Week 1

Questions:
 * "or shall we rather suppose that music tends to be productive of virtue, having a power, as the gymnastic exercises have to form the body in a certain way, to influence the manners so as to accustom its professors to rejoice rightly? or shall we say, that it is of any service in the conduct of life, and an assistant to prudence? " (Aristotle)
 * Aristotle seems to assign particular meaning to music (huge surprize): beauty (poetica?) seem attributed to just enjoying music while science seem attributed to learning (techne?) music. He goes on to assignment music as an assistant to life or can be used for "amusement" (trans to me = entertainment) or to "inspire joy". What does that mean for the rhetoric of music according to Aristotle? And where is the creation of music? I feel like Aristotle is a non-musician theorizing about music... he does recognize the pathos of music ("But anger and mildness, courage and modesty, and their contraries, as well as all other dispositions of the mind, are most naturally imitated by music and poetry; which is plain by experience, for when we hear these our very soul is altered" (Aristotle)), but only in a limited fashion-in its ability to imitate, duplicate, or simulate (oh, Baudrillard?) emotion or some internal state or movement (LeCoat, 161). Is the rhetoric of music onl about an emotional appeal (pathos)?
 * Aristotle is steeped in a transmission model of education...Friere is more my style. We don't instruct...we create learning spaces and contexts for people to engage in. How are we "instructed in art"?
 * It is interesting how Aristotle judges instruments as having more or less passion...and therefore age specific...while I do agree that age specific learning is important to consider, I am highly concerned about the generalities....universialities...ah, crap. I see a great place for discussion.

"Readings": I feel like I may find both Questions and supplimentary readings. What a great space for both?
 * Ahhhh, Aristotle..really? "Melody is divided by some philosophers, whose notions we approve of, into moral, practical, and that which fills the mind with enthusiasm"...you may make music, but only within the moral parameters that are positive. I never saw Aristotle as a purist, but I suppose that makes sense. I also think that Cicero's discussion of arrangement becomes important here (a regular order-what is a melody?).
 * Cicero speaks of "wisdom and eloquence" and a "fluency of language"...how does this apply to a rhetoric of music? I find myself compelled by the idea that we must study wisdom with eloquence... philosophy? with technique/techne. I am not sold always that studying philosophy or rhetoric is enough. We must embody it...not just read about it. We must play in ethical ways.
 * Both Aristotle and Cicero write of rhetoric for the good of society. How do we determine if specific music is a "good" rhetoric (epideictic)?
 * LeCoat talks about a composers job according to Peacham is addressing a "listener not directly, but mediately" (158). That culturally defined "tonal patterns" allowed for music to become "intelligeable" and communication to take place (158). What does this mean?
 * What is "poetic eloquence" (Le Coat, 161)? I have a thought...music (re)mediates (Bolter and Grusin) movement...
 * http://web.ics.purdue.edu/~rjohnso/ancientirish.pdf
 * After reading Artistole, I find myself wanting to have us read Huizinga's definition of play
 * Peachham from LaCoat piece: The Complaet Gentleman (1962)? But the cite is from 1620s?
 * Cicero...we need to read more....
 * "Fuel" Ani DiFranco: http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/anidifranco/fuel.html; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55AZRDkMZJs