User:BudjarnLambeth/Cultural appropriation-o-meter: Difference between revisions

{{Editable user page|You are free to add temperaments or other terms and place them where you think they should go. You are also free to move temperaments currently on the list into a different category if you think their current category is incorrect according to the criteria of this page.}}

 

 

;This is not a proper wiki page. It is NOT FACTUAL unlike the rest of the wiki, it is ONLY OPINION.

;You are encouraged to form your own opinions on this nuanced issue.

<br> <br>

This page aims to rate the [[Temperament naming|names]] of [[temperament]]s and other concepts in modern [[tuning]] theory based on where they fall on the spectrum of respectful inter-[[:Category:Traditions|cultural]] collaboration, to disrespectful cultural appropriation.

<br> <br> <br> <br>

;(Disclaimer!) This page is:

A temptation is to be so scared of cultural appropriation that you either never take inspiration from other cultures at all, or you do take inspiration, but try to pretend like you didn't to avoid getting in trouble.

 

It's sad to let this fear break down the open sharing of ideas between cultures. Cultures, musical and in general, have always cross pollinated and that's how most of the best concepts in music came to be in the first place.

 

Do keep being curious about their traditions!

And do keep giving them credit when they inspire your work!

Taking ideas from other cultures, then pretending that they're your own, is just as bad as claiming you represent a tradition when you don't.

''Do'' give credit. Just do it in a way where you say (1) "I took inspiration from x to make this tuning", instead of saying (2) "I found this tuning that is the same thing as x". The first of those is awesome and should be encouraged. The second is the one that will upset people.

You should NOT claim the temperament is completely original and has nothing to do with Otterpop, and name it something unrelated like "the beaver dam temperament".

You should also NOT call your temperament the "clam rock temperament", because that implies that it's the exact same as the traditional scale, which it is not. It's an approximation. You can't emulate all the [[Empirical tuning|nuances]] of clam rock music because you didn't train in that musical culture for decades.

What you SHOULD do is call your temperament something '''distinct ''and'' related'''. For example: "the near-clamrock temperament", "the almost-clamrock temperament" or "the clamrocklike temperament".

Not only is it stealing the respect afforded to the storied tradition you're claiming relationship to, it is also eroding the respect that people then pay to that culture's music theory. The more people who make unrelated bootleg copies of [[slendro]] scale or [[maqam]] bayati, the less seriously the public and scholars will take the actual, real slendro scale and maqam bayati, which is extremely unfair.

* '''5 stars''' = Respectful name that encourages people to check out the tradition which inspired it, without claiming to be identical to that tradition

* '''4 stars''' = Respectful name with slight flaws, which encourages people to check out the tradition which inspired it, without claiming to be identical to that tradition

* '''3 stars''' = Name with substantial flaws, but substantial good points as well

* '''2 stars''' = Name that seriously risks misrepresenting a tradition or falsely claiming credit for that tradition, or risks stealing from a tradition without giving credit

* '''1 stars''' = Name that misrepresents a tradition or falsely claims credit for that tradition, or which steals from a tradition without giving credit

==== Slendric ====

[[Slendric]]: the 5&36 temperament which has a sum total of absolutely nothing in common with real slendro scales.  

But none of that even matters because we're not talking about 9&17 bleu, we're talking about 5&36 slendric. Which has absolutely nothing to do with slendro at all. So referencing slendro in its name in any way is claiming false legitimacy and is blatant cultural appropriation.

I like "wonder" because 5&36 has remarkably low badness in its subgroup, just like how "[[magic]]" and "[[miracle]]" do in theirs. It's a nice descriptive name. So much better than "slendric".

I'm glad "gamelic" never caught on.

Luckily, this interval has two other names, “large septimal diesis” and “semaphore comma”, which are both wonderful, descriptive names. So we can just use those and pretend like “slendro diesis” never happened.

==== Biyatismic ====

[[Biyatismic]] temperament is inspired by maqam bayati, so it is good that it references that in the name. What's not good is that the name makes it sound like it is the exact same thing as maqam bayati. The name makes it sound like the temperament generates the original, traditional maqam bayati. Which is not the case.

 

Biyatismic temperament would score 5 stars instead of 1 if it were named something like:

Anything like that to communicate "this is not the same thing as maqam biyati, but it was inspired by maqam biyati".

[[Maqamic]] temperament was a deliberate attempt to approximate maqam music with a [[regular temperament]]. So it is fair for the name to reference that.  

What the name fails to do however, is to communicate that it is not actually maqam music itself, it is only a heavily stripped down, rough, approximation of it to make it easier to combine with Western techniques.

It is not fair for this temperament to call itself maqamic, because it doesn't actually generate maqamat. It generates a new, simpler, different thing based on maqamat. Not actually maqamat.

* Maqam-like temperament

Any of those would get 5 stars. But "maqamic" is a trainwreck.

==== Neutrominant ====

"Maqamic" has been renamed to "[[neutrominant]]". While that's an improvement, I actually dislike "neutrominant" almost as much.

Neutrominant was directly inspired by Arabic scales. Its explicit goal is to approximate them within an [[RTT]] framework. So the fact that its name includes no reference to Arabic music at all feels wrong. It's effectively stealing from Arabic music theory and claiming it as its own without giving credit.

A better name might be "zaeimmuhayid temperament", Arabic for "neutral leader" (kinda close to "neutral dominant", "neutrominant").  

That gives credit to the original source of the theory, but without claiming to be an exact replica of the theory.

==== Rastmic ====

[[Rastmic]] temperament is inspired by maqam rast, so it is good that it references that in the name. What's not good is that the name makes it sound like it is the exact same thing as maqam rast. The name makes it sound like the temperament generates the original, traditional maqam rast. Which is not the case.

* near-rast temperament

Anything like that to communicate "this is not the same thing as maqam rast, but it was inspired by maqam rast".

[[Srutal]] temperament and its [[Diaschismic family|siblings]] are quite close to the [[Indian]] shruti system, so it is good that they give credit to that inspiration in the title.

These names imply the tunings are identical to traditional Indian shruti. Which they are not. They are inspired by shruti and close to shruti, but they are not the ''same'' as shruti.

These temperaments should be named stuff like "shrutilike", "shrutiproximate", "nearshruti", etc. If they were, they'd get a passing grade. As they are, they're about as bad as names can get.

The name [[gamelismic]] is a bit unsuitable, because the temperament doesn’t really have anything to do with Indonesian gamelan. However, “gamelismic” is at least different enough from the word “gamelan” that it’s unlikely to confuse the two, and as a result “gamelismic” is unlikely to muddy the perception or reputation of the gamelan tradition in any way.

So, while slightly dumb, the name is harmless enough and gets a pass.

The name “[[mabila]]” is not different enough from "mavila" to make it obvious that they're not the same thing.

As this tuning is further removed from actual [[African|Chopi]] tuning practices, there is more need for it to distinguish itself.

It's harmless though, just kind of underwhelming.

I don't love this name, because it kind of implies that the modern tuning is directly inspired by the ancient Indian sages, which seems like a pretty arrogant implication for a name to have.

[[Slendrismic]] temperament is not actually named after slendro, it is named after the fact it has a slender generator. The name is similar enough to slendro that there is a tad possibility for confusion, so I can’t give too many stars, but really it probably is different enough that it’s fine. I don’t think anyone is likely to mix up “slendro” and “slendrismic”. So, it gets a high pass.

==== Avila ====

[[Avila]] is related to [[mavila]] temperament, which itself is directly inspired by actual music from Mavila, Mozambique, so there is legitimacy to this claimed relationship and it's good the name gives credit for that.

The name could do a better job of making it clearer than this is not the original mavila tuning. "Avila temperament" does a good enough job of this to get a good star rating, but something that more overtly states that it's not real mavila, like "mavilesque temperament" or "almovila temperament" would push it up to 5 stars.

The inventor of the [[Kartvelian scale]] wrote a lot of dodgy stuff, claiming that his tuning was the exact same one that is actually used in [[Georgian|Georgia]], erasing all the nuances of how Georgian music is actually tuned. If I was rating based on all that, this entry would get 1 star.

However, I am rating only the name of the scale itself, not anything else the creator has said. And the name itself is pretty great! It’s named after the main language family in and around Georgia. I think that’s a great way to give credit to the source of inspiration, without claiming to be the same thing as it.

Closely based on [[mohajira]] temperament, [[migration]] maybe doesn't give quite ''enough'' credit to the original Arabic inspiration of the tuning.

Its name is the English translation of mohajira's name, so it does still give credit indirectly by doing that, so that's why it's still rated so highly. That, combined with the fact that it is further removed from the practice of Arabic music than mohajira, so it's okay for it to give credit less directly.

Still, a little bit more direct credit would be nice, and would push migration up to 5 stars. But it's still good enough.

[[Mavila]] is not directly named after a traditional Chopi tuning, but is instead named after a village where that tuning was used.  

What would have been ''bad'' is if the traditional 7 tone scale itself was called the "mavila scale", then it would have been bad to copy that exact name. But since Mavila was only the name of a village, not the name of the traditional scale, it's completely fine.

 

What would have also been bad is to call the temperament "Chopi", because then you're claiming affiliation with that entire culture, which would be appropriation.

It's kind of the equivalent of being inspired by a tuning you hear in New Delhi, and creating a temperament called "New Delhi". That's a good name, because you're not stealing the name of a theory concept like a specific sruti, but you are still giving credit to the source of inspiration.  

(This is actually also kind of a timeless way to name scales and tunings throughout history: phrygian, dorian, etc. are all named after geographical places, so are many of the maqams.)

Important to mention, too, Mavila is actually very very close to the Chopi tuning and is directly inspired by it, so it is very much right for it to have a name related to that. It's not just had the name tacked onto it, it really merits the name.

[[Mohajira]] temperament is inspired by maqamat, but is not the same as them, so it is absolutely perfect that it used an ordinary Arabic word for its name - muhājirah, meaning, roughly, "migrating".

=== Unable to rate ===

==== Injera ====

I was a bit confused reading [[injera]]'s entry in [[temperament naming]]. It said [[26edo]] represents an [[African|Ethiopian]] flatbread well, and I'm very confused trying to figure out how 26edo can represent a physical piece of bread. I feel like I'm missing something.