My posts from most of the last week didn't post for some reason. I'm trying to retype up what I remember from before.
Nettl Chap. 21- Recorded, Printed, Written, Oral: Traditions
This chapter was about the differences in "oral" vs "aural" music. Oral learning, taught by telling, is completely different than aural learning, which is by listening. I had never thought of how much different are. In playing music, it is easy to tell someone how to play it but, at least for me, it is much easier to learn by listening to it and then playing.
This chapter was explaining how while they are different, aural is a much more precise description of how music was learnt. Oral music is often doubted in how accurate it is. Historians and musicologist worry that over time, the music has changed just like some of the oral history has changed.
To prevent this from happening, precise learning has to be used. All other version of the piece are considered variants, identities, imitations, and separate units.
Oral music was doubted and was not considered music for a long time but is now accepted but people still wonder if it is accurate to the past.
I thought the subject that we broached in seminar about how these two are not mutually exclusive of each other in learning, was interesting, as well as the pros and cons to each. In my experience, my private teachers have frowned upon me learning music by listening to recordings and prefer me to work through the score on my own, perhaps because, like you, I may have found learning by listening easier, or, perhaps, for more along the lines of accuracy than challenge. It struck me as odd considering we pride written music as truer to the intent of the composer, yet by only referencing the score, I actually have more freedom of interpretation than I would have had from listening to the lineage (assuming the performer listened to previous recordings as well) of performances dating back to as close a time as possible to the composer's.
ReplyDeleteComing from an both traditions of learning music orally and aurally, I find that there is often more accuracy and efficiency in aural learning, if I were to compare the two. We as musicians, are producers of music and sound, and thus it is natural for us to have a higher propensity towards reproducing sounds, timbres, and articulations that we have heard as we have something to latch on to rather than trying to describe a sound or a way of playing in the oral method. However, I think that an even truer degree of accuracy can only be achieved through the combination of oral, aural, AND visual learning techniques.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to oral traditions of music, I find that if the tradition persists, it will retain some accuracy however, it will not remain the same as it once began, as there are always discrepancies and differences between every person. But perhaps this is what makes music so unique and individual, that even though there are documentations, verbal recitations, literatures (both verbal and written), and scores of music there is always room for interpretation and expression.
I don't remember for sure but I thought this chapter was more a comparison of Oral/Aural traditions versus Notated/Literate traditions.
ReplyDeleteI come from a Notated/Literate Western Art Music tradition and I have to admit that for quite a long time I believed that this was for some odd reason far superior & more 'sophisticated.' This belief came from the environment in which I was raised, and largely because the people who were my peers & friends growing up were also raised in the same tradition with the same beliefs.
It was mostly through the middle of high school & into college that I began to realize that my ideas on what is 'better' or 'sophisticated' was extremely skewed. I began to meet brilliant musicians & artists who had NO background whatsoever in written traditions & yet they were producing music that I could never even dream of making. They seemed generally less inhibited, more open to new things, and often more in love with the work they did. There seemed to be a liberation in Oral/Aural traditions while in written traditions we may always be at least somewhat bound by notated scores. There are pros & cons to both, but in my personal opinion, a happy middle would be ideal. If I could I wish I could go back & hone my aural/oral skills. I would not give up my own training because I find it valuable as well, but if only I knew...a;lsdkjaslj