Ethno(Musico)Logical Thoughts from Cuba

Conceived as a brainstorm, rather than an academic article, this unorthodox text speaks to what a perspective from Cuba would contribute to musicology, the state of musicology in Cuba, and how its history is shaping the present. To this end, I emphasize some aspects of its genesis and principles, the academy and cultural management institutions, and finally the challenges of a global collaboration.

Extrapolating the Insularity

Cuban musicology has its contemporary roots in the studies of anthropologist Fernando Ortiz (1881–1969), who was a pioneer in thinking about music in Cuba from a cultural perspective. In his lecture entitled “The Human Factors of Cuban­ness,”¹ presented at the University of Havana in 1939, Ortiz explained essences that could be applied, for example, to an op-ed focused on the current debate on “migration and human delimitation” of race, gender, economy, nation, or cultural perspective. Its extravagant title is in chronological correspondence with the debate provoked by two of the main articles of the Constitution of the Republic of Cuba, proclaimed in 1940: “A citizen has the right to reside in his homeland without being made the object of any discrimination or duress, regardless of race, class, political opinions, or religious beliefs” (Title II, “Concerning Nationality,” art. 10). “Any discrimination by reason of sex, race, color, or class, and any other kind of discrimination destructive of human dignity, is declared illegal and punishable” (Title IV, “Fundamental Rights,” art. 20).² The intention of these constitutional declarations was based on the axiom of José Martí (1853–1895), who in 1895 proclaimed with philanthropic purpose: “Homeland is humanity.”³ This is because one of the pillars of Cuban culture refers precisely to the tacit acceptance of diversity as a unifying character that singularizes in a “Cuban being”; identification proportional to a “Yucatecan being,” “Yoru­ba being,” “French being,” or “Cantonese being.”

Therefore, going through Ortiz’s text, I propose to paraphrase one of the key statements of that conference and, to universalize it, replace the words Cuban/Cubanness with culture/cul­turality. Hence, in defining “The human factors of culturality [Cubanness],” we can generalize that

Culturality is not given in conception; there is no cultured race. And there is no pure race anywhere. Race, after all, is nothing but a civil status granted by anthropological authorities; but this racial status tends to be as conventional and arbitrary, and sometimes as changeable, as the civil status that fits men into one or another nationality. Culturality, for the individual, is not in the blood, nor on the paper, nor in the habitation of a place. Culturality is most of all the specific quality of a culture [latin: qualitas], of a culture [that of Cuba, Mexico, Nigeria, France, or China]. To speak in contemporary terms, culturality is a condition of the soul, a complex of feelings, ideas, and attitudes.⁴

From this anthropological perspective, which places the individual as a producer/mediator of cultural goods, Ortiz conducted his study in the context of the various manifestations of music in Cuba. He described in detail what he observed: each instrument, linguistic, musical, gestural, culinary, or celebratory expression. He understood that Cuban culture—like that of other territories of the American continent linked by processes of forced coexistence—was the result of various substrates, mixed in dissimilar proportions, but of equal importance. To explain it in ordinary terms, he appealed to the universal metaphor of a traditional soup (a creole ajiaco) that prefigures the 500-year process of “cooking” the European model in America, catalyzed by geopolitical impositions, such as the subjugation of the indigenous population, forced migration linked to African slavery, French refugees, or Asian neo-slavery. This mixture of varied ingredients resulted in a unique flavor in constant transformation. In the face of the same basic needs, cultural solutions make a difference.

Ortiz’s thesis, according to Julio César Guanche,

linked the organic and voluntarist theories of the nation in an open construction: one is Cuban because one is born in Cuba and part of its community of culture and by the “conscience of being Cuban and the will to want to be.”⁵

This position crystalized immediately in the theory of transculturation, which Ortiz argued from the two crops essential to the Cuban economy: tobacco and sugar, one native, another imported, but equally decisive in the formation of a local culture that became universal.

Alejo Carpentier (1904–1980), almost at the same time, came out in defense of the theory of Afro-Cubanism claiming, with the strength of his ideas and the talent of his metaphors, the extraordinary condition of Afro-descendent culture. But not even the provocative Carpentier escaped the need to validate from the canon. A selection of representative topics shows the breadth of the material described in the book Music in Cuba,⁶ for which its editors only approved a fixed and small amount of text. This is the reason for the synthesis of content and themes, so often criticized by universal and local historiography.

From another, less chauvinistic perspective, we could consider this book as an allusion to the “construct” of history of music of European matrix, seen through the events in Cuba. Carpentier structures a kind of Commedia dell’arte whose characters play roles of each canonical style/genre. Thus, in the “performance” of Music in Cuba, we find, for example, Esteban Salas, “the galant,” Juan Paris, “the classical,” Manuel Sau­mell, “the nationalist,” and Nicolás Ruiz Espadero, “the romantic.” But at the same time, he brings to the stage “the others” who had become invisible for hegemonic reasons, those who played and composed for the salons, the theater, the public dances, or the celebration of the ñáñigos. And not only does he present them, he summons them by the name that has been omitted, not out of respect, but out of shame, titling chapter 7 “The Blacks”; raising them to the same seats of importance with their companions of “the canonical pantheon.” All this stems from a constant search for polysemy, seeking to explain through allegories that infinite enigma, that irrational identity, that Ortiz defined as “condition of the soul”; a system that Carpentier condenses in his short novel Concierto Barroco through the myth of the fabulous (we do not always have among us a Cervantes Award for Literature).⁷

Who have traditionally been the subjects of a biography in music? What criterion of hierarchy, of consensual aesthetic tendency, have founded the selection of subjects of the “best sellers” of music history? These questions inevitably lead us to the debate about the canon and its relevance in music studies in Latin America. Much has been written about it, but I highlight the solution suggested by Alejandro L. Madrid that perhaps has to be taken into account as an analytical principle for current musicology: to propose the study of musical art, whatever its cultural affiliation or social application, from its context, technical/artistic value, use and function, assimilation, and impact.⁸ On the one hand, because the canon has existed, imported, used, and stratified; because “another canon,” the native, has been ignored or assumed through “non-formal forms.” And because the iconic use of the canon is still in force, now supported—increasingly—by the fragile criteria of media impact, often economically incentivized or influenced by dominant institutions.

From Latin America, we must also consider the decolonial theories, whose relevance is linked to the need to see ourselves with local, national, and regional self-esteem and place ourselves precisely in the global network; not as “super” or “sub,” but reflecting our culture and leveraging it in correspondence with its social representation. In the search to validate ourselves, we must not wage war against the past, nor against traditional canons, nor those of impact, but build new foundations. Is our cultural battle one of competition or permanence? From a cultural heritage perspective, what capital do we manage: symbolic, commercial, or both? Do we understand music as an art of equal relevance in any of its applications? Musicians in Cuba do. By consensus, you are a musician when you have a technical skill, language proficiency, and practice. Moreover, when music serves to stimulate the senses and provoke the cathartic extroversion that purifies the soul, a transcendent experience inherited from Afro-descendant culture. The genre does not matter, because in Cuba, music has no social hierarchies, all music is art. The question is, do we, as the musicological academy, consider that a “tumbao de changüí” is as canonical as a “passacaglia bass ostinato”?

Rather than complain about the past, or even the present that continues to ignore us—although it is necessary to continue sharing knowledge so that references are expanded and diversified—let us return to the essential. Questioning the nationality and cultural development of Isaac Newton, his language, citizenship, and family origin, the day of his birth, his pre-eminence in the texts of formal education, or the priority given to the printed dissemination of his laws does not change the fact of universal gravitation. Why are we so concerned about Bach’s Germanic origin and the prevalence of his canonical model? Why do we fear that this high-impact paradigm will be imposed, taught, and repeated? Why consider its study as a conspiracy against indigenous art? A Bach fugue is nothing more than the affirmation of a formula of unique coordination between melos and harmonies that respond, in a superlative way, to the rules (to the canon as a prototype) that he learned. On the other hand, I believe that the anima of the Lutheran Bach spoke with his divine creator according to the extraordinary ability he had received; therefore, gratefully facing the mystery, he signed “Soli Deo Gloria.” What is relevant is that the study of his complex and singular art is as valid as the analytical audition of a polyrhythmic improvisation of batá drums, whose Olú batá also have an extraordinary ability, developed with tenacity to become competent interpreters and of “canonical” result, who also direct their gratitude to the supreme creator.

About Musicological Management in Cuba

The Cuban school of musicology, founded by Argeliers León (1918–1991), connected with Ortiz, and early on emphasized ethno(musico)logy⁹ and the knowledge of the cultural matrices that amalgamated in the ajiaco of Cuban identity.

While traditional musicology was divided into historical and systematic tendencies, their differences were rooted on the object of study and the observation point of the expert—in Cuba, the academic program had been conceived comprehensively by León since 1976. Hence, the study of the binomials subject/object and bearer/document was equally relevant, and a musicological perspective was applied to a creative process involving sound: to the ethnos and its practice; and to the construction of the “logos” in any of its manifestations. Consequently, a musicologist had to learn how to decode the structure of a renaissance piece, while learning how to transcribe the rhythmic pattern of Arará drumming.

This musicological academy, based at the University of the Arts (formerly the Higher Institute of Art, ISA), today covers undergraduate, master’s, and doctoral degrees and teaches a hybrid program that combines various theoretical systems according to diverse subjects that emphasize Cuban themes. The admission process rigorously requires previous expertise in music, verifiable mastery of music theory, proficiency in an instrument, and analytical skills.

Between 1981 and 2019, 227 students earned degrees as musicologists; several have obtained master’s and doctoral degrees.¹⁰ In the period from 1974 to 1991 Cuban musicologists were also educated at the Tchaikovsky Conservatory in Moscow and earned doctorates at the Humboldt University of Berlin.¹¹ This influenced the syllabus of the time, which was permeated by the historiographical and analytical view of these schools of thought. Principally since 1990, graduates of the University of the Arts, have also continued postgraduate studies at universities in Argentina, Austria, Brazil, Chile, France, Germany, Mexico, Spain (beneficiaries, for example, of the Ibero-America+Asia scholarship of Banco Santander), and the USA, among others. This academic migration has nurtured musicology of Cuban origin from diverse sources and has led to the research of a broader range of topics. At the same time, this has promoted the positioning of Cuban professionals in conservatories, universities, research centers, and reference libraries inside and outside Cuba.

A more recent application of musicology is the study of the musical document from the vantage point of heritage education concreted in the master’s degree dedicated to Management of Historical-Documental Music Heritage (2015–22), offered by the University of Havana College of San Gerónimo de La Habana, in collaboration with the Office of the Historian of the City of Havana. As a result, thirty-seven theses have contributed to locating, analyzing, and disseminating important sources of musical documents, as a way to improve digital preservation, access strategies, and guidelines to support the validation of cultural goods. These results have been published in El Sincopado Habanero, digital bulletin of the Department of Musical Heritage “Esteban Salas.”

National institutions such as the Center for the Research and Development of Cuban Music (1978) and the National Museum of Music (1971) guide musicological research and heritage management of document reservoirs. They support a broad spectrum of specialists and possess collections of unique documents of notated music, instruments, field notebooks, and recordings. The result of musicological work is accredited by the Ministry of Science, Technology, and Environment. Remarkably, several musicological investigations have received awards by the Academy of Sciences of Cuba, the highest achievement of science in the country, which endorses the musicological results as a scientific contribution and as an academic referent.

Cidmuc Editions and Museum of Music Editions are leading specialized publishers in book format and Clave: Cuban Journal of Music disseminates scientific articles. Among Cuban record labels, Colibrí Productions stands out for its dual function of recording local artists and preserving Cuban musical heritage. Recently there have been plans to market these products through local streaming alternatives such as Sandunga. In addition, the Cuban Institute of Music promotes the insertion of musicologists in activities applied to the recording industry, media, and cultural management.

An alternative space, the Music Department of the Casa de las Américas, emerged in 1965 with the intent of spreading and stimulating Latin American and Caribbean musical thinking and creation in the most diverse of its expressions, from the folkloric and popular to the academic and experimental. The stimulus for knowledge and scientific research is materialized by the Casa de las Américas International Musicology Award (1979), with the purpose of promoting and publishing books that contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the music and culture of Latin America and the Caribbean. This has resulted in the Musicology Prize Collection. Between 1979 and 2020, twenty-four researchers from ten Latin American countries have been recognized with the Casa de las Américas International Musicology Award. After rigorous examination of each work, a prestigious expert international jury comprising prominent researchers in musicology elect the winner. Seventy-five judges from sixteen countries (thirteen Latin American states, Spain, Germany, and the USA) convened juries between 1979 and 2020. Since 1999, the award has been linked to the International Colloquium of Musicology, which is committed to the development of the most diverse fields of contemporary music and its results are published in Boletín Música de la Casa de las Américas. This biannual opportunity has guaranteed an update of the musicological trends in the region, has created a space for international exchange for students and local professionals who do not have access to other stages, and has promoted the meeting of global organizations such as ARLAC, IASPM, RIdIM, RILM, RIPM, and RISM in Havana.

Toward Global Exchange

In today’s world there are many obstacles which make access to original sources difficult. These “cultural goods” are the pillar on which we build the results of our profession. Sometimes our work demands the study of living memory, in other occasions, the examination of documents as recipients of information.

Several essential types of sources are not accessible from Cuba. In the same and opposite manner, foreign researchers cannot access the oral and documentary sources that are in Cuba nor the academic perspective of Cuban scholars. This stems from disruptive laws and agreements that are difficult to overcome. But we can choose to share inclusive alternatives.

Why should it be necessary to promote academic exchange with Cuba and its musicological products, inside and outside the island? Because native scholars study, from their cultural singularity the matrices of musical phenomena such as tumba francesa, changüí, rumba, punto cubano, bolero, danzón, and son that energized other processes; for their own musical characterization and inculturated performance that they have given to external genres (such as jazz, rap, contradanza, or villancico); for mapping an active endemic trans­culturation process; for the permanence of a musicological academy with its own roots; for results that support the interconnection of Cuban symbolic contents with the Ibero-American, North-American, African, and European scope. All this makes this island, its resources, and cultural products a relevant matter of study for musicology just as a natural reservoir is to a botanist.

The challenge lies in the fact that musical thought from Cuba has little or almost no diffusion. First, the products of Cuban thought and music are mostly written in Spanish. Second, only a small part is published digitally (either as merchandise or with free access). Third, what is accessible online on Cuban issues, in spaces of impact, is written mostly in English, usually by experts who have approached the study from other equally legitimated cultural perspectives; see Google Scholar, Google Books, Oxford Music Online, JSTOR, Musa, etc.

In turn, the high competitiveness involved in reaching, for example, a tenured professor position means that most high-impact institutional journals are controlled by the information market that restricts access by subscription. Job success, social impact, price, and exclusivity are related in today’s scientific world. Is everything exclusive, quality, and everything accessible, mediocre?

The path to utopia leads in another direction. Free platforms (which only charge through ads or storage), are a ready means for us to share our work. IMSLP, ResearchGate, Academia, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram have become friendly spaces for articles, videos, books, and records not subject to rights by the relevant institutions. More spaces accredited with open access online are needed.

Let us bet on collaboration and respect to improve the space of ethno(musico)logical knowledge accessible to all. Together, from our cultural positions, we can contribute to enrich it. That is utopia, but utopia works when there are results. Find them!

1. Fernando Ortiz, “The Human Factors of Cuban­idad,” trans. João Felipe Gonçalves and Gregory Duff Morton, Hau: Journal of Ethnographic Theory 4, no. 3 (2014): 445–80.
2. Georgetown University, “República de Cuba: Constitución Política de 1940,” in Political Database of the Americas. https://pdba.george town.edu/Constitutions/Cuba/cuba1940.html. English trans.: https://latinamericanstudies.org/constitution-1940.htm.
3. José Martí, “Patria, 26 de enero de 1895,” in Cuba, vol. 5 of Obras completas, ed. Centro de Estudios Martianos (Havana: CLACSO, 2011), 468. http://biblioteca.clacso.edu.ar/Cuba/cem-cu/20150114040958/Vol05.pdf.
4. Ortiz, “The Human Factors of Cubanidad,” 459.
5. Julio César Guanche, “La Constitución de 1940: Una reinterpretación,” Cuban Studies 45 (2017): 66–88.
6. Alejo Carpentier, Music in Cuba (Minneapo­lis: University of Minnesota Press, 2001).
7. Alejo Carpentier, Concierto Barroco (Madrid: Alianza Ed., 1998).
8. Alejandro L. Madrid, “Diversity, Tokenism, Non-Canonical Musics, and the Crisis of the Humanities in U.S. Academia,” Journal of Music History Pedagogy 7, no. 2 (2017): 124–30. https://www.ams-net.org/ojs/index.php/jmhp/article/view/238.
9. I propose first the ethnos and then the music, supported by Descartes’s error: “I am, therefore I think.” Antonio Damasio, Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason and the Human Brain (New York: Avon Books, 1998).
10. I thank María de los Ángeles Córdova, former head of the Department of Musicology, University of the Arts of Cuba, for the statistics.
11. Olavo Alén (1979), Victoria Eli (1987), and Danilo Orozco (1991) received their doctorates in East Berlin—three professionals who have greatly influenced Cuban and Ibero-American musical thought.