question numbah toow.
question number 2: what have i experienced as a student in regards to positivist musicology?
good question. i've experienced a lot of things as study in a music history class. a lot of it has been good, but there are also lots of bad experiences. i suppose that i should share with you the bad ones since they seem to relate most to this topic.
of all the examples i've given, none of them have been too extremely controversial. however, as i go into my experiences, i am stepping in a realm that a lot of people do not like. i'll start with some mildly entertaining experiences and work up to the ones that get people angry.
well, one of the interesting things i experienced as a student taking music history at the university (4 semesters worth) is the relibility of the required textbook. the book that we used in our courses is often called "the grout". which happens to be one of the authors of the book. Grout and Palisca. however, either one of them tends to be out of touch every now and then with the history of music and one could even raise the question of anti-semitism. alright, i really have no grounds for that and i really shouldn't even try to push that as a truth but in my first semester of the 351 series (there are three semesters plus the survey course that is a pre-requisite) we were required to write a short paper on a madrigal. there was no title given but somehow i managed to find out who the composer was and i checked out books on the composer for additional historical background. the composer's named was Salamone Rossi. he was an Italian Jew that lived in the 1600's. the Italians liked him enough in Mantua that they allowed him to go around the city without the mark of the Jew. anyhow, in the second semseter course, which covers the baroque thrugh the end of the classic era, salmone rossi was brought up. perhaps by myself...i do not remember anymore why he was mentioned. but he was doing something a bit before anyone else. our professor did not believe that salmone rossi was not in the textbook. i told her he wasn't because i tried to find him last semester and had no luck. she still did not believe me. so she asked for my book and checked the index, and i was right.
thats the only proof i have. i hope you realise that i'm half joking with that one. i'm not trying to call anyone anti-semitic. however, i did not understand why she was so shocked and maybe even more i did not understand why rossi was not in the textbook when he was a pretty important figure in the history of music. oh yes, he was one of the earliest compoers to use the trio sonata texture. so yes, rather important figure. but not mentioned.
you know, something else i really found bothersome is how the 19th century is treated, in particular.
i ask you, when you think of the WESTERN WORLD, what do you think of? I myself think North America, Europe and Russia. That would include all of the Slavic countries, England, United States, Latin America, South America, Spain, Portugal, Poland, etc. You know, by the 19th century the idea of nationalism has come about. And all of these countries are fighting for their own peice of land to call their own. What I mean is that there are a lot of nations that are in existance than just Italy and Germany! And yet, we seem to only focus on those two countries. Why is that, especially considering these countries are destined to become the leading fascist nations along with Japan in a war we like to refer to as World War II? Surely Italy was doing more than just pushing out operas. And Surely Germany was doing more than just pushing out really bad operas (Wagner anyone?). Alright, it is true that we did cover more than just German opera. We covered some German instrumental music! Oh and music from the Austro-Hungarian empire, which includes a lot of German speaking citizens.
The only composer of this time that I even consider to have a good deal of depth is Liszt. Liszt, if you try to read up on him, wanted a united Hungary that was not under the oppression of another country. Hungary had never really been an autonomous country before so it is interesting to see this sense of nationalism effect the man and his compositions. However, that is not important in music history.
That was a bit of a tangent, back to what I was saying. Why is it that the 19th century seems to have only occured in Italy and Germany (and it's sister county Austro-Hungary)? What were the French doing? What about the composers in England? Or Portugal? Or in Poland? They are all Westerners. Maybe, as I understand it, it is because the development of the study of music history started in Germany. You know how the Germans are. Germans, particularly composers, seem to believe that they are the greatest thing to happen. Honest. Read what Wagner writes, read what Webern writes. Read what Stockhausen writes. Stockahusen believes that he is from a line of German composers that were put on this earth to make the greatest music and only they can do it. Wagner is an anti-semitic and here is a quote:
This leads me back to question to general idealogy of musicology/music history. is it, in its popular stream, anti-semitic? i am not claiming that thousands of professors with a background in musicology are anti-semitic. but what i am saying is that as a whole, musicology has been moulded to ignore the Jews in music. does that seem likely? it is a very touchy subject, i know. and even writing about it makes me feel a little uneasy. but i put it out, because i think it is worth giving a thought about. Wagner admits that there are Jewish composers writing music in Germany and yet we have never even heard of them. There are a lot of reasons why I do not like Wagner, his anti-semitism is one and his music is another. i do not know if Wagner ever actually put his racist words to action through his music (i have not studied his music and no one has bothered to say so) except i do know that he advocated for violence toward Jews. but it is certain that he thought that the Jew or any other savage race had no place in Music.
i think maybe there is a built in ethnic/racist slant in musicology that probably stems from its origins. i do not have proof other than what i see as the main focus in the history books that are required reading for class.
it appears that this question requires a lot of writings, so i'll continue answering the question in my next post. i think i have written too much for one post already. if you are bothered by my inconsistent use of capital letters at the start of sentences, please forgive me. i am lazy.
good question. i've experienced a lot of things as study in a music history class. a lot of it has been good, but there are also lots of bad experiences. i suppose that i should share with you the bad ones since they seem to relate most to this topic.
of all the examples i've given, none of them have been too extremely controversial. however, as i go into my experiences, i am stepping in a realm that a lot of people do not like. i'll start with some mildly entertaining experiences and work up to the ones that get people angry.
well, one of the interesting things i experienced as a student taking music history at the university (4 semesters worth) is the relibility of the required textbook. the book that we used in our courses is often called "the grout". which happens to be one of the authors of the book. Grout and Palisca. however, either one of them tends to be out of touch every now and then with the history of music and one could even raise the question of anti-semitism. alright, i really have no grounds for that and i really shouldn't even try to push that as a truth but in my first semester of the 351 series (there are three semesters plus the survey course that is a pre-requisite) we were required to write a short paper on a madrigal. there was no title given but somehow i managed to find out who the composer was and i checked out books on the composer for additional historical background. the composer's named was Salamone Rossi. he was an Italian Jew that lived in the 1600's. the Italians liked him enough in Mantua that they allowed him to go around the city without the mark of the Jew. anyhow, in the second semseter course, which covers the baroque thrugh the end of the classic era, salmone rossi was brought up. perhaps by myself...i do not remember anymore why he was mentioned. but he was doing something a bit before anyone else. our professor did not believe that salmone rossi was not in the textbook. i told her he wasn't because i tried to find him last semester and had no luck. she still did not believe me. so she asked for my book and checked the index, and i was right.
thats the only proof i have. i hope you realise that i'm half joking with that one. i'm not trying to call anyone anti-semitic. however, i did not understand why she was so shocked and maybe even more i did not understand why rossi was not in the textbook when he was a pretty important figure in the history of music. oh yes, he was one of the earliest compoers to use the trio sonata texture. so yes, rather important figure. but not mentioned.
you know, something else i really found bothersome is how the 19th century is treated, in particular.
i ask you, when you think of the WESTERN WORLD, what do you think of? I myself think North America, Europe and Russia. That would include all of the Slavic countries, England, United States, Latin America, South America, Spain, Portugal, Poland, etc. You know, by the 19th century the idea of nationalism has come about. And all of these countries are fighting for their own peice of land to call their own. What I mean is that there are a lot of nations that are in existance than just Italy and Germany! And yet, we seem to only focus on those two countries. Why is that, especially considering these countries are destined to become the leading fascist nations along with Japan in a war we like to refer to as World War II? Surely Italy was doing more than just pushing out operas. And Surely Germany was doing more than just pushing out really bad operas (Wagner anyone?). Alright, it is true that we did cover more than just German opera. We covered some German instrumental music! Oh and music from the Austro-Hungarian empire, which includes a lot of German speaking citizens.
The only composer of this time that I even consider to have a good deal of depth is Liszt. Liszt, if you try to read up on him, wanted a united Hungary that was not under the oppression of another country. Hungary had never really been an autonomous country before so it is interesting to see this sense of nationalism effect the man and his compositions. However, that is not important in music history.
That was a bit of a tangent, back to what I was saying. Why is it that the 19th century seems to have only occured in Italy and Germany (and it's sister county Austro-Hungary)? What were the French doing? What about the composers in England? Or Portugal? Or in Poland? They are all Westerners. Maybe, as I understand it, it is because the development of the study of music history started in Germany. You know how the Germans are. Germans, particularly composers, seem to believe that they are the greatest thing to happen. Honest. Read what Wagner writes, read what Webern writes. Read what Stockhausen writes. Stockahusen believes that he is from a line of German composers that were put on this earth to make the greatest music and only they can do it. Wagner is an anti-semitic and here is a quote:
You ask me about the Judenthum [Judaism in Music]. You must know the article is by me. Why do you ask?...I felt a long-repressed hatred for this Jewry, and this hatred is as necessary to my nature as gall is to blood. An opportunity arose when their damnable scribbling annoyed me most, and so I broke forth at last.
This leads me back to question to general idealogy of musicology/music history. is it, in its popular stream, anti-semitic? i am not claiming that thousands of professors with a background in musicology are anti-semitic. but what i am saying is that as a whole, musicology has been moulded to ignore the Jews in music. does that seem likely? it is a very touchy subject, i know. and even writing about it makes me feel a little uneasy. but i put it out, because i think it is worth giving a thought about. Wagner admits that there are Jewish composers writing music in Germany and yet we have never even heard of them. There are a lot of reasons why I do not like Wagner, his anti-semitism is one and his music is another. i do not know if Wagner ever actually put his racist words to action through his music (i have not studied his music and no one has bothered to say so) except i do know that he advocated for violence toward Jews. but it is certain that he thought that the Jew or any other savage race had no place in Music.
i think maybe there is a built in ethnic/racist slant in musicology that probably stems from its origins. i do not have proof other than what i see as the main focus in the history books that are required reading for class.
it appears that this question requires a lot of writings, so i'll continue answering the question in my next post. i think i have written too much for one post already. if you are bothered by my inconsistent use of capital letters at the start of sentences, please forgive me. i am lazy.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home