THE REASON FOR THIS STATEMENT
I have arranged several spirituals for choir, and I have written this statement to answer those who have told me that, because I am white, this is “problematic”, or that I should not do so, or that I should only do so under certain conditions. I disagree. But I do not wish to glibly dismiss any concern or criticism. By contrast, I would rather explain why I disagree, and to explain my position, fully, thoughtfully, and respectfully.
ABOUT ME
I am white, British, male, middle-aged, middle-class, and straight. As such I am fully aware that I have not been discriminated against. And I acknowledge that I have benefitted from many structures that have been designed, and have evolved, consciously and unconsciously, in a society that has largely been run by “people like me.”
STAYING ON-TOPIC
There are many important issues of equality and representation in music, in the arts, and in the world, and it is easy to become side-tracked (the “but what about X?”, “what about Y?” approach). For now, I’m only talking about musical arrangements of spirituals.
TERMINOLOGY
At the time of writing (2020), terms such as BAME, People of Color, BIPOC, African-American are being used in this debate. We all know that language, meanings and implications change. Words that may have been culturally acceptable in earlier generations can quickly fall out of favour. For ease of reference, I am using “black” and “white” in the following paragraphs, acknowledging the limitations of language, and in an environment where these are widely acceptable, non-offensive terms.
COMMUNITIES
The word “communities” is used a lot, and I don’t think it’s helpful. I am one person, I am not writing “on behalf of the white community”. It has been suggested that white people adapting spirituals is offensive “to the black community”. But this assumes that all white people and all black people have one monolithic view each, which is a very prejudicial approach. The word seems to be dangerously close to “us”, “them” and “you people”.
THE SPIRITUALS
The songs I have arranged so far are “Deep River”, “Set of Quills”, “Joshua fought the battle of Jericho”, “Swing low sweet chariot”, “Didn’t my Lord deliver Daniel?”, “Go tell it on the mountain”, “Motherless Child” and “Go down Moses”. I hope to adapt more in the future. I have arranged them because I found the words and tunes so powerful, and because there were so many latent musical possibilities that I wanted to explore.
APPROPRIATION
Yes, I have appropriated the spirituals for my own artistic ends. I have also appropriated traditional folk material from many cultures and languages. Every time a composer sets a text to music, the words are appropriated. Any artistic creativity activity that involves using someone else’s material could be described as an act of appropriation.
Specifically, these spirituals were created at a particular time, in a particular place: by slaves imported to America from Africa. Many of them are inspired by narratives of another time and place: the Israelites in Egypt. Personally, I have no experience of slavery, discrimination, physical suffering, or anything more than very mild hardship. Clearly it would be ridiculous to claim the songs as “mine”. But they speak of hope, adversity, trials, heaven, suffering and joy, so I do feel the songs speak, in different ways, to everyone. I truly believe they are “ours”.
AUTHENTICITY
A colleague has suggested that white musicians should only arrange spirituals once they are familiar with the work of black arrangers, in order to write “within the tradition”. I couldn’t disagree more! I’d like to bring my own musical ideas to the melodies – otherwise what’s the point of being an arranger or composer? And what could be more patronising, condescending, plagiarising, and inauthentic to double-check every measure of my music, to see if it was pastiche enough to “pass as non-white” and conform to another style?
EXCLUSIVITY
There are already hundreds of musical versions of spirituals, created by all kinds of arrangers. I’m adding to a large body of work! And in the future, there will be hundreds more. This is because the source material – the words and melodies – are so strong. Composers create in an “infinite space” – that’s to say, there’s no limit on the number of songs, films, books, plays, etc, that artists can produce, of their own will. Arguments about equal representation in the arts should, I would argue, properly apply to the “finite space” of arts commissioning bodies, educational curriculums, music festivals, professional appointments, etc, where there are only X number of concerts, or roles, or publications, and only Y amount of money to pay for them. Transferring this issue into the realm of “what people are allowed to write” is totally wrong.
UNIVERSALITY
I truly believe that spirituals (as well as folksongs from every culture) belong to everyone on the planet. They should be sung, re-arranged, and enjoyed by all, in a thousand, a million, seven billion, different ways. Their provenance should be understood and respected, but musically there’s no absolutely “right” or “wrong” way to use and adapt them.
DEMARCATION
Demarcation is a polite way of saying ghettoisation, or apartheid. If anyone were to claim that spirituals are exclusively owned by “the black community”, then there wouldn’t be a leg to stand on, should someone present a counter-claim that klezmer is only for Jewish people, Noh theatre is only for Japanese people, Palestrina only for practising Roman Catholics, Gilbert & Sullivan only for white Anglophones, and so on, ad absurdam.
FINALLY
Thank-you for reading. I welcome correspondence, and I know that some may disagree with me. We can disagree, but still love and respect each other!
Paul Ayres (September 2020)