Feminism and Music. A Discourse on the Feminine Nature in the “New Musicology”
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The present article researches one of the crucial issues of the so-called “new-musicology,” namely, perceptions on
the feminine nature, which defines both the philosophy of music and the overall political aspirations of feminist
musicologists. The article demonstrates how the discourse of a woman is presented and constructed in the works of
feminists: as a rule, through rejection of the masculine nature and opposition to it (which is subjected to criticism
in the article). Also shown are the more general views of the feminists on the nature of the feminine and the
masculine, disclosed on the levels of the conception and idea, as well as on the level of musical form and the
musical text. The researchers mentioned in the article – representatives of feminism in music – include such figures
as Susan MacClary, Mark Minough, Philip Brett and numerous others. Among the various critical utterances about
the views of the feminists, the article demonstrates the critique of this tendency by Peter van den Toorn, who
defends the positions intrinsic to the traditional views on musical aesthetics, in particular, the autonomous position
of music, capable of being perceived “independently,” “by breaking through directly to the heart.” Concurring with
the opinions of van den Toorn, the author of the article asserts his perceptions of the current polemics regarding the
questions of feminism and music, calling upon Russian researchers to involve themselves in this polemics.
Keywords: new musicology, feminism and music, MacClary, Peter van den Toorn.
Article Details
Copyright
The rights on the results of intellectual activity and equated means of individualization are protected in accordance with Part IV of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. The authorship, author's name, executor’s name, inviolability of the work and result of execution are protected by the rules of Part IV of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation of the author or executor, regardless of providing legal protection of such results of intellectual activity at the time of their forming.
Copyright laws regulate the civil legal relations for using works of science, literature and art. Such relationships are formed as the result of the author’s writing his or her texts. In this case the author can rightfully claim copyright of the work.
The author has certain rights to reuse the work (see: “Ethical Aspects in Terms of Multifold Publications).
Licenses
All copyrights on the articles belong to their authors. The author transfers the rights on using the article the publisher.
PDF versions of scholarly articles of the journal PMN are published by using the license Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives cc by-nc-nd, allowing loading and distributing works on the assumption of indicating the authorship. The works may not be changed in any way or used for commercial interests.
Criteria for Authorship, Co-authorship
The term “author” refers to all persons (co-authors) who have made a substantial contribution to conducting the research and creation of the manuscript and responsible for its content. The person (author) who has submitted the manuscript to the editorial board shall bear responsibility for the complete list of the group of authors and the changes made to the manuscript in accordance with the results of the peer reviewing and editing.
1. Authorship is based on the following criteria:
1) The author made a substantial contribution to the research activity and development of concept, collected the data, made analysis and interpretation of the data.
2) The author carried out the writing of the text of draft articles and edited it attentively and substantially.
3) The author approved the final version of the article prior to its submission.
4) The author bears responsibility for the integrity of all parts of the manuscript.
2. The authors shall guarantee that the submitted manuscript is the original work.
3. Scholarly reviews for some issue or other should be objective, present material in a wide range and at the same time take into account the views of the author of the review.
4. The authorship of scholarly publications is obligated to reflect accurately the contribution of individuals to the research activity, with specific information about the authors.
5. The authors may not mislead the readers by publishing acknowledgements of gratitude to people who were not actually involved in writing the work. Other persons who made contribution to the work, but are nevertheless not the authors, may be listed in the rubric of “Acknowledgements,” with indications of the type and extent of their activities.
6. Authors are obligated to provide a description of their contribution to the publication.
7. The order of authorship must be a joint resolution of co-authors. The authors should be ready to explain the order of their enumeration and listing.
8. The authors shall be entirely responsible for the correct definition of authorship acting in accordance with the rules adopted in their institution.
9. Investigators must ensure that only those persons who meet the criteria for authorship (that made a significant contribution to the work), shall be considered the authors, and the researchers who do not merit authorship will be excluded from the list of authors.
References
2. Brett P. Round Table VIII: Cultural Politics (16th Congress of the IMS). Acta Musicologica. 1997. Volume 69, Fasc. 1, Jan. – Jun., pp. 45–53.
3. Castelvecchi Stefano (Statement). Musicology and Sister Disciplines. Past, present, Future: Proceedings of the 16th International Congress of the International Musicological Society. London, 1997. Ed. by David Greer. Oxford University Press, 2000, pp. 185–190.
4. McClary S. Feminine Endings. Music, Gender and Sexuality. Minneapolis: Univ. of California, Berkeley, 1991. 220 p.
5. McClary S. Getting Down Off the Beanstalk. Minnesota Composers Forum Newsletter. January 1987, pp. 4–8.
6. Minow M. Making All the Difference: Inclusion, Exclusion, and American Law. Ithaka: Cornell University Press, 1990. 424 p.
7. Musicology and Difference. Gender and Sexuality in Music Scholarship. Ed. by Ruth Solie. University California Press: London. 1993. 355 p.
8. Reitsma K. A New Approach: The Feminist Musicology Studies of Susan McClary and Marcia J. Citron. Musical Offerings. 2014. Volume 5, No. 11, pp. 37–63.
9. Showalter E. “Critical Cross-Dressing: Male Feminists and the Woman of the Year”. Men in Feminism. Ed. by Alice Jardine and Paul Smith. New York, Methuen, 1987, pp. 116–132.
10. Solie R. What Do Feminists Want? A Reply to Pieter van den Toorn. The Journal of Musicology. 1991. Volume 9, No. 4, Autumn, pp. 399–410.
11. Van den Toorn P. Music, Politics, and the Academy. University of California Press: London, 1995. 238 p.
12. Wood J. Gendered Lives: Communication, Gender, and Culture. Ninth ed. Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing, 2011. 368 p.