I read all of these in order, but I wish I would have read the Weir first. I found myself really suffering through the Wagstaff in the same way I've always found myself suffering through most academic articles. After reading through the Wagstaff, I summarized it as "This is what a periodical is, here are a bunch of them." But, it shouldn't be read the same way as a narrative, like Weir says. I feel Wagstaff is saying is that there is a scholarly periodical for pretty much everything in music.
I found the Weir tremendously valuable. I've had to read through scholarly articles before and always found myself drained mentally after the fifth time through and still not really knowing what I've read. I suppose I've always thought the author put those words together in that order to be read that way. It should be read the way the author wrote it, but in many cases (probably most actually) of scholarly writing, it just doesn't work. One gets far too caught up in the erudite and specific vocabulary and tough to penetrate tone of the article to actually retain any of the information. This sort of writing isn't intended for any average person, rather, a very specific type of person. Knowing that is the first step towards extracting the information one needs from the article. I also think the Weir article wonderfully illustrated the importance of the title. As I read some of my colleagues' blog posts I noticed their attention was grabbed by the inclusion of Harry Potter in the title (myself included). All I had to see was Harry Potter and I was drawn in, even when that title explicitly stated that it wasn't Harry Potter. Perhaps I'm no Ravenclaw after all :'(
I'm going to assume the fourth article was given as an exercise to employ the strategies laid out in the previous two, or at least I hope so, because I didn't read most of it. Instead, I read the introduction and conclusion and summarized it as "Do open access articles have greater research impact? Yes." But there are a lot of problems with that, as one finds in the last two articles. Open access is a wonderful idea, assuming that everybody is a good person, but they aren't. I believe this comic sums up predatory publishing (as well as many other things on the internet) very well. The internet is wonderful in that it allows so much information to be available to millions of people, but it isn't so wonderful at displaying what information is valuable and what isn't. This really opens the door for all kinds of unethical behavior and mistrust among academics. However, like so many other issues with the internet, it is very difficult to solve. It breeds more and more mistrust and makes it even harder to find reputable information and is a terrible shame.
Sunday, September 18, 2016
Sunday, September 11, 2016
Blog 2: "...that every word tell."
"Read," spoke the Archangel Gabriel. "Read ACTIVELY!" wrote Ashley Leyba. Now, Gabriel was a divine messenger so his one word demand certainly carries some weight, but I've always liked specifics.
Reading actively is certainly a learned skill. Marking the reading up, much like we would do with a score, would do wonders for drawing conclusions and making one's research that much more efficient and important. "Do not be a passive consumer of texts," she says. It is certainly important to obtain and retain information, but it is even better to analyze, question, and contemplate on what one has found.
I rather enjoyed the readings of Angell and White. Several things really resonated with me. "It isn't good enough," "I wish it were better." Nothing ever is, is it? There is always more to be done, more improvements to be made. We in the field of music are always working toward the next level. We try and try to improve and we do, but we are never finished. I am reminded of a quote from Pablo Casals: upon someone asking why he still practiced when he was 90 years old, he replied "Because I think I am making progress."
I found the most important piece of information in the foreword by E.B. White was the quoted passage of his professor William Strunk which ended with the phrase "...but that every word tell." This, in a way, recalls the readings we looked at for our last blog assignment, specifically the Barzun, whose central point was that one remains clear in one's writing. "Omit needless words!" said Strunk. The fact that he gives such special attention to the omission of such needless words that muddle the minds of those reading the sentences illustrates the fact that it is an issue with which all prospective researchers and writers struggle. Without this necessary step, many writings would serve to confuse and exhaust the reader, losing them in the swamp of commas and fluff that serve no purpose other than to fill a page, which is superbly unpleasant to the reader (which I hope I've properly illustrated here). I sometimes struggle with using too many words and sounding like academics more concerned with displaying their armory of big words rather than getting my point across.
The fourth reading by Provost wonderfully illustrates the importance of variance in writing; One must keep the reader engaged. If they are not, they will not read it and without a reader, the writing has little purpose.
Reading actively is certainly a learned skill. Marking the reading up, much like we would do with a score, would do wonders for drawing conclusions and making one's research that much more efficient and important. "Do not be a passive consumer of texts," she says. It is certainly important to obtain and retain information, but it is even better to analyze, question, and contemplate on what one has found.
I rather enjoyed the readings of Angell and White. Several things really resonated with me. "It isn't good enough," "I wish it were better." Nothing ever is, is it? There is always more to be done, more improvements to be made. We in the field of music are always working toward the next level. We try and try to improve and we do, but we are never finished. I am reminded of a quote from Pablo Casals: upon someone asking why he still practiced when he was 90 years old, he replied "Because I think I am making progress."
I found the most important piece of information in the foreword by E.B. White was the quoted passage of his professor William Strunk which ended with the phrase "...but that every word tell." This, in a way, recalls the readings we looked at for our last blog assignment, specifically the Barzun, whose central point was that one remains clear in one's writing. "Omit needless words!" said Strunk. The fact that he gives such special attention to the omission of such needless words that muddle the minds of those reading the sentences illustrates the fact that it is an issue with which all prospective researchers and writers struggle. Without this necessary step, many writings would serve to confuse and exhaust the reader, losing them in the swamp of commas and fluff that serve no purpose other than to fill a page, which is superbly unpleasant to the reader (which I hope I've properly illustrated here). I sometimes struggle with using too many words and sounding like academics more concerned with displaying their armory of big words rather than getting my point across.
The fourth reading by Provost wonderfully illustrates the importance of variance in writing; One must keep the reader engaged. If they are not, they will not read it and without a reader, the writing has little purpose.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)