Comments for radical musicology blog http://radmus.wordpress.com Sun, 01 Nov 2009 14:22:43 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 Comment on Constansis, Alexandros N. by Alex. Constansis http://radmus.wordpress.com/2009/01/21/constansis-alexandros-n/#comment-191 Alex. Constansis Sun, 01 Nov 2009 14:22:43 +0000 http://radmus.wordpress.com/?p=75#comment-191 Hi Robin. I can help. Sorry for the delay but have been terribly busy and unable to check this site. Please contact me via my own website. Thanks. A.N. Constansis Hi Robin.

I can help. Sorry for the delay but have been terribly busy and unable to check this site.
Please contact me via my own website.

Thanks.

A.N. Constansis

]]> Comment on Wise, Tim by bart • wreck http://radmus.wordpress.com/2007/11/17/wise-tim/#comment-186 bart • wreck Fri, 04 Sep 2009 10:55:44 +0000 http://radmus.wordpress.com/2007/11/17/wise-tim/#comment-186 your article has been very helpful in the writing of book 2 on yodeling, YODEL IN HIFI. but may i make a comment on the disappearance of yodel effects in classical music. this is not entirely true. check out "Maria" by Cecilia Bartoli [who learned to yodel for this homage] but also the opera "In the Alps" by Richard Ayres which he was commissioned to do for soprano Barbara Hannigan, a fan of yodeling. New-classical [for lack of a better name] theo loevendie, himself a fan of yodeling has wirtten an operina with plenty of yodeling. It features Kristina Fuchs, no stranger to yodeling herself. new classical composer toby Twining also has several works that include yodeling. there is also of course mary schneider... i'd like to continue this offline if possible. perhaps ask a few questions. your article has been very helpful in the writing of book 2 on yodeling, YODEL IN HIFI. but may i make a comment on the disappearance of yodel effects in classical music. this is not entirely true. check out “Maria” by Cecilia Bartoli [who learned to yodel for this homage] but also the opera “In the Alps” by Richard Ayres which he was commissioned to do for soprano Barbara Hannigan, a fan of yodeling. New-classical [for lack of a better name] theo loevendie, himself a fan of yodeling has wirtten an operina with plenty of yodeling. It features Kristina Fuchs, no stranger to yodeling herself. new classical composer toby Twining also has several works that include yodeling. there is also of course mary schneider… i’d like to continue this offline if possible. perhaps ask a few questions.

]]> Comment on Constansis, Alexandros N. by Robin http://radmus.wordpress.com/2009/01/21/constansis-alexandros-n/#comment-153 Robin Fri, 12 Jun 2009 22:38:28 +0000 http://radmus.wordpress.com/?p=75#comment-153 Fascinating article and some much-needed research. I'm a student of Musicology in Copenhagen, Denmark and am starting my transitioning now. I will definitely be following your advice given here - if you need more subjects or are interested in supplemental observations from me I would be happy to provide. Fascinating article and some much-needed research. I’m a student of Musicology in Copenhagen, Denmark and am starting my transitioning now. I will definitely be following your advice given here – if you need more subjects or are interested in supplemental observations from me I would be happy to provide.

]]> Comment on Constansis, Alexandros N. by c. http://radmus.wordpress.com/2009/01/21/constansis-alexandros-n/#comment-140 c. Thu, 21 May 2009 09:54:09 +0000 http://radmus.wordpress.com/?p=75#comment-140 Is it possible to get in touch re: vocal coaching? I'm a young trans guy planning on starting testosterone relatively soon and definitely interested in preserving my singing voice. Is it possible to get in touch re: vocal coaching? I’m a young trans guy planning on starting testosterone relatively soon and definitely interested in preserving my singing voice.

]]> Comment on Cusick, Suzanne G. by John Turner http://radmus.wordpress.com/2009/03/03/cusick-suzanne-g/#comment-121 John Turner Thu, 23 Apr 2009 15:33:41 +0000 http://radmus.wordpress.com/?p=77#comment-121 How is this 'scary'? This very moving article by Cusick is actually quite cautious about precisely this kind of investment. Have you read it? Really? How is this ’scary’? This very moving article by Cusick is actually quite cautious about precisely this kind of investment. Have you read it? Really?

]]> Comment on Cusick, Suzanne G. by PD Quinn http://radmus.wordpress.com/2009/03/03/cusick-suzanne-g/#comment-120 PD Quinn Wed, 22 Apr 2009 22:11:41 +0000 http://radmus.wordpress.com/?p=77#comment-120 Obama... Really? This article is one more frustrating example of somebody projecting images of the savior onto just another politician. The fact that there are people out there who think Obama is such a reparative figure that he deserves reference in the world of musicology is actually pretty scary. Obama… Really? This article is one more frustrating example of somebody projecting images of the savior onto just another politician. The fact that there are people out there who think Obama is such a reparative figure that he deserves reference in the world of musicology is actually pretty scary.

]]> Comment on Wise, Tim by Serge Lacasse http://radmus.wordpress.com/2007/11/17/wise-tim/#comment-115 Serge Lacasse Tue, 03 Mar 2009 21:28:18 +0000 http://radmus.wordpress.com/2007/11/17/wise-tim/#comment-115 Hey Tim, Great article! One thing though: in par. 26, you talk about the loft voice, suggesting that there are only few examples of its use in popular music. I will have to strongly disagree on this, because creaky voice (another term for it) is widely use. Just an example: Sia uses it all the time. The problem is more about how it is used. In any case, we should discuss this sometime. Take care, sErge Hey Tim, Great article!

One thing though: in par. 26, you talk about the loft voice, suggesting that there are only few examples of its use in popular music. I will have to strongly disagree on this, because creaky voice (another term for it) is widely use. Just an example: Sia uses it all the time. The problem is more about how it is used. In any case, we should discuss this sometime.

Take care,
sErge

]]> Comment on Constansis, Alexandros N. by Alex. N. Constansis http://radmus.wordpress.com/2009/01/21/constansis-alexandros-n/#comment-113 Alex. N. Constansis Thu, 12 Feb 2009 17:34:11 +0000 http://radmus.wordpress.com/?p=75#comment-113 Thank you for your kind words! By the way, I am based in the UK and currently coaching several transguys. Thank you for your kind words!

By the way, I am based in the UK and currently coaching several transguys.

]]> Comment on Constansis, Alexandros N. by H Baskerville http://radmus.wordpress.com/2009/01/21/constansis-alexandros-n/#comment-112 H Baskerville Thu, 12 Feb 2009 11:00:24 +0000 http://radmus.wordpress.com/?p=75#comment-112 Fascinating! I've been curious to know the effect of testosterone therapy on the singing voice. I'd love to know if similar coaching is available to transguys in the UK. Fascinating! I’ve been curious to know the effect of testosterone therapy on the singing voice. I’d love to know if similar coaching is available to transguys in the UK.

]]> Comment on Biddle, Ian by Ian Biddle http://radmus.wordpress.com/2007/11/22/biddle-ian-2/#comment-81 Ian Biddle Fri, 18 Jan 2008 02:13:52 +0000 http://radmus.wordpress.com/2007/11/22/biddle-ian-2/#comment-81 David. First of all, many thanks for your kind and thoughtful response to my article. I think you have identified precisely the point in my piece where the unconscious of the article, speaks, so to speak. If I may, I'd like to address the more substantial part of your comment. I realise that what your question raises is something both about the terms on which I am prepared (and, perhaps, able) to elaborate the argument, and also, I think, something about the impossibility of thinking as a critical Lacanian without some notion of subjectivity remaining intact, however fragmented, however fraught and distended. If that subject - whatever it may be, however it is constituted - is <em>some thing </em>(and I realise that even in Lacan that is something of an act of faith), then the elaboration you so tantalisingly hold out for me is barred to me (just as, for Lacan, the barred subject is always barred to itself). In the end this is precisely about epistemology, about what it is possible to think and to know. A Deleuzean (if I can be so crude as to pigeon-hole you) and a Lacanian are always going to disagree precisely about this issue since it gets to the heart of where Lacan and Deleuze part company. Of course, it is possible to draw the parting of ways too crudely, and I guess in the end where their work differs is in the consequence of the critique of subjectivity, not in their difference vis-a-vis the subject. I think where I have trouble with Deleuze, Baudrillard and Bulter on this issue (if I have understood their work correctly) is at the point at which they lose sight of the political. Now, whether the argument is 'structural' or not (although to refer to the Real as structure is quite problematic, of course) is neither here nor there for me and I could certainly imagine a radically different way of presenting the collapse I outline in paragraph 43. I am not wed to or necessarily need the Lacanian technology to make that point. But, and this is crucial and takes us to the first part of your comment: it is precisely in the hysteric relation, in the politics of community and its productive impossibility, that I want to hold this relation. What I am unable to agree with in your characterisation of the community's call to which I am unable to respond is the deathly foreclosure of the political productivity of thinking in/as community even when that fantasy shows itself to be fragile, delicate. Where I think my article fails is precisely in not being able to lead the reader to that point. I think the piece speaks only very surreptitiously of the political consequences of the fragility of community as a fantasy. My point would have been, I think, that, as fragile, that fantasy requires something like a political programme that would set out to procure, nurture and maintain it. Community, in other words, is a kind of political <em>work</em>, not a state of being or a simple hailing. It is precisely as hysteric, then (perhaps, only as hysteric) that that work can be done, it seems to me: one hails rather than being hailed. Who am I for you? That is the key question! I hope this goes some way to helping you make sense of what I was trying to achieve here, even if, as I think you can see, I am not always completely clear about how to make the consequences of what I say 'come out', as it were. Many thanks again for this thoughtful and testing response. David. First of all, many thanks for your kind and thoughtful response to my article. I think you have identified precisely the point in my piece where the unconscious of the article, speaks, so to speak.
If I may, I’d like to address the more substantial part of your comment. I realise that what your question raises is something both about the terms on which I am prepared (and, perhaps, able) to elaborate the argument, and also, I think, something about the impossibility of thinking as a critical Lacanian without some notion of subjectivity remaining intact, however fragmented, however fraught and distended. If that subject – whatever it may be, however it is constituted – is some thing (and I realise that even in Lacan that is something of an act of faith), then the elaboration you so tantalisingly hold out for me is barred to me (just as, for Lacan, the barred subject is always barred to itself). In the end this is precisely about epistemology, about what it is possible to think and to know. A Deleuzean (if I can be so crude as to pigeon-hole you) and a Lacanian are always going to disagree precisely about this issue since it gets to the heart of where Lacan and Deleuze part company. Of course, it is possible to draw the parting of ways too crudely, and I guess in the end where their work differs is in the consequence of the critique of subjectivity, not in their difference vis-a-vis the subject. I think where I have trouble with Deleuze, Baudrillard and Bulter on this issue (if I have understood their work correctly) is at the point at which they lose sight of the political.
Now, whether the argument is ’structural’ or not (although to refer to the Real as structure is quite problematic, of course) is neither here nor there for me and I could certainly imagine a radically different way of presenting the collapse I outline in paragraph 43. I am not wed to or necessarily need the Lacanian technology to make that point. But, and this is crucial and takes us to the first part of your comment: it is precisely in the hysteric relation, in the politics of community and its productive impossibility, that I want to hold this relation. What I am unable to agree with in your characterisation of the community’s call to which I am unable to respond is the deathly foreclosure of the political productivity of thinking in/as community even when that fantasy shows itself to be fragile, delicate. Where I think my article fails is precisely in not being able to lead the reader to that point. I think the piece speaks only very surreptitiously of the political consequences of the fragility of community as a fantasy. My point would have been, I think, that, as fragile, that fantasy requires something like a political programme that would set out to procure, nurture and maintain it. Community, in other words, is a kind of political work, not a state of being or a simple hailing. It is precisely as hysteric, then (perhaps, only as hysteric) that that work can be done, it seems to me: one hails rather than being hailed. Who am I for you? That is the key question!
I hope this goes some way to helping you make sense of what I was trying to achieve here, even if, as I think you can see, I am not always completely clear about how to make the consequences of what I say ‘come out’, as it were.
Many thanks again for this thoughtful and testing response.

]]>