Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

HERMANN DANUSER ( translated by Mary Whittall )

HERMANN DANUSER ( translated by Mary Whittall ) ß Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2005. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK REVIEW SYMPOSIUM be clarified in detail,3 but both emphasise that the concepts of history, music and theory have changed so fundamentally that the history of music theory cannot be conceived as a coherent `subject': The conventional definition of the history of music theory as a subject is the sum of early and modern concepts of theory . . . . Generally speaking, histories of theory usually bracket all pre-nineteenth century theory (which the nineteenth century did not recognise as theory) with nineteenth-century theory (which would not have been recognised as theory in the earlier period). Furthermore, the transfer of ideas from the Middle Ages to the nineteenth century is generally avoided. Acoustics and aesthetics (which eighteenthcentury theorists understood to be the two parts of medieval musica theorica and early-modern theory) were not normally admitted, despite the difficulty of accounting for their exclusion.4 So defined, a subject cannot be confined to a single historical narrative. The ontological concept of history, aimed at establishing the unalterable entity of tone systems and the norms that underpin the musical practices of past periods, is incompatible with http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Music Analysis Wiley

HERMANN DANUSER ( translated by Mary Whittall )

Music Analysis , Volume 24 (1‐2) – Mar 1, 2005

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/hermann-danuser-translated-by-mary-whittall-01DC3DQq3y
Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
Copyright © 2005 Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company
ISSN
0262-5245
eISSN
1468-2249
DOI
10.1111/j.1468-2249.2005.00220.x
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

ß Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2005. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK REVIEW SYMPOSIUM be clarified in detail,3 but both emphasise that the concepts of history, music and theory have changed so fundamentally that the history of music theory cannot be conceived as a coherent `subject': The conventional definition of the history of music theory as a subject is the sum of early and modern concepts of theory . . . . Generally speaking, histories of theory usually bracket all pre-nineteenth century theory (which the nineteenth century did not recognise as theory) with nineteenth-century theory (which would not have been recognised as theory in the earlier period). Furthermore, the transfer of ideas from the Middle Ages to the nineteenth century is generally avoided. Acoustics and aesthetics (which eighteenthcentury theorists understood to be the two parts of medieval musica theorica and early-modern theory) were not normally admitted, despite the difficulty of accounting for their exclusion.4 So defined, a subject cannot be confined to a single historical narrative. The ontological concept of history, aimed at establishing the unalterable entity of tone systems and the norms that underpin the musical practices of past periods, is incompatible with

Journal

Music AnalysisWiley

Published: Mar 1, 2005

There are no references for this article.