Paige’s Page discusses the trade-off ethnic studies academics make between authenticity and accountability:
I think the obsession with authenticity is related to the lowering of
standards. A while back we were watching a documentary on John Lee
Hooker, and some guy says, “Nobody can play and sing like John Lee,”
and it cuts to Hooker, mumbling and playing seemingly unrelated chords
and snatches of melody on the guitar. The guy gushing about Hooker’s
unmatched abilities probably has a Master’s in blues guitar, but he’s
not authentic, so who cares? Hooker is an old Black guy from
Mississippi, so of course he can do no wrong in the blues world. You
see it in Appalachian studies all the time. I’m thinking about giving a
dulcimer to my grandpa, who has never read or played a note of music in
his life, and seeing if I can get some ethnomusicologist to write a
paper about him in a year or less. I bet I could. After all, he’s the
real deal, right?
This reminded me of the first time I ever heard the term “ethnic”
used in a music context. It was in 1966 at The Lovin’ Spoonful Coffee
House on Auburn Avenue in Atlanta. We were two white boys from UGa who
had come to see folksinger Julius Lester (he later became an author)
at a coffee house known to be a hangout for Stokely Carmichael and his
Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee confreres (think of the
scene from “Animal House” when the guys walk into the black nightclub
with their dates and you pretty much have the picture). During one
particularly dramatic verse my friend looked at me and said, “Boy,
that’s ethnic.” I had no idea what he was talking about, but Paige’s
post gives me some idea, albeit 40 years in the coming.
(Hat tip: PirateBallerina via InstaPundit)
