The Underrating of Leadership

Leadership. As music educators this is a trying and defining word in our careers. We are held responsible not only to impart a certain wealth of knowledge in our students, but we are also held responsible for creating a functioning and productive community within our classrooms. Granted, a community will form no matter what the conditions, but it is our goal as music educators to foster a community that is conducive to exceptional musical learning and the application of these ideals to life beyond our walls. Creating a positive social structure in our classroom is a huge part of our job as educators, thus making us leaders of a given community. Beyond that, we are also leaders in a political sense; being constantly surveyed and pressed to legitimize/validate the craft we teach.
In his book, Block describes, and beautifully so, the qualities and skills a leader must possess. For example, he speaks of how a great leader is focused on the good of the whole as opposed to his own personal agenda. A leader focuses on the possibilities of a community and not the problems. He charges that the goal of a leader is to facilitate a more democratic community than is the trend of many communities at the present. He discusses extensively how the goal of a leader is to initiate and convene conversations, and how, above all, perhaps the most important task of a productive leader is to listen. Block also notes that these are all qualities innate in people, and therefore all people are capable of being leaders. Therefore, he urges for a de-glamorization of leadership. We must dismiss the notion of romanticized leadership.
I am inclined to agree with Block in many respects. He is so eloquent and assertive in his call to level leadership. I am, however, inclined to disagree with one particular point he raises. This is the idea that all people can be leaders. I guess really, in a humanist sense, yes, all people can be leaders. Sure, they may not lead something on a “grand scale,” but people can take charge in small groups and even share the power. However, within the parameters that I, personally, define a leader, I do not believe all are equipped with the skills essential to be successful. I suppose this is in regards to leadership on a large scale, which I believe encompasses teaching.
Speaking as a student leader on campus, I do not think that everyone has what it takes to be a student leader. Certainly, they possess the know-how and the ideas, but the largest contributing factor to leadership is drive and passion. Frankly, I think many people are content to travel through life sort of passive and apathetic in nature. This is not a bad thing either. If there were no followers, whom would a leader then lead? And without some senses of leadership, not necessarily singular and absolute leadership, but leadership all the same, how can a community properly function? I think it is a little too idealistic to think that a group of people can consistently govern themselves without the mediation and facilitation of a leader. Ultimately, I think people are too lackadaisical to be held SO responsible. In his book, Block states that leaders are comparable to cooks, carpenters, artists, and landscape designers. I cannot convince myself to believe this to be true. I think this is a huge disservice and understatement to the role of a leader in a community.