Dansk Musikforskning Online / Særnummer 2015 Danish Musicology Online / Special Edition 2015
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DANSK MUSIKFORSKNING ONLINE / SÆRNUMMER 2015 DANISH MUSICOLOGY ONLINE / SPECIAL EDITION 2015 MUSIKCENSUR RESEARCHING MUSIC CENSORSHIP Introduction 3 Tore Tvarnø Lind Blasphemy Cries over Pussy Riot’s “Punk Prayer” 7 Thomas Solomon Self-censorship as Critique: The Case of Turkish Rapper Sagopa Kajmer 37 Kjetil Klette Boehler How Live Cuban Popular Dance Music Expresses Political Values in Today’s Cuba 55 Ursula Geisler Political Music Censorship: Some Remarks on Nazi Music Regulations 1933-1945 77 Antti-Ville Kärjä Cultural Politics of Music Censorship in ‘Post-Soviet’ Finland 91 Kristine Ringsager “It Ain’t Shit About the Music!” Discussions on Freedom of Expression in Relation to Rap Music in Social Work 109 Johannes Frandsen Skjelbo Jamaican Dancehall Censored: Music, Homophobia, and the Black Body in the Postcolonial World 131 Note on the contributors 155 Guest editors: Helmi Järviluoma and Jan Sverre Knudsen (The Nordic network Researching Music Censorship) Editorial board: Martin Knakkergaard, Mads Krogh, Søren Møller Sørensen Dansk Musikforskning Online Særnummer, 2015: Musikcensur / Danish Musicology Online Special Edition, 2015: Researching Music Censorship ISSN 1904-237X © forfatterne og DMO DMO publiceres på www.danishmusicologyonline.dk Udgivet med støtte fra Forskningsrådet for Kultur og Kommunikation Introduction When the NordForsk-funded network Researching Music Censorship (RMC) was initiat- ed in 2010, it was obvious that music censorship was not decreasing. There were severe confl icts over freedom of expression in various parts the world, but also a growing awareness of issues concerning control and regulation of the arts. Censorship could be observed in areas of confl ict and political tension as well as in politically stable re- gions like the Nordic countries. Today we experience that censorship of the arts is an issue of increasing social and political signifi cance. We feel that have been heading in the right direction when assuming that it is essential to direct academic scholarship towards issues of censorship, freedom of expression and human rights in relation to the arts, in our case music. The objective of the RMC network has been to contribute with an academic ap- proach through the development of multifaceted, scientifi cally based research. At the outset, the aim of the network was stated as follows: “[...] to question the often un- complicated and simplifi ed defi nitions of the concept in popular discourse, and based on a fi rm understanding of music as a socially organised means of communication and through identifi cation and documentation of discourses on restrictions and reg- ulations in musical expression, the participating researchers will examine global, re- gional and local frameworks for music censorship”.1 As the contributions to this issue clearly demonstrate, research on music censor- ship is, on the one hand, concerned with social and political issues. Since censorship plays a part in struggles concerning class, race, gender and religion, the study of cen- sorship inevitably involves a focus on power relations; on the mobilisation and im- plementation of power both by the censors and those being censored. On the other hand, the study of music censorship is obviously also about music. It directs our at- tention towards the particular potential of music to articulate and communicate atti- tudes and opinions in ways that surpass what can be accomplished by use of the spo- ken word. Music may serve to empower or distribute a social or political message, but additionally, by way of association or representation, music may constitute a message in itself and can hence be studied both as a medium and as a message. Thus, we have seen that the object of censorship may be both the lyrical content of particular songs and the artists that perform them, but also entire music genres or even the perform- ance of music as such. The RMC network was offi cially brought to an end in late 2014, but the rich out- comes are only now starting to appear. The network has consisted of a total of 48 scholars and PhD researchers from all the Nordic countries plus associated researchers from other parts of the world. Their varied academic backgrounds include the fi elds of popular music studies, music education, ethnomusicology and religious studies. We 1 RMC Website, accessed 4 Feburary, 2015: http://rmc.ku.dk. DANISH MUSICOLOGY ONLINE SPECIAL EDITION, 2015 • ISSN 1904-237X SPECIAL EDITION · 2015 RESEARCHING MUSIC CENSORSHIP 4 are confi dent that the activities of the network have created a new awareness of the signifi cance and ramifi cations of the study of music censorship and artistic freedom of expression in the Nordic countries and beyond. Through conference presentations, papers and articles RMC members have shared their research perspectives with peers, and through media appearances and teaching at universities and university colleges they have raised public attention to the topic. Based on the many presentations at seminars and conferences organised by RMC, 25 articles were selected for publication in four forthcoming books and special jour- nal issues. The seven articles published in this issue of Danish Musicology Online are the fi rst publications coming out of the network. In our fi rst article, based on the repercussions following Pussy Riot’s performance of “Punk Prayer” in the Christ the Savior Cathedral in Moscow, Tore Tvarnø Lind dis- cusses different notions of blasphemy in view of religious and political discourses in Russia. He shows us how censorship and persecution of the group can be under- stood as a response to their intrusion into sacred space, their political critique, the “imagined violence” of their act, and fi nally, their feminist agenda. Thomas Solomon’s article questions the understanding of self-censorship as merely a capitulation to the censoring forces. Through a case study of the Turkish rapper Sagopa Kajmer (also known as DJ Mic Check) Solomon argues against a “victimology approach”, claim- ing that self-censorship potentially opens up space for creative practice, even involv- ing a critique of censorship itself. In his article on Cuban popular dance music as an expression of political values, Kjetil Klette Bøhler invites the reader to join and refl ect together with the political theorists Arendt and Rancière on the aesthetic polis space. Through his ethnomusicological fi eldwork and careful music analysis Bøhler shows how grooves and melodies shape opinions, values and preferences potentially critical of the state, thereby contributing to participatory democracy in Cuba. Ursula Geisler explores institutionalized music censorship enforced by the Third Reich in Germany. Her article summarises the laws and principles enforced by two specialized cultural institutions assigned with the task of controlling and limiting music in relation to a variety of issues, including Jewishness, Bolshevism and atonality. Geisler draws a com- plex picture of the Nazi regime’s pervasive control system and its strategies of cultural concessions and prohibitions. With a focus on censorship and self-censorship in Finn- ish news paper journalism Antti-Ville Kärjä discusses cultural politics in view of major societal changes in “post-Soviet” Finland. Analysing more than 400 newspaper articles from Helsingin Sanomat Kärjä identifi es four different censorship discourses related to music after the abolition of the Soviet Union. Kristine Ringsager investigates the use of rap music in social integration work among ethnic minority youth in Denmark. She discusses some of the obvious tensions between agencies that are ideally offered by such projects and the often provocative expressions promoted by the young rap performers themselves. In effect, Ringsager suggests that social work of this kind can be understood as a strategy of “repressive tolerance” and part of a dominant ideology. Johannes Frandsen Skjelbo explores the Danish debate following the near cancella- tion of a controversial concert with the Jamaican dancehall artist Sizzla. From a post- SPECIAL EDITION – RESEARCHING MUSIC CENSORSHIP · 2015 5 colonial perspective, Skjelbo discusses the controversy in view of freedom of speech and the protection of minorities as well as notions of the black body and black music. During the past years we have moved from a vague and, perhaps, too rigid under- standing of music censorship towards a much broader idea of it. We have become ac- quainted with the many ways in which music censorship is articulated and exercised in different locations, as well as a variety of perspectives on the how it can be ap- proached in scientifi c research. As guest editors of this special edition we hope these insights are useful to you as a reader. Many people have contributed to the completion of this special issue. We would like to thank the authors for their inspiring article contributions, the peer reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions, Mads Krogh and the DMO editors for their patience and for supporting the idea of a special issue, NordForsk for funding the net- work over four years, and fi nally, RMC leader Annemette Kirkegaard and Jonas Otter- beck for excellent cooperation and the great atmosphere in the organizing committee. Helmi Järviluoma and Jan Sverre Knudsen The Nordic network Researching Music Censorship SPECIAL EDITION – RESEARCHING MUSIC CENSORSHIP · 2015 TORE TVARNØ LIND Blasphemy Cries over Pussy Riot’s “Punk Prayer” Christianity, to put it bluntly, is the religion that made blasphemy popular.1 If the state is so closely identifi ed with the religion it has established and the head of the state is also the head of the church, then to subvert the doctrine of the established church is to undermine the authority of the state itself.2 Introduction Cries of blasphemy directed at Pussy Riot still echo, asserting that a delicate line some- where between the sacred and the profane has been crossed in ways causing offense to the Russian Orthodox Church and Christian Orthodox believers. These accusations of blasphemy and concern for people’s religious convictions have been countered by those who defend freedom of speech and the important role played by activist art in legally criticizing state and church politics.