[Smt-talk] MISSING THEORY COMPONENT?

[Victor grauer]

Stephen Jablonsky wrote:

"Since we are talking about ideal theory curricula I thought I would 
mention one of my pet peeves. A survey of the leading music theory 
textbooks reveals that they are missing a component I consider 
significant––melody."

I have always considered the study of 16th century counterpoint (aka "species counterpoint") the ideal method for training in both melody writing and scoring. To simply ask students to produce "nice" or "good" melodies per se does not strike me as an effective pedagogical method. As there is nothing to work against, such methods are therefore, as I've complained in an earlier post, non-dialectical. When properly taught, taking students from the species exercises to the writing of simply two part, three part and four part motets, modeled on Palestrina and Lassus (Lassus especially), will make them aware of how melodies are formed in the context of an inter-relational tonal fabric that must be mastered to produce a meaningful result.

Victor Grauer
Pittsburgh, PA, USA




On Friday, May 23, 2014 4:42 PM, Stephen Jablonsky <jablonsky at optimum.net> wrote:
 

>
>
>Yesterday I administered the last of my final exams for my 100th semester of teaching so it was a very special day. I am still basking in the glow.
>
>
>Since we are talking about ideal theory curricula I thought I would mention one of my pet peeves. A survey of the leading music theory textbooks reveals that they are missing a component I consider significant––melody. The authors of most theory textbooks seem to think that music theory is all about harmony, counterpoint, and voice-leading. But that is the theory of multi-voice textures. When do our students learn to construct single lines, the things we all hum as we go about our day?
>
>
>Back in the day, before I became chair, when I taught Theory 1 I always included a section on the composition of folk melodies in my syllabus. Because I am a composer I know that everyone of my students is a potential composer. Their ultimate success in this endeavor will depend on the degree of their talent, training, and time (The Three Ts) spent struggling to organize sounds and silences. Since I am a stickler for nonharmarmonic tones I find that they are best taught by having students use them in the composition of melodies. By writing folk melodies student learn about phrase structure, cadences, and contour in ways that are more lasting than just analysis alone. I am sure that all of you who teach theory know that beginning students have a difficult time discerning the harmonic implications of melodies and so it is hard for them to sit at the piano and harmonize a given tune. If they are taught to create melodies built on simple chord progressions
 they struggle less.
>
>
>If any of you would like to receive a copy of my chapter on the composition of folk melodies from myTonal Facts & Tonal Theories I would be happy to send you a pdf file.
>
>
>I should mention that in Theory 2 I have my students write original melodies to the chord changes of the American Standard Songbook. The best students in the class come up with amazing solutions that employ melodic development, sequences, and the construction of well planned and executed climaxes and conclusions. Along the way they gain familiarity with secondary ii-Vs and modal borrowings as well as chromatic appoggiatures and piquant suspensions.
>
>
>
>
>Dr. Stephen Jablonsky, Ph.D.
>Music Department Chair
>The City College of New York
>Shepard Hall Room 72
>New York NY 10031
>(212) 650-7663
>music at ccny.cuny.edu
>
>
>America's Greatest Chair 
>in the low-priced field
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>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/20140523/e0c81e8c/attachment-0002.htm>