Class Schedule
First Week
An introduction to the nature and background of the field.
Second Week
First half of class will meet in the Music Library’s Seminar room 3:00pm-4:00pm. Librarian David Gilbert will be our main presenter.
Historical Overview and Early Stages.
Pegg, Carol; Helen Meyers, et al. “Ethnomusicology,” The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, second edition, edited by Stanley Sadie, Vol. 8: 367-371. New York and London: Macmillan Publishers Ltd. Stokes, Martin
“Music,” Encyclopedia of Social and Cultural Anthropology, edited by A. Barnard & J. Spencer, 384-386 London: Routledge.
Langness, L L. 2005 The Study of Culture (Revised 3rd Edition). Novato, CA: Chandler and Sharp, Inc.
(Read Preface, Introduction and Chapter 1. Always try to relate the readings in Langness to the rest of the reading material.)
Loza, Steven. 2006. “Challenges to the Euroamericentric Ethnomusicological Canon: Alternatives for Graduate Readings, Theory, and Method.” Ethnomusicology Vol. 50, No. 2: 360-71.
*Wallaschek, Richard 1893 Primitive Music. London: Longmans, Green and Company.
(Read Preface and chapters 1 and 4; skim through chapters 9 and 10; read “Summary,” pages 291-95; glance at “Authorities Quoted,” pages 297-321 for familiar names; and look at the transcriptions at the end. Take note
of the author’s attitude, evolutionary thinking, and interest in the origins of music.)
[1st Commentary is due]
Third Week
I. First half of class will meet in the Ethnomusicology Archive, 3:00pm-4:00pm.
II. The rise of Comparative Musicology; “Comparative Musical Science” in Europe. Contributions by
European and American Scholars.
Ellis, Alexander. 1885 “On the Scales of Various Nations,” Journal of the Society of Arts. Vol. 33: (March 27): 485-527: (October 30) 1102-11.
(Read first seven pages or so, including footnotes, and the conclusions [pages 525-27]. Skim through the rest.)
Hornbostel, E.M.von. 1975. Opera Omnia I. Edited by K. Wachsmann, et al. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. pp. 92-113; 185-202.
(In this collection of Hornbostel’s works, focus on pp. 185-202 “On the significance of the phonograph for comparative musicology,” co-authored by Otto Abraham, and another chapter of your own choice. Be sure to examine the transcription methods and symbols, as well as the authors’ views on recording and analysis.)
Gilman, Benjamin I. 1909. “The Science of Exotic Music,” Science. Vol. 30: 532-35.
Bingham, W. V. 1914 “Five Years of Progress in Comparative Musical Science,” Psychological Bulletin. Vol. II: 421-33.
Hornbostel, Erich M. von and C. Sachs. 1961 “Classification of Musical Instruments,” (translation from the 1914 article in German by A. Baines and K.P. Wachsmann). Galpin Society. Vol. 14: 3-29.
(Here your main concern is not to learn the various categories, but to understand the systematic cross-cultural orientation of the work and to place it in the context of European Comparative Musicology.)
[2nd Commentary is due]
Fourth Week
Evolutionary implications, diffusion, cross-cultural comparative studies, fieldwork methods, and transcription.
*Béla Bartók. 1976. Béla Bartók, Essays.Edited by B. Suchoff, New York: St. Martin Press.
(Read chapter 1, skim through chapter 3, read chapter 22, and chapter 25 approximately to page 184. Observe the role of fieldwork and examine the musical transcriptions, and take note of the cross-cultural concepts and labels.)
Herzog, George. 1946 “Comparative Musicology,” The Music Journal. Vol 4. (November, December), No. 11: 42-44
Schneider, Marius. 1957. “Primitive Music,” in Oxford History of Music, edited by Egon Wellesz, Vol. 1: 1-82.
Kunst, Jaap 1969. Ethnomusicology, and Supplement. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff (formerly titles Musciologica).
(Notwithstanding, its revised title, this work is a summation of the European comparative legacy. Observe the various historical and scholarly attitudes expressed and their relevance to European Comparative Musicology.)
*Sachs, Curt. 1961. The Wellsprings of Music, edited. by Jaap Kunst. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.
(Try to relate this work to European Comparative Musicology in general. Read Chapters 1 and 10 and take note of the new and critical outlook toward “evolution” and “progress”.)
Nettl, Bruno. “Western Musical Values and the Character of Ethnomusicology,” The World of Music, Vol. 24, No. 1: 29-40.
[3rd Commentary is due]
Fifth Week
Cultural and historical relativism, the emergence of the American school represented by “ethno-musicology,” later “ethnomusicology.” Also the diversity of orientations: Culture as context; bimusicality and world music at UCLA; thoughts on the limitations of speech about music; the bridging of music history and ethnomusicology; and emphasis on local meaning.
Anthropological backdrop:
a) Langness, L.L. 2005. The Study of Culture (Revised 3rd Edition). Novato, CA: Chandler and Sharp, Inc. (Read chapters 2, 3, & chapter 5, pp. 171-184.
b) Sanjek, Roger
“Boas, Franz,” in Encyclopedia of Social and Cultural Anthropology, edited by A. Barnard and J. Spencer, 71-94. London: Routledge.
Ethnomusicological Response:
*McAllester, David P. 1954. Enemy Way Music. Cambridge, Mass: The Museum.
(Read Foreword and the first 14 pages. Also browse through and examine other parts. Listen to a class tape of Navaho music at the Ethnomusicology Archive.)
Rhodes, Willard. 1956. “On the Subject of Ethno-musicology,” Ethno-musicology Newsletter. Vol. 1, No. 1: 1-9.
------.1956. “Toward a Definition of Ethnomusicology,” American Anthropologist. Vol. 58: 457-63.
Hood, Mantle. 1957. “Training and Research Methods in Ethnomusicology,” Ethnomusicology Newsletter. Vol. 1, No. 11: 2-8.
Chase, Gilbert. 1958. “A Dialectical Approach to Music History,” Ethnomusicology, Vol 2: 1-9.
Seeger, Charles. 1961. “Semantic Logical and Political Considerations Bearing upon Research in Ethnomusicology,” Ethnomusicology. Vol. 5: 77-80.
Frisbie, Charlotte J. 1991. “Women and the Society for Ethnomusicology...(1953-53-61). In Comparative Musicology and Anthropology of Music, edited by Bruno Nettl and Philip V. Bohlman, 244-265. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Nketia, J. H. Kwabena. 1962. “The Problem of Meaning in African Music,” in Ethnomusicology. Vol 6: 1-7.
Sowande, Chief Fela. “The Role of Music in Traditional African Society” in African Music, published by UNESCO, pp.59- 69.
[4th Commentary is due: Suggestions: You may wish to begin your commentary with an overview of those theoretical trends in anthropology as presented in the “anthropological backdrop” section and how they relate to or influence ethnomusicological thought at the time.]
Sixth Week
The Functionalist (and Functionalist-Structuralist) paradigm. Positivist, Social Anthropology and the application of the scientific method. Quest for theory. “Music in culture’” and the organic interlink among social institutions. dies and universals in music. Interest in musical structure and in musical comparisons. Advocacy of world music and its artistic content. Nativist critique.
Langness, L.L.2005.The Study of Culture (Revised 3rd Edition). Novato, CA: Chandler and Sharp, Inc. (Revisit chapter 3 & read chapter 4)
Brailoiu, Constantin. “Reflections on Collective Musical Creation” and “The Widening of Musical Sensibility.” Problems of Ethnomusicology. Edited and translated by A.L. Lloyd. Cambridge University Press.
Deloria, Vine. “Anthropologists and other Friends.” Custer Died for Your Sins: An Indian Manifesto. 1988 Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
Winthrop, Robert H.1991. “Ethnoscience,” in Dictionary of Concept in Cultural Anthropology. New York: Greenwood Press, pg. 104-106.
*Merriam, Alan P.1964. The Anthropology of Music. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.
(Read Part One:chapters 1-3; try to skim through the rest. Make sure you understand Merriam’s stance regarding the influential work. As in the case of other readings, try to read critically. Also relate the content to the discussion of Functionalism in Langness. )
-----1969. “The Ethnographic Experience: Drum-making Among the Bala (Basongye,)” Ethnomusicology, Vol. 13, No. 1:74-100.
[5th Commentary is due]
Seventh Week
Music and culture areas. Approaches from cultural ecology and technoenvironmental, neo-evolutionary, studies in anthropology. Cantometrics and cross-cultural analysis of singing. World distribution of vocal styles.
Langness, L.L.2005. The Study of Culture (Revised 3rd Edition). Novato, CA: Chandler and Sharp, Inc. (Read chapter 5, pp. 186-205)
*Lomax, Alan. 1968. Folk Song Style and Culture. New Brunswick: Transaction Books.
(Read Forward and pages 1-33 critically. Browse through the other parts and try to understand the basic connections he makes between “song style” and “culture.”)
*1976.Cantometrics: A Method in Musical Anthropology. (and 7 cassette tapes). Berkeley: University of California Press. (Read the first 86 pages or so and browse through the rest. Arrange to listen to at least four cassette tapes and follow closely with the book particularly the opening statement on each parameter, where he links singing measurements to types of cultures. A listening-marathon (potluck party) may be substituted for this class session. A copy of the book and tapes is at the Ethnomusicology Archive.)
Henry, Edward O.1976. “The Variety of Music in a North Indian Village; Reassessing Cantometrics,” Ethnomusicology. Vol. 20, No. 1, 49-66. (In addition to the above works you may optionally read the two short reviews of Lomax’s book in Ethnomusicology, Vol. 14, No. 1, 1970, 57-67.)
[6th Commentary is due]
Eighth Week
Further approaches to the study of music and culture: Cross-cultural approaches from cultural ecology and economy-based, neo-evolutionary studies in anthropology; cantometrics and the cross- cultural analysis of structure; and world distributions of style.
Langness, L. L.2005. The Study of Culture (Revised 3rd Edition). Novato, CA: Chandler and Sharp, Inc. (Read pages 119-138.)
*Blacking, John.1973. How Musical is Man? Seattle: University of Washington Press.
(Try to understand the author’s novel ideas, particularly regarding music as a key player. Also note how his visions differ from those of other previous authors.
“Identifying Processes of Musical Change,” The World of Music, Vol. 28, No. 1, 3-12.
(Take note of the author’s views on the internal dynamics of musical change, and see how his ideas in this regard differ from those of Lomax, Merriam, and others).
Paredes, Americo “Folklore, Lo Mexicano, and the Proverb.” In The Chicano Studies Reader: An Anthology of 2001 Aztlan: 1970-2000. Noriega, Chon, and Eric Avila eds.
Gourlay, Kenneth.1982 “Towards a Humanizing Ethnomusicology,” Ethnomusicology Vol. 26, No. 3, 411-420. (You may read selectively to get the gist of Gourlay’s reactions against Merriam’s scientific-objective model and of Gourlay’s alternative humanized-dialectical approach to research.)
Spencer, Jonathan.1996. Symbolic Anthropology,” in Encyclopedia of Social and Cultural Anthropology, eds. A. Barnard and J. Spencer, 535-539. New York & London: Routledge
[8th Commentary is due]
Ninth Week
Symbolic Anthropology. Criticism of positivist theories in favor of an interpretive approach. Recognition of the special abilities of music, ritual, and the arts in general as symbolic systems of traverse barriers, challenge authority, and momentarily reverse social relationships. “Thick description” as interpretation of the layers of meaning behind actions.
*Geertz, Clifford. 1973. The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books, Inc. Publishers.
(For a first-hand experience of Geertz’s thinking and style of discourse take a stab at two chapters: Chapter 1, “Thick Description: Toward an Interpretive Theory of Culture” and Chapter 15, “Deep Play: Notes on the Balinese Cockfight.”)
Seeger, Anthony. 1979. “What can we learn when they sing? Vocal Genres of the Suya Indian of Central Brazil,” Ethnomusicology Vol. 23, No. 3:373-394 .
(Observe the use of symbolic concepts and interpretations and take special note of the power of music to transcend social barriers, as well as the author’s conclusion in which he distances himself from earlier functionalist explanations)
Roseman, Marina. 1987. “Inversion and Conjecture: Male and Female Performance Among the Temiar of Peninsula Malaysia.” In Women and Music in Cross-Cultural Perspective, edited by Ellen Koskoff, 131-149. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
(Here, focus on the use of ritual to momentarily reverse gender and other identities. Think of how Roseman’s symbolic analysis, or “thick interpretation,” can be related to Geertz’s “thick” analysis of what the cock fight momentarily does in Balinese culture).
*Abu-Lughod, Lila. 1986. Veiled Sentiments: Honor and Poetry in Bedouin Society. Berkeley: University of California Press.
(Read throughout the book. Begin with pages 1-35, then proceed and attempt to understand the concepts related to honor, shame, inferiority, and so on. Pay special attention to Chapter 4 and Part Two, titled “Discourse on Sentiment,” particularly the power of sung poetry to challenge rthe dominant male code of conduct. Here too, try to relate Abu-Lughod’s “thick” interpretation of sung poetry to Geertz’s “thick” interpretation of ritual or play)
*Agawu, Kofi. 2003.Representing African Music: Postcolonial Notes, Queries, Positions. New York: Routledge. (Read chapters 7 and 8. Focus on Agawu’s critique of Ethnomusicology and try to reflect on his stance, relate it to past readings, and finally your opinion of his interrogation of the field.
[9th Commentary is due: Provide a commentary of Geertz,’s reading, and Seeger’s or Abu-Lughod’s reading. Provide a separate critique under “Postscript” of Agawu’s chapters by focusing on the aforementioned points]
Tenth Week Presentations of bibliographic critiques.