Conference Agenda

The physical and administrative infrastructure surrounding the introduction of tools and techniques in academic electronic and computer music has inherited a persistently damaging legacy of trial-by-fire and sink-or-swim pedagogy. Assumed knowledge, in-crowded language, and toxic online forum culture has pushed generations of musicians away from developing a positive relationship with technology for creative sound production. It is incumbent on technical facilities at academic institutions to proactively address the implicit bias and gatekeeping inherent in studio design and access policies, technical support documents, and troubleshooting. In this paper, we briefly survey the physical and administrative design of historical university electronic music facilities and present a critical framework for understanding the underlying systems of power actively working against the development of identity-affirming spaces for the creative use of music technology. We report on the proactive application of gender and anti-racist theories to the principles that inform the ongoing redesign of the studios at the Computer Music Center at Columbia University and the Bregman Digital Music Studio at Dartmouth College. This paper aims to provide strategies for moving past the outmoded model of ‘learning the hard way,’ common in historically male-dominated technical spaces, by cultivating a collective 'unknowing' to reduce cultural anxieties often associated with technical skills acquisition and embolden deeper technological exploration. We conclude by proposing the development of open-source pedagogical and administrative resources aimed at reducing the friction of implementing workspaces and coursework that are welcoming to a range of learning styles, economic backgrounds, and previous technology exposure.

Composition remains a male-dominated field. In my three rounds as the adjudicator for the Score Follower call for scores, a curation initiative aimed at emerging composers, I observed that the submissions come primarily from white males despite active efforts of the curatorial team to reach underrepresented composers. Similar statistics are reflected in a study conducted by the Institute for Composer Diversity under the State University of New York, Fredonia. 87.7% of programmed orchestra repertoire in the United States in the 2022-2023 season is written by male composers. The balance changes to a slightly more positive outlook when considering race and ethnicity: 24.4% of orchestral works are by women, non-binary composers, and composers of color versus 75.1% by white male composers. Notably, men composers of color are twice as likely (12.2%) to be programmed than women of color (6%) or white women (6.3%). Despite the 510% increase in programming works by historically excluded composers since 2016-2017, there is still a significant room for improvement.

Regardless of the differences in ethnic and racial diversity and other historical, political, and socio-economic factors, the tendency is ubiquitous around the globe. This complex issue involves social class inequality, cultural determinants, and educational bias, among others. However, it is worth examining as it significantly affects all young composers. Early-career opportunities, as much as institutional, community, and individual support, are crucial in the beginning stages of a career in composition. I argue that conscious mentorship within and outside of school and academia is crucial in gaining self-confidence and the tools necessary to pursue a path in composition. Relying on my experience as a composer, adjudicator, mentor, and educator, practices observed throughout my long-time relationship with academia in several countries (Academy of Music in Lodz, Poland; Royal Conservatory of Brussels, Belgium; Columbia University in the City of New York, USA), I will examine the pervading inequities in the world of composition and propose solutions to taking action. By interviewing a number of pioneer composers and educators, I seek to find proven and new approaches to mentoring women and non-binary composers.

Women in music departments across the United States historically struggle for recognition. For example, Eda Rapoport (1890-1968) and Patricia Carpenter (1923-2000) might only be remembered through prizes in music studies dedicated in their honor: Rapoport has a composition prize at Columbia University; Carpenter has a prize for best student paper at the annual meeting of Music Theory Society of New York State. Despite strong ties to New York and Columbia University, virtually no information about these women can be found when visiting the Columbia Music Department’s web page, yet their papers found a home in Columbia’s Rare Book and Manuscripts archives.

This paper explores two questions: What is the role of the archive in activating the legacies of women and non-binary people in music studies? How can we teach our students to analyze music found within archives from a perspective of care while advocating for a broader knowledge of these figures? This approach takes heed of Jennifer Lynn Stoever’s call to not “further the neoliberal project of ‘giving voice to the voiceless’ or recovering ‘lost’ sounds” (2018, 6). Drawing on Christine Hocking’s definition of inclusive teaching, this paper presents inclusive teaching strategies focused on making archival and analytic assignments more “meaningful, relevant, and accessible to all” (2010). This pedagogical intervention combines music analysis with literary theory and critical methodologies of race, gender, and class to reconceptualize the role of the archive in music analysis and pedagogy. Relying on an interdisciplinary approach, this methodology not only considers what music studies might gain from incorporating critical approaches from adjacent disciplines, but also what kinds of tools musicology can contribute to other branches of scholarship. This truly interdisciplinary dialogue will foster inclusive classroom spaces and conversations for people of all gender identities.

Ultimately, this teaching practice encourages both students and instructors alike to think critically about existing structures of institutional memory and advocates for care when analyzing “rediscovered” works and figures.