Criticism

I had never really been bothered by bad criticism prior to reading these articles. I happily read my reviews in the New Yorker or Harper's or listened to them on NPR and didn't give much thought to what was going online or in newspapers. I suppose I thought that bad music was around because people liked bad music, regardless of what the critics had to say.

The story about Harry Connick Jr.'s comment about pentatonic scales becoming a joke changed my perspective. American Idol is a highly visible form of music criticism, and it's not really encouraging quality music making. In reality, critics, especially on a show like this, hold a lot of power of public opinion of music.

Regarding film, I feel that reviews from good critics are more visible but that people simply ignore them. I know many people who gleefully report that they never agree with the critics -- and these people have very bad taste in film. Sadly, I really can't envision a solution to this problem. Given how easy it is to spread information now, there will certainly always be a wealth of people who know nothing giving away their opinions to other unsuspecting people who will happily believe them.

Plagiarism

Kenneth Goldsmith's discussion of patch writing, or stringing together the works of others to create a vaguely new work, resonated with me. Most of the research-based writing I've done has felt plagiaristic in essence; i.e., lacking any sort of novelty or utility that the original sources didn't already possess.

How much more can there be to say? Certainly the context of our experience is in flux, but has the essence of being human really changed? Certainly there is still something left unimagined, but our age of information abundance is frightening: originality is elusive.

Goldsmith's new aesthetic makes sense in this new context. Creating is now secondary to pointing. His reading of a traffic report in the poetic voice was provocative -- captivating yet dispassionate and mechanical. A chilling depiction of a new reality, a world in which we say too much.

Bacon

As a self-described bacon trailblazer, I was a little surprised that those in the bacon community on Twitter were automatically assumed to be robots.

With this exception, I found the reading and podcast to be accurate. I was particularly moved by the comparison made between information on the internet and viral infections. Not that "going viral" is anything new, but the idea that information that spreads quickly is dangerous was profound. That said, I don't think we're ever going to slow things down now, so I wonder how our relationship with information will evolve. Perhaps society will grow to be more critical of information (and we've wanted that all along, right?). I think we can already see this new kind of information savvy in my generation (I'm thinking about how my mom clicks on spam links that I would never dare to click on!).

Social media presents another problem -- it leads us to equate popularity with value. Of course, this was (frustratingly) happening before social media, but it certainly seems worse now. Some people get upset over the number of facebook "likes" they get!

How far will it all go? My prediction: pretty far, but then I bet we'll see a repudiation of "internet behavior" and a return to more authentic (loaded word, I know) human interactions. At least I hope we do. Because as a self-described shy introvert, I'm increasingly finding myself the most "social" of my acquaintances and friends. Well, not social in the facebook sense.

 P.S. IMSLP is great! I use it all the time. I suppose some might have a problem with the particular editions uploaded on the site. Then again, as I wrote in my last post, I'm not a purist when it comes to editions.

Blog Post #5

Interestingly, I found more significance in the disputed period on the Declaration of Independence than in any of the discussions concerning historical music manuscripts. Perhaps it's because the period substantially changes the meaning of the Declaration, whereas a missing staccato in a performance has a somewhat lesser effect on a piece of music as a whole.

And this is why I find it so frivolous to attempt to follow a composer's intent so carefully. Great composers are truly inspired, but their work still carries the imperfections of any human work. If we stop viewing compositions by the "great" composers as without flaw, then what difference do small inconsistencies in the performance of these works really make? A look at Beethoven's manuscripts provides us with enough evidence that composers are themselves unsure of the best way to realize a musical idea.

I think an obsession with performing music exactly as the composer wrote it drains life out of music making. Music ceases to be a participatory experience and instead becomes a "work" to be admired at a distance. Do we really want our concert halls to become museums?

Then again, perhaps we do. Is it not important to preserve our canon of great Western classical music as we do with art and literature? On one hand, I'm inclined to think so, but then I find myself more inspired by a piece of community-produced public art than the Mona Lisa.

Minefields!

The readings today again highlighted the danger of trusting research simply because it was published by someone. Interestingly, these articles seem to encourage a close reading of the research methodology whereas our previous reading about research articles encouraged focusing on the conclusions. I suspect bogus research might be more of a problem in the pharmaceutical industry (where big pharmaceutical companies have a financial incentive to provide research heralding the successes of their new drugs) but I've certainly seem some research in music education that draws conclusions that seem tenuous. In particular, I've noticed studies often have sample sizes that seem too low, or seem to ignore factors that might distort results (and there are plenty of these when researching human behavior).

To avoid these pitfalls, I think we need to enter into research firmly accepting that we might not be able to prove what we intuitively believe to be true. We must consider every single way in which our conclusions might be disproved and point out the limitations of our research even when drawing conclusions. Until the research community gets its act together, it is probably wiser to place our greatest trust only in periodicals that are well-established and have a history of solid research. And on a more global scale, I think the incentives that exist to publish research need to be closely examined and reconsidered.

Periodicals

I was surprised by the sheer number of music-related periodicals available, as suggested in Oxford Music Online. It's disappointing that these journals are hard to find and access unless one has access to a well-stocked library (or wishes to pay for subscriptions to all of them!).  I also read with interest about the music periodicals of the past that contained music compositions. I'd be very interested in subscribing to a periodical that contained even excerpts of new works to try playing.

The other articles presented a darker story of periodicals. The danger of "pay-to-be-published" journals seems obvious. I think we can find examples throughout our society, whether it be colleges accepting mediocre students simply because they can pay tuition, or people paying to climb Mount Everest even though, by all objective measures, they shouldn't be. If a periodical relies on fees paid by those submitting articles, they have an obvious incentive to accept second-rate submissions if they need the money (and who doesn't want money?)  I think many of us wrongly assume the validity of published materials.

I have used periodical articles frequently in the past and even prefer using them over books in research because they require less sifting. I took a research methods course as part of an undergraduate honors in humanities program in which we made extensive use of periodicals. At the culmination of this two year program, we wrote a thesis on a topic of our choice. I feel quite comfortable with researching periodicals given this experience, but am still finding through our class that I don't know all of the intricacies of locating materials in the library.

My Research Topic

The readings about how to read a journal article confirmed that I've been reading journal articles the right way. Through research projects I did as an undergraduate, I quickly discovered that reading journal articles completely was time-consuming and, well, boring. I'm very much an intuitive, big-picture thinker and naturally gravitate towards the larger concepts put forth in articles. If you ask me, there's just too much good stuff written out there to waste time on that which is only mildly interesting.

The article about constructing an annotated bibliography also resonated with me. I find writing annotations comes naturally as I'm mostly concerned with the utility of information, not the inner workings. I found the list of language for talkingn about texts and arguments at the end of the article very useful; after twenty annotations, it's very easy to fall into the trap of using the same verbs (argue, examine, suggest are my weaknesses) in every annotation. I'll be referencing this list as I work through my annotated bibliography.

As I suggested in my last post, I'm interested in exploring alternatives to the largeensemble anchored model of music education we have throughout secondary schools in the U.S. I fear that we're stuck in a paradigm in music education that is becoming dated and isn't sustainable. I think the field needs to start adapting now and exploring how else we can approach music education in an evolving culture. Therefore, I'm interested in investigating what alternative models currently exist, both in the U.S. and internationally. Given that studying music education models internationally will be too broad, I will probably narrow my international focus to a few Anglophone countries with similar cultures.

This topic is timely because the education field is undergoing constant reform and the musical landscape of America has shifted significantly from the time that large music ensembles were first established in American schools. From my experience attending conferences and reading articles, this is an idea that is starting to interest more people in the field. My research will yield writings from progressive music educators, visionaries and game changers. I already have an idea of some of the new directions in which the field is moving from conference presentations and articles. I did extensive research on this topic as an undergraduate and am familiar with many of the authors writing about this.

I expect my research to be guided by the following questions:
1) What alternatives to a large ensemble anchored model of music education currently exist in U.S. secondary schools?
2) What alternatives currently exist internationally?
3) What is the efficacy of these alternative models and what barriers to change exist?

I still fear that my topic might be a bit too broad, so any suggestions for refinement are welcome!

Possibilities for a research topic

Barzun's account of the challenge and necessity of clearly defining a subject in writing was relatable. When I begin writing I often find that I have a strong notion of what I want to write, but it takes great effort to find the language to express it.  Having a clear subject requires a moment of inspiration; conveying that subject so that it's meaningful for the reader requires perfection of the writer's craft.

Roger Angell touches on the challenge of perfecting craft, arguing that "writing is hard, even for authors who do it all the time." He conveys a certainly universal experience, that an idea that is so clear in the writer's mind ends up distorted through the process of writing.

E.B. White, in his introduction to William Strunk's The Elements of Style, pays homage to the professor's seminal guide to style in the English language. White highlights the importance Strunk places on clarity in writing, noting that Strunk loved "the clear, the brief, the bold."

Angell and White, in their introduction to Strunk's book, compliment Barzun's argument, revealing the elements of craft needed to maintain a clear subject in writing.  I found all three articles entirely relatable; they stated neatly the obstacles I face in maintaining clarity as a writer, and they described a kind of strong, clear writing I aspire to create.

I'm interested in researching the place of large performing ensembles in the American music education system, or perhaps what other class formats would better reach our goals as music educators.  I am troubled that so many students stop making music as adults despite the presence of music in our schools and wonder if our system in which the large ensemble is the core of the music program is not to blame. I'm also curious about how change occurs in the field and what barriers to change exist. These are ideas I've been toying with since my undergraduate studies and my experiences in the field have only served to fuel my discontent with the current system. My non-ensemble classes that focus on composition and creativity have been more fulfilling for both me as a teacher and for my students. I wonder for how long large ensembles will be core of music education in America given the changes that have occurred in our musical culture.

Admittedly my topic is very broad and needs focus, but it's an idea that interests me greatly and that I'd like to pursue.