[Smt-talk] Female theorists in history

[Neil Newton]

Dear Michael,

The question doesn't state that this is for a music theory paper.  It is
possibly for a student studying issues of gender in music. But this list
would still be a good place to enquire.

Also, and more importantly, it is without doubt that women have been pushed
aside in history. There are likely female theorists from earlier times who
are worth studying, but some of us just haven't heard of them. This type of
research is great, and it we shouldn't disregard a theorists value simply
because they haven't been heard of. Such actions will only perpetuate the
disregard of potentially historically significant theorists, overlooked
simply because of their gender.

Also, would Nadia Boulanger fit the topic?

Best,
Neil Newton.
On Oct 16, 2011 2:51 PM, "Michael Morse" <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
>
> 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/20111016/7e1d9ca5/attachment-0004.htm>