Summary of "Future of Musicology" Panel from Fall 2012 Meeting
0 Comments Published by AMSGNY President on Sunday, October 21, 2012 at 6:50 PM.
“The Future of Musicology”: a Panel Hosted by the Greater
New York Chapter
On
October 13, 2012, the Greater New York Chapter of the American Musicological
Society convened at Hofstra University. A portion of their meeting was
dedicated to a panel discussion titled “The Future of Musicology.” The
discussion was led by Dr. Jeff S. Dailey (Five Towns College) and David Blake
(SUNY-Stony Brook), and touched on many topics, including current job
availability, the role of musicology outside of academia, the “consumer
mentality” of university students and its effect on music pedagogy, the growth of
popular musicology, and the position of musicology within the larger
humanities.
The
first topic of discussion, unsurprisingly, was the contentious job market. Sylvia
Kahan (College of Staten Island) sounded an optimistic note by arguing that as
musicologists hired in the 1960s are now arriving at retirement age, this year
marks a rise in the availability of academic jobs. Robert Waters (Seton Hall
University) agreed, but pointed out that the pool of applicants is also large. A
few attendees, led by Jeff Dailey, upheld musicological activities outside of
academia, questioning the dominant hierarchy between tenure-track and
unaffiliated or “public” musicologist. For example, Sarah Hoover (Hofstra
University) argued that there is important work to be done in the realm of
public musicology, and noted her work in teaching introductory music courses to
retirees eager to learn. Bethany Cencer (SUNY-Stony Brook) affirmed AMS’s recent
interest in encouraging public musicology as indicated in the February 2012 issue
of this newsletter.
The
discussion then turned to a reflection on the supposed “lost generation” of
musicologists referred to in a contentious AMS-Listserv post. David Blake acknowledged
that most meeting attendees had earned their degrees between 1980 and 2010,
questioning the invisibility of this generation. He also explained that during the
past decades, the idea that one should attend graduate school as a necessary path
toward a career emerged, producing a tension with the liberal arts philosophy
of disinterested learning. His comment led back into a pedagogical discussion. Jessica
Chisholm (Rider University) rightly pointed out the university’s growing emphasis
on music appreciation, and the potential conflicts of student interest that
arise when trying to sustain a course that incorporates both Western Classical
music and popular music for the sake of increasing “approachability” (some
students want to learn terminology, others want an easy A). Benjamin Bierman
(John Jay College, CUNY) responded by claiming that “popular music is not a
carrot,” questioning the familiarity of today’s students with older popular
music. David Hurwitz (music critic) argued that whether popular or classical,
music is ultimately one of two things: good or bad. He suggested that instructors
of musicology should deemphasize the classical/popular dichotomy, and proposed
that they teach on a genre basis, using the example of a song as a genre existing
in both Western classical music and popular music.
The perceived expansion
in music appreciation courses undergirded a larger discussion on the growing autonomy
of popular musicology as a discipline within popular music studies. David Blake
called attention to the wide array of popular music panels at the upcoming
national conference, and noted the growth of degree programs in popular music,
including a newly formed program at Rider University. The discussion then
returned to the growing presence of popular music courses in university
curricula. Jane Hettrick (Rider University) expressed concern over the growth
in popular music as a mainstream component in university music education,
arguing that it could result in fewer opportunities for musicologists
specializing in “serious” music. Styra Avins (Drew University) shared similar
concerns, arguing that Western musicology is “academically in trouble.” The
discussion concluded with a reflection on the necessity of adapting to the
changes within the discipline. Jeff Dailey acknowledged the importance of
interpersonal skills and networking during the job search. Jonathan Waxman
(Hofstra University) argued that a music degree provides a different
perspective that can benefit any career. Though participants hardly came to a
consensus, the discussion highlighted the rapid changes in musicology over the
past decade, revealing that the discipline’s future will only be determined by
engaging with the very real problems and polemics of the present.
Bethany
Cencer
Secretary,
Greater New York Chapter
0 Responses to “Summary of "Future of Musicology" Panel from Fall 2012 Meeting”
Post a Comment