Nettl 11 - Ethnomusicologist's Dilemmas

Chapter 11 of Nettl's book - "You Will Never Understand This Music: Insiders and Outsiders" discusses the problems ethnomusicologists face as they are studying the music of a culture because of who they are - they are usually outsiders.

The overarching theme of this chapter boils down to whether or not you are originally part of the culture you want to study - are you an outsider, or are you an insider? Often times, outsiders are initially measured with three criteria (in a negative light):

1. Comparative Ethnomusicology is often looked at negatively where the culture of music being studied is compared to the original culture of the ethnomusicologist and was once thought to show the superiority of the original culture - this was often if not always (at the time) a Western music culture.
2. Ethnomusicologists want to do ethnography their own way, often overlooking and disregarding practices that will help elucidate elements of that culture for they are criticized by native scholars as their research and methodologies as being improper or wrong.
3. Generalization and the disregard of boundaries between a culture and the subcultures within in, grouping them together on a global scale a la "World Music."

These criteria have led to feelings that insiders should be the only ones to study a particular culture in order to prevent these travesties (and to not have to deal with these close-minded foreigners) and insults to their culture; there is probably a large element of race that plays into these factors as well..

In contrast to this though, Elschek described that though he was studying the music of his culture, he felt as though he was an outsider and was treated as such by the people in the culture of which he was studying. I want to explore this concept in relation to our own projects as the concept of 'insider' and 'outsider' is very relevant to our own situations for this class.

Most of us are looking at our music cultures from the outsider's perspective, for it is one thing to play or listen to this type of music and be an avid listener and supporter of the music, but we are not completely involved and integrated into the culture to be able to look at it as an insider. I believe that unless we regularly attend sessions of a certain culture's music, but also interact (have connections extending deep within the community) with not only the performers of the music, but also those who are like us, fans or those who are interested in this type of music, will be able to call ourselves insiders. And even then, if we do fit these criteria, and are really considered insiders in our own field of music, we are outsiders to an extent - perhaps not as greatly as Elschek describes, but nevertheless we are (unknowingly) looking at the music from a comparative perspective probably due to the limitations of our own knowledge in respect ethnomusicology and anthropology.

I know for myself, I do not know enough about the culture of Japanese and Japanese Americans in relation to taiko drumming to be able to call myself an insider even though I am Japanese American myself and I have been a taiko drummer for 3 years and have become somewhat involved in the community. How do the rest of you feel on this subject? Are we all outsiders? Can we ever be insiders of the music culture that we appreciate?

Journal #5

I went to Adams Avenue Unplugged this weekend. It was pretty awesome. Most of the bands were folk and had serious old time influences throughout their sets. I actually happened to catch John C. Riley by accident and his band was actually really impressive. The demographic of the concerts surprised me because I thought it would be a younger, hipster-like crowd when in fact it was an older crowd, mostly white and a lot of young families. I'm sure this was greatly influenced by the fact that the event was free. Unfortunately, I did not get to see Curt perform because they switched his performance to today instead of yesterday and I already had other obligations. I am still going to email him and hopefully get the chance to pick his brain a bit. The concert was definitely not a waste of time because all of the bands I saw had enough to do with my genre that I plan to write some of the younger bands to see if they will answer a few questions such as "what do you know about the history of the music you perform?" I am anticipating a lot of silence:) One of my favorite bands was the Spirit Family Reunion. The fiddler is amazing. He not only plays the fiddle, but he sings beautifully.

John C Riley:
For some reason blogger wont let me upload this youtube video so:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owyuoJDFAKY

Seminar week 4

Mentioned readings:

Don't know if I actually mentioned his name, but:

Peirce, Charles Sanders. 1974. "Division of Signs" in Collected papers. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

Peirce basically argues that all our perception is through signs and symbols, and sets out a sort of theory of them and how they might be named and understood. Really quite hard work, but can be useful.

Eshun, Kodwo. 1998. More Brilliant Than the Sun: Adventures in Sonic Fiction. London: Quartet Books.

A great read, if really idiosyncratic—the one I was saying compares Depeche Mode to Blind Lemon Jefferson (or Howlin' Wolf maybe). 

And Music:

Billy Holiday singing Abel Meeropol's song, Strange Fruit. If you click through to youtube, there is an HD recording but without video, and a number of videos with pictures of the lynchings she is singing about—hard to watch, but if you've not seen them... perhaps they are a part of US history that you ought to know about?

The Pet Shop Boys—It's a Sin (Live 1991)

This has some fairly sketchy imagery, so pick a different version if you're easily offended.

Some Kraftwerk, who have recently been playing in some very fancy modern art galleries such as MOMA and the Tate Modern: 

Model:

The one I was playing in class: Trans Europe Express:

And, inevitably, the meme from hell—Hitler objecting to the two ticket limit for the show series:

Depeche Mode: Everything Counts:

And the 12" version (Everything Counts in Larger Amounts):

And this is great, DMK, a Depeche Mode cover band from Bogota (a fella and his two kids) version:

Flock of Seagulls: I ran:

Afrika Bambaata with Soulsonic Force (sampling Kraftwerk):

A few things from week 3's seminar

Umm... didn't get to Merriam—thus we'll spend this coming Thursday on him and maybe a little more on projects, now that everyone is committed—don't worry about the week 4 Nettle readings for now. Try to catch up with your comments and work on your projects. Come ready to discuss the Merriam!

A couple of things that came up on Thursday:

Reading:

Said, Edward. 1979. Orientalism. New York: Vintage.

This book, though often disagreed with on both factual and theoretical grounds, is one of the fundamental readings on race and ethnicity, otherness and othering, and cross-cultural encounter. Said argues that the Western view of "the Orient" is a continuously constructed imperialist fiction (as, among other reasons, it is absurd to think that the whole of the East is in any respect homogenous), and that this fiction permeates not only the West itself, but also the Orient. It deals with difficult, and often uncomfortable ideas, but is very well written.

MP3 and compression:

I, and one of your colleagues, went on a miniature rant about compression and sound quality. Here are some links to info about it. I suppose, I'd suggest that at some point you go into a place that sells some high end audio gear and take a listen to a good quality recording of something you like on a good set of headphones and some good speakers, just to get a sense of what the possibilities are and how much we lose with compressed audio files, computer speakers and cheap ear buds.

Neil Young hates MP3s, and a neat rundown on music file types

And here is a visual representation...

...and here is the "for dummies" site rundown on how it relates to itunes


Music:

We mentioned drum language and I offered some of Sheila Chandra's recordings as an example (her music is also a great example of several different sorts of fusion: the connection of traditional and global forms of music—see two below; and of more than one tradition—multi-cultural fusion, see three below). She recorded three albums for Peter Gabriel's Real World label (fusion/world beat based) and a song of hers was used on the Lord of the Rings soundtrack:

Speaking in Tongues

and the dance mix for those of you into electronica:

Lagan Love/Nada Bhrama:

...and finally:

The 1940's (since 1941 I think) Hollywood scene steakhouse that has jazz and a dance floor that I mentioned is called Cafe La Maze (video at the link) and is actually in National City.

WEEK 3 RESPONSE: "FUNCTIONS" OF MUSIC

1. Jazz - "a music that originated at the beginning of the 20th century within the African-American communities of the Southern United States Its roots lie in the African-American adoption of European harmony and form to existing African musical elements. African musical influences are evident in the use of blues notes, improvisation, polyrhythms, syncopation, and the swung note."

1) The function of emotional expression

--> use of the solo and progression into a primary mode of self expression
2) The function of aesthetic enjoyment

--> shown in various films and aesthesized in pop culture
3) The function of entertainment

--> was played at nightclubs and dancehalls
4) The function of communication

--> communication between musicians and instruments - call and response
5) The function of symbolic representation

--> a representation of american "black" culture and oppression
6) The function of physical response

--> physical movement, "feeling" the blues
7) The function of enforcing conformity to social norms

--> members within the culture have ideals on the "way" it should be played
8) The function of validation of social institutions and religious rituals

--> played in churches and to congregate individuals (?)
9) The function of contribution to the continuity and stability of culture

--> major role in progression of Afro-American culture
10) The function of contribution to the integration of society
--> integration and acceptance of African elements into American society

2. The Breakbeat - "can refer to two distinct but related things: It is both an electric music genre and the distinct percussive rhythm from which this genre takes its name, usually characterized by the use of a nonstraightend 4/4/ drum pattern. These rhythms may be characterized by their intensive use of sychopations and polyrhythms ... closely connected to hip hop and breaking."

1) The function of emotional expression

--> emotional response to the break of the record
2) The function of aesthetic enjoyment

--> the pop media representation of the dj, turntables, and scratching
3) The function of entertainment

--> party music, played at house parties, block parties, to (later) bigger venues
4) The function of communication

--> a means through with people could unite (?)
5) The function of symbolic representation

--> a representation of oppressed black "ghetto" culture in America
6) The function of physical response

--> its physical representation in "breakdancing"
7) The function of enforcing conformity to social norms

--> kept kids out of gangs and away from drugs (?)
8) The function of validation of social institutions and religious rituals

--> something good can come out of the Bronx ("ghetto" institution)
9) The function of contribution to the continuity and stability of culture

--> allowed young people a means to communicate with their generation (?)
10) The function of contribution to the integration of society

--> integration of black "ghetto" culture into society

3. Avant-garde Music - "a term used to characterize music which is thought to be ahead of its time, i.e. containing unique or original elements, or unexplored fusions of different genres ... Today the term may be used to refer to any other post-1945 tendency of modernist music not definable as experimental music, though sometimes including a type of experimental music characterized by the rejection of tonality." ... [definitions taken from wikipedia]

1) The function of emotional expression

--> a means of redefining what music is to the individual
2) The function of aesthetic enjoyment

--> aesthetics as a primary or irrelevant element (playing with dichotomy)
3) The function of entertainment

--> seen as "different" and something to be "experienced"
4) The function of communication

--> relationship between artist/musician and sound
5) The function of symbolic representation

--> symbolic representation as something also to be questioned
6) The function of physical response

--> asking the question: how and how should someone respond?
7) The function of enforcing conformity to social norms

--> a break from norms ... a progression towards new norms (?)
8) The function of validation of social institutions and religious rituals

--> ??
9) The function of contribution to the continuity and stability of culture

--> functions as the movement away from comfort in stability

10) The function of contribution to the integration of society

--> integration of new sounds and elements to society

MERRIAM CHAPTER 3

To get to the meat of this discussion and in order to open up further dialogue, I have decided to first flesh out what, for me, was the major part of the chapter in the way I read and understood it in order to get a better grasp at it myself as well as to see if others perceived it in a similar light ...

"Ethnomusicology aims to approximate the methods of science insofar as that is possible in a discipline which deals with human behavior and its products" (37).

In this chapter, the author basically takes the discussion we had in class last week about ethnomusicology as a critical lens through which one can listen to and study music in order to create a set of "universals" a couple steps further. He does so by establishing, what for him, are the basic founding "universals" of the field itself. These are (in paraphrase):

. ethnomusicology is a sort of scientific pursuit that produces nonscientific results.
. ethnomusicology is both a "field and a laboratory discipline" i.e. it is concerned not only with gathering and categorizing data, but with analyzing it and coming up with specified "results"
. ethnomusicology has historically leaned towards the study of primarily non-Western or nonliterate societies and cultures ...
. field "technique" in ethnomusicology differs from field "method" in that technique refers more the the "details of data gathering in the field" while field method refers to a much broader scope that encompasses the "major theoretical basis through which field technique is oriented"

He then goes on to a sort of self critique of these universals by stating the following:

"Ethnomusicology has for the most part failed to develop a knowledge and appreciation of what field method is, and has thus not applied it consistently in its studies ..."

"... there has been an artificial divorcing" of the "field" and "laboratory" disciplines of ethnomusicology  ... a lean towards "armchair analysis" that has prevented many studies from achieving "its most fruitful results" that must "inevitably derive from the fusion of both kinds of analysis ..."

For him, "the single most difficult problem" in ethnomusicology is "whether the aim of our studies is to record and analyze music, or whether it is to understand music in the context of human behavior."

From what I understand, the author is basically taking on the two extremes of ethnomusicological practice and suggesting some sort of happy medium? But then again, at the same time he suggests that there is a self-separating dichotomy between the two approaches and understandings of ethnomusicological study. For the most part, however, what I am getting from this reading is that the field itself is still undefined and that ethnomusicologists as a whole are still not yet quite united under an umbrella of field "method." He suggests that there is a divide within the "culture" of ethnomusicology that needs to be resolved. In order for ethnomusicology to better "approximate the methods of science" it needs a universalized approach - a mode of listening and documentation that supercedes individualized and specific "personal" approaches and decisions.

Nettl Chap. 21- Recorded, Printed, Written, Oral: Traditions

My posts from most of the last week didn't post for some reason. I'm trying to retype up what I remember from before.

Nettl Chap. 21- Recorded, Printed, Written, Oral: Traditions

This chapter was about the differences in "oral" vs "aural" music. Oral learning, taught by telling, is completely different than aural learning, which is by listening. I had never thought of how much different are.  In playing music, it is easy to tell someone how to play it but, at least for me, it is much easier to learn by listening to it and then playing.

This chapter was explaining how while they are different, aural is a much more precise description of how music was learnt. Oral music is often doubted in how accurate it is. Historians and musicologist worry that over time, the music has changed just like some of the oral history has changed.

To prevent this from happening, precise learning has to be used. All other version of the piece are considered variants, identities, imitations, and separate units.

Oral music was doubted and was not considered music for a long time but is now accepted but people still wonder if it is accurate to the past.

Week 3 Response: Merriam's "functions" of music in Western Art Music/1970s Punk/Arabic Mawwalil

1. Western Art Music - in the most general sense this may be defined as music produced following 'classical' Western traditions of theory, notation, instrumentation, & practice

• Function of emotional expression - at hands of both composer & performer
•  Aesthetic enjoyment
• Entertainment
• Symbolic Representation
• Physical response (maybe?) - prompt to dance; social construct of audience-clapping practices, etc.
• Enforcing conformity to social norms - in practice as well as content (religious music, people allowed/privileged to perform & hear music in this tradition/style)
• Validation of social institutions & religious rituals
• Contribution to continuity & stability of culture - perpetuates culture through enforced practice, performance, pedagogy, & rules

2. 1970s Punk - integral aspect of the growing punk subculture characterized by rebellion (against the norm, establishment, sentimentality, etc) as well as numerous ideologies ranging from the nihilism of Sex Pistols to the socialist aspirations of The Clash, along with a host of other sub-subcultures in between. 

• Function of emotional expression - clearly; just look at some of their performances
• Aesthetic enjoyment - ultimate celebration of aesthetic freedom
• Entertainment
• Communication - specific messages of punk mvt through image, performance, actions, words, etc
• Symbolic Representation
• Physical Response - anything, though it is often associated with violence/highly energetic behavior
• Contribution to continuity & stability of culture - in that it is integral to 'punk' though it often worked to undermine the establishment & authority rule
• Contribution to the Integration of society - punk [music] supposedly welcomed any who wished to take part in this movement & lifestyle, often across cultural & social boundaries (slightly different from the Skinhead movement around the same time which was generally partaken by working-class youths though many lifestyle/cultural similarities exist)

3. Mawwal - ancient Arabic music tradition characterized by distinct vocal technique & instrumentation (using traditional Arab instruments)...I think this stuff sounds so wonderful...
[Example of Traditional "Mawwal" style]
[More Modern example of "Mawwal" - Wael Kfoury] <--I only found out about this singer last year & I can't get enough of his songs!  He does both traditional & more 'modern' pop-fusion style songs.

• Function of emotional expression - improvisational freedom of vocalist
• Aesthetic enjoyment
• Entertainment - at least it is today, primarily in Arab cultures; it may have been in the past as well
• Communication - conveying poetic text
• Symbolic representation
• Contribution to the continuity & stability of culture - practice/style persists, with evidence of it being practiced even in Ancient Egypt, representing the longevity of Arab culture, particularly through music

Merriam Ch. 1

This reading starts off with separating musicology with ethnomusicology. Merriam emphasizes that historically, the difference was that ethnomusicology was strongly tied to anthropology (4-5). It also focused on the connection of music with geographic areas, but there were problems linking ethnomusicology to places. Instead of using geography as a basis, Merriam defines ethnomusicology as "the study of music in culture" (Merriam 6). Merriam says that "music sound is the result of human behavioral processes that are shaped by the values, attitudes, and beliefs of the people who comprise a particular culture" (6). To me this makes a lot of sense because relating music to a specific region is very different than understanding the culture of the people who perform or listen to that kind of music. Additionally, Merrian mentions that by defining in the sense of culture, we need further understand the "aspects of social sciences and aspects of humanities" behind their culture.

Merriam goes on talking about the stages that ethnomusicologists go through in terms of completing their research project. I was more intrigued at the beginning of this portion because I was still a little confused on how to approach our blogging project. The first steps are to collect data. So relating this to my journal blog, I would find out as much as I can about the EDM community in San Diego. I would look up videos and find as much as I can about the history of this community. The next step is to analyze it based on the community's "coherent body of knowledge about music practice, behavior, and concepts in the society being studied" (Merriam 7). Because I am targeting the community in San Diego, I think this step is slightly less overwhelming. My targeted audience are the rest of you, so our understanding of musical tones and concepts are more similar than if I had a project on something from China or Africa. But, to further my analysis I would utilize interviews to understand what the majority of the culture shares. Merriam also mentions the music needs to be analyzed with "special equipment for the transcription and structural analysis of music" (8). Of course this is not really applicable for us, but I would definitely try to look into the musical scores and compare the different sounds I hear. Lastly, Merriam says that the analyzed data need to be "applied to relevant problems, specifically in ethnomusicology and more broadly in the social sciences and the humanities" (8). Of course, I don't know what my conclusions will be, but it's good to keep the ideas of social sciences and humanities in mind while researching. It will definitely help me shape my interview questions as I dive further into my research.

I think this reading was pretty helpful to me because it gave me more guidance on how to approach my research. I wanted to ask how did this reading affected your perspective on ethnomusicology and your project? In the reading they talked about using ethnomusicology as a form of communication. I agree with this concept because the culture behind music can really show a lot about the people that listen or perform it, and by understanding it, we can definitely communicate with them better. Do you think this project will help you become a better communicator? What do you think understanding the history and "primitive culture" (Merriam 14) will offer for you? Also, is there anyone that is studying a culture that you are already part of? I have been part of the EDM culture in San Diego for about a year now, and I'm really excited to dig deeper into it. I love the music, but never really looked that much into it let alone the history behind it. And I've definitely never thought about connections it had toward social sciences and humanities. So I was just wondering if there was anyone out there in the same boat as me.

Merriam Chapter 2: Toward A Theory For Ethnomusicology

In this chapter, Merriam begins by discussing the dual nature of Ethnomusicology; the anthropological and musicological aspects. He discusses their differences and says there are 5 main discrepancies between the two: the differences between the artist and the social scientist, methods, results, activities, and content. The most divisive point he brings up is that of the scientist and the artist and their main purposes. According to Cassidy, communication of knowledge is the primary function of the scientist, but merely a "bonus" for the artist. He goes on to say that the scientist primarily communicates knowledge while the artist primarily communicates feelings. I think this is an interesting topic of conversation because a scientist can take on the role of an artist (i.e. theoretical postulation) and an artist can take on the role of a scientist (i.e. mathematical music). Here is an example of music based on math, particularly the Fibonacci sequence:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIIhC5bAX84

Merriam goes on to discuss the differences between the social sciences and the humanities. The difference between the two lies in the fact that we can derive the subject matter of the social sciences from the basic needs of the human biosocial organism, while we cannot do the same for the humanities.That being said, there are a couple things that the two share in common. Firstly, they both deal with what man does and why (despite using different approaches). Second, both consider human behavior to understand the art product. Merriam deems that ethnomusicologists are essentially "sciencing about music".

Similar to Nettl, Merriam attempts to define music by bringing up several different definitions coined by the Oxford dictionary, various anthropologists, musicologists, etc. Like Nettl, Merriam makes the point that music "cannot be defined as a phenomenon of sound alone", because of the element of human involvement and social interaction.

Merriam - Chapter 11: Uses and Functions

In this chapter, Merriam makes the distinction between uses and functions of music and then goes on to describe what he takes to be the universal functions of music. Use is described as a sort of the basic “what’s” of music that are presented as descriptive facts. Functions, on the other hand, help answer the “why” questions of music and are concerned with “the reasons for its employment and particularly the broader purpose which it serves” (210). Merriam also presents the four major ways the word “function” has been used in ethnomusicology. However, his main concern of this chapter is concerned with the last type of function, where function “may be taken to mean the specific effectiveness of any element whereby it fulfills the requirements of the situation” (211). This chapter ultimately leads to Merriam taking this definition of function and broadening it to describe what he finds to be the 10 universal/major functions of music.

EDIT:
I somehow forgot about this part of the instructions: "In comments, after reading Merriam’s Chapter 11, choose any three types of music (one should be the type you are working on in your project, and at least one should not have been mentioned in the chapter by Merriam). For each, describe the music and analyze what you believe to be its function(s) using Merriam’s notion of musical function (pp. 223-227). Your goal is to try to find all of his functions across your three types of music, or get as many as you can."

I left the irrelevant parts of what I typed earlier at the bottom of this post in case anyone feels like reading that. Anyway, for reference, these are the 10 musical functions Merriam lists:

1) The function of emotional expression
2) The function of aesthetic enjoyment
3) The function of entertainment
4) The function of communication
5) The function of symbolic representation
6) The function of physical response
7) The function of enforcing conformity to social norms
8) The function of validation of social institutions and religious rituals
9) The function of contribution to the continuity and stability of culture
10) The function of contribution to the integration of society








PRE-EDIT POST:

One part of the article that stood out for me was the mention of a supposed difference between pure and applied art. In the context of music, Western art music is generally regarded as pure, whereas TV, radio, and movie music are regarded as some examples of applied music. What bothers me with this distinction is how does one define pure music and such a thing even exists. If pure music means that the music carries no meaning, then I find this concept difficult to accept. If it carries no meaning, then it probably should not satisfy any of the universal functions of music that Merriam describes, except for maybe aesthetic enjoyment. But even then, does the music one creates and performs not contribute or take away from some music culture? The music one creates is also affected by one’s exposure to different traditions of music and carries some message about those traditions. Additionally, music is organized sound, and the process in which we organize that sound is not some completely random activity that does not carry some message. Even if I take the first several hundred numbers I get out of a random number generator and then find a way to map these numbers to sounds to create a song, my song would not be completely devoid of meaning. This indeterminate song says something about both me and my music tradition(s) and carries some message that I may be trying to send. It can represent my desire to break free from the ordered structures of popular Western music, the unpredictability of life, or some other deep message.

This wikipedia article talks about pure music and some of the debate surrounding it. It might be worth looking at. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_music

Some notes from today's seminar.

My memory seems a bit fuzzy at the moment, so hopefully I'll be able to add to this later.

Some books I mentioned today:

Carlson, Marvin A. 2004. Performance: A Critical Introduction. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge.

This book provides an overview of the contemporary concept of performance and its development in various related fields; including the development of performance art since the 1960s, the relationship between performance, postmodernism, the politics of identity and current cultural studies, and the recent theoretical developments in the study of performance in the fields of anthropology, psychoanalysis, linguistics and technology.

Cresswell, Tim. 2004. Place: A Short Introduction. Short Introductions to Geography. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

This book provides an overview of the contemporary concept of place and its development in Geography and other fields. As a significant and very interesting example of recent work on place, it includes most of Doreen Massey's article A Global Sense of Place.

Seeger, Anthony. 2004. Why Suyá Sing: A Musical Anthropology of an Amazonian People. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

A very interesting, readable and not too long book—at its end it tells the story of Tony's not entirely voluntary foray into "applied ethnomusicology".

Bourdieu, Pierre. 1990. The Logic of Practice. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press. p68.

This is at least one place where Bourdieu indicts participant observation: 

"One cannot really live the belief associated with profoundly different conditions of existence, that is, with other games and other stakes, still less give others the means of reliving it by the sheer power of discourse." (he goes on at some length)

Frith, Simon. 1996. Performing Rites: On the Value of Popular Music. Cambridge, MA: Harvard.

Can't remember why I mentioned Frith at the moment, but we'll be reading him later in the course (see the bibliography)

And some of the music and vid:

Snow Ball the dancing cockatoo (there is lots more of him):

Tuvan Throat Singing:
This bloke explains a bit about it (2.15 is when he starts singing and talking about it):

Huun Huur Tu (higher, whistle style):

An Edison wax cylinder and machine (he didn't think it would be used for music, but important speeches and such):

Wax Cylinder Recording Demo (keep watching, they show you more of how it works):

Matt Molloy and Donal Lunny (bouzouki) with James Galway watching:

Here's me mate John Joe on the bodhrán (the old winnowing tray) with Flook (solo around 2.15): 

Ch26 Nettl "The Creatures of Jubal: Instruments" (Week 2 Reading)

This chapter is mostly based around the classification of instruments: should there be classes? What would they be? How would you define the class? By the instruments cultural, physical or tonal aspects?...etc. Also, the chapter discusses if the study of instruments should be a separate from or a sub-field of Ethnomusicology all together?

The predicament is in the fact that there are so many different types of instruments between our plethora of cultures that defining classes is incredibly complicated.

The fact that the instrument population is so dense and diverse leads me to believe that it is a worthwhile field to study and further develop into it's own subject or sub-field.

I believe the classification system, if it is necessary, should be divided by culture, not blanketed across all. Culture is a huge part of what makes an instrument unique yet connected. By that I mean an an instrument is uniquely connected to a single or maybe only a few cultures. Instruments often tend to be first and foremost a reflection of a culture and many times are used to fulfill a cultural purpose, i.e. worship, celebration, mourning..etc.

I can't imagine a worthwhile classification system that would be comprehensive, yet concise enough to be useful if it includes universal statements to classify all instruments. I believe this is true unless the only type of classification being attempted is that of a physical or tonal nature. In terms of Ethnomusicology and Organology that is simply not thorough enough.

The most widely used format for instrument classification, without cultural identity taken into account, is the Hornbostel-Sachs system which categorizes instruments into five categories: Idiophones ( sound created through the vibration of the body of the instrument: cymbal, washboard, gong); Membranophones ( sound created by the vibration of a membrane: drums); Chordophones ( sound created by stretched string or strings between fixed points: cello, zither, lute); Aerophones ( sound created by vibrating air: organ, pipe, conch shell); and Electrophones ( instruments involving electricity: keyboard, synthesizer).

"Hornbostel and Sachs based their ideas on a system devised in the late 19th century by Victor-Charles Mahillon, the curator of musical instruments at Brussels Conservatory. Mahillon divided instruments into four broad categories according to the nature of the sound-producing material: air column; string; membrane; and the body of the instrument. However, these categories were not new; they derive from the Natya Sastra, a roughly two-thousand-year-old Indian theoretical treatise on music and dramaturgy. Mahillon limited his system, for the most part, to instruments used in European classical music. From this basis, Hornbostel and Sachs expanded Mahillon's system to make it possible to classify any instrument from any culture."- Wikipedia :)

Below is a link to the Smithsonian Sound for Global Libraries. This site uses the Hornbostel-Sachs system to categorize instruments. It is a nice and even kind of a fun way to further explore this form of instrument classification. Enjoy!

http://glmu.alexanderstreet.com/browse/instrument

Stokes Response (Week 1 Reading)

The Martin Stokes subject entry on Groves Music Online addressed contemporary theoretical issues in ethnomusicology. Stokes explains the current positions on several areas in ethnomusicology including theory and culture, communities and their musics, ethnicity, nationalism, diasporas and globalization, race, sexuality and gender, new historicism, practice theory, and music theory and analysis. The reading itself was fairly dry but highly informational--definitely a useful read as I familiarize myself with ethnomusicology.

The section that I found most intriguing was that on communities and their musics. As Stokes explains, music and dance create a sense of community, and the process of creating this music and dance, as opposed to the music and dance itself, is often a contributory factor to the creation of a sense of community. Durkheim's concept of collective effervescence can be used to understand this phenomenon. Collective effervescence is "a perceived energy formed by a gathering of people as might be experienced at a sporting event, carnival, rave or riot" (Wikipedia). The participation of individuals within a community in a communal music event (e.g. highland Berber festivies) may in fact be a foundational aspect of the community's identity.

This sense of community, however, can be applied to more than just a particular ethnic or national group of people. I believe that this sense of community does not even have to include a permanent group of individuals. A community can be defined as a group that shares common characteristics and views itself as a distinct collective in a larger society. With the annual Coachella Valley Music and Arts Festival coming up these next couple weekends, I could not help but think about how this analysis applies to the event. Thousands of individuals, all from different backgrounds, flock to the Empire Polo Fields in Indio and set up a sort of pop-up community in which everyone shares something in common: a desire to participate in an event that is more than just a concert. Coachella becomes this temporary space in which creativity thrives and one can escape the normal structures of society. Participating in the event itself creates this collective effervescence that Durkheim applies to religion and Stokes relates to ethnomusicology.  In doing so, the attendees of Coachella establish a sense of community--a temporary community, that is. The music is what brings everyone together and facilitates the collective camaraderie that everyone leaves with.

A reading that is somewhat related to this concept of temporary communities is Hakim Bey's "T.A.Z.: The Temporary Autonomous Zone, Ontological Anarchy, Poetic Terrorism." While Bey's book is focused on the socio-political implications of these temporary spaces, I think that it is an interesting read relevant to my analysis.

Here are some pictures of the Coachella community:

Ch 7- “I Can’t Say a Thing Until I’ve Seen the Score: Transcription”

An interesting theme in this chapter is that of an Ethnomusicologist’s worth. Especially prior to the invention of recording devices, transcription was a critical skill for the preservation of music which was a primary ethnomusicological goal. Nettl makes a comment questioning the usefulness of transcription in summarizing the music and culture it is in, yet, nevertheless, it is still of critical importance.

I found it particularly interesting that Nettl observed ethnomusicology as one of the few fields in which machines were not taking over, and were in fact being resisted despite the potential benefit in reduced human labor. Machines, while they may be more accurate in their diagnoses lack the ability to escape their programming should something unexpected occur, or something not conventionally notable. While a machine could more accurately record pitch (although I wonder if it would be able to account for a performer going sharp as the environment changed without modulating) and rhythm theoretically, it would be unable to perceive mood or impressions in place of actual occurrences.

This shortcoming of machines again places worth on human ability because a human can apply discretion concerning what is valuable to include, as opposed to what can be omitted since Nettl acknowledges that a completely comprehensive transcription is impossible as well as impractical because it would be so complicated to discern after the fact. Humans will also know their intended audience’s background knowledge (be it scholarly in the style, in a different style, or native musicians) which would further dictate what was necessary to include and what would be assumed.

Even with the easy access to recordings today, transcription is still necessary. Listening to a piece of music, there is no way that I would be able to discern nearly as much as someone highly trained in that style would be able to, but viewing a transcription made by that person can start to give some insight as to how they would go about analyzing it. It is also highly personal, however. What I think may sound like it is of the utmost importance, they may disregard as a performance choice, or as typical practice. That being said, Nettl conveys how insulting it can be to have a transcription of yours criticized. It makes sense—to be told your transcription is incorrect is tantamount to being told your logic and perception, and background knowledge are flawed, which is one thing for a student to hear, but quite another for an expert.

Transcription is also very malleable based on what is being transcribed. Nettl told how Strumpf used to transcribe based on many renditions by a live performer to create a sort of “average” which was supposed to be more representative of the music itself as opposed to the particular performer or performance and remove errors that could occur in a recording that was only done once. There are an awful lot of decisions to be made in regards to transcription, but it definitely leaves a lot of room for interpretation, and error, especially if it is based on a style that western notation cannot easily be applied and an essentially new method of representing the music has to be utilized.

Myer Reading: Ethnomusicology - History to 1945

The Myers reading isn't much of an opinion or argumentative reading but more so a presentation and listing of many ethnomusicologists and their studies/collections within different musics in various countries and regions. Myers does mention the ideologies of some of the ethnomusicologists and their approach to studying different musics, all of which are prior to 1945. Some of these pose some interesting questions and arguable theories.

Myer's writes about many ethnomusicologists who did fieldwork in their area of study and in order to preserve the music they used wax cylinder recordings. Myers mentions that wax cylinders were used due to their portability and convenience. I found it interesting that Myers states that they continued to be used even into the 1950's when more advanced technology such as the wire recorder became available. I then started to think of some questions as to why that may be. I came to the idea that it's possible the wire recorder was not as portable, harder to use, and possibly not as affordable (I'm speculating, I have no idea of the cost of either). The continued use of more wax cylinders vs. the newly available technology could bring to question the preservation of the music. The use of recording music was justified as a means of preservation and so I questioned the choice of recording technique and it's ability to last. I also questioned the quality of recording and which would contribute to a better quality of recording.

Another important concept that Myers touches on when discussing Cecil Sharp was the question of authenticity. Sharp a collector of English folksong and dance believed that "authentic" traditions were dying out. To preserve authenticity they obtained most of their material from singers age 60 or over. I found this interesting in saying that age may have a relationship with the material they have collected and it being "authentic". I can see that a theory to this may be that the older singers have more knowledge and have been exposed to or have more experience with "authentic" (I kind of assume he means original when say authentic), however this relationship and reasoning could be argued as being inaccurate.

Many collectors not only recorded the music but also transcribed it as well. Myers mentions John Comfort Fillmore a piano teacher who prepared transcriptions of Alice Fletcher's collections who collected works of Omaha Indian music, mostly song. The tradition of the Omaha Indians and song was that of an oral tradition, and like many who collected works from an oral tradition transcribed the music to paper by ear or fter recording it. It can be argued that although this was done to preserve the music it in a sense takes away from the tradition and "performance". After transcribing and then learning the music from paper goes against an important factor within that tradition, it's oral transmission an important teaching and learning process as well as communication within its community. Fillmore's view on the Omaha Indians was mentioned as having "pitch 'discrepancies' because the Indians had an inferior sense of pitch and discrimination". He then went on to try and reduce the songs to scales such as pentatonic scales and minor scales, ultimately finding he could not.

I feel that this view is bit ignorant and naive (mind you it was the late 1800's) due to the fact that, yes although it could be justified that his comparison of their song to that of more Western musical theory was to possibly obtain a clearer view (for Westerners) of their musical system, it in a way demeans it's tradition. I interpret his efforts, also due to his mentioning of their inferior senses, that he in a way has the view of "lower" and "higher" music and has thus tried to put the two against each other displaying a kind of power complex. He goes on to mention that they have poor pitch discrimination, however I think it should be taken into consideration that maybe the Omaha Indian music simply does not contain all the pitches Fillmore has tried apply/find in their song. It's possible that some pitches are not used or common within their music and so their "poor" pitch discrimination could be due to the fact their musical structure is not one that can be compared to his Western music example and some pitches from Western scales are new to the Omaha Indian tradition of song.

Myers article itself is pretty dry and listing apart from mentioning a few individuals and their theories, I don't feel there is an overall opinion or argument of Myers expressed throughout the piece.  These are a few things I personally picked out of Myers work.

NETTL - CHAPTER 5

    This chapter deals largely with one of the bigger concepts discussed in class last thursday - that of music and its universality. I relates music with language and points out their undeniably analogous structures. Each, in a sense, can be used as a template to help better understand the other. For example, renowned American ethnomusicologist Mantle Hood took on the idea, approach, and practice of linguists who would immerse themselves in a new language and culture in order to better understand it and applied it to music. He named his new concept "bimusicality" out of which came "the development of fieldwork in which a scholar would learn to participate - as a performer and maybe composer - in the music he or she was studying, developing competence somewhat analogous to being bilingual" (Netttl 58).

    This need for bimusical study and practice essentially negates the possibility of music being something that is "universally understood" by putting it on the same level as language. For it to be the "universal language" as conjectured in class, it would have to be above language in scope and "greatness" in that it would have to be the language that accomplished what all languages tried and failed to achieve, i.e. a complete and total unanimously understood means of communication. But if it is, in fact similar to language in the way that it is perceived, practiced, passed on, etc. then just as there is no such thing as a universally understood spoken language, there cannot be such a thing as a universally understood music sound or practice. Sure, there are similar structures and sounds within specific music styles that can form bridges and connect with other (not always so similar) musical traditions, but just because a language may have a similar phonetic alphabet as another doesn't mean that the two are mutually understood.

Nettl Ch.4 - Universals of Music (Week 2 Response)

Nettl ultimately asserts that "music is not the universal language" after an overview of different methodologies of studying "universals" in music & the unavoidable complexities of trying to compare music with language.  He starts with an attempt to define music but ends up identifying characteristics that can be generalized as "universal" to music across cultural/practical boundaries. 

I can see why identifying universals can be helpful in the study of music and ethnomusicology because it can make comparative analysis easier when there are certain comparable elements within which one may identify differences.  But in this chapter the different kinds of "universals" identified by Nettl seem so exceedingly broad to the point where I wonder if they are ultimately that useful...for example, "anything present in every instant of music" as a definition of music or that "musical utterances" are universal.  The third approach asks if "there is a way in which all musics are [...] in some way alike."  Is it just me or do these seem like givens? 

Reading this chapter has made me a bit apprehensive about the idea of "universals."  In seeking universality isn't there the danger of missing out on what actually makes different kinds of musics special or unique?  Universality seems to imply trying to find commonalities against which differences may be identified.  But wouldn't this lead to the generalizations of music traits to fit these "universals" rather than expand categories so as not to exclude elements that someone may arbitrarily dismiss as less significant in ethnomusicological studies? 

Pegg Reading Response

With the Pegg reading, which was mostly a background of the developments of ethnomusicology in the Western world, I couldn't find much in the way of opinions or material I could easily engage.  However, in looking for something I felt I could engage and write about, in the conclusion of Pegg's introduction to the article I noticed that he stated that Ethnomusicology, "...never fitted happily into the modernist dichotomization between ‘us’ and ‘them'...".  I don't agree with that point.

As is stated throughout the article there were many methodologies and theories that were disproven and many of them seem to create the dichotomy of an 'us' and 'them'.  For example comparative musicology would seem to encourage the idea of the 'other'.  That being said, as time goes on the ideas of 'us' and 'them' are shown to be false and born out of ideas that are built on ethnocentric presumptions, but nonetheless it is all too easy to fall into this trap of ethnocentrism when studying music.

While Pegg might say that Ethnomusicology does not fit into such a dichotomy I believe it can be very easy to create one, sometimes even subconsciously, and if one does not question the common ideas that are gained through their society it is almost impossible NOT to create this problematic dichotomy.

Bohlman Response: Paradigm Shifts and the Development of Ethnomusicology in Terms of Recording Technologies

This article was informative, yet also rather.... well... let's just say I got a few good winks of z's from reading it. It is quite hard to form an opinion on it as much of it, if not all of it, is the history of ethnomusicology's growth post-1945. Bohlman discusses the evolution and the "paradigm shifts" of the practice of ethnomusicology from just music to the applications of music within culture and society.

I shall briefly summarize and provide an opinion on what I found to be the most interesting aspect of Bohlman's article and its relation to the paradigm shifts ethnomusicology underwent with the advent of recording and playback technologies. Originally, recordings of traditional musics and melodies were for archival and historical purposes with... adequate support from external organizations and communities. With the rise of ethnomusicology becoming an academic field of study, along came the increased funds from these universities and organizations to fund research and field work on recording, exploring, and discovering new aspects of a culture's music. With the rise in popularity of ethnomusicology, so too did the recordings and the musics of other cultures (this is still when ethnomusicology was considered most world musics EXCEPT western art music and their traditions).

This led to a transformation in which the recordings that were once used primarily for scientific and archival purposes changed to a more public and commercial view; for many reasons I might add. One of these reasons is for the benefit and goodwill of increasing the awareness of these musics through its commercialization, leading to a greater purpose to record and archive these pieces for the public to enjoy. Another reason is for the positive-growth profit model that this genre of music "world music" can generate. Companies in both private and business sectors acted as sponsors for ethnomusicologists to conduct field research and the production of quality recordings to be enjoyed at one's pleasure by the consumer and at one's leisure by the scholar. The large increase in available funds contributed to both the amount of recordings seen as well as the technologies that were used to record them.

Now to get to the heart of things. I found this particularly interesting because "world music" is one of the genres of music that I listen to quite often and this section in Bohlman's article sparked interest and thought at a hopefully deeper level. World music is its own genre as labeled by the music industry and its consumers (it certainly has a nicer ring to it than "traditional musics of the world" or "ethnomusic" or something of the sort) has led to what I believe the commercialization, popularization, and stereotyping of this genre. As with any type of music, the companies behind the recording and publication need to make a profit. In modern day, after many recordings of many different traditional musics exist, with some more popular than others *Irish/Celtic music* and overtime they have become increasingly stereotyped to sound one way or the other - usually much less traditional than the average listener would think - that is not to say that it doesn't sound good or is completely disregarding traditions but it is an attempt to make the music more popular and generate profit.

An example of this would be from the Irish/Celtic music tradition:
More traditional - A collection of Reels and Jigs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3xeTpgLP5o

Less traditional but perhaps more stereotypical:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPr8v67-CW4

Just type in 'celtic music' in youtube and you'll find countless examples of this.

Bringing it back to the Bohlman article, ethnomusicology greatly evolved in both practice and technologies as the field itself became an "anthropology of music", observing the cultural and aesthetic elements that music has towards a society. The type of music that we consider 'world music' today, comes from its classification by ethnomusicologists for public consumption as well as historical and archival purposes. Without the desire to spread the knowledge and appreciation of this music - and also in some respects to profit from it, an appreciation for these musics and their respective cultures may not be as well received as they are now within our society.

-- I'm not sure I've done this reading response correctly since there were really no arguments in this set of articles as it is all history of the growth of what is Ethnomusicology. With that being said, I took liberties in the response because of the lack of argument within the article. I had fun in writing the post though; perhaps I will also be relating this concept of recording technologies and the commercialization of these musics in their relation to popular music.


- Jordan

From today's seminar, 4/4: Definitions of Culture link, A list of concepts/ideas to bear in mind while critically considering music, some music that came up, some authors and books that came up

A few of things from today's seminar:

Here is the nice page with a number of good, or interesting categorised definitions of culture. If ethnomusicology is, as Nettl says, the study of music in culture [or possibly as culture], it might be as well to spend some time and consideration on what culture might be:

http://varenne.tc.columbia.edu/hv/clt/and/culture_def.html

List (not comprehensive) of Concepts/Theories/Ideas to bear in mind while critically considering music—would be great to see others appear in the comments.

• uses and functions
• identity
• power
• hegemony
• imperialism/colonialism
• violence/aggression
• process or thing?
• industry
• intellectual property/ownership (copyright? tradition?)
• dissemination/distribution
• tradition
• regionality
• space/place
• production/consumption
• recording
• literacy/orality/memory
• memory
• reception
• audience
• performance
• community
• psychology/psychoacoustics
• brain function (cognitive science neuroscience?)
• meaning
• value
• culture (high/low/other?)
• time
• emotion
• gender
• race
• spirituality
• religion
• technology
• class/strata/distinction
• construction/material culture
• semiotics

Music mentioned/played in class




For anyone interested, the two things I played in class were, the

The Royal Edinburgh Military Tattoo, 2011



and Public Enemy,

"Don't Believe the Hype"

and "Bring the Noise"

from their album It Takes a Nation of Millions to Hold Us Back (sorry, it appears they're not into having their stuff embeded)

By the way, if anyone is into drumming and/or precision, check this mob out from the Military Tattoo a couple of years back—they're uncanny:




Finally, if you were wondering what I was on about at the strangeness of the way that Western art music (classical) has become conventionally performed, here is a decent quality vid of Beethoven's 5th Symphony. Check out the first movement (ends about 8.20—give yourself a least a minute or so before that even if you don't want to listen to the whole thing—if you're into it, put it on HD and plug it into the stereo, or good earphones) and have a look and listen to what's going on while this ferocious and fantastic music is being played and what happens (at 8.20) when it reaches its ending climax—does it not seem a little odd that the audience is dressed up and sits their woodenly throughout, and that when you get Beethoven's brilliant finish what happens is... nothing—that the audience must actively shut down its excitement? Also, what is the orchestra wearing? Why are they? etc. etc.




For those with more interest in this direction, some of the writings on Western art music that I know of are:

Small, Christopher. 1998. Musicking: The Meanings of Performing and Listening, Music/culture. Hanover: University Press of New England.

He writes about the sorts of things I've just mentioned above, and coins the word musicking, and applies it very broadly, to make it clear that music, in his view, is a process, not a thing.

Born, Georgina. 1995. Rationalizing Culture: IRCAM, Boulez, and the Institutionalization of the Musical Avant-Garde. Berkeley: University of California Press.

She writes about IRCAM, the Paris conservatoire of new/computer music.

Kingbury, Henry. 1998. Music, Talent, Performance: A Conservatory Cultural System. Philadelphia: Temple University Press

Kingsbury is the ethnomusicologist I mentioned who, having closely examined/taken apart the conservatory system in this book, found it very difficult to get a publisher and subsequently get/keep a job (a brain injury was also difficult to overcome), but the book is very interesting if you are interested in the conservatory etc.

Oh, and, finally, the French intellectual I mentioned who is "post-structuralist"—still sees strong structures but that work and are rearticulated through people, rather than being separate and simply working on them, is Pierre Bourdieu:

Bourdieu, Pierre. 1984. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Translated by R. Nice. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.

Bourdieu, Pierre. 1990. The Logic of Practice. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.

Bourdieu, Pierre, and Randal Johnson. 1993. The Field of Cultural Production: Essays on Art and Literature. Cambridge: Polity.