Almost anyone knows more than I do about punk, Country, film music, and so on. But when I write about them, however naively, my own narrow classical upbringing only serves as a reminder of what a very basic part of the soundscape all such popular genres are for anyone born since around 1900. This is just as true for WAM performers and the Li family Daoists—and even for scholars who interpret them. We really can’t bury our heads (ears) in the sand any longer, or unhear the sounds all around us.
But that’s only one rationale for the growing role of popular music in ethnomusicology since at least the 1960s—from Wilfrid Mellers on the Beatles or the wide-ranging studies of Susan McClary, to all the important work on genres in Asia and Africa, and so on. More fundamentally, I return to “delighting in all manifestations of the Terpischorean muse“: all kinds of musicking in all societies should be treated on an equal footing—Amy Winehouse, Erbarme Dich, and Daoist ritual really do deserve to be part of the same celebration (for a great playlist, see here).
* * *
That’s very different from the old cliché of “music is an international language”. For better and for worse, it really isn’t (see here, and here): in any tiny region of the world there is incomprehension, with music (and culture generally) delineating barriers as much as commonalities—and that’s what I’d like to overcome.
7 thoughts on “Our modern ears”
Pingback: Strings and voices | Stephen Jones: a blog
Pingback: Women of Yanggao 3/3: singers | Stephen Jones: a blog
Pingback: On visual culture | Stephen Jones: a blog
Pingback: Detroit 67 | Stephen Jones: a blog
Pingback: Is music a universal language? | Stephen Jones: a blog
Pingback: New musics in Beijing | Stephen Jones: a blog
Pingback: Pachelbel’s capon | Stephen Jones: a blog