Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Why do we not simply throw in the towel and give up on the idea of developing a new discipline called theomusicology? Has orthodox academia not rendered its verdict? Has it not done so, for instance, through its rejection of my application in 1991 to procure a grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) to hold a conference that I envisioned would be a defining moment in the his tory of theomusicology? Had not the peer evaluators for NEH ren dered theomusicology a moot idea when they said that the proposal I submitted looked like "a pretty brazen hustle" because in the years since the term theomusicology had been coined the idea of this being a new discipline had "failed to gain the approval of scholars in musi cology or ethnomusicology"? Another peer evaluator of my proposal argued that a thorough review of scholarship in related fields failed to show that a new musicological discipline is needed. The evaluator went on to say that the field of ethnomusicology already embraces interdisciplinary studies of music and culture and that it cannot be said that ethnomusicologists neglect the sacred dimensions of music or are unwilling to consult scholars of
Black Sacred Music – Duke University Press
Published: Mar 1, 1994
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.