Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Introduction

Introduction 52:1, Spring 2008 DOI 10.1215/00222909-2009-007 © 2009 by Yale University understand the reason for these statistics and how to reverse the trend,1 but I suspect that one contributing factor might be that many women—though certainly not all—working in the broad field of music theory place themselves outside the mainstream, either by repertory (e.g., early music, popular music, postmodern music) or by approach (engaging in, e.g., interdisciplinary work or feminist theory), which means that they may be publishing elsewhere. Certainly this is true for scholars working on music and theory before 1600; often these specialists publish in early music journals or journals of musicology that seem more receptive to topics that precede the onset of tonality. Indeed, three of the contributors to this volume, despite their engagement with music treatises and their frequent use of sophisticated musical analysis—Aubrey, Maloy, and Newes—have never published in music theory journals, while Judd, Fuller, and I publish equally in music theory and musicology journals. Unlike many music theorists who work in later repertories, these scholars often move easily between work that leans more toward historical concerns and that which leans toward the theoretical, frequently teaching across these (North American) disciplinary boundaries, as well. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Music Theory Duke University Press

Introduction

Bain, Jennifer
Journal of Music Theory , Volume 52 (1) – Mar 1, 2008
Download PDF
7 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/duke-university-press/introduction-vaYGwXQJ07

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Duke University Press
Copyright
Copyright 2008 by Yale University
ISSN
0022-2909
eISSN
1941-7497
DOI
10.1215/00222909-2009-007
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

52:1, Spring 2008 DOI 10.1215/00222909-2009-007 © 2009 by Yale University understand the reason for these statistics and how to reverse the trend,1 but I suspect that one contributing factor might be that many women—though certainly not all—working in the broad field of music theory place themselves outside the mainstream, either by repertory (e.g., early music, popular music, postmodern music) or by approach (engaging in, e.g., interdisciplinary work or feminist theory), which means that they may be publishing elsewhere. Certainly this is true for scholars working on music and theory before 1600; often these specialists publish in early music journals or journals of musicology that seem more receptive to topics that precede the onset of tonality. Indeed, three of the contributors to this volume, despite their engagement with music treatises and their frequent use of sophisticated musical analysis—Aubrey, Maloy, and Newes—have never published in music theory journals, while Judd, Fuller, and I publish equally in music theory and musicology journals. Unlike many music theorists who work in later repertories, these scholars often move easily between work that leans more toward historical concerns and that which leans toward the theoretical, frequently teaching across these (North American) disciplinary boundaries, as well.

Journal

Journal of Music Theory – Duke University Press

Published: Mar 1, 2008

There are no references for this article.