MEMT 815: Musical Values & Aesthetics Wednesday evening, 6 – 8:50 PM Spring Semester 2011
PROFESSOR: James F. Daugherty (email: [email protected]) Office: 448 Murphy Hall Office Hrs: Mon 1:00 -2:00 p.m., Thurs 2:00-3:15 p.m., or by appointment
COURSE WEBSITE: http://people.ku.edu/~jdaugher Go to Current Courses then navigate to MEMT 815.
PURPOSE: This course raises questions and examines foundational ideas relative to musical values and aesthetics, both historically and in the context of contemporary philosophies of music. Through readings, discussions, and critical analyses, students work toward (1) defining and refining the beliefs and values that inform their choices and decisions as professional musicians, as well as (2) enriching their understanding of music's varied roles in human experience, and (3) honing their skills in critical thinking, to the end that (4) their musicking is better informed and more fully subject to conscious direction.
The course is designed as a graduate level reading/survey course in the philosophy of music for music performers, educators, theorists, musicologists, and therapists.
REQUIRED TEXTS:
Battin, Margaret P., John Fisher, Ronald Moore, and Anita Silvers. Puzzles About Art: An Aesthetics Casebook. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1989.
Bicknell, Jeanette. Why Music Moves Us. New York: Palgrave/McMillan, 2010.
Brett, Philip, Elizabeth Wood, and Gary C. Thomas, eds. Queering the Pitch: The New Gay and Lesbian Musicology, 2nd edition. New York: Routledge, 2006.
Dewey, John. Art as Experience. NY: G.P. Putnam's, 1934.
Goehr, Lydia. The Imaginary Museum of Musical Works: An Essay in the Philosophy of Music. Rev. ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2007.
Hanslick, Eduard. On the musically beautiful: A contribution towards the revision of the aesthetics of music. Trans. G. Payzant. Hackett Publishing Co, 1891/1986.
Hegel, George W. F. The Introduction to Hegel¹s Philosophy of Fine Art. Trans. B. Bosanquet. London, UK: Tregan Paul, Trench, Trueber and Company, 1886. [Available digitally on course web site as a download
Kant, Immanuel. Critique of judgment. Intro by M. Lucht. NY: Barnes and Noble, 1790/2005.
Kivy, Peter. Introduction to a Philosophy of Music. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2002.
Kramer, Lawrence. Interpreting Music. University of California Press, 2010.
Levitin, Daniel. J. This Is Your Brain on Music. NY: Plume/Penquin, 2007.
McClary, Susan. Feminine Endings: Music, Gender, and Sexuality. 2nd edition. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 2002.
Ridley, A. The Philosophy of Music: Theme and Variations. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. 2004.
Sacks, Oliver. Musicophilia: Tales of Music and the Brain. Vintage/Random House, 2008.
Small, Christopher. Musicking: The Meanings of Performing and Listening. Hanover, NH: University Press of New England, 1998.
RECOMMENDED TEXTS:
Bowman, Wayne. Philosophical Perspectives on Music. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.
NOTE
The KU Office of Disability Resources (DR) coordinates accommodations and services for all eligible students with disabilities. If you have a disability and wish to request accommodations and have not contacted DR, please do so as soon as possible. Their office is located in 22 Strong Hall; their phone number is 785-864-2620 (V/TTY). Information about their services can be found at http://www.disability.ku.edu. Please also contact Dr. Daugherty privately in regard to your needs in this course.
COURSE REQUIREMENTS:
1. Evidence of critical reading of each assigned book in its entirety, as determined by the instructor, written responses to questions posed at the beginning of each class session, written questions you turn in, colleagues in the class
2. Thoughtful contributions to class discussions, as indicated by quality (not necessarily quantity) of contributions, assistance in keeping the discussion focused, respecting the contributions of others even when you disagree
3. On-time submission of 5 written critical analyses (see requirements & guidelines attached to this syllabus), demonstrating over the course of the semester progress in (a) ability to read a philosophy book with understanding and discernment; (b) honing abilities to identify & analyze arguments; (c) distinguishing sound arguments from valid arguments, opinions, simple belief, points of view, rhetoric, simple advocacy, etc.; (d) using writing skills appropriate for philosophical inquiry; and, by semester’s end demonstration of basic competency in each of the above, as well as in (e) advancing your own sound arguments.
Beginning of course (Kivy analysis) and end of course (chosen book analysis) critical analyses will be done by everyone. You may choose when and for which books you do your other three analyses (first come, first served).
On-time = Send your analysis as a .doc email attachment to the scheduled discussion leader no later than noon the day before the class meeting. Submit your final version to Dr. Daugherty for grading no later than noon on the day the class meets. N.B. The baseline analysis in conjunction with the Kivy book is an exception: Here everyone brings Xeroxed copies of their analyses to the class meeting.
4. Serve effectively as the discussion leader for two class sessions. Some indicators of effectiveness as a discussion leader: (a) well-prepared and knowledgeable about the material; (b) has defined strategies for encouraging discussion and for keeping it focused; (c) shows respect to all participants; (d) assures that the discussion is not monopolized by one individual (including the leader); (f) is not hesitant to challenge respectfully unsupported assertions; and (e) participants indicate, through brief, evaluations at the end of the class session, that the discussion has contributed to their understanding/thinking.
5. In-class Presentation (Book of your choice from the suggested list, including a handout and a critical analysis (your final one) distributed to the class. N.B. If you wish to use a book not on the suggested list, such may be negotiated with the instructor. First come, first served. You may make your choice as soon as feasible, but no later than the class meeting prior to spring break.
6. Miss no more than one class meeting
There will be no final examination or term paper for this course.
FINAL COURSE GRADE:
Reading/Discussion 50 points
Written Analyses (N =5) 30 points
Discussion Leadership 10 points
Class Presentation 10 points
A= 93-100points; B=85-92 points; C=77-84 points; D=70-77 points; F=69 or less points. Plus or minus grades may be given at the instructor's discretion. No grade of Incomplete will be given in this course.
Some Requirements for the two-page critical analysis:
1. Your analysis must be typed.
2. Your analysis may not exceed two pages. Whether you double-space or single-space, and where you set margins, are entirely up to you. If you single-space, please skip a line between paragraphs.
3. Use a 12-point font size.
3. Your analysis must be turned in/circulated on time. Send your analysis as a .doc email attachment to the scheduled discussion leader no later than noon the day before the class meeting. Submit your final version to Dr. Daugherty for grading no later than noon on the day the class meets. N.B. Exceptions: For the baseline analysis in conjunction with the Kivy book everyone brings xeroxed copies of their analyses to the class meeting. For the final critical analysis on a book of your choice, submit by email attachment by noon on the day the class meets.
4. Follow this format:
Your name in the upper right hand corner. Write a full bibiographic citation of the book you are reviewing, using Turabian (not APA) style, left justified or centered. Begin the body of your analysis. For purposes of this paper, all quotations from the book itself may be acknowledged simply by using quotation marks and indicating its page number with parentheses. Should you wish to quote other sources, use the Turabian end-note procedure. End-notes need not begin on a separate page, but they do count toward the two-page limit.
5. No misspellings, grammatical errors, punctuation errors.
6. Address somewhere in your analysis in some fashion these three questions:
Who is this person, & Why is s/he saying these things? What central arguments are made? So what?
There is no necessary order for when in your analysis you address these questions. Nor should you write section headings for your paper, or waste space with such statements as “Now I’m going to address the so what question.” Your approach will likely vary according to the particular book being reviewed.
As a general rule of thumb, you might well address the “Who is this person/Why is s/he saying these things?” question in a well-crafted sentence or two, or perhaps a short paragraph. You might even address it by short phrases or clauses throughout your paper. The point is that this question, while providing background information very important to both your reading and your analysis, need not occupy a great deal of real estate in your written paper.
How you proportion responses to the other two questions is up to you. That decision likely will be dictated by your interests and the propositions advanced by particular books. You might, for instance, find that you can state the central argument(s) rather succinctly, and that you detect no logical fallacies. In that case, you could devote most of your analysis to the “So what?” question. In other cases, you might find so many problems with one or more of the central arguments advanced, that you wish to spend more time addressing that aspect of the book.
7. You may assume that your classmates and the instructor have read the book. Therefore, do not include in your analysis extraneous material such as a survey of all its contents, whether or not you recommend others read it, etc.
Some Suggested Procedures for reading the book and for preparing to write the two-page critical analysis:
N.B. Suggestions only. You cannnot address every item in each category in a two-page paper.
Who is this person,
& What central Why is s/he saying arguments are made? these things?
*
So What?
*Two-page critical analysis: “lean & tight”
I. Who is this person, & Why is s/he saying these things?
Basic biographical / professional data: dust jacket of book Google search author’s personal or professional web page library search (e.g., other books/articles by same author, interviews with the author, etc.)
Affinities with any “-ism’s?” Bowman book Philosophy dictionary or encyclopedia Author self-acknowledgment
*Context: What is the “problem/issue” addressed? (ideas, practices, events, etc.) Why is it a “problem/issue”? Is it still a “problem/issue”? Is it a legitimate “problem/issue”? A problem/issue for whom?
Why is s/he interested in the “problem/issue”?
Whom/what does this thinker oppose, or wish to “set straight”/amend?
Locate critical book reviews or analyses by others:
Consulting evaluations (e.g., book reviews, articles, encyclopedia entries) others have written, either about a particular book or the overall perspective of a particular thinker, can be informativel/interesting at times, prompting you perhaps to consider some matters that had not yet occurred to you. However, keep in mind that the primary purpose of writing a two-page critical analysis in MEMT 815 is to exercise and hone your own thinking skills. Obviously, you may not plagiarize. But even more importantly you should avoid the trap of presuming that a published review, simply by virtue of its publication, is any “better “ or more valuable than your own dialogue with a particular book.
II. What central arguments are made?
Philosophers concern themselves primarily with arguments (propositions that serve as premises or conclusions), evaluating whether or not those arguments are sound arguments, and assessing the potential meanings/values of such arguments both in their present contexts and as they might be projected onto other contexts. For purposes of doing philosophy, then, “What is said?” per se, while often interesting, is not nearly as important as “What arguments are made?”
As you read, separate wheat from chaff, sheep from goats.
Bracket what is merely rhetoric, anecdote, filler, opinion, simple belief, ideology, etc., i.e., what is not used as part of a valid argument, either as a proposition or as evidence for the truth of a proposition.
Identify what portions constitute valid arguments, i.e., satisfy the requirements for being an actual argument.
Find your preferred means of identifying propositions, arguments, “interesting stuff” as you read:
Write in the book (if you own it). Underline. Circle. Margin notes. Diagram Bullets Flow chart List Paraphrase fairly etc.
Find a means to identify/remember particular sentences, passages, quotes that you suspect may be important or telling. Can save lots of time later on.
For the author’s arguments:
Follow principle of “charity,” i.e., assume at first that the author does indeed offer arguments, is trying to do what s/he says /she will do, etc. “Innocent until proven guilty.”
Identify propositions. Which serve as premises and which are conclusions? (sometimes it’s easier to identify conclusions first and work backward to premises….if you’re fortunate, the author provides some prompts, e.g., “therefore,” “thus,” “then,” “so,” etc….if author is not reader- friendly, you will have to put on your “Miss Marple” hat and play detective.
Is the argument deductive? inductive? dialectic?
Is the argument sound, i.e. true conclusion(s) following from true premises? Or, does it commit some logical fallacy?
Primary ways of taking issue with an argument: 1. At least one premise is not true, at least as presently stated. 2. The conclusion does not necessarily follow from the premise(s), i.e., more than one conclusion could be drawn from those particular premises.
Could it become a sound argument if certain assumed premises were added?
Could it become a sound argument by amending or dropping one or more premises? by re-formulating conclusions?
Conclusions of one argument typically become the premises of a succeeding argument in book length writings.
Follow similar procedures for the “overall,” “major,” or “central” argument of the book. Identify it, determine if it is sound, etc. Is it really the sort of argument the author said s/he would make? Or is it of another sort?
Option: Should you choose, you may state in a paragraph the central, overarching arguments of the book. Then devote the remainder of section two to addressing one particular, preferably smaller, argument in terms of (a) demonstrating that it is a sound argument; (b) taking issue with its soundness; or (c) suggesting how the author might re-state certain propositions to have a sound argument.
For the author’s treatment of opposing arguments (real or projected):
Does s/he phrase, re-state, paraphrase, allude to opposing arguments fairly? in their strongest form?
Does anything strike you as important by virtue of its omission? In other words, what was not said/argued. Why?
Epistemological analysis: How does this author know what s/he knows, or thinks s/he knows?
Traditional epistemology: Knowledge = belief that is both (a) true and (b) justified
III. So What?
Why do/should these arguments matter?
for the author? for me? for others? for the profession? for real life?
Ideas/conceptions have consequences…what are the consequences of the ideas advanced here?
What “light bulbs” switched on for me as I read this book? What I like most about this book…. What I liked least about this book…. Etc.
Trial Run for the Kivy Book:
Next time we meet we will discuss Kivy’s Introduction to a Philosophy of Music.
Prior to this class meeting, everyone should write a two-page analysis.
Xerox your analysis and bring to class sufficient copies to distribute.
These analyses will serve individually as a base line by which to measure future improvement, and collectively as a means for discussing what a critical analysis should look like. Everyone who completes this initial analysis per the directions given will be awarded the full point value for this particular analysis.
Note the article in Kivy’s title, Introduction to a Philosophy of Music.
Keep in mind that Kivy’s book simultaneously serves two purposes: (a) an introduction to doing philosophy of music generally, and (b) a statement of the particular philosophy Kivy articulates. Your written analysis should concentrate more on the latter.
In-Class Presentation:
Choose a book from the suggested bibliography. Or, consult with the instructor about another book.
Prepare:
15- 20 minute oral presentation. May include powerpoint, show and tell, whatever you wish to do. The purpose is to tease class interest in the book. You cannot cover everything in the short amount of time you have.
A handout for each member of the class and the instructor. Include on the handout: your name, bibliographic citation of the book. Listing or synopsis of the major contents. Any background information on the author you wish to share. Whatever else you want to include, perhaps some things you were not able to discuss in the oral presentation. Give the reader some indication of what to find/expect in the book.
Your final two-page critical analysis (on this book). Bring enough copies to give to each member of the class.
A BASIC BIBLIOGRAPHY: PHILOSOPHY OF MUSIC & MUSIC AESTHETICS < http://web.ku.edu/~cmed/815/815bib09.pdf> on course web site
Adorno, Theodor. (1984). Aesthetic theory. Trans. C. Lenhardt. London: Routledge.
______. (1973). Philosophy of modern music. Trans. A.G. Mitchell and W.V. Blomster. NY: Seabury Press.
______. (1999). Sound Figures. Trans. R. Livingstone. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Allan, Tuzyline Jita. (1995). Womanist and feminist aesthetics: A comparative review. Ohio Univ. Press.
Alperson, Philip A., Ed. (1987). What is music? An introduction to the philosophy of music. NY: Haven Publications.
Attali, Jacques. (1985). Noise: The political economy of music. Trans. B. Massumi. Minneapolis,: University of Minnesota Press.
Augustine. On music. Trans. R. Taliaferro. In Writings of St. Augustine, ed. L. Schopp. NY: CIMA Publishing, 1947.
Aristotle. On Poetics.
______. Politics.
Battersby, Christine. (1989). Gender and genius. Towards a feminist aesthetics. London: The Women's Press.
Battin, M. P., Fisher, J., Moore, R., Silvers, A. (1989). Puzzles about art: An aesthetics casebook. NY: St Martin’s Press.
Baumgarten, Alexander. (1735/1954). Reflections on poetry [Meditationes Philosophicae de Nonnullis ad Poema Pertinentibus]. K. Aschenburner and W.B. Hoelther, trans. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Beardsley, Monroe. (1966). Aesthetics from classical Greece to the present: A short history. Tusculoosa, AL: University of Alabama Press.
Bell, Clive. (1981). Art. NY: Chatto & Windus.
Blacking, John. (1973). How musical is man? Seattle: University of Washington Press.
Berleant, Arnold. (1991). Art and engagement. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Berlin, Isaiah. (1965/2001). The roots of romanticism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Bicknell, Jeanette. Why Music Moves Us. New York: Palgrave, McMillan, 2010.
Bowman, Wayne. (1998). Philosophical perspectives on music. New York: Oxford University Press.
Boethius. Fundamentals of music. Trans. C.M. Bower, Ed. C.V. Palisca. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1989.
Brand, Peg and Carolyn Korsmeyer, eds. (1995). Feminism and tradition in aesthetics. State College, PA: Pennsylvania University Press.
Brett, Philip, Elizabeth Wood, and Gary C. Thomas, eds. (2006). Queering the Pitch: The New Gay and Lesbian Musicology. Second edition. London: Routledge.
Budd, Malcolm. (1985). Music and the emotions. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Burrows, David L. (1990). Sound, speech, and music. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press.
Cage, John. (1961). Silence. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Carroll, Noel. (2001). Beyond aesthetics: Philosophical essays. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Chua, D. K. (1999). Absolute music and the construction of meaning. NY: Cambridge University Press.
Citron, Marcia J. (1993). Gender and the musical canon. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Clayton, Martin, Trevor Herbert, and Richard Middleton, eds. The Cultural Study of Music: A Critical Introduction. London: Routledge, 2003.
Clifton, Thomas. (1983). Music as heard: A study in applied phenomenology. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Cook, Nicholas. (1998). Music: A very short introduction. London: Oxford University Press.
______. (1990). Music, imagination, and culture. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
Cook, Nicholas and Everest, Mark (eds).(1999). Rethinking Music. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Cook, Susan C. and Tsou , Judy S. (1994). Ceclia reclaimed: Feminist perspectives on gender and music. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
Cooke, Deryck. (1959). The language of music. London: Oxford University Press.
Coken, Wilson. (1972). Music and meaning: A theoretical introduction to musical aesthetics. NY: Free Press.
Collingwood, R.G. (1938). The principles of art. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
Cumming, Naomi. (2000). The sonic self: Musical subjectivity and signification. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Dahlhaus, Karl. (1982). Esthetics of music. Trans W. W. Austin. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
______.(1991). The idea of absolute music. Trans. R. Lustig. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Damasio, Antonio. (2003). Looking for Spinoza: Joy, sorrow, and the feeling brain. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Books.
Danto, Arthur C. (2003). The abuse of beauty: Aesthetics and the concept of art. Chicago: Open Court.
______.(1986). The philosophical disenfranchisement of art. New York: Columbia University Press.
______. (1981). The transfiguration of the commonplace: A philosophy of art. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Davies, Stephen (2005). Themes in the Philosophy of Music. Rev. ed. New York: Oxford University Press.
Davies, Stephen. (1994). Musical meaning and expression. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Dewey, John. (1934). Art as experience. NY: G.P. Putnam.
Dickie, George. (1974). Art and the aesthetic: An institutional analysis. Cornell, NY: Cornell University Press.
Dufrenne, Mikel. (1973). The phenomenology of aesthetic experience. Trans. Edward Casey, et al. Evantson, IL: Northwestern University Press.
Eagleton, Terry. (1990). The ideology of the aesthetic. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
Elliott, David. (1995). Music Matters. New York: Oxford University Press.
Epperson, Gordon. (1967). The musical symbol: A study of the philosophic theory of music. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press.
Feagin, Susan and Patrick Maynard, Eds. (1997). Aesthetics. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ferrara, Lawrence. (1991). Philosophy and the analysis of music: Bridges to musical sound, form, and reference. New York: Greenwood Press.
Fiske, Harold E. (1990). Music and mind: Philosophical essays on the cognition and meaning of music. Lewiston, NY: Mellen Press.
______. (1993). Music cognition and aesthetic attitudes. Lewiston, NY: Mellen Press.
Gadamer, Hans-Georg. (1986). The relevance of the beautiful and other essays. Ed. Robert Bernasconi. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Godlovitch, Stan. (1998). Musical performance: A philosophical study. London: Routledge.
Godwin, Jocelyn. (1987). Harmonies of heaven and earth: The spiritual dimensions of music. Rochester, VT: Inner Traditions International.
Goehr, Lydia. The Imaginary Museum of Musical Works: An Essay in the Philosophy of Music. Rev. ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2007.
Goodman, Nelson.. (1976). Languages of art: An approach to the theory of symbols. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing.
Green, Lucy. (1988). Music on deaf ears: Musical meaning, ideology, education. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.
______. (1997). Music, gender, education. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Greene, Maxine. (2001). Variations on a blue guitar: The Lincoln Center Institute lectures on aesthetic education. NY: Teacher's College Press.
Gurney, Edmund. (1966). The Power of Sound. New York: Basic Books.
Hamilton, Andy. (2007). Aesthetics and music. London: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Hammermeister, Kai. (2002). The German Aesthetic Tradition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Hanslick, Eduard (1986). On the musically beautiful: A contribution towards the revision of the aesthetics of music. Trans. and ed. G. Payzant. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing.
______. (1957). The beautiful in music. Trans. G. Cohen. Ed. M. Weitz. NY: Liberal Arts Press.
Hastings, Thomas. (1822/1974). Dissertation on musical taste. New York: Da Capo.
Hegel, George W. F. (1820-26/1886). The Introduction to Hegel¹s Philosophy of Fine Art. Trans. B. Bosanquet. London, UK: Tregan Paul, Trench, Trueber and Company.
Hegel, George W.F. (1835/1975). Aesthetics. Lectures on Fine Art, trans. T.M. Knox, 2 vols. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
Herwitz, Daniel. (2008). Aesthetics: Key concepts in philosophy. London: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Hess, Jonathan. (1999). Reconstituting the body politic: Enlightenment, public culture and the invention of aesthetic autonomy. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press.
Higgins, Kathleen. (1991). The music of our lives. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Hume, David. (1742/2008). Selected essays. Stephen Copley and Andrew Edgar, eds. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
______. (1739/2002). A treatise of human nature. David and Mary Norton, eds. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Hutcheson, Francis. (1725/1973). Inquiry concerning beauty, order, harmony, design . Ed. Peter Kivy. The Hague: Martinua Nijhoff.
Ihde. don. (1976). Listening and voice: A phenomenology of sound. Athens, OH: Ohio University Press.
Ingarden, Roman. (1986). The work of music and the problem of its identity. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Jackson, Philip W. (1998). John Dewey and the lessons of art. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
James, Jamie. (1993). The music of the spheres: Music, science, and the natural order. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Johnson, Julian. (2002). Who needs classical music? Cultural choice and musical values. New York: Oxford University Press.
Jorgensen, Estelle R. (1997). In search of music education. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
Jourdain, Robert. (1997). Music, the brain, and ecstasy: How music captures our imagination. New York: William Morrow.
Kant, Immanuel. The critique of judgment. Trans. J. C. Meredith. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press, 1952.
______. Observations on the feeling of the beautiful and sublime. Trans. J.T. Goldthwait. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1960.
Kelly, Michael (2003). Iconoclasm in aesthetics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Kerman, Joseph. (1985). Contemplating music. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kivy, Peter. Introduction to a Philosophy of Music. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2002.
______.(1980). The corded shell: Reflections on musical expression. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
______. (1984). Sound and semblance: Reflections on musical representation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
______. (1990). Music alone: reflections on the purely musical experience. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Kramer, Lawrence. (1990). Music as cultural practice, 1800-1900. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Kramer, Lawrence. Interpreting Music. University of California Press, 2010.
Krims, A. Ed. (1998). Music/ideology: Resisting the aesthetic. Amsterdam: Overseas Publishers Association.
Langer, Susanne. (1942). Philosophy in a new key: A study in the symbolism of reason, rite, and art. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
______. (1953). Feeling and form.
______. (1957). Problems of art.
Leppert, R. and McClary, Susan. (1987) Music and society: The politics of composition, performance, and reception. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Levinson, Jerrold. (1990). Music, art, and metaphysics: Essays in philosophical aesthetics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Levinson, Jerrold. Ed. (1998). Aesthetics and ethics: Essays at the intersection. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Levitin, Daniel. J. The World in Six Songs: How the Musical Brain Created Human Nature. NY: Dutton, 2008.
Levitin, Daniel. J. This is Your Brain on Music. NY: Dutton, 2006.
Lippman, Edward. (1999). The philosophy and aesthetics of music. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
______. (1992). A history of western musical aesthetics. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
______. (1964). Musical thought in ancient Greece. NY: Columbia University Press.
Lyotard, Jean-Francois. (2001). Soundproof room: Malraux's anti-aesthetics.
McClary, Susan. (1991). Feminine endings: Music, gender, and sexuality. Minneapolis,: University of Minnesota Press.
McClary, S. (2000). Conventional wisdom: The content of musical form. Berkely, CA: University of California Press.
Maconie, Robin. (1990). The concept of music. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Martin, Peter J. (1999). Sounds and society: Themes in the sociology of music. Manchester, UK: University of Manchester Press.
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. (1964). The primacy of perception and other essays on phenomenological psychology, the Philosophy of Art, History, and Politics. Ed. J.M. Edie. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
Meyer, Leonard B. (1956). Emotion and meaning in music. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
______. (1973). Explaining music: Essays and explorations. berkeley, CA; University of California Press.
______. (1989). Style and music: Theory, history, and ideology. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Mithen, Steven. (2007). The singing Neanderthals: The origins of music, language, mind, and body. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Murdoch Iris. (1977). The fire and the sun: Why Plato banished the artists. Oxford, UK; Oxford University Press.
Nattiez, Jean-Jacques. (1990). Music and Discourse: Toward a Semiology of Music. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Nussbaum, Martha C. (2001). Upheavals of thought: The intelligence of emotions. NY: Cambridge University Press.
Phelan, Peggy. (1993). Unmarked: The politics of performance. London: Routledge. Plato. The Republic. Laws. Protagoras.
Pinker, Steven. (2002). The blank slate: The modern denial of human nature. New York: Viking Press.
Portnoy, Julius (1980). The philosopher and music. NY: Da Capo Press.
Raffman, Diana. (1993). Language, music, and mind. Cambridge, MA: Bradford.
Reimer, Bennett (2003). Advancing the vision: A philosophy of music education. Third edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Reimer, Bennett and Jeffrey E. Wright, eds. (1992). On the nature of musical experience. Niwot, CO: University Press of Colorado.
Ridley, Aaron. (2004). The philosophy of music: Theme and variations. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.
______. (1995). Music, value, and the passions. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univeristy Press.
Robinson, Jenefer, ed. (1997). Music and meaning. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Sacks, Oliver. (2008). Musicophilia: Tales of music and the brain. NY: Vintage Books.
Savile, Anthony. (1985). The test of time: An essay in philosophical aesthetics. Oxford, UK” Oxford University Press.
Schafer, R. Murray. (1977). The tuning of the world. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart.
Schiller, Friedrich. On the aesthetic education of man. Ed. and Trans. E. M. Wilkinson and L.A. Willoughby. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987.
Schopenhauer, Arthur. The world as will and representation. Trans. E.F.J. Payne. 2 vols. Indian Hills, CO, 1958.
Scruton, Roger. (1999). The aesthetics of music. New York: Oxford University Press.
Serafine, Mary L. (1988). Music as cognition: The development of thought in sound. NY: Columbia University Press.
Shepherd, John. (1991). Music as social text. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Small, Christopher. (1999). Musicking: The Meanings of performing and listening. Hanover, NH: University Press of New England.
______. (1977). Music-education-society. NY: Schirmer.
Sparshott, Francis E. (1982). The theory of the arts. Princeton, MJ: Princeton University Press.
Townsend, Dabney. (1997). An introduction to aesthetics. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Van den Toorn, Peter. (1995). Music, politics, and the academy. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Wallin, Nils L., Bjorn Merker, and Steven Brown, eds. (2001). The orgins of music. Rev. ed. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.
Walton, Kendall. (2004). Mimesis and make believe. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Weber, Max. The rational and social foundations of music. Trans. D. Martindale, et al. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press 1956.
Wolterstorff, Nicholas. (1980). Works and worlds of art. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
______. (1980). Art in action: Toward a Christian Aesthetic. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.
Other Recommended Books
Introduction to Philosophy in general (accessible/substantive):
Popkin, Richard H., and Stroll, Avrum. (1993). Philosophy made simple. 2nd rev. ed. New York: Doubleday.
Blackburn, Simon. (1999). Think: A compelling introduction to philosophy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Less substantive, but very enjoyable/accessible introductions to doing philosophy:
Cathcart, Thomas and Daniel Klein. (2007). Plato and a platypus walk into a bar: Understanding philosophy through jokes. New York: Abrams.
Cathcart, Thomas and Daniel Klein. (2008). Aristotle and an aardvark go to Washington: Understanding political doublespeak through philosophy and jokes. New York: Abrams.
Critical Thinking/Informal Logic:
Bowell, Tracy, and Kemp, Gary. (2002). Critical thinking: A concise guide. London: Routledge.
Baggini, Julian and Fosl, Peter. (2003). The philosopher’s toolkit: A compendium of philosophical concepts and methods. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Shand, John. (2000). Arguing well. London: Routledge.
Engel, S. Morris. (1986). With good reason: An introduction to informal fallacies. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
MEMT 815: TENTATIVE COURSE CALENDAR Spring 2011
JANUARY
26 Orientation Introduction to Doing Philosophy Introduction to Informal Logic Introduction to Formulating and Writing Critical Analyses Selection of dates for serving as discussion leader/critical analysis repondent(s).
______
FEBRUARY
2 Kivy: Introduction to a philosophy of music Everyone writes a critical analysis (baseline) and brings it to class this week. Xerox sufficient copies for everyone in the class.
Discussion leader: JD
9 Battin, et. al.: Puzzles about art: An aesthetics casebook Everyone brings to class two questions (written) for each chapter in the book. Xerox sufficient copies for everyone in the class.
Discussion leader: ______
16 Bicknell: Why music moves us
Discussion leader: ______*Respondents (critical analysis): ______, ______
23 NO CLASS MEETING. Reading Week. ______
MARCH
2 Kant: Critique of Judgment Everyone brings to class a list of his/her “Top Ten Questions” (written) about the book. Include specific section/page numbers or brief quotations to indicate particular part(s) of the book that give rise to a particular question. Questions should be distributed to afford indication that you have read/engaged with the entire book. Xerox sufficient copies for everyone in the class.
Discussion leader: JD
9 Hegel: Philosophy of Fine Art Everyone brings to class a list of his/her “Top Ten Questions” (written) about the book. Include specific section/page numbers or brief quotations to indicate particular part(s) of the book that give rise to a particular question. Questions should be distributed to afford indication that you have read/engaged with the entire book. Xerox sufficient copies for everyone in the class.
Discussion leader: ______
16 Hanslick: On the Musically Beautiful & Goehr: Imaginary Museum
Discussion leader: ______*Written critical analysis: ______(Hanslick) ______(Goehr)
23 SPRING BREAK
30 Dewey: Art as experience
Discussion leader: ______*Written critical analysis:______. ______
Due: Selection of book for final class presentation. ______
APRIL
6 Ridley: The Philosophy of Music
Discussion leader: ______*Written critical analysis: ______. ______
13 Small: Musicking: The meanings of performing and listening
Discussion leader: ______*Written critical analysis:______, ______
20 Levitin: This is your brain & Sacks, Musicophilia
Discussion leader: ______*Written critical analysis:______(Levitin), ______(Sacks)
27 McClary: Feminine Endings & Brett, et. al.: Queering the Pitch. Everyone brings to class two questions (written) for each chapter in the Brett book. Xerox sufficient copies for everyone in the class.
Discussion leader: ______*Written critical analysis (McClary):______. ______
MAY
4 Kramer: Interpreting Music Everyone brings to class one question (written) for each chapter in the book. Xerox sufficient copies for everyone in the class.
Discussion leader: ______*Written critical analysis:______, ______
*11 Class presentations: A book of your choosing from the suggested list, handout, and final critical analysis paper are due.
Presenting: Everyone Final critical analyses on your chosen book also due. *Possibly a slightly longer class this evening.
Wrap-Up. Course Evaluations. We’re done!
13 Stop Day.
*When you are scheduled as a respondent, i.e., to write a two-page critical analysis, email your paper as a .doc attachment to the discussion leader no later than noon on the day before the scheduled discussion. You may add whatever revisions, editorial changes, etc. to your paper before turning it in to the instructor by noon on the day of the class meeting. Email submission does not apply to the initial Kivy (baseline) analysis.