Discussion groups

Then to the term "world music", and my reasons for calling it useless. I assume you  are refering to this statement "Then what's world music? That's question even tougher to answer. To be frank, we don't really know. The music industry often uses this term for music not fitting under their labels. So one answer to the question might be, anything that sounds    exotic. In other words, the term is useless." at he first page. Am I right?

I guess meaningless (without actual meaning) had been a better word.

I haven't spent much time looking for a definition of the term, but most times I have seen it, it is used as a "label" for music, nothing else.

My first point is this. Do we really need these labels? From my point of view there are only two kinds of music, good music, and bad music. This leads into a completely different debate. What's good music? Let us leave it there for the moment.

Back to the definition. I have my own private or personal definition. If somebody asked me, I would probably answer with something like this: Good world music is global music (music with the power to communicate across cultural and ethnic borders), rooted in ethnic music or folk music.

But this is my own private definition, and this leads me to my second point. For many other people the term has an other meaning. And somebody uses the word only as an empty phrase they don't mean anything at all. The industry often uses it mainly because of lack of other terms. They refer to a global, tasteless and rootless soup. The ingredienses are mainly a pile of ethnic clichés, added with no other purpose than to sell records (make money). Other words and terms in the language have a relativ precise meaning. If I say car, you imagine the same thing as I do, more or less. The same thing with dog (if you're not afraid of dogs). This is not the case with world music. That's why I call it useless.

Just to make this even messier. There are other terms in use, describing the same phenomena. World fusion and crossover music. I'm still talking about my personal definitions. The term "world fusion" is more or less self explanatorying. It is a fusion of different music elements, some of them from ethnic music and some from jazz, rock and other styles. To separate world fusion from world music is more or less impossibel. The third term is crossover music. In my mind crossover music closer to the ethnic origins/roots. Crossover is not a genre or style. It is a musical meeting, across different cultures and nations. Real crossover is not "translated" to common musical platform.

I must also admit. Another reason for expressing myself in such a provocative way is just an urge to provoke. I (and we) want a debate on these topics. Hope this is the first start at an interesting debate, with many contributors.
By Tim Øsleby, co-founder of EthnoBass

PS: have you seen David Byrnes essay "I hate world music"? 

To answer your first question, I will try to give a bit of background about myself.  As stated, I am pursuing a Master's degree in International Affairs at DePaul University in Chicago.  My arrival at world music for a topic is actually quite interesting.  Upon starting my coursework, I originally planned to follow the path of discussing a topic dealing with politics or international law.  I had originally been interested in Franco-Algerian relations/immigration policy, etc.  Out of the blue, one of my professors gave me an article entitled "Arab Noise and Ramadan Nights: Rap, Rai, and Franco-Maghrebi identities" (Gross, Swedenburg, McMurray---1994).  It peaked my interest in rai music and its impact as a social, political, and even economic way of protest or "sepaking out".

There began the journey.  As my advisor and I continued to develop my project, it became increasingly clear that I needed to understand the phrase "world music" first before being able to generate a solid argument about rai's social influence.

Sooooo.....part of what I have been attempting over the past several months (and it has been quite difficult) has been to try and prepare a geneaology of the "discourse" of world music.  What does it mean to certain people in certain decades?  How does the phrase "world music" evolve over time?  What is the discourse behind it and through what discursive formations is "world music" constructed?

As I continue to immerse myself in literature, I tend to find the "world music" serves as a marketing tool to exploit musicians that don't really have a say in the "big, Western run" music industry.  But I also see other discourses that construct world music.  There is always academia---they tend to argue and debate over ethnomusicology versus world music.  Marketing, of course, is huge.  World music sells!  Sales are up nearly every year.  But who benefits from the sales?  The original artists?  Or the big music companies?

There's also something to discuss about all of the other terms for world music----fusion, ethnobeat, world beat....what do all of these have in common?  Why are they different?

Perhaps I digress.....perhaps I ask too much in one message.  I am thrilled that you contacted me and hope that you post the debate.  I would love to take part in a debate of this nature.....I have much to learn from your expertise and from those out there in the field and interested in world music.

Thank you so much!  I look forward to hearing from you and starting a fascinating dialogue.

Stephen

The EthnoBass staff.