Innovation and Preservation

There are many different views within the traditional music community regarding the preserving, contributing, developing of our collective music.

At this point I would like to state that it is the variety in opinion, musical taste, background, interpretation, creative work and performance that is the key strength in traditional music. It is moulded by many hands and continues because of that.

The preservation view is just as important as the innovation view (and lets not simplify this by pretending that we all stick to just one view!) or for that matter the 'natural development' view or the 'middle of the road' view or the 'mixed up' or 'don't want to have a view' views....

Anyway, some comments on different perspectives:

There are those who see innovation as essential to the development of traditional music, this is smaller-scale innovation which has always been a part of traditional music and contributes to its gradual development.

There are a few who see innovation as destructive: damaging to the strands of tradition handed down to us. Who want to preserve what we have inherited. Of course what we have inherited may have been altered any number of times.

However, in the intricate structure of traditional music and its community - even the most enthusiastic champions of innovation often have strands of tradition that are important to them and want to preserve and protect them for future generations.

When we talk about a Living Tradition, I think all of these strands should be taken into account to build up a picture of the complex, moving, developing, growing entity that doesn't always agree with itself that is 'the tradition'.

My personal feeling (if it isn't already becoming obvious) is that it comes down to the treatment of tradition. If a musician isn't well informed and knowledgeable (in particular the unspoken kind) then the likelihood of their musical products being an inappropriatre treatment of tradition are high. This is one of the main ways in which we attribute value to music in the traditional idiom.

The process of music filtering down and being repeatedly moulded and sifted through by musicians with the help of their audiences is like evolution, survival of the fittest. Of course 'the tradition' not only consists of a central body of repertoire and knowledge that goes with it but all of the related music surrounding it - larger-scale works, a variety of music developed for different contexts, collections of material that come in and out of popular use (particularly in Scotland with our lengthy mix of oral and documented tradition) - and this has long been the case.

So to sum up on a personal note: make it as innovative as you like but if you don't understand and respect the sentiment of the roots of traditional music then don't pretend that what you do has anything to do with tradition.

I could say more about the apparent requisite for apprenticeship in traditional music (or any music) in order to understand and absorb enough of it to be able to express yourself adequately through it, but I think that is for a different post!

The Innovation Spectrum

This is a term I have been referring to in my work and thought I would have an extra think about what I mean when using it.

Innovation Spectrum

The axis along which examples of music making by traditional musicians can be placed depending on how 'traditional' or 'new' they sound/are.

A way of mapping the musical products of traditional musicians with reference to how conventional or how 'traditional they sound' and how innovative they are or how 'new' they sound.


Conventional --------------------------------------- Innovative

Participants in my work have commented freely on 'barriers', 'boundaries' and 'the spectrum' and placed some of their (and my own) work 'outside of tradition'. Another example - 'well my barriers are right at the free improvisation...and there’s nowhere left to go after that to be honest'.


The Innovation Spectrum has helped me to visualise where different music projects and compositions 'fit in' to what we have already.

Far Out

A participant in my research recently described a part of my creative practice as 'fitting into things that are going on outside of tradition' and later they mused that as 'people get further out, the more of this sort of thing that traditional musicians do the further out they get...when they approach traditional music'.

I am wondering if that is always the case?

I don't think it is the case for me. It is true that I explore ways of being creative that take me completely outwith the traditional idiom, and my work can be placed at different points all along the convention - innovation spectrum, but equally I can approach a traditional tune (or tune within the traditional idiom) in a historically informed way and can achieve a very traditional sounding result. Yes my eyes are open to many creative possibilities and I have an expanded set of skills to apply but I consciously choose the musical outcome of my interpretation/arrangement/composition/performance.

However, perhaps it can be said that the more experimental and alternative approaches that traditional musicians explore, the more of these they can continue to employ in their practice, without necessarily impeding on their 'traditional' output?

Any thoughts?

questions, questions

It has come to my attention that the majority of content on this weblog will inevitably be questions posed for thought and discussion. If anyone would like to share any thoughts and questions related to contemporary innovation and/or traditional music please feel free, contributions are welcome.

More to follow.