1. In some of the ethnographies we have read, the researcher plays a part in the transmission of tradition within the community, as Kay Shelemay did. In others, the ethnomusicologist does no such thing and feels very little connection to the community after conducting research. What is the role of an ethnomusicologist, and what does she/he owe to the community being studied? What does the community owe to him/her? Do these roles differ if the ethnographer is "at home" or "away?"
2. We have looked at various examples of use of the internet in ethnographic research, including Miller's idea of A2A transmission via YouTube and Eric Whitacre's "virtual choir." How has the advent of the internet changed the practice of ethnomusicology? How has it made some parts of research more difficult?
This is a question that I have been thinking about throughout the course after reading Shelemay’s article on the pizmon community. I think that first and foremost the role of the ethnomusicologist is to objectively study and portray the community. In my opinion, this objectivity needs to come from a deep understanding of the community. Part of this understanding is through the ethnomusicologist getting involved and fostering relationships with the members. I do not necessarily believe that the ethnomusicologist has to feel a deep connection with the community to be effective because it is possible to generate these relationships while still feeling detached or “outside.” What the ethnomusicologist owes the community depends on the situation. In general, though, he/she does owe it respect. For example, this respect could mean keeping something confidential upon a request. However, if the situation is one where the ethnomusicologist has a deeper connection with the community it could mean aiding in the preservation and transmission of the music. While I do not think that the transmission of tradition is the ethnomusicologist’s responsibility and role, it is something in which he/she can likely be involved. For example, by simply publishing an article and documenting a music culture the ethnomusicologist is preserving it to some extent. While this is not direct transmission, a reader could become interested in the particular music culture and seek out the resources to learn it. So, with this said, I think another role of the ethnomusicologist is to have awareness of their ability to preserve and possibly transmit a music culture whether intentional or not. I think that this knowledge is a part of having reflexivity in the work and ultimately helps to make the ethnography and portrayal of the community as objective as possible. On the other side, I think that what the community owes the ethnomusicologist depends on how deeply the people within it understand his/her work and the terms of some mutual agreement. This is something that is very hard to quantify and depends upon how open the ethnomusicologist is about his or her process with the community. Assuming that the community understands the work, its role in the work, and has provided consent I think that they should be cooperative with the ethnomusicologist’s course of action in the field. Furthermore, I think that it is realistic that some communities could approach the ethnomusicologist’s work with the hopes of beneficial gains. While I do not think this is wrong, I do believe that, if there is an understanding of the work, the community should not overtly push an agenda because this could result in a less accurate representation of them. Lastly, regardless of whether the ethnomusicologist is at home or away, the roles that I see them having equally apply. I interpreted your idea of “at home” and “away” as the ethnomusicologist being in his or her own culture versus being outside of it. This relates to my stance on transmission of tradition because an ethnomusicologist can feel inclined to consciously help in spreading and preserving the music culture whether they are at home or away as an insider or outsider. Overall, I think that it is determined by the degree to which a personal connection is established. (Matt)
ReplyDeleteMatt, you say you believe that the ethnomusicologist doesn't need to "feel a deep connection with the community to be effective." However, if they don't feel an emotional connection, will their research truly be as effective? I guess the deeper question here is about the role of an ethnomusicologist: how scientific is this field? Clearly, research can't be wholly objective, but that's definitely what the "comparative musicologists" were trying to do by measuring scale degrees and doing transcriptions. Unfortunately, numbers and notation can't properly communicate a musical culture.
ReplyDeleteSo, should the work of an ethnomusicologist be more objective? I know that in my personal research, I find it hard to remain a silent observer - I definitely can see the benefits in participatory research, and I've loved getting to know the group as a participant. But does my role make me a less credible researcher? Sometimes I feel as though my perceptions of a musical group are colored by my impressions of specific members or other petty thoughts. So, what's your model for a credible ethnography?
My argument was focused more on the role of the ethnomusicologist and how he/she relates with the community. I agree that numbers and notation cannot properly communicate a music culture and that research cannot be wholly objective. My argument was that the relationships with the community are essential to understanding the music culture, but they do not need to be lasting connections. I think that the ethnomusicologist does not need to make lasting friendships or be an “insider” to be effective. I do believe that those qualities can help to generate an effective ethnography, and it would look different than one where the ethnomusicologist was more of an outsider. The question this poses for me is what are benefits in being an insider versus an outsider.
ReplyDeleteTo effectively portray a music culture do you think that there should be a balance between the insider/outsider perspectives? I have also experienced the benefits of participatory research in my work, but during this process I have found myself editing what I have written based on the relationships I have with the group. I’m not saying that participation automatically results in biases, but, with the potential for it, one solution can be to conduct and evaluate the research with an outsider perspective as well. I do not think that participation discredits ethnography, but I do think that it should be acknowledged as something to address in the portrayal of a music culture. For me, one method of achieving objectivity in ethnography is through the use of both insider and outsider experiences. While they are both effective on their own, jointly they can generate a balanced and more complete portrayal
Very interesting discussion. After reading your passionate exchange, it became clear that ultimately your discussion was, at least implicitly, about whether every ethnomusicologist should also do applied work. Applied ethnomusicology deals first and foremost with questions about how to give back to the community under study and do it in meaningful and helpful manner (not assuming that somebody needs help but working together with the community members to determined whether there is anything a scholar could do for them).
ReplyDelete[Numerical grades are available upon request via email.]