Challenge Question: Response to Jared's Response

Jared's Response

The manufactured Mozart-Beethoven continuum has persisted (and most likely exaggerated) over time. Still though, I cannot think of an example of this spectrum as it applies to jazz. The myth surrounding Charlie Parker has him removing himself from society for months at a time, practicing for 15-16 hours a day, working on his new sound. Armstrong, on the other hand, seemed to have a natural knack for creating new sounds. After creating the jazz solo as we know it today, he turned to jazz vocals, which made him an incredibly popular celebrity. His voice wasn't pure, or refined, but people were attracted to his gravelly voice. Although I'm sure he worked and studied hard, Armstrong's reputation is that of a prodigy virtuoso. However, this continuum isn't seen as strongly as the Mozart-Beethoven example that Nettl examines.

The other spectrum you mention is the composition vs. improvisation. This one would strongly correlate to Ellington-Parker. Duke Ellington is renowned for his compositions, whereas Parker is remembered as a soloist and performer. Ellington-Parker would also seem to encapsulate up the clean cut image vs. drug user. Certainly Parker is the poster boy for drugged up jazz musicians. This lifestyle contributes greatly to his legend, in fact the two are inseparable.

Other dualities in the jazz world include traditional music versus 'new' music. For example, Wynton Marsalis is a big promoter of traditional jazz. He mostly plays in the style of dixieland, and emulates (to a certain degree) Armstrong's sound (both are trumpeters). Chick Corea, however, is a promoter of new ideas. He is more willing to blend jazz, rock, electronic music, ambience, and other instrumentations into the music he writes - which is classified as jazz. There is a large spectrum here, outlined by these two artists. Some are in favor of remaining traditional (a point of view that I believe to be contradictory to the idea of jazz), while some are for abandoning the tradition to follow new paths. The center of that spectrum would contain a lot of musicians that wish to build off of the traditional music of the '20s, adding elements of contemporary styles.

Despite the direction of jazz music today, these three artists will undoubtedly be at the top of the jazz pantheon in 100 years, just as Bach, Beethoven and Mozart will.

Critical Review #10: Titon 1992

In Representation and Authority in Ethnographic Film/Video: Production, Titon presents the paradox of translation to the reader. "How can an ethnographer make the strange familiar, yet keep it strange?" The ethnographer, Titon argues, assumes the authority to represent people, and there are inevitable consequences of translated language and point of view. He then moves on to video, and discusses how film and video present a different arena of ethnographic authority. Although far more 'realistic' than text could ever be, Titon argues that the filmmaker assumes quite a bit of authority, unbeknownst to the viewer. Narrating (which is basically text), compressing time, and cutting from scene to scene are all authoritative tools used by the filmmaker. Titon concludes that film and video create larger issues with representation and authority than text. Leaving little to the viewer's imagination, a film captures more than just the words of a person.

Apart from viewing the camera crew and documentary setup on film, how else could Titon have shown the viewer that there was a large camera setup present in the church, which may or may not have affected the subjects of the documentary?

Though the presentation of professors in front of book shelves, speaking about a subject seems cliche, does Titon mean to say that no person should be presented as an authority on a subject? Or does he believe that this 'naked and obvious' display of authority should be avoided for aesthetic purposes?

Challenge Question: Response

Response to Bryan's post.

I agree that assuming both the roles of an insider and outsider is completely outside the realm of a polyphonic discourse. It also lies outside the spectrum of experiential and interpretive ethnographies - as it is clearly a different method of study. However I disagree that Nettl's technique is an improvement on an experiential discourse. I believe it is somewhat deceptive to fabricate the "alien" musicologist in order to create this outsider's perspective. The fact of the matter is that Nettl is an insider to the heartland music tradition, and creating an entirely different persona does not allow him to jettison his point of view. However, an alternative point of view doesn't need to be fabricated. Nettl could have used real experiences that are separate from his teaching at American universities for comparison. Nettl was born in Czechoslovakia, which he could leverage as the point of view as an 'outsider'. In my opinion an internal dialogue between existing personalities with different points of view is preferable to an attempt to assume the role of a blank slate.

This insider's ethnography is no more informative, and no less informative, it is merely a different flavor. There are valuable elements of this ethnography that could have only come from an insider, however an outsider's experiential discourse may reveal much more that an insider takes for granted or never considered. It wouldn't necessarily be better if a member of an East African Kwaya wrote a about their experience. In fact, this point of view may be more difficult to interpret as an outsider, as there may be some cultural practices or even vocabulary that an outsider is not familiar with. An outsider's discourse would be more appropriate for an outsider to read.

Critical Review #9: Pacini

In Dancing with the Enemy Deborah Pacini Hernandez discusses Cuban music and its role in global markets. She discusses the African diaspora, and its affect on world music. A particularly dominant influence on popular music is Afro-Cuban music. She continues by discussing the marketability of African music, especially with respect to its "authenticity". She talks about the evolution of salsa and its cousin salsa romantica as an example of the success of Cuban music on a world stage. The Cuban government steals the focus of her paper, as she begins a discussion of Postrevolutionary Cuban music, after institutionalized racism is removed from Cuba. The embargo of Cuba (and therefore its culture) affected the exchange of musical ideas between American and Cuban musicians, especially after Ronald Reagan "slammed the door". She then discusses the business of making music to be sold in foreign markets - how different countries prefer different variations on the Cuban style of music.


How does isolation play into the authenticity of Cuban music? Like the Lee family's isolation from Sacred Harp music, does isolation equate to a greater degree of authenticity in Afro-Cuban music? Has the cultural embargo of Cuba been a driving factor in Cuban music retaining its 'purity' or 'authenticity'?

Challenge Question Answer: Jared's Second Question

In the same chapter, Nettl examines the myths surrounding Beethoven and Mozart, and what they suggest about the values of Western classical music. Do the same with a specific musical tradition of your choosing - consider the mythology surrounding one or more of its prominent members, and what this mythology suggests about the values inherent in the tradition.

If I were to choose a "Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven" of Jazz music, three names come to mind. Louis Armstrong, Charlie Parker, and Miles Davis are three innovative, creative, and virtuosic players that have shaped the way jazz musicians compose and perform. These three musicians were creative in their improvisation, innovative in their methods, and virtuosic in their playing. Each of these big players brought something new to the way jazz musicians write tunes and improvise. Armstrong began embellishing prewritten melodies, playing within the confines of the scale. Charlie Parker played around the chord changes of a tune - he created his own melody based off of the chord changes of the written melody. Miles Davis began playing like Charlie Parker, but soon established a style of his own - one that is most commonly described as 'cool'. His low-register, sparse, dramatic and reflective improvisations contrast greatly with the fast runs and stream of eighth notes in bop solos from Parker and Coltrane. The mythology, bordering on legend, of these three players suggests that jazz musicians and listeners tend to value creativity, innovation, and technical virtuosity while improvising.

Louis Armstrong’s improvisations began as embellishments. His added notes accentuated chord tones with arpeggios and melodic runs and leaps, but his improvisations were always variations of the prewritten melody. He is also described as a virtuoso, able to play technically demanding passages. To jazz musicians who followed, he is the first great improviser and will always be considered a ‘father’ of jazz music.

Charlie Parker redefined jazz by creating a new improvisation technique - he considered extensions a part of the chord he was soloing over, and would incorporate these notes (as well as many chromaticisms). His drug addiction also contributed to his mythology. Because of it, he died young - he was only 34 years old (but the coroner thought he was 60 because of the abuse he put himself through). Because his full potential was not reached, listeners believed he could have continued his innovation and virtuosity. Dying in his prime greatly contributes to his standing as a jazz legend.

Miles Davis took a step back from Bebop. Not back in the sense that he returned to dixieland or a previous sound, but in the sense that he played fewer notes and sparser solos than the beboppers of his day. His mid-career solos were introspective, melodic, boisterous yet reserved. The range of emotion with which he played is remarkable. He was also willing to experiment in different genres. In the 80’s his playing gravitated towards electronic music. His persistent creativity in style and innovation in composition is well respected. Moreover, his attitude - turning his back to the audience while soloing, for instance - also contributes to his jazz legend.

The popular players today tend to be either extremely creative in performance, or quite virtuosic. For instance, the group Medeski, Martin and Wood combine sounds and techniques that draw from multiple genres - a lot of free jazz, classic jazz, rock, neo-classical, minimalist, etc. They are, however, considered a 'jazz' group by most. Their creativity spans multiple genres (and their virtuosic technique, although not as lauded as most, is of incredible quality). Yet this group is wildly popular among jazz fans and musicians, due to their creative mixing of genres. Other popular players, such as Wynton Marsalis, play in a more traditional style, but are held to a high esteem by performers and fans alike because of their virtuosity.

Players and listeners of jazz music show great deference to Armstrong, Parker and Davis because of inherent values of the tradition. Improvisational creativity, compositional innovation and technical virtuosity are just three of these values.

Critical Review 8: Miller 2004

Questions for Kiri:

Have you ever been singing with a group when a newly composed tune was distributed and sung? Was this met with any sort of hostility by the group? Did only a certain demographic of the group show a dislike for singing non-traditional tunes? Do most Sacred Harp singers strive to be as 'traditional' as possible?

If most tunes are not sung as written, then why are key signatures written at the beginning of each tune? Would you consider this an artifact of the written tradition?

Discussion Question:

Why has the Lee Family's isolation 'become the measure of their authenticity'? Why are they considered to be the ultimate traditional Sacred Harp singers? What does this say about the goals of Sacred Harp singers (as it applies to the current generation, and future generations)?