MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037362378 · doi:10.1353/utq.0.0465

Master Musicians of India: Hereditary Sarangi Players Speak (review)

2009· article· en· W2037362378 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Margaret Walker

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Toronto Quarterly · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiverse Musicological Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDialogicPresentation (obstetrics)SociologyVisual artsHistoryPsychologyMedia studiesArtPedagogyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Master Musicians of India: Hereditary Sarangi Players Speak Margaret E. Walker (bio) Regula Burckhardt Qureshi. Master Musicians of India: Hereditary Sarangi Players Speak. Routledge. xxxvi, 328. US $100.00 Chief among the challenges of ethnomusicological writing today are questions of representation and voice, the accuracy of scholarly interpretations, and their distance from the lives of living practitioners. One of the solutions in recent decades has been the employment of dialogic processes, through which scholars share research with ‘insiders,’ soliciting opinions and feedback or even producing collaborative final products. In Master Musicians of India: Hereditary Sarangi Players Speak, eminent ethnomusicologist Regula Qureshi takes a unique approach to dialogic [End Page 347] presentation and thus contributes to a new paradigm for the publication of field research. Most recorded interviews and field notes remain in institutional or personal archives, drawn on for scholarly projects, but rarely made public. Qureshi has chosen, with permission and support from the musicians, to publish twenty-three translated and transcribed interviews from her own research. Organized in eleven chapters and enhanced by biographical and contextual information, the interviews offer strikingly intimate glimpses into the lives of ten ‘masters’ of the North Indian bowed instrument, the sarangi. Spanning a period of almost forty years, Qureshi’s interviews document the ongoing process of tradition and change among these artists, their disciples, and communities as her collaborators speak of their training, approaches to teaching, innovations, and a host of other subjects. Qureshi takes a broad approach to the term hereditary at times, including performers whose families have been professional musicians for only a few generations, but this increases the breadth of the data. The speakers range from Qureshi’s own teachers to other renowned artists, and she frames the book by beginning with her second Ustad, Sabri Khan of Delhi, and ending with her first Ustad, the late Hamid Husain of Lahore. This last chapter is a touching selection of excerpts from his memoir, which reach back into the 1800s, connecting globalized present with feudal past. One also learns about Qureshi, who candidly situates herself in the context of both lessons and conversations. In a personal voice that combines fond memories with scholarly reflexivity, she presents her own experiences candidly, frequently emphasizing her language proficiency and musical accomplishments, but also frankly drawing attention to occasional cultural errors she made in spite of her achieved insider status through her Indian husband and his family. Her expertise is clearly situated in the world of hereditary Muslim rather than Hindu performers, however, as a slip in the lineage of a Hindu dance family reveals. One of Qureshi’s primary aims in creating this work was to present the musicians’ words unmediated by scholarship in order to honour her ‘commitment to the individuals who make interpretation possible in the first place [and] to let them be heard on their own authority.’ Yet words are not always straightforward, and the acts of transcription and translation can easily shape meaning. Language is therefore an essential issue and approached with great insight here. The dialogues, for example, preserve a sense of the syntax of the original Urdu or Hindi nicely without becoming ungrammatical. There are occasional inconsistencies in the italics and parentheses used for contextual or descriptive interjections, but never to the point of causing confusion. I must admit to being distracted by the consistent spelling of all right as alright, but otherwise found metaphoric and linguistic concerns approached with intelligence and sensitivity. [End Page 348] All in all, Master Musicians of India is an immensely interesting and useful book that offers an intriguing framework for the presentation of research. The amount of raw, largely unmediated information is phenomenal, yet the intimate nature of the dialogues makes the book an easy read. The serious scholar will have to create his or her own index, as many gems of information in the text are not included in the index, but this is a feature of the presentation rather than a weakness. One is compelled to delve into and analyze the book as the archive it is, rather than skim through in search of salient quotes. The multiple approaches through which the text can be accessed and the...

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.158 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Toronto QuarterlySame topicDiverse Musicological StudiesFrench-language works237,207