“社会激进主义的遥远音乐”:公元4世纪伯拉纠与奥古斯丁之争及其与音乐教育的关系

IF 0.2 0 MUSIC
Georgia Pike-Rowney
{"title":"“社会激进主义的遥远音乐”:公元4世纪伯拉纠与奥古斯丁之争及其与音乐教育的关系","authors":"Georgia Pike-Rowney","doi":"10.1177/15366006231187659","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper focuses on the Pelagian Debate of the late 4th Century CE between Augustine of Hippo and the British cleric Pelagius, and its little known or understood relevance to music education practice and scholarship. A transdisciplinary review of theological, historical, pedagogical, and musicological texts suggests that Augustinian notions of sin, goodness, and human nature reflect assumptions embedded in traditional classical music education paradigms. As a contrast, Pelagius’ notions of the importance of the “laity,” and criticism of church hierarchy, later suppressed and deemed heretical, can be related to tensions between amateur and professional musicians in music and education contexts. This paper will explore this debate, and Augustine’s victory, as a means of questioning assumptions embedded in music education discourse concerning talent, discipline, and human capacity for music. In this way, the debate is made relevant not only as a means of enhancing understanding of historical conceptions but also as a lens through which contemporary music education might be interrogated.","PeriodicalId":40170,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Historical Research in Music Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The ‘Distant Music of Social Radicalism’: The debate between Pelagius and Augustine of the 4th Century CE and its Relevance to Music Education\",\"authors\":\"Georgia Pike-Rowney\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15366006231187659\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper focuses on the Pelagian Debate of the late 4th Century CE between Augustine of Hippo and the British cleric Pelagius, and its little known or understood relevance to music education practice and scholarship. A transdisciplinary review of theological, historical, pedagogical, and musicological texts suggests that Augustinian notions of sin, goodness, and human nature reflect assumptions embedded in traditional classical music education paradigms. As a contrast, Pelagius’ notions of the importance of the “laity,” and criticism of church hierarchy, later suppressed and deemed heretical, can be related to tensions between amateur and professional musicians in music and education contexts. This paper will explore this debate, and Augustine’s victory, as a means of questioning assumptions embedded in music education discourse concerning talent, discipline, and human capacity for music. In this way, the debate is made relevant not only as a means of enhancing understanding of historical conceptions but also as a lens through which contemporary music education might be interrogated.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40170,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Historical Research in Music Education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Historical Research in Music Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15366006231187659\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"MUSIC\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Historical Research in Music Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15366006231187659","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"MUSIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文主要关注公元4世纪晚期河马的奥古斯丁和英国牧师伯拉纠之间的伯拉纠之争,以及它与音乐教育实践和学术的鲜为人知或鲜为人知的联系。对神学、历史、教育学和音乐学文本的跨学科回顾表明,奥古斯丁的罪恶、善良和人性观念反映了传统古典音乐教育范式中嵌入的假设。相比之下,伯拉纠关于“俗人”重要性的观念,以及对教会等级制度的批评,后来被压制并被视为异端,可能与音乐和教育背景下业余音乐家和专业音乐家之间的紧张关系有关。本文将探讨这场辩论,以及奥古斯丁的胜利,作为质疑音乐教育话语中关于天赋、纪律和人类音乐能力的假设的一种手段。通过这种方式,辩论不仅作为加强对历史概念的理解的一种手段,而且作为当代音乐教育可能被讯问的一个镜头。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The ‘Distant Music of Social Radicalism’: The debate between Pelagius and Augustine of the 4th Century CE and its Relevance to Music Education
This paper focuses on the Pelagian Debate of the late 4th Century CE between Augustine of Hippo and the British cleric Pelagius, and its little known or understood relevance to music education practice and scholarship. A transdisciplinary review of theological, historical, pedagogical, and musicological texts suggests that Augustinian notions of sin, goodness, and human nature reflect assumptions embedded in traditional classical music education paradigms. As a contrast, Pelagius’ notions of the importance of the “laity,” and criticism of church hierarchy, later suppressed and deemed heretical, can be related to tensions between amateur and professional musicians in music and education contexts. This paper will explore this debate, and Augustine’s victory, as a means of questioning assumptions embedded in music education discourse concerning talent, discipline, and human capacity for music. In this way, the debate is made relevant not only as a means of enhancing understanding of historical conceptions but also as a lens through which contemporary music education might be interrogated.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信