You are mistaken if you think this applies generally MH
--- On Sat, 2/7/11, Christopher Wilke <[email protected]> wrote:
From: Christopher Wilke <[email protected]>
Subject: [LUTE] Re: What's the point to 'historical sound'
To: [email protected], "Ron Andrico" <[email protected]>,
"Martyn Hodgson" <[email protected]>
Date: Saturday, 2 July, 2011, 19:29
Martyn,
--- On Sat, 7/2/11, Martyn Hodgson <[1][email protected]>
wrote:
>
> The whole effort of historical musicology
> for at least the past 50
> years has been to determine, in so far as
> the evidence exists and to
> the best of our ability, what the earlier
> composers (and thus their
> audiences) would have expected.
>
Really? I gathered that the whole point of historical musicology
involves adopting some all-embracing modern social thesis (usually
inherited from one's doctoral advisor and of a properly radical
persuasion) and then diligently applying oneself to creating a
decontextualized selective historiography demonstrating how all of the
"great ones" were secretly ardent adherents of the then-heretical
philosophy. I'm thinking of something like Susan McClary's hypothesis
that Schubert's instrumental music is really a thinly veiled homosexual
manifesto because he often used "girly" chords related by thirds.
Chris
To get on or off this list see list information at
[2]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
References
1. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
2. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
