David W. Fenton wrote:
On 27 Mar 2008 at 6:28, dhbailey wrote:
I think I would begin such a class with the statement "90% of anything
is crap. That includes the Baroque Era of music history, which we will
be studying in this class. You're lucky in that we will be studying the
10% of Baroque music which isn't crap, but I want you all to remember
that while these composers we will be studying were creating these
masterworks, there were many more composers turning out efficient but
hardly worthwhile music that we won't be studying."
While I heartily endorse Sturgeon's Law, and teaching it to students,
I think the above approach to teaching music history is badly
mistaken. History includes the good and the bad, and what we consider
"good" today is only clear in comparison to what we consider "bad"
(which quite often differs wildly from the opinions of the time).
Teaching nothing but "masterworks" is what got music history into
such a bind in the first place, and the approach you outline just
makes it that much worse.
I'd leave the assessment of "good" and "bad" to the students and
instead try to teach something that's representative of what happened
musically during the historical period in question.
I agree -- but it's hard to find a textbook to teach with which has a
listening collection which would fit such a fair-representation delivery.
--
David H. Bailey
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
