[Smt-talk] MISSING THEORY COMPONENT?

[Darryl White]

Stephen Jablonsky wrote:

*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?*

Perhaps our teaching may have something to do with this omission.

What has been the result of querying students about "the harmonic
implications of melodies" and teaching them "to create melodies built on
simple chord progressions?" Professor Jablonsky can begin to answer his own
question.

Victor Grauer and Peter Schubert agree that "counterpoint is the father of
melody." Perhaps this idea also helps explain the omission.

I wonder what those monodic melodists of ancient (and present) times would
think of such ideas.


-- 
Darryl White
University of Arizona
School of Music
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.societymusictheory.org/pipermail/smt-talk-societymusictheory.org/attachments/20140524/7113bc13/attachment-0002.htm>