The Snedden-Farnsworth Exchanges of 1917 and 1918 on the Value of Music and Art in Education

In 1917 and 1918, Charles Hubert Farnsworth, a leading music educator from Teachers College, Columbia University, and David Snedden, a critic and educational theorist of national repute, privately exchanged views on the role of art and music in society and in education. Snedden mulled over Herbert Spencer's query “What knowledge is of most worth?” and concluded that music must have practical survival value: it must contribute primarily to the maintenance of social and political order and secondarily to other aims. Farnsworth, on the other hand, thought that music performance or appreciation should be for the immediate joy that it gives the individual, not for some deferred social purpose no matter how important it might be. These divergent positions are explained in light of Farnsworth's interests in philosophy and Snedden's schooling in Spencerian and Darwinian thought.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/68979/2/10.2307_3345173.pd

Closure and the Book of Virgil

Taking its initial inspiration from Lipking’s first foray into what is now known as ‘career criticism’ this chapter considers the ‘wheel of Virgil’ and the works of the poet’s ancient biographers in structuring structuring readers’ understanding of his three canonical works and of the connections between them. Rejecting the idea that the career pattern necessarily means that we must see Virgil as progressing towards ever greater acceptance of the political realities of his day, the chapter instead looks to different models of reading, in which attention to intratextual echoes prevents purely linear and teleological interpretations. It is proposed that the Book of Virgil demands a circular rather than a linear pattern of reading, and that the role played by the image of shade and darkness, and the word umbra in particular, is to unify the three works in rejecting the triumph of epic and empir