The Color

I really appreciated watching all of these different productions over the past week in class. First off, I loved watching Topsy Turvy. I love that it both captures the "personal" lives of the characters offstage in addition to what they become when they are on stage. One stark contrast that we see in the movie especially is the use of vibrant color within the production of The Mikado. There are probably many reasons why they chose to make the color change so different in the two "worlds" of the film, but what keeps coming to mind are the many discussions that we have had about the living conditions of the Victorians. The use of coal in the cities quite literally made London filthy. The furniture, streets and life was covered in the smog and soot that came from these unsanitary living conditions. I loved that the dark undertones of the colors used in the "reality" sections of the movie were in such direct contrast to the whimsical world of the stage. The stage then takes on a whole new life with the vibrancy of the production and the color of the visual aspect of the work. In the clips of Princess Ida I also noticed a difference in the vibrancy of the productions. I loved the costuming of the singers in the production that Houston Grand performed in 2003. These costumes seemed to capture a similar vibrancy that I felt in the movie that we watched this week. Maybe it is just my own personal opinion, but it seems that the silly whimsical nature of G&S satire seems to be even more highlighted by the visual vibrancy this type of production and costume provides. As much as I enjoyed the Canadian joke that occurred in "This Helmet I Suppose" in the International G&S festival in Buxton, England, the costuming seemed washed out (quite literally with the women's chorus in white). This washed out affect I think takes away from the pointed specificity of G&S. For my own personal taste, and if I ever am on the production side of a G&S performance one day, I would hope that I can capture the energy in the sarcasm within the visual effect of the opera. I think that the jokes breathe a whole new vivaciousness in full "Technicolor." I also wonder with the improvement of the HD broadcast and such if we will then be able to see some of these new productions in a similar vibrant and captivating way.

things are better in threes

I thought it was interesting that the trio "I am a Maiden" from Princess Ida was set for trio male voices. I guess I was most surprised so see another "maiden" song for trio because of the trio that we just saw in the production of The Mikado. I would assume that the trio of maids from school is not really a coincidence. Again like the "maidens" of the Princess Ida the maids from Mikado also poke fun at what it is to be expected in their daily duties and how life is for a maiden from day to day. Again all of the responsibilities of these maidens seem to be trite and superficial. It is interesting after learning about the libretto that Princess Ida's revolves around a princess who is teaching the superiority of women to men at her women's university thus satirizing women's education that it seems to be the same stab at women's education in The Mikado. As this being my own first exposure to Princess Ida I also thought it was an interesting choice for both of the performances to include the "maidens" dancing about in a silly manner on the stage with the "graduation" regalia look. The plot really binds the director to this choice when it comes to staging so it began to make more sense to me for the strange choice. The men are supposed to be dressed up as maidens in order to scoff at their sister's college for women adding to the battle of the sexes. Again the plot is then making it "appropriate" that they would be acting ridiculous as "maidens." Although this is mildly offensive in one way, it is still done hilariously because in all honestly the men (as they point out themselves) know that their disguises are silly and will not fool anyone. Bringing in the concept of which sex is the "sillier" one of the two and adding to the overall hilarious satire of the opera. I wonder if the appearance of the three comic characters are a stab at grand opera. For instance, it brings to mind the three comic roles of Turandot, Ping, Pang and Pong. The concept of a comedic trio seems to resound throughout the times and even making its way into the 20th century with the hilarious Marx brothers.

"Bare"-ing it all

The tableaux vivant was a shocking art form to learn about in this week's reading. I guess I have been living under a rock, because I really had no idea that people used to recreate portraits and statues of pieces of art trying to completely be "authentic" down to the costume, or lack there of. I was too surprised that this practice was something that came from the aristocracy and upper class society. I assumed that practices like this might have originated from the lower class and assumed that it would be another opportunity to exploit women, but this was not the case at all. The tableaux vivant seemed to truly be an art. It took skill and talent to recreate these works of art effectively and in a way that is "authentic." In the chapter we see the description of the famous tableaux artist, La Milo. Her performances were regarded so highly and reviews express that her name is synonymous with art. Again this whole practice seemed strange to me. Especially the glowing reviews of its practice. It does make me reconsider my own biases in this situation. When I think about a practice posing nude, it seems outrageous to me. It is probably because I would feel exploited or uncomfortable in my own skin if I was to be in this position. But, as we discussed in class there seem to be a difference of opinion about posing in the buff. Some women embrace the liberating feeling of having their body be the spectacle. Others may feel similar to me and may not enjoy their line of work. Either way, the performance practice has definitely trickled down into our society today and has influenced art of the 20th century and beyond.

"The Novel"... why not?

I appreciated this week's chapter's approach to looking at the music hall in terms of how it is represented in the literature of the time. We saw this tactic earlier in the semester when we explored the book Daniel Deronda by George Eliot. Eliot had used this book as a vehicle to poke fun at Victorian society. In this chapter we also see the author of the novel using the book as a vehicle to forward their own opinion of the topic of the society. Walter Besant takes an optimistic approach to women working in the music hall. This view is starkly contrasted by the attitude of Hall Craine's novel The Christian. Besant create a condition for the main character, Dorothy necessitate her working in the music hall. He also comments on her own talent at performing which again "excuses" her line of work. He also uses Dorothy as a vehicle for his own exploration of the music hall in his article "At the Music Hall" which he signed "Dorothy Wallis."By using Dorothy's name, he is able to give an "insider" view of the music hall. Drastically contrasted from Besant's optimistic view of the music hall we have Craine who openly "punishes" women for working in the music hall. We see the character of Glory Quayle leave her "respectable" job as a nurse to become a music hall performer. Faulk says, "[Glory's] success in the West End represents the growing commercial and popular success of women stars. But Caine also uses Glory to represent the moral decay of the West End; she eventually signifies all that resists the ministrations of Storm's philanthropic project." At the end of the story Storm, the minister, literally tries to kill Glory. This act is basically excused by his attempt to clean up the West End and all it stands for. Glory then serves as an icon of all that has gone wrong with society and the music hall. It is interesting that both of these drastically different viewpoints are expressed though the literature of the time. "Fiction" is then a mask that these authors can hide behind while providing social commentary and satire.

What IS politically correct?

This past winter I was in my first production of Madame Butterfly. I was so excited when we began staging because the director pointed out that I, along with nine other chorus members would be the "Geisha." I knew that this would mean that I would get to wear a kimono and very amazing makeup that was common practice of the geisha. Some of the other women of the chorus were made into relatives of Butterfly. When we had our first meeting with the make up crew, we learned how to put on a "Geisha face." The make up was complete with white foundation to make the porcelain skin that was the trademark of a geisha. After this demonstration, she had a different meeting with the "family members" who had different makeup with a different hue of foundation to make them appear more "ethnic." The color of the make up is best described as a golden brown that gave almost a yellow appearance to the performers. The color was really unbecoming on them and looked almost ridiculous. But the color, coupled with the black eyeliner that was applied to make the eyes look flat and longer was truly stereotyping what a Japanese person would look like. Practices such as black face, and yellow face were popular during the Victorian era. Kift discusses this issue during the character section of the chapter. Since the Victorian era, it seems that blacking out ones face has fallen out of favor and has become a social taboo in our culture, but why is it still acceptable to stereotype and comment on other cultures in the name of art? It is no different whether the singers were wearing the "yellow face" for the production of Butterfly then if they had been wearing "black face" for a production of Porgy and Bess and yet one seems to still be tolerated in our culture and one is completely incomprehensible. Is it because of the history that black people have had in our nation? Didn't we too make other groups of people suffer such as the Japanese in the work camps of World War II? Shouldn't we be mutually sensitive to everyone's culture? Does the story of Madame Butterfly face the possibility of not being told well if the makeup isn't "racially accurate"?

What ever happened to the music hall?

I thought it was very interesting this week to consider the music hall and where it's position is now in our society. Like always finding parallels to today's culture and what echoes of Victorian life we still see today is fascinating to me. As we discussed in class with the help of the temperance movement, and the fact that it was able to influence the goings on of the music hall, it changed the floor plan of the music hall. In the Kift article it was shown that the floor plan changed once the bars were removed from the hall from the standard table layout that invited people to socialize, drink and not necessarily be too concerned with the performance to benches that were positioned towards the stage that would then encourage people to pay attention to the show instead of just socializing. It is interesting to observe the influence of the cinema or maybe the reverse affect of the new floor plan to maybe inspire the cinema. In the early movie theater we see many similarities to the music hall. There was still some form of entertainment through the use of musicians playing the soundtrack and all of the sound for the film. Again as we discussed in class, there were also sometimes variety show type acts that would occur when reels would be changed or there would be a break in the production. I wonder if the temperance movement had not carried so much influence if we would not have seen the same tradition of the music hall carry over to America. Kift also blamed some of the demise of the music hall on other influences that were imported from America. The growing popularity of the dance the "Charleston" and Ragtime music attracted people to the dance hall instead of the music hall. Although I do believe that the "dance hall" we see during the big band era in America also echoes the traditions of the original music hall. In these dance halls we see people attending the performance not necessarily to see the band that is playing as much as to socialize, dance, and eat. Although the atmosphere may be similar, the music being played does not really follow suit to the variety acts of the music hall stage.

Vaughan Williams and Opera?

I have to say, prior to this week I really didn't even know that Vaughan Williams had written any operas. It was really nice to become acquainted with some of his work in this way. After listening to some of the operas I have to say the music is very beautiful and really easy to listen to. Quite a contrast to what we see coming out of some other countries in Europe at this time... Not that either is better, it is just interesting to see the difference in what was being performed in other parts of the world. It also made me think about what Vaughan Williams himself said about a genius. Maybe if Vaughan Williams had come earlier he too could have established a different and maybe more lasting tradition of British music. Anyway about the operas, I really appreciated the format of the article comparing these two operas in particular. Although the time between the release of Hugh the Drover and Sir John in Love was a short five years, there was really a significant change in the approach to composition that is apparent in these works. As I said in class when I was reading about Hugh the Drover I was thinking to myself that a more integrated use of folk song something that would propel the motion of the drama would make more sense and then when Saylor described Sir John in Love, it seemed to fit the bill. I really think that by using folk elements and making it a part of the characters by using diegetic music allows a flexibility and an overall more effective approach into integrating folk song into the traditions of English music. I was also happy that we discussed the appearance of the French chanson in the opera, Sir John in Love. I thought that it was funny that this happened when I read the article thinking, "Wouldn't it undermine his own efforts to establish English folk song in 'serious art' to establish a sound of England? But considering the long lasting opinion of both the French of the English and the English of the French it makes the appearance of the chanson laughable as far as the character is concerned. It adds a whole new level of insincerity to the character. Overall I loved considering these works and hope to learn more about his operas. They definitely seem worth it.

Vaughan Williams and National Music

I really enjoyed this week's discussion about Vaughan Williams' revival or maybe even the discovery of a national sound or music in England. I did find myself in his reading trying to think of many different ways I could argue against his view of folk song but I found it very hard to disagree with his opinion. I thought to myself about all of the other nations that have a well established "sound" and it seemed that these sounds are rooted in folk tradition. For example in Germany we see the folk song tradition directly influencing the strong establishment of the Lied in society. It was through these straightforward rhythms, "singable" tunes, importance of the message and the word that we have a genre that then can speak to many different people. I did like though that Vaughan Williams took the time to discover a uniquely "English" sound. Unlike the folk tradition of Germany, Vaughan Williams used the use of mode to inform the use of folk song and thus it became a sound that we could associate with the revival of this genre and the establishment of this sound in England. I also thought it was interesting that he claimed that the use of modes in the church also grew out of this folk tradition. On page 24 of his book he states, "Because a folk-song can be referred to one of these 'ecclesiastical' modes it is often imagined that folk-song derives from church music. I believe that it is just the other way round, namely, that church music derives from folk-music." I'm not sure if i necessarily agree with this or not, but I did find it interesting that in the Stanford article we see the same issue come up but he seems to argue the opposite viewpoint and using the example of Martin Luther and Germany said, "He explained how Martin Luther had affected the whole trend of culture, and had directed all the forces of artistic aspiration into one channel, music; thereby ensuring the ascendancy of the art in Germany for a doubly long period of time." Whatever came first, the chicken or the egg, what is true is the establishment of folk song sentiments in the culture's music can completely revive and aid in the establishment of a national music in a country.

How "progressive" was Elgar?

I also really enjoyed the Thomson article that we read for Thursday's class this week. I loved that from the beginning of the article it pointed out the contradiction that we see in Elgar's opinion and in addition to the opinion of the critics. I thought that it was so funny that Elgar praised critics and likened their opinion to what we now consider a job of a musicologist to analyze reception history. I also think that it is funny that it was then these well known critics such as Fuller-Maitland who despised Elgar so much. Again the concept of him not being accepted into the upper class due to his lower class birth comes up and this, in the article, really seems to be the argument for all of the criticism that he received from these people. Because personally, even with the well presented argument about his use of leitmotif and chromaticism I still don't hear the "progressive tendencies" in Elgar's music. I think that it is true that maybe it isn't quite as square and in the box as Parry' ultra conservative approach to composition, but I think that maybe it is the slightly more unique sound that really makes us remember Elgar for being a little bit different. I just found it so interesting that during that time Elgar would be lumped together as a progressive such as Wagner or Strauss. Is it maybe just because the full impact that Wagner had on music thought the development of composers like Schoenberg hadn't occurred. It is obvious that the Wagner debate was very important at the time and that it was in the forefront of many people's mind, but I would be interested to see if the criticism would have been similar knowing what we know now. Maybe this is out of the scope of this class, but it is surprising that Schoenberg doesn’t come up when we talk about the progressives of this time. Did this other progressive style not reach as far as England at this time? It would be interesting to see if this influenced any of our Victorians or not.

As a side note...

I found this monologue and I thought it was funny...

Classifieds Advert/Situations Wanted: Victorian Hermit

April 7, 2010 by The Good Ear Review

Dear Country Estate Owners:

I am currently looking for a well-appointed garden shed or cave for hermetic possibilities on your property.

I require very little upkeep as I am partial to voles. I am suitably apoplectic, adequately eccentric, and erudite in my mutterings.
I philosophise.

Let me be your living lawn ornament.

I can be reached at … I am not reachable.

http://thegoodearreview.com/2010/04/07/classifieds-advertsituations-wanted-victorian-hermit/

Gossip Girl

I really enjoyed reading this week's article by Sophie Fuller, "Elgar and the Salons: The Significance of a Private Musical World." As I said in class, it read like a gossip column. I loved that reflecting back on the Victorians and through primary documents such as letters and diary entries. As I was reading the article, I kept checking in on how I felt about Elgar and my opinion of him kept changing. As I was reading about his relationships with the "women of the salon" I felt myself wanting to judge him and his behavior. Then when she discussed the relationship with Schuster I found myself again drawing new conclusions about who I though Elgar actually was. In class though I think Lindsay said it well. Maybe because of his severe insecurities he constantly needed to surround himself with people to stroke his ego and make him feel better about himself. As I was reading the article I was thinking, "Wow, he was a womanizer." or "Wow, I guess he was a homosexual." But it really makes much more sense that in a lot of a ways I don't even think that Elgar knew what he was. He seemed to only want to define himself through societal approval and status. Or maybe he really was too "weak" in his own character to really be able to have an opinion for himself. I also really enjoyed that from the beginning of the article she was tackling the concept of the masculine versus the feminine. Even in the bank note, with the appearance of St. Cecelia it was already softening and confusing who Elgar actually was. I think it was interesting that there was so much pressure on men in society to be "manly" and that music was associated with the feminine. It seemed that for Elgar, he learned to keep up appearances such as the manly and masculine appearance of his dress and mustache or the scolding of Schuster's behavior. But maybe through his private relationships with all of these women it allowed him to indulge in more effeminate behavior. Either way, I think that Elgar is a very interesting character. It would be interesting to be able to take a peek into his psyche. I think Fuller's attempt at understanding him through the "gossip" of the time definitely was able to capture him in another light.

Slumming it

Have we really not changed that much over the last hundred years or so? I really wonder if the Victorians are really that different from you or I? It seems that there are still echoes if the Victorians in today’s culture. For instance the section of the reading this week that discussed the concept of “slumming” that now a days people still seem fascinated by. In today’s culture we see the hipsters of New York slumming it in the East Village. Experiencing the “tough life” through their father’s pocketbook. Is that not the same concept that we have for the Victorians who would only really want to experience another life in order to maybe brag about it, or to live the bohemian lifestyle… without all of the problems, sickness, lack of heat and the conveniences of their privileged lifestyle. Then how appropriate that we would then could even “slum” it in the opera house through the troubled lifestyle of the bohemians in La Bohème or in the article the lucky aristocrat who could slum it in her own upstairs parlor at a spinet piano with some parlor songs. In a way, this reminds me of the first few articles we read in the class where we unveiled the fascination that the Victorians had for mystery and the exotic. The ability to slum it and experience an exotic lifestyle seems to fit directly into this concept. How appropriate it seems that even today we are obsessed with the strange, horrific nature of the exotic. Now we experience it through movies instead of the sideshows of the 19th century. One thing I wish we had also drawn from the Victorians was the interest and knowledge and appreciation for classical music. I guess it may be another study all in itself the culture that has now developed around popular culture and the glorification of these icons and the rejection of classical music from our generation. Maybe if opera became exotic… which it is getting in some productions, we would have the same draw to it that we see in our culture the strange and abnormal that we see in other aspects of our cultural entertainment.

Wish I had been there...

So the only person to blame is themselves. According to the Temperley article an unfortunate series of socially motivated occurrences basically added to the attitude of Victorians having to musical abilities. I thought that it was particularly interesting that the attitude that we now have about the era was born at that time. It makes a lot of sense that if a group of people are not interested in what a country is producing musically why would there be a sudden appreciation and interest in what they had accomplished over a hundred years later. He brought up the idea of the musical genius of the time being Beethoven, Schubert, Wagner, Verdi. Therefore when there was a movement in musicology to study the artistic aspects of musical history they were drawn to these genius giants of the 19th century thus glossing over the other composers of the era. He makes the argument that at this time England felt as though it was on top of the world. The country then didn’t have the nationalism needed for political gain to drive the musical choices and the genre. Again the excitement of the exotic is echoes in the choices of music that is acceptable in society. The Victorian upper class was once again drawn to the exotic of the foreign land and it was much more accepted for foreigners to be pursuing a musical career than in England. For men he points out that a musical career would make someone effeminate where as for women we see the amateur musician being the encouraged artist. The girl at the parlor piano who is practicing her way to a successful marriage. I loved his concluding thoughts about Victorian music being the “lost chord.” “The chord was heard only faintly by the Victorians themselves, being drowned out by sounds coming across the Channel.” (pg. 21) I think that this is such a great way to put it. How then can we find new life in this music that seems to be lacking because of the lack of interest in it? Or will the British always be too good for Victorian music and the sound of the late 19th century.

What makes something memorable?

Thursday's class brought up a lot of ideas about what we remember from the past. In some of my posts I have mentioned that a lot of my concepts and maybe misconceptions about the Victorians developed from the literary tradition that I know about the time. All off the Jane Austen and Bronte novels of the time have been what for me have become the classics of this era. It was so interesting to hear about another author, George Eliot, who wrote books that challenged society and wanted to bring attention to the faults of the Victorian era. I guess my literary exposure is fairly limited, but it really saddens me that I had never even heard of George Eliot before this article. A female writer, who adopted a pen name in order to be respected as an author and then writes these books that push the envelope so much over 100 years ago. How awesome! I love that through satire she was able to bring to light the issues of society that were "problematic" and should be thought about again. I guess maybe I do just live under a rock because in looking at more information about Daniel Deronda it has been filmed three times, once for silent film and twice for television. But maybe the most notable production of this book occurred back in the 1960s. But it is books like this that raise social awareness and toleration for others that should never be forgotten. I loved that Eliot was able to use social conventions of the time relating to music to further define the characters of the story. I loved the irony of Klezmer's/ the Wagnerian icon character, or the fact that Gwendolyn sung bel canto style opera (basically the furthest thing from Wagner) - terribly. How great to show dynamic and again reiterate the sentiments of the musical scene and how it translates to other aspects of Victorian life. I thought it interesting that George Eliot was unlike the "girled" women that we saw on Tuesday. It is great that her father invested in her education, although it was unfortunate that it was because of her low probability of being marriage material.

"girling"

I really enjoyed this past week's article on "Girling" at the Parlor Piano. I really enjoyed reading the excerpts from the "daughter's" journals in order to gain perspective on how people felt about the daughter of the family functioning in a way to keep the emotional well being of the family. I think for many of the daughters, the piano took on a new life. It really functioned in their world as not just an object but something they could confide in. We talked a lot about escape, and how the piano served as this for the girls. I still think so much of this holds true today. I found myself drawing so many parallels between this article and my own life during class. I too felt as though I was "girled" at my piano. In my house both my sister and I were encouraged to be artists and although my parents probably won't admit it, I think it was almost expected that we would do something in the arts, so that we could "express ourselves." I was always the musician, and my sister was always the visual artist. So when I found my escape in playing my piano, my sister would spend countless hours locked in her room drawing. Through this article, I found it so interesting that this expectation of providing the family with entertainment. And the expectation that as women we would tend to the "softer" more "aesthetic" aspects of life at least for my family has not changed too much. I was always expected to play for the family when we had dinner, and especially if my family had friends over. Me at the piano was kind of a novelty to them. I do appreciate that I was not alone in this experience growing up. In this article there were so many girls who experienced the same things as me. Again another feeling that the Victorian's were maybe not so far off from who we are and what we have developed into today.

Wagner vs Austen

So as I brought up in class I think that part of why I think the Victorians were so confused by Wagner's music was the inaccessibility of the text. In Wagner all of the meaning of the music is carried in the music and explored through chromaticism, larger than life sound (via singer and orchestra), the color of the sound, and the use of leitmotif. In England though, we see a literary tradition that is reaching back hundreds of years and is carried through the Victorian era. There are so many literary icons that were British and wrote in amazing prose that is still worshiped today such as Shakespeare, Donne, and Austen. Therefore how could Wagner expect a society that is so sensitive to the word and the meaning of the text propelling the sound (i.e. the many, many famous chorals written by so many Englishmen) be super receptive to his incredibly new pallet of sound that considers music before the text, or at least music to inform the text.

Speaking of important British voices... I stumbled across the movie of the play The Importance of being Earnest by Oscar Wilde. This play depicted many aspects of Victorian society that I thought were very interesting. I think its depiction of the workings of the upper class was also intriguing. Although I thought it slightly frustrating that it is a comedy in which we see a woman using her "power" to manipulate people only to attempt to get what she was looking for which was a marriage to the man of her choice. But I think that it is movies where I have taken most of my own prejudices of Victorian society from. I had always assumed that the level of "politeness" that we see meant that there was also an understood conservatism that follows suit. It is interesting to free these characters from my own prejudices. They seem to take on a whole different level of depth and "likability" to me. They seem not so different then from what we still see now... it isn't like we haven't heard a story of a manipulating woman before.

on to February

I really enjoyed this week's reading especially the Sweet article because it really brought new life to my own questions about who are the Victorians. As the article also brought to light, and made me feel better about, was all of the misrepresentation that we see of these people in our history. It appears that (like usual) only selective aspects of society seem to be remembered of this time. The aspects of culture that we do remember reflect sometimes the "uptight" and "conservative" nature of this culture. I loved how Sweet sought to refute this common misconception and refuted it with revealing the thrill seeking nature of the Victorians. I thought it was so interesting the fascination with horror that this society had. Between the mystery novels, horror stories, and the "freak" side shows this society truly knew how to push the envelope. The daredevils who risked their lives for these crazy stunts put all of this horror and adrenaline front and center for the entertainment of these people. I also was very intrigued when we were discussing sexuality as it pertains to homosexuality and the acceptable nature of this in the society. It had me wondering if the "prudeness" of America had something to do with making this curious society change. Maybe it is the spreading influence that America has over the world especially after WWI that causes the world to be held to American social standards? Maybe I'm just ranting about nothing but I at least think it would be interesting to see where these shifts in taboos come from. I also wonder whether it is also our modern day again "prude" view of society that leads to the selective history that we see coming from this period. It seems that the Victorians have been glorified for their highly respectable society and intolerance for "unbecoming" behavior. It would seem like a convenient concept to only remember the structured aspects of society and class and thus making it a standard to which all others seem to fall short. But one would think that maybe a Victorian too would fall short of these idealized views of society.

sigh...

I am excited about blogging my reactions of this Victorian Music class. I am not really a blogger per se, although this may have inspired a blog idea for my own personal life, but I do think that it is a nice medium to rant and express my own thoughts about what is going on in class. First thing, I guess I was more clueless about this era then I thought I was. During class I was thinking about all of the things that I associated with the Victorian Era… and sadly couldn’t really come up with anything except all of this “high society” that was associated with the time. I thought to myself “well cool! That means that all of those great Jane Austin books that I love were probably describing the Victorian Era, right?” Sadly, to only find out after checking the copyrights that they were published before this time. Great! Back to the drawing board… Then I thought that maybe the book that I read this summer, Rebecca, was written during this time. Then I quickly remembered the use of cars and looked that book up and again was disappointed to discover it was written in the 1930s. Anyway I don’t really know what to say about all of this except that I guess it means that I am clueless. I hope that within this course we will be able to straighten out this literature crisis that I seem to be having. I think I assumed they were all Victorian books because of the large stress that was placed on the society and how these characters functioned in the society. I always felt that this must have been occurring within the 19^th century. I am very excited to connect the dots in my brain and fill in the category of 19^th century England with true and validated aspects of culture. I especially find this interesting because of the other classes that I have taken during graduate school. I took a literature class on Bel Canto opera my first semester and just recently took a class in German Literature. It will be nice to see what is going on in England around the same time that some of these other aspects of music were developing. I thought it was especially neat in the Wilson article was the connection of other nationalities with the happenings in England. It will be interesting to see how everything connects and music travels through Europe. Overall I am very excited to be learning about this time so maybe one day I can understand a bit more about this now enigmatic (at least for me) part of musical history.