A Discourse on the Nature of Women in Musicology
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The article discusses the phenomenon of gender musicology (a trend of the so-called new musicology), viewed
through the lenses of a foreigner, of a representative of a different national school of musicology (namely, Russian).
The article questions the basic fundamental concepts of feminism in musicology – particularly the black-and-white
vision of almost everything, from barlines to musical genres and forms – where we always forced to recognize
masculine and feminine features. The focal point of the essay is the criticism viewpoints of Susan McClary, who is
one of the founders of this discipline. Another case is constituted by the discussion of one of the most well-known
and picturesque examples of feminist critique: Bizet’s opera Carmen, which is the showcase for numerous ideas
of musical feminists – namely, the juxtaposition between the body-oriented outlook of Carmen and spiritual and
bourgeois outlooks, the music- and gender-related mechanism of creating the musical and conceptual ‘desire’ to kill
Carmen, and so on. Additionally, of positions critical gender musicology are discussed – epitomized by Peter van
den Toorn’s critique of musical feminists, and his subsequent counteraction against their position. Finally, the essay
questions the essential role and value of feminism, part of whi ch is formed by gender musicology.
Keywords: masculinity and femininity in music, Gender Musicology, Anglo-American musicologist.
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. Statement by Stefano Castelvecchi. 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. 681 p.
3. Higgins, Paula. Women in Music, Feminist Criticism, and Guerrilla Musicology: Reflections on Recent Polemics. Nineteenth-Century Music, 17 (1993), pp. 174–192.
4. McClary, Susan. Feminine Endings. Music, Gender and Sexuality. Minneapolis, 1991, 220 p.
5. McClary, Susan. ‘Getting Down Off the Beanstalk’. Minnesota Composers Forum Newsletter (January 1987), pp. 4–7.
6. Minow, Martha. Making All the Difference: Inclusion, Exclusion, and American Law. Ithaca, 1990, 424 p.
7. Schiff, David. The Bounds of Music: The Strange New Direction of Musical Criticism. The New Republic, 3 February 1992, pp. 32–37.
8. Showalter, Elaine. Critical Cross-Dressing: Male Feminists and the Women of the Year. Men in Feminism. Ed. by Alice Jardine and Paul Smith. New York, 1987, pp. 116–132.
9. Musicology and Difference. Gender and Sexuality in Music Scholarship. Ed. by Ruth Solie. University California Press, London. 1993, 353 p.
10. Solie, Ruth. What Do Feminists Want? A Reply to Pieter van den Toorn. The Journal of Musicology, Vol. 9, No. 4 (Autumn, 1991), pp. 399–410.
11. Van den Toorn, Peter. Music, Politics, and the Academy. University of California Press, London, 1995. 229 p.