So, if early music in Ireland and Britain is about the production of socially appropriate bodies (listeners and performers), bodies that are raced, classed and gendered, not to mention modern (ref Cook ‘Western Music as World Music’ and Taruskin or Butt on authenticity/early music and modernity), then what does that mean for diversity? On one hand, no wonder early music in Ireland and Britain has a hard time with outreach for in order to attract new audiences—audiences whose bodies are diversely raced, classed, and gendered—the early music community needs to deal with its position of privilege. Not just its historical privilege in the production of music associated with European courts around the time of the ‘birth of modernity’ but also its privilege in the 20th century.
What does that imply about the complaints regarding arts funding in Britain? How might Ireland’s early music scene avoid the painful situation of the British early music scene?
Complaints of arts funding in Britain stem in part from the painful redistribution of funding that is considered politically and socially necessary (although IMHO not distributed well--I'd prefer a more radically socialist feminist model!). The recognition of whiteness and privilege is painful. Acknowledging the role one plays in a system of privilege, the role one plays in the perpetuation of a system of privilege is extremely painful but a necessary preliminary step to the critical examination and potential dismantling of that system. Perhaps in part the problem is that rather than increase the arts funding pot so that 'non-privileged arts organisations/practitioners' (I'm using really awful shorthands here, since this blog is really a very grand note to self) can get a hefty increase bringing them to a par with similarly sized 'privileged arts organisations/practitioners' that some (but not all) of the culturally privileged organisations have had a decrease and they see that their money is being redistributed to 'non-p arts orgs/pract'ers'. Of course, the situation might not actually favour those organisations: perhaps everyone's funding is being cut proportionally. Need to look into this.
Would a dismantling of white privilege mean the end of early music? No, it doesn’t have to. There’s no reason for early music not to be one ethnic music among many. There’s no reason for early music not to continue to be available. Why should the kinds of bodies produced by and through and in early music be any less valid than the kinds of bodies produced by and through and in any other kind of music? But equally, they should not be more valid.
The feminist consideration of whether the kinds of bodiesi being (re)produced, inscribed etc by a given music is desirable . . . The kinds of bodies validated by contemporary chart music or hip hop subject to substantial feminist critique and rightly so. The kinds of bodies created and validated by privileged arts also subject to substantial feminist critique.
But from the perspective of someone who loves ‘early music’, can anything be done to disengage from the privilege system, even to begin dismantle that, without losing the music, the repertoire? An expansion of the repertoire certainly is in order (and has begun: music by women (esp. nuns), for women, music by ethnic ‘others’ [Rossi etc]). How to be an early music feminist activist within & through early music? Isit possible? Is it desirable?
Hip hop feminists find ways to reconcile their politics with the less desirable aspects of the system that produces the music they enjoy. Can feminists in early music? Can early music feminists achieve similar goals?
No-one in hip hop to my knowledge is talking about outreach—is anyone in hip hop trying to get white grannies in to the audience? If that is a ridiculous idea, perhaps the reverse is also ridiculous? While it is desirable to dismantle systems of race, class and gender privilege, it is not actually possible or desirable to do that by attempting to ‘colonise’ other audiences…. How can early music practitioners and devotees seek to diversify their community in a way that is not colonial, patronising? In a way that does not require diverse raced, sexed, classed, gendered bodies to become white middle class bodies? Is that even possible?
Tuesday, 22 April 2008
Friday, 4 April 2008
beginning of the rest of the year....
Teaching ended about 10 days ago and I'm now returning to the research projects from which I allowed myself to be sidetracked.
First, the good news. My piece on 16th century male friendship and music has been through several revisions and will shortly be in press. It's nice to have something finished and coming out, and it's nice to have a piece on friendship for a friend, but I am a tad concerned about certain aspects. For a start, I totally sidestep the friends/lovers issue: these homoerotic 'true friendships' are now part of the history of (homo)sexuality as much as they are part of the history of friendship. I feel I should have addressed the issue because by ignoring it I think I might be taken as promoting heterosexism which is not my intention at all. However inadvertent, that might be the result. I suppose that's the problem with privilege—for those who are straight, it is too easy to forget to address these issues, or to miss the political significance of a particular angle. And that is what concerns me. I wasn't thinking critically enough about the political implications of that piece--or at least, not in as many ways as I could have done. It has a postscript in which I reflect upon certain ideological issues, but I ignored that one. I agonised over it in private discussions, but these were not reflected in the written work.
So, what are some of the issues?
Well, the historian part of me says that the male-male relationship I focus on was described in its own time as a 'true friendship' and briefly explains some of what that meant at the time. The historian acknowledges that language of 'true friendship' is and was homoerotic, and in the 16th c. that kind of language and that kind of friendship could be interpreted as sexual. So I come down on all sides of the fence. But I don't explicitly say something I might have said: there's no reason to believe that the men were or were not having a sexual relationship, and there probably isn't going to be evidence either way.
I suppose what I'm concerned about is that I just avoid/ignore the debate over terminology for human relationships past and present. Same-sex relationships existed, but there is considerable uncertainty about terminology, the nature of these relationships etc. I'm all for accepting and acknowledging difference, yet what strikes me about this particular case is that there is no such argument against heterosexuality existing in the 16th century. It seems to me, though, that if there wasn't such a thing as homosexuality as we understand it today, then there wasn't such a thing as heterosexuality either, and of course that also suggests that friendship as we know it today was different too--and the archetype of 'true friendship' really doesn't seem to have a modern equivalent. (But then, I am quite tired and perhaps I'm just not firing on all cylinders. I have a cold. My back hurts. There are many distractions.)
That said, I'm reading (still) Guido Ruggiero's book on Machiavelli in which he argues that actually homosexuality did exist.
Now, the not-so-good news. I'm waaaaaaay behind with work for the other book chapter I'm writing at the moment. Waaaay behind. And I don't currently have access to the materials I need to see to complete that.
And other projects are nagging at me: two or three articles have been on the back burner for several years (I am mortified) that I want to submit to peer-reviewed journals; and two book reviews (one a joint review with a colleague). And there's the vexing question of whether I should propose an edited collection from a conference I organised.
Ugh. Now I'm going to feel real guilty. That's a recipe for a really good night's sleep.
First, the good news. My piece on 16th century male friendship and music has been through several revisions and will shortly be in press. It's nice to have something finished and coming out, and it's nice to have a piece on friendship for a friend, but I am a tad concerned about certain aspects. For a start, I totally sidestep the friends/lovers issue: these homoerotic 'true friendships' are now part of the history of (homo)sexuality as much as they are part of the history of friendship. I feel I should have addressed the issue because by ignoring it I think I might be taken as promoting heterosexism which is not my intention at all. However inadvertent, that might be the result. I suppose that's the problem with privilege—for those who are straight, it is too easy to forget to address these issues, or to miss the political significance of a particular angle. And that is what concerns me. I wasn't thinking critically enough about the political implications of that piece--or at least, not in as many ways as I could have done. It has a postscript in which I reflect upon certain ideological issues, but I ignored that one. I agonised over it in private discussions, but these were not reflected in the written work.
So, what are some of the issues?
Well, the historian part of me says that the male-male relationship I focus on was described in its own time as a 'true friendship' and briefly explains some of what that meant at the time. The historian acknowledges that language of 'true friendship' is and was homoerotic, and in the 16th c. that kind of language and that kind of friendship could be interpreted as sexual. So I come down on all sides of the fence. But I don't explicitly say something I might have said: there's no reason to believe that the men were or were not having a sexual relationship, and there probably isn't going to be evidence either way.
I suppose what I'm concerned about is that I just avoid/ignore the debate over terminology for human relationships past and present. Same-sex relationships existed, but there is considerable uncertainty about terminology, the nature of these relationships etc. I'm all for accepting and acknowledging difference, yet what strikes me about this particular case is that there is no such argument against heterosexuality existing in the 16th century. It seems to me, though, that if there wasn't such a thing as homosexuality as we understand it today, then there wasn't such a thing as heterosexuality either, and of course that also suggests that friendship as we know it today was different too--and the archetype of 'true friendship' really doesn't seem to have a modern equivalent. (But then, I am quite tired and perhaps I'm just not firing on all cylinders. I have a cold. My back hurts. There are many distractions.)
That said, I'm reading (still) Guido Ruggiero's book on Machiavelli in which he argues that actually homosexuality did exist.
Now, the not-so-good news. I'm waaaaaaay behind with work for the other book chapter I'm writing at the moment. Waaaay behind. And I don't currently have access to the materials I need to see to complete that.
And other projects are nagging at me: two or three articles have been on the back burner for several years (I am mortified) that I want to submit to peer-reviewed journals; and two book reviews (one a joint review with a colleague). And there's the vexing question of whether I should propose an edited collection from a conference I organised.
Ugh. Now I'm going to feel real guilty. That's a recipe for a really good night's sleep.
Sunday, 27 January 2008
bodies/music at last
Finally we're holding the preliminary b/m meeting on Weds 30 Jan at 4pm. We'll sketch out a plan as a group.
In terms of projects, I have one that might or might not be suitable. I was thinking of doing something on early music and singing, but then I wondered about early music and whiteness. Now, I'm not sure exactly how this might work at the moment, but I was thinking of doing something on early music in Ireland/England (possibly also rest of Britain) in relation to those who attend festivals and/or performers. Nick Cook is giving a seminar paper in a couple of months on 'Western Music as World Music' in which he's going to be looking at Western music in Korea, so that could be relevant in a way.
I was thinking particularly about some anxiety/frustration with arts funding that I've heard expressed by early music performers based in England. It seems to tie in with the SE England anxiety about immigration--our government is giving our funding/benefits/work (privilege?) to x immigrant group, basically. So that's quite interesting. It ties in with the whole discourse on privilege in really fascinating ways. That's not to say that internationally early music is about whiteness, but I am interested in certain ways the conversation I've heard relates to whiteness.
Some things to consider.
1. My informant says it's impossible to get arts funding for concerts now; you have to get the money for other work (community outreach etc), and you're still left having to scrape the barrel to pay for concerts. So, one of the issues here is that festival organisers (well, at least one) feel like the arts council is forcing early music to be a local/community music when perhaps they don't see it that way. In a sense, although early music in southern England does seem to be the domain of white people (in terms of audience, performers, if not also scholars, instrument builders, festival organisers etc) the festival organisers don't like to be reminded of this. Would I need demographics for early music in S. E. or is it enough to work with people's perceptions? Should I contrast perception with demographics collected over a period of time?
2. The idea that early music is nevertheless good for people--part of cultural history that one needs to know about, but also somehow conveys good . . . morals? or other attributes--not sure quite how to articulate this--education, cultivation, sophistication all come into it. Anyway, early music is good for everyone--universal, transcends cultures etc. Very colonial attitude. Complimented, perhaps, as Han pointed out, by the white liberal enjoyment of world music that we saw displayed so provocatively in UCC's Glucksman Gallery last year. (Niwel Tsumbu's ensemble included a "mysterious" Japanese player of the shakuhachi flute; the same announcer made some comment about Niwel's rhythmic guitar, but said nothing about the Irish and German musicians in the same group: western Europeans were unmarked.)
3. The resentment about funding is directed primarily toward non-'Western European' ('old European'?!) cultures--Asian, Afro-Caribbean, and even Polish ('Eastern European'/'new European')--not toward the big institutions that seem to me to suck up substantial amounts of arts council funding (opera houses etc). I'd need to check out the stats on arts funding in Britain. On top of this resentment about the allocation of funds by a presumably already cash-strapped arts council is going to come resentment about the diversion of arts council budget away from arts in favour of the Olympics. I am guessing this will particularly hit southern England, even as the Olympics potentially brings in an arts audience (even if arts isn't the main activity of sports tourists, athletes etc, one assumes at least one or two will visit a gallery, catch a show, attend a concert, check out a museum...).
Lots to go on, and more to come here. Cross-ref to one of my earlier rants about classical music .
In terms of projects, I have one that might or might not be suitable. I was thinking of doing something on early music and singing, but then I wondered about early music and whiteness. Now, I'm not sure exactly how this might work at the moment, but I was thinking of doing something on early music in Ireland/England (possibly also rest of Britain) in relation to those who attend festivals and/or performers. Nick Cook is giving a seminar paper in a couple of months on 'Western Music as World Music' in which he's going to be looking at Western music in Korea, so that could be relevant in a way.
I was thinking particularly about some anxiety/frustration with arts funding that I've heard expressed by early music performers based in England. It seems to tie in with the SE England anxiety about immigration--our government is giving our funding/benefits/work (privilege?) to x immigrant group, basically. So that's quite interesting. It ties in with the whole discourse on privilege in really fascinating ways. That's not to say that internationally early music is about whiteness, but I am interested in certain ways the conversation I've heard relates to whiteness.
Some things to consider.
1. My informant says it's impossible to get arts funding for concerts now; you have to get the money for other work (community outreach etc), and you're still left having to scrape the barrel to pay for concerts. So, one of the issues here is that festival organisers (well, at least one) feel like the arts council is forcing early music to be a local/community music when perhaps they don't see it that way. In a sense, although early music in southern England does seem to be the domain of white people (in terms of audience, performers, if not also scholars, instrument builders, festival organisers etc) the festival organisers don't like to be reminded of this. Would I need demographics for early music in S. E. or is it enough to work with people's perceptions? Should I contrast perception with demographics collected over a period of time?
2. The idea that early music is nevertheless good for people--part of cultural history that one needs to know about, but also somehow conveys good . . . morals? or other attributes--not sure quite how to articulate this--education, cultivation, sophistication all come into it. Anyway, early music is good for everyone--universal, transcends cultures etc. Very colonial attitude. Complimented, perhaps, as Han pointed out, by the white liberal enjoyment of world music that we saw displayed so provocatively in UCC's Glucksman Gallery last year. (Niwel Tsumbu's ensemble included a "mysterious" Japanese player of the shakuhachi flute; the same announcer made some comment about Niwel's rhythmic guitar, but said nothing about the Irish and German musicians in the same group: western Europeans were unmarked.)
3. The resentment about funding is directed primarily toward non-'Western European' ('old European'?!) cultures--Asian, Afro-Caribbean, and even Polish ('Eastern European'/'new European')--not toward the big institutions that seem to me to suck up substantial amounts of arts council funding (opera houses etc). I'd need to check out the stats on arts funding in Britain. On top of this resentment about the allocation of funds by a presumably already cash-strapped arts council is going to come resentment about the diversion of arts council budget away from arts in favour of the Olympics. I am guessing this will particularly hit southern England, even as the Olympics potentially brings in an arts audience (even if arts isn't the main activity of sports tourists, athletes etc, one assumes at least one or two will visit a gallery, catch a show, attend a concert, check out a museum...).
Lots to go on, and more to come here. Cross-ref to one of my earlier rants about classical music .
Wednesday, 21 November 2007
Monday, 2 July 2007
bodies and music
Together with a colleague, I'm organizing a research seminar on bodies and music. I'm trying to work out what to speak (and write) about. I could do something on sixteenth-century Italian music and bodies--perhaps querying the idea that modern bodies perform Cinquecento song in the same way as Cinquecento bodies (that's what is implied by McClary in her most recent book); this would necessarily entail looking at how Cinquecento bodies performed. I have some ideas about what such a paper might look like. But I'd also like to write something about an area of music that is newer (in academic terms) to me. I've been thinking about work on jazz and pop for some time now. The question is what could I do?
Mina Agossi is very cool indeed and I love her music. Perhaps I'm too much of a fan to write something on her, though, because every time I try I just seem to start and end with "wow, she's so cool".... Perhaps there's something to be said about identity. Most of the scholarly writing on jazz with which I'm familiar deals with the "canonic" figures of jazz (especially Miles), most (all?) of whom are American. Agossi is not a canonic figure, and nor is she American. So I wonder if there could be something to say regarding identity issues, European (French) politics, that kind of thing. Another possibility would be to look at the writings about Agossi--her website, myspace page, fan sites, journalism (such as this), or reviews on blogs (such as this choice example)--and look at the kinds of things people say about her to see what the trends are, perhaps do a discourse analysis type thing.
Mina Agossi is very cool indeed and I love her music. Perhaps I'm too much of a fan to write something on her, though, because every time I try I just seem to start and end with "wow, she's so cool".... Perhaps there's something to be said about identity. Most of the scholarly writing on jazz with which I'm familiar deals with the "canonic" figures of jazz (especially Miles), most (all?) of whom are American. Agossi is not a canonic figure, and nor is she American. So I wonder if there could be something to say regarding identity issues, European (French) politics, that kind of thing. Another possibility would be to look at the writings about Agossi--her website, myspace page, fan sites, journalism (such as this), or reviews on blogs (such as this choice example)--and look at the kinds of things people say about her to see what the trends are, perhaps do a discourse analysis type thing.
Thursday, 28 June 2007
research plans
Phew, busy few months--two conferences (one of which I was organizing), then straight into examining. It's all over for the summer, though--time to resurrect my research.
I have several projects on the go:
Far too many to complete in one summer, I think, especially since there's only 8 weeks or so left and I am due about 3 weeks holiday.
I have several projects on the go:
- An essay on decorum, music and innuendo in Italian academies of the sixteenth century for an essay collection with OUP.
- A book review for JSMI.
- An article that was to be a chapter in a book on early modern masculinities is now cast adrift and in search of a new home. I need to work out where to send it and get the blasted thing out.
- An article on sprezzatura that I have trailed around as a conference and seminar paper several times.
- I need to decide whether to get together a proposal for an essay collection from my conference.
- I'm going to propose an edition of dialect songs. We'll see how that goes--worst I can hear is "no".
Far too many to complete in one summer, I think, especially since there's only 8 weeks or so left and I am due about 3 weeks holiday.
Monday, 5 March 2007
farinelli ideas
So, I've been thinking about the movie Farinelli for a while--partly because I show it to my students and their reactions are always so fascinating, but particularly at the moment since one of my UG supervisees is writing a dissertation on it.
There being no castrati around these days, Farinelli's voice was created by blending a soprano and a countertenor (courtesy of IRCAM). This weird sound doesn't always sync with the actor's lips. As my colleague CM pointed out, synchronized sound/lips is an obsession of Hollywood rather than of European cinema: it's just not considered important in Euro film.
Anyway, I've been wondering about this recently particularly in relation to two theories:
1. Donna Haraway's work on cyborgs
2. fragmented body (Lacan) - thanks to CM for this one.
Got a few ideas on this--not sure whether it's enough to make into a paper yet. Had my student gone down either of these avenues, I wouldn't be thinking about this now (ethics)....
The fragmented body idea is possibly the most fruitful initially, but I think the cyborg has mileage too. The question is what exactly.
This might turn into a paper someday. At the moment, I should be working on a paper for this conference.
There being no castrati around these days, Farinelli's voice was created by blending a soprano and a countertenor (courtesy of IRCAM). This weird sound doesn't always sync with the actor's lips. As my colleague CM pointed out, synchronized sound/lips is an obsession of Hollywood rather than of European cinema: it's just not considered important in Euro film.
Anyway, I've been wondering about this recently particularly in relation to two theories:
1. Donna Haraway's work on cyborgs
2. fragmented body (Lacan) - thanks to CM for this one.
Got a few ideas on this--not sure whether it's enough to make into a paper yet. Had my student gone down either of these avenues, I wouldn't be thinking about this now (ethics)....
The fragmented body idea is possibly the most fruitful initially, but I think the cyborg has mileage too. The question is what exactly.
This might turn into a paper someday. At the moment, I should be working on a paper for this conference.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)