Locke's essay about the African Ensemble in America brought up many questions in my mind about authenticity and cultural ownership that definitely relate to my research project:
How does an “awareness of the hardships that face third world musicians challenge the moral authority of first world ethnomusicologists”? (p.171)
What motives might an ethnomusicologist have in studying a certain culture (affinity, heritage)? What moral difference do these two motives make?
Does race/heritage undermines legitimacy as a teacher or researcher or participant?
“Is a show “African” if the song texts, dance movements, and drum parts are well researched and the instruments and costumes are imported from the motherland?” (p.180)
“The integrity of an adaptation depends upon the leader's quality of knowledge of both the original music-culture and the culture into which the new work is being introduced (p.179) – can a cultural “outsider” ever have this knowledge?
Is there an “authentic” way to teach/learn, and does this make the final product more “authentic”? (can an outsider like Locke authentically teach Ewe culture?)
Who has cultural authority? - “One village may say the next village has got it wrong; one artist may say another artist failed to learn the work thoroughly” - Even groups among the same culture may argue about authenticity – but then again, where does one draw the lines between different cultures?
And who has the right to modify/interpret a piece of music? Is this right reserved to people of that musical/cultural heritage? Can a well-informed outsider do what he/she wants with an ethnic music without being “culturally inappropriate/insensitive” (and what does this mean—p.171)?
And how much inter-cultural interactions can there be before a music becomes “inauthentic”--again, where do we draw the line between cultures? (idea of tainting pure, authentic indigenous cultures with Western ideas/culture)
Notation as commodification and inauthentication of indigenous musics
“There is nothing to guarantee that a first existence performance will be a more accurate source than a private lesson in the United States.” (p.171) – how can this be?
He then goes on to say “Fidelity to the source is important.” (p.179)-- but what does this mean? What is an “accurate source”?
What is the relationship of a privileged, white, American student-musician to a poor African musician—what are the dynamics of this relationship? Does it perpetuate colonial attitudes/dependencies? Who has the power in this relationship? (p.172-173)
What might Locke mean by “authentic interdependency”, which he hopes will eventually come out of his relationship with his teacher?
“I sensed honesty within that complex soundscape..” (p. 168). What does Locke mean by “honesty” in this sense (musical honesty)? - perhaps he means “honest” in the way that he uses it later regarding art—honest art does not compromise itself for the sake of what the audience wants—but is this true? Are all “authentic cultures” this sort of “honest art”? If this is so, then does catering to an audience, either Western or African make something “dishonest art”, and thus inauthentic? (p.177)
Reinvention of the African ensemble as an art object - “performances of African music by non-Africans are at least as much about the attitudes toward Africa of the performers and the audience as they are about African expressive culture itself.” (p.180) - what attitudes toward Africa does African music convey?
“what truths about Africa can music convey to non-Africans?” (p.181)
“Performances of world music by born-in-the-tradition musicians reinforce comfortable categories, but anomalous presentations of the Other by non-others confound expectations” (182)
Orientalism – perpetuated or dispelled by the African Ensemble in America?
“The African ensemble can reinforce systems that perpetuate unjust power relations, or it can counteract them.” (p.187) – how might it do this?
“Art works, in particular, are capable of creating the ironic distance necessary to gestate change.” (p.188)
Locke believes that “traditional African expressive culture is a transregional heritage available for fair-use by everyone; and [he] acts in the world to challenge stereotypes and empower others.” (p.185) – this seems a noble enough cause – are there similar beliefs about other types of music? Is this view valid?
No comments:
Post a Comment