Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-7tdvq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-15T02:06:15.742Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Using Tests of Sound Perception in Fieldwork

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 March 2019

John Baily
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

One of the crucial lessons that anthropology has taught ethnomusicology is the importance of trying to understand things from the inside, to explore the emic view, the folk view, actor's view, evaluation, explanation, model, representation; there are lots of terms for it. The point was made clearly many years ago by Alan Merriam in The Anthropology of Music, in the contrast between what he termed the folk evaluation and the analytical evaluation (Merriam 1964:31-32). Like other authors, Merriam emphasised the need for the researcher to find out how people define music and distinguish music from non-music:

One of the most important of such concepts is the distinction, implied or real, made between music on the one hand, and noise, or non-music, on the other; this is basic to the understanding of music in any society … If one group accepts the sound of the wind in the trees as music and another does not, or if one group accepts the croaking of frogs and the other denies it as music, it is evident that the concepts of what music is or is not must differ widely and must distinctively shape music sound (ibid. 63).

Type
Articles
Information
Yearbook for Traditional Music , Volume 28 , 1996 , pp. 147 - 173
Copyright
Copyright © 1996 By The International Council for Traditional Music

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

1.

This research was funded by the Social Science Research Council of the UK under their Conversion Fellowship Scheme, 1975-78. An early version of this paper was read in the Departmental Seminar of the Department of Social Anthropology, Queen's University of Belfast on 4 March 1980, under the title “Classification of Sounds: A Problem in Research Technique.” I am grateful to Dieter Christensen for encouraging me to re-write the paper for publication in this issue of YTM.

References

References Cited

Baily, John 1976 “Recent Changes in the Dutar of Herat,” Asian Music 8(1):29–64. Reprinted in K. Shelemay, ed., The Garland Library of Readings in Ethnomusicology. Volume 6. Musical Processes, Resources and Technologies. New York: Garland. 1990, pp. 223–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1981 “Music and Religion in Herat,” IMS 1981. In Report of the Twelfth Congress Berkeley 1977. Daniel Heartz and Bonnie Wade (eds.). American Musicological Society. Bärenreiter. pp. 387–389.Google Scholar
1988 Music of Afghanistan: Professional Musicians in the City of Herat. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. With accompanying audio cassette.Google Scholar
Harwood, Dane 1976 “Universals in Music: A Perspective from Cognitive Psychology,” Ethnomusicology 20:521–534.Google Scholar
Merriam, Alan P. 1964 The Anthropology of Music. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Nelson, Kristina 1982 “Reciter and Listener: Some Factors Shaping the Mujawwad Style of Qur'anic Reciting.” Ethnomusicology 26:41–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sakata, Hiromi Lorraine 1976 The concepts of music and musician in three Persian-speaking areas of Afghânistân. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Washington.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1983 Music in the Mind. The Concepts of Music and Musician in Afghanistan. Kent: Kent State University Press.Google Scholar
Zemp, Hugo 1978 “‘Are'are Classification of Musical Types and Instruments”. Ethnomusicology 22:37–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar