Bruno Nettl, "Music," A draft for The Revised New Grove Dictionary of
Music and Musicians. Sorry, not in this site!
Philip Brett, "'Fiery Visions" (and Revisions): 'Peter Grimes' in Progress" in Benjamin Britten: Peter Grimes, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983): 47-87.
This article begins with a general idea of the manuscript studies and quickly leads the discussion to Peter Grimes. The author uses a more familiar example of Bach's original document, which at one hand do not necessarily have a strong relation to Peter Grimes but gives a good starting point for readers to know the nature of the article.
There are many documents studies, but some of them are not of my interesting, partly because of the boring beginning, probably intended for specialists only. The whole book, one volume of Cambridge Opera Handbooks, seems to have been written for academies, performers, opera goers, and music lovers alike. I believe such a stance is valid for many other music writings.
The whole article is about the genesis of this opera, not only its music but also its libretto. It is interesting to know how the changes of the libretto affects the dramatic content of the opera. The changes of the libretto also seems to change the role of the characters, who occupies substantial part of the opera. For this kind of study, we have to know that the changes in libretto and the music per se are not terribly interesting, but the meaning and reason for changing details is important and of everybody's interests. This theory may be applied to archival researches. The detail is important, of course, but we should not forget a broader picture.
I checked out this book from the music library. I do not like library book a little, because it does not have a cover, which may be beautiful. The book without a cover seems like something that lost its identity. It is just a minor thing. I use library books a lot, but I am just saying my personal opinion. Thank you for reading :-)
There is no plural form for Japanese nouns as far as I know.
Maybe a little in Europe. Very little in Japan, where all sorts of European music are available (at least in Tokyo). You can ask any classical music fans in Japan. It must be very difficult to find somebody who know about Griffes.
The discussion of Griffes works needs more historical background, not just analysis of pieces and general description of stylistic features. He makes good point that Griffes is not just an American impressionist, because his early works has much influence from the German Romantic tradition. In fact, he studied with Hunperdinck (sp?).
I did an oral presentation on general American music of the twentieth century. After my explanation that Griffes were influenced by French impressionist, I played Griffes's early song with orchestra. The teacher points out that the piece sounds like a Mahler song. I could not answer why so. After that presentation I looked up his biographical information, and a big surprise happened.
Nevertheless, this is one of the few (two?) books on Griffes, and I may need to have it eventually.
Japanese university may not have this book. Actually there are only a few university which has a music department. There are many educational institution, in which music education students can be found. I am one of such students. Basically, what I studied at the school is not totally different from a music school, I believe, but I had to take some classes that focus on education (the Principles of Education, Educational Psychology, The study of music teaching materials, etc. etc.). Not every student becomes a teacher; some of my colleagues went to a computer company, many female students became a housewife.
Nicholas E. Tawa, Mainstream Music of Early Twentieth Century America: The Composers, Their Times, and Their Works, (Westport, CT: Greenwood, 1992).
The style is concise, strong, and seems convincing. The topic sentence clearly establishes what he want to say in a given paragraph. Even when I could not understand whole details in one paragraph from the my week reading skills, I could always associate unclear parts with the topic sentence. If I just read the topic sentence and skip to the next paragraph, occasionally a nice summary seems to come up in my mind (well...maybe not completely...).
This book does discuss actual musical works but does not include music examples. Tawa seems to focus more on historical and social background in which the composers of the early twentieth-century America lived. One needs to extend the discussion of these composers and their music, presenting more detailed information and throughout analysis of their music itself (probably with musical/analytical terms). Probably he just avoids such a comprehensive way to talk about his topic.
This book seems to give me a good starting point when I need to know about early twentieth-century American music. The bibliography and discography in the appendix helps me to get into that.
David Schiff, Gershwin: Rhapsody in Blue, Cambridge Music Handbooks, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1997).
The author uses some unusual names for chapters, such as "Instruction manual (Instead of an Analysis)" and "Ingredients." Certainly, they seem cathy to the readers of such a "Music Handbook," but I am not sure if these titles really make this kind of book more creative. One may wonder what kinds of things are written in these chapters, and that kind of things are intended??? Maybe... Is it common to any other guide-book writing??? I really don't know!
Some chapter begins with short a quote (s) from various sources. According to Frank Zappa (!), they are called epigraph and loved by publishers! What kind of effect can be made from them. I am curious.
The writing style is readable even for me. It is pretty straightforward. It is, however, not too intensive. The chapter I enjoyed most was the one on interpretations, in which Schiff talks about various recordings of Rhapsody in Blue. He felt a crisis when he listened to Bernstein version, because Bernstein's style is not Gershwin's Jazz but more drowsy and Blusy interpretation. Actually, I liked that recording, but from a historical perspective, he may be right. He also talks about Arthur Fiedler's version, which, as he describes, is symphonic. Certainly, Fiedler's "Pops" orchestra made one of the most "classical" and noble version of the Rhapsody, and I like it, too. One of my friends, who knows a lot about twentieth-century classical and popular musics claims that Fiedler version is the best.
Then, I have to think about the difficult historical position of the piece. It's a nature of this piece. Is it classical or popular? Is it Jazz or "experimental" music???
This kind of problem seems to have been asked by many historians and fans, I guess. Probably, his music is just Gershwin's music and should not be classified (too obvious?) As Professor Webber said today in his Opera Literature, green is not a mixture of blue and yellow, but it is just green. It is a successful fusion of drama and music. Probably Gershwin's music is a successful fusion of classical and Jazz (Too obvious?)
Tuesday, January 13, 1998.
Charles Hamm, "Privileging the Moment: Cage, Jung, Synchronicity, Postmodernism," The Journal of Musicology 15/2 (Spring 1997): 278-89.
The author tend to extend a sentence very long, by putting many ideas and ornamental words. As long as the ideas are clear, it is fine, I guess, but I do not feel his long sentences so comfortably. He seems to have his original ideas (or at least he want to appeal to have many ideas?) but may need to have a deep breath before rushing into a long sentence. By having long sentences, he could present very detailed thought of his but sometimes seems to lose a direction.
Probably the most appealing word in the title of this article is the "postmodernism." I expect him somehow to persuade the reader why Cage's music can be interpreted as postmodern. What I found, however, is not the continuous argument of the postmodernism.
When he starts discussing about "modernism," probable in order to clarify his "postmodernism," he gives two ideas. The first one came from the music history: "'modern music' was used as a label for compositions of the Western classical repertory written in the first five or six decades of the twentieth century." The second derived from "other academic disciplines" in which the "Modern Era" started in the eighteenth century with the Age of Enlightenment and continued until the several decades after the end of World War II. Fine. Then, I wondered which scope he takes to make his argument more valid. I do not find anything that my question. This is partly his problem of the "logic" in the discussion (especially the sentence from the last two lines of page 278 to the fourth line of the page 279, which does not belong to anywhere).
He suddenly gives some characteristics of "postmodernism" on page 279: "fragmentation of style and structure within the art object etc," but he hardly make any association with the idea or aesthetic of the postmodernism (if he has). Probably it is risky to present what the postmodernism is at this moment, but unless he present any one of many possible definition, his discussion cannot be extended, no matter how well he analyses Cage's idea and musical style.
Why did postmodern style appear? How did this happen? I do not know. What I can say is that there seems to have been something that can be called "modern," which was the only acceptable idea in modern "artistic" world. In post-modern age, modern become one of acceptable idea. In the Western musical world, total serielism in the 1950s was a norm, outside of which was not acceptable. Today, outsiders are accepted. The modern becomes one of the styles or thoughts. The architecture uses not only modern and extremely functional style, but also ornamental and non mainstream styles. I do not think that simple eclecticism make a work of art postmodern. Postmodernism may not the particular style, but an attitude and thought. Leonard Bernstein's Mass is not postmodern but eclectic. Mauricio Kagel's cynical interpretation of modern music in his works sounds more convincingly postmodern. Probably one must clearly express his interpretation of modern in a certain form. Probably something "beyond" modern is necessary. It is not how one use a certain materials but why one use them, I guess....
Edward Jablonsky and Lawrence D. Stewart, The Gershwin Years: George and Ira, (New York: Da Capo, 1996).
He seems to use very similar openings, such as "When George, while the family live on 144 Street...," "Harry
Asking, who had been the Miss 1917 company singer...," "Some snap,' Ira commented in his journal...," "'Half
Past Eight, ' George continued.... By starting sentences with names, a reader wonders what is this name, and it
seems to lead the reader vitally into author's biographical narrative. By starting a sentence with a direct
quotation of a speech (in this case the author may have made the conversation up, because it was orally presented,
and it is difficult to know if a conversation was exactly the same as the written form in this book) makes the story
more vivid. If one uses this too much, however, it may become more like a fairly tale and less believable. A
simple and continuous narrative of several historical facts are also boring unless one is really interested in
somebody's life (in this book, Gershwin). We need to think what kind of dramatization is necessarily (or
unnecessarily), depending on what kind of people would read a book (or article).
The whole book has many facts and details. It also has nice pictures, with which we can imagine the time when the Gershwin brothers worked together. It seems a good biography. However, if we need a broader scope to study Gershwins (for example, their relations with their time, society, and contemporary thoughts), one need to consult a different type of book. Also if one need to know more about their music (styles), other books would be needed.
Jeff Todd Tition and Mark Slobin, "The Music-Culture as a World of Music," in World of Music: An Introduction to the Music of the World's Peoples, 3rd ed. (New York: Schirmer Books, 1996).
The writer seems to talk to a student like a somebody who has authoritative knowledge, because he try to use "we" when he states his opinion which should be understood by the reader. He also uses "you" when he refers to the reader. There is a clear distinction between "we" and "you."
As a textbook, such use of pronouns might work for student to feel this book use-friendly. However, the use of such pronouns might make some readers irritating, because the readers may feel that the author is speaking down to them (I am not saying that this book is the case but speaking generally).
By the way, my model for elements of music performance would be like the following.
This figure has some problems. First, music may not be an art; it may be just a part of ritual, not necessarily aimed to be artistic. Second, music should not seen as the center of the whole thing, but just one of the human activities, culture, or art. Third, the elements that Titon shows--performers, audience, and time and spaces cannot be neatly fit around the music, because music has all of these at once. Titon's second figure (page 4) is more confusing. Why memory/history comes around community or performance? Why affective experience is the center of all? Probably, simple lists of the elements or verbal explanations would be more valuable in the discussion of this chapter.
The components of a music-culture (Table 1-1, p. 7) differs from my view point, which is as follows.
I. Aesthetic of music
A. Nature of music
1. Body movement
2. Religions
B. Beauty of musicII. Contexts of music
A. Social contexts
1. Musicians
2. Performers
3. Audience
4. Transmission
5. Relationship with other arts
6. Relationship with material culture
B. Historical contexts
"In the eighteenth century, when Europeans began collection music from the countryside and from exotic, "faraway places outside their homelands, they thought the "real" traditional music was dying out" (p. 13)
This book includes a lot of quotations. It is perfectly all right to have as many quotes as possible as long as they are credited, I think. However, I cannot stop having an impression that authors depend too much on somebody else's opinions. They could have limited some quotation from secondary materials and paraphrased with their own words. Also, I would like to see how "they" feel with the musicians, musical pieces, and critiques' comments.
Another problem (albeit it is a minor one) is that this book should include more musical discussion. The book has nice biographical sketches, sometimes very detailed, but the reader might want to know about the relationship between the musicians' lives and their musics. Additionally, more broader discussion of each period/musician would be needed in this textbook.
Morton Gould, "The Sound of a Band," Music Educators Journal 48/5 (april-May 1962): 36 37, 46.
Morton Gould seems to have had a good understanding about the band and its music. Band music itself has a fascinating history in the United States. Many "serious music" composers- such as William Schuman, Vincent Persichett, Norman Dello Joio--wrote good amount of band compositions.
Gould claims that the orchestra, different from the band, is a concept. His point is the
instrumentation of a band varies so much that people cannot define it as a one whole thing.
Although the combination of the orchestra also varies pretty much, we seems to have a more
integrated image of orchestra. Gould emphasizes the equal status and musical responsibility
of woodwinds, brass, and string instruments, whereas a band may have woodwinds which may
have no oboe or three oboes, for example.
Reebee Garofalo, Rokin' Out: Popular Music in the USA (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1997).
I found this book very informative. It has many details on the history of Rock 'n' Roll, especially its social contexts. One probably needs to have another book for more musical discussion of the rock styles (no musical examples!), however. Stylistically, one paragraph seems so long that I sometimes lose energy to read it through. Once I lose the energy, I get lost and have to start reading from the beginning of the paragraph. I am not sure if the same thing happens to anybody else. Some knowledge of rock literature would help to read more entertainingly, but I afraid that this book is intended for introductory classes, in which not everybody need to have solid knowledge of rock history.
My favorite rock history book is Szatmary's Rokin' in the Time and Chris
Cutler's File under Popular; the latter of which is important to those who
want to know the nature of "popular" music. Cutler's book also have
severe criticism on mainstream rock music and interesting insights on
"underground" music!
Andrew Mead, An Introduction to the Music of Milton Babbitt, (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994).
This is a user-friendly (!) introduction to Babbitt's music. The author does not use many technical terms to explain Babbitt's musical works and styles. A reader, however, need to have basic knowledge of pitch-class -set analysis to follow the discussion. The author gives a nice introduction to the atonal analysis theory a little, but some may find it difficult or too mathematical.
The sentences are quite straightforward and clear. The examples and diagrams in the book help understanding the main features of each piece discussed.
This book is not a biographical account of Babbitt; it does not talk about the philosophical and aesthetic aspects of Babbitt's music. I wonder why so many people have not discussed Babbitt's thoughts on music. Only his famous article (with somebody else's title) is well known. I , for example, want to know how he thought of Jazz when he composed All Set.. Is there any relation to the "third stream" of Gunther Schuller or any other jazz sub-genres? The answers to this kind of problem may be found in Babbitt's article or something (maybe need an interview?). Do we have to listen to Babbitt's piece solely from a theoretical point of view? Is that what Babbitt's want?
The use of scientific knowledge in music seems to have something to do with the scientific boom in the fifties in the U. S., especially after Sputnik Shock.
I don't think that Babbitt's electronic works are very sophisticated. His pieces are
more like serial pieces written for synthesizer. RCA synthesizer must have been
very difficult to operate, but the use of such a difficult machine does not guarantee
the quality of the piece. It just like a having a trumpet with extra keys (if there are
any) ;-)
Richard Hippin, Medieval Music, (New York: Norton. 1978).
I am reading the section titled "The Troubadours," just because of my curiosity (pp. 266-85).
One interesting feature in this book, at least of this section, is that there is no single musical example. A part of the reason is that there is a separate anthology that accompanies this book. Norton music history series, especially the "new cycle" seems to take this approach: take the music example out and let the reader buy the anthology! It might work for a commercial success, but for me it is a little frustrating not to have any idea on the discussion unless I have a score at my hand. When I read the book, I had to look up the library catalogue and walk around the library just to find the anthology, which shelved at the far away (because the anthology is classified as a music collection.
Another problem is that Hoppin does not always give comprehensive analysis of every piece in the
anthology. He has quite extensive analysis of the rhyme scheme of one troubadour song, but just
for knowing the rhyme scheme, it is very helpful if we had just first few stanzas, written out in the
text proper. If one need more extensive and complete information, then he/she can turn into the
anthology.
His discussion of music would be easier if he had made some markings on the score. The pieces discussed in this section are very short, and the inclusion of the music with analytical aids (alphabets) would work quite well.
Preston Stedman, The Symphony, 2nd ed. (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1992).
This book has much analytical information on the symphony from the early classical period to the second half of the twentieth century. It is probably intended for undergraduate students who studies symphonic literature. For gaining some basic idea of various symphonies, this book may serve as an introduction to them.
However, I have to question some style of his writing. For example, he wrote, "[Beethoven's] life span more or less bridged the classical and romantic period...." I wonder if his life span has anything to do with the historical period established by later musicologist. He probably wrote various styles that bridged the classical and romantic period, but just living in certain length of time does not necessarily mean Beethoven belongs to two historical period. What is historical periods anyway?s
Another word that catches me is "[Beethoven's] expansionist tendencies created longer introductions...." I have never heard the term "expansionist." Are there any other expansionist in music, poem, literature???
The author needs to be more careful about what he is writing. It does not matter for whom this book is intended.
Peter C. Van Den Toorn, Music, Politics, and the Academy (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1995.
Van Den Toorn seems to use "but" a lot at the beginning of the sentence. I am not sure if it is a good idea, because I have been told not to begin any sentence with "but." Instead, I can use "however." Some other teachers told that the use of "however" at the beginning is not be preferred by many scholars. However, it seems that the use of the "however" at the beginning of the sentence sometime works (how about this sentence???).
It is not surprising to see somebody who would say something against recent trend of "New Musicology," probably meaning the studies which focus on "extra-musical" things such as cultural contexts and other disciplines such as gender studies.
I am not sure exactly how "New Musicologists" (if there are any such people) really claim that the analysis is "coldly 'technical'" (p. 1). True. Analytical writing utilizes many terms which may not be used in daily conversation. They, however, help a lot to get closely into music and gives a certain depth that would not be accomplished without specialized terms.
My first impression with analysis by utilizing literal criticism and gender studies was that this kind of analysis is "very" specialized and difficult, because those who use these non-musical disciplines seem to use their non-musical terms. To get into literal criticism applied to musical studies, I have to have solid and basic knowledge on the literal criticism (at least I think so). Gender study, too. Unless I know of the feminism theory, I may not be able to comprehend the discussion.
Broadening the area of the study...yes...sounds wonderful. But this does not mean that one can deny old ways. Analysis and positivism have their own advantages. We have to accept it. It is not either/or problem. Why not using both? Or choose one if you wish so.
Otherwise, we may have a situation that happened to a composer in the 1950s: everybody have to use one methodology: serealism. No dogmas, please!
Marris Mamorsky, "Composing for Radio," in Music in Radio Broadcasting, (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1946).
This is practical guide book on "what to do" and "how to do" when one composer have a opportunity to write a piece for a radio. A variety of situation are offered. There are no footnotes or information from other sources. Probably he was writing this article from his experiences with radio stations.
I found one interesting feature in this article.
The usual kinds of bridges are these:
1. Passage of time.
2. Change of locale.
3. Emphasis.
4. Emotional tags.
5.Comic effects.
6. Gag bridges.
7. Neutral bridges.
Then he starts discussing about each entry.
Such a style for giving outline of certain idea may be useful in a certain case.
It attracts a reader, she/he can have basic framework of a certain thing.
Another interesting thing in this article is that the author uses terms like leitmotifs,
montages. I am not sure about the second one, but I guess that some music
may have had something to do with radio drams in these days. Although the
leitmotifs in this article may not have as serious connotation as in nineteenth
century music, it is worthwhile how a composer create "dramatic" music.
The author even talks how one music can be appropriate for one dramatic
moment!
While I am reading the chapter titled "Musical and Dramatic Structure," I felt that I wish I had a score with me. This chapter discusses the dramatic effect and music structure, especially focusing on key changes. Maybe just a diagram which shows the relations between the dramatic progression and the key would be very helpful. The chapter called "Musical Declamation" seems better because it does have good numbers of examples to illustrate the discussion.
Herman Sable, "The Feldman Paradoxes," in The Music of Morton Feldman, ed. by Thomas DeLio (New York: Excelsior, ), 9-15.
In the first section titled "Preliminaries,the author numbered his discussion focuses as follows
1.------------------------------------
2.-------------------------------------
This seems a little unusual for musical writing.
The next section is called "The Problem.," which does not begins with a statement of the problem. Instead, it starts with a discussion of Feldman's pieces.
Actually the article does not have any musical example. The discussion is very general and abstract and does not give insight that would be argued with more specific evidence. For those who know Feldman's music could enjoy reading a little.
On the other hand, the writing style is not complicated and is straightforward.
The author gives an extensive history of the Freischütz story's origin, earliest being in 1484. The author shows comprehensive knowledge of the subject, and for those who would like to know about the libretto, this chapter would serve as a good source to consult.
On the other hand, one may think of a more broader discussion of the opera's libretto. For example, one might want to know why such an old German story became enormously popular in the nineteenth-century.
This article does not have a problem-solving process. It is a straightforward narrative of the opera libretto's genesis. It may not be interesting to read the whole thing at once if one is not strongly interested in the subject matter.
Undergraduate non-music majors would welcome such a user-friendly textbook of world music. Many chapter begins with a discussion of today's music and its association with cultural contexts. Some of them describes the concert in the format of a somewhat loose concert report. Isabel K. F. Wong discusses about recent historical issues and music, such as Tiananmon Square and "Song of the Masses" . On the other hand, Bruno Nettl seems to write about his encounter of more traditional musical traditions.
I like the way these articles are written, because they are very concrete and do not give too abstract introduction for each music cultures. To be honest, I enjoyed reading this more than May book, which might be much more academic but not easy to read.
This book does not have any musical example. Probably the authors assume that non-music majors cannot read music so much.
The writing style is somehow informal, but it gives vivid picture of each music's cultural context. The technical and theoretical discussions seems to use more formal styles, which works for these purposes.
Isabel Wong's discussion on Japanese music does not include any contemporary music but only present state or Japanese music in general- the mixture of the west and east.
*Some problematic descriptions in her discussion on Japanese music*
p. 110
"Za means 'seat.'"
p. 128
Heian (Kyoto)...remained the capital of Japan for more than a. millennium (until the Meiji Restoration in 1868).
p. 72
Since the mid-1980s, rock music has become increasingly popular among university students...
Rock 'n' Roll was very popular in the 1960s and the Beatles came to Japan.
Around that period, many Japanese pop stars imitated American bands.
*Some typos*
(1) In the text
p. 125
The paragraph which begins with "Aesthetically."
(2) In Discography
Shinto Music..."Matsuri Gayashi" should be "Matsuri Bayashi."
No..."Hogoromo" should be "Hagoromo."
It is embarrassing for me to admit that I do not have any book on general American history until today. This is the first one for me!
The university bookstore has a variety of textbooks on American history, and it is very difficult to decide which one I choose.
There is one book which claims the "second edition." This means that this book has been thought worthwhile and has been revised for improvement, I presume. On the other hand, I saw the book I bought which was published in 1998. Usually, a safe decision is to buy the one already have certain amount of reputation as "classical," but I bought the new one.
The reason was that this brand-new book attracts me in many ways. First explained in the Preface for Instructors, the writing style of this book is "clear, direct, and interesting." Other books usually contains a lot of informative facts but a little boring to keep reading. I thought that it was my language problem. Part of the reason still is that, but I can read this book more easily than other American history books.
Second, the book has many nice pictures and illustrations which really are "speaking" (xxii). Interests in these colorful vidual aids work as the motivation to read the historical narrative which has nice linking to the illustrations themselves.
Third, on every page, the chapter title and aiming time era is printed. I do not have to think too much about when or what about the text.
If I have to complain, I would say that the price of the book, $64, is extremely expensive for any collage students (the class that uses this textbook requires for another book!). I also have to complain about the thickness and the weight of this book. It is not fan to carry around and read this book. I do not want to bring this book every class meeting.
William Fetterman, John Cage's Theatre Pieces: Notations and Performances (The Netherlands : Harwood Academic Publishers, 1996).
Regardless of the title, this book discusses how one theater piece was composed by Cage and how this piece was performed for the first time. In this sense, this is historical book, focusing on compositional aesthetic and receptive history, rather than how Cage invented new notation or how one could perform Cage's theatrical works.
His fourteen-page (!) discussion of 4"33' reveals many unknown facts on this
piece. For example, do you know the score used for the first performance
has been lost? Do you know there are four versions of score for this piece?
For more compositional views, one needs to read Prichatt's Music of John
Cage, but this book also gives much historical insights.