SEM History Post

The first few issues of Ethno-musicology are called newsletters, not journals as they are today. Numbers 1-5 (December 1953 to September 1955), the first five issues, are unsurprisingly very different in both layout and content from their 2006 counterparts. A representative issue of the early “newsletter” style issues is Newsletter No. 5, from September 1955. Most notably, some sections are primarily concerned with the identity and definition of ethnomusicology—several ideas are included in this issue—and its relationship with anthropology and musicology.

The introduction announces a meeting in Boston where the goal will be to form an ethno-musicological society at the 54th Annual Meeting of the American Anthropological Association. From this, it can be inferred that an “official” separation from anthropology has not yet occurred, but enough people have realized how significant the differences are that they are clamoring for a separate society.

The Notes and News section mostly contains paragraphs describing the work of various ethnomusicologists. Notably, some paragraphs are in foreign languages: two are in French and one is in German. Also, Mr. John Blacking, “an internationally known British anthropologist and musicologist” (2) admits in his paragraph that his work is more musicological than ethnomusicological, though this did not prevent the editor from printing the letter despite the fact that far more letters were received than were reprinted, as seen from the “Letters also received from” section at the end of the Notes and News.

A letter from Henrietta Yurchenco, who wrote from Rome, shows exactly how “new” of a field that ethnomusicology is. She is happy to read that people are trying to “remove ethnomusicological research from its isolation and take its place in the study of culture as a whole” (6), and that people are trying to make it more comprehensive and inclusive. She writes that investigating “music as an emotional expression” must go beyond musicology, beyond just collecting, classifying, and analyzing music from a technical point of view. She states, in accordance with modern ethnomusicological theory, that though field recordings are indispensible, the ethnomusicologist needs to fill in the blanks and also be an excellent observer of human beings.

The Recordings section lists a set of records about theories of different types of music, such as “Indian Music Theory and Acoustics.” Notably, all are musicological: none address the relationship between music and culture. Also, a reprinting, in French, of the Musée de l’Homme ethnic music catalog is included.

The Exchange section makes its final appearance in Vol. 1 No. 11 (Sept. 1957). It is basically a forum for the community: some offer recordings for exchange or purchase, such as Toshi and Peter Seeger, who are making videos of various American folk instrumental techniques. They believe that a sort of “central depository” of film similar to theirs should be made, though they write that it is for comparative studies. I found Seeger’s “second communication” amusing: “I and several others…have planned a campaign to introduce [the steel drum] and the methods of making it to U.S. teenagers with with whom, we feel, it should be very popular since it is a percussion instrument perfectly suited to many popular folk tunes[…]cheap to make, and loud!” (17) Clearly, stereotypes of American teenagers have not changed much.

Writings which today would be considered anthropology and musicology are included alongside letters that could find its way into current issues of this journal. The content of this early issue of Ethnomusicology shows just how recently the field was defined.