Kay Shelemay’s “Thoughts on Bridging Disciplines and Musical Worlds” is concerned with the need to rid ourselves of the distinction between “Western Music and “Non-Western Music” if we are to successfully link historical musicology, ethnomusicology, and anthropology. She acknowledges the fact that the present division between the two musics has not been challenged, especially by ethnomusicologists, who seek to “preserve their own pursuits and identity” in the presence of Western music institutions. However, she does claim that boundaries are beginning to crumble/blur due to the international influence on even the most Western of musics. This leads into the rest of her paper which examines the advantages and disadvantages of studying Western music and how ethnomusicologists can continue to push towards progression. For example, she explores the ideas of “early music” and its possible connection (or disconnection) from Western music and she even touches on the aspect of authenticity. In the end, she stresses what seems to be glimpses into the “new fieldwork” and ethnography, in that she feels like ethnomusicologists should “participate in joint ethnographic ventures”; that is to say, strive to present a more intersubjective perspective.
Discussion Question: Is authenticity better described temporally or qualitatively? That is to say is it the first performance of a piece that makes it authentic or the best performance?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment