Music theory courses are filled with rules. “You have to learn the rules to break them,” is what young composers are told when they hand-in homework assignments overflowing with parallel fifths and doubled leading tones. Those assignments inevitably come back with the words “What would Bach do?” tattooed across the manuscripts in bright red ink.

We like to compare our compositional output to Bach’s extensive collection of perfection, since he so obviously did things right. Everybody loves Bach, and who can blame them? A Counterpoint professor of mine would talk about Bach like he was an old bar buddy that he would drink with on Thursday afternoons. Another faculty member created special “What would Bach Do?” bumper stickers for all his students to be placed on their old beat-up jeeps, cello cases and Macbook Pros. The only thing left would have been to write-up tickets for those who carelessly broke the laws of Johann Sebastian Bach.

Bach created beautiful music, but music wouldn’t be an art without exploration and development. Sorry Bach, sometimes you have to break the rules. We modernized-Americans cheat on our diets, loiter in front of convenient stores, drive over the speed limit, and yes, occasionally omit the 3rd when harmonizing a chord.

We do need to formulate guidelines for good music based on what’s been done that works, in order to build a foundation for compositional practices. Guidelines are simply important for structure, and a good way to ground your approach to a piece. Thoughts and ideas, however, should never be bound by universal laws.