According to Attali, music heralds the ideology of a repetitive society. This argument resonates with Macarthur’s analysis of the composer (chapter 2) and new music’s public image (chapter 3). What is the role of money in the ideology of repetition and how has this had an impact on new classical music? In your response, include a critique of Attali’s and Macarthur’s arguments as presented in the textbooks and decide whether you agree with these authors. Support your arguments with relevant scholarly literature and musical examples.
Music Making Models
Attali, Jacques. Noise: The political economy of music. Vol. 16. Manchester University Press, 1985.
In the book the author refers to music as ?the sounds of power? as it intrigues various aspects to the target audience, for instance, he further explains the relationship between noise and politics. A model of music making that insists on the collaboration and community engagement according to this theory is the most effective model as compared to the other model that emphasizes on an individual. Music, which is referred to as noise in this theory is said to be a tool that fashion the society creating harmony and unifying the society through its consolidating message. A collaborative model of music thus appears more effective as compared to the other model where the music focuses on an individual. Attali further reveals music as a mirror and a prophetic tool. He explains that good music enables one to reflect and think through various options in his/her life, and it should enable one to explore several factors of life faster than reality can. This theory thus still supports a collaborative model of music as the most effective as it gives room for meditation and promotion of indigenous cultures in the society as compared to the individual empathetic model.
Finnegan, Ruth. The hidden musicians: Music-making in an English town. Wesleyan University Press, 2007.
There are various models in music making. The music makers and writers thus select the best model they prefer according to their main purpose of the main purpose of writing or making the music. One might decide to make music for meditation or personal reflection while another might decide to make a heroic music. The model is, however, critical as it determines the final feedback of the community audience according to Finnegan. This study looks at two different models: music produced to harmonize the community members towards a collaborative measure, and the music made to appreciate the heroic nature of a person or appreciate a given art. The first model, the writer makes sure that he or she addresses the needs of the community members and tries to promote unity and peace among the community members in a given target audience while the second is made when the musician wants to appreciate something thus great details are required in order for him or her produce a consolidated appreciative music. These reveals the two boundaries between the two models. The first model is more effective to the community members as it promotes the unity and togetherness of the community members as compared to the second one which only appreciate the already done works.
Brown, Steven. “Evolutionary models of music: From sexual selection to group selection.” In Perspectives in ethology, pp. 231-281. Springer US, 2000.
Brown challenges the sexual selection model which comparatively is the model that emphasizes on an individual or heroic based. He supports the group selection model which is a collaborative model as he states that music is the most powerful and effective tool for engineering and group or society identity, their coordination, cognition and it has special futures reflecting on its powerful role in supporting corporation in any group level. Through this way, it is evident that a collaborative model of music making where the music writers engage the entire society, or community is the most effective when it comes to the promotion of unity and the harmonization of the society. In this article, it is discussed how music evolved through various models for instance from the sexual selection model which was pretty much of individual based on the group selection model which supported coordination among the community members. Brown argues that a sexual selection or rather an individual or heroic model of music brings a sense of unhealthy competition which does not support peace and unity in any given society.
Schwanauer, Stephan M., and David A. Levitt. Machine models of music. MIT Press, 1993.
The major objective of this article was to look at the machine models of music, the writer, however, looked at the various models apart from the machine models as well. in the beginning, he states that music making should be of a positive effect on the society. Just like the previous sources discussed, Schwanauer discusses that music making should be aimed at promoting peace, harmony, and unity amongst the members of a given society. He thus supports that collaboration and community engagement model of music making is the most effective considering its end result to the target audience. In this article, he criticizes the other types of music like the modern secular music which contain vast pornographic material in the videos. From the article, one can thus conclude that a collaboration and community engagement music model is more effective as compared to a heroic or individual music model.
Brinner, Benjamin Elon. Knowing music, making music: Javanese gamelan and the theory of musical competence and interaction. University of Chicago Press, 1995.
Benjamin states that this is the ultimate theory of music making. In simple terms, the theory states that any model of music must be competitive in terms of improving the interactive and social nature of its target audience. A collaboration and community engagement model of music making is fully supported by this theory at is the best model supporting this kind of interaction according to the theory stated above. This draws a boundary and shows a clear difference between the two models of music making focused on this study. Just like the other sources, this book supports that music should be a speaking sound to the community urging the community members to leave in harmony with each other for a better society.
Minsky, Marvin. “Music, mind, and meaning.” In Music, mind, and brain, pp. 1-19. Springer US, 1982.
According to their research, music is the greatest healer of any form of conflict and settles any type of atrocity. Minsky and Marvin explain further that the best music composer is that who consider the promotion of peace, unity, culture or creating and improving the moral nature of the audience. In the article, they only recognize the kind of music that promotes collaboration and ignores the other models of music like the heroic types of music which their general agenda is to exalt a given character. From the entire context, it is, therefore, supportable that a collaborative model of music which engages the entire community members is the most effective model as compared to the heroic or individual music type that only focuses a specific type of audience. Throughout the entire article, the authors talk about how the entire music generation has evolved from the other types of music to a more specific where they state that music writers today consider a collaborative model which engages the community members and a greater range of target audience.
Negus, Keith. Music genres and corporate cultures. Routledge, 2013.
Negus talks about various music genres and gives out clear differences between the various kinds of music. The concern to this study, the two genres were considered. There are vast differences between the two genres or models. The first one where the music writer writes with the entire community in his/her mind is the most common and effective model of music that promotes team building and harmony in any given society. He also emphasizes just like the other previous researchers that good music is which motivates and unify the community members and brings the people together. There other genre or model where the writers appreciate certain arts or leadership skills, as well as heroic icons in the society, are an as well creative model though are not as effective as the first genre since it can intrigue jealousy or unhealthy competition. The major aim of the study here was to identify the difference in the two models and a clear difference is thus drawn showing that the first model the target audience is anyone in the society as it helps in reflection, meditation, and acceptance of one another while the second model is that which the musician talks about a specific person or hero in the society. This brings out the difference in the two models.
Zbikowski, Lawrence M. “Conceptual models and cross-domain mapping: New perspectives on theories of music and hierarchy.” Journal of Music Theory 41, no. 2 (1997): 193-225.
In order to bring out further differences between the two models of music making, the study went further to look at the deeper view of music in terms of conceptual and cross-domain mapping model of music writing that enhance the understanding and how the music is presented to the audience. The first theory is the conceptual model where the various concepts and themes passed are related to the daily living conditions that a normal human goes through. This model is used in writing the collaborative and community engagement music where the music maker relates to the community members the day to day factors that they go through. On the other hand, the cross-domain mapping in music making is used to intrigue the human appreciative cognitive capacity to envy the efforts of a given activity for instance art. This is applied in making the individual or heroic model of music. These two theories draw a clear difference between the two models of music as well.
Green, Lucy. “Music education, cultural capital, and social group identity. ?The cultural study of music: A critical introduction (2003): 263-273.
This book majorly talks about the effect of music on the social relation among various groups of people. In accordance with this study where the aim was to identify any two models of music making and their impacts on the humans whether effective or non-effective, this book assists as it explains how various genres/models of music making affect the cultural and social group identity and relation as a whole. Unlike other sources referred, this source supports a model that emphasizes on an individual, hero or art. It states that appreciation is a form of motivation where the person appreciated, and motivated is able to work even more and will influence the other people around as well. according to Green and Lucy research, these models of music are more effective in the society as compared to collaboration and community engagement music models. He also supports the collaboration and community engagement model but gives more appreciation to the first model where the efforts of certain activity or heroes are appreciated. This is thus contradictory with the other sources studied.
Dillon, Steve. “Assessing the positive influence of music activities in community development programs.” Music Education Research 8, no. 2 (2006): 267-280.
Dillon and Steve in their research found out that music is a very important and influential tool in mobilizing human beings and to improve someone?s morale when undertaking any given activity. They went further explaining that the kind or model of music is what determines this impact on the individuals. A model of music made to encourage the community members to work together towards any given goal set helps the target audience to gain a positive energy towards team building and working together thus easily achieve a certain community goal promoting development. This is unlike a genre which instead talks about a specific art. It does not give the people any morale whatsoever to work together or to harmonize with each other this the collaboration and community engagement model of music making is more effective to the society more than the individual or heroic models.
This essay is the written version of your research topic, which you established in Week 8 with the submission of your literature review. The essay will make the case for your topic.
The topics are listed above in assessment 2.Students will work on their research paper throughout the semester with annotated bibliography (assignment 2) forming the first part of the roject. Following the feedback from this, students will have a further 4 weeks to work on and complete their essays.
Write a 4000-word essay (35%), incorporating approximately 2000 words from the annotated bibliography (assessment 2), which is to be rewritten as a literature review so that it makes sense in the essay.
Select ONE topic listed in Assessment 2 above. Structure the essay into the following sections: Introduction (this is what I will do), body (which includes a literature review to provide the context),and conclusion (this is what I have done). Students are required to use 12-point font size, double-space their essays and set them out with wide margins (2.54cm,left, right, top and bottom). The Chicago Manual of Style should be adopted for this project.
Announcement by my lecturer about this assessment:
Some of you have asked me about how to convert an annotated bibliography into a literature review for your final essays. I have uploaded a file to the Learning Materials folder, called ‘Literature Review Examples’. This document contains some rough drafts from my own work which I have annotated with comments to explain what I am doing with each example of the literature review. I hope you will find this helpful. The main points to remember when converting an annotated bibliography into a literature review are:
? You are organising your work by topic instead of by author
? Your annotated bibliography was an analysis of each author’s work in isolation; your literature review will be a synthesis of the views taken by multiple authors. This means that instead of thinking about each source on its own, you will compare and contrast the sources’ information on relevant topics, reflect on their disputes and their points of agreement, and reflect on how you might develop your own point of view in relation to what they have done. Imagine you are a judge in a courtroom, where everybody is trying to speak all at once – it is your job to bring order to the situation, to consider all sides of the argument, and to boldly proclaim what is true and good!
? As you are no longer using citations for your paragraph headings, you will need to provide footnote references and a bibliography.
? The literature review is the ‘setup’ for your essay, so make sure you reflect on the literature in such a way that it moves towards the point that you would like to make – you are not writing an encyclopaedia or a book review; everything you say should contribute to your response to the essay question.