amitsingh
I came across these really nice bunch of guys.. who took indian music to an all new level acroos the world. They are called Sifar. I think what bands like these do will bring India laurels across the globe in the music industry too.
Reply 0 0
Raga_Mala
This topic is intended as an open-ended discussion on several thoughts I've been having. The above was the best title I could come up with for the topic. I'm soliciting people's thoughts on the following:

1) What is the meaning of "ethnic music" or "world music"? Ravi Shankar has contended that it is inappropriate to teach Indian Classical as ethnic music because of its age and complexity, and he has jokingly said that Indians should call Bach and Beethoven "ethnic music."
However, this evinces a troubling trend to me because it would elevate Indian music along with Western classical while casting down the rest of the World's musical traditions. It is no more fair to group all world musics in as "ethnic music," but it is also undesirable I think to denigrate the great non-classical traditions of the world (African rhythm/drumming, Arabian and European folk musics with all their complexities, Georgian folk choirs, Deshi music of the various Indian states etc etc). One can't say these have the depth or sophistication of "Classical" music, but nor can we contend that the music is less valid or its expression less meaningful.

2) Over-inflation of India's place in the world. Raviji has contended in one of his writings that Indian and European classical music are the only true "classical" musics of the world, and he cites mainly their age and length of evolution, and to a lesser extent their refinement. For all my love of ICM, it pains me in that context to see cast aside the intricate and ancient classical musics of China, Persia/Arabia, Japan, and Indonesia. Are these too not magnificent? I believe they are. (For the record, Ravi is NOT the only person I have known to make this contention)

3) West-bashing. This is pandemic among YouTube commenters (and I've seen it in one or two posts here). When adding their "kya baat hai!" to a video, some YouTubers feel it necessary to say something like "this music blows Western classical out of the water! much deeper/more sophistiacted/more complicated/more refined, (take your pick)". Is it necessary in loving our ICM to throw down the music of the West? If it came to musical fisticuffs, India would take home the prizes in rhythm and possibly melody, but the West would clobber India in harmony and form, as well as ensemble playing/composition. Neither is greater and both, in their moments of brilliance, can show pathways to God. True, the religiosity of a Bach Passion is much different from that of Bhimsen-ji's Darbari Kanada, but nevertheless in both one can glimpse the face of the Almighty.

Sorry, this came out as preaching, it was more intended to be a recognition of trends among Indian music lovers and musicologists, and now it is a platform for discussion of those trends and their validity. Thoughts?
"Not all is good that bears an ancient name,
Nor need we every modern poem blame;
Wise men approve the good, or new, or old;
The foolish critic follows where he's told."
-Kalidas, Malavikagnimitra I.i.2
Trans. Arthur Ryder
Reply 0 0
jaan e kharabat
Raga_Mala wrote:
1) What is the meaning of "ethnic music" or "world music"?
I don't know, you tell me.
Raga_Mala wrote:
Ravi Shankar has contended that it is inappropriate to teach Indian Classical as ethnic music because of its age and complexity, and he has jokingly said that Indians should call Bach and Beethoven "ethnic music."
However, this evinces a troubling trend to me because it would elevate Indian music along with Western classical while casting down the rest of the World's musical traditions.
How about just calling it by its native designations, e.g. Hindustani/Raag Sangeet, or even by an English translation of that like Indian Classical Music, and leave it at that? I don't see why labels such as 'ethnic' and 'world' are necessary. Everything is 'ethnic' and 'world' to somebody and 'classical/traditional' to another.
Raga_Mala wrote:
2) Over-inflation of India's place in the world. Raviji has contended in one of his writings that Indian and European classical music are the only true "classical" musics of the world, and he cites mainly their age and length of evolution, and to a lesser extent their refinement. For all my love of ICM, it pains me in that context to see cast aside the intricate and ancient classical musics of China, Persia/Arabia, Japan, and Indonesia. Are these too not magnificent? I believe they are. (For the record, Ravi is NOT the only person I have known to make this contention)
Just because Raviji wrote some inane thing at one time doesn't mean we have to agree with him....
Raga_Mala wrote:
It is no more fair to group all world musics in as "ethnic music," but it is also undesirable I think to denigrate the great non-classical traditions of the world (African rhythm/drumming, Arabian and European folk musics with all their complexities, Georgian folk choirs, Deshi music of the various Indian states etc etc). One can't say these have the depth or sophistication of "Classical" music, but nor can we contend that the music is less valid or its expression less meaningful.
...and yet you fall into the same trap as Raviji!
Raga_Mala wrote:
3) West-bashing. This is pandemic among YouTube commenters (and I've seen it in one or two posts here). When adding their "kya baat hai!" to a video, some YouTubers feel it necessary to say something like "this music blows Western classical out of the water! much deeper/more sophistiacted/more complicated/more refined, (take your pick)". Is it necessary in loving our ICM to throw down the music of the West? If it came to musical fisticuffs, India would take home the prizes in rhythm and possibly melody, but the West would clobber India in harmony and form, as well as ensemble playing/composition. Neither is greater and both, in their moments of brilliance, can show pathways to God. True, the religiosity of a Bach Passion is much different from that of Bhimsen-ji's Darbari Kanada, but nevertheless in both one can glimpse the face of the Almighty.
What does some youtube posters' idiotic comments got to do with us? just don't fall into the same traps as they did. :wink:

p.s. welcome back, Luke! When did you change your handle?
If there are just ''six tones'' in an octave [sic] then why have frets for tones that don't exist?
Reply 0 0
trippy monkey
Words such as ethnic & world music are all very insular & are only used from a western POV.
We ALL know ICM is the best :wink:
But seriously folks...
I very rarely care what U-tubers say as it's only an opinion in the end. Most of them seem not to trained in ANY kind of music.
Still, as long as we have ICM admirers for many years & keep the standards then we can rest happy!!!

Nick
Reply 0 0
jaan e kharabat
trippy wrote:
We ALL know ICM is the best
tsk tsk tsk...you should know better than to reveal such family secrets in front of strangers, trippy!
If there are just ''six tones'' in an octave [sic] then why have frets for tones that don't exist?
Reply 0 0
ragamala
Frankly I am starting to think ICM is greatly inferior to certain other musical traditions - check out the water drumming videos here
http://www.baka.co.uk/baka/song.htm

tabla players eat your heart out

Wouldn't you love to see all that in the Royal Albert Hall.
Reply 0 0
John
jaan wrote:
I don't see why labels such as 'ethnic' and 'world' are necessary.
Marketing. :evil:
Other than that, they have no purpose.
"Truth cannot be taught, truth can only be discovered"-- Hazrat Inayat Khan
Reply 0 0
ragamala
jaan wrote:
Everything is 'ethnic' and 'world' to somebody and 'classical/traditional' to another.
Agreed. Not, however, when it comes down to seeking funding - witness especially in the UK BBC Radio 3's case of trying to justify spending significant public money on extreme minority interest (or zero interest). Political kudos, correctness etc etc - all these have helped in the UK to bring down the reputation of one of India's finest achievements by equating it with mind-numbing crassness, as well as to my mind, bringing about a downturn for the BBC, which pioneered the interest of ICM years ago. Shameful, especially in a country which has such a large proportion of Indian (loosely used, both in terms of geography and heredity) people.

Maybe, in the face of this, some here can justify the BBC continuing subsidising the rich and famous, particularly the Shankar dynasty (enter John's good point). I can't.


Raga_Mala wrote:
2) Over-inflation of India's place in the world.
The importance of India - whether we are talking about a revered musical heritage second to none or potential future powerhouse of the world economy - should not be underestimated. Of course when they can pull the chestnuts out of the fire (re Commonwealth Games/Delhi metro airport connection etc) and convince the world they are capable of organising a piss-up in a brewery the nation may command more respect

But more seriously, check out
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/worldmusic/index.shtml

and please tell me how many of these musical traditions could be argued to be on a par with ICM on any other than anthropological grounds.
Reply 0 0
rajpuranik
Words such as "superior" and "inferior" have little meaning outside of a thoughtful, rigorous discussion that places the words in context. I'm not sure what Raviji meant by 'classical" music, but in fairness, he has earned the right to have his opinions taken seriously. If you think Persian or Indonesian music is superior (or equal) to ICM or WCM in some way, then certainly you have the right to make the case, just like Raviji. Sounds like an excellent thesis for an ethnomusicology PhD candidate.

Anyone can have an opinion, but the difference between Raviji and the average YouTuber is an "informed" opinion.

In the book "Closing of the American Mind," Professor Allan Bloom deplores the politically correct campus environment where multi-cultural studies are encouraged, as long as no judgment is drawn about what is being studied. What is lost in the end is the search for a universal truth. He also points out that in most cultures, people consider their own culture to be the best! So it's not just Indians who feel this way - they are just more vocal about it online. Ironically, most Indians couldn't care less about ICM and only want their son or daughter to win some award on the SaReGaMaPa reality show, singing Bollywood songs, which are based mostly on ... WCM harmony and form.

As founder of worldmusicguru.com, I use the term "world music" in the most inclusive form - to mean music found around the world - including ICM and WCM. So yes, it is a marketing term and nothing more.

Regards,
Raj Puranik
http://worldmusicguru.com
Learn music online
Reply 0 0
Raga_Mala
jaan wrote:
p.s. welcome back, Luke! When did you change your handle?
Name's not Luke! Sounds like a nice guy, though...

I'm Justin. Here's my intro:
http://forums.chandrakantha.com/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=7561

The discussion here is good so far, I wonder if we can take it further?

For instance, I have contended that Westerners are the masters of harmony/form and Indians the masters of rhythm...can we find the other heavy-hitters of world music and find their strengths?

For instance, I would contend that Indonesian Gamelan is the absolute mastery of heterophony. This texture is totally unique--very beautiful!

Also, what can we do to promote mutual appreciation of ICM, WCM and others, without watering them down or allowing them to lose their uniqueness. For indeed, in each case, insular pride is part of the mechanism that keeps the music pure and great among some of its finest practicioners.

Thoughts?
"Not all is good that bears an ancient name,
Nor need we every modern poem blame;
Wise men approve the good, or new, or old;
The foolish critic follows where he's told."
-Kalidas, Malavikagnimitra I.i.2
Trans. Arthur Ryder
Reply 0 0
talasiga
Raga_Mala wrote:
.....
1) What is the meaning of "ethnic music" or "world music"? Ravi Shankar has contended that it is inappropriate to teach Indian Classical as ethnic music because of its age and complexity, and he has jokingly said that Indians should call Bach and Beethoven "ethnic music."
However, this evinces a troubling trend to me because it would elevate Indian music along with Western classical while casting down the rest of the World's musical traditions. ........
I agree that ICM is not an ethnic music becuase "Indians" are not one ethnicity for a start just as Europeans are not one ethnicity. Music systems that cover a range of ethnicities on some universal or other principle that overcomes ethnic and regional diffrences can qualify as a classical system.

In the case of European Classical (ECM)it draws on and has theoretical system that can cover (explain or communicate about) and create new music that is accessible across all the ethnicities that inform it - Celtic, Balkan, Mediterranean, Nordic, Germanic etc.

In the case of Hindustani, despite the many ethnicities and different languages and cultures, not readily accessible between them ICM operates as a system that bridges and is accessible to all.

The theory systems of each can be applied all over the world to analyse and communicate about music phenomena. ECM excels in tools for the examination of deliberate harmony and multi- instrument performance, ICM in tools for the examination of melody and solo performance.

Just a generalised overview here that supports the contention but NOT because of the age and complexity factor which, IMO, are not relevant per se.
every flute harbours a muse
Reply 0 0
jaan e kharabat
talasiga wrote:
Music systems that cover a range of ethnicities on some universal or other principle that overcomes ethnic and regional diffrences can qualify as a classical system.

The theory systems of each can be applied all over the world to analyse and communicate about music phenomena.
But this is true of any music, isn't it? It's not like a particular musical system is embedded in the DNA sequence of some people to the seclusion of others, making it impossible for the latter group to learn it.

I could accept the first sentence as a definition of 'ethnic' versus 'classical' even though it's not so significant a distinction in the grand scheme of things but the latter assertion is not very relevant at all.
If there are just ''six tones'' in an octave [sic] then why have frets for tones that don't exist?
Reply 0 0
musicslug
the whole topic makes me think of the history of the idea of evolution. in the early days, it was seen as linear, with 'primitive' societies 'behind' advanced ones - it was thought that there was basically one track to evolution. with time, evolutionary biology recognized that evolution occurs on multiple 'tracks' and that the only thing in common, as far as direction, is the tendency towards increased complexity.

in other words, you can't understand Pygmy culture in terms of European culture - it has to be studied as its own distinct area.

it's the same with music. while ethnomusicological studies have their place, it's hardly disputable that an Ustad or a Pandit will have a deeper understanding of ICM than your average academic.

if you want to understand anything well, go deep. if you try to understand a bit of everything, you'll likely never reach the depths of any one thing. 'ethnic' and 'world' music are just shorthand for oversimplification, a symptom of intellectual laziness that would lump together completely different cultural expressions, like Pygmy music and ICM.
Reply 0 0
Raga_Mala
musicslug wrote:
the whole topic makes me think of the history of the idea of evolution. in the early days, it was seen as linear, with 'primitive' societies 'behind' advanced ones - it was thought that there was basically one track to evolution. with time, evolutionary biology recognized that evolution occurs on multiple 'tracks' and that the only thing in common, as far as direction, is the tendency towards increased complexity.


I like this analogy a lot! The same is true with languages, actually. At one times linguists believed that there was such a thing as "primitive" languages. In fact, it has since been found that every single culture has a language exactly suited to describe and interpret their world, and some of the languages of "primitive" cultures actually have far more grammatical complexity than European languages!

musicslug wrote:
if you want to understand anything well, go deep. if you try to understand a bit of everything, you'll likely never reach the depths of any one thing. 'ethnic' and 'world' music are just shorthand for oversimplification, a symptom of intellectual laziness that would lump together completely different cultural expressions, like Pygmy music and ICM.
I agree with this very much.

I think the problem I am trying to get at in the OP is assessing a number of double-edged swords: how do we categorize and define music without making value judgments? How do we discuss the common import of music without blurring its distinctions? How do we teach and learn the music of other cultures without inevitably giving short-shrift? How do we practice love for a given or particular art form without denigrating others?

And to my mind, these questions lead to another question, which is: what do these music traditions and their practicioners have to teach us, and to teach each other? What can we learn from them, each and every one of them? Although all cultures evolve along separate lines in separate directions (as you stated), their is a clear trend in the modern world and in the foreseeable future for cultures to grow more towards each other and less apart. Globalization and technology would seem, for the time being, to be making this inevitable. If so, what is the future of music as cultures cross-over and blend? What do the wells of history teach us about how to make music? How can these musics maintain their integrity without sacrificing their relevance?
"Not all is good that bears an ancient name,
Nor need we every modern poem blame;
Wise men approve the good, or new, or old;
The foolish critic follows where he's told."
-Kalidas, Malavikagnimitra I.i.2
Trans. Arthur Ryder
Reply 0 0
ragamala
My My, the question mark on your keyboard must be worn out by now
Reply 0 0
Raga_Mala
Haha, yes.

Sorry to phrase everything in the form of a question, these thoughts all kind of flooded into my head one afternoon, after reading the Ravi passage (Preface to a book, actually) and having seen a few random YouTube comments.

So I don't necessarily have assertions on these matters, just kind of open-ended thoughts and value-judgments.

Ya know???????????
"Not all is good that bears an ancient name,
Nor need we every modern poem blame;
Wise men approve the good, or new, or old;
The foolish critic follows where he's told."
-Kalidas, Malavikagnimitra I.i.2
Trans. Arthur Ryder
Reply 0 0
Reply