Critical Review #6: Nettl 1995

Nettl attempts "ethnomusicology of home" (Western classical music) through the abstracted Heartland U. music school through four perspectives: a religious system, a society of opposing forces, a venue for the meeting of all musics, and they way that the society interprets the body of Western classical music. In chapter one, "In the Service of the Masters," Nettl compares classical music to a religious system, drawing multiple comparisons between classical composers and ancient pantheons of gods. The section I found most significant (and personally relevant) was the one titled "A Roundtable of Deities." In this section, Nettl states, "musical life is built on a group of widely articulated beliefs, mainly about composers, and these have something (but not necessarily much) to do with historical reality" (19). Particularly, I have definitely heard the "unique personalities" of the composers and have frequently heard them compared in the terms Nettl presents. Also, like he says, I have been entreated to think about a composer's personality and life (such as Haydn's modesty and obedience), and to attempt to incorporate it in my playing (with simple phrasings and a delicate tone quality, for example). Thus, like Nettl writes, "The labels continue to play a role in musical thinking and writing" (21). Of course, the idea of a group where each member has a specific personality and, perhaps, responsibilities is characteristic in ancient pantheons of gods.

Discussion question: Chapter One compares the composers to deities. Are there ways this comparison is not appropriate? On a different topic, on page 19 Nettl writes, "a tendency to delete the names [of composers engraved on buildings] (as on the outside of Boston's Symphony Hall) has arisen in the last few decades." Why might this have occurred?