Music, Ideas and Monteverdi

Well, I'm about to start teaching the entire music first year undergrad cohort in my third of a compulsory unit that is my department's answer to the survey course. We don't do a historical survey, and I'm very pleased about that. But I need to review my portion of the unit and decide what to keep, what to replace, and what the hell I'm gonna say tomorrow. And I still don't know if the bookshop has the scores.

My main problem, actually, is why did I choose Monteverdi?

This really bugs me, because I didn't think I was really in to doing the canon thing, and yet somehow that's exactly what I've managed to do.

Next year, I'm not 'doing' Monteverdi. Next year, I'm gonna use music by Maddalena CasulanaChiara Margarita Cozzolani. That's a cert.

But this year, I'm stuck with Monteverdi.

I want to introduce the students to studying early music, but most importantly to the idea that we define early music--that it's not about unearthing the right or wrong way to do something, but it's about contemporary imagination and possibilities. That it's not all clear cut.

I wondered about starting by having the students role play going to a concert, or rather, coming out of a concert and talking about what they heard. Maybe compare what they might say then with what they might say after coming out of a trad gig, or out of a dance club? I'm interested in the way we talk about 'classical' music, specifically things like 'did you like the Beethoven?' That definite article, the privileging of the composer. These are all issues I want to raise tomorrow.

Need to think about this some more, though.

Going to do dishes and think.