Critical Questions: Miller

Questions for the Ethnomusicologist:

When you began with ethnographic detail, did you think to yourself "hmm, what technique would be effective here" or did you just write what seemed natural without really intending to use this technique, and only noticed it upon reflection?  The larger question, in a sense, is to inquire into the distinction between actively using techniques to write and using techniques to label what you write.  

You mention on page two that you sing with the groups that you study.  I also know from the strategically placed flyers around Brown's campus that you actively bring Sacred Harp singing to the Brown community.  Do you feel that at some point, you became an insider to the culture (alternatively, was there a point where you weren't)?  Do you think this has affected your research in a significant way?  Do you you promote Sacred Harp singing at Brown because you enjoy it, or because you feel it is your responsibility to in some sense preserve the culture (though, from reading the article, it doesn't really seem as though this tradition is in any immediate danger)?

Discussion question

"Like much rural Southern music, Sacred Harp singing has long been marked as explicitly and indigenously American" (p. 14).  American culture is relatively young, when compared to other world cultures.  Additionally, America is a country of immigrants; arguably, the only truly "native" culture with historical roots in this country is that of Native Americans.  Indeed, during the colonial times to which this music traces its roots, the individuals practicing it could very likely have considered themselves British citizens.  What does it mean to have an "American" tradition/culture when so much of our culture is imported?  Given that our national identity is often one of the "melting pot" (though I do understand that this term is no longer fashionable), would an American tradition embrace the notion of imported culture, or define itself by a rejection of the imported?