Following on from harmonyharmony's comments elsewhere, this is just to start a thread where we can talk about the current state of music in education, student's level of knowledge or skills, or otherwise, the attitudes to teaching and research, and so on. I'll post some thoughts of my own later.

I liked your "something"   Actually this is exactly what Rodger Wright became with his BMus (Hons).

Hi Ian

I think the ethos of what constitutes "musicology" varies widely between Universities.  I have the impression from colleagues who did the "Oxbridge" thing that the prevalance of Chapel Choir music within the life of the colleges led to a preponderance of views opposing other musical trends.  For example, a friend of mine who read Music at Cambridge remember his Professor referring to Schoenberg's music as "utter vomit".  When asked if that opinion included even Verklaerte Nacht, the same gentleman replied "If you are going to serve vomit, at least have the intellectual honesty not to put honey in it."

My own BMus course was rather odd, and the Department seemed to consist of a number of specialists, each burrowing away in his or her own field.  You could sign-up to spend time with any combination of them,  and the shape of what you learnt at the end was determined by whom you'd studied with.  I evaded any study of music after 1790 in this way.   Chance events could materially affect your studies...  I remember that consideration of "the later English lutenists" was terminated by the announcement "well, they are probably quite interesting, but it's getting dark and I've left my bicycle lights at home, so we shall have to omit any further discussion of them".

Actually a variety of composers, performers, R3 supremos etc managed to emerge from this course. Here in Russia this is barely understood.  If you are forced to admit you didn't go to Conservatoire, the scales from their eyes when they say "aha - theoretik!" - a worse condemnation of a musician than a Lifeguard who can't swim.  I'm an average recorder-player, clumsy pianist and bloody awful violist, but being seen to perform on these instrument has been vital in persuading colleagues that I don't sit in an ivory tower penning scathing assassinations of the work of Wolfgang Rihm all day  

I'd say that was a very fair assessment of the situation, Ian.  "Theoretics" are limited to being critics, concert-presenters (all concerts in Russia are announced in the manner of a fairground barker, or Bruce Forsyth in The Generation Game - a practice which drives me quietly nuts), radio-presenters etc.  Almost no composers fall into this grouping.  Being able to get your sleeves up and knock-out an arrangement (quickly, with no fuss, and no emails asking what the ranges of the instruments or their transposing keys are) of something for Wind Octet is utterly foreign to the "theoretic".  Theoretics seem to hover on the periphery of music, and people expect them to say weighty things about "aesthetics".  A lot of them come from the "what Brahms liked for breakfast" school of musicology - and unfortunately feel obliged to hold forth on the topic when presenting concerts.

The best ludicrous comment I've heard was at Organ Recital in Ekaterinburg.  A woman with the appearance and mannerisms of Hattie Jacques emerged clad in what appeared to be a recycled barrage-balloon.  "Johann Sebastian Bach was an extremely genial man" she intoned with ponderous portent, as though this remark would come to us as a shock?  I was sharply reprimanded by an Attendant, and told that "any more tittering and you will be thrown out".  By way of introducing the rest of the items on the program (individually) we learned that Bach's proficiency in music arose from being the father of many children...  that he had taught the pianoforte to Anna Magdalena... and that he had written 24 Preludes and 24 Fugues, making 48 in total.   I have no idea where they get these people, but they are unfortunately numerous.

In all seriousness, however, Russia is still living in the shadow on the era of "culture instead of religion", a soviet-era shibboleth which hasn't yet died. Classical music - especially in the regions - is presented rather like castor oil...  highly unpleasant, but probably beneficial in ways which are not immediately obvious at the time.

Actually I was confronted by one of these ladies at a Festival Press Conference...  I was the last of the panel to present, and had just tried to be quite upbeat about a programme of Weill, Korngold, Spoliansky, and the Russian premiere of Ullmann's THE EMPEROR OF ATLANTIS.  The presiding Artistic Director asked if there were any questions, and a woman stood up, almost quivering with rage.  "Vladislav Mikhailovich, why are you allowing THIS MAN (pointing at me with an extended figure) to present THE MUSIC OF OUR ENEMIES?!"   I did my best to point out that all the composers in my programme were those named as "Enemies Of The Reich" by their own country, and Felix Wittmann, the Cultural Attache at the German Consulate, gave an impromptu speech of spirited support. (Marvellous though this was, it was a bit like getting an endorsement from Attilla The Hun).  Nevertheless, the lady involved arranged for my concert to be picketed by her students, and the audience had to pick their way through a rather angry group outside, chanting that I was a "British Nazi".   Actually we could not possibly have had better publicity (her attack on me was widely reported), and I secretly enjoyed the fact that his music could still engender such fierce - if utterly misplaced - emotions.  I gave out balcony tickets to the protesters inviting them to come in and see for themselves, if they agreed not to disrupt the performance, and some of them did.  They slunk off afterwards, somewhat ashamed of themselves, I believe.   

The root cause of it all was poor tuition...  they didn't know any more about these composers than that they were "German", and for them, that was already enough. I know this seems to have been a bit discursive, but my point is that these were supposed to be "Music History" students

All so very very true, alas, t-p. Also, quality of teaching is hardly a factor any longer in universities - what counts is research points, attained through publications, performances (for composers), recordings, so on. In the UK, for the last 10-20 years there has been a decisive shift towards the type of 'university as business' ethos that you're describing, with students viewed as 'consumers' and so on. The idea that teaching and academic research might be gauged according to other criteria is rapidly going out of the window in the process. And the idea that, as you say, areas in the arts and sciences that are less commercial should be government-supported. That should be a cause for concern for all.

Personally I believe the main opportunity University offers you is the chance to study for 3+ years.  Your lecturers and tutors may be of some help in this, but you shouldn't count on it.  You can - in most forward-thinking Universities - also attend lectures in other departments, and I found these some of the most interesting of all.  (For example, if you are studying medieval music, and you are not going to lectures in the French department on the poetry of the period, you should be asking yourself "why not?".  The same if you're studying Weill or Eisler - there is important stuff in the German and History Departments you should be looking for).

If what you want to know isn't taught where you are, then write to whoever it is at another University who can tell you?  My experience is that true experts are very keen to share their enthusiasms with others, provided that you're not hoping they will write your essays for you.  Make an appointment in advance, and say what it is you hope to discuss - more often than not you will get a "yes".  I got invitations to lectures at other Universities and Colleges in response to my letters, for example.

A modern University is a huge resource - not only of lecturers (who have their opinions), but the complete range of OTHER opinions in books, periodicals, etc.  Although academia is still dismissive about this, there's a lot of information to be found in the printed material released with cds these days (especially with box sets).  And there are broadcasts on TV and Radio.

It's not a school - there are no Inspectors to ensure you've turned-up.  It's your own chance to wallow in the luxury of time and resources that you'll never have again.

Very interesting, Eruanto - I am involved (on the delivery side) in Conservatoire education, but from your description of c20th studies I don't think it is my Conservatoire...

My day-to-day experience is much closer to t-p's observations about universities being run like businesses. The same is certainly true in conservatoires. It affects the delivery of courses, it affects staffing, in the end it affects staff morale - and then the effect rebounds on to the students.

When I was a university student I don't think I quite realised how lucky I was in having a non-modular course; it meant that I studied music from the renaissance to the present day, performing was a compulsory element in years 1 and 2, composition right the way through the course; one specialised in the final year on a big project, either performance, composition or research, whilst keeping one's hand in with everything else. Reiner's comment about not studying anything after 1790 shows up the dangers of the modular approach, not so much for the high-fliers who will pursue their own interests whatever the syllabus, as for what were rather unkindly known in my day as the "basket-weavers"... Going to a Conservatoire for postgraduate study was a real culture shock that twenty years still hasn't soothed; the gap between high-fliers and basket-weavers is much wider now in my present workplace than it ever was, partly because of pressure to fill places with students who can pay high fees but who are not necessarily very able; partly because a superficial technical ability, revealed in entrance auditions, is no indicator of musicianship or - even worse - any INTEREST in music.

The truth is that there are many tuba students (for example) who can get around their instrument but can't count, can't phrase, know nothing about the music of Hindemith or Vaughan Williams other than the  Sonata/ Concerto - and who come out with a fairly respectable degree, do a year's PGCE and then pass on their (lack of) knowledge to the next generation...

Maybe I should post this in the Rant Room!!!

t-p, the number of times I have had that experience...

 

The world is a crazy place...