Critical Review #7: Shelemay 2001

Shelemay's essay claimed to focus on the potential benefits and problems of doing ethnomusicologies of "Western music" through her ethnography (with associates) of Early Music in Boston. However, it most of the essay contained an ethnography of those groups as a whole. Still, she did include this information at the end. Benefits of a study on "Western music" include the fact that it can help readers (and researchers) "'re-envision' the past differently" (23), that they help music historians, that some (many?) ethical concerns are irrelevant, and that such ethnographies are extremely reflexive. On the other hand, the main problem with this project is that there is often no distinct line between ethnographer and research associate, especially if one is doing "ethnomusicology at home," and fieldwork activities become difficult to separate from everyday life. For example, an interview can "lapse" into a conversation or debate, and vice-versa. Additionally, it can be difficult to maintain ethnographic neutrality because research associates may ask for, expect, or even demand criticism from the ethnomusicologist whom they perceive as an expert. Difficulties associated with more traditional ethnographies also apply to ethnographies of "Western music," such as the difficulty of drawing boundaries, and the balance of social, cultural, and musical issues.

Discussion Question: One page 23, Shelemay writes, "For ethnomusicologists, ethnographies of "Western music" provide a lively field in which power relations are largely symmetrical, putting to rest ethical issues of longstanding concern." Do you agree? In what ways are ethnographies of "Western music" more or less ethical than ethnographies of "world music"?