Challenge Question RESPONSERESPONSERESPONSE

I think Meghan's option that ethnomusicology is just a word that defines a field based on a general consensus is closest to the truth. But then again, I tend to look at all words from that perspective, so maybe I am biased. Either way, ethnomusicology, like other fields have, will evolve and experience changes in its methods of study and subjects of study. Whether it receives a new name, or a qualifier in addition to the existing name, or no change in name at all, is all up to the general, and somewhat arbitrary, consensus.

In terms of methods of study and their trustworthiness, I completely agree that a lot of the time they are unjustifiably put under suspicion. In terms of approach, Wong's study is completely legitimate, because she intends to only study one person, and doesn't try to make it more than it is. My concern is just that readers might not think that this study carries much weight, because it represents only one person and not larger trends, which might make it "less useful." Kiri's research may miss out on a more casual GTA audience, but that is not necessarily because of her methods or represent any bigger gap in study sample than a typical ethnography. What I'm mainly concerned with is reader's perceptions and judgements, which, though sometimes unwarranted, are nevertheless there.

Novak Critical Review #10

Novak sets out to examine the effects and motivations behind the remediation and repurposing of Asian media, specifically song and dance from Bollywood film. The first example he looks at is the opening credits of "Ghost World," an American film based on a graphic novel, which features the protagonist Enid dancing along to a Bollywood dance sequence, "Jan Pehechan-Ho." This remediation, so distant from its original source material, sets the stage for themes of cultural disconnect and alienation.

Novak finds this example interesting because it showcases the way media creates a distance from authorship. Enid's copy-of-a-copy videotape of a foreign film is an extreme example of the separation that occurs between creator and created at the moment of creation. Novak's best explanation of what is going occurs in this quote: "And recognizing oneself as a part of this process—whether one is invested in nostalgia or newness— requires de-emphasizing the authority of an original media context in favor of its remediations." The varying degrees of irony, nostalgia, and newness that appear occur because of this deemphasis of authorship and and result in a distinct product, a remediation, which can then be interpreted in different ways.

One example of an interpretation gone wrong was the Heavenly Ten Stems' concert and ensuing protest. The key elements to be considered here were intent and the visibility of intent. The band intended to celebrate this music, but that intent was not entirely clear. Power dynamics is the other key issue; interpretation is inevitably skewed when there are expectations based on historically imbedded power relationships, such as that between the US and Asia.

Overall these examinations of remediations reveal a lot about music and media in general, and provide somewhat extreme cases to use as lenses to look at more subtle interactions between authorship and context elsewhere.

Meintjes Critical Review #9

Mientjes addresses the interesting case of collaboration in Paul Simon's Graceland, addressing lots of political issues despite the record itself being largely apolitical/politically ambiguous. She correctly states that this does not absolve the record from having political issues associated with its production. She goes a bit to far in my opinion in writing off the "bourgeois" notion of treating an album as an independent entity; it seems like a threatening line of thought that could undermine her whole point.

She does a thorough job of explaining the spectrum of collaboration on the individual tracks, as well as the complex crossindexing that occurs when two musical worlds that have influenced each other for a long time are explicitly combined.

She also carefully stepped through various involved parties and the different interpretations of the record within those parties. One of her most interesting points was the rhetoric behind a vaguely-pronoun "we," and how different groups used that for their own political and social purposes.

While the depth and breadth of her examination are both impressive, I can't help but think that this whole article can be summed up by simply saying. "Graceland meant a lot of different things to a lot of different people."

Challenge Question Response... Response

Rebecca makes great points about the inaccessibility of ethnomusicological language - overcomplicating the simple, referencing previous definitions, authors not being mindful of their non-ethnomusicological audience. She identifies all the hurdles more casual readers face.

She is spot on about the use of specialized languages among experts, and raises the even more important question about the ends justifying the means, that is the final product of ethnomusicology justifying the use of its language. Her question of the purpose of ethnomusicology to those who aren’t ethnomusicologists is absolutely critical. The best purpose I can come up with is an amassing of knowledge. What that knowledge is used for is sometimes determined by the ethnomusicologist (e.g. those that choose to do serious advocacy work for their subjects) and is sometimes determined by whoever else seeks out that knowledge. The point seems to be mainly that the information is there; it is recorded and can be accessed by anyone looking to satisfy curiosity or do something more significant, as long as their willing to put in the language legwork.

However, I think in a lot of cases, ethnomusicologists let their purpose stop at this amassing of knowledge, believing that it is innately good or useful. I think the next question that ethnomusicologists as a collective needs to ask and answer is “How do we want our work to be used in the end?” If the answer is to inform and educate the greater public, maybe language accessibility should be emphasized. If the answer is to provide a knowledge base for specific interested individuals pursuing larger goals (e.g. popularization/commercialization of a type of music?), then ethnomusicologists need to be mindful over how their final products are being used and how much of a role they would like to play in that process. Either way, I think having a vision of the end result of their work, beyond a paper, will help inform ethnomusicologists’ language choices.

Challenge Question Response

Key to addressing the deviations from the normal ethnomusicological format is identifying the important elements of that norm. Ethnomusicology expects face-to-face interactions, a certain amount of time spent in the field, a group of multiple subjects, and sometimes participation in the music being studied. Additionally, when the groundwork was being laid in the early issues of Ethnomusicology Magazine, those doing the laying had no way of accounting for/addressing the internet. Each of the articles mentioned deviates from one or more of these expectations.

Whether these deviations are a dangerous departure or a positive evolution depends on both their motivation and effect, and really can be only considered on a case-by-case basis. Ethnomusicologists should deviate from the norms only when there is something unique to be gleaned via the deviation, and preferably this information or perspective should supplement a more traditional approach. The fact of the matter is that people mistrust small sample sizes, personal involvement, and interactions over the internet. Hinging an entire ethnography on any of these things is risky, but can be warranted. Sometimes the deviations are only practical ways of accomplishing the fieldwork. Asking Les Back to take a participatory role in White Power music, or for Kiri Miller to reach a large community of Grand Theft Auto players through some means other than the internet, or to discredit Deborah Wong’s work until she could find more Asian-Americans to corroborate the musical history of her subject would be unreasonable. The choices that these ethnomusicologists made were not motivated by laziness or an attachment to comfort zones, but rather practicality. Other times the effect is worth the deviation - Wong’s in-depth analysis of one person’s musical past speaks both to larger cultural trends and provides a mirror with which to examine our own methods and motivations of music consumption.

However, the guidelines of ethnomusicology, while in some ways arbitrary and flexible, are there for reasons. This unique structure of constraints is intended to produce a unique experience, and a unique set of results and perspectives. A part of that experience is a departure from one’s comfort zone and into a position of vulnerability. The process of gradual immersion enables the ethnomusicologist to communicate effectively with outsiders of the musical culture, but at a depth level approaching that of musical insiders. If an ethnomusicologist is deviating from the typical setup to stay within a comfort zone, then he or she is “just plain missing the point.” To some extent, if a researcher wants their work to be considered to be ethnomusicology, he or she must play by the rules of ethnomusicology, or at least make a best effort. If not, that doesn’t make the research not valuable, it just makes it not ethnomusicology.

In some ways, there is room for similar research outside of the realm of ethnomusicology. For example, one could argue that Wong’s article is not ethnomusicology because it is not “the study of people making music” but rather “the study of people (or in this case, a person) consuming music,” which is just as interesting and valid a field. It might even be more useful in a music economy like that of the mainstream of the United States, where there is a relatively small number of well-known artists/bands being consumed by comparatively massive amounts of people. It is just as interesting and enlightening to look at the other side of the equation, even if it means a separate field of research.

Fieldwork: 8bitcollective's Most Liked

Today I'm taking a look at 8bitcollective's most liked track of last week, and seeing what people had to say about it.

The winner is "I AM A FUCKOKA RAVER" by USK (Fuckoka is a city in Japan and the name of a record company USK has released material under). I was a bit surprised to see that this was USK's first submission, so I dug a little deeper. Turns out USK is kind of a big deal. Looking at his bio, he's been making chiptunes for a little over 10 years and has been performing live since 2004, including some places far, far away from his hometown in Japan. So it's understandable that this well-established chiptune artists finally posts some stuff on 8bitcollective and people go absolutely nuts for it. And deservedly so - the song has a catchy hook, a well-layered arrangement, and is energetic and danceable.

Moving on to the comments, the first 12, which came within 2 hours of posting, are all just chock full of excitement, most just saying something like "USK!" USK gets in a response saying, "I'm so happy to share the same feeling with you all lo-bitterzzzz!!!!" The positive comments continue to stream in, but some come close to criticism:

Droid Song: "okay..I must admit i was gonna move on about half way through the song and then that little funky swing breakdown came up. that part is really really really good."

xGx: "Well i cant stand those fucking shitty 8btit noisey drums, those cymbols sound like shit but then that mid section kicked in and I was like omfg wow! Those damn drums cant save this for me but that middle bit was fricking awsome man."

I highlight these only because the overwhelming majority of posts are basically one sentence long, each one a more ridiculous way of saying "I loved it" than the last. My initially impression of the site was a slew of possibly disingenuous compliments, so I'm trying to probe that impression and see how accurate it is, especially in a situation involving a celebrity of the genre.

Mikimedia: "ive listened to this alot now, and still dont like it. i wish i liked this"

This strikes me as unquestionably honest, which is reassuring. A bit more partial criticism:

Deadly-Beatz-"Sorry, but I do not like the intro, and frankly it seems rather repetitive throughout the entire song until the second 1/3 or so. Then it is very very very very very very very (have I made my point yet?) very good!!!!"

Some honesty here, some criticism. "Sorry" could indicate the commenter knowing that he/she is deviating from the expected behavior.

The critics get a mouthful, however..

smiletron: "@everyone who doesnt like this: USK pretty much DEFINES chip unce. there can be no other. he is the first and he is the best. FOREVERRRR"

"Unce" hear refers to the sound of a dance music bass drum, and the genre that uses it frequently. Another commenter piggybacks..

boaconstructor: "Thumbs up smiletron. Its ridiculous to think of how many of the songs on this sight (and maybe even the sight itself) wouldn't be here if it weren't for USK! Know your roots chipperzzz!!!"

This comment sparks a debate...

Xylo: "Calling USK 'chiptune roots'. You fell on your head boy?"

YourPOV : "No joke man. USK is good at LSDJ for sure. That doesn't make him the beginning and end of all chiptune. Let's not go crazy here. On a side note, this is amazing :)"

I will keep an eye out to see if the debate unfolds more, but what I've observed is, while USK is definitely very important and respected in the chiptune scene and has been for a while, he is not unarguably part of the roots of chiptune. Also, there is some discrepancy of knowledge / fluidity of interpretation among the commenters as to the history of the scene and the genre.

USK's other comment in the thread, two weeks after posting, simply says: "I AM A FUCKIN HAPPY RAVER NOW." He is pleased with the responses to his song.

Fieldwork: Chiptune Interview

This is a partial transcript of my interview with Chris Novello, a friend and chiptune composer. Italics are me, normal type is him, notes of omitted sections are in brackets. Minor edits for readability have been made (e.g. removing "um"s and the like).

So I guess I’ll start off with a basic question, how did you get into chiptunes?

It pretty much has always been in my background, having had a childhood with 8 bit games. I started with an Atari 2600, and then Coleco, and Nintendo, Sega Genesis, Super Nintendo, etc. I had a Gameboy, and a Commodore 64, basically a lot of things that made really raw waveform bleeps.

That was actually my next question, what’s your history with videogames and how do the two relate for you?

Although my interest in the texture nowadays doesn’t feel necessarily connected to videogames sometimes, it absolutely is. You know, there’s no question that these particular tones are reminiscent of something from childhood. I kind of feel like I was raised by a Nintendo or a Super Nintendo the way some people say they were raised by a television. It’s imprinted in me in subtle ways that I don’t think I can articulate or really claim agency over.

[Talked about how videogames influence his composition]

You said write other music - where does chiptunes fit into that and what kind of other music are you interested in writing?

Yeah, I mean there’s always this dream right? I guess ever since The Postal Service it’s kind of been like “Oh wow, you can take that sound and make it into something a little more pop accessible, and I guess its been happening for a long time, I feel like that band was the first to kind of like COMPARTIZE that sound in a popular fashion. And they’ve got credibility, too, and since then it’s become kind of a cliché. But it’s interesting, because even though it’s a total cliché, I still feel ownership of it.

[Talked about chiptune covers]

I don’t want to call chiptunes an aesthetic, there’s something… maybe it’s the infusion from childhood, or maybe it’s just these raw waveforms, you know, but if you take an arrangement by The Smiths, and play it through chiptunes, without Morrisey whining, you all of a sudden hear how happy that music is. And to hear The Smiths done in chiptune from really recontextualizes it so that you feel like you’re playing a platformer that’s got like, you know, neon hues and pink skies and all these cartoonish things.

[Compared with shoegaze, in terms of compositional motivation and posting on message boards]

Speaking of message boards, one of the kind of big resources in the chiptune community is 8bitcollective, what’s your experience with that site been?

That site is awesome. For many years, I’ve kind of looked online for either access to hardware, or ways to get that sound, for almost ten years now. And that site finally came around and just kind of became what I consider like an epicenter for the information, and also for the community of distributing the music . And people with all sorts of different perspectives on chiptunes post there, it’s a really good community in that way.

[Talked about resources on the site, fringe projects on 8bitcollective, current chiptune listening]

[Asked him about possible disadvantages of an online scene, he said there aren’t many and the advantages far outweigh them]

[Talked about hardware and software]

Nowadays there are some pretty good software emulations that I’ve heard, and it’s easy, it’s always so seductive to want to just go that route and cut out all this hardware, and go that way. But truthfully, it’s just never… there’s a little something missing that’s kind of important, whether or not you think it’s important.

[Talked about more emulation]

One of the things that they have is a SID emulator, a 6502 I think is the chip? Which doesn’t sound exactly like you would want it too, it’s kind of digital. But again, at a certain point, once you have raw waveforms, you’re in this domain. You could almost do it with like an analog modular synth.

[Talks about the different sound of different chips]

They’re all a little different, but the idea is just these raw waveforms and using them in a certain kind of minimal way. Although, you know, the creativity that those composers milked out of those chips is nuts. I mean you’ve got a chip that has like two or three oscillators and a noise channel, and sometimes a sample channel, and somehow they get these like… I mean, arpeggiation comes into play to make chords, and just the way they will jump between these channels, and the tricks they pull, are just… there’s a lot of finesse. There’s a real mastery of a platform, which is to me kind of what any good musician is doing with an instrument. And by that I mean an expressive system, so an acoustic guitar, a drum machine…

[Talked about authenticity, difficulty involved in creating chiptunes, and the value of structural limitations]