I think about teaching the Musicology objective[i]a lot… and just when I think I’ve worked out the best way forward, I hit a stumbling block. You may have seen some evidence of this thinking (and the stumbling!) through previous posts (here, and here). I do not see them as failed attempts, but more so the continual development of my thinking and knowing of teaching music analysis. The stumbling is often preceded by a student not understanding the processes underpinning Musicology (especially in the analysis and evaluation criteria), and my inability to clarify for them the way forward…

Recently, my Year 12s and I were unpacking the Lacrimosa from Mozart’s Requiem in D Minor (K.626) in terms of what makes the piece ‘sad’. This question seems simplistic, but it is couched in the context of the students selecting a piece (from a selection) that may warrant the title of ‘the saddest song ever written’ (it is important to note that this is for musical, not text-based or historical reasons).[ii]I’ve been here before with other tasks, but as I was asking the opening question ‘what makes this song sad’, I was presented with wonderfully descriptive statements that were essentially based on the associative power of the music – the ‘what’ music conjures – rather than the analytical descriptions I was seeking.

The students spoke with lucid description of the associations, imagery and meanings of the work. They naturally started with the whole – the whole work, the complete meanings, the imagery conjured. They went straight there, where music communicates and reveals its meaning to us. Usually, I start the students with broad themes that house an evaluative criteria drawn from the question/problem posed; analytical findings are then help up against these criteria. I don’t see this as a bad place to start, but it can place the ‘cart before the horse’. It might sound like the same thing, but there is a subtle difference; and a major difference (based on the lesson experienced) in purposeful analysis and meaning-making for the students. Music communicates something of meaning. This is a feature of the incoming 2019 syllabus[iii], and the students led me there, naturally. When we listen to music, it provides strong associations; it tells us how to feel. So, we started there.

With the Lacrimosa, the comments containing rich, descriptive terms like ‘pathetic’, ‘panic’, ‘breathing’, ‘fragility’, ‘purity’… were all offered. On repeated listenings, we listened for these ‘associations’ – the ‘what’ – in the work. These then became things we needed to find evidence for – we needed to assemble the parts that support what we put forward as out associations. This is where the analysis and evaluation entered – the ‘how’ is this achieved. Again, this process may not seem overly different from the one discussed above or in previous posts, but the comfort with which the simple question, ‘what does this piece ‘say’ to you?’ provoked all the difference.

To step back a little, the question posed to the students became a ‘filter’ for their associations. The associations were then matched to evidence – analytical parts and detail were sought to support these associations. Positioning the ‘what’ first made the ‘how’ easier – it also afforded greater understandings of the linkage and interrelationships between music elements. They don’t often work in isolation, but we tend to analyse them that way. In terms of the Lacrimosa, the student who offered up ‘fragility’ referred to analytical details that included the use of pitch in the melody (moving from tonic down to leading note, for one example of a few given), in conjunction with the timbre of the violin, and the expressive devices employed across the phrase… Weaknesses in students writing isn’t often the ways in which music communicates meaning, but rather the supportive analysis that props up the evaluation and justification. This (though not their complete idea – my memory fails me a little!) was wonderfully more connected and closer to the main point of the question – the meaning of the work.

I madly scribbled down the evolving lesson and discussion as we progressed, then tried to capture the process on a worksheet/template for future lessons…! Musicology – Associations to Themes to access this. Basically, we move from associations, to analysis, to themes – the two intermediary stages see us filter our thinking and findings/evidence.

 

Associations

Consider the narrative of the work and its associative power:

What does it ‘say’ to you?

What does it communicate? 

What words identify your interpretation?

Then apply the filter: “Does each ‘association’ align with the question/purpose of the task (if not, discard)? Is it important in answering the question?”

 

Analysis

Connect these associations conjured by the narrative to identifiable/’point-out-able’ uses and manipulations of music elements and compositional devices.

What music elements and compositional devices are used to create these associations?

How do music elements interrelate and work in conjunction with each other?

Then apply the filter: “Do the analytical ‘parts’ support evaluation – measurement against the criteria posed in your question (if not, discard)? How can the analytical findings be synthesised to form your final themes and justify your response to the question?”

 

Themes

Consider the synthesis of your findings:

How can you report on your refined ‘associations’ (your themes)?

How does a discussion on each theme support your evaluation?

How do the findings align with your established criteria/expectations, and ultimately, the question posed?

 

I was forced into a new way of thinking by the type of question I asked against this piece (the task question), but hopefully in uncovering my practice around my initial stumbling, there is some transferability of this to general analytical processes. I invite you to look at the first draft of this and provide any comments/feedback. You are more than welcome to take this and play with it in your own context. Please let me know how you and your students get on!

 

---

[i]From the 2013 Music: Senior Syllabus– Queensland Curriculum and Assessment Authority.

[ii][ii]See ‘Resources’ Musicology for some tasks focused on this.

[iii]2019 Music: General Senior Syllabus – Queensland Curriculum and Assessment Authority. (the very syllabus I had a hand in developing, yet near-dismissed this central feature of!)

Picture credit: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/d-brief/2015/07/24/musical-tastes/