SEM Write-Up

I was interested in the article Ethnomusicology, Its Problems and Methods by Mieczyslaw Kolinski from May 1957. In many ways, I was surprised by the extent of the author’s dedication to maintaining an unbiased view as an Ethnomusicologist, as I expected less because of the date of the article. He criticizes the work of Erich von Hornbostel for concluding that certain forms of world music were inferior to European music. He notes some flaws of comparative musicology, which focuses mainly on how music from different cultures differs rather than finding common threads among cultures other than among those that are ethnically closely related. While his criticisms and suggestions of open-mindedness are progressive and reflect the values and morals of unbiased Ethnomusicology, there are several points in the article that fail to convey this message or need more work.

Kolinski describes how Hornbostel saw non-European music as inferior to European music because the former had descending melodic trends and the latter had ascending melodic trends. Kolinski devalues this claim by describing examples of countries, both European and non-European, in which an average was taken of the actual degrees that music ascends and descends in music. His conclusion was that European music actually descends with similar degrees to non-European music. However, Kolinski fails to recognize that the actual idea that ascending melodic pattern is superior to descending is a bias itself and is only valued in certain cultures and contexts. By proving that European and non-European music have degrees that ascend and descend similarly, he is indirectly acknowledging that ascending patterns are, in fact, superior because he is not refuting or contextualizing this idea. Also, it seems unrealistic and biased to categorize all music into European and non-European music, especially since both Europe and everything outside of Europe are made up of many different countries and cultures. In his proof of degrees, Kolinski gives examples of some European and some non-European countries, but, especially concerning non-European countries, there are so many different cultures out there that it would be extremely bias to assume that a small representation of countries could represent the entire rest of the world. What about how the music of those countries compares to or differs from each other? I don’t believe one can classify an entire region made up of countless cultures as having one kind of music or another.

Kolinski attempts to criticize another of Hornbostel’s biased ideas relating to the supposedly inferior intervals used in “Negro” and “Indian” songs. Again, Kolinski acknowledges that this is bias, but tries to refute this idea not by stating that Hornbostel’s opinions are influenced by his own cultural ideals, but by claiming that the intervals Hornbostel described are not actually those used in “Negro” and “Indian” songs. Also, while Kolinski describes different intervals used in these songs, he fails to give examples and his arguments indicate that all “Negro” and “Indian” songs use these intervals, which, without extensive evidence, would be an audacious assumption.

To Kolinski’s credit, he does provide a reflection on his own work at the end, but it would have been helpful to see more of this throughout the paper. Generally, he fails to provide any evidence for his claims or give us any background details on where he is getting his information. I have drawn the assumption that he is of similar cultural background to his critiqued Hornbostel because instead of explaining why Hornbostel might have certain ideas about inferiority and superiority and why it is important to recognize his work as biased, Kolinski simply tries to disprove Hornbostel’s theories. Overall, I was impressed with Kolinski’s general attitude of assigning equal value to the music of all cultures, but he would still have much work to do in order to remain unbiased.