Read on Twitter
Composers as academics, a thread:
Beethoven: The only person in the field that the general public has ever heard of
Mozart: Published his first article in middle school to much fanfare; unrelatedly, parents both have PhDs in the field
Beethoven: The only person in the field that the general public has ever heard of
Mozart: Published his first article in middle school to much fanfare; unrelatedly, parents both have PhDs in the field
Haydn: Always snubbed at the [Discipline] Society Annual Awards in favour of Mozart, even though he’s made more contributions to the field over a longer career
Vivaldi: Has given the same paper at six conferences
Vivaldi: Has given the same paper at six conferences
JS Bach: Publishes several excellent articles a year but continues to toil in obscurity at a third-rate state school because his research area hasn't been fashionable in 30 years
Stravinsky: Was doing groundbreaking work right up until he got tenure
Stravinsky: Was doing groundbreaking work right up until he got tenure
Monteverdi: Self-proclaimed standard-bearer of New [Discipline]. Still pretends to be persecuted by the “old guard” even though everyone does New [Discipline] now
Clara Schumann: Often dismissed as a spousal hire by people who don’t read her work
Clara Schumann: Often dismissed as a spousal hire by people who don’t read her work
Allegri: Research goes viral in the popular press after the university media office makes it sound more interesting than it really is
John Cage: Just puts his name on articles created by the Postmodernism Generator. Once got a mailing-list unsubscribe message through peer review
John Cage: Just puts his name on articles created by the Postmodernism Generator. Once got a mailing-list unsubscribe message through peer review
Wagner: Books are cited by everyone, but people only actually read the abstracts, excerpts, and reviews because they are SO LONG
Brahms: Always giving invited talks but you still can’t figure out what’s supposed to be interesting about his work
Brahms: Always giving invited talks but you still can’t figure out what’s supposed to be interesting about his work
Schoenberg: Starts a new sub-discipline that nobody really understands, but his devoted acolytes gradually take over the entire field
Webern: Has only written one short article and two book reviews but got a prestigious job because his PhD advisor is very influential
Webern: Has only written one short article and two book reviews but got a prestigious job because his PhD advisor is very influential
Mozart (alternate): Despite obvious brilliance and an excellent reputation in the field, drifts through a series of post-docs and VAPs in several countries before dying in poverty.
Rossini: wins a Nobel Prize at 37, uses the money to buy a boat, and retires
Gesualdo: Does truly original and inspired research but at conferences everyone just gossips about his disastrous personal life
Gesualdo: Does truly original and inspired research but at conferences everyone just gossips about his disastrous personal life
Tchaikovsky: Once gave an cringe TV interview for the History Channel that became a popular internet meme, haunting him for years and destroying his Google results page
Schubert: Eight months after a spectacularly successful dissertation defense, dies from a treatable infection because he was kicked off the grad student health plan.
Stockhausen: Trains a neural net to generate research papers; somehow convinces tenure committee to substitute a Turing test for traditional review
