Week #4

Question 1: Why does she say that this music is not as "ancient" as it is marketed to audiences? (Just answer in one paragraph) Question 2: In a different way, why did Western scholars accuse the modern Chinese orchestra as not being "authentic" enough? What do you think of these arguments? Does authenticity exist on a continuum like identity? In other words, are there a lot of gray areas?

The author claims that Modern day Naxi music is not as "ancient" or rather "authentic" because of the purpose of the performances. "True" Naxi music was played for ritualistic occasions and entertainment for the locals. According to the author, today's Naxi music is performed to cater to tourists and to educate outsiders about the culture. On top of that, the author asserts that the music has been heavily influenced by the styles of Han music. The music has a distinct Naxi feel but the structure is unmistakably Han. Westerners do not think this is authentic because they think that authenticity is defined by ideas and culture that are unique to a certain area. In this case, the Naxi area.
Western Scholars do not think Chinese Orchestra is "authentic" because Western influences have permeated into the components of the Chinese music. I personally think that both sides have a valid arguement. However, I would have to say that authenticity is relative and cannot be a concrete label. Although it is evident that the effects of globalization have infused western thoughts, ideas and sounds into the music of the east, I believe that music can still be original with the influences of different cultures.
Who is to say what authenticity is? How do we know for sure that the music of the "ancients" were not an eclectic mix of surrounding cultures? When we are talking about authenticity, are we talking about the creative element of the music or the traditional feel? These modes of think produce very different answers. As for the term "Ancient", the word is self-explanatory. The music is old. Authentic? Maybe. It is tempting to use terms like "authenticity" "original" and "ancient" interchangably. But I think it is wrong. I think the "originality" of music is violated when the musician creates music to mimic the music of the ancients. Music is changes constantly over time and should conform to the current state of the culture. So in today's case, the world is experiencing globalization. Therefore the music should have western influences to match what is going on in today's world. Even though the music contains western elements, the music is still distinctively Chinese.

Ratna Ayu and Gamelan Bali Nyepi video comparison.

I found it interesting that music from the same culture can have very different elements given a different setting. Both pieces were performed at the same time and both are Balinese Gamelan and were performed in the same year. Yet, the pieces gave off a different feel and a different sound.
An obvious difference was the visual presentation. In the Ratna Ayu, the audience was presented with ambient lighting, dancers and props. The music seems to be the secondary element to the performance thus making it seem more like a play. The dancers and the props are the centerpiece of the performance. It seems this way because the musicians are set aside and blended into the background of the stage with the help of the stage lighting. Rather than the dancer corresponding to the music in the conventional sense, it seems that the purpose of the music is to accompany and add to the effect of the dancer's movements. This performance also included a vocal element in the music. The lyrics of the music may tell a story and add to the theme of a play instead of a pure audial performance.
The Gamelan Bali Nyepi video clip lacked all the visual elements listed above. It seems the sole purpose of the performance is to present the audience with audial stimulation. There was no vocal elements that the listeners were presented with. The only thing to see was an ensemble of musicians playing on a beach. The simplicity of the performance gave way to the musical elements instead of a full-on broadway presentation.
The second video, Gamelen Bali Nyepi, seemed more authentic to me. I was given more of a musical statement than all the flashy effects. It seems as if the Gamelan performed by the California Institute of the Arts took elements of Gamelan and added American superficiality to the presentation to please the audience. Don't get me wrong, I thought it was great. But I felt like I was watching "The King and I" on broadway when I was watching the American performance.