Op zaterdag 23 maart houdt de Bake society een tweetal paneldiscussies die voor studenten musicologie interessant zullen zijn. Toegang is gratis en er is ook een strip mee te verdienen.
Locatie: Lipsius gebouw zaal 028, Cleveringaplaats 1, Leiden
Aanvang 14:00 uur
(a) voordrachten over het (veranderende) werkveld van de musicoloog – op zoek naar nieuwe initiatieven.
Cultureel ondernemen schept toekomst. Maak je niet afhankelijk van subsidies en instellingen, maar wees creatief en neem initiatief. Cultureel ondernemen is meer dan een begroting maken, of de VAR aanvragen: het is een houding van eigen kansen creëren. Het panel van musicologen zal in korte voordrachten voorbeelden geven van hoe het werkveld er op dit moment voor hen uitziet. Ze bespreken hun aanpak in een periode van (dreigende) culturele kaalslag. Henrice Vonck trekt conclusies en doet aanbevelingen.
Panelleden: Jaenneke den Boer, Suzanne van der Pol, Bernard Kleikamp, Henrice Vonck
(b) panel en discussie over het opkomende fenomeen van de culturele muziekwetenschap.
Panel: Cultural musicology, ethnomusicology, new musicology: The same difference?
Panellists: Barbara Titus (UU), Vincent Meelberg (RUN), Joep Bor (UL), Fred Gales (Bake society), Helen Metselaar (UvA), Wim van der Meer (UvA)
Moderator: Klaus Kuiper (Bake society), Referents: Adri Schreuder (CvA), Henrice Vonck (Codarts)
Up to the 80s of the past century musicology mainly knew two branches: musicology and ethnomusicology [1]. The former studied the European ‘art’ music tradition and its manifestations elsewhere, the latter studied all ‘other’ music. But not only the object of study was different, their methods also diverged. Musicology was primarily historical, perusing scores and exploring archives, ethnomusicology applied anthropological methods to music research. In the 80s turmoil ensued, ethnomusicological methods were applied to European ‘art’ music, and historical and other perspectives were applied to the study of ‘other’ music. The binary opposition of European ‘art’ music and ‘other’ music had eroded and perhaps even became obsolete. Then we saw the rise of an ever growing number of designations; anthropology of music or musical anthropology, new musicology, critical musicology and of course cultural musicology. And then there were further bifurcations that focussed on specific issues: popular music studies, world music studies, jazz studies, postcolonial musicology, feminist musicology…
What we will try to elucidate in this panel is whether these designations refer to distinct disciplines and if so what does distinguish them. We will also raise the question whether the old musicology-ethnomusicology binary is still viable and if ethnomusicology, historical musicology and cultural musicology can coexist meaningfully. But most of all, we will attempt to get a clearer picture of what cultural musicology is or could be.
Members of the panel will be asked to prepare a five minute statement presenting their views on the matter, and in a second round can respond to the statements of others. Finally the discussion will be thrown open to the floor.
[1] there are of course other branches, such as systematic musicology, biomusicology, sinology, music theory, paleomusicology, etc.
(a) voordrachten over het (veranderende) werkveld van de musicoloog – op zoek naar nieuwe initiatieven.
Cultureel ondernemen schept toekomst. Maak je niet afhankelijk van subsidies en instellingen, maar wees creatief en neem initiatief. Cultureel ondernemen is meer dan een begroting maken, of de VAR aanvragen: het is een houding van eigen kansen creëren. Het panel van musicologen zal in korte voordrachten voorbeelden geven van hoe het werkveld er op dit moment voor hen uitziet. Ze bespreken hun aanpak in een periode van (dreigende) culturele kaalslag. Henrice Vonck trekt conclusies en doet aanbevelingen.
Panelleden: Jaenneke den Boer, Suzanne van der Pol, Bernard Kleikamp, Henrice Vonck
(b) panel en discussie over het opkomende fenomeen van de culturele muziekwetenschap.
Panel: Cultural musicology, ethnomusicology, new musicology: The same difference?
Panellists: Barbara Titus (UU), Vincent Meelberg (RUN), Joep Bor (UL), Fred Gales (Bake society), Helen Metselaar (UvA), Wim van der Meer (UvA)
Moderator: Klaus Kuiper (Bake society), Referents: Adri Schreuder (CvA), Henrice Vonck (Codarts)
Up to the 80s of the past century musicology mainly knew two branches: musicology and ethnomusicology [1]. The former studied the European ‘art’ music tradition and its manifestations elsewhere, the latter studied all ‘other’ music. But not only the object of study was different, their methods also diverged. Musicology was primarily historical, perusing scores and exploring archives, ethnomusicology applied anthropological methods to music research. In the 80s turmoil ensued, ethnomusicological methods were applied to European ‘art’ music, and historical and other perspectives were applied to the study of ‘other’ music. The binary opposition of European ‘art’ music and ‘other’ music had eroded and perhaps even became obsolete. Then we saw the rise of an ever growing number of designations; anthropology of music or musical anthropology, new musicology, critical musicology and of course cultural musicology. And then there were further bifurcations that focussed on specific issues: popular music studies, world music studies, jazz studies, postcolonial musicology, feminist musicology…
What we will try to elucidate in this panel is whether these designations refer to distinct disciplines and if so what does distinguish them. We will also raise the question whether the old musicology-ethnomusicology binary is still viable and if ethnomusicology, historical musicology and cultural musicology can coexist meaningfully. But most of all, we will attempt to get a clearer picture of what cultural musicology is or could be.
Members of the panel will be asked to prepare a five minute statement presenting their views on the matter, and in a second round can respond to the statements of others. Finally the discussion will be thrown open to the floor.
[1] there are of course other branches, such as systematic musicology, biomusicology, sinology, music theory, paleomusicology, etc.