I have to confess that I was not excited to read this book. I don’t particularly care about the Roma or their music, and I’ve learned that “cultural politics” can be slang for “difficult reading ahead.” This being said, I’ve enjoyed Silverman’s book so far. It presents an interesting and nuanced look at a historically-marginalized community, and the introduction (and I’m guessing the second half) look at the ethical ramifications of this. I found the concept of “transnational families” interesting. We typically do not think of these social groups as extending beyond the local (however we may conceive of that), and music scholarship that focuses on this topic (especially the routes of people and culture in the American border lands) typically does not have to deal with the issues this Roma example raises (the ocean, for starters). Such travel made me wonder about Silverman’s use of “diaspora,” since if the “home” is a transnational one, which direction is the diaspora occurring in? Which location is “home”? Is this question even apt with the Roma example (it might not be)? I would like to discuss some of the ethical implications involved with fieldwork (and the subsequent scholarship). I personally found some of the social mores regarding the wedding (checking the sheets) to be both repugnant and backwards, and objected to the assumptions underlying the practice. I am all for relativism, but I would love for someone to make an argument supporting this type of societally condoned treatment of women (seriously– go for it). What is our ethical responsibility as observer/analysts? Is there an ethnographic Prime Directive that we have to follow, or can we voice our own objections to such practices? If Silverman has an ethical responsibility to engage in activism FOR the Roma, does she also have an obligation to engage in activism WITH the Roma?
Yes, I'd like to discuss the ethical problems as well. I tend not to be of the "innocent bystander" camp, so being an objective scholar that sees something wrong and has the power to help change happen, yet does nothing is hard to understand. On the other hand, what is the effect on scholarship when a scholar is an activist? And like you, John, I had a hard understanding how one could be an activist for the Roma without perhaps also advocating for what seems to be some badly needed change within the Roma cultures she was studying.
It seems like there is a real danger of being discriminated against not just for being "Roma" in America when there is so many specifics of the culture that can be modern Western culture can object to as well (gender specific jobs, comments about females being pulled back to the home around 15-16, the wedding ceremony, arranged marriages, role of the younger women, etc.).
I agree with your "for/with" distinction and that she has a responsibility to engage in activism with the Roma as well.
The book almost made it seem, though, that people fake the blood a lot. I'm no expert, but they did say in the book that not everyone bleeds, even if they are virgins. And then the author brought up chicken blood and the woman she was interviewing said something like "People do what they have to do" in a way that made it seem like she was trying to change the subject or something. I wonder if it's one of those things that everyone fakes and everyone KNOWS everyone fakes, but NO ONE talks about it. That was sort of the sense I got from this. Not that it really makes it much better though.
I thought it was a great read too, but a lot to take in as well. I think the ethical issues of fieldwork is a great topic for discussion. It popped into my head when she was talking about her struggle between activist and scholar.
On the for/with distinction: I think because she has set herself within the culture that she does have an obligation to engage in activism with the Roma. I think this gets back to the whole insider/outsider debate.
I have been so grateful to make use of the companion website for this text!!! The video examples were incredibly helpful in gaining a much more nuanced understanding of what the text was describing.
A few themes to touch on here. The first and most fascinating for me is the idea that Romani music was specifically excluded from the government-sponsored conception of Bulgarian folk music. As Silverman points out, the reasons for this are reflected in the political climate at the time and in the societal treatment of Romani. I think a large part of its exclusion has to do with the fact that commercialism is built into the societal structures surrounding this music (musicians being paid for performances, especially for weddings). As we have seen in this class, commercialism is often seen as an "inauthentic" feature, especially when the commercialism is such a blatant aspect of performance (throwing money on the stage, into instruments, etc). How fascinating that in this case, commercialism is at the heart of the music! Even during the 1980s when the Bulgarian government put bans on Romani music, the musicians persisted, not for purely political reasons but for financial survival.
A second theme that was brought to the fore by Silverman was the issue of gender roles within Romani society. For me, the most fascinating aspect of her discussion was the fact that many Romani women who read her studies objected to her conclusions regarding the power of women, saying that men had more control over financial decisions than women did. To me, this was a red flag. Silverman herself admits that she was deeply immersed in this culture, and even spent time performing with them. Perhaps her role as a woman within the culture she was studying caused her to skew her perceptions. Of course, it is also possible that she is making an astute observation and the women who objected are speaking out of ingrained social norms. Do you all have any thoughts on this?
Silverman seems to present the women as dancers and ritual makers (the ones who create and control the wedding, etc) and the men as musicians and financial providers. However, she does mention that women traditionally would play music in private circumstances for dancing and rituals, and that women are not encouraged to perform in public. I wish we could see an example of this feminine music, because all of the musical examples we have seen so far have been male performers, and I think the tradition overall has a "masculine" quality about it (forgive me if that sounds dated or sexist!)
Finally, on pg. 132 she describes the separation between the folk tradition and the classical tradition -- that if a student wants to study at a folk school, he/she should not learn a classical instrument, and vice versa -- but that instrument crossover happens quite often. The example of Ivo Papazov demonstrates this, the potential hybridity of the musical style -- he brings in elements of multiple genres and integrates them to form his own particular style. Silverman mentions that others have drawn a connection between the nomadic lifestyle of the Romani peoples and the musical styles these people come into contact with, but Silverman also does a fantastic job demonstrating that the process is much more nuanced than that. I do wonder, though, if the Romani musicians are partially able to draw upon so many different musical styles because their music has not been "nationalized" or "folklorized", unlike so many of the other traditions we have studied. Do you think that the Romani's lack of attachment to a particular government has allowed them this freedom?
That does seem like a red flag regarding women and economic control. I'm so unfamiliar with ethnographic work, though, that I wonder how you could get a better, more objective answer. I have no idea!
I think you are probably right about the Romani's lack of attachment aiding them in their musical freedom. Not only since their music has not been folklorized by external governments, but also because their history, it seems, is EVERYONE'S history. They have cultural memories all across Europe (and elsewhere) Perhaps. Thoughts?
I agree that commercialism seems to be a large part of Roma musical culture and that commericalism has been viewed as 'inauthentic' or negative. This is such a perplexing issue that you brought up though. If the musicians are making the money then is it such a bad thing? But who is profiting most? But I think this all gets back to this hybrid world music industrial-commercial apparatus that as Silverman points out rarely ever changes inequality. I would guess she has a sort of negative view towards this commercial/exploitive aspect.
I have been spending hours every day with this reading, and I’m still struggling with it so much. I think it’s very difficult. It probably doesn’t help that everything I know about Gypsies I learned from Brahms’ Zigeunerlieder.
That being said, I found it interesting that Silverman describes the Roma as valuing innovation above all, even in their music. This seems to me to parallel a lot of the discussion that we have been having regarding folk music in general. Many outsiders (etic approach) have made it their life goal to “preserve a dying tradition” or something, while people in that tradition don’t necessarily see it as dying. This makes me wonder: is this value on innovation particularly special for Roma, or does it crop up in many different folk musics? I found it interesting that recently, two zurlas have begun playing in parallel thirds (p. 24–25). I suppose this could be a Western influence, or it could simply be valued innovation in practice. Also, Silverman says that “any good piece of Romani music…tends to exist in multiple variants; that is a mark of its excellence.” As further evidence of this high value of innovation, Silverman quotes Ivo, the highly in-demand wedding musician: “I can eat the same dish twenty times, but I can’t play the same thing the same way twice.” (P. 136)
I’m not sure that I am convinced that the Roma Beads CD is “more than mere borrowing.” (p. 27). Maybe we can discuss this in class since she expands on it in Chapter 7.
I did find the I+V=E equation very interesting. I am fascinated by the idea that Silverman thinks that for Roma, the equation might also be stated as V=I+E, making emotion a component of virtuosity. I think in a Western music context, we don’t usually equate the two. Someone CAN have both virtuosity and great emotion in their playing, but we usually don’t think that great emotions equal great virtuosity.
To repeat my question: is this value on innovation particularly special for Roma, or does it crop up in many different folk musics?
I think the very idea of "innovation" is as problematic and as value-laden as the idea of "folk music," since it privileges the new, the novel, or the unheard. That being said, it does seem that "innovation" is especially important for the Roma. Many of the other traditions we've looked at haven't valued change for its own sake.
I ran into the same question about "covering" vs. "borrowing." I haven't listened to the CD and probably I'm not familiar enough with either covers or Rom music now to determine the differences someone in the culture would hear. I think some of the problem might stem from the fact that the back blurb says Silverman is an anthropologist and folklorist, and may just not be familiar with the way Western classical musicians distinguish between the terms?
That is hilarious! I kept thinking about Carmen when I was reading this...
I was thinking about your comment on V=I+E. I think that sometimes in singing, especially in opera, we consider emotion being a component of virtuosity. Maybe that is because you have to work the emotion into your voice in order for it to work well.
Carol Silverman’s Romani Routes sheds a great amount of light upon the plight of the Roma’s of the world and their dependence on music in life events/rituals. Silverman sheds light on some interesting aspects of Roma life and music (past and present) that parallel some aspects of American life, existence, and music. Silverman states that Balkan Romani music is a “constellation,” varying between regions and throughout history rather than as a unified whole. This constellation idea can also be applied to the many different variations in American popular music. For example, the giant American country music conglomerate has many different sub-genres present outside of the Nashville region. Honky Tonk Country, which is more “raw” sounding in nature, was established and is found (to a certain extent) primarily in Texas and lower Oklahoma. Rockabilly (a combination of Rock and Roll and the old Hillbilly music) has its origins in the Southern U.S., namely Sun Studios in Memphis, TN. Bluegrass music comes from the Bluegrass region of Kentucky, Red Dirt Country from Stillwater, Oklahoma, the Bakersfield Sound from Bakersfield, California, and so on. Silverman notes how Roma families are transnational, person oriented, patrilineal and patriarchial, have a strong work ethic, and are anti-welfare. I found this description to fit (oddly enough) with the Volga German immigrants and their ancestors living today primarily in the upper and lower midwest regions. In a nutshell, the Volga Germans were invited by Catherine the Great to farm and settle the area around the Volga river without the threat of cultural assimilation to Russia. However, this promise eventually faded and many left for the U.S. Volga German families are extremely large (sometimes upwards of 10 children) and are usually led by the father. Their occupations (like the Roma) are usually gender coded; men take care of the farm work and have another part-time labor job while women take care of household matters. The women sometimes take up a secondary part-time job as well. Most importantly, music plays a vital role in VG communities as in Roma ones. Marriage is usually accompanied by a huge polka dance; these dances are also used as a way for community members to socialize as well as a way to celebrate a marriage. There are still some churches that occasionally have masses or ceremonies done in German. Most children are encouraged to learn an instrument and/or participate in school musical activities because it helps “build character.”
I only had time to skim this book, which is a bit of a shame at times given that it is a very dense, award winning work. I’ve read a little about Rom/Gypsy/stile Hongroise before (how could I not, with J. Bellman as an advisor?!?) However, all of that was based on music mostly from art music’s Western perspective, in the Classical and Romantic eras. I was expecting the book to give a little background from that time period, but instead it has (very wisely, given the amount of material) focused on the current day. Strange to see how much as apparently not changed. However, it is very dense, and honestly, especially given the chapters on women’s roles in America in the present day, skimming is the best I could manage. I also have to wonder about the author’s views and orientation a little bit. In previous articles we’ve read, the authors have tried to maintain some sort of objective stance. This author’s work so far is, by and large, objective scholarly research, but she also admits to being very involved for a long period of time and being an activist.
I do wonder about the tone occasionally: if borrowing and mixing of styles is acceptable to Rom, why is the fact that Rom and non-Rom dancers are performing in a television show brought out on p.33? (“unsubtle modern dance choreographies that have little in common with Romani dance.”) Later it is argued that (older?) women viewed it as bad PR for Rom and Romani women in particular, but the blend seems to be what was critiqued earlier, not the whole quagmire of women dancing.
One of the questions posed in the beginning of the book (or maybe I’m mixing it with other reading) is how the music of the Rom can be valued, yet they as a people despised. I’m wondering if the “polylingual” or multi-ethnic qualities described around p. 26 in the introduction correspond partially to that. If the Rom culture and people have maintained their distinctiveness, yet the music is interpreted as incorporating various local traditions and instruments, perhaps that is part of the reason. (Not that I’m meaning to condone viewpoints). Thoughts?
Do we equate covers with “mere borrowing” now? Or “diaspora” with “ghetto”? I haven’t had a conception of those two terms as linked before reading this book. Where are the Kalderash Roma based? Are animal trainers still allowed? Bear acts, monkeys, etc.? It seems that it is, now. out of curiosity, is there oversight of this (like the ASCPA here in the US?)
Covers are treated very differently than borrowing in everything I've seen (which isn't a lot, to be fair). Borrowing typically involves taking an entire idea and putting in a new context, whereas covering typically involves reimagining that context itself.
That was my thinking. Covering can also be seen as an emulation of sorts, whereas borrowing can have both positive and negative connotations now (post-Romantic era). Yet on p. 27 I - and I think Doug too - ran smack into "the 2005 CD... *Roma Beads*...features remakes of Chinchiri's songs as well as other repertoire from the 1950s. Although these examples could be termed "covers" or remakes, I would counter that this is more than mere borrowing." Which very strongly seems to equate covers with "mere borrowing." That's strange to me, especially given the book's emphasis on variation and innovation, which seems to be essential to covers, not borrowing. Maybe that's because Silverman is a professor of anthroplogy; I don't know what her formal music background is.
She is a musician herself, I know, but I don't know if classically trained.
Regarding the dancers being problematic... I believe it is because the Roma themselves draw a big distinction between appropriating styles within the confines of their own tradition and simply re-labeling a non-Romani style as suddenly Romani. I agree, though, that there are subtleties to that televised performance that could be addressed further.
I thought that covers typically took something that could still be recognized as the same "song" or "work" or whatever and changed things about it, still allowing it to be recognizable. (For instance the Dirty Loops' excellent cover of Justin Bieber's "Baby." Seriously, listen to it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjVGJ3YFDc8)
Whereas I thought borrowing might be more used for musical quotation, such as what mashup artists do. No?
Since it was a lot, I'll try to make just a quick critique/comment on each chapter/section.
Methodology: Her explanation was very clear, which I am grateful for. This approach to ethnography seems quite new and ambitious in its scope. Looking at both the diaspora and the native culture requires a very special background, which she certainly seems to have. Also, I like the idea that there is no pure or "authentic" cultural source. Her identity struggle between scholar and activist is also something for discussion.
Chapters 1 & 2 -- Invaluable background and very well-written. These two chapters setup the whole book very nicely. I'd be (utterly) lost without them. It seems a good deal of Romani music has retained its functional role at festivals/dances/etc.
Chap. 3 – I particularly liked the idea that “we must remember that diasporas are not homogenous, a diaspora is a site of multiple consciousness” (pg. 41) Many of the problems of studying diasporas, at least as from what I can glean from this chapter, might be traced back to this misconception. Hybridity is also another issue worthy of discussion—“hybridity rarely changes structures of inequality.” (45) I wonder if there aren’t examples of hybridity in Western music.
Chap. 4 – I didn’t think the idea that diasporas are linked to their native land was all that novel. Maybe that’s not her point though. So, even if that is the case, it felt like, “Well, who cares?” Are marriage, language, and ritual unique to this diaspora? I don’t have enough background with diaspora movements in general, so maybe this is a unique situation?? Probably not my favorite chapter.
Chap. 5 – By now, I’m getting the idea of how central celebrations and festivals are to Roma culture and music-making. It was a very insightful look into the Roma wedding celebrations. They seem to be quite lavish, which makes sense given their cultural importance.
Chap. 6 – It is always interesting to find where stereotypes come from. For example, the Markovic companies that presented gypsies as “tapping tambourines on their hips, elbows, and shoulders; dancing solo steps in unison; doing intricate footwork (including spinning) over large distances.” (116-17)
Chap. 7 – This chapter sounded like a tune we’ve sung before, state appropriation of a subaltern community/identity/culture, etc. The popularity of wedding music, particularly in recordings, is a little unusual from anything we've seen this semester. At least in America, wedding music is usually a dreadful hodgepodge of different styles.
One of the questions from the intro that I've been keeping in the back of my mind is, "Are the Roma ‘reinscribing their stereotypes or subverting them?" It's quite a paradox...
I absolutely loved her discussion of hybridity! I can't believe I didn't bring it up in my post. She brings up the idea that if we sink too deeply into labeling hybrids, everything eventually becomes a hybrid and nothing has meaning anymore -- which reminded me of our early class discussions regarding the definition of folk vs. classical vs. popular music.
I also loved this: "Liberals can feel good when buying a hybrid product like a world music CD because of the imputed connection to the dispossessed. In fact, marginality can become a kind of asset, a type of political cache.." Ouch! That's her inner activist coming out. Grains of truth later on... she calls for a focus on "representation, performance, and aesthetics while still maintaining a solid connection to material conditions and history." Then she moves on... hybridity seems to be beyond the point, for her.
I agree with Douglas that this is a very difficult read especially since the author tackles the subject from many different (historic, cultural, ethical, commercial) angles and the many strands were difficult to digest together. The thing that jumps out to me is her debunk of the idea of music stars out pure and authentic and only ceases to be that way when it moves to an outside culture. This also applies to the idea of commercialisation as a late feature. In both cases, the author argues that the Romani people have always been a part of these processes and the idea of a fixed, non-commercial purity is simplistic and inaccurate. Michelle and John pointed out the ethical dimensions of some of the social issues cited by the author. The author admits that her account is a 'partial truth'. Her account and assessment of the cultural issues are of course inextricably linked with a Western sensibility. As she mentioned, she struggled to combine activism and scholarship and was 'alternatively accused of neglecting one for the other'. There's no such thing as a totally objective research ultimately, and I like her activism approach since it comes from a real engagement with the people as well as interraction with them.
I found this reading to be very interesting, but also difficult to follow. I found the idea of there being multiple separate groups of one culture fascinating. So far in class we have dealt with cultures that are solidly linked to one single geographic location, but the idea of there being a group that exists without a home land really changed my way of thinking about national culture. For instance, while reading this, the question of, can a group that is nomadic and therefore does not have a "homeland" have a folk identity? I am sure it is possible, but up until now we have only seen folk as an old or rural part of a single location.
I had some issues with the author's use of Youtube as an ethnographic tool. It just seems lazy to me. I can see why she does it, but couldn't this be considered unreliable?
Second week comments: Silverman’s depiction of the culturally ambiguous space of Romani festivals led me to believe that these function as social and aesthetic ghettos. The government provides performance opportunities to showcase Romani contributions, but in a limited and controlled way that does little to integrate the Rom into the larger national formation. As long as the Rom do not stray from these cultural spaces, there are “welcomed,” and transgressions are punished politically. I wonder why Silverman did not extend this line of thought, since it reinforces many of her ideas about the mistreatment of Roma people. I have been trying to think of similar treatments of musicians (not necessarily ethnic minorities) but drawing a blank (it doesn’t help that there are fighter jets flying overhead all day, as Louisville starts the month of pre-Derby festivities), so suggestions are welcome! I thought that the discussions of Azis (ex. pg. 194) was fascinating, especially regarding the performativity of gender and the challenging of heteronormativity. Azis adopts personas typically associated with the “other” gender, while revealing them as performed because of his “real” gender. On an unrelated note, I was also intrigued by Silverman’s discussions of hybridity, and her concluding critique of the “world music” market. I had never considered the consumption of these musics as (neo-)liberal and multicultural, but they are. What’s more, consuming them passively and without context, or evaluating them according to some constructed idea of “traditional” or “authentic” might actually serve to undermine multiculturalism. Overall, I think one of the things that gives the book it’s realistic yet positive bent is Silverman’s rhetorical tactic of presenting the negatives and real-world treatment of Roma peoples, but then following that up with positives. This deliberate and political framing not only creates the sense that life is (or can be) improving for the Rom, but subtly reinforces her point: if there are pages of negatives and only a couple of paragraphs depicting positives, it underscores the urgency of her activist causes.
This isn't quite answering your question, but I wonder how Westernized depictions of ethnic minorities plays into all of this (weren't there gypsies in The Huntchback of Notre Dame?).
To more directly answer your question, I think that Le Mystere des Voix Bulgaire is an example that Silverman proposes. I wonder if spirituals could be the same thing: white people were eating them up at the turn of the twentieth century, but only in the concertized, dressed up form. Either no one WANTED to hear them as originally sung, or they never had the opportunity to hear them sung that way. I think this may have been largely an initiative from the ex-slaves, however, rather than from some more powerful group that imposed it on them. This is kind of the sense I have been getting from reading about them. I dunno.
I agree with John that my favorite thing about this book is the fact that Silverman presents such an all-encompassing view of the Roma people and their association with the music industry. She juxtaposes her own personal activism with contradictory opinions, and save for a few places, manages not to present these contradictory opinions in a negative light. Truly, she has achieved relatively balanced scholarship in this book.
I'm also impressed with her juggling of so many issues -- economics, politics, language, ethnicity, religion, musical style, nationalism -- and still managing to maintain at least a semblance of a thesis. Reading her conclusion really brought to light that as comprehensive as this text is, each and every point connected to her conclusion. Truly masterful.
I was thrilled to see that she brought Gogol Bordello and Borat into the mix. Admittedly, these two represent some of my only contact with Romani culture previous to reading this book, and so I was grateful for her contextualization. With her discussion of the DJs, too, I was fascinated by their response to her questioning of their motives. They seem to be baffled that anyone would be offended by their hybridizing of musical styles. This ties in to an editorial I read earlier today about millennials (http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/04/06/my-so-called-opinion/) who are criticized for being indecisive and appropriating when in fact we were raised to be pluralistic! Extremely fascinating -- I'm probably going to tie this into my term paper. As for my personal opinion regarding hybridization and appropriation of Romani music... I am torn. As Silverman notes, on the one hand these musicians need to make a living for themselves, and each will do so in a way that is right for them, but on the other hand, sometimes they end up making a profit by exploiting or propagating racist or prejudiced views. Indirectly, this is a critique of capitalism, pointing out the corruption that may occur when vulnerable groups of people are forced to find a way to support themselves.
I wonder what are everyone's thoughts regarding authenticity and hybridization. Can a hybrid music claim greater or less authenticity by its very nature of being a hybrid? Is Silverman's critique of hybrid-Romani music founded or unfounded? (Isn't Romani music by its very nature a sort of hybrid, or is that just a stereotype?)
I agree. I think attacking hybrid music is beside the point. It's all about aesthetic preference. Some people like bringing these other influences into their music. There's nothing wrong with that, and I don't think it makes it any less "authentic," whatever that may mean. It is certainly novel, but there are still Roma influences. Those influences are no less "authentic" because of the mixing, right? And I agree that Roma music is hybrid by nature. She has even sort of been saying that in earlier parts of the book (or so I thought). It may just be so much more pronounced in recent years with globalization and pluralization.
Earlier in the book I remember her criticizing the overuse of the term hyrbid, since most music can be defined as a hybrid of some type, and then were would you be? Or the ilk. I think she has a bit of a point and that, like many terms we've looked at, hybridity can be thought of as a spectrum and should be used carefully, but I don't think the term or the music can be tossed out.
I’m having the strangest sense that I’ve read a lot of this book someplace else before. The idea that a culture – or “folk” is more appealing if it is placed in a mythical past, with nostalgia for a simpler time? The debate about whether music should be used to educate or entertain? The problems of power relationships between recording companies and marketers and the groups they represent? The question of intellectual property rights versus remixing and covers? Even complaints by musicians that recognition comes too late in their careers and often originates outside their own locality seems to be a thread that has run through music for an extremely long time. That being said, I don’t think I’ve seen such problems applied so broadly across a culture, especially one that is spread between so many different countries. Silverman also incorporates the musician’s voices, quoting extensively from interviews, liner notes, and the like, skillfully moving the narrative between personal and culture-wide spheres. Inclusion of artists such as Azis and Esma Redzepova also seemed to challenge not just outsider’s views of Rom culture, but also, to a certain degree, “insiders.” Esma faced issues inside Roma culture because she was a woman; Azis commented that “even Gypsies hate me.” Overall, to me *Romani Routes* still felt a little more like a gathering of essays on related themes, with the conclusion a little abrupt and short considering the scope of the book. But it brought back many ideas from the beginning, including the issue of hybridity and how it is viewed by Romani as well as outsiders. The idea of hybridity and world music was probably the most difficult for me. I think maybe my conception of “world music” is wrong, or at least different – I always thought “world music” was this sort of “it’s a small small world” mashup of different sterilized cultural styles on a single CD or radio station or something, all sort of turned into easy listening pop/muzak. It’s not something I listen to deliberately; I just thought of it as the ubiquitous stuff in Starbucks or maybe Panda Express, or even preloaded onto my Microsoft machine. I thought the idea was to have a selection of pieces represent the “world” in a really casual sort of way, deliberately limiting cultural markers, not accentuating a difference – thus “world music.” And I never associated the consumption of world music with any type of latent activism or “neo-liberal” tendencies (maybe because to me, my concept of “world music” was broadcast over speakers and I didn’t have a choice about hearing, if not listening, to it?) I realize this is a whole ‘nother can of worms, especially since we’ve spent a lot of time deconstructing the idea of “folk” music. But it seemed like a central point to Silverman….so…. what is your idea of “world” music, and why?
Agree that with such an extensive array of materials and methods, she absolutely needed a larger conclusion. Unless we read that as indicative of the lack of conclusion in the musical culture, but let's not be like that.
I share similar thoughts about "world music," and your examples are what I usually lump into that category (see also Putumayo's releases). I differentiate between that category (which is widely agreed upon as a marketing term, at least from what I've read) and "musics of the world," which is my broad rubric for everything that is "outside" the Western/American music school tradition. If a music (Talking Heads, Simon, Messiaen, etc.) uses ideas or sounds influenced by a "world" tradition (or even by the composer's idea of what that "world" tradition sounds like), I typically lump it with the originating category and target market. So, Graceland is Western pop, even though some consider it one of the first "world music" albums.
I think it is very interesting that Bulgarians felt more comfortable with the heavily arranged music of Le Mystère des Voix Bulgares representing them than with music of the Roma representing them. As I am writing my paper on spirituals, I am discovering what I think it a similar line of thinking that explains why spirituals are only known to us in their concert form now. I think there is a desire to present a group of people’s “folk music” in a sort of “cleaned-up” form. It’s all about presenting yourself to the world, and saying that the “people” of your nation or ethnicity have valuable contributions to the world of music. However, there is this tendency to present this material in versions that are perceived to be more palatable to Western audiences. Do you think this constitutes some kind of racial or ethnic shame? It almost seems like it to me sometimes. I would love to discuss this. I think the idea of “self-orientalizing” and self-stereotyping in chapter 12 is related to this. In the case of the United States, we might liken it to African Americans participating in minstrel shows that took advantage of stereotypes.
I also liked the discussion of Chalga. It’s fascinating to me to learn about other genres of pop music in general, but it was especially interesting that Chalga has a connotation of being low class and uncivilized. From an outsider point of view, this seems so ridiculous! Are there any parallels to this in Western music? I think that Country music might sometimes have that connotation, but I’m not sure.
I had totally forgotten about the band Gogol Bordello. Wow. I had friends in high school who LOVED that band. During the section talking about Gogol Bordello and other Gypsy-Punk/remixes/etc., the author brings up questions of ownership in remixes. Without saying too much about this, I can say that this is always a question when discussing remixes and quotation. I think it is interesting here, though, because of the question regarding a marginalized group’s potential profiting from these remixes.
This book actually brings up several interesting things, but I am not sad to be done with it! So challenging!
I found Silverman’s account of Yuri Yunakov’s musical training to be very interesting in that it brings up the dilemma of rote learning found in the world of music education. Yunakov states that “the neighborhood was my school…,” meaning (as Silverman relates) that “informal music instruction was the rule…nobody went to music school (223).” Learning music by ear was heavily stressed (and still is to some extent) by my private instructors and music education professor’s as a way to gain complete facility of one’s instrument. This learning style is a major component of the Suzuki method, forming a large portion of the beginning student pedagogy. Obviously, this learning method worked very well for Yunakov as evidenced in the video presentation from last class. The anti-rote stance believes that rote learning does not encourage musicians to develop critical thinking skills. So, would it be more beneficial for musicians in the long run if they were encouraged to do more things by ear? What may be some pitfalls present in both methods?
Silverman brings up an interesting point about Azis having a “double whammy” factor in terms of his sexuality and ethnicity on page 197. This does make sense, looking at other stars in gay culture that have used this duality to gain notoriety, namely RuPaul. However, there were many stars before RuPaul came along that were able to “transgress” without the aid of a “double whammy” factor, e.g. Divine. It is almost like saying, in my view, that performing abilities do not matter when it comes right down to it. Rather, how intriguing you can portray yourself to be? Maybe both instances are one in the same? Thoughts and opinions on this matter?
Interesting question! I might add that the *idea* of the performance might be the most important thing, i.e. it might matter less what one actually does and more what they're trying to do. For example, David Bowie also crosses the boundaries we typically assign to gender, but I don't think it was a matter of him being intriguing or being a skilled performer, and the fact that he was performing in character. To relate this to your example, he lacks the "double-ness" of Azis, but it might not matter in the long run.
I also think that pop stars are differentiated from other types of musical performing artists when it comes to image versus performing ability. Think of Britney Spears for example... profited immensely off her image as a dancing "naughty school girl" in the song Hit Me Baby One More Time, but in truth really can NOT sing very well. As a result, she sells her dancing abilities, photogenic face and figure, and sex appeal -- the rest of the package is what is created by producers and other music industry execs.
Of course, certain pop stars use their *actual* singing abilities to garner a sense of authenticity. Think of Lady Gaga singing jazz standards with Tony Bennett or Miley Cyrus singing with a bluegrass band... they are cultivating their image on one hand in the same vein as Britney Spears, but on the other they are saying, "Hey look, I can actually sing too!"
Silverman's discussion of the famous chalga female singer (the name escapes me at the moment) actually lines up with this way of thinking/marketing... Silverman seems to say, THIS singer actually CAN sing.
Week 2: Chapter 8: She seems disheartened by the systematic shutting out of the Roma musicians by the Bulgarian state. In Macedonia, the situation seemed slightly better perhaps. Can Roma represent the nation? I think we talked about that quite a bit last week. I think an extra component of this is the discrimination against Roma peoples too, in addition to the geographical and nostalgic problems we brought up.
Chapter 9: The criticisms of chalga as "low-class" seem fairly even across the board. We hear the same things used to characterize popular music here. I think there are similar class distinctions with pop and classical music hereWe often hear classical music in luxury car commercials, while more economical car commercials feature pop music.
Chapter 10: The saga of Esma. I found it interesting how she positioned herself as a representative of the state. I liked how she explored her motives for this. But I thought the whole thing was kind of obvious. "These women, like Esma, strategize to maximize both their commercial success and their reputation." I mean, has it ever really worked out well for someone who has criticized the state? I guess her point is that because women are more marginalized they have more pressure to do so than men.
Chapter 11: I thought her interpretation of Yunakov was interesting. I think openess and flexibility is part of that Roma stereotype, the migratory musician, always able to adapt.
Chapter 12: I thought this chapter really formed the heart of the book so far. At least to me, it was the most interesting in terms of content and ideas. At times some of the other chapters just seem to rehash rather unspectacular observations, which I suppose is part of an ethnography--not everything is going to be exciting all the time, especially if you're trying to give a complete picture of a society. My other thought was how is the current othering or exoticizing of Roma culture any different than it was in the 18th or 19th centuries?? Also, what is gypsy punk?
Chapter 13: Hmm...seemed to rehash a lot of the ideas from Chapter 12? Appropriation of styles, "negotiating" styles to appeal to a larger mass audience.
Overall, I have enjoyed this book and it is definitely a great reference to have. Especially the earlier background chapters. I am not always convinced each chapter points to one central idea or is related to what she said she set out to accomplish. I think most of these chapters could easily be excerpted, which is good, but she did not make it seem from her intro that she had intended that. Has definitely changed my understanding of Roma culture and music, quite a complex topic, with many layers.
Your chapter 12 question is really intriguing... how is this any different? I would guess that perhaps the difference is in the participation of the actual Roma people in the exoticization, made possible by the new form of capitalism under which the music industry operates (as opposed to pre-Industrial forms of the music business).
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI have to confess that I was not excited to read this book. I don’t particularly care about the Roma or their music, and I’ve learned that “cultural politics” can be slang for “difficult reading ahead.” This being said, I’ve enjoyed Silverman’s book so far. It presents an interesting and nuanced look at a historically-marginalized community, and the introduction (and I’m guessing the second half) look at the ethical ramifications of this.
ReplyDeleteI found the concept of “transnational families” interesting. We typically do not think of these social groups as extending beyond the local (however we may conceive of that), and music scholarship that focuses on this topic (especially the routes of people and culture in the American border lands) typically does not have to deal with the issues this Roma example raises (the ocean, for starters). Such travel made me wonder about Silverman’s use of “diaspora,” since if the “home” is a transnational one, which direction is the diaspora occurring in? Which location is “home”? Is this question even apt with the Roma example (it might not be)?
I would like to discuss some of the ethical implications involved with fieldwork (and the subsequent scholarship). I personally found some of the social mores regarding the wedding (checking the sheets) to be both repugnant and backwards, and objected to the assumptions underlying the practice. I am all for relativism, but I would love for someone to make an argument supporting this type of societally condoned treatment of women (seriously– go for it). What is our ethical responsibility as observer/analysts? Is there an ethnographic Prime Directive that we have to follow, or can we voice our own objections to such practices? If Silverman has an ethical responsibility to engage in activism FOR the Roma, does she also have an obligation to engage in activism WITH the Roma?
Yes, I'd like to discuss the ethical problems as well. I tend not to be of the "innocent bystander" camp, so being an objective scholar that sees something wrong and has the power to help change happen, yet does nothing is hard to understand. On the other hand, what is the effect on scholarship when a scholar is an activist? And like you, John, I had a hard understanding how one could be an activist for the Roma without perhaps also advocating for what seems to be some badly needed change within the Roma cultures she was studying.
DeleteIt seems like there is a real danger of being discriminated against not just for being "Roma" in America when there is so many specifics of the culture that can be modern Western culture can object to as well (gender specific jobs, comments about females being pulled back to the home around 15-16, the wedding ceremony, arranged marriages, role of the younger women, etc.).
I agree with your "for/with" distinction and that she has a responsibility to engage in activism with the Roma as well.
DeleteThe book almost made it seem, though, that people fake the blood a lot. I'm no expert, but they did say in the book that not everyone bleeds, even if they are virgins. And then the author brought up chicken blood and the woman she was interviewing said something like "People do what they have to do" in a way that made it seem like she was trying to change the subject or something. I wonder if it's one of those things that everyone fakes and everyone KNOWS everyone fakes, but NO ONE talks about it. That was sort of the sense I got from this. Not that it really makes it much better though.
I thought it was a great read too, but a lot to take in as well. I think the ethical issues of fieldwork is a great topic for discussion. It popped into my head when she was talking about her struggle between activist and scholar.
DeleteOn the for/with distinction: I think because she has set herself within the culture that she does have an obligation to engage in activism with the Roma. I think this gets back to the whole insider/outsider debate.
I have been so grateful to make use of the companion website for this text!!! The video examples were incredibly helpful in gaining a much more nuanced understanding of what the text was describing.
ReplyDeleteA few themes to touch on here. The first and most fascinating for me is the idea that Romani music was specifically excluded from the government-sponsored conception of Bulgarian folk music. As Silverman points out, the reasons for this are reflected in the political climate at the time and in the societal treatment of Romani. I think a large part of its exclusion has to do with the fact that commercialism is built into the societal structures surrounding this music (musicians being paid for performances, especially for weddings). As we have seen in this class, commercialism is often seen as an "inauthentic" feature, especially when the commercialism is such a blatant aspect of performance (throwing money on the stage, into instruments, etc). How fascinating that in this case, commercialism is at the heart of the music! Even during the 1980s when the Bulgarian government put bans on Romani music, the musicians persisted, not for purely political reasons but for financial survival.
A second theme that was brought to the fore by Silverman was the issue of gender roles within Romani society. For me, the most fascinating aspect of her discussion was the fact that many Romani women who read her studies objected to her conclusions regarding the power of women, saying that men had more control over financial decisions than women did. To me, this was a red flag. Silverman herself admits that she was deeply immersed in this culture, and even spent time performing with them. Perhaps her role as a woman within the culture she was studying caused her to skew her perceptions. Of course, it is also possible that she is making an astute observation and the women who objected are speaking out of ingrained social norms. Do you all have any thoughts on this?
Silverman seems to present the women as dancers and ritual makers (the ones who create and control the wedding, etc) and the men as musicians and financial providers. However, she does mention that women traditionally would play music in private circumstances for dancing and rituals, and that women are not encouraged to perform in public. I wish we could see an example of this feminine music, because all of the musical examples we have seen so far have been male performers, and I think the tradition overall has a "masculine" quality about it (forgive me if that sounds dated or sexist!)
Finally, on pg. 132 she describes the separation between the folk tradition and the classical tradition -- that if a student wants to study at a folk school, he/she should not learn a classical instrument, and vice versa -- but that instrument crossover happens quite often. The example of Ivo Papazov demonstrates this, the potential hybridity of the musical style -- he brings in elements of multiple genres and integrates them to form his own particular style. Silverman mentions that others have drawn a connection between the nomadic lifestyle of the Romani peoples and the musical styles these people come into contact with, but Silverman also does a fantastic job demonstrating that the process is much more nuanced than that. I do wonder, though, if the Romani musicians are partially able to draw upon so many different musical styles because their music has not been "nationalized" or "folklorized", unlike so many of the other traditions we have studied. Do you think that the Romani's lack of attachment to a particular government has allowed them this freedom?
That does seem like a red flag regarding women and economic control. I'm so unfamiliar with ethnographic work, though, that I wonder how you could get a better, more objective answer. I have no idea!
DeleteI think you are probably right about the Romani's lack of attachment aiding them in their musical freedom. Not only since their music has not been folklorized by external governments, but also because their history, it seems, is EVERYONE'S history. They have cultural memories all across Europe (and elsewhere) Perhaps. Thoughts?
I agree that commercialism seems to be a large part of Roma musical culture and that commericalism has been viewed as 'inauthentic' or negative. This is such a perplexing issue that you brought up though. If the musicians are making the money then is it such a bad thing? But who is profiting most? But I think this all gets back to this hybrid world music industrial-commercial apparatus that as Silverman points out rarely ever changes inequality. I would guess she has a sort of negative view towards this commercial/exploitive aspect.
DeleteI have been spending hours every day with this reading, and I’m still struggling with it so much. I think it’s very difficult. It probably doesn’t help that everything I know about Gypsies I learned from Brahms’ Zigeunerlieder.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, I found it interesting that Silverman describes the Roma as valuing innovation above all, even in their music. This seems to me to parallel a lot of the discussion that we have been having regarding folk music in general. Many outsiders (etic approach) have made it their life goal to “preserve a dying tradition” or something, while people in that tradition don’t necessarily see it as dying. This makes me wonder: is this value on innovation particularly special for Roma, or does it crop up in many different folk musics? I found it interesting that recently, two zurlas have begun playing in parallel thirds (p. 24–25). I suppose this could be a Western influence, or it could simply be valued innovation in practice. Also, Silverman says that “any good piece of Romani music…tends to exist in multiple variants; that is a mark of its excellence.” As further evidence of this high value of innovation, Silverman quotes Ivo, the highly in-demand wedding musician: “I can eat the same dish twenty times, but I can’t play the same thing the same way twice.” (P. 136)
I’m not sure that I am convinced that the Roma Beads CD is “more than mere borrowing.” (p. 27). Maybe we can discuss this in class since she expands on it in Chapter 7.
I did find the I+V=E equation very interesting. I am fascinated by the idea that Silverman thinks that for Roma, the equation might also be stated as V=I+E, making emotion a component of virtuosity. I think in a Western music context, we don’t usually equate the two. Someone CAN have both virtuosity and great emotion in their playing, but we usually don’t think that great emotions equal great virtuosity.
To repeat my question: is this value on innovation particularly special for Roma, or does it crop up in many different folk musics?
I think the very idea of "innovation" is as problematic and as value-laden as the idea of "folk music," since it privileges the new, the novel, or the unheard. That being said, it does seem that "innovation" is especially important for the Roma. Many of the other traditions we've looked at haven't valued change for its own sake.
DeleteI ran into the same question about "covering" vs. "borrowing." I haven't listened to the CD and probably I'm not familiar enough with either covers or Rom music now to determine the differences someone in the culture would hear. I think some of the problem might stem from the fact that the back blurb says Silverman is an anthropologist and folklorist, and may just not be familiar with the way Western classical musicians distinguish between the terms?
DeleteThat is hilarious! I kept thinking about Carmen when I was reading this...
DeleteI was thinking about your comment on V=I+E. I think that sometimes in singing, especially in opera, we consider emotion being a component of virtuosity. Maybe that is because you have to work the emotion into your voice in order for it to work well.
Carol Silverman’s Romani Routes sheds a great amount of light upon the plight of the Roma’s of the world and their dependence on music in life events/rituals. Silverman sheds light on some interesting aspects of Roma life and music (past and present) that parallel some aspects of American life, existence, and music.
ReplyDeleteSilverman states that Balkan Romani music is a “constellation,” varying between regions and throughout history rather than as a unified whole. This constellation idea can also be applied to the many different variations in American popular music. For example, the giant American country music conglomerate has many different sub-genres present outside of the Nashville region. Honky Tonk Country, which is more “raw” sounding in nature, was established and is found (to a certain extent) primarily in Texas and lower Oklahoma. Rockabilly (a combination of Rock and Roll and the old Hillbilly music) has its origins in the Southern U.S., namely Sun Studios in Memphis, TN. Bluegrass music comes from the Bluegrass region of Kentucky, Red Dirt Country from Stillwater, Oklahoma, the Bakersfield Sound from Bakersfield, California, and so on.
Silverman notes how Roma families are transnational, person oriented, patrilineal and patriarchial, have a strong work ethic, and are anti-welfare. I found this description to fit (oddly enough) with the Volga German immigrants and their ancestors living today primarily in the upper and lower midwest regions. In a nutshell, the Volga Germans were invited by Catherine the Great to farm and settle the area around the Volga river without the threat of cultural assimilation to Russia. However, this promise eventually faded and many left for the U.S. Volga German families are extremely large (sometimes upwards of 10 children) and are usually led by the father. Their occupations (like the Roma) are usually gender coded; men take care of the farm work and have another part-time labor job while women take care of household matters. The women sometimes take up a secondary part-time job as well. Most importantly, music plays a vital role in VG communities as in Roma ones. Marriage is usually accompanied by a huge polka dance; these dances are also used as a way for community members to socialize as well as a way to celebrate a marriage. There are still some churches that occasionally have masses or ceremonies done in German. Most children are encouraged to learn an instrument and/or participate in school musical activities because it helps “build character.”
I only had time to skim this book, which is a bit of a shame at times given that it is a very dense, award winning work. I’ve read a little about Rom/Gypsy/stile Hongroise before (how could I not, with J. Bellman as an advisor?!?) However, all of that was based on music mostly from art music’s Western perspective, in the Classical and Romantic eras. I was expecting the book to give a little background from that time period, but instead it has (very wisely, given the amount of material) focused on the current day. Strange to see how much as apparently not changed. However, it is very dense, and honestly, especially given the chapters on women’s roles in America in the present day, skimming is the best I could manage. I also have to wonder about the author’s views and orientation a little bit. In previous articles we’ve read, the authors have tried to maintain some sort of objective stance. This author’s work so far is, by and large, objective scholarly research, but she also admits to being very involved for a long period of time and being an activist.
ReplyDeleteI do wonder about the tone occasionally: if borrowing and mixing of styles is acceptable to Rom, why is the fact that Rom and non-Rom dancers are performing in a television show brought out on p.33? (“unsubtle modern dance choreographies that have little in common with Romani dance.”) Later it is argued that (older?) women viewed it as bad PR for Rom and Romani women in particular, but the blend seems to be what was critiqued earlier, not the whole quagmire of women dancing.
One of the questions posed in the beginning of the book (or maybe I’m mixing it with other reading) is how the music of the Rom can be valued, yet they as a people despised. I’m wondering if the “polylingual” or multi-ethnic qualities described around p. 26 in the introduction correspond partially to that. If the Rom culture and people have maintained their distinctiveness, yet the music is interpreted as incorporating various local traditions and instruments, perhaps that is part of the reason. (Not that I’m meaning to condone viewpoints). Thoughts?
Do we equate covers with “mere borrowing” now?
Or “diaspora” with “ghetto”? I haven’t had a conception of those two terms as linked before reading this book.
Where are the Kalderash Roma based?
Are animal trainers still allowed? Bear acts, monkeys, etc.? It seems that it is, now. out of curiosity, is there oversight of this (like the ASCPA here in the US?)
Covers are treated very differently than borrowing in everything I've seen (which isn't a lot, to be fair). Borrowing typically involves taking an entire idea and putting in a new context, whereas covering typically involves reimagining that context itself.
DeleteThat was my thinking. Covering can also be seen as an emulation of sorts, whereas borrowing can have both positive and negative connotations now (post-Romantic era). Yet on p. 27 I - and I think Doug too - ran smack into "the 2005 CD... *Roma Beads*...features remakes of Chinchiri's songs as well as other repertoire from the 1950s. Although these examples could be termed "covers" or remakes, I would counter that this is more than mere borrowing." Which very strongly seems to equate covers with "mere borrowing." That's strange to me, especially given the book's emphasis on variation and innovation, which seems to be essential to covers, not borrowing. Maybe that's because Silverman is a professor of anthroplogy; I don't know what her formal music background is.
DeleteShe is a musician herself, I know, but I don't know if classically trained.
DeleteRegarding the dancers being problematic... I believe it is because the Roma themselves draw a big distinction between appropriating styles within the confines of their own tradition and simply re-labeling a non-Romani style as suddenly Romani. I agree, though, that there are subtleties to that televised performance that could be addressed further.
I thought that covers typically took something that could still be recognized as the same "song" or "work" or whatever and changed things about it, still allowing it to be recognizable. (For instance the Dirty Loops' excellent cover of Justin Bieber's "Baby." Seriously, listen to it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjVGJ3YFDc8)
DeleteWhereas I thought borrowing might be more used for musical quotation, such as what mashup artists do. No?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete(Had to fix some typos):
ReplyDeleteSince it was a lot, I'll try to make just a quick critique/comment on each chapter/section.
Methodology: Her explanation was very clear, which I am grateful for. This approach to ethnography seems quite new and ambitious in its scope. Looking at both the diaspora and the native culture requires a very special background, which she certainly seems to have. Also, I like the idea that there is no pure or "authentic" cultural source. Her identity struggle between scholar and activist is also something for discussion.
Chapters 1 & 2 -- Invaluable background and very well-written. These two chapters setup the whole book very nicely. I'd be (utterly) lost without them. It seems a good deal of Romani music has retained its functional role at festivals/dances/etc.
Chap. 3 – I particularly liked the idea that “we must remember that diasporas are not homogenous, a diaspora is a site of multiple consciousness” (pg. 41) Many of the problems of studying diasporas, at least as from what I can glean from this chapter, might be traced back to this misconception. Hybridity is also another issue worthy of discussion—“hybridity rarely changes structures of inequality.” (45) I wonder if there aren’t examples of hybridity in Western music.
Chap. 4 – I didn’t think the idea that diasporas are linked to their native land was all that novel. Maybe that’s not her point though. So, even if that is the case, it felt like, “Well, who cares?” Are marriage, language, and ritual unique to this diaspora? I don’t have enough background with diaspora movements in general, so maybe this is a unique situation?? Probably not my favorite chapter.
Chap. 5 – By now, I’m getting the idea of how central celebrations and festivals are to Roma culture and music-making. It was a very insightful look into the Roma wedding celebrations. They seem to be quite lavish, which makes sense given their cultural importance.
Chap. 6 – It is always interesting to find where stereotypes come from. For example, the Markovic companies that presented gypsies as “tapping tambourines on their hips, elbows, and shoulders; dancing solo steps in unison; doing intricate footwork (including spinning) over large distances.” (116-17)
Chap. 7 – This chapter sounded like a tune we’ve sung before, state appropriation of a subaltern community/identity/culture, etc. The popularity of wedding music, particularly in recordings, is a little unusual from anything we've seen this semester. At least in America, wedding music is usually a dreadful hodgepodge of different styles.
One of the questions from the intro that I've been keeping in the back of my mind is, "Are the Roma ‘reinscribing their stereotypes or subverting them?" It's quite a paradox...
I absolutely loved her discussion of hybridity! I can't believe I didn't bring it up in my post. She brings up the idea that if we sink too deeply into labeling hybrids, everything eventually becomes a hybrid and nothing has meaning anymore -- which reminded me of our early class discussions regarding the definition of folk vs. classical vs. popular music.
DeleteI also loved this: "Liberals can feel good when buying a hybrid product like a world music CD because of the imputed connection to the dispossessed. In fact, marginality can become a kind of asset, a type of political cache.." Ouch! That's her inner activist coming out. Grains of truth later on... she calls for a focus on "representation, performance, and aesthetics while still maintaining a solid connection to material conditions and history." Then she moves on... hybridity seems to be beyond the point, for her.
Yes, agreed. She cannot hide her bias/perspective throughout. I'm not so sure I want her to though.
DeleteI agree with Douglas that this is a very difficult read especially since the author tackles the subject from many different (historic, cultural, ethical, commercial) angles and the many strands were difficult to digest together. The thing that jumps out to me is her debunk of the idea of music stars out pure and authentic and only ceases to be that way when it moves to an outside culture. This also applies to the idea of commercialisation as a late feature. In both cases, the author argues that the Romani people have always been a part of these processes and the idea of a fixed, non-commercial purity is simplistic and inaccurate.
ReplyDeleteMichelle and John pointed out the ethical dimensions of some of the social issues cited by the author. The author admits that her account is a 'partial truth'. Her account and assessment of the cultural issues are of course inextricably linked with a Western sensibility. As she mentioned, she struggled to combine activism and scholarship and was 'alternatively accused of neglecting one for the other'. There's no such thing as a totally objective research ultimately, and I like her activism approach since it comes from a real engagement with the people as well as interraction with them.
I found this reading to be very interesting, but also difficult to follow. I found the idea of there being multiple separate groups of one culture fascinating. So far in class we have dealt with cultures that are solidly linked to one single geographic location, but the idea of there being a group that exists without a home land really changed my way of thinking about national culture. For instance, while reading this, the question of, can a group that is nomadic and therefore does not have a "homeland" have a folk identity? I am sure it is possible, but up until now we have only seen folk as an old or rural part of a single location.
ReplyDeleteI had some issues with the author's use of Youtube as an ethnographic tool. It just seems lazy to me. I can see why she does it, but couldn't this be considered unreliable?
Second week comments: Silverman’s depiction of the culturally ambiguous space of Romani festivals led me to believe that these function as social and aesthetic ghettos. The government provides performance opportunities to showcase Romani contributions, but in a limited and controlled way that does little to integrate the Rom into the larger national formation. As long as the Rom do not stray from these cultural spaces, there are “welcomed,” and transgressions are punished politically. I wonder why Silverman did not extend this line of thought, since it reinforces many of her ideas about the mistreatment of Roma people. I have been trying to think of similar treatments of musicians (not necessarily ethnic minorities) but drawing a blank (it doesn’t help that there are fighter jets flying overhead all day, as Louisville starts the month of pre-Derby festivities), so suggestions are welcome!
ReplyDeleteI thought that the discussions of Azis (ex. pg. 194) was fascinating, especially regarding the performativity of gender and the challenging of heteronormativity. Azis adopts personas typically associated with the “other” gender, while revealing them as performed because of his “real” gender. On an unrelated note, I was also intrigued by Silverman’s discussions of hybridity, and her concluding critique of the “world music” market. I had never considered the consumption of these musics as (neo-)liberal and multicultural, but they are. What’s more, consuming them passively and without context, or evaluating them according to some constructed idea of “traditional” or “authentic” might actually serve to undermine multiculturalism.
Overall, I think one of the things that gives the book it’s realistic yet positive bent is Silverman’s rhetorical tactic of presenting the negatives and real-world treatment of Roma peoples, but then following that up with positives. This deliberate and political framing not only creates the sense that life is (or can be) improving for the Rom, but subtly reinforces her point: if there are pages of negatives and only a couple of paragraphs depicting positives, it underscores the urgency of her activist causes.
This isn't quite answering your question, but I wonder how Westernized depictions of ethnic minorities plays into all of this (weren't there gypsies in The Huntchback of Notre Dame?).
DeleteTo more directly answer your question, I think that Le Mystere des Voix Bulgaire is an example that Silverman proposes. I wonder if spirituals could be the same thing: white people were eating them up at the turn of the twentieth century, but only in the concertized, dressed up form. Either no one WANTED to hear them as originally sung, or they never had the opportunity to hear them sung that way. I think this may have been largely an initiative from the ex-slaves, however, rather than from some more powerful group that imposed it on them. This is kind of the sense I have been getting from reading about them. I dunno.
Week 2:
ReplyDeleteI agree with John that my favorite thing about this book is the fact that Silverman presents such an all-encompassing view of the Roma people and their association with the music industry. She juxtaposes her own personal activism with contradictory opinions, and save for a few places, manages not to present these contradictory opinions in a negative light. Truly, she has achieved relatively balanced scholarship in this book.
I'm also impressed with her juggling of so many issues -- economics, politics, language, ethnicity, religion, musical style, nationalism -- and still managing to maintain at least a semblance of a thesis. Reading her conclusion really brought to light that as comprehensive as this text is, each and every point connected to her conclusion. Truly masterful.
I was thrilled to see that she brought Gogol Bordello and Borat into the mix. Admittedly, these two represent some of my only contact with Romani culture previous to reading this book, and so I was grateful for her contextualization. With her discussion of the DJs, too, I was fascinated by their response to her questioning of their motives. They seem to be baffled that anyone would be offended by their hybridizing of musical styles. This ties in to an editorial I read earlier today about millennials (http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/04/06/my-so-called-opinion/) who are criticized for being indecisive and appropriating when in fact we were raised to be pluralistic! Extremely fascinating -- I'm probably going to tie this into my term paper. As for my personal opinion regarding hybridization and appropriation of Romani music... I am torn. As Silverman notes, on the one hand these musicians need to make a living for themselves, and each will do so in a way that is right for them, but on the other hand, sometimes they end up making a profit by exploiting or propagating racist or prejudiced views. Indirectly, this is a critique of capitalism, pointing out the corruption that may occur when vulnerable groups of people are forced to find a way to support themselves.
I wonder what are everyone's thoughts regarding authenticity and hybridization. Can a hybrid music claim greater or less authenticity by its very nature of being a hybrid? Is Silverman's critique of hybrid-Romani music founded or unfounded? (Isn't Romani music by its very nature a sort of hybrid, or is that just a stereotype?)
Thanks for the editorial link, that's interesting!
DeleteI agree. I think attacking hybrid music is beside the point. It's all about aesthetic preference. Some people like bringing these other influences into their music. There's nothing wrong with that, and I don't think it makes it any less "authentic," whatever that may mean. It is certainly novel, but there are still Roma influences. Those influences are no less "authentic" because of the mixing, right? And I agree that Roma music is hybrid by nature. She has even sort of been saying that in earlier parts of the book (or so I thought). It may just be so much more pronounced in recent years with globalization and pluralization.
DeleteEarlier in the book I remember her criticizing the overuse of the term hyrbid, since most music can be defined as a hybrid of some type, and then were would you be? Or the ilk. I think she has a bit of a point and that, like many terms we've looked at, hybridity can be thought of as a spectrum and should be used carefully, but I don't think the term or the music can be tossed out.
DeleteI’m having the strangest sense that I’ve read a lot of this book someplace else before. The idea that a culture – or “folk” is more appealing if it is placed in a mythical past, with nostalgia for a simpler time? The debate about whether music should be used to educate or entertain? The problems of power relationships between recording companies and marketers and the groups they represent? The question of intellectual property rights versus remixing and covers? Even complaints by musicians that recognition comes too late in their careers and often originates outside their own locality seems to be a thread that has run through music for an extremely long time.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, I don’t think I’ve seen such problems applied so broadly across a culture, especially one that is spread between so many different countries. Silverman also incorporates the musician’s voices, quoting extensively from interviews, liner notes, and the like, skillfully moving the narrative between personal and culture-wide spheres. Inclusion of artists such as Azis and Esma Redzepova also seemed to challenge not just outsider’s views of Rom culture, but also, to a certain degree, “insiders.” Esma faced issues inside Roma culture because she was a woman; Azis commented that “even Gypsies hate me.”
Overall, to me *Romani Routes* still felt a little more like a gathering of essays on related themes, with the conclusion a little abrupt and short considering the scope of the book. But it brought back many ideas from the beginning, including the issue of hybridity and how it is viewed by Romani as well as outsiders.
The idea of hybridity and world music was probably the most difficult for me. I think maybe my conception of “world music” is wrong, or at least different – I always thought “world music” was this sort of “it’s a small small world” mashup of different sterilized cultural styles on a single CD or radio station or something, all sort of turned into easy listening pop/muzak. It’s not something I listen to deliberately; I just thought of it as the ubiquitous stuff in Starbucks or maybe Panda Express, or even preloaded onto my Microsoft machine. I thought the idea was to have a selection of pieces represent the “world” in a really casual sort of way, deliberately limiting cultural markers, not accentuating a difference – thus “world music.” And I never associated the consumption of world music with any type of latent activism or “neo-liberal” tendencies (maybe because to me, my concept of “world music” was broadcast over speakers and I didn’t have a choice about hearing, if not listening, to it?) I realize this is a whole ‘nother can of worms, especially since we’ve spent a lot of time deconstructing the idea of “folk” music. But it seemed like a central point to Silverman….so…. what is your idea of “world” music, and why?
Agree that with such an extensive array of materials and methods, she absolutely needed a larger conclusion. Unless we read that as indicative of the lack of conclusion in the musical culture, but let's not be like that.
DeleteI share similar thoughts about "world music," and your examples are what I usually lump into that category (see also Putumayo's releases). I differentiate between that category (which is widely agreed upon as a marketing term, at least from what I've read) and "musics of the world," which is my broad rubric for everything that is "outside" the Western/American music school tradition. If a music (Talking Heads, Simon, Messiaen, etc.) uses ideas or sounds influenced by a "world" tradition (or even by the composer's idea of what that "world" tradition sounds like), I typically lump it with the originating category and target market. So, Graceland is Western pop, even though some consider it one of the first "world music" albums.
I think it is very interesting that Bulgarians felt more comfortable with the heavily arranged music of Le Mystère des Voix Bulgares representing them than with music of the Roma representing them. As I am writing my paper on spirituals, I am discovering what I think it a similar line of thinking that explains why spirituals are only known to us in their concert form now. I think there is a desire to present a group of people’s “folk music” in a sort of “cleaned-up” form. It’s all about presenting yourself to the world, and saying that the “people” of your nation or ethnicity have valuable contributions to the world of music. However, there is this tendency to present this material in versions that are perceived to be more palatable to Western audiences. Do you think this constitutes some kind of racial or ethnic shame? It almost seems like it to me sometimes. I would love to discuss this. I think the idea of “self-orientalizing” and self-stereotyping in chapter 12 is related to this. In the case of the United States, we might liken it to African Americans participating in minstrel shows that took advantage of stereotypes.
ReplyDeleteI also liked the discussion of Chalga. It’s fascinating to me to learn about other genres of pop music in general, but it was especially interesting that Chalga has a connotation of being low class and uncivilized. From an outsider point of view, this seems so ridiculous! Are there any parallels to this in Western music? I think that Country music might sometimes have that connotation, but I’m not sure.
I had totally forgotten about the band Gogol Bordello. Wow. I had friends in high school who LOVED that band. During the section talking about Gogol Bordello and other Gypsy-Punk/remixes/etc., the author brings up questions of ownership in remixes. Without saying too much about this, I can say that this is always a question when discussing remixes and quotation. I think it is interesting here, though, because of the question regarding a marginalized group’s potential profiting from these remixes.
This book actually brings up several interesting things, but I am not sad to be done with it! So challenging!
I hope we watch some video examples of chalga in class. Or not... it could end up awkward. They are quite raunchy, I think!
DeleteI found Silverman’s account of Yuri Yunakov’s musical training to be very interesting in that it brings up the dilemma of rote learning found in the world of music education. Yunakov states that “the neighborhood was my school…,” meaning (as Silverman relates) that “informal music instruction was the rule…nobody went to music school (223).” Learning music by ear was heavily stressed (and still is to some extent) by my private instructors and music education professor’s as a way to gain complete facility of one’s instrument. This learning style is a major component of the Suzuki method, forming a large portion of the beginning student pedagogy. Obviously, this learning method worked very well for Yunakov as evidenced in the video presentation from last class. The anti-rote stance believes that rote learning does not encourage musicians to develop critical thinking skills. So, would it be more beneficial for musicians in the long run if they were encouraged to do more things by ear? What may be some pitfalls present in both methods?
ReplyDeleteSilverman brings up an interesting point about Azis having a “double whammy” factor in terms of his sexuality and ethnicity on page 197. This does make sense, looking at other stars in gay culture that have used this duality to gain notoriety, namely RuPaul. However, there were many stars before RuPaul came along that were able to “transgress” without the aid of a “double whammy” factor, e.g. Divine. It is almost like saying, in my view, that performing abilities do not matter when it comes right down to it. Rather, how intriguing you can portray yourself to be? Maybe both instances are one in the same? Thoughts and opinions on this matter?
Interesting question! I might add that the *idea* of the performance might be the most important thing, i.e. it might matter less what one actually does and more what they're trying to do. For example, David Bowie also crosses the boundaries we typically assign to gender, but I don't think it was a matter of him being intriguing or being a skilled performer, and the fact that he was performing in character. To relate this to your example, he lacks the "double-ness" of Azis, but it might not matter in the long run.
DeleteI also think that pop stars are differentiated from other types of musical performing artists when it comes to image versus performing ability. Think of Britney Spears for example... profited immensely off her image as a dancing "naughty school girl" in the song Hit Me Baby One More Time, but in truth really can NOT sing very well. As a result, she sells her dancing abilities, photogenic face and figure, and sex appeal -- the rest of the package is what is created by producers and other music industry execs.
DeleteOf course, certain pop stars use their *actual* singing abilities to garner a sense of authenticity. Think of Lady Gaga singing jazz standards with Tony Bennett or Miley Cyrus singing with a bluegrass band... they are cultivating their image on one hand in the same vein as Britney Spears, but on the other they are saying, "Hey look, I can actually sing too!"
Silverman's discussion of the famous chalga female singer (the name escapes me at the moment) actually lines up with this way of thinking/marketing... Silverman seems to say, THIS singer actually CAN sing.
I'm not really familiar with the Suzuki method, but I thought there was a lot of rote learning in that system?
DeleteWeek 2:
ReplyDeleteChapter 8: She seems disheartened by the systematic shutting out of the Roma musicians by the Bulgarian state. In Macedonia, the situation seemed slightly better perhaps. Can Roma represent the nation? I think we talked about that quite a bit last week. I think an extra component of this is the discrimination against Roma peoples too, in addition to the geographical and nostalgic problems we brought up.
Chapter 9: The criticisms of chalga as "low-class" seem fairly even across the board. We hear the same things used to characterize popular music here. I think there are similar class distinctions with pop and classical music hereWe often hear classical music in luxury car commercials, while more economical car commercials feature pop music.
Chapter 10: The saga of Esma. I found it interesting how she positioned herself as a representative of the state. I liked how she explored her motives for this. But I thought the whole thing was kind of obvious. "These women, like Esma, strategize to maximize both their commercial success and their reputation." I mean, has it ever really worked out well for someone who has criticized the state? I guess her point is that because women are more marginalized they have more pressure to do so than men.
Chapter 11: I thought her interpretation of Yunakov was interesting. I think openess and flexibility is part of that Roma stereotype, the migratory musician, always able to adapt.
Chapter 12: I thought this chapter really formed the heart of the book so far. At least to me, it was the most interesting in terms of content and ideas. At times some of the other chapters just seem to rehash rather unspectacular observations, which I suppose is part of an ethnography--not everything is going to be exciting all the time, especially if you're trying to give a complete picture of a society. My other thought was how is the current othering or exoticizing of Roma culture any different than it was in the 18th or 19th centuries?? Also, what is gypsy punk?
Chapter 13: Hmm...seemed to rehash a lot of the ideas from Chapter 12? Appropriation of styles, "negotiating" styles to appeal to a larger mass audience.
Overall, I have enjoyed this book and it is definitely a great reference to have. Especially the earlier background chapters. I am not always convinced each chapter points to one central idea or is related to what she said she set out to accomplish. I think most of these chapters could easily be excerpted, which is good, but she did not make it seem from her intro that she had intended that. Has definitely changed my understanding of Roma culture and music, quite a complex topic, with many layers.
Your chapter 12 question is really intriguing... how is this any different? I would guess that perhaps the difference is in the participation of the actual Roma people in the exoticization, made possible by the new form of capitalism under which the music industry operates (as opposed to pre-Industrial forms of the music business).
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete