Nicely said Arle. I think it IS HG related as so many "out there" presume it's a "Celtic" instrument for playing "Celtic" music so we need to agree (as a group) what that name means as if affects how others see us. You are quite right that there are two distinct things here. Racial ethnicity and public perception. Celtic music should be seen more as a style common to many areas. Blues was a specific music form sung by specific people (black, southern states USA) derived from other roots. Now it's accepted as a music style and sung by anyone and anywhere. Maybe we should forget about the origins in this particular discussion and concentrate more on style. I'm Welsh but that doesn't make every tune I write "Celtic". There's absolutely no reason why a South American/Swedish/ Hungarian can't write Celtic music. Surely it's the style not the nationality that counts? Of course, trying to define THAT, opens another can of worms........... Colin Hill ----- Original Message ----- From: "Arle Lommel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 2:36 AM Subject: Re: [HG] My page about Asturias and Galicia
> On Aug 27, 2007, at 5:35 PM, Jon Redpath wrote: > > > There is NO such thing as Celtic music. Scotland, Ireland, Wales, > > and Brittany have only one thing in common, an unfounded dislike of > > the English. The musical identities are very different with a few > > overlaps. The Celtic label is just a con , made up to make money > > out of nothing. In Scotland our music is Scots/ Gaelic NOT Celtic. > > At the risk of continuing something that is rather tangential to the > list (although perhaps germane to the extent that everyone seems to > assume that drones = "Celtic," ergo the HG is "Celtic"), I'm going to > disagree with Jon's dismissal of the Celtic rubric to some extent. It > isn't just a con to sell music. The people who call their music > Celtic do, in general, consider themselves to be "Celtic," whatever > that may mean. This means that a Galician looking for "authentic" > elements to add to their repertoire will be much more likely to look > to Ireland or Scotland than to Tierra del Fuego, Papua New Guinea, or > Mozambique. Whether or not the idea of "Celtic music" has any > historical validity (I'm with Jon on thinking that it does not), the > point is that today these musics *are* Celtic because their > performers and audience believe that they are and they have entered > into a community of influence with each other. Galician performers > thus feel justified in taking Irish tunes (and vice versa) and using > them without the stigma of being "inauthentic" (a *very* problematic > term, as I've mentioned before). > > In other words, historical connection is not the only criterion for > determining whether something is made "out of nothing." The > connections people believe that they have can be a powerful force for > change, and there are Scots who happily embrace the "Celtic" label > for their music, even if they are making no money off of it. > > Or to turn to something closer to Jon's home, "Celtic" music is just > as authentic and real as clan tartans, which were made up to "make > money out of nothing." The notion that tartans were associated with > specific clans that were entitled to use them was a fabrication from > whole cloth (pun intended), but that doesn't make them a con or an > inauthentic part of Scottish culture in the present day. > > Notions and questions of musical authenticity are endlessly vexing > and never settled because there is no single criterion to which > everyone can agree that will provide the answer. > > Best, > > Arle > >
