How We Got into Analysis, and How to Get out

Kerman, Joseph

doi:10.1086/448101

Cited by 170 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…They insisted not only on their right to independence from AMS but also asserted the logical value of "analysis itself " in producing isolated analytical "readings" of works with little attention to communicative properties or meanings outside the analysis itself. Nevertheless, the attacks continued from the historians (e.g., Kerman, 1980Kerman, , 1985Treitler, 1982) with replies in like kind from the theorists (see, e.g., Agawu, 1997Agawu, , 2004. Music theorists felt under siege at the time (Schmalfeldt, 1998), and SMT hunkered down to preserve and defend itself against all postmodernists, determined to show AMS members that sophisticated analysis was necessary and that it would survive, flourish, and in time validate itself (for more bibliography and examples of theory's defense, readers should consult the first six essays in volume 3 of the 1997 Journal of Musicology).…”

Section: Music Theory As An Independent Disciplinementioning

confidence: 99%

Our Varying Histories and Future Potential: Models and Maps in Science, the Humanities, and in Music Theory

Narmour

2011

Music Perception

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Part 1 briefly recounts the influence of social unrest and the explosion of knowledge in both psychology and the humanities circa . As the sciences rely on explicit top-down theories connected to bottom-up maps and models, and whereas the humanities build on bottom-up differences within malleable top-down "theories" (approaches, themes, theses, programs, methods, etc.), the changes in the sciences during this period contrasted sharply with the changes in the humanities. Part 2 discusses in detail how these two social transformations affected the histories of music theory and cognitive music theory. The former fractiously withdrew from its parent organization (AMS), whereas the latter was welcomed into SMPC. Inasmuch as both music theory and cognitive music theory rely on maps and models, Part 3 examines the metatheoretical importance of these terms for music cognition, music theory, and cognitive music theory. Part 4 speculates about the future-how music cognition, cognitive music theory, and music theory contribute to the structure of musical knowledge. The intellectual potential of this unique triadic collaboration is discussed: psychology provides a commanding empirical framework of the human mind, while music theory and cognitive music theory logically model moment-to-moment temporal emotions and the auditory intellections at the core of musical art. . © 2011 by t h e regents o f t h e university o f california all rights reserved. please direct all requests for permission to photo copy or reproduce article content through the university of california press's rights a n d permissions w e b s i t e , h t t p ://www.ucpressjournals.com/reprintinfo.asp.doi: 10.1525/mp.2011.29.1.1 eugene narmour University of Pennsylvania part 1 briefly recounts the influence of social unrest and the explosion of knowledge in both psychology and the humanities circa . As the sciences rely on explicit top-down theories connected to bottom-up maps and models, and whereas the humanities build on bottom-up differences within malleable top-down "theories" (approaches, themes, theses, programs, methods, etc.), the changes in the sciences during this period contrasted sharply with the changes in the humanities. Part 2 discusses in detail how these two social transformations affected the histories of music theory and cognitive music theory. The former fractiously withdrew from its parent organization (AMS), whereas the latter was welcomed into SMPC. Inasmuch as both music theory and cognitive music theory rely on maps and models, Part 3 examines the metatheoretical importance of these terms for music cognition, music theory, and cognitive music theory. Part 4 speculates about the future-how music cognition, cognitive music theory, and music theory contribute to the structure of musical knowledge. The intellectual potential of this unique triadic collaboration is discussed: psychology provides a commanding empirical framework of the human mind, while music theory and cognitive music theory logically model moment-to-moment tempor...

show abstract

Section: Music Theory As An Independent Disciplinementioning

confidence: 99%

Our Varying Histories and Future Potential: Models and Maps in Science, the Humanities, and in Music Theory

Narmour

2011

Music Perception

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This activity, corresponding to what Calhoun describes as the most recent phase of critical theory, has often exposed methodological or ideological assumptions. As music analysis and musicology journals have shown since the 1980s, music theory as analysis has been one of the sites of conflict in musicology debates: Kerman (1980) and Agawu (2004) in a sense frame one of the major debates, the latter providing both a sense of closure and a continuation. The conflict extended far beyond music analysis, of course, but insofar as it challenged claims of music's autonomy as an aesthetic object and its claims to be analysed in and for itself rather than for its political or social meanings, analysis was a 'critical' component in this conversation.…”

Section: Music Analysis As Critiquementioning

confidence: 99%

How critical is music theory?

Lucia

2007

Critical Arts

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article I address the problem of locating 'music theory' within contemporary critical theories in the social sciences and humanities. I show how two kinds of music theory can be distinguished: music theory as an interpretative and 'critical' set of theories used mainly in music analysis, and theory of music as an 'uncritical' set of practical tools for both composition and analysis. I trace the origins of such theories and the separation between the two, and argue that theory of music as a prerequisite for practice comes from a notion of theory inculcated by music pedagogy in the nineteenth century, entrenched through the external examinations of London-based conservatoires. I show how the ethos of such examinations became lodged in the musical consciousness of South Africans as one of many colonial traces, but I argue that, unlike other aspects of colonialism, theory of music did not become adapted in the process of colonization, but has remained something of an anomaly in music teaching and practice. Especially, it has remained a different kind of 'theory' in critical discourse in the social sciences and humanities. Music theory in South Africa, too, has not undergone the kind of transforming process as other 'critical' theories have although it has far more possibilities for critique, but has remained a somewhat limited tool for music analysis in South African scholarship.

show abstract

“…More than thirty years have passed since 1980 when Joseph Kerman first challenged musicology as a disciplinary enterprise in his article on "How we got into analysis and how to get out" (Kerman 1980), and in his canonical Contemplating music (1985), published five years later. 2 Since then the premises of the so-called "new" musicology have become well known, and do not need any further introduction in this article.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is now fully acknowledged that Joseph Kerman's (1980;1985) challenge to mainstream musicology resulted in a deconstructive programme that systematically discredited the connection between analysis and concepts of musical autonomy and unity, development, and organic form. Although this programme expanded the musicological agenda into a broad variety of culturally-oriented issues and questions, it simultaneously cast doubt on the status of music theory per se.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A critique of the music school as a conservative system of music production

Viljoen¹

2014

Muziki

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores the music school as a locus of musical production that is rarely subjected to critique. Departing from the viewpoints of Bruno Nettl (1995) who describes the music school as a society "ruled by deities with sacred texts, rituals, ceremonial numbers, and a priesthood", it is hypothesised that many of the questions put forward in his Heartland excursions (1995) still pose challenges to schools of music (or tertiary departments of music) in South Africa today. While the new musicology has taken local music scholarship by storm and turned its more traditional, formalist-oriented practices upside down, it can hardly be denied that this progressive discipline is still practised within institutionalised contexts that are heavily invested in the autonomy principle. Within the South African musical landscape, this is most true for those schools of music or tertiary music departments viewed as leading institutions. The aim, therefore, of this paper is to introduce questions relevant to a critical dissection of the dichotomy between the premises of a cultural or critical musicology, and the institution of the music school as a conservative "production of belief". Stephen Miles 1997: 744) -specifically in a country where musical pluralism is an important aspect of all tertiary education, namely, developing skills and knowledge that are relevant specifically to the complex demands of our multi-faceted society. Accordingly, the way in which the autonomy principle continues to reinforce the legitimacy of the idea of autonomous music will be investigated -a principle constructed so subtly that implicit supremacy is promoted most effectively through the unspoken practices of concert requirements, the emphasis on music competitions, faculty status, and other internationally recognised markers of musical prestige. This principle clearly underlies a pre-defined set of professionalised values forming the foundations of "successful" music institutions. However, finally it will be argued that music schools, in pursuing a truly critical mediation between music and society, should not engage only with questions of music's social meaning, but in particular with the question of how music comes to be socially meaningful.

show abstract

How We Got into Analysis, and How to Get out

Cited by 170 publications

References 0 publications

Our Varying Histories and Future Potential: Models and Maps in Science, the Humanities, and in Music Theory

Our Varying Histories and Future Potential: Models and Maps in Science, the Humanities, and in Music Theory

How critical is music theory?

A critique of the music school as a conservative system of music production

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About