar with the model, Zanders’ explanation offers a solid introduction. In brief, the model consists of four quadrants, each representing different dimensions of music therapy:

1. Upper-left quadrant: Subjective and internal experiences of the individual (emotions, awareness, self-reflection—e.g., humanistic-existential therapy).

2. Upper-right quadrant: Objective and observable aspects of the individual (body, behavior, biological processes—e.g., music medicine and medical music therapy).

3. Lower-left quadrant: Shared psychological and cultural aspects, collective identity, worldview (e.g., community music therapy).

4. Lower-right quadrant: Systemic aspects of existence (social structures, institutions, physical environment).

   
   

This framework captures key dimensions of music therapy within an overarching philosophy—Wilber’s "integral" worldview. For me, this was a clarifying and inspiring read, even though I have attempted to grapple with this quadrant model several times before.

The Collective Exterior

I believe there is a particular reason to revise the content of the lower right quadrant and give it a more sociological and ecological perspective if we want to bring music therapy closer to culture, society, and everyday life. Zanders describes Bruscia’s extended interpretation of this quadrant in Wilber’s model as follows:

"The Collective Exterior perceives music as a manifestation of universal energy, characterized by its interconnectedness and systemic harmony, aligning with complexity science’s focus on nonlinear dynamics within systems."

I struggle to fully grasp this—"universal energy in systemic harmony and aligned with the focus on the nonlinear dynamics within systems." When I spend an hour browsing the internet searching for "criticism of Wilber’s quadrant model" and supplement this with a question to my AIChat, I come across responses that seem relevant to my context. Wilber has been criticized for his approach to power and social classes—the power dynamics and social structures that shape human experience.

Postcolonial and feminist theorists have pointed out that Wilber does not sufficiently address the deep-rooted structures that uphold class, race, and gender. Critics have also noted that there is an inadequate discussion of social justice—how power and privilege influence both individual and collective experiences. This can lead to a detour away from pressing social issues such as racism, class differences, and injustice. Some critics argue that Wilber focuses too much on individual development and consciousness. This might result in the individualization of collective problems related to power relations, rather than recognizing how such problems are deeply embedded in structures and systems.

Another criticism that is easy to agree with is that the quadrants are not necessarily so distinct. When cultural and thus culturally relative perspectives are placed in one quadrant (lower left), such cultural relativizations will naturally also influence the other quadrants.

Now, I am not here to validate all this criticism or to argue how Wilber should respond to it. There are at least a thousand articles on the internet, as well as dedicated websites discussing Wilber’s Integral Theory. Some believe that one may retain the quadrants but should also be open to discussing the content within each quadrant. When Zanders writes about post-structuralism—which aims to deconstruct all such universal structures that structuralism attempted to establish—he sees that the entire quadrant model collapses.

I have had several good and intense discussions with Ken Bruscia whenever we met, whether in Jutland or in Philadelphia, where he lived in the eighties and nineties. We disagreed on a fundamental point. I believed more strongly that humans are shaped externally, by society and culture, while Ken placed more emphasis on the individual and universal forces as decisive factors. This, of course, led to discussion. I have probably been more influenced by critical theory, social constructivism, and a postmodern view of science than Bruscia. As a result, I have an inherent skepticism toward grand, generalizing narratives, whether about humanity or therapeutic practices.

It is quite possible that Bruscia has changed his perspective in several areas. Zanders frequently refers to a podcast from 2011 in which Bruscia participated, where he reportedly expresses a clear contextual view of music therapy (Bruscia, 2011), which I do not have access to. In other words, Bruscia acknowledges connections between what happens on an individual level and the culture and context in which we operate. The simplest way to describe this would be to say that there is a dialogical relationship between external influences and the agency that comes from the individual.

Historical Predecessors

In Chapter Three, Zanders asks, "Where did we start, and how did we get there?" He begins by referencing the important symposium in New York in 1982. At the symposium titled Music in the Life of Man, Barbara Hesser from New York University invited 31 music therapists from around the world, including myself (Forinash & Kenny, 2015). Many of the key figures of this era were present—Ken Bruscia, Clive Robbins, Helen Bonny, Clifford Madsen, Charles Eagle, Barbara Wheeler, Alfred Schmölz, Edith Lecourt, Rachel Verney, Lia Rejane Barcellos, Alf Gabrielsson, Susan Munro, Carolyn Kenny, and of course, Barbara Hesser herself, who initiated and led the symposium.

When I look at the list of participants, I realize that many are no longer with us today—including Carolyn Kenny, and most recently, the Danish philosopher Hans Siggaard Jensen, who played a crucial role in the early development of music therapy in Aalborg, as well as he inspired my definition of music therapy. I formed friendships with many of them, including the musicologist and music philosopher David Burrows. When I looked him up on Google, I discovered that he, too, has passed away.

During that week, I also established a strong international network that not only took me around the world but also put me in direct dialogue with central music therapy theorists such as Ken Bruscia and Carolyn Kenny. It seems that many had similar experiences. The symposium format placed us in small groups for discussions, and it was precisely this conversational approach—the dialogue and the theoretical agenda—that led to the symposium of 1982 being recognized as the event that initiated the development of music therapy theory. However, I would argue that for us in Scandinavia and Europe, this process had started a few years earlier.

The Herdecke Conference

As mentioned earlier, we had already been engaged in music therapy theory for four years in Norway before the New York conference. It is also worth noting that in the same year we started our education program in 1978, Johannes Th. Eschen organized a major international conference on music therapy didactics in Herdecke, Germany. This conference focused on teaching methods and curricula in music therapy education, as well as theory and practice. At Herdecke, Eschen had just launched Germany's first music therapy program, incorporating contributions from Mary Priestly and Clive Robbins—two key but quite different branches of music therapy, one analytical and the other humanistic.

This conference was at least as well attended as the one in New York, with a stronger European presence but also featuring American representatives such as William Sears, a true pioneer in music therapy theory.

I wrote a fairly detailed report from this conference (Ruud, 1978). What stood out was the distinct lack of dialogue. Most attendees were focused on presenting their own music therapy approaches, and in my report, I noted that it seemed as if no one had previously heard of each other. In this context, I had an advantage because I was familiar with German, English, and American music therapy traditions.

I see in Musikkterapi No. 1 (1979) that we organized an international seminar on music therapy theory from January 20-21, 1979, with participants including composer Werner Wolf Glaser (chair of the Swedish music therapy association), Hans Siggaard Jensen from Aalborg, and Clive and Carol Robbins from New York. From Norway, Even Ruud, Unni Johns, and Tom Næss participated. The seminar report states: "The seminar addressed music therapy's connections to various related disciplines within psychology, musicology, psychiatry, and philosophy. One day was dedicated to phenomenological explanations of music’s role and function in music therapy contexts."

Perhaps even more significant was the theory seminar in Aalborg in the summer of 1979 (Ruud, 1979). Over the course of two weeks, music therapists gathered for a research seminar with a strong emphasis on theory—perhaps too much for the new music therapy students at the time. With Hans Siggaard Jensen as the organizer, hermeneutics and phenomenology were central themes. Contributions from music psychologists Jørgen Pauli Jensen and Alf Gabrielsson, as well as music sociologist Finn Gravesen, enriched the interdisciplinary musicological discussions. Additional perspectives came from special education and psychotherapy. Participants from Germany included Johannes Th. Eschen and Volker Bolay, while Judith Jellison and Ted Tim represented the United States. In other words, the development of music therapy theory had begun in Europe several years before the symposium in New York.

A Music Therapist Without a Musical Background

When Zanders refers to this historic event in New York, he highlights the contribution of French psychoanalyst Edith Lecourt, who argued that music therapists do not need to be musicians but should preferably be analysts. I later became acquainted with Lecourt during a visit to Paris, where she invited me to eat snails at Café de la Paix. I read some of her work and can agree with Zanders’ portrayal of her views.

But what about all the other dialogues? While quotes from participants of the New York conference appear later, we never fully grasp the discussions that took place during those days. However, some memories do resurface.

I cannot fail to mention that I invited the behaviorist Clifford Madsen, my lecturer and co-supervisor from Florida State University, to a café to meet the Marxist Hans Siggaard Jensen for a discussion. Naturally, this meeting is not mentioned in Forinash and Kenny’s book. I was in opposition to Madsen—we were on opposite sides of the Vietnam War. But Madsen, a former university champion in rhetoric, often overwhelmed me in debates. I felt the need to introduce a more academically trained opponent, so I brought in Hans Siggaard Jensen. It was a lively debate—but at that time, the field of music therapy was perhaps not yet ready for such dialogues between pragmatism and Marxism.

Dialogue Unites

To continue this digression, I must mention that this week was also sponsored by some very wealthy families in New York. We attended several cocktail parties, including one at one of those grand mansions on Fifth Avenue by Central Park. Being greeted by servants in tailcoats was quite an unusual experience for a simple boy from Kampen, the east side of Oslo.

At one of these gatherings, which took place on the rooftop of a skyscraper, I had brought my camera (we didn’t have iPhones back then)... I have preserved two legendary photos from that time. One is of Helen Bonny, whom I would later got to know better during a longer retreat in the Catskill Mountains, organized every summer in the 1980s by Barbara Hesser and Carolyn Kenny. But the real scoop is probably the picture of Clive Robbins and Clifford Madsen in brotherly unity—the humanist and the behavior therapist, who, at least philosophically and theoretically, stood far apart.

Helen Bonny, 1982. Photo: Even Ruud

Clifford Madsen. and Clive Robbins, 1982. Photo: Even Ruud

From Prehistoric to Current Questions

Zanders does not take the opportunity to delve deeper into the dialogues in New York. Instead, he outlines some theories and ideas about music therapy from various American predecessors, as documented by Bruscia in an anthology. This was not particularly interesting reading. More relevant was the discussion on “music as” and “music in” music therapy—a distinction that serves as a guiding thread through several chapters, particularly in relation to music-centered theories, which are treated with care. Similarly, Zanders discusses the distinction between music as a means and music as a medium, as well as music as an independent force (agency).

Epistemology, Axiology, and Ontology

We must consider that this book aims to introduce theory and philosophy. Thus, questions related to epistemology, axiology, and ontology fit well within its scope. The presentation tends toward a compendium format, at times with a somewhat listing style and broad strokes. I would have liked to see these central areas of philosophy illustrated with more examples from music therapy. For instance, axiology—or ethics, which is a key area—could be illustrated with examples from music therapy practice, unless this is something that will appear later in this labyrinth, I think as I read.

Aesthetics and Creativity

Zanders does well in highlighting the importance of aesthetics, art, and creativity—all these fields in music therapy that behavior analysts (like Madsen, from the earlier photo) removed from music therapy in the 1970s when I was at Florida State University. Ken Aigen’s music-centered therapy rightly receives significant attention, as does Colin Lee’s “Aesthetic Music Therapy.” However, these introductory pages on art and aesthetics can easily take on the tone of a ceremonial speech, and I feel that what Zanders calls “context-oriented music therapy” is somewhat superficially addressed. At times, I find myself getting lost in the labyrinth and wanting to leave the text. But Zanders becomes more concrete over time, so he is likely following a plan, I think as I read on. Ultimately, I must commend Zanders for his neutral and distanced descriptions of the theories and philosophies he refers to—though at times, he subtly reveals his disagreements.

Philosophy and Theory for Practice

The second part of the book continues the philosophical and theoretical discourse, but now in closer dialogue with music therapy practice. Integral philosophy and theories in music therapy practice are addressed in Chapter 6. The chapter begins with a description of ancient music therapy in Epidaurus, the Greek medical center for holistic medicine, which I also described in my own doctoral dissertation.

Zanders then jumps straight into some key mechanisms of change in music therapy: therapeutic alliance, insight and self-awareness, cognitive restructuring, emotional expression, behavioral change, support and validation, coping strategies, role-playing and skill-building, empowerment, changes in identity narrative, and interpersonal growth.

This is a mix of elements from various therapies and theories, and not all of them are immediately followed up with discussions. Instead, we get a section on the significance of aesthetics in music therapy theory and philosophy, where ideas from earlier chapters are revisited. But that is what happens when navigating a labyrinth—take the wrong turn, and suddenly, you find yourself at a dead end.

A Wealth of Ideas

Zanders presents a vast array of ideas, philosophies, and theories that have emerged in music therapy over the years. The presentation can sometimes feel unstructured, and if one is not already familiar with these ideas, it can quickly become confusing. It is also sometimes unclear whether Zanders’ formulations reflect his own views or if he is merely describing others’ ideas. He presents theories without immediate critique but balances his presentation by highlighting weaknesses and criticisms that have emerged. This is a strength of the text, though it also creates some uncertainty about the narrator’s stance.

In Chapter 7, he touches on empirical and evidence-based research in music therapy, with references to Michael Thaut’s neurological music therapy. He briefly discusses rationalism before moving on to positivism. We get a good description of outcome-oriented music therapy before revisiting behavior therapy. This is followed by a discussion on biopsychosocial perspectives. Suddenly, Charles Eagle’s “quantum music therapy” appears, giving me flashbacks to the New York symposium where Eagle took me on a bar-hopping tour late one night.

I developed a good rapport with Eagle—alcohol facilitates “male bonding.” Charles Eagle was one of the first American teachers in music therapy, from the same generation as my primary advisor, Donald Michel. But unlike the skeptical Don Michel, Eagle was an intellectual curious about grand speculations. However, this mix of modern physics, chaos theory, the composition of the universe, mathematics, and physics was too much for me to swallow, even with help from the bar.

Main Directions

I jump to Chapter 9, where Zanders describes several key movements and scientific theories. Here, we encounter social constructivism, humanism, cultural relativism, postmodernism, critical theory, phenomenology, eco-psychology, (post)structuralism, and Marxism. Zanders relates several of these theories to Wilber’s quadrant model and Bruscia’s context-oriented thinking. There is a detour into the ancient theory of Musica Humana, some discussion of biology and evolution, and a solid presentation of Brynjulf Stige’s culture-centered theory. Suddenly, we are onto Carolyn Kenny’s The Mythic Artery and the significance of rituals, followed by queer music therapy, anthroposophy, and spiritualism! Zanders rounds off the chapter with Bruno Nettl’s contributions from music anthropology. We are deep in the labyrinth now, with no clear way out.

Bruscia’s Stages

We now move to part three of the book, where Chapters 10 and 11 review various theories in psychotherapy and counseling, the theory of common factors in psychotherapy, and critical psychiatry. These theories are linked to music therapy using Bruscia’s stage theory as a framework.

In his foreword to Brynjulf Stige’s Culture-Centered Music Therapy, Bruscia pointed out that psychology had gone through several developmental stages or “forces of thought.” In a slightly different order, he suggested that music therapy had undergone a similar evolution since its establishment in the 1950s.

The first phase of modern music therapy focused on how music affects behavior, particularly in the physical realm. This included research on music’s impact on our bodies and physiology and, eventually, its role in behavior-analytic music therapy. The next phase involved interest in how music could reveal unconscious dimensions of experience and its consequences for music therapy—what we recognize from analytically oriented music therapy.

The third and fourth phases dealt with music’s role in self-experience and spiritual development. These include humanistic-existential music therapy and its transpersonal continuation. The culture-centered approach represents the fifth phase in this evolution.

A Sixth Phase?

If it were up to me, I would add a sixth phase, considering the sociological turn evident in recent feminist, anti-colonial, and queer contributions, or other attempts to push music therapy in the sociological direction (Ruud, 2020).

All these phases coexist today. The first phase has evolved into a strong tradition in music and brain research, alongside behavior therapy (now also cognitive therapy), analytical, humanistic, transpersonal, culture-centered, ecological, and sociological perspectives in community music therapy and other approaches.

Theory of Science and Evidence-Based Philosophy

Chapter 12 provides an overview of theories of science, ranging from positivism to constructivism and postmodernism. Paradigms are discussed, and there is a brief detour into arts-based research, which I would have liked to read more about. The chapter also covers interpretation as a central aspect of all research.

The following chapter on evidence-based philosophy and theory first provides a detailed review of music therapy research as presented in the Journal of Music Therapy over the years. Evidence-based thinking is based on how research can be categorized into different levels of evidence (Levels of Evidence – LoE). One of the strengths of Zanders’ presentation is, as mentioned, his ability to provide neutral descriptions of theories and philosophies. In this case, he first presents solid and objective arguments for the value of evidence based on meta-studies and RCTs (randomized controlled trial) studies, which form the top two levels of the evidence hierarchy. (Considering the current research landscape in the U.S., with a president and health minister who do not seem particularly concerned with evidence-based research, there is hardly any reason to offer a general critique of such research.)

Zanders also provides a solid account of other forms of evidence encountered in music therapy, where qualitative and mixed-methods studies rank lower in the hierarchy. He presents the criticism raised against this hierarchy by music therapists such as Ken Aigen and Brian Abrams. In particular, he highlights how the objective research placed at the top of the hierarchy does not necessarily have the greatest clinical relevance for music therapists. This type of research is also advantageous in a system where funding for music therapy is tied to the positivist hegemony. If music therapists must conform to such a system, some ethical rules of engagement are challenged, given that the music therapist has other tools that can help clients and are supported by the lower end of the evidence hierarchy.

He particularly emphasizes Brian Abrams’ article on evidence-based music therapy (Abrams, 2010). Abrams bases his understanding of evidence on Ken Wilber’s integral theory, which was previously discussed in connection with the quadrant model. Based on this, Abrams argues that different forms of evidence must be used in accordance with what we seek to prove. In other words, we need a different type of evidence if we aim to understand how or why a therapy works than if we are simply measuring its effect.

Integral theory does not seek to create a hierarchical relationship between different forms of evidence. Abrams defines evidence simply as: “When client and therapist work together through music to promote health, guided by grounds sufficient to help ensure that the work is valuable” (Abrams, 2010:360). These “sufficient grounds” can therefore come from both objective randomized effect studies and intersubjective interpretations of situated practices.

Ethical Theories and Pedagogy

Towards the end of the book, there is a chapter on ethics, where Zanders outlines key ethical perspectives. This includes a general discussion of ethical theories such as deontology, virtue ethics, and consequentialism. I would have liked to see a mention of Emmanuel Levinas, who is a central ethical thinker for many music therapists. Zanders has worked as a research assistant for Cheryl Dileo while studying at Temple University in Philadelphia (where he is now a professor), which explains his engagement with this topic. It is therefore natural that he references Dileo’s book on ethics and music therapy.

There is also a chapter on educational philosophies, which can easily be linked to music therapy education. Here, Zanders provides a good overview of possible pedagogical approaches, ranging from lecture-based teaching to dialogical education, competence- and experience-based teaching, critical pedagogy, and more. It is easy to recognize and agree that a mix of approaches is necessary, especially practice-oriented and experience-based learning, which is essential for fulfilling the role of a music therapist.

Develop Your Own Theory!

In the sixteenth and final main chapter, Zanders encourages music therapists to develop their own theories. He provides a step-by-step description of what it takes to create theories, which will be familiar to anyone who has attempted to formulate research questions and write a master’s thesis based on studies within the field of music therapy. I think this is a valuable encouragement, but I fear that the approach might be so ambitious that it could intimidate music therapists in the early stages of their careers. However, it is certainly worth reflecting on what is required.

“Labyrinth” or “Maze”

I notice that both labyrinth and maze translate to the Norwegian labyrint. The difference, according to Zanders, is that a labyrinth is meant to lead to a center, a core, even though there are many twists and turns, dead ends, and stopping points along the way. A maze, on the other hand, is something one cannot find a way out of and seemingly becomes trapped in—an endless attempt to escape.

Zanders does not provide a shortcut out of this dilemma either. Instead, he sees navigation through the labyrinth as a way to increase self-reflection and awareness. The core, meaning an ultimate definition or truth that would give us a final answer to the fundamental questions of music therapy, does not seem to be something he believes in. Rather, he advocates for a well-founded theoretical and philosophical diversity of perspectives.

I believe this book can serve as a valuable addition to music therapy education, provided that readers take the time and engage in dialogue to understand how these theories interact with music therapy practice and research. And perhaps not attempt to read through the entire book in a single week...

To connect back to the introduction, I referred to how our understanding of key concepts such as “human,” “music,” and “health” will be crucial in determining one’s stance on many of the philosophical questions Zanders raises. I would argue that starting with these central concepts could also be an effective pedagogical approach to understanding why theories are necessary for the development of the music therapy field. Additionally, I would ask specifically how culture, societal development, politics, economics, and technology create obstacles to finding a way out of this labyrinth.

References

Abrams, B. (2010). Evidence-based music therapy practice: An integral understanding. Nordic Journal of Music Therapy, 47(4), 351–379.

Bonde, L. O. (2001). Steps towards a meta-theory of music therapy? An introduction to Ken Wilber’s integral psychology and a discussion of its relevance for music therapy. Nordic Journal of Music Therapy, 10(2), 176–187.

Bonde, L. O., Stensæth, K., & Ruud, E. (2023). Music and health: A comprehensive model. https://prod-aaudxp-cms-001-app.azurewebsites.net/media/fwmnuadw/music-and-health-2023-final.pdf

Bruscia, K. (2011). Ways of thinking in music therapy [The William W. Sears Distinguished Lecture Series, American Music Therapy Association 13th Annual Conference, Atlanta, Georgia]. Podcast. Retrieved January 15, 2021, from www.musictherapy.org

Bunt, L., & Stige, B. (2014). Music therapy: An art beyond words. Routledge.

Forinesh, M., & Kenny, C. (2015). The 1982 symposium “Music in the Life of Man”: The beginnings of music therapy theory. Barcelona Publishers.

Ruud, E. (1973). Music therapy and its relationship to current treatment theories (Master’s thesis, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL).

Ruud, E. (1978). Musikkterapiens samtidshistorie – en skisse. Musikkterapi, 4.

Ruud, E. (1979). Nordisk forskerkurs i musikkterapeutiske forskningsproblemer. Musikkterapi, 3–4, 44–46.

Ruud, E. (1988a). Der improvisierende Mensch. In H.-H. Decker-Voigt, J. Eschen, & W. Mahns (Eds.), Musik und Kommunikation: Hamburger Jahrbuch zur Musiktherapie und intermodalen Medientherapie (Vol. 2, pp. 202–210). Eres.

Ruud, E. (1988b). Music therapy: Health profession or cultural movement? Music Therapy, 7(1), 34–37.

Ruud, E., & Mahns, W. (1992). Meta-Musiktherapie: Wege zu einer Theorie der Musiktherapie. Gustav Fischer Verlag.

Ruud, E. (2020) Towards a Sociology of Music Therapy. Music as a Cultural Immunogen. Barcelona Publkishers.