Sonneck Society for American Music
Bulletin, Volume XXIV, no. 1 (Spring 1998)
News of the Society
Message From the President
"We've come a long way, folks (but not far enough!)"
As I put together the panels and presentations on the need for more American
music in our curricula for the recent National Association of Schools of Music
meeting, it was tempting to fall into the despairing mode: here we are at the
end of the 20th century still arguing for something that many of us think
should be self-evident. This despairing mode was presented even more recently
in an editorial by Sammie Ann Wicks, a folklorist, for The Chronicle of Higher
Education (9 January 1998), in which she cites some damning statistics:
In a study that I conducted of curricula at 58 public universities, I found that
the elite Western tradition was the focus of almost 98 percent of music department
courses, with American traditions representing a scant 1.37 percent. The Western
tradition also was the subject of 80 percent of the music scholarship--980 of a total
of 1,230 articles--published between 1948 and 1996 in the Journal of the American
Musicological Society, this country's leading musicology journal. Articles on
American topics accounted for just 7 percent of the articles.
Damning -- but not the whole story. Before we join in a general chorus of despair,
let's also count the progress and success stories -- including our own. I wrote a
letter of reply to the Chronicle, which may or may not get printed, but
let me quote it in part, because I feel it presents a more optimistic -- and ultimately
truer -- picture of the current importance of American music in our
academic curricula.
As Dean of a school of music, and President of a major scholarly society devoted to
American music (The Sonneck Society for American Music), I find myself extremely
ambivalent about Dr. Wicks's comments. While she puts her finger on the real
problem, she does so in a manner that gives no credit for the progress made,
particularly in the last two decades.
To use myself as an example, I've gone from being a virtual pariah in the field of
musicology (the room full of medievalists used to clear before I would present a
paper on some aspect of American folksong -- it was the only session they could "fit"
me into!) to being the head of an organization of 1000 members that publishes
a distinguished journal of American music and offers annual prizes for best American
music dissertation, best book and best periodical article. Our topics are now welcome
at the American Musicological Society and Society for Ethnomusicology meetings, as well
as in their journals -- but we also have our own group that is in vibrant good health.
At the same time, as Dean of a School of Music, I see the remnants of what Dr. Wicks
refers to -- studio teachers still welded to and teaching an almost entirely European
art-music tradition. However, I also see a younger (and sometimes older) faculty coming
in that uses popular and jazz idioms as part of their teaching of theory; that premieres
exciting American works on their recitals and in their ensembles; that composes in
idioms combining the best of both American vernacular and European traditions (after
all, we have inherited both). I see history courses teaching both European and American
idioms, and I see courses for the layman that cover topics such as jazz, rock, and blues
in a responsible manner, teaching students their complex histories, as well as how to listen
with discrimination.
I am wondering how recently Dr. Wicks has surveyed schools of music, and how
deeply she has gone into course content beyond titles: courses such as "Theory I" or
"History of Western Music" can be taught with a wide variety of content, depending upon
the instructor. I wonder whether she has perused the journals she mentions for the
percentage of American articles within the last decade as opposed to over the
last 50 years. And she ignores altogether the existence of journals such as
American Music (1983-present), Black Music Research Journal
(1990-present), and various popular music journals, which have largely American content.
I can only welcome the invitation she makes to have other departments teach about music
as a cultural and historical artifact -- many scholars have stayed away from music too long,
assuming they lack the expertise. One of the joys of belonging to the Sonneck Society for
American Music is to see how often we can use the insights of people from other fields who are
welcome to belong to the Society and contribute their papers.
In short, while the problems Dr. Wicks alludes to are not completely cured, we
have -- in that quintessentially American phrase, "come a long way, baby" --
and that should be acknowledged.
That is my message to the academic world, and that's my message to all of you, as well --
we should be proud of what we've accomplished, and we should keep striving to accomplish
more. The discouraging aspect of the NASM meeting was that ours was not a plenary session,
and that therefore only a fraction of the heads of schools and departments of music got our
message. The remarks will be published, however, and this may give them a broader reach.
We must simply take every opportunity, large and small, to speak to the reasons for and
benefits of including American music in our curricula. However, it is better to speak
in a spirit of optimism -- that we have already accomplished much -- than in one of
despair. No one likes to be part of something that seems like a losing cause! I propose
that we make ourselves heard in all sorts of organizations and journals -- not just our
own -- and use our best powers of speech to celebrate what we've done already and suggest
what more can be done.
Yours, in eternal optimism,
Anne Dhu McLucas
Election Results
The new Members-at-Large of the Society's Board of Trustees are Judy Tsou, Nym Cooke, and
David Nicholls, and our new President-elect is Rae Linda Brown. The new electees will
take office at the Business Meeting in Kansas City. Prof. Brown will serve one year as
President-elect and will assume the office of President at the Fort Worth meeting in
1999. The members of the Nominating Committee would like to extend sincere thanks to all
those who ran for office. Your commitment to the work of the Society is truly laudable, and
much appreciated at all.
--Paul Wells
Chair, Nominating Committee
Finance Committee Report
The Society has now completed its fourth year of the new budgeting process involving the
Finance Committee. During that period of time, the process has been evaluated, revised, and
refined. Initially, the committee makes an estimate of income from membership dues and interest
earned by Society accounts for the next fiscal year, and income from ads in the Directory
and the sale of Sonneck mailing list. It also adds any unexpended funds from the Discretionary
Account of the previous fiscal year (this was effective for the 1997 fiscal year -- 5% of
estimated income is set aside for this fund), all gifts received by July 1 of the current year
(this is effective for the 1998 fiscal year), and any profit from the annual
conference of the current year (this was effective for the 1997 fiscal year). This results
in a total estimated income for the next fiscal year.
The chair of the committee solicits budget requests from all officers, appointees, and
committee chairs. A packet including the income estimate and copy of all budget requests
is sent to the members of the Finance Committee. The committee consists of the appointed
chair, the executive director, the treasurer and the chair of the Development Committee. With this
information in hand, the committee prepares a recommended budget for consideration by the board at
its fall meeting. This includes a listing of all budget requests, the funding recommended by the
committee (including all rationales), and the income estimate. The board then takes action on each
item. Following the board meeting, the chair of the committee sends each individual a written
notification of the board action regarding his budget request.
Requests for funding are denied either because the expenditure is not considered to be in the best
interests of the Society, or because of lack of funds. This past fall, it was clear that the 1998
budget recommended by the Finance Committee and the budget approved by the board exceeded the estimated
income for that year. It was for that reason that the board voted to establish a modest dues increase
for its members in 1998. I would add that, even with the dues increase, membership in the Sonneck
Society is still a "good deal" compared to other professional societies.
Requests for funding of unexpected expenses during the fiscal year are submitted to the Finance
Committee. It makes a decision regarding the request in consultation with either the President
or the Executive Committee of the Society. Funds awarded in this process are taken from the
established Discretionary Account.
I have recently completed an evaluation of the three fiscal years we have completed under this
process, and am pleased to inform you that the process is working well. Some basic information
for 1995-1997 is given as illustration.
1995 - General Fund Income
Source Projected Actual +/-
Dues $43,100 $44,470 +$1,370#
Ads $ 500 $ 250 -$ 250
Label sales $ 600 $ 440? -$ 160?
Interest $ 3,300 $(3,300) 0
Gifts $ 2,208 +$ 2,208 0
*Conf. Transfer $ 2,500 +$ 2,500 0
TOTALS $47,500 $53,806 +$6,306
# $1341 of the increase in dues income of $1,370 was expended to cover journal subscriptions
for the new members.
? the reports are difficult to interpret -- we are working on refining this.
0 the treasurers report for this year does not assign earned interest to specific accounts --
only a lump sum is available.
* reimbursement to the board for special subventions for 1995 conference programs.
1995 Expenditures
Budgeted Actual +/-
$46,643 $44,472 +$2,171
1996 - General Fund Income
Source Projected Actual +/-
Dues $39,300 $44,045 +$4,745#
Ads $ 300 $ 225 -$ 75
Label sales $ 200 $ 1,350? +$1,150?
Interest $ 6,350 $ 5,970 -$ 380
Gifts $ 0 $ 1,910 +$1,910
Bk Isssue sales $ 0 $ 187 +$ 187
TOTALS $46,150 $53,687 +$7,537
# $3,546 of the $4,745 increase in dues income was expended to pay for journal subscriptions
for new members.
? the records are difficult to interpret -- we are working on refining this.
1996 Expenditures
Budgeted Actual +/-
$43,933 $46,062 -$2,129@
@ due primarily to increased paper costs for our publications and journal subscription
costs for new members.
1997 - General Fund Income
Source Projected Actual +/-
Dues $43,662 $43,552 -$ 310#
Ads $ 300 $ 300 $ 0
Interest $ 6,000 $ 7,654 +$1,654
F03 transfer $16,091 $16,841 +$ 750@
Label sales $ 0 $ 450 +$ 450
F09 transfer $ 0 $ 4,347* +$4,347
TOTALS $66,503 $72,944 +$6,891
# Institutional membership dropped from 124 to 117, while retired membership grew
from 102 to 114.
@ This is an accumulation in the Discretionary Account over several years. Future
transfers will probably be about $3000 if nothing is expended from that account
during the fiscal year.
* Profit from the 1996 Annual conference in Washington, D.C.
1997 Expenditures
Budgeted Actual +/-
$60,442 $53,245 +7,197*
* NOTE: This includes $4,396 budgeted to support the editoral costs of the journal
editor that was not expended, and the $1,200 budgeted to support activities of
Interest Groups at the annual conference, which could not be used by the Interest
Groups until the 1998 conference. Factoring in these two items reduces the +$7,197.27
to +$1,600.48.
Summary
We have been successful in predicting income from membership dues, and we hope to do
the same with interest income. In the future, totals available from unexpended funds in the discretionary account,
annual conference profits, and gifts to the society will be known before the
budgeting process begins. The unknowns that cannot easily be predicted will be income
from ads in the Directory and income from membership address label sales. We are
pleased that we have not yet had a budget deficit at the end of the fiscal year.
Expenditures from restricted funds (Lowens Awards, Johnson Fund for Book Publication Subventions,
Non-Book Publication Subventions, Dissertation Prize, and Student Travel Assistance) are not included
in this report. Student travel to the annual conference is supported by income from the silent
auction at the conference and by gifts to this fund. Expenditures for all other restricted funds
are approved by the board upon recommendations of the appropriate committee.
A comparison of the above reports with the reports of the treasurer for the same fiscal years will show
different figures in many areas. My report reflects income and expenditures that relate to the specific
fiscal year only, while the treasurer's report shows all transactions that take place within the
twelve-month period, whether they relate to the fiscal year or not. For example, the majority
of our members paid their dues for 1998 in late 1997. Consequently, that income will be shown
in the 1997 report, even though it aplies only to the 1998 fiscal budget. Note also that
this report does not provide information on the annual conference budget. That budget is
handled independently by the conference manager, who reports directly to the board.
It is important to acknowledge that the Society receives significant financial support from the
institutions with which its officers, appointees and committee members are associated. This is
realized in the subvention of materials, supplies, postage, telephone costs, travel to fall board and
committee meetings, and (in some instances), release time. Thanks is also due the individual
members who personally absorb the costs of society-related work, and who also contribute a
significant amount of time in accomplishing the work of the Society.
--Homer Rudolf
Chair, Finance Committee
Updated 4/15/98