 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: clarinet713
Date: 2002-01-05 07:29
what does it take to become a mus history prof? Obviously a lot of hard work But I would have to have a doctorate to teach in a college-would that be a lot of interference with me trying to get an orchestra job? (PLEASE don't give me the schpeal about how there are no orchestra positions out there, I know, I've read all the posts, I'm pretty stubborn when it comes to this, thank you thank you)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Micaela
Date: 2002-01-05 13:51
If you want to teach at a four year college (and most community colleges don't have music history professors) as a non-adjunct (adjuncts are temporary, usually part-time teachers rehired every semester as needed and paid about half of what full time professors get) you need a Ph.D. to even be considered for a job. And if you're going to teach music history, you'll need a Ph.D. in music history. A doctorate is two to three years of full-time classes and however long it takes for you to write your dissertation.
I suppose you COULD look for an orchestral job at the same time, but I think that most people who are working on their performance full-time would probably have an advantage over you. Getting a Ph.D. is a full-time job since you also would probably have to be teaching undergraduate classes or work as a teacher's assistant at the same time, unless you have enough money to pay for it all by yourself (and then try paying off your student loans on an orchestral salary!).
As it happens, being a music history professor is my career goal also. I love research and history, I'm not really considering a job with a professional orchestra- maybe a semi-professional group or a really good community orchestra. If you're looking at colleges in the Northeast US, I've been accumulating information on most colleges in the New York-Boston-Philadelphia area that have good music history programs.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2002-01-05 16:35
Music history has always been my favorite area of study. After my undergrad degree in performance, I concentrated on music history for my MA and further graduate credits.
Knowing and discovering the whys and wherefores of the origins of repertoire, along with proper research techniques (uh oh, here we go again) has brought the entire scope of music literature into clearer perspective.
I never pursued college instruction for many reasons (ridiculous pressure to publish worthless article on rehashed subjects, salary tied to college tuition costs, stability of public school teaching, etc...) but rather used many of the insights gleaned about the literature and composers in my "Intro to Music" or "Music Appreciation" classes in the high school. Students always found the little details not in the textbooks to be fascinating.
I would strongly urge taking as many different music history classes as you can find. Do not overlook the "beginnings" of music literature (1100-1400), find an area of expertise, and "jump in and get wet".
It always astounds me as to the number of people who perform with not a clue about the music they are playing. One does not have to become an expert, but some rudimentary knowledge is very easy (and rewarding) to know...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Lisa Chien
Date: 2002-01-07 19:39
I had once considered a career as a music professor. Even though my career has changed considerably I am in daily contact with all my professors. I am always asking them about their professions and if they're still happy.
One of my former professors says he loves teaching for three reasons: June, July and August. He works three days a week for about 7 hours per day. He loves his career. And he especially loves when he gets the rare student with both the interest and talent in music.
However there are times when he cannot stand teaching. He constantly tells me about the lack of interest among the vast majority of his students who take his Intro to Music class to fulfill a requirement. These students have absolutely no clue about European music before 1960. On one of his tests he asked the following, "give the name and number of instruments in a string quartet." He showed me some of the responses: "3 - bass, drums and lead guitar." of 3 - soprano, tenor and bass. These students drive him crazy.
One thing I have noticed about every music history professor that I have studied with is that they all are keyboardists by training. I have never encountered a music history professor who was a clarinetist by training.
Since much music theory is demonstrated or directly referenced from the keyboard extreme proficiency on the keyboard is essential. Also you will need a PhD. Given the extreme competition for these seldom vacated positions, a PhD is one of the very least requirements one has to have.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2002-01-07 20:34
Lisa ...One of my favorite music history "blunders" by a Freshman was once shown to me (in graduate school) by my favorite music history professor.
The question on an Intro to Music exam was: "Name a famous Requiem by a French composer"
The student's answer: "The 4-H Requiem"
The professor made a copy of the exam answer, as he knew no one would ever believe him...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: diz
Date: 2002-01-08 22:58
GBK - "g'day mate"
Tell me - I "used" a clarinetist once (I was conducting an operetta) and he played with a very "chirpy and clipped" approach ... kind of reminded me of a "dixie" style.
When I asked him why he played this way (I didn't mind it at all, by the way) he said that it was closer to the "style" that the pit clarinetists would have used at the time (1890s). I thought you might give me some insight.
thanks
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
