Nettl, Brono. 1998. “Arrows and Circles: An Anniversary Talk about Fifty Years of ICTM and the Study of Traditional Music.” Yearbook for Traditional Music 30: 1-11.

“歷史的變化與循環：關于ICTM的五十年和音樂研究傳統——在ICTM五十周年紀念上的講話”

主講：陳晨  專業：傳統音樂

一、引言

學術研究者總是反思的兩個問題：“What have we learned?”更徹底"Have we really learned anything in all that time?"

本文題目的來源：A book by Stephen Jay Gould, Time's Arrow, Time's Cycle

詳解：歷史是一種自我重復的過程，從學科的歷史是由一系列范式構成的。

本文的內容與目的是通過回顧歷史，解釋民族音樂學學科在哪些方面經歷歷史的循環、重復與重新發現，統一的保持，在哪些方面跟隨著歷史的改變，從而引發反思。

二、似曾相識

v     今昔不同的社會政治大環境

v     今昔不同的學科大環境

三、作者自我小傳

作者的三個親身經歷，揭示 1947年前后民族音樂學學科的現象。

™    Prague-Walter Kaufmann-Indian music

™    Prague-Father-78-rpm records and later discography

™    Bloomington-Herzog-"Folk and Primitive Music."

總結民族音樂學在1947年后的50年，發展的基線 P3/4：

™    study of non-Western and folk music – the study of the exotic which requires special methods

™    the attachment of non - Western music to the Western for suggesting a skewed  chronology 年表 of world music

™    the unification of an eclectic methodology

v     提問并引出下文 P3/5 ：

™    我們在過去的五十年中學到了什么，我們是在循環還是在進步？

™    引出下文段落a) What is ethnomusicology? b) What is music? c) What is a music - or rather, what is our conception of the world of music? d) What kind of people are we? and finally, e) Have we done anyone any good? Needless to say, I have no answers but want to comment briefly and selectively from the viewpoints of circle and arrow.

四、什么是民族音樂學？

循環一 ：對于學科Ethnomusicology的定義  P3/6-P4/1

™    Merriam: "Ethnomusicology today is an area study caught up in a fascination with itself." 1964

™    ethnomusicologists -- not numerous the number of definition and conceptualization -- very considerable.

™    “ethno” and “compare” – long discussion

循環二：學科內關注問題的一致性 P4/2

™    Peasant societies:

™    Education:

™    Music and ethnicity:

™    Technology:

™    Relationship of music and dance:

™    on folk and art music;

作者對于學科的將來提出問題：P5/1

™    …現在是否已是時間考慮我們的學科聯盟是幫助了我們的學科，抑或是阻礙了它？

五、什么是音樂？

由民族音樂學家觀念中的兩分法，引出Folk Music的定義問題。

Folk music 定義1955：P5/3-5：民間音樂是一種音樂傳統的產品，這一產品是在口頭傳播的過程中演進而來的。民間音樂必須包含的因素有：聯系著現在和過去的連續性、因為個人或者群體自發的創造沖動而不斷變化、有社群決定他的它的生存的形式。例如，未受藝術音樂或流行音樂影響的社群的原生音樂；或者，由個人創作的音樂，但被社群采納并通過口傳流傳。創作的流行音樂不包括在內，因為它在社群中不發生變化，民間音樂的核心特點是在流傳的過程中不斷地被重置和再創造。

通過舉例貝多芬的民歌改編，質疑三種folk music觀點，引發反思。

六，什么是一種音樂？

循環：音樂的世界是由一系列不同劃分的音樂組成的這一觀點沒有改變。

矛盾體：保存——變化的民間音樂

問題：對于音樂的劃分，我們需要新的理論嗎?

七、我們是怎樣的一群人？

變化：學術和實踐分家

變化：舞蹈方面逐漸削弱

問題：保持純學術，亦或重返Bloomington當年？（當年歌舞并用的場面）

八、我們是否作出了貢獻？

對于世界的好處：使世界對音樂的多樣性以及音樂與舞蹈在民族人中扮演的角色更有了解。

對于學界的好處：提高了師生對于世界范圍內音樂多樣性的認知，而這些多樣的音樂是需要多樣的適合的方法去理解的

對于局內人的有爭議的好處：我們的研究是否真的對于局內人有幫助？但至少我們比前人能夠正視這個問題了。

九、小結

  本文是發表在ICTM五十周年慶上的主體演講，正如作者所說，整篇文章并不是要回答問題，而是提出文體引發思考，對于民族音樂學的反思、對于民族音樂學方法論的反思、對于民族音樂學家本身角色的反思、以及對于學科的研究對象、50年來學界貢獻的反思。

曹老師的點評：

這篇文章應該與前面課堂上已經討論過的Christensen、Nettl（1988）的文章互相對照來看。

Structure of the Article

Introduction

The Field: What is ethnomusicology? [Definition of ethnomusicology]

Object of Study: What is music?

Unit of the object under study: What is “a” music?

Us the researchers: What kind of people are we?

Conclusion: Have we done anybody any good?

以下是曹老師希望同學在文章中注意的地方：

Introduction

p. 1

It's an honor for me to have been invited to speak on this occasion of the golden anniversary of the ICTM.

If we are an organization of people devoted to scholarship and research, looking back to the time of our origins, we should be asking, “What have we learned?” or with a bit more bite, “Have we really learned anything in all that time?” A book by Stephen Jay Gould, Time’s Arrow, Time’s Cycle (1987), suggested my title to me. It juxtaposes the resigned-sounding adage, “history repeats itself”….

So I want to ask to what extent we in ethnomusicology have been following the circle of history, repeating and rediscovering, maintaining consistency, and to what extent we have followed history’s arrow. I’d like to draw you back to the era or period of history about 50 years ago, and more, so that we can see in what ways our organization and our profession have moved forward【“arrow”】, and in what ways our history has been cyclic.

p. 1 – 2

In 1987, our fortieth anniversary, several spoke about the history of ICTM, its relationship to the field of ethnomusicology as a whole, the interface between European and American styles of scholarship, our institutional history (see e.g. Christensen 1988, Nettl 1988, Stockmann 1988)【前兩篇文章在課堂上已討論過】… there are various histories of the field that ascribe its onset to Guido Adler's (1885) seminal article, to the earliest field recordings of 1891, to the publication of the Sammelbande fiir vergleichende Musikwissenschaft in 1922, to Jaap Kunst's first edition (Kunst 1950), to the establishment of the Society for Ethnomusicology in 1955, or even 【注意 “or even” 這個用詞（“就算連”）】to the publication of The Anthropology of Music (Merriam 1964).【作者的意思：“‘甚至連’Merriam的The Anthropology of Music也算在歷史時刻之內”——給人的感覺似乎有作者與Merriam有舊賬未清之感】… origins are always obscure. In any event, when IFMC was founded in 1947, the term “ethnomusicology” wasn’t yet established, and when it was, perhaps a few years later, many of our members really wouldn’t have felt comfortable with such a highfalutin word.

p. 3

For my third incident I mention taking a course in 1949 at Indiana University in Bloomington taught by George Herzog, a man also reared not far from here, in Budapest…Herzog brought into this course the eclectic approach that characterized his work and also that of many in our field: the analytic folk music study of Bartok and Kodaly with their emphasis on authenticity; the analytical paradigms developed by Hornbostel; the holistic view of culture characteristic of the American anthropology of Franz Boas; the folkloristics of the Scandinavian school and its historical-geographic method, and pre-C