Shadows In The Field - UNAM
Shadows in the FieldSecond Edition
This page intentionally left blank
Shadows in the FieldNew Perspectives for Fieldworkin EthnomusicologySecond EditionEdited byGregory Barz& Timothy J. Cooley12008
1Oxford University Press, Inc., publishes works that furtherOxford University’s objective of excellencein research, scholarship, and education.Oxford New YorkAuckland Cape Town Dar es Salaam Hong Kong KarachiKuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City NairobiNew Delhi Shanghai Taipei TorontoWith offices inArgentina Austria Brazil Chile Czech Republic France GreeceGuatemala Hungary Italy Japan Poland Portugal SingaporeSouth Korea Switzerland Thailand Turkey Ukraine VietnamCopyright # 2008 by Oxford University PressPublished by Oxford University Press, Inc.198 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10016www.oup.comOxford is a registered trademark of Oxford University PressAll rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means,electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise,without the prior permission of Oxford University Press.Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication DataShadows in the field : new perspectives for fieldwork in ethnomusicology /edited by Gregory Barz & Timothy J. Cooley. — 2nd ed.p. cm.Includes bibliographical references and index.ISBN 978-0-19-532495-2; 978-0-19-532496-9 (pbk.)1. Ethnomusicology—Fieldwork.I. Barz, Gregory F., 1960– II. Cooley, Timothy J., 1962–ML3799.S5 2008780.89—dc2220080235301 3 5 7 9 8 6 4 2Printed in the United States of Americaon acid-free paper
bruno nettlForewordFieldworker’s ProgressShadows in the Field, in its first edition a varied collection of interesting, insightfulessays about fieldwork, has now been significantly expanded and revised, becomingthe first comprehensive book about fieldwork in ethnomusicology. Because ethnomusicologists think of fieldwork as the defining activity of their endeavor, onemay be surprised to find, looking through our literature, not much that tells what itwas really like to work in the ‘‘field,’’ nor much about the methods employed ingathering data for any particular project in ethnomusicology. But one does get asense that fieldwork meant—means—many different things to different scholars;many different things, indeed, in the career of any one scholar. As the history ofethnomusicology proceeded through the twentieth century, fieldwork changedradically, and many times, in its basic assumptions and execution; it has changed,as well, in my own several decades of attempts—and surely in the life of any of uswho have been at it for several years.In North America through the twentieth century (and, for that matter, in myown experience since 1950), the configuration, very, very roughly, went somewhatlike this. Starting with simple ‘‘collecting’’—we found an ‘‘informant’’ and askedhim or her to sing for our recording devices, posing such questions as ‘‘What doyou use this song for?’’ and ‘‘Where did you learn it?’’—we proceeded to moregeneral ‘‘hanging out’’ in a distant community, spending a summer, a year, attending events as they occurred and asking random questions. We began to engagein fieldwork by participating in the music we were studying—learning how to playand sing it—first often at our home institutions, then continuing in the culture’shome ground, putting ourselves as pupils in the hands of competent teachers,joining local groups or classes. We moved on to the idea of projects to answerspecific questions. For example, in my research, I tried to figure out how the minds
viForewordof improvisers of Persian music worked, by making and collecting many recordings of one dastgah, or ‘‘mode,’’ and getting help from the musicians in analyzinghow they had used the basic material of the radif.We came to realize that we should do field research in our own communities,something that was both easier (it’s our turf ) and harder (be ‘‘objective’’ aboutone’s own family and friends?) than working abroad. We began to question therole we were playing in the ‘‘field’’ communities, whether we were doing harm orgood, and about our relationship to ethnomusicologists from those host communities. We worried that our very presence would result in significant culturechange (and sometimes it did). It may have come as a bit of a surprise that theparticular identity (nationality, ethnicity, gender) and the personality—shy, outgoing, quick on the uptake, contemplative—of the fieldworker makes a lot ofdifference in the research enterprise. We learned that fieldwork may include thegathering of ethnomusicological data from seemingly impersonal sources such asrecordings and the Internet. And we have devoted quite a bit of energy to criticizing our discipline, largely in terms of the approaches and methods in the field.In its very comprehensiveness, this nutshell history of fieldwork hides dramaticevents that become defining moments in one ethnomusicologist’s progress.Dramatic events for me: The Arapaho singer Bill Shakespear telling me in 1950that two songs that sounded identical to me were different, and two that soundedvery different were actually the same, ‘‘although very little difference in tone,’’teaching me that different cultures have very different conceptions of what makes aunit of musical thought. Calvin Boy, my Blackfoot teacher in 1966, telling me ‘‘theright Blackfoot way to do something is to sing the right song with it,’’ putting theculture’s conception of music into a single sentence. My teacher in Tehran tellingme, perhaps with a bit of exasperation, that I’d never be a cultural insider and thatany uneducated Persian would understand the music instinctively better thanI ever could, with a little sermon in 1969 that began, ‘‘You know, Dr. Nettl, you willnever understand this music.’’ A Carnatic music lover in Chennai, to whom I wastalking in 1981 about Mozart, exclaiming, ‘‘He is your Tyagaraja!’’Writing about FieldworkThat’s a précis of fieldwork—history and autobiography, in tandem. What, now,more specifically, about the history of the literature about fieldwork? Consideringthe centrality of fieldwork in the ethnomusicological enterprise, it’s surprising thatShadows in the Field was really the first book devoted completely to this entirecomplex—and that there were few in the related disciplines of anthropology andfolklore. (An early exception I’d draw to the reader’s attention is Hortense Powdermaker’s classic Stranger and Friend [1967], which lays out the similarities anddifferences of experience in four cultures in the author’s lifetime career). And therewere only very few chapter- or article-length extended discussions of fieldwork as
Forewordviia whole. Or maybe it wasn’t so strange, when we consider the small amount ofattention given to the actual activities of fieldwork in the vast majority of thetypical research studies, the ethnographic and musicological reports that make upthe core of our recorded knowledge—most notably in those published before 1980.Many papers hardly tell us more than ‘‘this study is based on three months offieldwork in . . .’’ If we compare these reports with those in the hard sciences, whereeverything—from number and grouping of subjects to precise times and detailedprocedures of all activities—must be accounted for, we may wonder why ethnomusicologists, in describing their research, are so private about the fieldwork.Here is one likely cause of this development: As most of the essays in thisvolume demonstrate, our informants-consultants-teachers become part of ourfamily; or even more likely, we become part of theirs. I’m reminded of the jokeabout the structure of the Native American family—two parents, two children, oneanthropologist. Talking about our fieldwork relationships would in some ways belike talking about family relationships. Our consultants and teachers do often treatus like wayward children (my elderly Persian music teacher scolding me: ‘‘Why doyou go around Tehran talking to other musicians when you know I am the realauthority?’’); or like uncles or aunts (a Blackfoot dancer informing me, a bitcondescendingly, ‘‘Things are very different from when you first came here’’); orlike siblings (we may help them with transportation or a bit of money; they oftenget us out of embarrassing social pickles). The fieldworker may relate to them as ifthey were parents, grandparents, lovers—the kinds of relationships that are difficult to write about, and especially to integrate into a scholarly, informative, and insome ways ‘‘objective’’ account. How we felt about them, emotionally, and perhapshow we think they saw us, may be virtually impossible to report on. As HelenMyers wrote, ‘‘In fieldwork we unveil the human face of ethnomusicology,’’ and‘‘Fieldwork is the most personal task required of the ethnomusicologist’’ (1992:21),suggesting that in contrast to the kinds of disciplines in which one may studymanuscripts and texts, or statistically survey vast numbers of people through briefquestionnaires, ethnomusicological data gathering is essentially a human exchange, and the quality of the human relationship between fieldworker and consultant, student and teacher, is at the heart of the endeavor.But in contemplating the history of ethnomusicology from the perspective offieldwork (rather than, say, analysis or interpretive theory), I am astonished at thelarge number of activities, as well as concepts, that fieldwork encompasses and thusshould properly be included in its discussion, and at their interrelationships. Theactivity receiving the most attention in print has been the process of sound recording: selecting and learning to use (and maybe to repair) equipment and developing recording techniques, a profession by itself in modern musical life, butsomething ethnomusicologists had to absorb along with everything else. There arethe associated problems of recording verbal information, making and organizingfield notes (in the field, and later). But before all that should have come acquiring
viiiForewordlinguistic and cultural competence; finding or selecting informants, consultants,and teachers, and dealing with the complex question of who is a proper spokesperson for the culture being studied; apprehending the culture- and communityspecific methods needed for acquiring, as an ethnomusicologist, the three kinds ofinformation that Malinowski (1935) specified for social anthropology—texts(maybe the songs and pieces); structures (the system of required behavior inmusical activity, and the system of ideas underlying music); and the most intriguing, because it tells how these structures are actually observed in life, the‘‘imponderabilia of everyday life’’ (who talks to whom, what kinds of things musicians actually talk about, what’s the course of a lesson). Then come decisions:What does one do if one’s consultants disagree? Is there unanimity? What is thedistribution of beliefs? What are the subjects of local debate?—I’m just at thebeginning of the list. Most important, the fieldworker needs to find a niche forhimself or herself in the host society, where one is inevitably an outsider, but, ifI can put it this way, an outsider of the insider sort.There are so many things that are distinct about ethnomusicological fieldwork, one wonders why it hasn’t received a lot more attention in the history of ourliterature. The question is particularly remarkable because this is a field which has,more than most, devoted a great deal of attention to its own methods and techniques, developing, indeed, a tradition of self-examination and critique. We wouldhave expected some ‘‘how-to’’ books, textbooks for courses in field methods; worksthat theorize the problems of the interpersonal relations involved; books about thechanging concept of ‘‘field’’; and detailed accounts of individual experience. Butmost of our literature treats these matters at best as an essential step toward whatwe are trying to find out and not as a central activity. And yet, let me not neglect tomention some important surveys of fieldwork: Two massive chapters in MantleHood’s The Ethnomusicologist (1982[1971]); two chapters in Helen Myers’s editedcompendium Ethnomusicology: An Introduction (1992); six short chapters in myown Study of Ethnomusicology (2005); and Herndon and McLeod’s comprehensiveand thoughtful Field Manual for Ethnomusicology (1983).Shadows among the LandmarksI have been complaining about the absence of literature about fieldwork in the lasthundred years of ethnomusicological writing. But there has all along been a thinstrand of such writing, and Shadows in the Field, while it is a unique contributionthat fills an important niche, should also take its place among a number of important landmarks that go back to our earliest literature. A few words about theexperience of collecting do appear in some of our earliest classics. Carl Stumpf(1886) gives us a fairly detailed (if sometimes curiously ethnocentric) account of hisbrief relationship with a member of the Bellakula, and his eliciting and transcribingsessions. Walter Fewkes (1890), writing about the earliest recording work, tells
Forewordixsomething of what it was like. But it is somewhat baffling to read the manypioneering studies of George Herzog or the first book to attempt a comprehensiveaccount of a small musical culture, by Alan Merriam (1967), and to find very littleabout the way this information was acquired. Later on, I must quickly add,Merriam produced two articles that qualify as classics in fieldwork literature—theunprecedentedly detailed account of the making of a drum among the Bala ofCongo (1969) and the story of his revisit to the Basongye after fourteen years ofabsence, where it turned out that his earlier visit had come to be seen by his hosts asa defining moment in their music history (1977b).And to be sure, beginning in the late 1970s and snowballing by the 1990s,authors of book-length ethnographies made the fieldwork process increasingly partof the discourse. Among the classics here are Paul Berliner’s The Soul of Mbira(1993[1978]) and his descriptions of his interviews and lessons with prominent jazzartists in Thinking in Jazz (1994); and Steven Feld’s work on the Kaluli in Sound andSentiment (1990), with the intriguing attempt to have the result of his workcritiqued by his teachers in a process he called ‘‘dialogic editing’’ (1987). Among theworks I consider recent classics in their explanation and description of fieldwork,I wish to mention Anthony Seeger’s Why Suyá Sing (1987b); Helen Myers’s Music ofHindu Trinidad (1998); and Donna Buchanan’s Performing Democracy (2005),which extends the subject to an urban society. These are outstanding examples,but there are now dozens of others, and they show that we have come a long wayin understanding how much the process of fieldwork affects the final outcomeand how important it is for the reader to get a sense of the relationships theauthor developed in the field. Everything that comes later—analysis, interpretation, theory—depends on what happened in the ‘‘field.’’Aside from its primacy as a comprehensive book on fieldwork, Shadows in theField, in its first edition, and even more, a decade later, in its second, concentrateson telling us how fieldwork affected the fieldworkers themselves. When firstpublished, it was immediately seen as a book of great importance, and unsurprisingly it began quickly to be used as a text or required reading in seminars ofstudents heading for the field. Many of its individual articles have been widely citedand it has become a mainstay of the central literature of the field. This second,expanded edition adds a new level of comprehensiveness. Preferring, in mostinstances, comprehensive works by individuals giving a personal synthesis in aunified perspective, I am persuaded in the work at hand that the diversity offieldwork—the many kinds of attitudes and activities, the variety of host culturesand communities, and of relationships between fieldworker and teacher—couldnot be adequately represented by one author. We have here a plethora of presentations, most by well-established American, European, and Asian scholars withrecords of distinguished publications (among them, incidentally, six former orcurrent presidents of the Society for Ethnomusicology), but also including, in thespirit of the first edition, voices of junior scholars. The authors have worked on all
xForewordcontinents and in villages and cities, telling us what it was like, what they tried todo, how they solved (or didn’t solve) their central problems, how they related totheir teachers, but also—and this strikes me as most significant—how the fieldexperience changed them and their ideas, and how they as visitors changed theirhosts.
ContentsForeword vBruno NettlContributorsxiii1. Casting Shadows: Fieldwork Is Dead! Long Live Fieldwork!Introduction 3Timothy J. Cooley and Gregory Barz2. Knowing FieldworkJeff Todd Titon253. Toward a Mediation of Field Methods and Field Experiencein Ethnomusicology 42Timothy Rice4. Phenomenology and the Ethnography of Popular Music:Ethnomusicology at the Juncture of Cultural Studies and FolkloreHarris M. Berger5. Moving: From Performance to Performative Ethnographyand Back Again 76Deborah Wong6. Virtual Fieldwork: Three Case Studies 90Timothy J. Cooley, Katharine Meizel, and Nasir Syed62
xiiContents7. Fieldwork at Home: European and Asian PerspectivesJonathan P. J. Stock and Chou Chiener8. Working with the MastersJames Kippen1081259. The Ethnomusicologist, Ethnographic Method,and the Transmission of Tradition 141Kay Kaufman Shelemay10. Shadows in the Classroom: Encountering the Syrian JewishResearch Project Twenty Years Later 157Judah M. Cohen11. What’s the Difference? Reflections on Gender and Researchin Village India 167Carol M. Babiracki12. (Un)doing Fieldwork: Sharing Songs, Sharing LivesMichelle Kisliuk18313. Confronting the Field(note) In and Out of the Field:Music, Voices, Texts, and Experiences in Dialogue 206Gregory F. Barz14. The Challenges of Human Relations in Ethnographic Inquiry:Examples from Arctic and Subarctic Fieldwork 224Nicole Beaudry15. Returning to the Ethnomusicological PastPhilip V. Bohlman24616. Theories Forged in the Crucible of Action: The Joys, Dangers,and Potentials of Advocacy and Fieldwork 271Anthony SeegerReferencesIndex313289
ContributorsCarol M. Babiracki is associate professor of ethnomusicology in the Fine ArtsDepartment of Syracuse University. Before joining Syracuse, she taught on thefaculties of Brown and Harvard Universities. She holds a PhD in ethnomusicologyfrom the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. She has spent many years inIndia researching classical and folk music and dance, with a focus on folk and tribalmusic and dance in the state of Jharkhand over the past twenty-five years. Herresearch interests there include ethnicity, identity, gender, politics and culturalpolicy, oral epics, repertory studies, and flute performance. She is the recipient ofSyracuse University’s Meredith Teaching Recognition Award, and her publicationshave appeared in the journals Ethnomusicology and Asian Music and in the booksWomen’s Voices Across Musical Worlds, Shadows in the Field: New Perspectives onField Research in Ethnomusicology, Comparative Musicology and the Anthropology ofMusic, Ethnomusicology and Modern Music History, and The Western Impact onWorld Music.Gregory F. Barz has engaged in field research in Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania,Rwanda, and South Africa for the past fifteen years. He received the PhD fromBrown University and the MA from the University of Chicago. He is currentlyassociate professor of ethnomusicology and anthropology at the Blair School ofMusic at Vanderbilt University. He is also the general editor of the African Soundscapes book series and served as African music editor for the New Grove Dictionaryof Music and Musicians and as recording review editor for the journal World ofMusic. His latest book is t
and thoughtful Field Manual for Ethnomusicology (1983). Shadows among the Landmarks I have been complaining about the absence of literature about fieldwork in the last hundred years of ethnomusicological writing. But there has all along been a thin strand of such writing, and Shadows in the Field, while it is a unique contribution
May 02, 2018 · D. Program Evaluation ͟The organization has provided a description of the framework for how each program will be evaluated. The framework should include all the elements below: ͟The evaluation methods are cost-effective for the organization ͟Quantitative and qualitative data is being collected (at Basics tier, data collection must have begun)
Silat is a combative art of self-defense and survival rooted from Matay archipelago. It was traced at thé early of Langkasuka Kingdom (2nd century CE) till thé reign of Melaka (Malaysia) Sultanate era (13th century). Silat has now evolved to become part of social culture and tradition with thé appearance of a fine physical and spiritual .
On an exceptional basis, Member States may request UNESCO to provide thé candidates with access to thé platform so they can complète thé form by themselves. Thèse requests must be addressed to esd rize unesco. or by 15 A ril 2021 UNESCO will provide thé nomineewith accessto thé platform via their émail address.
̶The leading indicator of employee engagement is based on the quality of the relationship between employee and supervisor Empower your managers! ̶Help them understand the impact on the organization ̶Share important changes, plan options, tasks, and deadlines ̶Provide key messages and talking points ̶Prepare them to answer employee questions
Dr. Sunita Bharatwal** Dr. Pawan Garga*** Abstract Customer satisfaction is derived from thè functionalities and values, a product or Service can provide. The current study aims to segregate thè dimensions of ordine Service quality and gather insights on its impact on web shopping. The trends of purchases have
Chính Văn.- Còn đức Thế tôn thì tuệ giác cực kỳ trong sạch 8: hiện hành bất nhị 9, đạt đến vô tướng 10, đứng vào chỗ đứng của các đức Thế tôn 11, thể hiện tính bình đẳng của các Ngài, đến chỗ không còn chướng ngại 12, giáo pháp không thể khuynh đảo, tâm thức không bị cản trở, cái được
Keywords: shadows, real-time, precomputed 1 Introduction With state of the art real-time shadowing algorithms, it is still difficult to generate high-quality shadows in large open scenes. When a user needs to simultaneously see detailed shadows of nearby objects and alias-free shadows in the far distance, the traditional shadow
Automotive Finance Luxury Media Retail Sport Tech Move In the Decade of Possibility. Best Global Brands fl flfi Automotive 5 Welcome to Best Global Brands 2020 At a time of deep reflection, the deepest form of relevance is increasingly being driven by an uncompromising approach to fundamental human issues. Businesses that do not yet know, very specifically, which constituents they are .
