[Smt-talk] Female theorists in history

[Isaacson, Eric J]

Wow, is this response insulting, both politically and intellectually. A major aim of at least part of our research enterprise is bringing the obscure and forgotten to light and reassessing it in a contemporary context. To suggest that gender might be an inappropriate criterion for a search topic is bizarre. And to pre-suppose the outcome of the student's conclusions strikes me as terribly bigoted.

Eric J. Isaacson
Treasurer, Society for Music Theory
Associate Professor of Music Theory (isaacso at indiana.edu<mailto:isaacso at indiana.edu>,  812-855-0296)
Director of Graduate Studies (musicdgs at indiana.edu<mailto:musicdgs at indiana.edu>,  812-855-1738)
Indiana University Jacobs School of Music
(Sent from my iPad)

On Oct 16, 2011, at 9:51 AM, "Michael Morse" <mwmorse at bell.net<mailto:mwmorse at bell.net>> wrote:

Why would you accept a paper about a theorist solely based on their gender? The setup is especially egregious, as the student doesn't even know which theorist they want to discuss, nor what their ideas might be, only that the subject of a music theory paper should be based on the (to be determined) theorist's gender.  Isn't the conclusion already written? The theorist-to-be-named is a. brilliant of course and a right-on sister; b. deliberately neglected or obscure because of patriarchal oppression.

Do you really want to collude in this self deformation?

MW Morse
Trent University
Peterborough, Oshawa


_______________________________________________
Smt-talk mailing list
Smt-talk at lists.societymusictheory.org<mailto:Smt-talk at lists.societymusictheory.org>
http://lists.societymusictheory.org/listinfo.cgi/smt-talk-societymusictheory.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.societymusictheory.org/pipermail/smt-talk-societymusictheory.org/attachments/20111016/b25cf7f3/attachment-0003.htm>