Report on teaching deformities in the study of the discipline of Musical Forms

Abstract

Do composers produce cells, figures, motifs, or periods? Does the concept of form only mean a string of capital letters in music? How interested can a singer be in the form of instrumental music? What could the word composition mean after all? And why would compositional analysis be different from simple form analysis? There are just as many questions that produce logical and legitimate anxiety. And all this because of the form of music which is synonymous with the form of water. With only one difference: water is liquid and formless, and music’s only sense of form is acoustic and invisible. Because the form of music cannot be and is not musical. The discipline of musical forms teaches nothing about form, only compositional scheme. Which has nothing to do with music. Do composers produce articulations or perhaps ideas, melodies, meanings, and themes? Which in turn can assume various compositional schemes. After so many questions, it would be appropriate to formulate a final query: given so many distortions, what exactly does the discipline Analyses of musical forms teach students?