Leon Stefanija

The Introduction contrasts a double tripartite perspectivism on music that is basic to social reflections on music. On the one hand, music as a social phenomenon is always a sublimation of the three segments of the communicative chain—creation, mediation and reception, ofmusical creations (various aesthetic stimuli),the media of dissemination or performance (technology of dissemination or communication), andthe way in which the music is heard and interpreted (effect).On the other hand, music is always a structure, a thing that requires different epistemologies. Music is eithera bio-physiological stimulus that evokes aesthetic reactions;a cultural phenomenon, a part of many rituals that are developing or already constituteda part or a constitutive segment of institutions and their economies.The introduction thematises these two socially relevant tripartite perspectives, which inevitably overlap.

Theory is often considered to be boring. Yet, it is only a word denoting what one perceives within a certain horizon. Without theory, the world would remain a fuzzy canvas of impressions. The best theoretical paragon from the historical part of this book is WeberWeber, Max’s ideal type. We perceive the world through many ideal-typical concepts. And theory explains how we conceive such concepts.This chapter is an overview of socially oriented theorizing on music, beginning with ethno/musicological interpretation and etymological explanation and ending with what social theories of music have to add to the basic proposition of theory as observing music in a particular way.

If theory is the researcher’s eye, the legs should stand for her/his methodology: they offer concrete steps towards the research goal. The word method is a compound of the Greek words μετ᾽ (met) = besides, over, above + ὁδός (hodós) = threshold, road, path and means the path we take to reach our goal. If we want to get somewhere, we have to know first how we can get there.Each profession cherishes its methodology. In music research, several methods are in circulation (for instance, RuwetRuwet, Nicolas and EveristEverist, Mark1987, or CrawfordCrawford, Tim and GibsonGibson, Lorna2009). Ethnomusicologists and popular music studies expand the basic musicological tools by borrowing and adapting methods from different branches of knowledge. In music sociology, two prevail that come from general sociology. They are explained in detail in this chapter.

A benevolent reader will certainly notice that by now the practice of music sociology has been lurking on every page. The first chapter introduced the Whos,Whens, and Whats, the second chapter concentrated on Whats andWheres in music sociology, the third focused on Hows that explain Whys in the field. The overview of sociology of music is thus roughly rounded-off.However, many issues have been left out of the skeleton of music sociology sketched so far. Between historical knowledge, theoretical perspectives, methodological ideals, and practice there are many in-between spaces that emerge only through close observation of concrete research questions and heuristic procedures—practice.

The textbook provides students with insight into and overview of the basics of social research on music. It addresses the Who, What, When, Where, Why, How of music research through four perspectives from the sociological study of music: a historical survey of the social study of music (when), theoretical points of view (what), and methodological (how), and pragmatic aspects (who, why & how). The other Ws (where and why) are included within the four main perspectives. The four perspectives – history, theory, methodology, and practice – are complementary. Some of the names included in the theory and practice of music are also listed as a part of the history of music sociology, and vice versa. In this way, the book encompasses what Howard S. Becker has conceptualized as an art world, Kurt Blaukopf as musical practice, and Christopher Small as musicking. Covering all the relevant detailsyet concise in structure, this book is ideal for students of the sociology of music, musical education, musicology and of arts and aethestics.

Članek prinaša štiri poglede na hermenevtiko glasbe, ki so osredotočeni na 1) vzpostavljanje hermenevtičnega obzorja, 2) zgodovinske umestitve hermenevtike glasbe, 3) teoretsko razmejitev glasbene povednosti v muzikologiji in 4) spoznavoslovne razmejitve glasbene povednosti. Osrednja pozornost pri vseh štirih pogledih je naravnana k vprašanju: katere epistemološke ravni kaže upoštevati, ko govorimo o hermenevtiki glasbe kot muzikološkem pojmu v najširšem smislu?Različne fasete, ki tvorijo hermenevtiko glasbe, zato narekujejo za glavni cilj prispevka: očrtati meje med hermenevtiko kot teoretskim sistemom, ki temelji na metodah vzporejanja glasbenega stavka z "zunajglasbenimi" pojavi, in hermenevtiko kot "kulturno institucijo" ali pragmatičnim pristopom, ki poleg spoznavoslovnih prednosti prinaša tudi vrsto pasti.Four different sketches of musical hermeneutics are given, focused respectively on 1) the formation of the hermeneutical horizon, 2) historical framings of the musical hermeneutics, 3) theoretical division of the musical meaning within musicology, and 4) epistemological layering of the musical narrativity. The main focus of the four sketches is to discuss single issues arising from the following question: which levels of epistemology should be considered to define hermeneutics of music as a musicological term.Because of the various facets involved, the main aim of this article is to sketch the boundaries between hermeneutics as a theoretical system founded on comparative methods and hermeneutics as the "cultural institution", or a pragmatic approach, bringing about not only epistemological advantages but also a number of issues.