Googlepreview
Googlepreview
Ethnomusicology
Ruth M. Stone
First published 2008 by Pearson Education, Inc.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in
any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter
invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or
retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.
Notice:
Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are
used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.
$SFEJUTBOEBDLOPXMFEHNFOUTCPSSPXFEGSPNPUIFSTPVSDFTBOESFQSPEVDFE
XJUI
QFSNJTTJPO
JOUIJTUFYUCPPLBQQFBSPOBQQSPQSJBUFQBHFXJUIJOUFYU
Stone, Ruth M.
Theory for ethnomusicology / Ruth M. Stone.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references (p. ) and index.
ISBN-13: 978-0-13-240840-0 (alk. paper)
ISBN-10: 0-13-240840-6 (alk. paper)
1. Ethnomusicology. 2. Music—Philosophy and aesthetics. I. Title.
ML3798.S76 2008
780.89—dc22
2007020333
To my students—past, present, and future
This page intentionally left bank
Contents
Figures vi
Plates vii
Preface ix
1 Inquiry in Ethnomusicology 1
3 Structural-Functional Approaches 37
4 Linguistic Approaches 51
5 Paradigmatic Structuralism 90
6 Marxist Explanations 98
References 226
Index 236
v
Figures
vi
Plates
vii
viii Plates
Ethnomusicology has been variously defined as the study of any and all of the
music of the world, the study of music as culture, or the study of music as
human experience. Each of these definitions moves into different dimensions
of inquiry, but all of the definitions expand the study of music.
Ethnomusicology is a field of inquiry that is half a century old, and many eth-
nomusicologists espouse the centrality of theory to this enterprise. Theory,
whether appearing explicitly or implicitly, is an important mark of a distinguished
ethnomusicologist. Whether an ethnomusicologist is studying the inner workings
of a string quartet playing Mozart or the playing of the horse-head fiddle in the pop-
ular music of Mongolia, theory has its place and significance. Nevertheless, there
are generally limited discussions of theory in either general books devoted to eth-
nomusicology or in specific ethnographies of musical practice.
This book addresses ethnomusicological theory directly and explicitly,
exploring some of the underpinnings of various approaches and analyzing dif-
ferences and commonalities in these orientations. The study also explores how
ethnomusicologists have used these theories in their ethnographic research,
exploring the particular circumstances of the theoretical application in
ethnomusicology.
ix
x Preface
particular theory would be to ignore the reality of practice within the field. Many
scholars mix and match theories with considerable ease, and this book explores
both how those various theories have been used in conjunction with one another
and on what bases these combinations may or may not be compatible.
The practice of present-day ethnomusicologists to draw on multiple
approaches is not unlike that of Charles Seeger (1886–1979) Seeger (1977)
embraced at least three different approaches to his work. He relied on the work
of Henri Bergson, for his interest in intuition and mystical faith as a basis for
studying music; on Bertrand Russell, for his way of combining mystical faith
with logic; and on Ralph Barton Perry, who supplied the rationale he later
employed to explain the relation between music and language as well as an
overarching framework for combining his interdisciplinary interests (Greer
1998:21–22).
At certain points in the history of ethnomusicology, a particular theory has
lit up the landscape and been embraced as the nearly perfect explanation for
musical phenomena. The appearance of paradigmatic structuralism, best
known through the work of anthropologist Claude Lévi-Strauss, appeared to
offer such a solution in the early 1970s. The meeting of the Society for
Ethnomusicology in 1972 included a number of papers that demonstrated that
palpable excitement. Yet by the latter part of the decade, a diminishing number
of references to structuralism could be found in the current work of ethnomu-
sicologists, and other theories were now favored in conference papers and
ethnographic studies.
The theories in the social and humanistic sciences, when compared with
one another, may at first seem to bear no resemblances. I would point, however,
to Wayne D. Bowman’s (1998) comment in his book Philosophical Perspectives
on Music: “[A]midst the striking diversity, there do exist discernible patterns,
convergences of perspective, recurrent disputes and problems.”
My mentors, Alan P. Merriam and Charles Boilés, instilled a keen interest
in and concern for theory in me during my days as a student. This was
reflected in my dissertation, which included an extended discussion of theo-
retical assumptions that framed my study of Kpelle cuing in performance
(Stone 1979:1–65).
When I began teaching at Indiana University more than twenty-five years ago,
I inherited what may be the most consistently taught graduate course in ethnomu-
sicological theory, “Paradigms in Ethnomusicology.” This class was patterned on
one by the same name that Boilés had taught in the Department of Folklore
and Ethnomusicology at Indiana University some years earlier. In that class, he
examined linguistic approaches to ethnomusicology. I expanded the course to
include a broad range of theoretical approaches, and over the years I have contin-
ued to add to the range of theories addressed with the goal of exploring common
themes among the various approaches. Several years ago, the Ethnomusicology
Institute, in recognition of the importance of theory to the training for students,
added another course in theory—an advanced theory course—which, in addition
to the “Paradigms in Ethnomusicology” course, is required of all doctoral students
who specialize in ethnomusicology at Indiana University.
xii Preface
Many of the ideas offered in this book were first discussed in the “Paradigms
in Ethnomusicology” class. Ideas on theory also emerged in lectures to students
at other universities, including those from the University of California, Santa
Barbara; University of California, Los Angeles; University of Ghana; University
of Malawi; New York University; University of Michigan; and the University of
Zimbabwe. Through their probing questions and keen observations, the students
and other audience members provided the basis for changes and amplifications.
The chapter on history, for example, was added to the manuscript at the sugges-
tion of students after I had written an initial draft and let them read and critique
it. Thus this book should be read as a summary of numerous dialogues that have
ensued over some twenty-five years of lively exchange.
This work presents my views on the advantages as well as limitations of
these theoretical approaches in ethnomusicology. Such explorations show that
no theory encompasses all issues of inquiry. Ethnomusicologists have judged
some theories better than others for their work at certain points in history, and
not all ethnomusicologists would agree on what the best theories might be. But
these orientations are, at best, partial in their explanatory power.
Theories often incorporate aspects from earlier approaches and thus build
from earlier work. Thus they may share some aspects of earlier theories in ori-
entation. In this way, theories overlap and interrelate in ways that complicate
the best attempts to build tight categories.
My goal here is to show that, whether acknowledged or not, theory under-
lies ethnomusicological inquiry and even implicit theories have a bearing on
the analyses that result from our fieldwork. The trick is not to obscure the
study of music making with clumsy or inappropriate frameworks. Theory
should ultimately make ideas transparent and strengthen the quality of the
intellectual conversation.
This book explores the underlying ideas within the humanities and social
sciences to which ethnomusicologists have referred. The basic assumptions of
these theories are explained and compared in order to understand relation-
ships. Examples are offered of how ethnomusicology as a field of inquiry has
used and adapted these theories.
Each chapter centers on a distinct theory or cluster of theories that have
been or are presently important to the studies produced by ethnomusicologists.
In most cases the treatment includes the following:
A final chapter draws some general conclusions about the status of these theo-
ries, showing how they converge at some points and diverge at other points.
A number of people have assisted me in the work on this book, and I would
like to thank them for their efforts. Each class of “Paradigms in Ethnomusicology”
students, beginning in 1980, has contributed to making this book what it has
Preface xiii
References
Berger, Harris M. 1999a. “Theory as Practice: Some Dialectics of Generality and
Specificity in Folklore Scholarship.” Journal of Folklore Research 36(1): 31–49.
Bowman, Wayne D. 1998. Philosophical Perspectives on Music. Oxford and New York:
Oxford University Press.
Greer, Taylor Aitken. 1998. A Question of Balance. Berkeley: University of California
Press.
Seeger, Charles. 1977. Studies in Musicology 1935–1975. Berkeley and Los Angeles:
University of California Press.
Stone, Ruth M. 1979. “Communication and Interaction Processes in Music Events
among the Kpelle of Liberia.” PhD diss., Indiana University.
This page intentionally left bank
Chapter 1
Inquiry in Ethnomusicology
Ethnomusicologists carry out research about music performance, about music
experience, and about music performers using concepts that are drawn from
inquiry in the social and natural sciences as well as the related areas of music
and the humanities. A number of concepts anchor the language that surrounds
“theory” as well as other aspects of research in ethnomusicology. These ideas are
essential to the extended discussion of theory in ethnomusicology.
Paradigm
One starting point in the conceptual apparatus of theories is the idea of paradigm.
Paradigm means “pattern, exemplar, example” (Oxford English Dictionary 1986).
The concept became a very popular in academic circles with the publication of
Thomas Kuhn’s book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962). Kuhn defined
paradigm as the shared understandings and agreements that form the lens used by
scientists to proceed in conducting “normal science” (1962:10). When a revolution
in scientific research occurred, he maintained, a particular paradigm changed, giv-
ing way to a new procedure for conducting research.
Paradigms or exemplars include sets of assumptions that are not necessarily
obvious but describe those things that make up the world and are models for how
we can inquire about them. “Acquisition of a paradigm and of the more esoteric
type of research it permits is a sign of maturity in the development of any given sci-
entific field” (1962:11). Because they are often implicit, they are out-of-awareness
and not altogether obvious.
Kuhn outlined a set of chronological phases for paradigms: (1) a pre-paradigm
stage, (2) crystallization of a dominant paradigm with the beginning of a normal
science, and (3) scientific revolutions. Scientific revolutions are marked by those
Paradigm
• Model or example
• Shared understandings about research procedures
1
2 Chapter 1
moments when there is a shift; a new paradigm takes over and becomes the dom-
inant exemplar.
Although Kuhn’s ideas have had a long-lasting influence in scholarship,
they have also been subject to critique on a number of fronts. Some scholars
have felt that Kuhn’s conception of paradigms made these models incompatible,
one with another, in a way that was not necessarily typical of the interpenetra-
tion of research ideas with one another. Other researchers observed that Kuhn
saw the scientific community as separate from society in general. But Paul
Hoyningen-Heune (1993) maintains that many scholars misread Kuhn’s early
formulation as well as ignored his later formulations, which led to some of the
misunderstandings.
We might consider what paradigm characterizes ethnomusicology today. Alan
Merriam proposed in the 1960s a three-part “model” that addressed (1) music sound,
(2) behavior in relation to that sound, and (3) conceptualization about music
(1964:32–33). That exemplar has been widely quoted and cited over the years. Yet
Merriam staunchly maintained, in class lectures and conversation, that ethnomusi-
cology as a whole possesses no single paradigm.
Mantle Hood, Merriam’s contemporary, maintained that ethnomusicology
is “a field that has almost as many approaches and objectives as there are prac-
titioners” (1971:1). Merriam did not see the situation as quite that diffuse and
posited that there were, more or less, two approaches to ethnomusicology—
what he liked to call the “two horns of the dilemma”—one that derived from the
anthropological perspective and another that was inspired by the musicological
viewpoint.
Ethnographic work means having direct, sustained contact with people and
their activities—it means talking with them and spending time at it. . . .
At some point, you transform the accumulation of particularities (personal
Ethnography
Fieldwork
Theory
There are other concepts in the field of ethnomusicology that ground analysis and
deserve elucidation. Theory is one overarching such concept. Few researchers
would agree on a definition of theory, but many more agree on what theory does.
“Theories, then, are more than merely abbreviated summaries of data, since they
not only tell us what happens but why it happens as it does. Any worthwhile the-
ory should thus perform the double function of explaining facts already known as
well as opening up new vistas which can lead us to new facts” (Kaplan and
Manners 1972:11). Theories suggest explanations not only for the phenomena that
invoked them in the first place but for other phenomena as well.
Theory
Theory Example
Cutting-the-edge dance cues are characteristic of music that is considered
entertainment in nature and quite absent in ritual events.
Descriptive statement
Theory Example
Song performance can characterize a culture in terms of basic structural
elements such as complexity and subsistence level, political structure,
complementarity and sexual mores. (1968:98)
Range of Theory
Theories show enormous range in level of generality. The level of generality
involves the radius of the explanatory shell or the extensiveness of the sorts of
events to be considered such as might be distinguished in the range between
macrotheory versus microtheory. If we take
This could be considered a theory with limited generality and limited abstract-
ness. But, if we take
• Theory 3: Specific instruments across the world are associated with specific
colors, times of the day, and moods.
Types of Theory
Ethnomusicologists refer not only to theories that derive from Western academic
scholarship, and by extension Western philosophy, but from the various cul-
tures where research is conducted. Because these indigenous theories are often
implicitly rather than explicitly stated, they are not always easily discerned.
Inquiry in Ethnomusicology 9
Over time, it became clear that insider perspectives not only had determined
the central unit of study, but had opened pathways for its interpretation as
well. (1998:2)
In the end, theory making is not a privilege of the elite but a process in which
we all engage, and awareness of diverse theories created by the musicians we
study comes with careful listening and observing.
Theoretical Orientation
As ethnomusicologists prepare and plan a research project, theoretical orientation
might best describe the frame of reference they use. This orientation draws from
theoretical issues and contains some assumptions or things that researchers hold to
be true as they begin to work.
Some ethnomusicologists staunchly maintain that they want to enter the
field with a blank slate. They do not want to go in with an orientation. Such an
approach, no doubt, harkens to the ideas that have been held about music as an
object that does not rely on any external element but stands as an independent
entity and should be understood as such. Music, they contend, exists separately
from context.
I maintain that meaning in music is socially created just as culture is
socially created. Whether we acknowledge our theoretical orientation or not,
Theoretical orientation
This book addresses the issue of agency in society, particularly the role of the
exceptional individual in expressive culture. Theoretically it rests on the rather
large literature that has become known as practice theory as well as the litera-
ture associated with cultural studies. I am particularly indebted to the work of
Raymond Williams, whose Culture and Society accounts successfully in broad
social terms for a good number of English literary “stars.” (1997: ix)
Danielson succinctly locates her work in practice theory and cultural studies,
identifying Raymond Williams as a scholar on whom she relies in accounting
for the behavior of an exceptional individual.
Veit Erlmann positions Nightsong, his work on migrant work song in South
Africa, by saying this:
In the account that follows, I have adopted a writing strategy that, like the title
of the book, highlights rather than obliterates the foreignness and shifts that
Method
Once a theoretical orientation or general framework is identified, we can then
identify method for carrying out the research. Method is “the process by which
[an ethnomusicologist] generates an abstract view of the situation. In this way
[method] comprises how the [ethnomusicologist] decides what social phenom-
ena are relevant to his descriptive project at hand and how he deals with these
in developing his account or theory” (Phillipson 1972:79). In other words,
method is how we get at our research. In contrast, methodology is “the study—
description, the explanation, and the justification—of methods” (Kaplan
1964:19).
Method in Ethnomusicology
One method many ethnomusicologists use is participant-observation. This
method provides for varying degrees of involvement with a culture, depending
on the techniques employed and that place the researcher more or less at the
participant end of the spectrum or more or less at the observer end of the spec-
trum. Ingrid Monson describes the observation end of the spectrum and many
things one can learn about a culture:
Method
Methodology
Participant-observation
We spent most of our time participating in farming activities with our host fam-
ily: stringing tobacco, chopping wood, threshing wheat, irrigating fields, pick-
ing vegetables, herding oxen, baking bread. (1997:8)
Such activities led to a deepening understanding of issues and values that are
critical to the creation of the music. John Blacking, many years earlier, also
reported on the participant end of the spectrum when he detailed his research
among the Venda of southern Africa:
I learnt the songs both from adults and from children. On some occasions I made
deliberate mistakes, and was therefore especially interested if I was not cor-
rected. (1995a [1967]:33)
Archival work
Techniques in Ethnomusicology
Techniques are “specific procedures used in a given science or in particular con-
texts of inquiry in that science” (Kaplan 1964:19). A number of techniques that
ethnomusicologists employ include sound and video recording, still photogra-
phy, transcription of music or speech, and the writing of fieldnotes.
Ethnographic interviews—playback interviews, life history interviews, and ques-
tions from an interview schedule—all constitute yet another series of techniques.
Ethnomusicologists frequently mention their techniques as they introduce
their books. For example, Shelemay notes, “The team effort results in a large col-
lection of field recordings and interviews deposited in the Sephardic Archives”
(Shelemay 1998:2; emphasis added). Or Sugarman comments on techniques used
in Eastern Europe:
I . . . turned increasingly to playback interviews structured around audio or
video recordings (see Stone and Stone 1981). Here the advantages of video were
immediately apparent. Not only was it easier to identify all participants in a
singing occasion, but the songs could be correlated more precisely to other activ-
ities taking place. (1997:21; emphasis added)
In each case, the ethnomusicologist begins with either audio or video recordings
and then structures interviews of various kinds adjacent to or with those recordings.
Assumptions
Assumptions, held by any ethnomusicologist venturing to the field to do
research, are taken-for-granted knowledge. These are concepts, theories, or
ideas that at any particular moment are beyond question. They are accepted
Techniques
Assumptions
• Concepts or theories that are held to be true and beyond question at a given
moment
• Taken-for-granted knowledge
Inquiry in Ethnomusicology 15
as given “until further notice” (Schutz and Luckmann 1973:4). Yet in the
process of any project, these assumptions yet may become the basis for
inquiry.
Benjamin Brinner tells us in his introduction to a study of the Javanese
gamelan about his assumption:
The Chomskyian concept of linguistic competence and its offshoots should not
be taken apriori as the standard for the more inclusive concept of musical com-
petence proposed here. I prefer to start with the assumption that these compe-
tences are essentially different, allowing the phenomenon of musical compe-
tence to be judged on its own merits while leaving open the possibility, indeed,
the desirability of comparing it with linguistic competence at a later date.
(1995:2–3; emphasis added)
In my own work about music event among the Kpelle of Liberia (1982: 7–10),
I outlined eleven assumptions I was making in conducting the study, beginning
with, “Music is communication,” and including “Meaning in music is created by
participants in the course of social interaction.” I continued with, “The social
relationship among event participants is based upon the simultaneous experi-
encing of the performance in multiple dimensions of time,” and ended with,
“The ethnomusicologist makes inferences about music event interaction by
engaging in interactional behavior.”
The premise on which this study is based assumes, as Peter Manuel has
observed, that music functions not merely as a passive reflection of broader
sociocultural phenomena, but also as an active contributor to the processes of
cultural change. (1993:xvii; emphasis added)
These statements of assumptions then cordon off those things, which scholars
take to be true and are not questioned as ethnomusicologists embark on their
research. It is important to identify assumptions so it is clear from the start
what areas are not open to question—at least at the outset. Now there are of
course many cases where evidence may change those assumptions at a later
point in time.
Over the years of reading proposals submitted for research, I have noticed
that some scholars begin by describing certain assumptions about a body of
music to be studied. Very quickly as the research questions are presented, it
becomes evident that some concept stated as an assumption is also being posed
as a research question. Although one may end up, in fact, questioning one of
the assumptions because of unexpected data, one needs to be clear from the
start where the investigator is placing and situating the work, and what aspects
are initially not open to questioning.
Research Questions
Rather than hypotheses, several broad questions typically frame and guide eth-
nomusicologists as they conduct research. These research questions are
encompassing in nature, and, like the theoretical orientation, are quite general
and abstract. For example, these were Danielson’s questions for the study of the
Egyptian singer Umm Kulthūm:
Why was this individual, among many other entertainers, so important? . . . What
were the material circumstances of a commercial singer’s life? How did she make
her way? In what respects was Umm Kulthūm’s career typical? How was she
affected by the operations of institutions such as record companies and theaters?
What was her effect on musical life and in what ways were her actions informed
or constrained by precedents? Where were her performances situated in the larger
processes of life? (1997:2–3)
Hypothesis
Research question
These questions imply a study that begins with the performance of the singer but
moves to explain larger social processes that interrelate with that performance.
Sugarman framed her study of singing at Prespa Albanian weddings with
these questions: “How is it that these families have developed such a strong
sense of place? What is it about weddings that make them so central to the life of
the community? And why is it so important that everyone sing at such a cele-
bration?” (1997:7). Like Danielson, Sugarman firmly embeds her study in the
larger social setting. Her guiding research questions help her determine what
data to collect as she proceeds with fieldwork. And both scholars are asking
why music seems so vital to the conduct of the larger social life.
The research questions that Brinner poses focus on the actual performance
of the music and the relationship to competence. He begins his study of
Javanese gamelan by asking, “How do they do what they do?” and follows
with, “How do musicians make music together?” (1995:1). Despite different
research questions, an assumption of a social basis for performance seems
shared by all of the scholars—Sugarman, Brinner, and Danielson.
Guiding research questions derive both from what is already known about
a specific musical issue and from the theoretical orientation that the researcher
uses. Research questions give strong clues about what data will be vital to the
ethnomusicologist.
Study Object
The most explicit statement about the focus of a research project is identification
of the study object. Theoretical orientations and research questions may provide
a few hints, but they may not directly address the unit of analysis. Certain of
these units or study objects may be associated with a specific approach. Among
early comparative musicologists, for example, the “song” was the unit of analy-
sis. Study of these recorded or experienced objects yielded scales or pitch inven-
tories, which could then be compared. Later, structural-functional scholars,
influenced by anthropology, took the community as the study object. For many
years, these ethnomusicologists studied all music making within a geographi-
cally bounded unit such as a village. A song versus a community forms quite dis-
parate study objects that each yield much different results.
Today we have yet other study objects that serve to center our studies. My
own research among the Kpelle for example, has taken the music event as a
point of focus. In doing so, I have argued that the event is a unit of analysis
with saliency for the Kpelle people. The event is bounded and set apart from
Study object
• Unit of research
• Units include song, individual, event, repertory, community, genre
Inquiry in Ethnomusicology 19
everyday life and is where sound and behavior are united in musical interac-
tion. Often Kpelle musicians say, “Kwa loi belei su” (“We are entering the inside
of the performance”). The Kpelle mark the boundaries as they speak of the
“inside” of the performance (Stone 1982:2).
Monson identifies her study object as jazz improvisation, centered on inter-
action in this multiple sense. Stressed here are the “reciprocal and multi-layered
relationships among sound, social settings, and cultural politics that affect the
meaning of jazz improvisation in twentieth-century American cultural life”
(1996:2). Thus although she begins with a musical process, Monson also links
this process to much broader issues of race and culture. She also indirectly com-
ments on the structural-functional definition of community when she says, “By
stressing the activity of music making as something that creates community, I am
purposefully moving away from the idea of community that is defined exclu-
sively by a particular geographic location or a particular social category, such as
race, class, or gender” (1996:13).
Shelemay chooses a repertory of songs, pizmonim, as her study object and
she tells us she intends to “document and interpret the pizmonim tradition for
the recent century” (1998:1). She even comments on the choice of study object:
“In contrast to most ethnomusicological projects, where the unit of study
slowly emerges during the course of ethnographic research, the central focus
here was identified before the process of fieldwork began in consultation with
members of the Syrian Jewish community in Brooklyn” (1998:1).
Timothy Rice presents his study object:
which they were thrown, I hope to show (1) how they have defined themselves
in interaction with that changing world; (2) the dramatic changes in that world
over the seventy years or so of their lives; and (3) what aspects of that world—of
that culture—are opened to our understanding by musical sounds, performances,
and contexts acting as symbols. (1994:8)
For the present discussion, what are interesting are the implications of these
choices for theory in ethnomusicology. Using a song as a starting point for a
study is very different from using a community as a starting point. If individ-
ual songs form the focus, then elements of these songs become the most likely
areas of examination. In contrast, if community is the object of study, then the
research will embrace a whole range of performances and inevitably treat the
References
Blacking, John. 1995a [1967]. Venda Children’s Songs: A Study in Ethnomusicological
Analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Brinner, Benjamin. 1995. Knowing Music, Making Music: Javanese Gamelan and the
Theory of Musical Competence and Interaction. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Danielson, Virginia. 1997. The Voice of Egypt. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Erlmann, Veit. 1996a. Nightsong. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Glaser, Barney G., and Anselm Strauss. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory:
Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine.
Guilbault, Jocelyne, with Gage Averill, Edouard Benoit, and Gregory Rabess. 1993.
Zouk: World Music in the West Indies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hood, Mantle. 1971. The Ethnomusicologist. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Hoyningen-Huene, Paul. 1993. Reconstructing Scientific Revolutions: Thomas S. Kuhn’s
Philosophy of Science. Translated by Alexander J. Levine. Foreword by Thomas S.
Kuhn. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kaplan, Abraham. 1964. The Conduct of Inquiry: Methodology for Behavioral Science.
San Francisco: Chandler.
Kaplan, David, and Robert A. Manners. 1972. Culture Theory. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:
Prentice-Hall.
Kuhn, Thomas S. 1962. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 2nd ed. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Lomax, Alan. 1968. Folksong Style and Culture. Washington, D. C.: American
Association for the Advancement of Science.
Merriam, Alan P. 1964. The Anthropology of Music. Evanston: Northwestern University
Press.
Middleton, Richard. 2003. “Music Studies and the Idea of Culture.” In The Cultural
Study of Music, eds. Martin Clayton, Trevor Herbert, and Richard Middleton. New
York and London: Routledge, 1–15.
Monson, Ingrid. 1996. Saying Something: Jazz Improvisation and Interaction. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Oxford English Dictionary, The Compact Edition. 1986. 2 vols. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Phillipson, Michael. 1972. “Theory, Methodology and Conceptualization.” In New
Directions in Sociological Theory, ed. Paul Filmer et. al. Cambridge: MA: MIT Press,
77–118.
Qureshi, Regula Burkhart. 1995 [1986]. Sufi Music of India and Pakistan: Sound,
Context and Meaning in Qawwali. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Inquiry in Ethnomusicology 23
Preface
Baest, Arjan Van, and Hans Van Driel. 1995. The Semiotics
of C. S. Peirce Applied to Music: A Matter of Belief.
Tilburg: Tilburg University Press.
———. 1969b. The Raw and the Cooked. New York: Harper & Row.
Averill, Gage. 1997. A Day for the Hunter: A Day for the
Prey: Popular Music and Power in Haiti. Chicago: University
of Chicago Press.
Averill, Gage. 1997. A Day for the Hunter, A Day for the
Prey: Popular Music and Power in Haiti. Chicago: Chicago
University Press.
Abraham, Otto, and Erich M. von Hornbostel. Attali, Jacques. 1985 [1977]. Noise: The
1975 [1903]. “Studies on the Tonsystem and Political Economy of Music. Translated by
Music of the Japanese.” In Hornbostel Opera Brian Massumi. Minneapolis: University
Omnia, Vol. 1, eds. Klaus P. Wachsmann, of Minnesota Press.
Dieter Christensen, and Hans-Peter Reinekke, Auerbach, Susan. 1989. “From Singing to
The Hague: Martinus-Nijhoff, 1–84. Lamenting: Women’s Musical Role in a
Abrahams, Roger. 1970. “A Performance-Centered Greek Village.” In Women and Music
Approach to Gossip.” Man 5: 290–301. in Cross-Cultural Perspective, ed. Ellen
———. 1972. “Folklore and Literature as Koskoff. Urbana: University of Illinois
Performance.” Journal of the Folklore Insti- Press, 25–44.
tute 9: 75–94. Austen, Ralph A., and Jan Vansina. 1996.
Adams, Charles R. 1974. “Ethnography of “History, Oral Transmission and Structure
Basotho Evaluative Expression in the in Ibn Khaldun’s Chronology of Mali
Cognitive Domain Lipapali (Games).” PhD Rulers.” History in Africa 23: 17–28.
diss., Indiana University. Austerlitz, Paul. 1997. Merengue: Dominican
Adler, Guido. 1885. “Umfang, Methode und Zeil Music and Dominican Identity. Phila-
der Musikwissenschaft.” Viertelsjahrsschrift delphia: University of Temple Press.
für Musikwissenschaft 1: 5–20. Averill, Gage. 1989. “Haitian Dance Band Music:
Anderson, Benedict. 1983. Imagined Communi- The Political Economy of Exuberance.”
ties: Reflections on the Origin and Spread PhD diss., University of Washington.
of Nationalism. London: Verso. ———. 1997. A Day for the Hunter, A Day
Aparicio, Frances R. 1998. Listening to Salsa: for the Prey: Popular Music and Power
Gender, Latin Popular Music, and Puerto in Haiti. Chicago: Chicago University
Rican Cultures. Hanover, N.H.: University Press.
Press of New England. Avorgbedor, Daniel. 1998. “Rural-Urban Inter-
Appadurai, Arjun, ed. 1988 [1986]. The Social change: The Anlo-Ewe.” In Africa: The
Life of Things. Cambridge: Cambridge Garland Encyclopedia of World Music, ed.
University Press. Ruth M. Stone. New York and London:
———. 1991. “Global Ethnoscapes: Notes and Garland, 389–99.
Queries for a Transnational Anthropology.” Baest, Arjan Van, and Hans Van Driel. 1995.
In Recapturing Anthropology, ed. Richard The Semiotics of C. S. Peirce Applied to
G. Fox. Santa Fe: School of American Music: A Matter of Belief. Tilburg: Tilburg
Research, 191–210. University Press.
———. 1996. Modernity at Large: Cultural Bahr, Donald M., and J. Richard Haefer. 1978.
Dimensions of Globalization. Minneapolis: “Song in Piman Curing.” Ethnomusicology
University of Minnesota Press. 22(1): 89–122.
Armstrong, Robert Plant. 1971. The Affecting Barkin, Elaine, and Lydia Hamessley. 1999.
Presence: An Essay in Humanistic Anthro- Audible Traces: Gender, Identity, and
pology. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Music. Zurich and Los Angeles: Carciofoli.
Asch, Michael. 1972. “A Grammar of Slavey Barnard, Alan. 2004. History and Theory
Drum Dance Music.” Paper presented at in Anthropology. Cambridge: Cambridge
the annual meeting of the Society for University Press.
Ethnomusicology, Toronto. Bartók, Béla. 1933. “Hungarian Peasant Music.”
Askew, Kelly. 2002. Performing the Nation: Musical Quarterly 19: 267–89.
Swahili Music and Cultural Politics in ———, and Albert Lord. 1951. Serbo-Croatian
Tanzania. Chicago: University of Chicago Folksong. New York: Columbia University
Press. Press.
226
References 227
Basso, Ellen B. 1989. “Musical Expression and ———. 1995b. “Music, Culture, and Experience.”
Gender Identity in the Myth and Ritual of In Music, Culture, and Experience, ed.
the Kalapalo of Central Brazil.” In Women Reginald Byron. Chicago: University of
and Music in Cross-Cultural Perspective, Chicago Press, 223–42.
ed. Ellen Koskoff. Urbana: University of Bleich, David. 1978. Subjective Criticism.
Illinois Press, 163–76. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Bauman, Richard. 1975. “Verbal Art as Blim, Michael. 2000. “Capitalism in Late Moder-
Performance.” American Anthropologist nity.” Annual Review of Anthropology 29:
77: 290–311. 2–38.
———. 1984 [1977]. Verbal Art as Performance. Bloch, Maurice, ed. 1975. Marxist Analyses and
Prospect Heights, Ill.: Waveland Press. Social Anthropology. London: Malaby Press.
———. 1986. Story, Performance, and Event: Blum, Stephen. 1991. “European Musical Ter-
Contextual Studies of Oral Narrative. minology and the Music of Africa.” In Com-
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. parative Musicology and Anthropology of
———. 2004. A World of Others’ Words. Oxford: Music, eds. Bruno Nettl and Philip V.
Blackwell. Bohlman. Chicago: University of Chicago
Becker, Judith, and Alton Becker. 1979. “A Press, 3–36.
Grammar of the Musical Genre Srepegan.” Blumer, Herbert. 1969. Symbolic Interactionism:
Journal of Music Theory 24(1): 1–43. Perspective and Method. Englewood Cliffs,
(Reprinted in Asian Music 14(1): 30–73 N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
with original pagination preserved.) Bogatyrev, Petr. 1971. The Functions of Folk
———. 1983. “A Reconsideration in the Form Costume in Moravian Slovakia. Translated
of a Dialogue.” Asian Music 14(1): 9–16. by Richard G. Crum. The Hague: Mouton.
Beeman, William O. 1993. “The Anthropology Bohlman, Philip V. 1987. “The European Discov-
of Theater and Spectacle.” Annual Review ery of Music in the Islamic World and the
of Anthropology 22: 369–393. ‘Non-Western’ in 19th-Century Music His-
Béhague, Gerard. 1984. Performance Practice: tory.” Journal of Musicology 5(2): 142–63.
Ethnomusicological Perspectives. Westport, Boilés, Charles L. 1967. “Tepehua Thought-Song:
Conn.: Greenwood Press. A Case of Semantic Signalling.” Ethno-
Berger, Harris. 1999b. Metal, Rock, and Jazz: musicology 11(3): 267–392.
Perception and the Phenomenology of ———. 1973a. “Semiotique de l’ethnomusi-
Musical Experience. Hanover, N.H.: cologie.” Musique en Jeu 10: 34–41.
University Press of New England. ———. 1973b. “Reconstruction of Proto-Melody.”
Berger, Peter, and Thomas Luckmann. 1967. Annuario Interamericano de Investigacion
The Social Construction of Reality. Garden Musical 9: 45–63.
City, N.Y.: Doubleday. ———. 1982. “Processes of Musical Semiosis.”
Bernstein, Jane A., ed. 2003. Women’s Voices Yearbook for Traditional Music 14: 24–44.
across Musical Worlds. Boston: Northeast- Boon, James A. 1973. “Further Operations on
ern University Press. ‘Culture’ in Anthropology: A Synthesis of
Besmer, Fremont E. 1974. Kídan dárán sállà: and for Debate.” In The Idea of Culture in
Music for the Eve of the Muslim Festivals the Social Sciences, eds. Louis Schneider
of ‘Id Al-Fatir and ‘Id Al-Kabir in Kano, and Charles Bonjean. Cambridge: Cam-
Nigeria. Bloomington: African Studies bridge University Press, 1–32.
Program, Indiana University. Bordieu, Pierre. 1977. Outline of a Theory of
Bielawski, Ludwik. 1958. “History in Ethno- Practice. Translated by Richard Nice.
musicology.” Translated by Ludwik Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wiewiorkowki. Yearbook for Traditional ———. 1984. Distinction: A Social Critique of the
Music 17: 8–15. Judgment of Taste. Translated by Richard
Birdwhistell, Ray L. 1970. Kinesics and Nice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Context. Philadelphia: University of ———. 1995. Randal Johnson, ed. The Field of
Pennsylvania Press. Cultural Production: Essays on Art and
Blacking, John. 1969. “The Value of Music in Literature. New York: Columbia University
Human Experience.” Yearbook of the Press.
International Folk Music Council 1: 33–71. Brăiloiu, Constantin. 1984. Problems of Ethno-
———. 1972a. “Deep and Surface Structures in musicology. Translated by A. L. Lloyd. Cam-
Venda Music.” Yearbook of International bridge: Cambridge University Press.
Folk Music Council 3: 91–108. Brett, Philip. 1994. “Musicality, Essentialism,
———. 1973. How Musical Is Man? Seattle: and the Closet.” In Queering the Pitch:
University of Washington Press. The New Gay and Lesbian Musicology,
———. 1995a [1967]. Venda Children’s Songs: eds. Philip Brett, Elizabeth Wood, and
A Study in Ethnomusicological Analysis. Gary C. Thomas. New York: Routledge,
Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 9–26.
228 References
Brinner, Benjamin. 1995. Knowing Music, Making ed. World Music and Social Change.
Music: Javanese Gamelan and the Theory of Manchester: Manchester University
Musical Competence and Interaction. Press.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Cook, Susan C., and Judy S. Tsou, eds. 1994.
Brown, Richard. 1989 [1977]. A Poetic for Cecilia Reclaimed: Feminist Perspective
Sociology: Toward a Logic of Discovery for on Gender and Music. Urbana: University
the Human Sciences. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
of Chicago Press. Crafts, Susan, Daniel Cavicchi, and Charles
Burke, Kenneth. 1969. A Grammar of Motives. Keil. 1993. My Music: Explorations of
Berkeley: University of California Press. Music in Daily Life. Hanover, N.H.: Wes-
Burnim, Mellonee V., and Portia K. Maultsby. leyan University Press.
2006. African American Music: An Intro- Cuddy, Lola L., and Annabel J. Cohen. 1976.
duction. New York: Routledge. “Recognition of Transposed Melodic
Burns, Lori, and Mélisse Lafrance. 2002. Sequences.” Quarterly Journal of Experi-
Disruptive Divas: Feminism, Identity and mental Psychology 28: 255–70.
Popular Music. New York: Routledge. Cuddy, Lola L., and Janet Miller. 1979. “Melody
Butler, Judith. 1988. “Performative Acts and Recognition: The Experimental Application
Gender Constitution: An Essay in Phenom- of Musical Rules.” Canadian Journal of
enology and Feminist Theory.” Theatre Psychology 33: 148–57.
Journal 40(4): 519–31. Danielson, Virginia. 1997. The Voice of Egypt.
———. 1990. Gender Trouble: Feminism and Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
the Subversion of Identity. New York: Davidson, Lyle, and Bruce Torff. 1991. “Situated
Routledge. Cognition in Music.” World of Music 34(3):
———. 1993. Bodies That Matter: On the 120–39.
Discursive Limits of “Sex.” New York: D’Azevedo, Warren L. 1962. “Uses of the Past in
Routledge. Gola Discourse.” The Journal of African
———. 1997. Excitable Speech: A Politics of History 3(1): 11–34.
the Performative. London: Routledge. DeMaille, Raymond J. 1984. The Sixth
Cavanagh, Beverley. 1982. Music of the Netsilik Grandfather: Black Elk’s Teachings Given
Eskimo: A Study of Stability and Change. to John G. Neihardt. Lincoln: University of
Ottawa: National Museums of Canada. Nebraska Press.
Chakrabarty, Dipesh. 2000. Provincializing Derrida, Jacques. 1998. Of Grammatology.
Europe: Postcolonial Thought and Translated by Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak.
Historical Difference. Princeton, N.J.: Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Princeton University Press. Dowling, W. Jay. 1972. “Recognition of Melodic
Chapman, Malcolm, Elizabeth Tonkin, and Transformations: Inversion, Retrograde,
Maryon McDonald, eds. 1989. History and and Retrograde Inversion.” Perception and
Ethnicity. New York: Routledge. Psychophysics 12: 417–21.
Charry, Eric. 2000. Mande Music: Traditional ———. 1978. “Scale and Contour: Two Compo-
and Modern Music of the Maninka and nents of a Theory of Memory for Melodies.”
Mandinka of Western Africa. Chicago: Psychological Review 85: 341–54.
University of Chicago Press. Ekman, P., W. Frieson, and T. Taussig. 1969. “II
Chase, Gilbert. 1958. “A Dialectical Approach to VIR-R and SCAN: Tools and Methods for
Music History.” Ethnomusicology 2(1): 1–9. the Automated Analysis of Visual Records.”
Chaudhury, Ajit. 1995. “Rethinking Marxism in In Content Analysis, eds. G. Gerbner,
India: The Heritage We Renounce.” O. Holsti, K. Krippendorff, W. Paisley, and
Rethinking Marxism 8(3): 133–43. P. Stone. New York: Wiley.
Chenoweth, Vida, and Darlene Bee. 1971. Epstein, Dena J. 1975. “The Folk Banjo: A Docu-
“Comparative-Generative Models of a New mentary History.” Ethnomusicology 19(3):
Guinean Melodic Structure.” American 347–71.
Anthropologist 73: 773–82. Erlmann, Veit. 1996a. Nightsong. Chicago:
Chomsky, Noam. 1957. Syntactic Structures. University of Chicago Press.
The Hague: Mouton. ———. 1996b. “The Aesthetics of the Global
Chuse, Loren. 2003. The Cantaoras: Music, Imagination: Reflections on World Music
Gender, and Identity in Flamenco Song. in the 1990s.” Public Culture 8(3): 467–87.
New York: Routledge. “Ethnohistory.” 2006. JSTOR: Ethnohistory.
Citron, Marcia J. 1993. Gender and the Musical http://www.jstor.org/journals/00141801
Canon. Cambridge: Cambridge University .html (accessed July 3, 2006).
Press. Evans-Pritchard, Edward E. 1961. Anthropology
Collins, John, and P. Richards. 1989. “Popular and History. Manchester: Manchester
Music in West Africa.” In Simon Frith, University Press.
References 229
Fabian, Johannes. 1990. Power and Perfor- Friedson, Steven M. 1996. Dancing Prophets:
mance: Ethnographic Explorations through Musical Experience in Tumbuka Healing.
Proverbial Wisdom and Theater in Shaba, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Zaïre. Madison: University of Wisconsin Frisbie, Charlotte. 1991. “Women and the
Press. Society for Ethnomusicology: Roles and
Fales, Cornelia. 1993. “Auditory Illusion and Contributions from Formation through
Cognitive Patterns in Whispered Inanga of Incorporation (1952/53–1961). In Compar-
Burundi.” Ph.D. diss., Indiana University. ative Musicology and Anthropology of
Feld, Steven. 1974. “Linguistic Models in Music, eds. Bruno Nettl and Philip V.
Ethnomusicology.” Ethnomusicology 18(2): Bohlman. Urbana: University of Illinois
197–217. Press, 244–65.
———. 1981. “‘Flow Like a Waterfall’: The Frobenius, Leo. 1898. “The Origin of African
Metaphors of Kaluli Musical Theory.” Civilizations.” Annual Report of the Board
Yearbook of Traditional Music 13: 22–47. of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution I:
———. 1982. Sound and Sentiment: Birds, 640–41.
Weeping, Poetics, and Song in Kaluli Fuller, Sophie, and Lloyd Whitesell. 2002. Queer
Expression. Philadelphia: University of Episodes in Music and Modern Identity.
Pennsylvania Press. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
———. 1984. “Sound Structure as Social Garafalo, Reebee. 1987. “How Autonomous Is
Structure.” Ethnomusicology 28(3): 383–409. Relative: Popular Music, the Social
———. 1988. “Aesthetics as Iconicity of Style, Formation and Cultural Struggle.” Popular
or ‘Lift-Up-Over Sounding’: Getting into Music 6(1): 77–92.
the Kaluli Groove.” Yearbook of Tradi- Garraghan, Gilbert J. 1946. A Guide to Historical
tional Music 20: 74–113. Method. New York: Fordham University
———. 1991. “Sound as a Symbolic System: Press.
The Kaluli Drum. In The Varieties of Geertz, Clifford. 1973. The Interpretation of
Sensory Experience: A Sourcebook in the Culture. New York: Basic Books.
Anthropology of the Senses, ed. David Geysbeek, Tim. 1994. “A Traditional History of
Howes. Toronto: University of Toronto the Konyan (15th–16th Century): Vase
Press, 79–99. Camera’s Epic of Musadu.” History in
———, and Aaron Fox. 1994. “Music and Africa 21: 49–85.
Language.” Annual Review of Anthropology Giddens, Anthony. 1994. “Living in a Post-
23: 25–53. Traditional Society.” In Reflexive Modern-
Fernandez, James W. 1986. Persuasions and ization: Politics, Tradition, and Aesthetics
Performances: The Play of Tropes in Culture. in the Modern Social Order, eds. Ulrich
Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Beck, Anthony Giddens, and Scott Lash.
Firth, Raymond. 1984 [1975]. “The Sceptical Stanford: Stanford University Press, 56–109.
Anthropologist? Social Anthropology and Glaser, Barney G., and Anselm Strauss. 1967. The
Marxist Views on Society.” In Marxist Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies
Analyses and Social Anthropology, ed. for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine.
Maurice Bloch. London: Tavistock, 29–60. Godelier, Maurice. 1977. Perspectives in Marxist
Fish, Stanley. 1980. Is There a Text in This Class: Anthropology. Cambridge: New York.
The Authority of Interpretive Communities. Goffman, Erving. 1959. The Presentation of
Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Self. New York: Doubleday Anchor.
Press. ———. 1967. Interaction Ritual. New York:
Foucault, Michel. 1972. The Archaeology of Doubleday Anchor.
Knowledge and the Discourse of Language. ———. 1974. Frame Analysis. New York:
Translated by A. M. Sheridan Smith. New Harper & Row.
York: Pantheon Books. Goodenough, Ward H. 1957. “Cultural Anthropol-
———. 1976. Histoire de la sexualité, vol. I, La ogy and Linguistics.” In Report of the
Volonté de savoir. Paris: Gallimard. Seventh Annual Roundtable Meeting on
———. 1977. Discipline and Punish. New York: Linguistics and Language Study, ed. Paul L.
Vintage Books. Garvin. Georgetown University Monograph
———. 1984a. Histoire de la sexualité, vol. II, Series on Language and Linguistics, No. 9.
L’Usage des plaisirs. Paris: Gallimard. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University
———. 1984b. Histoire de la sexualité, vol. III, Press, 167–75.
Le Souci de soi. Paris: Gallimard. Gourlay, Kenneth. 1982. “Towards a Humanizing
Francès, Robert. 1988. The Perception of Music. Ethnomusicology.” Ethnomusicology 26(3):
Translated by W. Jay Dowling. Hillsdale, N.J.: 411–20.
Erlbaum; originally published in 1958 as La Greene, Paul D. 1999. “Sound Engineering in a
Perception de la musique. Paris: J. Vrin. Tamil Village: Playing Audio Cassettes as
230 References
Gender, Race, and Class. New York: P. Merton, Robert K. 1996. Ed. Piotr Sztompka. On
Lang. Social Structure and Science. Chicago:
Manuel, Peter. 1987. “Marxism, Nationalism University of Chicago Press.
and Popular Music in Revolutionary Meyer, Leonard B. 1956. Emotion and Meaning in
Cuba.” Popular Music 6(2): 161–78. Music. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
———. “Andalusian, Gypsy and Class Identity Middleton, Richard. 2003. “Music Studies and
in the Contemporary Flamenco Complex.” the Idea of Culture.” In The Cultural Study
Ethnomusicology 33(2): 47–65. of Music, eds. Martin Clayton, Trevor
Marcus, George E., and Michael M. J. Fischer. Herbert, and Richard Middleton, 1–15.
1986. Anthropology as Cultural Critique: New York and London: Routledge.
An Experimental Moment in the Human Miller, G. A., Galanter, E., and Pribram, K. H.
Sciences. Chicago: University of Chicago 1960. Plans and the Structure of
Press. Behavior. New York: Holt, Rinehart &
Marx, Karl. 1967 [1867]. Capital: A Critique of Winston.
Political Economy. New York: International Moisala, Pirkko, and Beverley Diamond, eds.
Publishers. 2000. Music and Gender. Urbana:
———. 1973. Grundrisse: Foundations of the University of Illinois Press.
Critique of Political Economy. New York: Monelle, Raymond. 2000. The Sense of Music:
Vintage Books. Semiotic Essays. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton
Maultsby, Portia K. 1975. “Music of Northern University Press.
Independent Black Churches during the Monson, Ingrid. 1996. Saying Something: Jazz
Ante-Bellum Period.” Ethnomusicology Improvisation and Interaction. Chicago:
19(3): 401–20. University of Chicago Press.
Mazo, Margarita. 1994. “Lament Made Visible: A ———. 1999. “Riffs, Repetition, and Theories of
Study of Paramusical Elements in Russian Globalization.” Ethnomusicology 43(1):
Lament.” In Theme and Variations, eds. Bell 31–65.
Yung and Joseph S. C. Lam. Cambridge: Moore, Jerry D. 1997. Visions of Culture: An
Department of Music, Harvard University Introduction to Anthropological Theories
and Hong Kong: The Institute of Chinese and Theorists. Walnut Creek, Calif.:
Studies, The Chinese University of Hong Altamira.
Kong, 1164–1210. Morris, Charles W. 1972. Writings on the General
McClary, Susan. 1989. “The Blasphemy of Theory of Signs. The Hague: Mouton.
Talking Politics during Bach Year.” In Music Nattiez, Jean-Jacques. 1977. “The Contribution
and Society: The Politics of Composition, of Musical Semiotics to the Semiotic
Performance and Reception, eds. Richard Discussion in General.” In A Perfusion of
Leppert and Susan McClary. Cambridge: Signs, ed. Thomas A. Sebeok. Bloomington:
Cambridge University Press, 13–62. Indiana University Press, 121–42.
McDaniel, Lorna. 1994. “Memory Spirituals of ———. 1990. Toward a Semiology of Music.
the Ex-Slave American Soldiers in Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Trinidad’s ‘Company Villages.’” Black ———. 1991. Music and Discourse: Toward a
Music Journal 14(2): 119–43. Semiology of Music. Trans. Carolyn Abbate.
McLeod, Norma. 1966. “Some Techniques of Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Analysis for Non-Western Music.” Ph.D. Nauta, Doede. 1972. The Meaning of Information.
diss. Northwestern University. The Hague: Mouton.
———, and Marcia Herndon. 1980. Ethnog- Negus, Keith. 1996. Popular Music in Theory:
raphy of Musical Performance. Norwood, An Introduction. Hanover and London:
Pa.: Norwood Editions. Wesleyan University Press.
Merriam, Alan P. 1964. The Anthropology of Neisser, Ulric. 1976. Cognition and Reality. San
Music. Evanston: Northwestern University Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
Press. Nettl, Bruno. 1958. “Some Linguistic Approaches
———. 1967a. Ethnomusicology of the to Musical Analysis.” Journal of the
Flathead Indians. Chicago: Aldine. International Folk Music Council 10: 37–41.
———. 1967b. “The Use of Music as a Technique Nicholson, Linda, and Steven Seidman. 1995.
of Reconstructing Culture History in Africa.” “Introduction.” In Social Postmodernism:
In Reconstructing African Culture History, Beyond Identity Politics. Cambridge:
eds. Creighton Gavel and Norman R. Bennett. Cambridge University Press, 1–35.
Boston: Boston University Press, 85–114. Nketia, J. H. Kwabena. 1958. “Yoruba Musicians
———. 1977. “Definitions of ‘Comparative in Accra.” Odu 6: 35–44.
Musicology’ and ‘Ethnomusicology’: Norris, Christopher. 2001. “Marxism.” The New
An Historical-Theoretical Perspective.” Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians.
Ethnomusicology 21(2): 189–204. 2nd ed. London: Macmillan Press.
References 233
Ortony, Andrew, ed. 1979. Metaphor and Reed, Daniel. 2003. Dan Ge Performance: Masks
Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University and Music in Contemporary Côte d’Ivoire.
Press. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Oxford English Dictionary, The Compact Edition. Reiner, Thomas. 2000. Semiotics of Musical
1986. 2 vols. Oxford: Oxford University Time. New York: Peter Lang.
Press. Rice, Timothy. 1987. “Toward the Remodeling of
Palmer, Gary B., and William R. Jankowiak. Ethnomusicology.” Ethnomusicology 31(3):
1996. “Performance and Imagination: 469–88.
Toward an Anthropology of the Spectacular ———. 1994. May It Fill Your Soul: Experiencing
and the Mundane.” Cultural Anthropology Bulgarian Music. Chicago: University of
11(2): 225–258. Chicago Press.
Paprotté, Wolf, and René Dirven, eds. 1985. The Robertson, Carol E. 1979. “‘Pulling the
Ubiquity of Metaphor. Amsterdam and Ancestors’: Performance, Practice, and
Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Praxis in Mapuche Ordering.” Ethnomus-
Park, Robert E. 1952. Human Communities. icology 23(3): 395–416.
New York: Free Press. ———. 1989. “Power and Gender in the
Peirce, Charles S., Max Harold Fisch, and Musical Experiences of Women.” In
Christian J. W. Kloesel. 1982. Writings of Women and Music in Cross-Cultural
Charles S. Peirce: A Chronological Edition. Perspective, ed. Ellen Koskoff. Urbana:
Bloomington: Indiana University Press. University of Illinois Press, 225–44.
Phillipson, Michael. 1972. “Theory, Methodology Roseman, Marina. 1989. “Inversion and
and Conceptualization.” In New Directions Conjunction: Male and Female Performance
in Sociological Theory, ed. Paul Filmer et. among the Temniar of Peninsular Malaysia.”
al., 77–118. Cambridge: MA: MIT Press. In Women and Music in Cross-Cultural
Porcello, Thomas. 1998. “‘Tails out’: Social Perspective, ed. Ellen Koskoff. Urbana:
Phenomenology and the Ethnographic University of Illinois Press, 131–50.
Representation of Technology in Music- ———. 2000. “Shifting Landscapes: Musical
Making.” Ethnomusicology 42(3): 485–510. Mediations of Modernity in the Malaysian
Post, Jennifer. 1989. “Professional Women in Rainforest.” Yearbook for Traditional
Indian Music: The Death of the Courtesan Music 32: 31–65.
Tradition.” In Women and Music in Cross- Rosenblatt, Louise. 1978. The Reader, the Text,
Cultural Perspective, ed. Ellen Koskoff. the Poem: The Transactional Theory of
Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 97–110. Literary Work. Carbondale: Southern Illinois
Pratt, Mary Louise. 1992. Through Imperial University Press.
Eyes: Travel Writing and Transculturation. Rouch, Jean, director. 1954. Les Maitres Fous
New York: Routledge. (“Mad Masters”). Color; VHS; 35 minutes.
Propp, Vladimir Akovlevich. 1958. Morphology Watertown, Mass.: Documentary Educa-
of the Folktale. Edited with an introduction tional Resources.
by Svatava Pirkova-Jakobson; Translated by Sachs, Curt. 1929. Geist und Werden der
Laurence Scott. Bloomington: Research Musikinstrumente. Berlin: D. Reimer.
Center, Indiana University. ———. 1940. History of Musical Instruments:
———. 1984. Theory and History of Folklore. The Rise of Music in the Ancient World
Translated by Ariadna Y. Martin and East and West. New York: Norton.
Richard P. Martin. Minneapolis: University Sachs, Nahoma. 1975. “Music and Meaning:
of Minnesota Press. Musical Symbolism in a Macedonian
Qureshi, Regula Burkhart. 1995 [1986]. Sufi Village.” PhD diss., Indiana University.
Music of India and Pakistan: Sound, Sacks, Sheldon, ed. 1979. On Metaphor.
Context and Meaning in Qawwali. Chicago: Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
University of Chicago Press. Said, Edward. 1978. Orientalism. New York:
———. 2002. Music and Marx: Ideas, Practice, Pantheon Books.
Politics. New York: Routledge. Sakata, Hiromi Lorraine. 1989. “Hazara Women
Radcliffe-Brown, Alfred Reginald. 1933. The in Afghanistan: Innovators and Preservers
Andaman Islanders. Cambridge: Cambridge of Musical Tradition.” In Women and Music
University Press. in Cross-Cultural Perspective, ed. Ellen
Ramsey, Guthrie P. 2003. Race Music: Migration, Koskoff. Urbana: University of Illinois
Modernism, and Gender. Berkeley: Press, 85–96.
University of California Press. Sanderson, Stephen K. 2002. Social Evolutionism:
Ranke, Leopold, and Robert Wines. 1981. The A Critical History. Oxford: Blackwell.
Secret of World History: Selected Writings Sapir, J. David. 1969. “Diola-Fogny Funeral
on the Art and Science of History. New Songs and the Native Critic.” African
York: Fordham University Press. Language Review 8: 176–91.
234 References
Saussure, Ferdinand de. 1966 [1916]. Course in ———, and Thomas Luckmann. 1973. The
General Linguistics. Translated by Wade Structures of the Life-World. Chicago:
Baskin. New York: McGraw-Hill. Northwestern University Press.
Sawa, George. 1981. “The Survival of Some Scott, Derek B., ed. 2000. Music, Culture, and
Aspects of Medieval Arabic Performance Society: A Reader. New York: Oxford
Practice.” Ethnomusicology 25(1): 73–86. University Press.
Schaeffner, André. 1956. “Ethnologie musicale Seeger, Anthony. 1987a. “Do We Need to Remodel
ou musicologie comparée.” In Les Colloques Ethnomusicology?” Ethnomusicology 31(3):
de Wégimont, ed. Paul Collaer. Brussels: 491–95.
Elsevier, 29–30. ———. 1987b. Why Suyá Sing: A Musical
Schafer, Robert J., and David H. Bennett. 1980. Anthropology of an Amazonian People.
A Guide to Historical Method. 3rd ed. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge
Homewood, Ill.: Dorsey Press. University Press.
Schechner, Richard. 1985. Between Theater and ———. 1993. “When Music Makes History.” In
Anthropology. Philadelphia: University of Ethnomusicology and Modern Music
Pennsylvania Press. History, eds. Stephen Blum, Philip V.
———. 1988. Performance Theory. New York: Bohlman, and Daniel Neuman. Urbana:
Routledge. University of Illinois Press, 23–34.
Schenker, Heinrich. 1945. Challenge to Musical Seeger, Charles. 1962. “Music as a Tradition of
Tradition: A New Concept of Tonality. Communication, Discipline, and Play.”
Edited by Adele T. Katz. New York: Knopf. Ethnomusicology 6(3): 156–63.
———. 1977. Readings in Schenker Analysis ———. 1977. Studies in Musicology 1935–1975.
and Other Approaches. Edited by Maury Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of
Yeston. New Haven: Yale University Press. California Press.
Scheub, Harold. 1970. “The Technique of the Shelemay, Kay Kaufman. 1980. “‘Historical
Expansible Image in Xhosa Ntsomi Perfor- Ethnomusicology’: Reconstructing Falasha
mances.” Research in African Literatures Liturgical History.” Ethnomusicology 24(2):
1(2): 119–46. 233–58.
Schieffelin, Edward L. 1985. “Performance and ———. 1998. Let Jasmine Rain Down: Song and
the Cultural Construction of Reality.” Remembrance among Syrian Jews. Chicago:
American Ethnologist 12: 707–24. University of Chicago Press.
Schippers, Mimi. 2002. Rockin’ out of the Box: Shen, Yeshayahu. 1992. “Cognitive Aspects of
Gender Maneuvering in Alternative Hard Metaphor Comprehension: An Introdu-
Rock. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers ction.” Poetics Today 13(4): 567–74.
University Press. Shepherd, John. 1989. “Music and Male
Schmidt, Cynthia. 1998. “Kru Mariners and Hegemony.” In Music and Society: The
Migrants of the West African Coast.” In Politics of Composition, Performance and
Garland Encyclopedia of World Music: Reception,” eds. Richard Leppert and
Africa, ed. Ruth M. Stone. New York: Susan McClary. Cambridge: Cambridge
Garland, 2–6. University Press, 151–72.
Schneider, Albrecht. 1991. “Psychological Shepherd, John, Phil Verder, Graham Vulliamy,
Theory and Comparative Musicology.” In and Trevor Wishart. 1977. Whose Music? A
Comparative Musicology and Anthropology Sociology of Musical Languages. London:
of Music, eds. Bruno Nettl and Philip V. Latimer New Dimensions.
Bohlman. Chicago: University of Chicago Shepherd, John, and Peter Wicke. 1997. Music
Press, 293–317. and Cultural Theory. Cambridge: Polity
Schutz, Alfred. 1932. Der sinnhafte Aufbau Press.
der sozialen Welt; Eine Einleitung die Shiloah, Amnon, and Erik Cohen. 1983. The
Verstehende Soziologie. Vienna: J. Springer, Dynamics of Change in Jewish Oriental
1932. Ethnic Music in Israel. Middletown,
———. 1971a. “Making Music Together: A Conn.: Society for Ethnomusicology.
Study in Social Relationship.” In Collected Singer, Milton. 1955. “The Cultural Pattern of
Papers II: Studies in Social Theory. The India.” The Far Eastern Quarterly 15: 23–26.
Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 159–78. Skarda, Christine A. 1989. “Alfred Schutz’s
———. 1971b. “Mozart and the Philosophers.” In Phenomenology of Music.” In Under-
Collected Papers II: Studies in Social Theory, standing the Musical Experience, ed.
edited and introduction by Arvid Broderson. Joseph Smith. New York: Gordon and
The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 179–200. Breach, 43–100.
———. 1976. “Fragments on the Phenomenology Slobin, Mark. 1992. “Micromusics of the West:
of Music.” In In Search of Musical Method, A Comparative Approach.” Ethno-
ed. F. Kersten. London: Gordon and Breach. musicology 36(1): 1–87.
References 235
Soedarsono. 1969. “Classical Javanese Dance: Tarasti, Eero. 2002. Signs of Music: A Guide to
History and Characterization.” Ethno- Musical Semiotics. Hawthorne, N.Y.:
musicology 13(3): 498–506. Mouton de Gruyter.
Solomon, Maynard. 1974. Marxism and Art: Tunstall, Patricia. 1979. “Structuralism and
Essays Classic and Contemporary. New Musicology: An Overview.” Current
York: Knopf. Musicology 27: 51–64.
Spivak, Gayatri C. 1988. In Other Words: Essays Turino, Thomas. 1999. “Signs of Imagination,
in Cultural Politics. New York and London: Identity, and Experience: A Peircian
Routledge. Semiotic Theory for Music.” Ethnomusic-
Stevenson, Robert. 1973. “Written Sources for ology 43(2): 221–255.
Indian Music until 1882.” Ethnomusicology Turner, Jonathan H., and Alexandra Maryanski.
17(1): 1–40. 1979. Functionalism. Menlo Park, Calif.:
Stokes, Martin. 1992. The Arabesk Debate: Benjamin Cummings.
Music and Musicians in Modern Turkey. Turner, Victor. 1967. The Forest of Symbols:
Oxford: Oxford University Press. Aspects of Ndembu Ritual. Ithaca, N.Y.:
———, ed. 1994. Ethnicity, Identity and Music: Cornell University Press.
The Musical Construction of Place. Oxford: ———. 1986. The Anthropology of Perfor-
Berg. mance. New York: PAJ Publications.
Stone, Ruth M. 1982. Let the Inside Be Sweet: ———. 1990. “Are There Universals of Per-
The Interpretation of Music Event among formance in Myth, Ritual, and Drama?” In
the Kpelle of Liberia. Bloomington: Indiana By Means of Performance: Intercultural
University Press. Studies of Theatre and Ritual, eds. Richard
———. 1988. Dried Millet Breaking: Time, Schechner and Willa Appel. Cambridge:
Words, and Song in the Woi Epic of the Cambridge University Press, 8–18.
Kpelle. Bloomington: Indiana University Tyson, Lois. 1999. Critical Theory Today. New
Press. York: Garland.
———, and Verlon L. Stone. 1981. “Event, Vansina, Jan. 1985. Oral Tradition as History.
Feedback, and Analysis: Research Media Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
in the Study of Music Events.” Ethnomus- ———. 1990. Paths in the Rainforest: Toward a
icology 25(2): 215–25. History of Political Tradition in Equatorial
Strauss, Anselm L., and Juliet M. Corbin. 1990. Africa. Madison: University of Wisconsin
Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Press.
Theory Procedures and Techniques. Wachsmann, Klaus P., ed. 1971. Essays on
Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage. Music and History in Africa. Evanston, Ill.:
Stumpf, Carl. 1886a. “Lieder der Bellakula- Northwestern University Press.
Indianer.” Viertelsjahrsschrift für Musik- Wade, Bonnie. 1998. Imaging Sound: An
wissenschaft 2: 405–26. Ethnomusicological Study of Music, Art,
———. 1886b. “Review of Alexander J. Ellis, and Culture in Mughal India. Chicago:
‘On the Scales of Various Nations.’” University of Chicago Press.
Vierteljahrsschrift für Musikwissenschaft Waterman, Christopher. 1990. Jùjú: A Social
2: 511–24. History and Ethnography of an African
———. 1911. Die Anfänge der Musik. Leipzig: J. Popular Music. Chicago: University of
A. Barth. Chicago Press.
Sturtevant, William C. 1968. “Studies in Williams, Linda Faye. 1995. “The Impct of African-
Ethnoscience.” In Theory in Anthropology: American Music on Jazz in Zimbabwe:
A Sourcebook, eds. Robert A. Manners An Exploration in Radical Empiricism.”
and David Kaplan. New York: Aldine, Ph.D. Dissertation, Indiana University.
475–500. Wong, Deborah. 2001. Sounding the Center:
Suchoff, Benjamin, ed. 1997. Béla Bartók History and Aesthetics in Thai Buddhist
Studies in Ethnomusicology. Lincoln and Performance. Chicago: University of
London: University of Nebraska Press. Chicago Press.
Sugarman, Jane C. 1997. Engendering Song: ———. 2004. Speak It Louder: Asian Americans
Singing and Subjectivity at Prespa Albanian Making Music. New York: Routledge.
Weddings. Chicago: University of Chicago Worth, Sol. “The Development of a Semiotic of
Press. Film.” Semiotica 1: 282–321.
Sutton, R. Anderson. 1989. “Identity and Zemp, Hugo. 1978–1979. ‘“Aré ‘aré Classifica-
Individuality in an Ensemble Tradition. tion of Musical Types and Instruments.”
The Female Vocalist in Java.” In Women Ethnomusicology 22(1): 37–67; 23(1): 5–48.
and Music in Cross-Cultural Perspective, Zuckerkandl, Victor. 1956. Sound and Symbol:
ed. Ellen Koskoff. Urbana: University of Music and the External World. London:
Illinois Press, 111–30. Routledge and Kegan Paul.