Musical instruments as tangible cultural heritage and as/for intangible cultural heritage

IF 0.6 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY International Journal of Cultural Property Pub Date : 2022-02-01 DOI:10.1017/S0940739121000436
Keith Howard
{"title":"Musical instruments as tangible cultural heritage and as/for intangible cultural heritage","authors":"Keith Howard","doi":"10.1017/S0940739121000436","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Musical instruments are central components of both the tangible and intangible heritage. However, discourse about music as intangible cultural heritage frequently overlooks the importance of instruments in conserving traditions inherited from the past and making live performance possible in the present, while curating instruments as tangible heritage often neglects their function for making music. This article explores two interrelated research questions about musical instruments as heritage. First, should instrument-crafting skills inherited from the past be sustained today, and, where industrial or mechanized manufacturing processes and the development of instruments is encouraged, what are the implications for sustaining music traditions? Second, given that instruments as crafted objects deteriorate over time, should instruments inherited from the past be displayed as objects, be restored to playing condition, or be updated and developed for contemporary use? To explore these questions, I take three case studies that juxtapose musical instruments from opposite sides of the world and from societies with very different philosophical and ideological approaches. The three case studies are Britain’s piano heritage, traditional Korean instruments (kugakki) in the Republic of Korea/South Korea, and “national” instruments (minjok akki) in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea/North Korea. Based on fieldwork, ethnography, and collecting and curating work, my choice of case studies allows me to look at both the country I call home (Britain) and the region where I have researched matters musical for 40 years (the Korean peninsula). But the case studies also demonstrate that there is no single answer to questions about the role of musical instruments when (and if) instruments are recognized as both tangible and intangible heritage.","PeriodicalId":54155,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Cultural Property","volume":"29 1","pages":"23 - 44"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Cultural Property","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0940739121000436","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Musical instruments are central components of both the tangible and intangible heritage. However, discourse about music as intangible cultural heritage frequently overlooks the importance of instruments in conserving traditions inherited from the past and making live performance possible in the present, while curating instruments as tangible heritage often neglects their function for making music. This article explores two interrelated research questions about musical instruments as heritage. First, should instrument-crafting skills inherited from the past be sustained today, and, where industrial or mechanized manufacturing processes and the development of instruments is encouraged, what are the implications for sustaining music traditions? Second, given that instruments as crafted objects deteriorate over time, should instruments inherited from the past be displayed as objects, be restored to playing condition, or be updated and developed for contemporary use? To explore these questions, I take three case studies that juxtapose musical instruments from opposite sides of the world and from societies with very different philosophical and ideological approaches. The three case studies are Britain’s piano heritage, traditional Korean instruments (kugakki) in the Republic of Korea/South Korea, and “national” instruments (minjok akki) in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea/North Korea. Based on fieldwork, ethnography, and collecting and curating work, my choice of case studies allows me to look at both the country I call home (Britain) and the region where I have researched matters musical for 40 years (the Korean peninsula). But the case studies also demonstrate that there is no single answer to questions about the role of musical instruments when (and if) instruments are recognized as both tangible and intangible heritage.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
乐器作为物质文化遗产和非物质文化遗产
摘要乐器是有形和非物质遗产的核心组成部分。然而,关于音乐作为非物质文化遗产的讨论往往忽视了乐器在保护从过去继承的传统和使现场表演在现在成为可能方面的重要性,而将乐器作为有形遗产进行管理往往忽视了它们制作音乐的功能。本文探讨了乐器作为遗产的两个相互关联的研究问题。首先,从过去继承下来的乐器制作技能今天是否应该保持下去?在鼓励工业或机械化制造工艺和乐器开发的地方,对保持音乐传统有什么影响?其次,考虑到乐器作为手工制作的物品会随着时间的推移而退化,从过去继承下来的乐器应该作为物品来展示,恢复演奏状态,还是更新和开发以供当代使用?为了探索这些问题,我进行了三个案例研究,将来自世界两端以及哲学和意识形态方法截然不同的社会的乐器并置。这三个案例研究分别是英国的钢琴遗产、大韩民国/韩国的传统朝鲜乐器(kugakki)和朝鲜民主主义人民共和国/朝鲜的“民族”乐器(minjok akki)。基于实地调查、民族志以及收集和策展工作,我选择的案例研究使我既能看到我称之为家的国家(英国),也能看到我研究音乐事务40年的地区(朝鲜半岛)。但案例研究也表明,当(以及是否)乐器被承认为有形和非物质遗产时,关于乐器的作用的问题没有单一的答案。
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 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Cultural Property
International Journal of Cultural Property HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
14.30%
发文量
13
期刊最新文献
Different Materialities – Different Authenticities? Considerations on Watercraft Exhibited in Museums Learning and Knowledge Loss: Returning Antiquities from Fordham University to Italy Are Archaeologists Talking About Looting? Reviewing Archaeological and Anthropological Conference Proceedings from 1899–2019 How to Be a ‘Good’ Collector: Some Ethical Reflections on the Private Collecting of Cultural Heritage T. rex is Fierce, T. rex is Charismatic, T. rex is Litigious: Disruptive Objects in Affective Desirescapes
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1