Dear all,<div><br></div><div>I write this email not to opine on the value or uses of Wikipedia, which we can agree have been well rehearsed by members of this listserv in the past weeks. Rather, I wish to reiterate what I stated in my July 17 message: to anyone who is willing, the Wikipedia page on <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prolongation" target="_blank">Prolongation</a> will benefit greatly from your input. Even if you are concerned with vandalism, inaccuracy, or the complexity of the subject matter, a few small contributions (such as adding sources, examples, and clarifications where needed) could go a long way in improving this "blasted" page. Many changes would require but the smallest time commitment. If we are willing to to write such lengthy and eloquent emails <i>about </i>Wikipedia, I have no doubt we could write <i>on </i>Wikipedia with great success, even if only in small doses.</div>
<div><br></div><div>This evening I began an overhaul of the prolongation entry (as shrewdly noticed by <span style="font-family:arial, sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255, 255, 255)">Bob Kosovsky). This included dividing the page into subsections and fleshing them all out to a minor extent. I am amused that many of those citations that </span>Devin Chaloux remarked were valuable are the product of my quite hasty first stab at fixing the page up. It is, to be honest, still a mess--most egregious is the paucity of concrete references to Schenker's writings. But I maintain it would not take much to turn it into something we could collectively feel was respectable. Once again, there is a useful <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Prolongation" target="_blank">discussion page</a> on which editors could sound out strategies for improvement (or critiques -- believe me, I have no strong attachment to the page's current content or layout!).</div>
<div><br></div><div>Finally, perhaps this apparently intense concern about online references could be focused into an SMT interest group (my apologies if this has been organized in the past and I'm unaware of it).</div>
<div><br></div><div><span style="font-family:arial, sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255, 255, 255)">Best,</span></div><div><span style="font-family:arial, sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255, 255, 255)"><div>
Frank Lehman</div></span><span style="font-family:arial, sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255, 255, 255)"><div>Harvard University, Ph.D. Candidate in Music Theory</div><div><a href="mailto:flehman@fas.harvard.edu" target="_blank">flehman@fas.harvard.edu</a></div>
</span><a href="http://unsungsymphonies.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">Unsung Symphonies Blog</a></div><div><br></div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote">2011/8/2 Devin Chaloux <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:devin.chaloux@gmail.com" target="_blank">devin.chaloux@gmail.com</a>></span><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Thank you Yosef for the reply!<br><br>I was speaking in terms of students and how they act today - I am very
aware of where I can get top-end results on research. I use Grove very
often.<br><br>As a TA, I taught college freshmen last year and I had several run-ins
with "well Wikipedia said..." The fact is - students get information
from there whether or not we tell them too. In the mind of the student - if I'm off campus, it is a pain to get onto
the VPN or proxy so I can search something up through the library website. I'm not sure how many clicks that takes on each school's website, but to our streamlining youth, they'll tend to go with the path of least resistance, which is probably Wikipedia. <br>
<br>
Regardless, we should be maintaining Wikipedia pages, to some degree, for
all who aren't affiliated with academic institutions and want to find
more. There are plenty of people in the world who could benefit from an
article on Wikipedia and stimulate their own interest. These articles will never
be at the level of a Grove entry. Drabkin's entry in Grove is a great resource that we can trust for a detailed explanation of prolongation. <br><br>At the same time, Grove fails us sometimes where in articles just like prolongation, we have no bibliography or references section to learn more. Yet, I go to the Wikipedia page, and the reference section brings my attention to Salzer's "Structural Hearing", Salzer and Schachter's "Counterpoint in Composition", Drabkin's article on Schenker in the Cambridge Companion to Western Music, etc. But - it also cites Straus' "The Problem of Prolongation in Post-Tonal Music." No where in the Grove article did it mention anything about issues with prolongation in post-tonal music - and having read this article in congruence with a lecture dealing with Schenkerian analysis, it certainly is a resource I think is worthy of at least linking to the article. Nevertheless, the Wikipedia page ignores Larson's response to that article "The Problem of Prolongation in Tonal Music: Terminology, Perception, and Expressive Meaning" which I think would enhance the article.<br>
<br>...And I'm sure there are tens to hundreds more articles that deal with the issue of prolongation in music. We have this incredible resource (the Internet) at our hands to help us link articles we think are relevant and important to specific issues in our field. While I currently don't mind perusing through thousands of articles and books through databases like RILM and WorldCat, searching different keywords just to make sure I don't overlook a potential source, we have the ability to organize a reference list for major topics. In a utopian world, we could compile lists like David Carson Berry did with his "A Topical Guide to Schenkerian Literature: An Annotated Bibliography with Indices" and keep it up to date. <br>
<br>It's not about making Wikipedia our new Grove - it's about utilizing Wikipedia for its strengths. We can direct our students to, rather an avoid Wikipedia, learn how Wikipedia could be a "tool" to help jump start their research. Between that, access to non-academic affiliated people, and the ability to update Wikipedia instantly, it should be a resource we should utilize. <br>
<br>At this point, I will bow out of this discussion. I only intended to first shed light on the situation from a current student's perspective. I hope I have succeeded at this point.<br><br>Happy analyzing!<div>
<br><br>-- <br>
<div><b>Devin Chaloux</b></div>
<div><font size="1">University of Cincinnati - College-Conservatory of Music</font></div>
<div><font size="1">M.M. in Music Theory '12</font></div><br><br></div></blockquote></div></div>