| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Do you think it’s acceptable in a Journal Book Review article for a reviewer to restate the authors’ personal theories, suppositions and opinions as being a matter of factual history? |
| Yes, I think this is an acceptable practice. |
|
32% |
[ 26 ] |
| No, I do not think this is an acceptable thing to do. |
|
67% |
[ 55 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 81 |
|
| Author |
Message |
John Mohan
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 13 Nov 2001
Posts: 9830
Location: Chicago, Illinois
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 3:14 pm Post subject: ITG Journal Review Article Turns Suppositions Into Fact |
 |
|
| On Page 71 of the January 2006 ITG Journal, a reviewer wrote: |
Although this tongue-controlled embouchure may seem outlandish to many players using more conventional approaches, the authors point out that it is used by many prominent modern-day trumpet players, as well as notable players throughout history, including jazz greats Harry James and Roy Eldridge. |
(boldness added for emphasis)
For some time, Callet and Civietti have been claiming that certain famous players play or played using their radical TCE system, or “elements” of their TCE system. The only evidence they have ever produced to support these claims is that they claim the players they name have certain sound qualities or their faces and lips look a certain way when they play. Or, in the case of my teacher's teacher Herbert L. Clarke, they quote from a letter he once wrote about a "stunt" and/or "trick" he sometimes did to squeal very high notes ("stunt" and "trick" are the words Clarke used). Civiletti and Callet both feel that this is enough evidence for them to claim that Clarke tongued through his teeth when he performed. I don't agree, and I doubt that you do, either.
It has always been bad enough that Misters Callet and Civiletti resort to such misleading claims in their efforts to sell their system of playing. But now they have an ally in their far-fetched claims.
Now the ITG Journal has published a "review" that turns their claims into fact! The reviewer didn't write "The authors believe" or "It is the Authors' opinion that based on their sound, such-and-such players incorporated elements of TCE in their playing..." or words to that effect. He wrote, "...the authors point out that it [TCE] is used by many prominent modern-day trumpet players, as well as notable players throughout history, including jazz greats Harry James and Roy Eldridge."
In one sentence, the reviewer has turned Callet's and Civiletti's suppositions into fact.
And then he ends his review with the following sentence that again, takes Callet's point of view and turns it into fact:
| On Page 71 of the January 2006 ITG Journal, the reviewer wrote: | | As Callet states, "Be courageous! Be persistent... All the world's greatest players have used these secrets fro more than three hundred years of trumpet playing. Why shouldn't you try it?" |
I find this to be extremely upsetting. I have no problem with a positive review of something - even Callet material. I am not the God of trumpet, and I know fully well that my opinion of Callet's ideas and method(s) could be completely wrong. But the reviewer has clearly, purposefully chosen the words "As Callet states" to turn Callet's radical ideas into factual history. It seems clear to me that the intention of the proponents of TCE and SuperChops is to rewrite history to sell more of their product.
Look at it from another point of view:
Imagine if some researcher came to the conclusion that say, for instance, eating dandelions mixed with Jello pudding cured cancer, and he reached this conclusion without the support of any real scientific evidence (no double-blind studies, no fluoroscopic studies, nothing at all that could be measured, substantiated or verified), then wrote a book publicizing his rather imaginative idea - and then a reviewer for the Journal of the American Medical Society wrote the following sentence in a review:
“As the researcher points out, eating dandelions mixed with jello pudding cures cancer.”
I thought the ITG journal was meant to be an educational journal, perhaps even peer-reviewed. To allow such a thing to be written in a review - the unquestioning acceptance of any opinion or claim, especially one so wild as the one under discussion, is inexcusable in a publication that is supposed to reach for the levels of respect that the ITG Journal is supposed to reach for.
How do you all feel about this? If you feel as I do, perhaps you will want to send an e-mail voicing your feelings about this to John Korak, the ITG Book Reviews Editor at:
bookreviews@trumpetguild.org
I would appreciate it if you also took a moment to answer the Poll Question I've added to this. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
John Mohan |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
dave belknap
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 29 Mar 2004
Posts: 677
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 8:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
John:
I am in complete agreement with your point of view.
Cheers,
Dave Belknap
Trumpet
Local #47 American Federation of Musicians
Hollywood, CA |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
beartrumpet74
Veteran Member
Joined: 06 Nov 2004
Posts: 182
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 8:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Mr. Callet and others should present more emperical evidence before making these claims, AND ITG reviews SHOULD preface any article of this nature with a disclaimer that states that claims made by the interviewees are not verified. Unforutunately as time progresses and mass media spreads ever farther into the reaches of society, the sheer volume of methods and ideas about how to do anything increase. The student and/or professional is left with a wild array of topics and ideas to sift through in order to get authoritative information about whatever topic they choose to study.
This is regretable, but unlikely to change, and in some ways more information is a good thing. It's just hard to decide when enough is enough.
Sorry for any mis-spellings.. I play trumpet...I don't teach english.....
Peace to you all
Matthew |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
oxleyk
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 4180
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 9:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Isn't the purpose of a review, whether it's of a book, a restaurant, or a movie, to give the target audience enough information to decide if they want to read/eat/see it? Since when do reviews have to substantiate what the author states? The reviewer is just giving a synopsis of the subject.
While I am in no way a defender of TCE, I only have to listen to Mr. Civiletti to know that he's doing SOMETHING right, whatever it is.
Kent |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Mohan
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 13 Nov 2001
Posts: 9830
Location: Chicago, Illinois
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 9:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| oxleyk wrote: | Isn't the purpose of a review, whether it's of a book, a restaurant, or a movie, to give the target audience enough information to decide if they want to read/eat/see it? Since when do reviews have to subtantiate what the author states? The reviewer is just giving a synopsis of the subject.
While I am in no way a defender of TCE, I only have to listen to Mr. Civiletti to know that he's doing SOMETHING right, whatever it is.
Kent |
No Kent, that is not what the reviewer did.
The reviewer did much more than just to give a synopsis of the subject. And the reviewer did much more than just say that he agrees with the authors (which of course would have been okay to do as well). No, he goes way beyond the acceptable norm. He uses the words: "The authors point out, [that this person and that person played in the TCE manner]." And then to close his review, he writes, "As Callet states... All the world's greatest players have used these secrets for more than three hundred years of trumpet playing...." (italics added for emphasis)
This is akin to saying that what the authors claim is a point of historical fact. And presto: fiction (in my opinion) becomes fact.
Sincerely,
John Mohan
P.S. I do agree with you wholeheartedly about the crying in baseball observation you made! Not much crying going on down here in the Beverly Neighborhood near 95th and Western!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
oxleyk
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 4180
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 9:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
OK, I get it. You're opposed to the reviewer slanting the review a certain way.
John, I was also disappointed by the Sox not making the playoffs. They blew it!
Kent |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Mohan
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 13 Nov 2001
Posts: 9830
Location: Chicago, Illinois
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 9:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
To be even more accurate:
I am against a reviewer misleading his audience into thinking that suppositions, opinions, and theories of the author of the reviewed material are historical, proven facts when they are in fact, most certainly not proven to be facts.
And I have to confess, I have been so immersed in school, that I wasn't even aware that the Sox are out of it. Shame on me!
Cheers,
John |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Brian Moon
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 05 Sep 2004
Posts: 2785
Location: Detroit
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 9:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| John Mohan wrote: | To be even more accurate:
I am against a reviewer misleading his audience into thinking that suppositions, opinions, and theories of the author of the reviewed material are historical, proven facts when they are in fact, most certainly not proven to be facts.
And I have to confess, I have been so immersed in school, that I wasn't even aware that the Sox are out of it. Shame on me!
Cheers,
John |
You beat me to it John. Right on.
and
GO GET "EM TIGERS!
_________________
Either is fine. My chops always feel great
ObamaCare, a massive government takeover, a measure destroying jobs and the economy, a law designed to enslave the American people, an instrument of tyranny in the hands of criminal elitists. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nonsense Eliminator
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 03 Feb 2003
Posts: 5212
Location: Toronto
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 10:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm no fan of TCE, and I don't think that the wording in that review is particularly balanced or well-chosen. But here's the thing: The ITG Journal may call itself a "journal," but it's certainly not the same animal as a peer-reviewed scientific journal, or even academic music journals. Virtually every article or review I have ever read in the ITG Journal of anything seemed to have a positive slant to it. I'm certainly not an expert on the ITG editorial process, but it has always appeared to me that what gets reviewed and how it gets reviewed depends almost entirely on who feels like submitting a review. Most of the people who are inclined to buy a book, read it, and then write and submit a review of it (for free, unless I'm mistaken) are probably predisposed to agree with the content of the book. I would bet that if you went through back issues of the ITG Journal and read every review of a method book, you would find that in virtually every case, the reviewers make little attempt (if any) to present a balanced accounting of the author's views. In short, if you're expecting the ITG Journal to print balanced, unbiased reviews, you're often going to be disappointed.
_________________
Richard Sandals
NBO |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
crzytptman
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 03 Sep 2003
Posts: 10124
Location: Escondido California
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 11:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | I was also disappointed by the Sox not making the playoffs |
| Quote: | | I wasn't even aware that the Sox are out of it |
Why did the discussion abruptly turn to underwear?
I'm with you, John. The merits of the method should be judged by the success of it's admitted adherents. In the case of the historical references, one would have to base the claim on some kind of disclosure from the historical player, or else it's just speculation.
_________________
Crazy Nate - Fine Yet Mellow Fellow
"so full of it I don't know where to start"
Horn: "just mismatched Kanstul spare parts"
- TH member and advertiser (name withheld) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pops
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 14 Sep 2002
Posts: 2039
Location: Dallas (Grand Prairie), Texas
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
.
I have had books reviewed by the ITG Journal.
They do NOT accept review submissions. Meaning you can't just write a review and send it to them.
They also will not let you suggest a reviewer.
A man who edited a famous trumpet book really WANTED to review one of my books. He has reviewed before and I was fine with him doing it. Actually I felt honored by him asking, but he was turned down.
I was told that the Journal assigns reviews to people that don't know the author and haven't used the book. It is supposed to be a FRESH review that way.
I was still fine with that I just thought that he would have been cool.
_________________
Clint 'Pops' McLaughlin
You can always Google me.
50 years Teaching. Teaching and writing trumpet books is ALL I do.
7,000 pages of free music. Trumpet Books, Skype Lessons: www.BbTrumpet.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Mohan
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 13 Nov 2001
Posts: 9830
Location: Chicago, Illinois
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm curious who the 3 people are that voted that they think it is okay for a reviewer to mislead his audience by presenting unproven speculations of the author of the book he is reviewing as historical fact.
I find that to be a really interesting point of view.
Sincerely,
John Mohan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MPWall1
Veteran Member
Joined: 18 Sep 2002
Posts: 238
Location: Rochelle Park, NJ
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I whole-heartedly agree with Richard (Nonsense). I expected the ITG Journal to be a peer-reviewed journal with intelligent writing and opportunities to engage in intellectual discourse. I was mistaken. Although there are many articles that I enjoyed, such as anything on Herseth, most of the writing in there doesn't fit into what a "journal" would publish. But hey, they make there money, just not from me.
To each his own.
Michael
_________________
Michael Patrick Wall, Ed.D.
Independent Researcher in Music Education |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sully2302
Regular Member
Joined: 12 May 2006
Posts: 70
Location: NYC
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
deleted
Last edited by Sully2302 on Sat Aug 27, 2011 5:52 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jpellett
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 01 Oct 2004
Posts: 1859
Location: Atlanta, GA
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 6:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This is funny. I suppose then John that if you wrote an article for the ITG journal that you would stop making your claims that tongue controls airspeed, thereby affecting pitch, or would at least present that as an opinion. We both know that would never happen though.
Jason Pellett
_________________
http://www.jasonpellett.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Brian Moon
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 05 Sep 2004
Posts: 2785
Location: Detroit
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 9:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| John Mohan wrote: | I'm curious who the 3 people are that voted that they think it is okay for a reviewer to mislead his audience by presenting unproven speculations of the author of the book he is reviewing as historical fact.
I find that to be a really interesting point of view.
Sincerely,
John Mohan |
I suggest two answers.
1) Some people have great difficulty looking at anything objectively.
2) They are just dumb as a rock and don't understand the question.
_________________
Either is fine. My chops always feel great
ObamaCare, a massive government takeover, a measure destroying jobs and the economy, a law designed to enslave the American people, an instrument of tyranny in the hands of criminal elitists. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
robert_white
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 19 Feb 2003
Posts: 1583
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 4:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
The ITG does not pay reviewers - to the best of my knowledge. People sign up to do it so that they can pad their academic curriculum vitae or tenure review files (if I may grossly overgeneralize). Sometimes, they are just interested in sharing a review with the ITG community. In either case, they are not "peer-reviewed" or subjected to rigorous editing.
John, there's no conspiracy here. It's unfortunate that the reviewer left out "in the author's opinion...". Unless you're going to go back and raise a ruckus over all the crappy reviews that have appeared in ITG over the years, though, I'd suggest giving this a rest.
Write an email to ITG and then chiiilllll. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Mohan
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 13 Nov 2001
Posts: 9830
Location: Chicago, Illinois
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 2:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jpellett wrote: | This is funny. I suppose then John that if you wrote an article for the ITG journal that you would stop making your claims that tongue controls airspeed, thereby affecting pitch, or would at least present that as an opinion. We both know that would never happen though.
Jason Pellett |
Hi Jason,
Apparently you are confused.
There is a difference between writing an article publicizing one's opinion about how certain players play or played, whether or not the tongue controls the airspeed, etc. and writing a review of such an article where the original author's personal opinions are falsely presented as scientific fact.
If I reviewed any book on any method, including Claude Gordon's method, rest assured I would not take the author's opinions - whether they are wild opinions without scientific merit, or well-thought opinions based on strong evidence - and restate them as historical fact.
Would you?
Sincerely,
John Mohan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Mohan
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 13 Nov 2001
Posts: 9830
Location: Chicago, Illinois
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 2:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In reference to the fact that there are now 12 people who seem to think it is okay for the author of a Journal Review Article to purposefully mislead people, perhaps my own opinion that the vast majority of trumpet players tend to be of at least average intelligence, is perhaps a bit optimistic.
Or: Those 12 votes are the result of a person or some people clowning around.
Whatever.
Cheers,
John |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Mohan
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 13 Nov 2001
Posts: 9830
Location: Chicago, Illinois
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 3:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sully2302 wrote: |
...The late Claude Gordon, who I deeply respect, said in Brass Playing is no Harder.....that, "The great [trumpet] virtuosos can be counted on your hands". This was published as fact, though it is only one man's opinion. WHY did Mr. Gordon feel the urge to publish his opinion on this matter in a way that presented it as fact?...
Regards,
Matt
P.S.
In response to "who are the 3 people who voted yes", they are likely people who did not answer the question directly, as it is a trap seemingly designed to make people vote in favor your point of view.
The wording of the poll is akin to me asking, "Do you feel that it is morally right to publicly insult, scrutinize, and attack an amateur writer for making a symantic error in one of his/her articles?" in order to gain support for my above post. |
I'll address your P.S. first: The poll question was the most direct and accurate wording that I could come up with to ask what I wanted to ask, within the confines of the number of characters allowed in a TH Poll Question. I'll summarize for you:
1) A book was published that contained some wild claims that certain famous trumpet players play or played using a certain method of playing. Little or no scientifically acceptable evidence of those claims exists in that book, or otherwise.
2) A supposedly independent review was made of that book in the the main Journal for trumpet players. In that review, the reviewer falsely restated the authors' wild claims as being proven historical fact.
3) I think that's a really crappy thing to do, so I wrote about it and asked the poll question.
Do you agree that it is a crappy thing to do, or do you think doing what that reviewer did is ethically acceptable?
And if you don't think it's acceptable, why are you criticizing me?!?!
Now on to your first point of the two I quoted above: First off, Claude would be livid about this whole situation with the proponents of TCE making the kind of claims they make.
But that's beside the point and doesn't address what you wrote about - sorry for the digression.
When Claude said and wrote that "there are thousands who play the instrument, and yet the greatvirtuosos can be counted on your hands" I think one can take that to be a metaphorical statement - or one can choose not to. I happen to think it's literally accurate (based on my idea of what level a greatvirtuoso plays at).
But that's not in the least bit important in regard to the point you tried to make. Every statement reflecting the author's beliefs made in a book, article, or essay does not have to contain the words, "in my opinion" or "I think" or something similar. In my opinion, that would make for very tedious reading. I think that would drive most readers crazy. I mean, I think that in my opinion, most people would be very aggravated by such etiquette if they had to read it. I didn't mean literally they would be driven crazy - after all, I have no way to prove the exact factual point at which someone is really crazy - so I think it I meant crazy in a figurative way.
Had enough?
Okay, back to some level of normalcy: When someone writes an article or a book and their aim is to help others, and part of that goal means they need to convince others that their beliefs are true, the important statementsare the ones that need to have evidence presented to support them. If the words "in my opinion" were required all the time, we'd all be buying a lot more ink cartridges.
I'm tired of writing. Goodbye.
Cheers,
John |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
