User:BudjarnLambeth/Cultural appropriation-o-meter
|
This user page is editable by any wiki editor.
As a general rule, most users expect their user space to be edited only by themselves, except for minor edits (e.g. maintenance), undoing obviously harmful edits such as vandalism or disruptive editing, and user talk pages. However, by including this message box, the author of this user page has indicated that this page is open to contributions from other users (e.g. content-related edits). |
- This user page is a statement of opinion, and not objective fact.
- You are encouraged to form your own opinions on this nuanced issue.
This page aims to rate the names of temperaments and other concepts in modern tuning theory based on where they fall on the spectrum of respectful inter-cultural collaboration, to disrespectful cultural appropriation.
DOs
DO give credit if you take inspiration from other cultures
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 taking inspiration from other cultures!
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.
DO differentiate your name from the original concept
Imagine there is a country called Otterpop, and they use a musical scale called the clam rock scale. Imagine you invent a temperament that approximates the clam rock scale.
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 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".
DON'Ts
If you create a temperament, scale, or anything else that is not related at all to another culture's music theory, or is only very loosely, weakly related, then don't name it after that.
This is effectively just stealing the name from that culture to give the illusion of time-honoured legitimacy to your new concept. This is like when people claim to be practicing Native American herbal medicine when they're doing nothing of the sort.
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.
DON'T claim your concept is an exact replica of the original concept
See the Otterpop example above.
Appropriation-o-meter ratings
Rating system
- 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
3 stars or above can be considered a "passing grade". 3+ star names ought to be kept in most cases.
2- star names ought to be thrown out in most cases.
1 star (fail)
Slendric
Slendric: the 5&36 temperament which has a sum total of absolutely nothing in common with real slendro scales.
R.M.A. Koesoemadinata found that the temperament most similar to slendro scales is 9&17, i.e. bleu temperament. So bleu is the only temperament that could ever get away with being called "slendric". Though even then, it would better to have a name that acknowledges being similar but different to slendro, like "slendroesque", "slendro-like", etc., or a name after a city in Sunda like "palembang", "makassar", etc.
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.
The original name for 5&36 was "wonder temperament". Can we please change it back to that? There was nothing wrong with "wonder".
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".
Gamelic
Another name for slendric temperament is "gamelic temperament". This name is equally bad for all of the same reasons. The name "gamelic" implies this temperament is identical to the ones used by gamelan orchestras. But it is not remotely the same, so this name is stealing a term from another culture to try to lend itself legitimacy at that culture's expense.
I'm glad "gamelic" never caught on.
Srutal, shrutar, sruti, shru
I'm not sure how similar or not srutal temperament and its siblings are to the Indian shruti system. If they are very similar, then they can go up to 2 stars, but they still fail.
These names imply the tunings are identical to traditional Indian shruti. Which they are not. They are inspired by shruti, they are not the same as shruti.
These temperaments should be named stuff like "shrutilike", "shrutiproximate", "nearshruti", etc. If they were, they'd be get a passing grade. As they are, they're about as bad as names can get.
2 stars (fail)
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:
- biyati-like temperament
- biyatiesque temperament
- near-biyati temperament
Anything like that to communicate "this is not the same thing as maqam biyati, but it was inspired by maqam biyati".
Maqamic
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.
A much better name would have been something like:
- Approxarabic temperament
- Nearmaqam temperament
- 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.
3 stars (pass)
Mabila
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 Chopi tuning practices, there is more need for it to distinguish itself.
It's not harmful really but it is kind of underwhelming.
Rishi
Rishi is a higher rank version of sruti temperament, which itself was based on shruti in Indian music theory. Rishi is named after the rishis, sages who are believed to have created shruti texts.
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.
Nonetheless, it's better than straight up calling it "sruti", as that would be claiming to be an exact 1 to 1 representation of Indian theory. At least "rishi" does communicate that it's not exactly the same thing, and also does give credit to the culture too.
Rishi gets a barely passing grade.
4 stars (distinction)
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 passing 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.
Migration
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.
5 stars (high distinction)
Mavila
Mavila is not directly mamed after a traditional Chopi tuning, but is instead named after a village where that tuning was used.
This is a great way to go about it, I think.
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.
But using the name of a village instead is perfect. It gives credit to the original place where you were inspired by their tuning, without claiming to be their tuning.
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
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".
Using an everyday word from the language is the perfect way to give credit to the original culture, without claiming its traditions as your own or risking confusion with them.
Definitely something more names should emulate!
Unable to rate
Injera
I was a bit confused reading injera's entry in temperament naming. It said 26edo represents an 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.