Performance as an Ambivalent Act: Views from the UK and Corsica

Caroline Bithell, Khatuna Managadze (Editor)

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

56 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

This paper considers different ways in which we might think about musical performance. Drawing examples from my research into the revival of traditional music in Corsica and the culture of contemporary community choirs in the UK, I discuss the reasons for which musicians and others might be ambivalent about the conventional model of a formal performance presented as entertainment for an audience. In particular, I address some of the problems associated with staged performances of traditional or folk music. At a theoretical level, I note the need to distinguish between stage culture and living tradition, and between presentation and participation. I consider a range of alternative models of performance, informed by ideas about performing as a way of creating social relationships and sustaining community.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationThe Issues of Performance (of) Folk and Church Music
Subtitle of host publicationGiorgi Garaqanidze X International Festival of Folk and Church Music in Batumi
EditorsKhatuna Managadze
Place of PublicationBatumi
PublisherBatumi State University of the Arts
Pages127-144
Number of pages18
ISBN (Print)978-9941-9404-5-3
Publication statusPublished - 2015
EventGiorgi Garaqanidze X International Festival of Folk and Church Music - Scientific Conference - Batumi State University of the the Arts, Georgia
Duration: 2 Nov 20155 Nov 2015

Conference

ConferenceGiorgi Garaqanidze X International Festival of Folk and Church Music - Scientific Conference
CityBatumi State University of the the Arts, Georgia
Period2/11/155/11/15

Keywords

  • Performance
  • Stage culture
  • Living tradition
  • Participation
  • Community

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Performance as an Ambivalent Act: Views from the UK and Corsica'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this