[Smt-talk] the impossibility of listening

[Laurel Parsons]

On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Daniel Roca <drocacan at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> Besides, adding musical examples in a book about the history of opera is
> not necessarily about structural analysis.
>
>
> I agree 100%. But I think it was Stephen Hawking who said that, while
> preparing A Brief History of Time, the publisher said that any mathematical
> formula on it would decrease expected sales in 50%. Finally, he only used
> E=mc2.
>

On the other hand, when a chemist friend of mine by the name of Penny
LeCouteur was writing the chemistry book *Napoleon's Buttons: 17 Molecules
That Changed the World,* she held her ground against her publisher's
similar arguments about putting in molecular diagrams.  She insisted that
a) they were essential, and b) the general public was smart enough to
figure them out as long as she explained them well enough.  She was right,
and the book has sold far beyond anyone's expectations.

So perhaps in a book designed for a general audience, it's a matter of
taking care to write a clear enough explanation of a score example that
even non-expert music readers can get something out of it without feeling
patronized.

Laurel Parsons
North Vancouver, BC













> _________
>
> Daniel Roca
> Higher Conservatory of the Canary Islands
> Spain
> drocacan at gmail.com
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20121102/a279437d/attachment-0001.htm>