Wednesday, September 14, 2005
professing
The dialogue David Toub and I had below headed off in a number of valuable directions, but his argument is based on one assertion that I find mistaken. David argues that teachers should deal in facts, like the names of the brachial nerves, or e=mc2. But teachers are not simply dispensers of information – if that were true, they’d all be useless, because we can get all the information we need from textbooks.
At least as far back as Socrates, the job of the teacher has been to share wisdom.
Now one could argue that many composition teachers are not very good at sharing wisdom, and I would have to agree. But it makes no sense to say that the entire pursuit of composition teaching is a waste of time. By that logic, the fact that most musicians can’t play Feldman’s second quartet would mean either that musicians or Feldman’s second quartet are a waste of time, which is preposterous.
What I would love to hear David say is “Great music can be written by people who don’t have composition degrees,” an assertion I would back wholeheartedly, and listen respectfully as he expounded on the theme, because he has insights into the challenges and rewards that I can’t possibly match.
So here’s a question for everyone: Can great music be written by people who don’t study composition? Do you have a favorite composer who received no formal training?
posted by Lawrence Dillon
9:35 PM
|
