Valuing Whiteness: The Presumed Innocence of Musical Truth

Erin Johnson-Williams
{"title":"Valuing Whiteness: The Presumed Innocence of Musical Truth","authors":"Erin Johnson-Williams","doi":"10.52214/cm.v109i.8729","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The end of 2020 presents a crucial time to reflect on the challenges that lie ahead for decolonizing and disrupting musicology. While many have flocked to what I call here the “presumed innocence of musical truth” during the time of Covid-19, any move to disaggregate music from political realities—both the contexts within which it was first created, and those that have upheld the musical traditions that are now in place—carries the risk of perpetuating the destructive possibility that loving the canon can also be our alibi for (or, as I propose here, our “claim to innocence” about) why the discipline of musicology has been so slow to engage with antiracist and decolonial debates in a sustained way. Thinking critically about systemic racism at the end of a particularly challenging year, the time is ripe for interrogating how the institutional structures that uphold western art music are still tied to values about aesthetic truths that have yet to be decolonized. In this article I respond to critical race and Indigenous studies theorists Eve Tuck and K. Wayne Yang in their renowned 2012 article “Decolonization is not a Metaphor,” by outlining three “moves to innocence” that are prevalent in music academia, followed by a proposed “move to disruption” about musical value that contributes to an actively “decolonizing” musicology. Focusing on the themes of truth and value, I argue that the next decade holds an opportunity to engage with the ideas that might productively disrupt our discipline the most.","PeriodicalId":34202,"journal":{"name":"Current Musicology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Musicology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52214/cm.v109i.8729","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The end of 2020 presents a crucial time to reflect on the challenges that lie ahead for decolonizing and disrupting musicology. While many have flocked to what I call here the “presumed innocence of musical truth” during the time of Covid-19, any move to disaggregate music from political realities—both the contexts within which it was first created, and those that have upheld the musical traditions that are now in place—carries the risk of perpetuating the destructive possibility that loving the canon can also be our alibi for (or, as I propose here, our “claim to innocence” about) why the discipline of musicology has been so slow to engage with antiracist and decolonial debates in a sustained way. Thinking critically about systemic racism at the end of a particularly challenging year, the time is ripe for interrogating how the institutional structures that uphold western art music are still tied to values about aesthetic truths that have yet to be decolonized. In this article I respond to critical race and Indigenous studies theorists Eve Tuck and K. Wayne Yang in their renowned 2012 article “Decolonization is not a Metaphor,” by outlining three “moves to innocence” that are prevalent in music academia, followed by a proposed “move to disruption” about musical value that contributes to an actively “decolonizing” musicology. Focusing on the themes of truth and value, I argue that the next decade holds an opportunity to engage with the ideas that might productively disrupt our discipline the most.
重视白色:音乐真理的假定纯真
2020年底是反思非殖民化和颠覆音乐学未来挑战的关键时刻。尽管在新冠肺炎期间,许多人都涌向我在这里所说的“音乐真理的假定无罪”,但任何将音乐从政治现实中分离出来的举动都是在音乐最初创作的背景下进行的,以及那些维护了现有音乐传统的人,都有可能使破坏性的可能性永久存在,即热爱经典也可能是我们的不在场证明(或者,正如我在这里所提议的,我们“声称自己无罪”),为什么音乐学学科在以持续的方式参与反种族主义和非殖民化辩论方面如此缓慢。在特别具有挑战性的一年结束之际,批判性地思考系统性种族主义,现在是时候质疑维护西方艺术音乐的制度结构如何仍然与尚未非殖民化的美学真理价值观联系在一起了。在这篇文章中,我回应了批判性种族和土著研究理论家Eve Tuck和K.Wayne Yang在2012年的著名文章《非殖民化不是隐喻》中的观点,概述了音乐学术界普遍存在的三种“走向天真”的举措,然后提出了一种关于音乐价值的“走向颠覆”的建议,这有助于积极地“非殖民化”音乐学。专注于真理和价值的主题,我认为未来十年将有机会参与可能对我们的学科产生最大影响的想法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信