Professor Saida Daukeyeva’s text Musical Instrument as Sentient Being, presented in the Entangled Sounding Objects music seminar, prompted me to grapple with the concept of ecomusicology in Central Asian musical tradition. It is not a term that I had previously encountered, and I found the text’s presentation of this term and its subsequent theoretical impacts in the field of musicology to be strongly compelling.
It is written that “Tim Ingold’s ecological approach has been adopted in the field of ecomusicology which views music and sound as a part of a social and environmental ecosystem.” This idea was then elaborated upon through the positioning of music, not as a purely human invention, but as an expression of dialogue between humans, non-human beings, and their ecological environments.
These themes effectively contextualize Tölegen Särsenbaev’s processes for instrument creation and his emphasis on the communicative relationship between himself and the trees that he considered as he selected wood for the bodies of his instruments. The following direct quote beautifully captures this sentiment: “Over time I learned to select wood so that already by looking at it, I can tell whether or not a qobyz will come out. The tree gives a sign.” This thoughtful approach to instrument making is rooted in the historic practice of nomadic pastoralism as well as in shamanic spirituality and ritual.
As someone who has always experienced music as being inextricably connected to nature, I am fascinated by the implications of ecomusicology within the broader fields of musicology and ethnomusicology. After reading this paper, I am curious how modern day instrument makers see their processes continuing to change from an ecomusicological perspective with increased technological processes. Is it possible to remain rooted in natural traditions as environmental shifts take place?
