Interview with Christoph Schwabe

By Melanie Voigt

Introduction

On November 23, 2009 I travelled by train from Munich to Gera, where Dr. Christoph Schwabe met me and took me to his home in Vollmershain. It was a cold, windy day, and we sat in front of the fireplace and talked for over two hours about his way toward music therapy, the development of music therapy in the German Democratic Republic (GDR), different influences and experiences within that field before 1989 and the changes that have taken place since then. After this very interesting and pleasant conversation in which the time flew by, I returned to Munich.

The original manuscript was quite a bit longer. Dr. Schwabe assisted in making clarifications and cuts. The translation of the interview is not word for word, but is the attempt to transmit the meaning and the atmosphere of the interview.

Early Influences

The first questions I had for Dr. Schwabe dealt with his personal background and the influence it had on the development of his approach to music therapy. He described not only childhood experiences, but also the beginning of his work as a music therapist.

Personal Background

Melanie Voigt: Dr. Schwabe, thank you very much for agreeing to give this interview today. The first question I would like to ask you has to do with your personal background. You have always described yourself as being an unconventional thinker, someone who does not always swim with the stream. You also emphasize your love of music, especially the works of Bach and the organ. How have this character trait and this musical identity influenced the development of your form of music therapy?

Christoph Schwabe: In regard to my personal development, I think that the fact that I am a fraternal twin and was not expected played a role here. I was born at a time in which mothers often did not know that they were expecting twins. That was the way it was with me. As long as I can remember I had the feeling that I had to assert myself. I think that this had a formative influence in a way. In the politically difficult times in which I was born, it certainly led to the massive development of self-assertiveness. Defending oneself and safeguarding one’s own existence was one choice, swimming with the stream was the other. I think that this was nothing exceptional for my generation, born in 1934. I don’t see myself as a hero who was always mounting the barricades against communist state, but I had enough difficulties in the GDR just because I asked too many questions. But I must admit that I have never regretted it.

Another thing that must have been endowed on me from birth was the very early emotional resonance to certain types of music. I can remember that at the age of about four I hung onto this little radio that we called the “Göbbel’s Harp” because mostly Nazi reports were broadcast. But good music was broadcast as well. I heard Beethoven’s G-major piano concerto for the very first time. [sings the beginning phrase]. It moved me so deeply that I didn’t know what was happening. It was like a drug. Later there was a Bach-Cantata on the radio every Sunday morning, and I didn’t miss a single one. My experience was similar.

The third thing that played a role is a sentence that I told my mother at about 5 years of age. “Mutti, I’m going to buy myself an organ like that.” I always had to sit by the organ during church services.

Those are very basic experiences. I remember that it was a huge disappointment when I realized that the console of our village organ—it stood a little in front of the organ—was not the organ, but that the organ was the huge box in back of it. That meant that I couldn’t put such a huge organ in the flat. But I learned to play organ on that instrument. Between the ages of 13 and 14 I think I knew the organs in my area better than the cantors did. This love of the organ remains to this day. And now in my old age, playing the organ, especially playing village organs, is actually more important for me than music therapy. So I am starting to take leave of music therapy and think that there are many more interesting and beautiful things. Interestingly, I now play mostly young Bach. I am rediscovering the young Bach that I played at 15 or 16. That is the Thuringian Bach—I live in Thuringia. That is actually a little bit of my world.

Another aspect that influenced my view of things very early was painting, because I liked both areas equally well from childhood on and have been active in them up to the present. The pictures hanging here—those are all pictures I painted.

I never wanted to become a professional. Even during my study of music I never wanted to become a specialized musician. My piano teacher who wanted to make a pianist out of me said, “Yes, because you are too lazy!” and he was completely right. I can’t imagine sitting 5 or 6 hours at the piano.

I wanted to be freer and to reflect about art, to experience what was there and how it works. I think that is why this interest developed relatively early. Of course, certain teachers also played a role in waking that interest. The question “What does art give rise to?” occupied me during school and especially at the beginning of my studies. Less, “You have to play an instrument with virtuosity.” Rather “What happens when art is performed” “What happens within oneself?” I never thought about music therapy, but these questions were formative because I wasn’t really sure what I wanted to study. I decided to study music education because I felt it was the broadest course of study that was available. But what disturbed me during that course of study was that you could dabble in little bit of everything but couldn’t learn anything really right. Yes, that was the disadvantage of that course of study. But it gave me the opportunity to try things relatively freely and to ask the question “What do you really want to do?”

Maybe the thing I wanted to do most was to lead a choir—voice and choir. That interested me very much, but I studied in the 1950’s in Leipzig, and leading a choir meant joining a socialist choir and leading company choirs and things like that. Naturally, I didn’t want to do that. I wanted to direct madrigals, I wanted to perform Monteverdi and old folk music for choir and that was difficult at that time because it didn’t fit into the socialist propaganda. That was the beginning.

In addition (I graduated in 1958), I was disqualified for a profession by the Party and the youth organisation at the university, because they thought that I couldn’t be a real socialist teacher—which I also didn’t want to be. Everyone thought I would go to the west. I had a position in Hamburg and my clothes were already in West Berlin. That was possible, the border was still open. But I didn’t go. I stayed in Leipzig. And I ask myself yet today why I stayed here. I can’t give a conclusive answer. In any case, the fact was (and this sounds somewhat emotional) that I could live in this area. So many composers who were vitally important to me were born and lived here. About 20 kilometres in that direction is where Robert Schumann was born. Heinrich Schütz was born 20 kilometres in the other direction and Bach was born a few kilometres further. Händel was born in Halle, close to Leipzig. Close to here is the Erzgebirge an area in which many musicians and artists live, which is overwhelming. That was my territory, not the GDR but here. Leipzig was the centre of the world for me. I wouldn’t have been able to dream of leaving Leipzig at that time. So I stayed in Leipzig and was cantor, choir leader, instrumental teacher. I was able to have a position as an assistant in a youth choir in broadcasting. I gave concerts, I wrote critiques. Yes, all that was possible.

Early Work in Music Therapy

Christoph Schwabe: Many people think that we went through life adhering to doctrine. But one could also do what I did. However, I didn’t have a steady job. The party officials thought I had gone west and I more or less immersed myself in Leipzig.

Yes, there are things that are like fate. The newly founded Department of Psychotherapy at the university was looking for someone who might develop music therapy. And so the musicologists were asked if they knew of someone who possibly would do that. I was recommended, and that must have had a reason. They certainly did not seek a streamlined person but someone as crazy as I was. I was so busy trying things out in 1959 that I first said, “No, I have no time for things like that.” Then I agreed to try and stayed. That’s the way it all started.

That was a completely new period in my life. From 1960 on I worked in the Department for Psychotherapy and in the neurological-psychiatric clinic at the same university that had issued me the disqualification for a profession. That’s paradoxical. But the philosophical faculty had disqualified me and now I was on the medical faculty. That was also possible! I could never have gotten my doctorate in Leipzig because I would have had to be admitted to the philosophical faculty, and they would not have allowed that.

I would like to mention an important experience here. My superior, Prof. Christa Kohler, was a dedicated Marxist, her father was a pastor. The psychologist was also on the church council, and of course there were very strict comrades there. At this clinic I wasn’t a comrade, I was considered to be politically unreliable because I didn’t say “Yes, yes” enough. All that happened during the Stalinist period. That was also possible. If I hadn’t had such a convinced comrade as superior who was also convinced that I was the right person for the institution, I would not have been able to work there. So, there were comrades who protected me and made it possible for me to work. The new experience for me was to feel accepted as a professional and to have no political opposition. That was unbelievable. I was able to work there for 10 wonderful years. I was lucky to be able to begin with a newly created team. We were all developing something new. Our superior was convinced that medical doctors and others should work together cooperatively and be treated as equals. Imagine that.

Melanie Voigt: Real interdisciplinary work.

Christoph Schwabe: Interdisciplinary work was really practiced. That doesn’t mean we were always embracing each other in love and friendship. No, no. There were a lot of competition and power struggles, but they were settled decently. I was able to begin and try things out in that atmosphere, which would be impossible today. I cannot imagine any clinic where that would be possible today. The hierarchy is more predominant now than ever. So much for the beginning.

Theoretical Aspects of Schwabe’s Approach to Music Therapy

In this part of the interview we spoke about choice of music in therapy, psychotherapy and music therapy, societal influences on developments on music therapy practice and single vs. group therapy.

Choice of Music in Therapy

Melanie Voigt: I think you use much classical music in your regulative music therapy. Did the experience from earlier times influence that, or were there also other ideas and realizations that played a part?

Christoph Schwabe: The very early, far reaching experience with so-called classical music formed my life and my way of thinking very strongly. This experience also played a role in the choice of music within music therapy. It wasn’t only that, though. Objective criteria were developed which have to do with the character of this music, its structural characteristics. In this context one must warn against choosing music that is preferred by the therapist instead of choosing according to objective aspects that are independent of the subjective love or rejection of certain types of music.

But before I go into regulative music therapy and the choice of music I would like to mention something important. The idea of the methodological system that I developed in the 1960s is repeatedly up for discussion. My practical work at this time consisted, among other things, of the development of procedures of music therapy that could be used directly in certain situations of psychotherapy. That means there was not THE music therapy that I carried out while others practiced something else. Rather there were certain indications, and I had to develop special procedures of music therapy that were united in my methodical system. Regulative music therapy was only one of these methods. Naturally, we had this complex psychotherapy in which verbal and nonverbal methods were treated equally. Music therapy as a nonverbal method did not mean that no one speaks. Does the music do everything? No, no. That is not my opinion.

But now back to your question regarding the choice of music. I do not like to use the usual term “classical music”, because that implies a form of judgement. Instead, for this approach, the goal of which is essentially the stimulus of perception and the development of perception, experience has shown that music which has a variety of structures and uses different timbres should be preferred to music which I like to describe as ornamental on a metric level because it makes it possible for one’s attention to correspond between oneself and the music. We understand music in Regulative Music Therapy as a type of object, as a vis-à-vis, as a sort of partner and this or that vis-à-vis should have a certain standard, at least the same standard or level that I have myself. It shouldn’t be trite, but it also shouldn’t demand too much of someone. It should have many forms and be complex.

These criteria apply to the symphonic and concert music from these 300 years of common musical development which includes an indescribably large abundance of musical life. This inexhaustible reservoir is antiquated, but alive. For me, Rock-Beat from the 1970’s, especially East German Rock, is also classical music that I use. So, when I speak of East-Rock and prefer that to Rock from the West, it is only a small accentuation. But I have found more substantial music there with more profound messages. Logical, isn’t it?

Melanie Voigt: Because of the social background.

Christoph Schwabe: I would also call that classical music. So, for me all music is interesting and important and should be known by the music therapist so that one can know what ideas the patients have regarding music. The Musikantenstadl [a television program in Germany with folksy music] belongs here too, that kitsch. One has to be acquainted with all these things. That doesn’t mean I use it, but when the wish is expressed in a group music therapy session, then I sing it even if I have to grit my teeth, because the people who listen to it fanatically transport real feelings through it.

Melanie Voigt: That is a way of reaching them.

Christoph Schwabe: Exactly, so I am very cautious about passing judgement and would prefer an objective reference to the choice of music and not aesthetic components or judgemental things. By the way, the concrete choice of music in a specific therapy situation is a very difficult decision for the music therapist. There are many things that need to be considered that cannot all be listed here. These components are therefore also a point of emphasis in our concept of music therapy training.

Psychotherapy and Music Therapy

Melanie Voigt: What meaning did or does the Viennese school of psychotherapy have for the development of music therapy from your point of view?

Christoph Schwabe: First of all—and I will say it drastically—it is a lie when people assume that in the GDR we did not deal with Freud, Jung, Adler and other schools of thought. We did that from the beginning, even if it was considered politically to be bourgeois and thus “counterrevolutionary.” We not only read Freud but also the others, including Moreno and Frankl, of course, who also belonged to the Viennese school. I met Frankl personally. Even if we officially were not allowed to speak about it, there was lively discussion about these fundamental analytical concepts.

Your question is so broad that I will select a bit and mention that I see a major difference between the western development, especially in the Federal Republic of Germany, and our development. First to our development: I think that the fact that we were forced to rephrase everything in order not to fall into disrepute with official views, political views, had a type of paradoxical effect. For example, early disorders: That term is not so old. But what Freud placed in early childhood, we referred to as the retrospective view of things. And that said everything. No one understood it, but those who needed to understand it, understood.

Melanie Voigt: If I might interrupt you, I think at that time, maybe I’m not correctly informed, behaviour therapy was accepted. Is that correct or is it an oversimplification?

Christoph Schwabe: That is an oversimplification. At the beginning of the ‘60s only a Pavlovian, biological, vulgar-materialistic view of human existence was accepted. Behaviour therapy came from the West and one was officially critical. There was a development that originated in Leipzig, a really revolutionary analysis of this vulgar-materialistic image of man, and I use this term consciously. Received opinions did not play a role, but the analysis that the psychological corresponds to the material. The idea of the bio-psycho-social unity of the human personality and of life grew out of this analysis. The teachings with which we were acquainted, the entire spectrum from psychoanalysis and psychodynamic teachings to behaviour therapy were assigned to this image of personality and of psychotherapy.

But I would like to come to the following important point, the Viennese school and the difference to West Germany.

I consider it tragic that the West German developments in music therapy, which started about 10 or 15 years later than the East German, had a pronounced orientation toward psychoanalysis. Orff-Music Therapy is an exception here. What I find tragic is that the first teacher of music therapy in the 1970s in West Germany had psychoanalytic training and only this was taught. That pointed the way only in one direction, and following versions haven’t differed much. I think that this is an one-sidedness that did not benefit music therapy.

So, getting back to the Viennese school, that which influenced us and was most important to us as basic knowledge, especially from Freud’s teachings, regards the unconscious—the phenomena of transference and the importance of early childhood for development.

In my opinion, Moreno was more important for practical music therapy. Moreno said, “In the beginning was the deed, not the word.” Beyond that was the acquaintance with Frankl. Frankl was not only a logo-therapist. That was also practical behaviour therapy, didactics. All the things he developed, such as symptom prescription—the Viennese school in its entire breadth played a role in the development of a complex system of psychotherapy, not only with reference to Freud, Jung and Adler. A word about Jung: We were always cautious with Jung, because he is too speculative. When I think about the interpretation of pictures, well, we were very sceptical, and I still am. Jung said many important things such as the teachings regarding archetypes and the collective unconscious. These are culturally important things. But I think that in the whole psychodynamic area, also in Jung’s school, much is much too speculative. Yes, maybe so much to that question.

Melanie Voigt: That was very helpful.

Christoph Schwabe: One more thing: In 1965 I was lucky to be able to be in Vienna for 4 weeks. Somewhere, the connections worked and others didn’t. I had received a working vacation in Vienna and that was very interesting and also very complicated for me. I learned to know Viennese music therapy very well. I learned to know Koffer-Ulrich. I experienced the beginning of Alfred Schmölz’s work. We were friends then for a long time. I was able to bring him over here every so often.

Koffer-Ulrich suggested that I take over her institute. The Austrians sometimes had better relations with East Germany than did West Germany, which was strange. Sometimes certain persons from the east were “loaned”, and she was hoping for something like that. But I must say that if I had had been able to choose freely at that time, like today, I would not have gone to Vienna. Well, all the things I experienced at that institute—that was disconcerting for me. Schmölz suffered under all the bureaucracy. But I also learned to know really wonderful things in Vienna. When one wanted to go to Frankl, one shouldn’t be installed on the university neurological clinic. The head doctor, Hoff, and the head of psychiatry at the university, Frankl, were deadly foes.

Melanie Voigt: Really?

Christoph Schwabe: Yes, I was warned. Once I said I wanted to go to see Frankl. Others said, “Don’t do that for heaven’s sake, here they’ll throw you out.” And then I went to see Frankl on my last day. He asked, “Why not before today?” I said, “I think you know why.” And then he laughed.

Societal Developments and Music Therapy Developments

Melanie Voigt: This year is the twentieth anniversary of the fall of the Wall, the “Wende” [turning point]. You have already mentioned that you do not only see this positively, that it was not only easy for you.

Christoph Schwabe: No.

Melanie Voigt: But your Social Music Therapy was developed within the frame of these very large social changes. I would like to know what connections you see between Social Music Therapy and your other forms of music therapy and to the societal development in general.

Christoph Schwabe: I need to begin somewhat earlier. I was able to publish the book “Methodik der Musiktherapie” [Methodology of Music Therapy] in 1978. By the way, that was my postdoctoral thesis, as far as I know, the first with a topic of music therapy in Europe. Why shouldn’t I mention that?

Melanie Voigt: Yes, of course.

Christoph Schwabe: That was a first attempt to sort out music therapy methodologically. Afterward, the books about Active Group Music Therapy for adults and Regulative Music Therapy were written based on this methodology. I had planned to describe particular methods which developed out of the methodology. The Active Group Music Therapy appeared during the time in which I left Leipzig. It was written based on practical experience here in this house.

I left Leipzig, which was very tragic and painful for me. The clinic literally broke apart with Christa Kohler’s departure when she became seriously ill. A climate developed there during the second half of the 1970’s in which different concepts were brought into the clinic by different people—a condition that is common today—where the integrated concept collapsed. My music therapy was designed for integration and could no longer be realized. That brought me into a massive conflict, also with the colleagues who worked there. I more or less became unemployed. That existed in East Germany also. Of course, the Party also saw to it that I was unemployed, but that’s another story.

In any case, I sat here and developed Active Music Therapy seen from the angle of its use within different working conditions within psychotherapy. So actually, this concept was the first attempt to develop a concept of music therapy that was not based on one school of thought. The book was not supposed to be published, books were controlled and censored, and I had attacked the Leipzig school of psychotherapy. That was not allowed for political reasons. But the publisher wanted to publish it, and so we tricked the Party—also an exciting story. In any case, it appeared three years later and has become more or less a textbook. That is the background story to your question.

Then came 1989, 1990, 1991 in which the whole system of health care of East Germany collapsed, especially psychotherapy. The so-called “Guideline Psychotherapy” of West Germany was adopted along with certain doctrines. That meant that a widespread form of music therapy that was practiced here especially by clinical psychologists was no longer accepted by the insurance companies. There hardly a clinic in which Regulative Music Therapy was not used. All that collapsed. Actually, everything I had built up in music therapy collapsed.

That was the situation that we also had in music therapy training. There was no more interest in it. I am currently complying with a request to write about music therapy for a history of psychotherapy in the GDR. Right now I am occupied with the number of training courses we held. We had trained thousands of people who really practiced the therapy. That was all gone. And now we also to change our training institutions, our scientific societies—it was crazy. We were constantly taking death-defying leaps. The Academy for Applied Music Therapy Crossen was founded during this time.

We suddenly had many demands for people who could practice music therapy with the handicapped, in special education, in the area bordering on pedagogy, the care of those with multiple handicaps. We had that in East Germany, too, but the conditions were completely different. So we first had to deal with this clientele, and that meant expanding and modifying the existing methodology to some extent.

I think that the principle of causality, described in 1983 in the book Active Group Music Therapy served as the basis for that development. This was a working model for the question of indication and the choice of method and the definition of goals on a broad basis and made it possible for us to modify that which we had, not to develop something new. What came of it is what we then called Social Music Therapy. It was a further development along these lines. It is not really something new, but is just a broadening of a clinical model into a non-clinical model.

That is why we have ceased to use the term Social Music Therapy. This term is misleading as is the term Regulative Music Therapy, as if it were only concerned with the social. Actually, what it means is that social interaction is one of the key instruments for that concept of music therapy which is used in clinical-pathological and non-clinical-pathological areas. I would say that this development is actually the development from a method to a concept. In the meantime, the clinical area has recovered somewhat and the demand for music therapy training for clinical music therapy has increased. We also have courses for Regulative Music Therapy again.

Melanie Voigt: You said that you have dissociated yourself from the term Social Music Therapy. Did I understand you correctly?

Christoph Schwabe: This term exists. That is like it is with names that one is given, one can’t get rid of them. But we are not happy with that term because others too often understand something different than we intended. That is also evident in our conversation. For that reason we don’t use that term anymore.

Melanie Voigt: What term would you use now? Or is it actually a concept of music therapy that is to be adapted to the needs of the patient?

Christoph Schwabe: Yes, exactly. My colleagues call it Music Therapy according to Schwabe. We did not coin a new name for it.

Music Therapy Settings

Melanie Voigt: I believe you first practiced music therapy in the single setting, then in the group. Is that correct?

Christoph Schwabe: Yes.

Melanie Voigt: . . . and then the group-setting became very important for you. What experiences and realizations influenced that?

Christoph Schwabe: I am smiling because I am remembering so many things; political things, misunderstandings about which one could talk about a long time in connection with this topic. But maybe one more thing: In the 1970’s the conceptual activity of psychotherapy moved from Leipzig to Berlin, East Berlin. That is connected with the name of Kurt Höck, one of the most important fathers of psychotherapy in East Germany. His name is connected with the development of group psychotherapy, that is, group dynamic therapy. There was an unbelievably important, euphoric, enthusiastic support for this form of training in East Germany among young psychotherapists. The reason was that these group dynamic forms of training were a forum or a protected zone in which they could be the way they wanted to be—not regulated, not conform to doctrine—they could live out their individuality. I also went through that training, and today I see it critically.

At that time one thought that one could do without psychotherapy in the dyad and placed the emphasis fully on group therapy. I was one of the people who said, “You can’t just use group psychotherapy. There are patients who can only be treated in the dyad.” That’s why I was smiling when you asked that question. That was a phase at that time, in which the young generation of psychotherapists in East Germany swore solely by group psychotherapy. There wasn’t group psychotherapy in East Germany because it was only about collective conciousness, collective thinking. That’s ridiculous. Group psychotherapy in East Germany was clearly individualistic, designed for the individuality of the personality, not only for training but also for the patients. It wasn’t about collectivism.

At that point I get upset and could ask, “Why do you foul your own nest?” And when I do, I am always suspected of wanting to defend the GDR. I certainly do not want to do that, believe me. I suffered enough. But I think one has to sort things out correctly. So that is the historical background of why group psychotherapy developed so strongly.

But that is only part of the truth. Now I’m coming to music therapy, why we prefer the group setting. I’ll bring it to a point and say: The group is standard. The indication for the dyad exists when the group situation is not possible because of psychopathological or other handicaps of the patients, but the group is standard. That doesn’t mean that we only work with groups. It’s simply because the social interaction in the group is a wonderful instrumentarium that I wouldn’t want to miss, for many indications. However, because of the experiences we had in group dynamics, we have a completely different idea concerning the role of the therapist. When a psychoanalyst claims that during group psychotherapy, group music therapy the leader [therapist] should act within the group process because he can perceive better what happens, well, he annuls basic psychological facts. It means that when I act, my perception is impaired. And I think that the group leader must stay out of the group process for the most part because it has to do with accepting responsibility. I cannot confirm the arguments that say, the patient is somehow handicapped. The fact that we usually use a group leader and a co-therapist in the group setting has to do with making it safe for the group, but also . . .

Melanie Voigt: . . . for the therapist

Christoph Schwabe: Yes, for the protection of the therapist from the group and the protection of the group from the therapist.

Factors Influencing Music Therapy Development

The next part of the interview was concerned with Dr. Schwabe’s views on the development in the universities and on specific scientific research with regard to music therapy. Additionally we spoke about the relationship between the independent developments of different approaches to music therapy at the same point in time.

University Development and Music Therapy

Melanie Voigt: How do you see the university development of the last 40 years with regard to music therapy?

Christoph Schwabe: It’s tragic. Maybe a historical beginning here also: In 1968 we had the first German International Congress of Music Therapy in Leipzig, in which we were able to invite speakers from the Federal Republic, from Austria and other countries in spite of great odds. It was a huge success.

Afterward, the minister of health in the GDR ordered us to develop a concept for music therapy training, which we did. By the way, I still think that this concept is right, even though it couldn’t be realized. But I must explain who “we” are.

In the East German development of psychotherapy and music therapy there was a scientific Society for Medical Psychotherapy with different sections, also a section for music therapy, group psychotherapy, behaviour therapy etc. And these scientific Societies had quite a lot of autonomy. They were also responsible for questions regarding training. All of the educational activities for music therapy occurred within the Section Music Therapy, the scientific society. The state hardly bothered with this at all. When one wanted to develop a concept of music therapy training, the state questioned the scientific society.

After this congress in 1968 the Society for Psychotherapy was told by the minister of health in East Germany—Mecklinger was his name—to develop a concept for music therapy training. So I have dealt with the professional profile of music therapists since 1968. At that time, we wanted to promote an academic course of study and a middle-medical course of study because we realized that the academic course of study would be of little use for practical work. And that has been confirmed up to the present.

There are additional factors that have become relevant to this dilemma. I think that there are at least 2, if not 3 relevant hindrances regarding the academic course of study. First of all, there is no money in the health system for a new professional group like music therapists. The health system cannot even pay its doctors and nurses adequately. The expectation that this professional profile can be established will not be successful in practice.

The second reason is that the academic course of study is a rational course of study. Music therapy is concerned with personality development as is every form of psychotherapy. That cannot be taught at a university. Instead, they send the students to practical training and delegate the duty of education and training to others. When I see some of the courses of study of dear colleagues; these are interesting for research but not for practical work. When people come to us in the clinics to observe, they don’t even know what Group Singing Therapy is, and that is our daily bread. That is the second reason that I feel that the real therapeutic training is not solvable in this way. There is not really an academic course of study geared solely to therapy. Only the music therapists think that this is possible. Based on my experience, I cannot share that opinion.

The third reason is that in my opinion good nurses’ training provides a better foundation for the relationship between patient and therapist than an academic course of study. There is no academic profession in practice which has its roots in nonverbal methods. That means that when the therapists want to be integrated in a therapeutic system, they must be educated on the same level as the occupational therapists, the movement therapists, the creative therapists. That would be realistic, nothing else. This is also applicable to the new creation “art therapist.”

That is my opinion of the academic development of the music therapist. I consider it utopia when I think about the practice of music therapy. That doesn’t exclude the fact that in certain clinics, academics work as music therapists. But it is usually better when these people have a second basic profession. I practiced music therapy for 20 years, but I did more than just practical work.

So I think they should all be a little more modest and cautious. When I hear about all the disputes that are carried out in the Kasseler Konferenz, I think we should concern ourselves with these and be open to other concepts of music therapy in order to find a common language.

Specific Areas of Scientific Research and Music Therapy

Melanie Voigt: What effects have developments in neurology and other findings in research had on music therapy in general? Have these developments brought about developments in your form of therapy?

Christoph Schwabe: I would like to say something else about the academic course of study. I have the impression that in the last years music therapists have been concerned with creating a professional image of THE music therapist. I think that they have neglected the fact that it is indeed desirable that psychotherapists from the medical and psychological areas learn certain forms of music therapy and that they practice these as techniques or approaches. I am of the opinion that music therapy should not be restricted to one species, the specialist. Rather, it should be understood as a collection of approaches that are practiced by other psychotherapists. There are so many methods in psychotherapy that can be learned and that is what I would wish. Next year I will offer two approaches to music therapy, Regulative Music Therapy and Active Group Music Therapy, in a ten hour course for psychotherapists within the Psychotherapy Week in Erfurt. The participants should get to know the approaches and want to learn more about them. I think we should not lose sight of such things.

Now to your question: Our concept has broadened greatly in both clinical and non-clinical practice in the last 20 years. Internal medicine plays a great role here, for example oncology but also neurology. Different approaches have been developed further, especially in the dyad with accident patients. New realizations have been gained, especially with regard to the reactivation or activation of the pre-verbal area in the brain through acoustical stimuli, e.g. music. These are things that did not play such a role at first in a concept that was aimed for use in treating psychosomatic illness, neurosis, psychosis. So, that is enriching and has broadened the criteria for indications. Yes, I think that would be the answer to this question.

Simultaneous, World-wide Developments in Music Therapy

Melanie Voigt: You have described the conditions under which you developed music therapy. Within this period of time there were forms of music therapy that developed independently of each other throughout the world--Priestly, Alvin, Nordoff und Robbins, Orff and naturally your music therapy, even though the social conditions were different. When you look at these developments, what relation do you see between them?

Christoph Schwabe: The first thing that comes to mind is the fact that there were individual personalities who had a kind of “Saul to Paul” experience at sometime in their lives and then developed something. I think that biographical things played a role in the development of these concepts. These had less to do with social conditions than with one’s own biography. Certainly, the different forms of society in which we lived or live also influenced us, and I think that ways of life are not only political, but that they are influenced by other cultural factors. So I think that it is completely normal that the development of music therapy in America is different than that in Germany, and in Germany it is different than in other countries. I think that has something to do with general conditions. The German, with his partially admired tendency toward being philosophical but also extremely narcissistic, which then led to political extremes that set the world on fire—that is a different mentality than that of the Americans—you know that better than I—which is more pragmatic. I think that these things also play a role in concepts of psychotherapy.

Melanie Voigt: That is certainly true.

Christoph Schwabe: Yes, and I would also wish that people were more curious, and not just for a concept in which one feels good, but to look on the other side of the fence. I think about Robert Schumann with his musical rules for house and life. He said or wrote, “Someone also lives on the other side of the mountains.” Appreciate one’s own but look at others and to have interest in them. That is something I wish were more prevalent, now that the borders are open, also to East Germany. And who comes? You.

Melanie Voigt: But you have contacts in the former Federal Republic.

Christoph Schwabe: Yes I have contact, but this contact is much stronger from East to West than in the other direction. But I don’t want to emphasize this direction alone. I would wish that one interest himself more for the other. But I also think that the prerequisite for having interest in another is to develop one’s own. Just as important is this: The more I know what I do myself, the better. That brings us back to types of study. Institutions that claim to offer everything, all concepts. They think that then they [the students] will develop their own concept—I don’t think that is right. The people don’t have that much time. They have four years to study. It would be better if they would really learn a concept from scratch and then be told, “Now look around and learn to compare yours with the others.”

Looking to the Future

Melanie Voigt: Now we come to the question of caring for children. That expression was given to me by a supervisor and I found it very good. I took up Gertrud Orff’s work and experienced from that angle what it means to take something that someone else has developed, to keep it alive and to develop it further. When this happens, the original automatically changes to a certain extent. I know this situation from that perspective and you have the other perspective.

Christoph Schwabe: There are some things in which I consider myself a lucky man. There are also things that I am not happy about, of course. I am not a euphoric person. But regarding this question, I am the happiest man in the world. I can say that I have two hands full of so fantastic, great colleagues who continue to carry out what I started without trying to reinvent the wheel and to develop it further. I think it’s normal when one sometimes argues, and that happens every so often. When I do something and my boss, Ulrike Haase, is not informed and then demands that information with great affect, then I experience that we sometimes clash. But I think that’s part of it, like in a good marriage. It is also my duty to observe how some things are done differently than I did them. Sometimes I think one could be more thorough, and sometimes more relaxed or here and there less dramatic. I sometimes wonder why they are concerned with certain things, but I think that it is my duty to learn to observe and not to be the wicked mother-in-law. Sometimes I am successful, sometimes I am not. But one thing is clear: They will prevail and will not let the old man steal the butter from their bread. I find that completely OK.

So, I am very satisfied with my role and still do a lot. It is not easy to say farewell, I don’t want to play that down. But I am actually happy that I have so many interests. Back over there (points over his shoulder) is my harpsichord. Four kilometres away there is a wonderful organ. My painting things are upstairs. I can finally read novels, which I formerly didn’t have time to do. What more could I want? It’s wonderful.

Melanie Voigt: That’s wonderful. Now to the last question: What do you wish for the future of music therapy in Germany and in the world.

Christoph Schwabe: As you ask me this question, I am remembering something I experienced three days ago. I held a video conversation with my grandson. He is currently in New Zealand, 18,000 kilometres away. And I saw that boy on the screen and we were talking about this and that. And that moved me very much—what nature offers us, also through globalization. We tend to see globalization as a threat, but I think there are always two sides. The question is how we deal with it responsibly. And that’s the way I regard this question.

My wish is that we will learn to deal with globalization in our area responsibly. For me, that means that I first do my own homework and cannot bother with the patients in Greenland or Russia, or go to Israel to tell them what music therapy is. That is often done today. I must do my work here and know the mentality of my patients and work through my own problems. I wish that would be done more, especially by professionals who think they are doing research by flying around in the world. They should do their work at home and be more thorough about it.

The other wish is that we remain interested in others and not become megalomaniacal, founding more organisations than we already have, doing things for the sake of doing them and occupying people with all sorts of absurd ideas. Music therapy is not there for the world, but for the patients who live among us. Yes, that would be my wish: that this dialectic is kept in mind and that the responsibility for that which happens in our front yard and behind our closed doors here is greater than it is. The way I see our universities—I worked 30 years there—there have been no improvements there. And when the students go out on the streets and demonstrate today, then I say they should do it with emphasis and more. Today there are 5,000 students demonstrating in Leipzig. That’s not enough. The way the courses of study have developed doesn’t work. I experience too often that too many people think that when they have the title of professor, they’ve made it. I can’t see that they really get going at that point. Take our last conference. I would have liked to have discussed with certain people who exclaimed “Receptive Music Therapy: We must study the laws of reception.” We invited them. But who came from the West to the East? There was more interest in speculating about what happens at the receptive level. But in the meantime I can laugh about it.

Melanie Voigt: Many, many thanks for your willingness to give this interview.

Christoph Schwabe: Have we made it?

Melanie Voigt: We made it. Now we just need a picture.