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?
The perspective of the outsider has many benefits to the study of a culture. Many people do not recognize their own cultural idiosyncrasies and if they are not well traveled and versed in world wide cultural traditions they are often going to mistake certain traditions as commonplace and unimportant. This is a huge downfall for the insider. Perhaps a combination of the insider and outsiders perspective would be ideal.
ReplyDeleteAs far as evolving from an outsider to an insider I think the terms themselves are too black and white. There can be varying degrees of "outsiders." An ethnomusicologists could make it her life's mission to not only study, but engross herself in a culture, but there are many aspects of that culture she may never understand because she was not raised within that society's rules, beliefs and "norms." Norms are probably what most often falls to the wayside because the culture doesn't know a certain trait or tendency in their society is unique so without witnessing it the researcher has no knowledge of what could be an important part of that culture's identity.
I feel on the periphery of my own genre of Appalachian music because technically I am apart of it, being of the ethnicity, but culturally and/or traditionally I am not.
I am definitely an outsider of my research topic - Capoeira. Up until a year or so ago, I had little exposure to anything "Brazillian", let alone Capoeira, so a lot of this is all very new to me. I go to classes every so often but I am far from integrating myself into the culture and there are some things that continue to remind me that I am an outsider. For one, there is Capoeira's cultural roots which I feel disconnected from. There's also the language barrier. When we sing or listen to others sing, I can't but help wonder what I am missing from not understanding the words. I think I also have to immerse myself into other aspects of Brazilian culture if I want to really get a grasp of the insider feel, since there seems to be a strong tie between Capoeira and other aspects of Brazilian life. Just going to a class, no matter how frequent, doesn't seem to be enough. And as CassWhite describes, there's a bunch of rules, beliefs, and norms in any culture that you grow up with. If I immerse myself into Capoeira, I will move up the outsider/insider spectrum towards insider, but there will still be the barrier from not growing up in that culture that makes me, and probably some others, feel like a bit of an outsider.
ReplyDeleteJordan's comment about race reminded me of the difficulties Bruce Lee faced when learning Wing Chun because of his mixed ancestry. I think his outsider/insider issue revolved entirely around the race element. As far as I know about his life, Bruce Lee grew up in Hong Kong like many of his Wing Chun peers and was probably involved in the Wing Chun community at least just as much as them, yet the only thing that seemed to prevent him from being fully accepted was mixed ancestry. I wonder how the insider/outsider matter works though when there's a split opinion in the community and how what one believes him/herself to be factors into it all. Though many alienated Bruce Lee, there were still some, including his master, who accepted him learning Wing Chun despite his ancestry. And then there's how Bruce Lee felt. If he didn't put much thought into those who did not accept him, then perhaps he was a true insider in his mind.
I think that once you start to analyze any culture or subculture for that matter you become an outsider, because you are looking at habits and traditions in a new light or as if you have no connection to them, even if you considered yourself an insider before. Because the whole goal is to answer why questions and once you start asking these questions you remove yourself from maybe the unconscious knowledge you might have had while as an insider. So I don't think that insider outsider necessarily means being in a foreign environment or being in one that is well know to you, but it's more of a perception change.
ReplyDeleteYou also mention that playing a certain type of music or being an avid listener and supporter doesn't make you an insider. I don't really know what you mean by this because to me, these are definitive qualifications for being an insider. Being an insider doesn't mean you have to know every single aspect of the culture but simple be a part of it. Like, for my interview I interviewed someone who simply listens to they type of music I am doing, because they have perspective, maybe not as a performer but as a listener.
In regards to my project, I consider myself as an insider so I'm having some trouble transitioning to an outsider. LIke in my interview I found myself helping the person answer some of the questions I was asking! And I sometimes find my questions redundant because I feel like I know the answers already, but really it's not about a right or wrong but more of a subjective.
In response to your last two paragraphs, I realize that this is all really subjective when it boils down to everything. I believe my classification for an insider was that there had to be at least some knowledge of the culture and connections within the community, but I suppose it was not worded as such.
DeleteI hardly consider myself an insider because the community is so large and so widespread; almost everything I know has come from my own group and hardly anything else from many other groups that exist in the community, let alone the San Diego community. Also the fact that there are practically no Japanese Americans within my group makes it difficult to understand Japanese American values, traditions, and views in regards to the artform as I grew up with none of these myself.
I'm not sure that I agree that someone becomes an outsider by studying a culture you are an insider in. The understanding of the knowledge gathered through the questions that are asked can be markedly different between an outsider and an insider. The insider might make assumptions from his personal experience that the outsider wouldn't make, and thus lead to a different answer to a question. Both answers could be right or wrong, but only according to the context they were studied in, so I think while it is good idea to see things from both the perspective of an insider and an outsider.
DeleteI agree with you that I think the insider/outsider thing has a lot to do with perception and how you approach the music. I know it's probably a cop-out answer, but I think all ethnomusicologists must be both an insider and outsider to an extent to fully appreciate the music being studied. As in the book, many of them were confronted with the issue that they would never understand how it is to be an insider. That's true, but they can participate and learn to the best of their ability as an 'insider' and then step back to look at and evaluate things that would not be clear to an insider.
DeleteAnd regarding Jordan's concern about being an insider in the Taiko community, I think it's important to note that you may not necessarily be a member of the Japanese Taiko tradition, but more specifically of the Taiko community at UCSD where you ARE an insider.
DeleteI dunno, I think I agree with Afsar in that as soon as you begin to analyze a culture from the perspective of an ethnomusicologist, regardless of your status as a member of the community and part of the tradition, you are immediately constituted in a different way. Rather than being just a participant of the culture as an insider, you are participating for the sake of research & discovery/insight. There is an underlying purpose that I would assume is different from the person who is just an insider who doesn't really intend to study one's own culture.
DeleteFor example, I am an insider in terms of Korean American culture & that is all - it is my everyday existence as a Korean American & interacting with some other fellow Korean Americans. But if I decided I wanted to conduct an ethnographic study of Korean Americans, while I am ethnically an 'insider,' in the context of this new study I would then be an outsider as someone analyzing my culture. If I was not an outsider in some way when conducting a study, it seems that it would be impossible to avoid some biases. While bias is inherent in every choice we make, the mental distinction between an 'outsider' and 'insider' seems important in terms of ethnographic & ethnomusic research [as in all other types of research along these lines].
I thought it was interesting how Nettl lays out the positives and negatives of being either an insider or an outsider of the culture one is studying and then comments that both are necessary and useful in ethnomusicology, yet says rarely are efforts ever made in order to work collaboratively. Translators are used in order to relate to languages we don't understand, and, in a sense, aren't an ethnomusicologists' informants kind of like translators? I know he is referring to the collaboration between a native ethnomusicologist and an ethnomusicologist from an outside culture, but then we are again faced with the concern that Jordan pointed out; there are many degrees of being an "insider". A case could be made, as subsequent posts have alluded to, that once you remove yourself from participating in the musical culture just to participate and move instead into the realm of participating in order to study something in particular, you are not approaching the scene any longer as an insider at all because your mindset is different than the mindset an insider solely concerned with what is going on now, not the significance, relevance or implications of what he or she is doing.
ReplyDeleteI am thinking about this as I continue fieldwork for my project. I worked retail for four years so I have a bit of a dim view of the music I was forced to listen to day in and day out as an employee, but sometimes I enjoy is as a customer. This puts me in a similar grey area because I am an insider of multiple camps (or of none). I understand the manipulation behind it, which is one of the reasons I want to study it, but I also think it is pleasing and even necessary (how awkward would it be if you felt like every other customer in the store was listening to your conversation?). Furthermore, I am studying it which, based on my prior post, could make me an outsider to both.
DeleteAs an outsider, it seems as if you can never know enough about the culture, community, etc. to get a full understanding of the music. As an insider, it seems as if you are prone to being blind to your own traditional views and unaware of how prominent they may seem to outsiders. Too bad you can't truly ever be both. It seems to stem down to being as "worldy" as possible and aware of your surroundings/community/cultures. One must step away from it all a a personal level it seems, and try to break it down more technically to understand how different values play a role in culture and music. In the end, this is more difficult to do as an insider, but the view is less complete and thorough as an outsider.
ReplyDeleteFor me, I am completely an outsider for my project on African music. I feel that I need to apply what I learn from my research to what is familiar to me in my own culture in some way though. This would make it something that I feel I can connect and understand more thoroughly.
I think the subject of insiders vs. outsiders is one of the central topics of study when it comes to my personal project. Although I play guitar (including some blues guitar), listen to blues music every day, and attend concerts of blues musicians whenever possible (i.e. BB King, Buddy Guy), does that make me an insider?
ReplyDeleteAs much as I'd like to be accepted as an insider of the blues community, I wouldn't feel completely comfortable being placed in that category. I wasn't subjected to years of slavery, racial abuse, and segregation the way bluesman of yesteryear were. That kind of pain and torment makes those bluesman insiders beyond compare. For that reason, I'm more than happy being labeled as an outsider looking in, maybe one day approaching the line between outsider vs. insider.
Outsiders vs. Insiders is something that I found really interesting. Speaking from my own personal topic of study, (EDM) I would completely consider myself an outsider. When choosing a subject to research, I thought it would be more interesting to study a genre of music that I normally did not listen to. As a result I have learned a lot about this culture.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I do not think I will fully understand the culture and be an insider, the EDM community seems to be very accepting of new comers. They want you to know what EDM is all about. Speaking to my friend Sherri, who I would consider an insider to this culture, she was super excited that I wanted to learn and experience EDM music. I feel like sometimes some musical cultures are more accepting than others in taking people in. Some cultures want to keep things to themselves, while others want people to learn about them.
I think it's interesting when you talk about being an insider or outsider of the EDM community. But I think there is a wide spectrum of levels of understanding particular type of music. Where's the line that determines whether you are an insider or outsider? I'm starting to understand the EDM world a little better based on my song recognition and genre categorization. But I have friends that can name almost every EDM song on Spotify. Furthermore, he is pretty confident about the genres of music each song is. For example, if a song was playing and I assume that it's trans, he would correct me and say it's more electro-trans or say that it has other genres mixed into it. So to me, he is definitely an insider, and I am sort of in a grey area between them.
DeleteAs an insider though, I feel like I might have certain biases based on what I know and by what my friends know. But I suppose that any researcher would encounter the same problem if their sample size was so small. So I think I could fix the issue by interviewing a lot more people. I think it would also be a good idea to look up sources from a broader perspective
Like Nettle writes I think that there are both negatives and positives to being an insider vs an outsider. I think everything is pretty well laid out in the other comments, with outsiders providing some important insights that the insider might be blind to, while the insider has more of a native understanding of the music. I would definitely consider myself to be an insider in bluegrass, having been a part of the culture for almost ten years and I know in general how to move within the culture and the standard protocols. In attempting to study this culture I've been trying the best I can to take a step back and see things from an outsider perspective, and in doing so I've noticed a tendency to glorify the music or make certain notable figures Godlike and to play down, in particular, the importance of the blues in bluegrass.
ReplyDeleteI also forgot to mention that the problem of the insider and outsider views also show us that no single person can really see all sides of a culture. As Nettle wrote in Chapter 10 that once someone has studied a culture it doesn't mean that it has been 'researched' and that is the final understanding. I believe that it takes a plurality of views and understandings to begin to really piece together an understanding of any culture
DeleteAn "insider" is one that is raised in the culture of that music. Whether that person decides to study that music or not they do not become an outsider unless they put themselves outside. This includes people that would be blind to some aspects of what something might mean in their culture, they are still an insider. But, on the other end, anyone not from that culture is an outsider (including someone that could know everything about that music), if someone is not from that culture, they can't be claimed to be an "insider" (and due to this need to categorize everything) become an "outsider."
ReplyDeleteWith this being said, I do believe that there is varying degrees depending on the culture, some musics are rooted more into tradition, in which if you are not from that culture, you would never truly understand, and some other musics, such as pop, is not, and can be easier to become an "insider"
Reading through all the previous comments, it is pretty apparent that everyone agrees on the need for both an insider and outsider perspective. What I am wondering is what would be the best approach to facilitate this in our own projects? Interviewing subjects that would be considered "insiders" is not necessarily collaborating with said "insider." One would simply be researching the subject.
ReplyDelete