An Introduction To Ethnomusicology

In previous modules you learned about the various elements of music – melody, harmony,
rhythm, meter, timbre and others, and how these elements are found in the musics of various
cultures. In this class, it is important that you understand these building blocks of music, know
how to identify them in various music genres, and understand how they are similar and different
within the context of those genres. In this module, we will focus on music as an element of
culture – how and why humans make music.
The field of ethnomusicology has been described and defined in many different ways; the
simplest may be “the study of people making music” (Pettan and Titon 2015). Those who study,
research, and teach in this field are known as ethnomusicologists. As an academic discipline,
ethnomusicology is multidisciplinary, meaning that it borrows elements from many other fields,
including musicology, anthropology and other social sciences, folklore, linguistics, sound
studies, and many other fields. Ethnomusicology traces its roots to an earlier discipline knows as
comparative musicology, which largely involved comparing the musical characteristics of
various kinds of musics. The term ethnomusicology first appeared in 1950. Individuals who
found common interests and challenges in different disciplines – including musicology and
anthropology – began to identify discuss these issues within this context, and in 1956, the first
annual meeting of the Society for Ethnomusicology (SEM) was held in Philadelphia. Four
individuals are commonly cited as the founding fathers of the society – William Rhodes, Alan
Mirriam, David McAllester, Charles Seeger – though many others contributed to the early
development of the field and the society. One of the early motivations of the founders of SEM
was to bring a greater focus to the study of the cultural practices involved in music
making.Among the issues that brought this group together and motivated them were “problems
of ethnomusicology, historical, theoretical and methodological, and above all, a need for
association and communication with persons with similar interests” (Rhodes 1980).

Major Figures in Ethnomusicology

Like all academic disciplines, there are some individuals who have gained
fame in ethnomusicology for their research, writing, and long history of
contributions to the field. Several were mentioned earlier as being among the
founders of the Society of Ethnomusicology - William Rhodes, Alan Mirriam,

Bruno Nettl
David McAllester, Charles Seeger. Like several of his predecessors, Nettle contributed greatly to
our knowledge of the music of Native North America. He has also authored countless articles
and books, with a focus on the development of ethnomusicological theory and methods (Titon
and others 2009).
Two ethnomusicologies who rose to prominence in the 1960 are worth
discussing together. Alan Merriam is best known for his research and writing
about music in Native America and Central Africa as a faculty member at
Indiana University in the late 1960s. His text The Anthropology of Music
(Merriam 1964) brought greater focus the study of music using Alan Mirriam

anthropological methods and perspectives. Mantle Hood was a contemporary of Merriam’s who
research focused on gamelan music from Indonesia. Hood created the first American university
in ethnomusicology at UCLA. Hood proposed the previously mention of concept of bimusicality
– that those researching the music of another culture would benefit from learning how to perform
that music. Hood resided in Hawai‘i in the 1970s after his retirement from
UCLA, and served as first editor of Ha‘ilono Mele (Hawaiian Music Foundation
1975-1978) – the newsletter of the Hawai‘i Music Foundation that was published
from 1975 to 1978. Merriam and Hood became central to debates in the field of
ethnomusicology regarding the place and importance of researching and writing
Mantle Hood
about cultural and musical elements. Merriam, with his backgrough as a cultural
anthropologiest, argued strongly for and developed specific metholodigies and theories for the
study of “music as culture” (instead of simply being one facet of culture) while Hood argued just
as vigorously for the importances of the study of musical elements to the field. There is now
broad recognition of the value and importance of examining both cultural and musical elements
in ethnomusicological research, though some scholars will place greater emphasis on one over
the other. John Blacking was a contemporary of Merriam and Hood’s whose background was
social anthropology, and whose work, like Hood’s, focused on the cultural and social aspects of
music making, stating that “no musical style has ‘its own terms’: its terms are the terms of its
society and culture” and argued that music should be studied as “humanly organized sound”
(Blacking 1973). Blackman is perhaps best known for his research of children’s music among
the Venda in the northern part of South Africa.
Later ethnomusicologist who made significant contributions to the field of study and who
remain active and influential in the field include Anthony Seeger (“Why Suya Sing: A Musical
Anthropology of an Amazonian People”), Stephen Feld (“Sound and Sentiment: Birds, Weeping,
Poetics, and Song in Kaluli Expression”), Tim Rice (“May It Fill Your Soul:
Experiencing Bulgarian Music”), and Jeff Todd Titon, who has written
extensively about the sustainability of music, and who is one of few prominent
ethnomusicologists who shares his writing via a blog (Titon 2017). Amy
Ku‘uleialoha Stillman, a native Hawaiian ethnomusicologist working at the
Amy Stillman
University of Michigan, has produced an incredibly body of literature
regarding Hawaiian music over the past three decades (Stillman 2016).

Methodologies

Ethnomusicologists employ a variety of approaches to collect data, analyze, and write about
music and the individuals and cultures that produce it. One of the most common methods of
collecting data is fieldwork. The field is defined as the area in which a researcher conducts their
research, and fieldwork includes the activities conducted when an researcher observes and
sometimes interacts with the subjects that they are studying. The practice of living and
interacting with the subjects of research is known as participant observation, and it has been
practiced since the late nineteenth century. This has not kept some from criticizing the practice,
noting that the presence and participation of the researcher may influence the behavior of those
being studied. The practice has subject to much critique and examination, and today it is not
uncommon for music researchers to learn to perform the music that they are studying, or with
those that they are studying. One prominent
ethnomusicologist, Mantle Hood, proposed that
music researchers would benefit from bi-
musicality – fluency in two (or more) musical
cultures. Just as bilingualism (the ability to
understand two languages) is a benefit to
researchers working in cultures that speak Amy Stillman

languages, those studying another musical

culture would benefit from a “fluency” in that Mantle Hood with UCLA’s gamelan instruments

culture’s musical language (Hood 1960, 55-59).

Another prominent method employed by ethnomusicologies (and other social scientists) is
ethnography – to examine, analyze and write about culture. These methods are not exclusive of
each other, and quite often the research will take the data collected during fieldwork and write
about it using an ethnographic method. The researcher focuses on a particular aspect of culture,
observes and documents it, analyzes it, and describe what they’ve observed in as complete
cultural context as possible.
Ideas and attitudes about the practice of ethnography have changed over the years. It was
once believed that a researcher must remain objective and
write an unbiased account of what they observed. Over
time, social scientists realized that it was impossible to
remain truly objective and complete avoid the knowledge
and biases that they had accumulated in their life
experiences and education. Reflexivity and reflexive writing
– an acknowledgement of our own biases, our influence on
our subjects as well as their influence on us – is now an
important part of the enthographic approach. Likewise,
attitudes toward emic approaches (those conducted by a
cultural “insider” and etic approaches (conducted by a
cultural “outsider”) have evolved (Herndon 1983, 63-80). Frances Densmore recording Blackfoot chief
Mountain Chief in 1916.
It was once believed preferrable to have those unfamiliar
with music and other cultural practices to study and write about them, in the belief that an
outsider could be more objective in analyzing and writing about their subjects. Today, there is
recognition that most researchers are neither completely insiders or outsiders, but quite often
share characteristics of both. And it now just as common for research of music (and other
elements of culture) to be conducted by someone who is a part of the culture that they are
studying as it is by a cultural outsider. And while fieldwork once mean that a researcher would
travel to distant and sometimes remote locations of the world to conduct their research, the
“field” can also now be one’s own home. Finally, while ann ethnomusicological approach was
most often applied to non-western musical cultures, they are now just as likely to be applied to
those music, including popular music, rock, jazz, folk, country, and even classical music.
Many of these methods originate in western academic studies and share their perspectives,
biases, and epistemologies (the study or theory of knowledge). In recent decades, indigenous and
other non-western scholars have introduced new methodologies that come from within their own
cultures. One example is Timote Violeti’s talanoa methodology, a conversational approached
based on a Tongan cultural practice. Instead of a formal interview with precomposed set of
questions or clear agenda to the conversation (Vaioleti 2006, 21-34). Keola Donaghy used this
approach in conversations with haku mele (composers of Hawaiian poetry) to determine what
elements and characteristics of mele (Hawaiian poetry) they most valued (Donaghy 2010).

Theories

Theories used in ethnomusicology are often rooted in other disciples, such as anthropology
and other social sciences, some come from the field of musicology, and a few are specific to
enthomusicological study. Theories are most simply described as concepts and ideas that allow
us to generalize knowledge that has been gathered about music, and explain why something
happened or is (or was) done in a particular way. By using theories found in the social sciences,
scholars can examine, analyze, and describe the musical phenomenom that they are researching
from a cultural vantage point, rather than a musicological one. There are complete books that
describe and discuss the many theories that have brought forth and applied to the study of music.
What follows is a very short list of some ideas that have been applied to the study of musical
culture:

• Universals – Are there any shared truths about music, elements of music or music culture
that are shared across all cultures? Are there any shared musical traits? You may have
heard the statement that “music is a universal language.” Is that really true, and is music
even a language?
• Authenticity – The idea that any form of music is “authentic” is often tied to older forms
of music, and in colonized areas, ascribed to those forms that existed prior to it being
colonized, and lacking outside influence. Why is it problematic? What does it say about the
members of a culture who have adopted elements of an introduced culture to their musical
practices? Are they no longer “authentic”?
• Hybridity – While it is derived from the biological concept of mixing two different living
forms, races, or species, in terms of music and culture, it means the mixing of elements of
two different cultures into a new form. How and why does this happen?
• Identity - Music is a product of social behavior, but it is also strongly tied to one’s own
sense of self and identity as individuals within our social group. How does music provide a
means of establish one’s own cultural identity as part of a group, or as a creative individual
working within a social and cultural framework?
• Diaspora – In recent centuries, there have been mass movements of people from one area
of the world to another. They have carried their music with them, and have been involved
 in both the preservation of their music traditions as well as blending with music of their
new homes.
• Globalization – The development of transportation and telecommunications technology
has enhanced the mobility of music. A song recorded today can be made available to even
the most remote regions of the world within hours, and ability of musicians to travel the
globe and share their music has never been easier or less expensive, though the political
climate in many parts of the word can make travel to and from some locations even more
challenging than in the past.
• Transmission – How is musical knowledge maintained and taught? For some musical
cultures, there are musical specialists, and those who train performers. In others, music may
be composed and performed by all. In some, it is a part of family tradition, and passed
down from family member to family. What do these factors say about the culture that
produces this music?
• Sustainability – One popular and current trend in ethnomusicology is to examine the
sustainability of musical culture using ideas and methodologies that examine the
sustainability of ecosystems, and the challenges that are faced by those trying to maintain
them. There is an entire subfield of ethnomusicology called ecomusicology dedicated to
this area, and Titon is one of the most prominent researchers in this field.

Models

Models can provide a means of providing a structure and approach to using different theories.
A number of different models have been developed and applied to ethnomusicological research.
Three will be presented here. Each can be brought to bear on any musical culture, and each
provides a different perspective into the music of those cultures.
In The Anthropology of Music Merriam presented a three-part model for examining musical
culture, whereby music can be analyzed on how it is conceptualized by the culture that produced
it, their musical actions and activities, and the sounds that are produced by them:

COGNITION

MUSIC SOUND BEHAVIOR

 So in this model, Merriam brings in the anthropological aspects of music making – how it
conceptualized by composers, performers, received by audiences, and their actions and activities
as music is being performed and listened to. The examination of the music itself is included, and
the model is designed to show how these elements interact with each other.
Many years later, Timothy Rice adapted a statement made by anthropologist Clifford Geertz,
who noted that symbolic systems, such as music, “are historically constructed, socially
maintained and individually applied,” and created a model for examining and writing about
music based on Geertz statement (Rice 1987, 469-488). Simply put, this means that when people
make music, it is done with a knowledge of older forms of music that we have encountered in
our lifetimes. We as individuals experience music and are influenced by them as individuals, and
we also create new forms as individuals. Social maintenance refers how society – its acceptance
or rejection of our creations in varying degrees – influences the continual development of
musical forms.

HISTORICAL
CONSTRUCTION

INDIVIDUAL
EXPERIENCE AND SOCIAL
CREATION MAINTENANCE

The last model that will be discussed is used by Jeff Todd Titon in his textbook Worlds of
Music (Titon and others 2009). While it simply lists for four aspects of music that can be used to
examine music and does not explicitly state the interactions between the elements, such
interactions and connections can be inferred.
 Ideas About Music Activities Involving Music
How is music conceptualized? What is music in a How, when and where is music performed,
culture and what is it not? What are its aesthetics, and by whom? What other activities and
context, and history within a culture? individuals are involved, such as those that
organize concerts, record, promote, write about
music, etc.

Repertories Of Music Material Culture Of Music

The body of music performed, its style, genres, The instruments that are performed, the
texts (song/chant), composition, and transmission of buildings, venues, locations that it is performed,
knowledge and performance skills. any material object related to the performance of
music.

The theories and models presented here allow us to examine specific areas of music and the
cultures that produce them. None of them are perfect, but all are very useful. They are presented
here as a valuable tool to use that can help you narrow down the topic of your final research
search paper should you find them to be to broad, or allow you to delve more deeply into them
should you find them to be too narrow or lacking a specific focus. They allow you to go beyond
simply describing the aspects of music or musical culture that you are writing about, and be able
to more deeply analyze them, and go beyond a simple comarison of two different musics or
musical cultures.
An example of using these kinds of models can be found the article “He Ahupua‘a Ke Mele”
(Donaghy 2013, http://ethnomusicologyreview.ucla.edu/journal/volume/18/piece/698) In it
Donaghy applied Rice’s model to a Hawaiian conceptualization – the ahupua‘a (a land unit) to
examine the processes of Hawaiian language composition, and how they are historically
constructed, individually experienced and maintained, and socially maintained.

Conclusion

The study of music is never simply about the music alone – the arrangement of sounds as
melodies, harmonies, rhythms, meters, and timbres. A recording or live performance of any
musical piece is the product of a many processes that begin when the individual is exposed to
musical performance for the first time, participates in musical experiences within their culture
and society as a composer, performer, audience member, instrument maker, ticket seller,
manager, promoter, engineer, producer, graphics designer, or any number of other positions in
which people can participate in what Christopher Smalls refers to as “musicking” (Society for
Ethnomusicology 2007). The means by which we study music are deep and varied, and evolve
just as our musics and societies do.
A recent and growing subfield of ethnomusicology that is worth noting is called applied
ethnomusicology (Pettan and Titon 2015) – when ethnomusicologist take their research and put
it to practical use. Much ethnomusicological research was written in a manner that enabled it to
be shared with other ethnomusicologists – and it continues to be – but here is now a greater
emphasis on using that knowledge to benefit the musical communities in which the research is
conducted Ethnomusicologists are often asked to advocate for traditional musical forms in order
to gain government or funding support, organize performaces, write articles targeting a non-
academic audience, assist in the production of recordings, provide educational opportunities,
lend their expertise to legal disputes, archiving audio recordings and making them publicly
accessible, and much more. As an organization, the Society for Ethnomusicology took a strong
public stand against the use of music as a means of physical and psychological torture, following
reports that it was being used in this manner by the U.S. military (Society for Ethnomusicology
2007).
The ultimate goal of this short reading is to provide insights into the strategies and
approaches taken by ethnomusicologist when conducting research about music. By using some
of the theories or one of the models provided above, you will empower yourself to go beyond
simply describing the music that you choose for your final research project, and create a deeper
analysis that will also provide some cultural context for your research and writing.
Bibliography

Blacking, John. How Musical is Man?. John Danz Lectures. Seattle: University of Washington
Press, 1973.
Donaghy, Joseph Keola. "He Ahapua‘a Ke Mele: He Ahupua‘a Land Division as A Conceptual
Metaphor for Hawaiian Language Composition and Vocal Performance." Ethnomusicology
Review 18, (2013): http://ethnomusicologyreview.ucla.edu/journal/volume/18/piece/698.
———. "The Language is the Music: Perceptions of Authority and Authenticity in Hawaiian
Language Composition and Vocal Performance." Ph.D., University of Otago, 2010.
Hawaiian Music Foundation. "Ha‘ilono Mele." 1975-1978.
http://ulukau.org/gsdl2.80/collect/hailono/cgi-bin/hailono.
Herndon, Marcia:. "Insiders, Uutsiders: Knowing our Limits, Limiting our Knowing." The World
of Music 35, no. 1 (1983): 63-80.
Hood, Mantle. "The Challenge of "Bi-Musicality"." Ethnomusicology 4, no. 2 (1960): 55-59.
doi:10.2307/924263. http://www.jstor.org/stable/924263.
Merriam, Alan P. The Anthropology of Music. Evanston, Ill.: Northwestern University Press,
1964.
Pettan, S. and J. T. Titon. The Oxford Handbook of Applied Ethnomusicology Oxford University
Press, 2015. https://books.google.com/books?id=VY1yCQAAQBAJ.
Rhodes, Willard. "The Founding of SEM." . Accessed 5/31, 2017.
http://www.ethnomusicology.org/?page=History_Founding.
Rice, Timothy. "Toward the Remodeling of Ethnomusicology." Ethnomusicology 31, no. 3
(Autumn, 1987): 469-488. http://www.jstor.org/stable/851667.
Society for Ethnomusicology. "Position Statement on Torture." . Accessed 6/13, 2017.
http://www.ethnomusicology.org/?PS_Torture.
Stillman, Amy K. "Hawaiian Music for Listening Pleasure (Blog)." . Accessed 6/2, 2017.
https://amykstillman.wordpress.com.
Titon, J. T., T. J. Cooley, D. Locke, D. P. McAllester, and A. K. Rasmussen. Worlds of Music:
An Introduction to the Music of the World's Peoples, Shorter Version Cengage Learning,
2009. https://books.google.com/books?id=NYMBss__MmgC.
Titon, Jeff T. "Sustainable Music (Blog)." . Accessed 6/2, 2017.
https://sustainablemusic.blogspot.com/.
Vaioleti, Timote M. "Talanoa Research Methodology: A Developing Position on Pacific
Research." Waikato Journal of Education 12, (2006): 21-34.