Caroline Bithell is Professor of Ethnomusicology at the University of Manchester, UK and a regular visitor to Georgia. She is currently conducting research into Georgian traditional music and dance funded by the British Academy and Leverhulme Trust. The project title is ‘Performing Georgia: From Heritage Preservation to Intercultural Musicking’. The main outcome will be a monograph which addresseses contemporary issues in ethnomusicology and heritage studies, using Georgia as a case study. Beginning with a survey of music and dance practices in different regions, the book will go on to explore connections between the UNESCO-supported renaissance of multipart singing in Georgia and the international network of ‘foreign’ singers who have formed Georgian choirs in their own countries and who travel to the Caucasus to study with Georgian song masters. Caroline’s analysis of the complex interface between state-sponsored programmes and grass-roots initiatives promises fresh insights into urgent questions about the sustainability of traditional music practices in the twenty-first century.

Can you please introduce yourself and tell us about your work in general as well as the ongoing project that is going to be a book on the traditional music of Georgia.

My current professional role is as a professor of ethnomusicology at the University of Manchester. I have degrees in ethnomusicology and languages and the reason that I discovered ethnomusicology as my true home is that it brings together music, anthropology and languages, all of which I love. My PhD was about the revival of traditional music in Corsica – how the revival developed in the 1970s in the context of the nationalist movement, then in the 1980s and 1990s in relation to world music. That then became my first book.

We kind of use the word “revival” in relation to something that had been lost, or that had been forgotten, or some descending tradition, and not as much as living any more. Is this correct to say about Corsican music?

It’s true to say that it had fallen out of favour with many Corsican people who had adopted a more modern lifestyle and related more (in the middle of the 20th century) to modern continental culture. So, people aspired to what they saw as a modern form of music and the old Corsican singers sounded very different. But I think of the term “revival” as a kind of shorthand for lots of terms that also begin with “re” but add different kinds of nuances. So we could also talk about “resurrection”, which does suggest bringing back something that had died, but we could also talk about the “reclamation” of something that had been repressed or lost for a while … like the chant tradition in Georgia that went underground, as if hibernating.

So to die or just be hibernating… These are two different things?

Yes, I would think of them as something different. We can also talk about renewing, refreshing, recreating, renovating. All of these words have slightly different nuances or resonances. So I think that something does not have to be completely dead or lost to be revived. Often, younger generations want to reclaim something from the past which had been neglected but which they now see as being valuable, sometimes for political reasons, sometimes for artistic reasons. When I made a proposal with my colleague Juniper Hill for The Oxford Handbook of Music Revival, one of the things we wanted to do was to come up with different models and different ways of theorising different kinds of revivals. We have a certain understanding of what we are talking about if we consider, for example, the North American folk revival or the Scandinavian folk revival. Yet in other parts of the world there have been similar processes of people reclaiming, rediscovering, reinventing, even if they haven’t used the word “revival”.

To go back to revival processes in Corsica, what did you observe there? Are there specific reasons or circumstances, including political or cultural changes, which pushed or inspired people to get back to something which had been either lost or hidden? What made them interested to get back to the roots/traditions?

It was quite specific in that Corsica is an island that has been passed between different ruling powers. It’s officially been part of France since the 1760s and French has gradually become the official language, but the Corsican language exists in its own right, so the songs became very important for the younger generation in the 1970s who were involved in the independence movement. Because the traditional songs were in the Corsican language, and because the style of singing and the harmonies and melodies and so on that were characteristic of Corsica set it very much apart from France, the songs became central to that struggle and a lot of young people started to think of themselves as cultural militants. They were using songs, music and other aspects of traditional culture to bring alive Corsica’s separate identity and to reclaim a sense of their own belonging to Corsica.

But things then changed again in the late 1980s because world music suddenly became a thing and there were then opportunities to perform Corsican music outside Corsica and to have concerts and CDs that would appeal to a wider audience. At that point it became less political and less inward-looking and more women started getting involved as well. In that way, Corsican music in its contemporary guise became far better known beyond Corsica.

You’ve been studying Georgian traditional music for some years now. Did you observe the same processes in Georgia? Or did you detect some other motivations/reasons for the revival of Georgian traditional music? Or do you think the life of Georgian traditional music has never been interrupted or terminated and it’s been more a continuous process?

First, if I can go back to Corsica I would like to say that in the 1970s it was like a real awakening and rediscovery, and it was about the reclamation of traditional life ways as well as traditional music and the Corsican language. Young people at that time felt that they had a mission to help this rebirth and they wanted more people in Corsica itself to recognise how rich the old traditional Corsican culture was. Later, it was more about popularising Corsican music outside Corsica. At that point, some of the musicians saw themselves as cultural ambassadors, taking the best of Corsican culture to show it to the rest of the world. That was an interesting shift. But two things then happened side by side. There were some people who still had very patriotic, nationalist aspirations and others who gradually came to see themselves more as artists in their own right: they were interested in exploring new developments based on the tradition but also how you can be creative with traditional material. There was quite an energetic debate about ‘tradition and modernity’ or ‘tradition and creation’. Some people were very conservative and had very strict definitions of what was authentic and what shouldn’t change. Other people said that tradition has always changed with each generation and it has to be alive, not just something in a museum. Each generation adds something from their own creativity and their own reality of life, without destroying the tradition – they just add something to it. So this was an interesting debate and it was interesting then to map that onto the kind of music that different groups presented on stage and on their CDs.

Earlier I asked you about Georgia, but in the meantime you raised an important issue that is very relevant for Georgia and seems to be universal. We also have many ongoing discussions about what is "right" and "wrong" when touching something traditional. In this way, we really label things, constantly evaluating and choosing between the two extreme poles. We, many of the Georgian ethnomusicologists, are very actively involved in this heated discussion, considering ourselves responsible for protecting authenticity and therefore being a kind of police of Georgian traditional music, while the so-called "inauthentic" part of traditional music is often in defensive mode to protect itself from these “police". Where do you think this might lead us? How can we judge what is really traditional and what is "right" or "wrong"? Does the oral (non-fixed) tradition, which has no strictly defined boundaries, allow us to decide what is the very original form of music that, like a living phenomenon, changes by passing from mouth to mouth?

Dance ensemble 'Ghorjomi" 

There is a problem about how far back you go if you want to compare a present-day interpretation with what you see as more authentic or a pure original, because it’s difficult to go further back than the earliest recordings and that’s only 125 years or so. What about 500 years ago or 1000 years ago? We don’t know. The concern to preserve and protect the tradition and not deviate from what is believed to be "authentic" tends to be strongest at the beginning of a revival when it’s really important to get this thing that has been lost or forgotten, and is no longer valued, back into the place it deserves. But there is often a relaxation with the realisation that this thing is now saved. In Corsica, people in the 1990s were saying: ‘Now we’ve saved the paghjella (the indigenous style of polyphonic song): we don’t think it’s going to die anymore, we don’t think we’re going to lose it. So, now that we’ve saved it, what do we do next? It’s another stage now. What comes after revival?’ For myself, I prefer not to think in terms of “right” or “wrong”, or “better” or “worse”, “good” or “bad”. Obviously, you can make judgments about some things being stronger or more convincing or whatever, but I like to think in terms of things being different and diverse. And I think diversity and richness imply different possibilities, not just one thing that’s always the same. This is why for my second book I used “different” in the title: I called the book A Different Voice, a Different Song. It was about more traditional or folk ways of singing with a natural voice, rather than a trained classical voice. But I didn’t want to say that one is superior, one is inferior; one should be rejected, the other should be promoted. There are different choices and different pathways, and they can exist at the same time. Some people go in one direction and some people in another. But also as an individual, you can do both. I saw this in Corsica with the groups who were involved in the revival of traditional songs and we can see the same in Georgia. You perform on the stage, maybe in your costume, and you perform a sort of polished, rehearsed version of your repertoire, but you might sing the same songs differently if you are singing around the table or at a wedding – that’s part of the flexibility in the songs themselves – and these ways of singing prove that the songs are really alive and not just something that has been very carefully preserved.

So, what have you observed in Georgia in respect of preservation of our musical repertoire or traditions? Have you seen any changes and would you say the process is becoming stronger, more things are happening or the opposite?

If we are comparing with trends in other parts of the world, the level of activity in Georgia is very high – the degree of involvement in traditional music and dance, organisations that support and promote traditional music and dance, the involvement of young people. That’s why I want to write as much as I can about the situation in Georgia – because I think it’s a really powerful example for other people to see what has happened here in recent years, particularly since the 2001 UNESCO proclamation. I can say more specifically that over the years that I’ve had some kind of relationship with Georgia, yes: I have seen an acceleration of musical activity. The main point of comparison I can make now is with the time I spent here in 2015 (about five months). Already there was a lot going on that made an impression on me. I got to know several ensembles in Tbilisi and I became aware of just how much they did together. Often they were rehearsing to sing at a wedding, at the grape harvest, at a conference – not only for the stage. Members of the group Adilei talked about how singing was for when you are together with your friends in the yard, for example. This kind of informal singing is important in providing a model that others can follow. I thought there were some very interesting seeds for me to watch to see how they would grow. At that time the Folklore Centre was just launching the salotbaro schools project. This time one of my priorities was to see how that project had developed. I was able to visit some of the schools and observe classes. I also went to the Voices of the Future festival in Anaklia and just recently I caught up with some of my new friends from the salotbaro schools at the festival of youth choirs organised by the Georgian Choral Society. There are now an astounding number of children involved in traditional folk music and dance – not only through the salotbaro schools supported by the Folklore Centre but also through private folklore schools, music schools, choirs attached to cultural centres, and so on – and that seems like a major advance. And again, so many young people are singing not only in the classroom or when they’re with their teachers. Sometimes I bump into groups of young people just singing on their own outside. There are also a lot more adult ensembles and it just so happens that in research terms I was lucky twice. In 2015, my stay overlapped with the National Folklore Festival and I was able to see several of the groups performing in the first round. Just by chance, the next edition of the National Folklore Festival was scheduled for this year and this time I have been able to attend many more days – in Tbilisi, Telavi, Mtskheta, Kutaisi, Zugdidi, Akhaltsikhe, Khulo, Keda, Batumi. It seems to me that there are now more ensembles (both vocal and choreographic), the repertoire is more varied and in terms of the criteria set by the jury the standard is surprisingly high. I saw so many truly outstanding performances!

You’ve said that this time you’ve seen impressive numbers of children involved in Georgian traditional music. I just had a thought that one of the reasons could be the increasing interest of foreigners. When Georgians see so many foreigners loving our own culture, it helps us appreciate our traditional heritage more. You already have a good experience in participating in singing tours. What in your opinion triggers increasing interest in Georgian traditional music by Georgians?

I’ve traveled with lots of foreign groups in Georgia and I think that can be one factor. I’ve heard people say that, when they’ve seen people coming from outside Georgia and really loving the culture and even learning to sing the songs, that has inspired them to think of their own culture as something that has a higher value and status. But I think that’s just one factor and I wouldn’t make a big claim for that. I think that’s been important, for example, for the project we’ve both have been involved with in Lakhushdi. In 2011 I was able to observe the first group of foreigners from Scotland and other places learning with the older song masters: Murad, Gigo and Givi. Every day some of the young girls and some very small boys would be sitting on a bench watching us, so yes, it did seem to work. I don’t think it was only that they thought: ‘Oh, we should take care of our traditions.’ It was also a way of making new friends and I think that’s equally part of the attraction at the salotbaro schools, for example, when the children are not only having their lessons every week but they are also being taken on outings where they learn something about the history of the region. So it’s not just about a singing class. It’s about all sorts of activities with a group of friends. I’ve also become very much aware on this trip of how much social media is used. Events might be live-streamed, or people might post photographs and videos later. This also reinforces and celebrates that activity.

Back to the revival of traditional music: we have talked about aspects of the revival movement in Corsica, but what can you say about the factors of the revival in Georgia? In the Soviet era, we had quite a rich traditional singing and dancing life, with a large number of choirs, festivals and olympiads and many masters of traditional singing employed by the government to work throughout Georgia. So what is the difference between the times of "now" (post-Soviet) and "then" (Soviet)?

First of all, I want to say that there is a big difference when comparing Georgia with Corsica because there was already a very rich musical life in Georgia that had gone through earlier phases of revival and renewal. But the most recent major impetus for reclaiming a certain aesthetic of traditional music in Georgia would be the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the shift away from Russian and Soviet influences back to a more rooted Georgian aesthetic, most often associated with people like Edisher Garakanidze and Malkhaz Erkvanidze, who pioneered a return to a sort of village aesthetic rather than the polished, professional, academic style of performance.  I have been trying to understand how people in Georgia viewed the kind of music-making that thrived in Soviet times as something that needed to change. In this case, it wasn’t about reviving the music itself. It was more about performance aesthetics. I’ve been reading the book that was produced for the recent memorial concert for Anzor Erkomaishvili and there are comments there about how there was a time when folk music wasn’t very popular: I don’t know enough about this to make a judgment about it. Obviously, in order to make an application to UNESCO for the safeguarding of intangible cultural heritage you need to frame your case in terms of music that needs support if it is to survive and you have to say why it is under threat, One of the other things I’m now interested in, in the case of Georgia, is how projects and initiatives that are supported by the state – through the Ministry of Culture, the Conservatoire, the Folklore Centre, etc. – are complemented by informal, individually-initiated, grassroots projects. This latter category includes things like people developing programmes whereby they welcome foreign guests to their village to learn songs from the song masters. That’s not something which the government set up or told them to do. Those projects tend to arise from personal connections and I find it extremely interesting because there are now very large numbers of foreign singers of Georgian songs involved and this has all developed as an informal economy, operating from the bottom up. Again, I don’t think either one of these trends is better or worse. I’m interested in the different ways in which Georgian traditional culture (specifically music and dance) has been enriched, the different ways in which it has been helped to secure a stronger foundation in the 21st century, the different ways in which it now has meanings and functions in real life, and the different ways in which these activities have enabled Georgians themselves, as well as people in other parts of the world, to become better acquainted with Georgia’s musical history and to have a deeper understanding of contemporary Georgian culture.

Ensemble Kolkha and lili Abdulishi 

I would like to continue the last point of your reflections and observations when you note the growing/high interest of foreigners who love Georgian music and seek a deeper understanding of Georgian culture, and therefore participate in projects initiated by private individuals. So, I would like to ask you a question not as a scientist, an ethnomusicologist, who studies Georgian music, but as a (non-Georgian) person who also studies and practises this music. So, you are striving to master the Georgian musical language through the study of these songs. What do you find so interesting and special about Georgian music?

Maybe the easiest answer is the harmonies, particularly the kinds of harmonies that are unusual and exciting to my ear because they are outside the range of harmonies we are used to in the Western classical or Anglo-American pop traditions. But it’s not just about hearing those harmonies. There are certain combination of notes where you have a sort of physical experience when singing those intervals, which is different from just hearing them as a member of an audience. People sometimes talk about it in terms of vibrations. It’s partly to do with how the harmonics work together. It’s also about voice production, timbre and singing quite loudly in the chest voice. When you are singing Svan songs, for example, you get a very powerful sound and you are very much in the middle of that sound when you’re singing. Also singing with other people: a really important aspect is the friendships you make in quite a short time with other people with whom you’re sharing what psychologists call “peak experiences” – in this case, very powerful emotions to do with singing together but also singing together up in Svaneti or Achara, in the mountains and in a village and with people from those places. And because you’re away from home it’s a really special experience and that’s also part of it. But of course, I’m never just there as a singer and a participant: I am always thinking about it as a researcher as well. When I’m learning Georgian or Bulgarian or Corsican songs, just trying to sing them gives me a better understanding of how the structure of the song works, and how certain stylistic features work, and why it’s like that, because you have a sense of your own body, your own breath – when you take a breath, how you listen, how you interact with other people – and that’s not just about interaction itself but about how those particular songs and particular styles are structured.

Returning to the topic of revival and the fact that you, as a scholar, are interested in a deeper study of these processes, how would you see the form of festivals and competitions that include a competitive aspect, especially among children and youth? This time in Georgia you attended a number of such festivals. Do they help the whole process of revival or development of traditional Georgian music? Or can they have the opposite effect, meaning that people can get frustrated and discouraged when judged by a jury and compared to other groups/performers and fail in this kind of competition?

It does seem, from my conversations with members of ensembles who take part in these festivals and contests, that having something to work towards is really important, and travelling and performing for a different audience somewhere else is really enjoyable, but the competition aspect not always so because people can then worry that they didn’t do as well as they had hoped. Obviously, there is a logistical problem once you get more and more groups who are actually very good and you’re going to have to make a distinction between some groups being better than others. Only one person or group normally wins first prize (or maybe you share the first prize), but what if there are thirty who deserve it or who are as good as you could expect them to be? The idea of there are being a bigger number of people who are laureates or who are invited to take part in the final display is one way of sharing things out as much as possible but this is one of the biggest challenges. I don’t know what the answer is but there are examples of big events that draw large numbers of participants and provide a platform for singing and dancing ensembles from all over the country without a competitive element. The Art Geni Festival is good example: it’s a celebration of different styles and traditions from all over Georgia without being a competition and performers still want to take part. And then there are other things like the National Folklore Festival which, at the moment, is structured in such a way that there are finalists and prize-winners but it must be increasingly difficult to decide who is first, who is second, who is third from among the impressive numbers who are recognised as laureates. It’s interesting to think about what would be a good model. I think a lot of people recognise that it’s really important to give and receive as much encouragement as possible.

Yes, but sometimes, as we both also witnessed in Achara, for example, people are very free, very inspired, very expressive and happy when they sing and dance at a supra or in other informal contexts, but we could hardly recognize them when we saw their performances at festivals. They seemed very reserved and reticent or nervous.

Yes, that’s true and it was something that surprised us. However, I think a lot of people recognise that encouragement is a good thing. If some people have some way to go in developing their full potential and you think they can do better, then how best to encourage and support them in a positive and constructive way (rather than risk discouraging them) is something we always have to think about. If we are concerned not only with preserving and protecting tradition but also with making it sustainable for the future, then we want as many people as possible to be singing and dancing, we want to help create as many opportunities as possible, we want to encourage people as much as possible. If the impetus to perform comes from people themselves, and it makes them happy and it has meaning for them and it has a function for them, then this is a good development, a healthy development. If we are thinking about sustainability and wellbeing then everybody doesn’t have to be the best. They can still be celebrated for doing their best.

Thank you Caroline for your time and generous and thoughtful sharing… and the last question is kind of technical. When can we read your book about Georgian traditional music that you are currently working on?

Books are a long process. Next year I’m free from teaching in order to complete the manuscript. It will then be submitted to the publisher, it will go through a process of review and I might be asked to make revisions.  After that, it will go through the various stages of publication. So, maybe in 2025...

Good luck with the book and with your future projects.