This post is written by Doug Bott.

In the drive for greater diversity, ‘classical’ music itself must evolve. We can’t change the people and expect the music to stay the same.

Sheku Kanneh-Mason plays the cello. We already have loads of music for the cello, so we can book him for lots of concerts. But what if we want to book more disabled musicians such as Evelyn Glennie or Nicholas McCarthy? Compared to the cello, there’s not that much existing music for percussionists, or left-handed pianists. And what about talented young disabled musicians coming through the National Open Youth Orchestra playing electronic instruments such as the Linnstrument, Seaboard Rise or Clarion? Where’s their music?

One answer is to increase new commissions for a more diverse range of instruments and players. I believe we should do this, but this new music will only hit the same problem in future, when the diversity of musicians and instruments has changed again.

Ultimately, if ‘classical’ music is going to benefit from the injection of creativity that diversity can bring, we need to be more adaptable in approaching the music we play. This means not only commissioning more new music, but also being flexible about which instruments this new music is composed for, and more open to rearranging existing repertoire for different instruments and musicians.

I’m not proposing we throw the baby out with the bath water here – that orchestras stop performing faithful renditions of Beethoven and Mozart and switch entirely to a new, radical approach. But I think we can have ‘both, and…’. Beethoven and Mozart would have been excited by these opportunities, because they were innovators. They were at the forefront of experimenting with new instruments and repertoire in their time, and almost certainly would be now too, if they were still here.

Doug Bott is musical director of Open Up Music.