Music and culture (Part 1 of 2)

In a new two-part series, I'll explore first the cultural authenticity of music, and then the cultural transmissibility of music. The former follows below. 



On the first day of my World Music class, it was suggested that Paul Simon was a cheat and a scoundrel. He went into Africa, my professor maintained, stole the people's music, and sold it for a great deal of money (his widely successful solo album "Graceland"). 

I was horrified. I love Paul Simon. I soon dropped the class, but before I did, I got in a few good arguments with my professor. Paul Simon went to South Africa and, in many ways, collaborated with South African musicians. The record was a hit, and Paul made a lot of money, while the South Africans made significantly less. The situation is complicated given that South Africa was in the middle of apartheid and the rest of the world had a "cultural boycott" against South Africa. 


Was Paul exploitative? The album is highly African-influenced, to be sure. But, is influence exploitation? Many of the musicians on the album (notably Ladysmith Black Mambazo) went on to become internationally famous because of Paul Simon--in other words, he discovered them. 


The native music of Paul Simon, a North American, is quite different from the music of his album, "Graceland." But, as I argued in World Music class, no one owns music, and every composer is influenced by everything he or she hears. 

Oh, Claude!

Claude Debussy was supposedly very influenced by the gamelan he heard at the 1889 World Fair. Debussy took the things that struck him--the off, poly-rhythmic feel perhaps, and the use of the pentatonic scale--and integrated them with his more western ideas of music. This is exactly the process Paul Simon went through. The entire album is written by Paul (though he has some featured composers on some tracks). True, the Africans had a lot to do with it. But, clearly, so did Paul Simon, without whom there would not be a multi-million dollar album.


Could Paul Simon have made "Graceland" just the same without the South Africans? Nope. Could the South Africans have made an album like "Graceland" without Paul Simon? Nope. Paul Simon got the lion's share of the payoff for the album, and that's too bad, but it's not musically unsound. We should be influenced by other cultures' music, other ways of thinking about sound. What peeved me off about World Music class was that my professor seemed to claim that it was not only immoral of Paul Simon but that the album was bad music because of it. And that's just not the case.

Ladysmith Black Mambazo, a picture of whom
is easily available on the internet, thanks to
Mr. Paul Simon.

In 1974, twelve years before Paul Simon released "Graceland," Wayne Shorter, renowned saxophonist (who I have blogged about previously), released "Native Dancer." Shorter linked up with Brazilian musician Milton Nascimiento, who wrote half of the tracks on the album. Despite Nascimiento's important influence on the album, Shorter is credited as the leader (though he wrote less than half of the tracks). 

Clearly, as with Paul Simon's album, there is a great deal of collaboration going on. Check out Ponta de Areia, a Nascimiento composition. Shorter gives it life and breadth. The tune is a synthesis of Brazilian music and Jazz, and is truly a joint effort. Who was influenced by whom?


Interpreting and being influenced by another culture's music isn't theft (though, there may be some theft involved if the work of one performer is not monetarily recognized as may be the case with "Graceland"). It's not poor musicianship or a-musical to take what you like from another culture and integrate it into your compositions. In fact, I'd argue that it's usually quite hip and groovy.

Of course, this brings up an entirely new set of questions: Is it possible to understand the music of another culture the same way that someone from that other culture understands it? I'll tackle that one next post.