Kristin McGee

Introduction

Since the 1990s, transformations to analytical approaches towards the study of musical works have reflected  the impact of gender, race and sexuality theory upon the fields of musicology and music theory. The “new musicology” of this period sought to integrate both historical and cultural context while interrogating particular ideologies as relevant for the analysis of musical recordings and compositions. This resource offers an overview of key debates emerging since this period, which have expanded the tools for understanding how we appoint, analyse, and valorise musical works. It reveals how historical, cultural, political, and ideological context always impacted which works were considered valuable for study and which deemed important for canonization. Further, it provides a critique of the racial and gendered biases inherent in earlier musicological and theoretical perspectives embedded within the study of especially Western art musical works.

<aside>

Learning Outcomes

  1. To identity key debates with regards critical appraisals and revisions to the fields of musicology and music theory.
  2. To compare and contrast the ways that gender, race, and sexuality have impacted approaches towards musical composition and analysis.
  3. To choose one case study and integrate a short analysis drawing from key concepts from various readings. </aside>

<aside>

Keywords: critical race theory and listening, music theory and intersectionality, gender ideologies and music composition, queer music theory, vocal timbre

</aside>

<aside>

Part 1

Read the texts by McClary and James.

  1. How do McClary and James approach the problem of gender ideologies in musical composition differently?
  2. Reflect upon the different economic and cultural cultures which supported gender ideologies with regards music composition and production in these two historical periods. </aside>

<aside>

Part 2

Read the texts by Agawu, Ewell, and Schloss & Chang.

  1. In what ways do the texts by Agawu and Schloss & Chang highlight different aesthetics with regards musical composition and practice within Black musics in contrast to classical music? Which boundaries are bridged or breached by these differing approaches?
  2. Summarize key points of Ewell’s critique of music theory in one paragraph. </aside>

<aside>

Part 3

Read the texts by Lee, Cox, and Eidsheim.

  1. Reflect upon how these researchers highlight listening as an ideological practice with implications for how we hear race, gender or sexuality?
  2. What ways do forms of acculturation as well as music technologies and representational strategies play a role in these forms of listening? </aside>

Book Chapters:

Agawu, V. Kofi. 2023. ”The Minimalist Impulse.” In On African Music: Techniques, Influences, Scholarship. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Cox, Arnie. 2016. ”Introduction.” In Music and Embodied Cognition: Listening, Moving, Feeling, and Thinking. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. http://site.ebrary.com/id/11258858.

Eidsheim, Nina Sun. 2019. “Chapter Three: Familiarity as Strangeness: Jimmy Scott and the Question of Black Timbral Masculinity.” In The Race of Sound: Listening, Timbre, and Vocality in African American Music. Durham: Duke University Press.

Ewell, Philip. 2023. ”Chapter One: On Music Theory, Race and Racism.” In On Music Theory and Making Music More Welcoming for Everyone. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

James, Robin. 2015. ”Introduction.” In Resilience & Melancholy: Pop Music, Feminism, Neoliberalism. Winchester, UK: Zero Books.

Lee, Gavin S. K. 2023. ”Queering Schubert’s ‘Der Atlas’: Reflections on Positionality and Close Reading.” In Queer Ear: Remaking Music Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press, Incorporated.

McClary, Susan. 2002. ”Chapter 1 Introduction: A Material Girl in Bluebeard’s Castle.” In Feminine Endings: Music, Gender, and Sexuality. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.