<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 7/5/2012 6:55 AM, Kris Shaffer wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:F689A170-1516-452D-8572-FBB769F635B9@csuniv.edu"
type="cite">
<div>
<div>On Jul 4, 2012, at 10:40 PM, Steven Rosenhaus wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-style-span"
style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: Helvetica;
font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight:
normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal;
orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none;
white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;
font-size: medium;">
<div>I've long lamented the switch to hiring folks with
theory-only degrees to teach music theory at the expense
of composers, who more often than not know the practical
application of what is being discussed. And a theorist who
composes is not the same as a composer who can explain
theory/analyze music.</div>
</span><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
</blockquote>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Dear Colleagues,</div>
<div>I'll refrain from joining the well worn debate over the
relative merits of composers and theorists in teaching music
theory, which I hope has not been newly ignited by the above
comment. <br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
Probably a wise thing. It's a little bit analogous to the situation
of a young couple going to see a counselor because they are having
problems keeping their kids in line. But the counselor is a young,
unmarried woman, and the couple has no confidence in her ability to
help them, because they think that only someone who has reared kids
herself would be qualified to help. <br>
<br>
It's also similar to asking whether it's better to study with a
concert artist or an artist-teacher. There are plenty of incredible
performers who seem to be unable to teach effectively, especially to
students who aren't very good at learning on their own. <br>
<br>
It's probably a poor question to start with. For one thing, it
incorrectly assumes that a Ph.D. in theory automatically means one
is more likely to be an effective theory teacher than someone with a
DMA in composition (for example). (It also leaves undefined the
meaning of "theory teacher," but that's another story.) When I was
an undergraduate (sometime in the Jurassic era, I think), none of my
theory teachers was a "theorist"--they were all either composers or
performers first. <br>
<br>
Here's another thought. Since I'm retired, I really don't know
whether a course in theory pedagogy is required in most graduate
composition studies. I am of opinion that it should be, since most
composition grads will seek academic positions and will probably be
assigned some theory courses. It's my view that undergraduates,
especially in the first two years of study, often fail to understand
why "theory" -- that is, traditional harmony, ear-training, and all
the rest -- is necessary. Theory pedagogy should address that and
similar issues. <br>
<br>
My bias is that theory study is justified only to the extent that it
improves the practice of music -- composing, performing, and today
we have to add producing, I think. The most important outcome of the
study of theory is the deep understanding of the creative tension
between constraints (which define style) and freedom to innovate
(which fuels stylistic change over time), and how to use that
understanding to advantage in one's career. The person who is able
to pass on that understanding is a good theory teacher, and he or
she could be a composer, performer, or theorist. <br>
<br>
Christopher Bonds<br>
Wayne State College [retired]<br>
</body>
</html>