Assignment #1 - "Introduction"

Oh dear...I need to write a full page summary of this? I'm not sure I understood quite enough to flesh it out much beyond a paragraph, but we'll see! Now that my brain has been turned into oatmeal, I'm certainly still up for trying.

In the introduction - aptly titled: "Introduction," - Dr. Ferrara outlines the purpose of his book Philosophy and the Analysis of Music and makes a case both for the development of his "eclectic analysis" and for the progression of its very explanation within the book itself.

It is Dr. Ferrara's opinion that none of the common modern methods used to analyze music do an adequate job of it on their own. All of these methods, though they have varying philosophical traditions behind them, can be broken down into three main categories: those methodologies that analyze form, those that analyze historical context and reference, and those that focus on the sound of the music itself. Instead, Ferrara seeks to "bridge the gap" between these three methods of analysis, and contends that in order to achieve a better picture of a piece of music one should come at it through not one, but all three of these ways, layering them on and playing them off each other to bring to life a more complete analysis - the "eclectic" analysis.

To finish the introduction Ferrara defends his style of writing, preemptively silencing those that might accuse him of being too repetitive. He speaks of philosophical education as concentric circles ever rotating tighter and tighter around a fixed point - in this same way when Dr. Ferrara brings up points throughout the books, points that have already been made, it is not to be redundant but rather to re-illuminate, reexamine, and generally give greater depth to ideas already presented. These levels of deeper understanding cannot be reached until prior foundations have been laid!

For my own half page reflection, I'll say this: I pulled out the book expecting a rather short reading, and was amazed at how long it took to get through! This was a very dense reading. Very dense, indeed. Several sentences required second and even third readings in order to allow the sentence to organize itself in my head. Whole paragraphs went by unnoticed, until I finally had to admit to myself that I didn't really get that bit and had better go back and re-read it. In the philosophy classes I have taken in the past, I have never had much of a problem with the "denser" materials and authors, so I was surprised when these few pages presented so much of a challenge! I think I was expecting something entirely different from this book. After experiencing Dr. Ferrara's (fabulous) lectures, I think I was expecting something intellectual but conversational, as opposed to intellectual and obviously spilling from the mind of an attorney. Nevertheless, I think I'm going to enjoy this book and this class, and whether or not all of the readings are assigned I have a feeling I'm going to end up reading all of them ;)