Noel Niehaus is a waiter at Yogi’s Restaurant. His real occupation and passion is musical performance. Noel is a songwriter, musician and performer. He says that music gives him a sense of connection. To him, “it’s his home.” With music he can be himself. When he is composing, playing and singing, he feels he is the most honest person he can be, true to himself.
Noel is a self-taught musician. He has had no formal training. He may have inherited his love of music naturally, as his family has a musical and acting heritage. His father’s family had several musicians. His great grand uncle, until the age of 85, played sax and other horn instruments in a Big Band era music band. He was a role model and inspiration for Noel, and sadly died two years ago. His father was not as musical, but his mother was a singer in the church choir and played piano. Noel says there was always music in his home, growing up. His older siblings are artistic and both ultimately became theatrical actors. Their parents “forced” his siblings to take piano lessons when they were young and they rebelled. Noel, as the youngest child, was never forced to take piano lessons, and he never did. Yet, today he plays the piano by ear as well as rhythm guitar, both totally self-taught.
Noel started singing in school. He recalls his first solo at the age of seven in a third grade musical. He loved the acting that went with the singing. From a very young age, and until puberty, he could hit a high C, so his natural skill got him recognized more as a singer than an actor. During his sixth grade year, he won the state-wide COY singing contest and was named Indiana’s best young male vocalist. That same year he attended an Elton John’s concert which subconsciously set his professional direction. Though his parents did not support his professional musical direction, they gave him the freedom to pursue his dream. Noel stays in touch with his elementary teacher. She encouraged his gift for singing and built his confidence early in his life.
As a songwriter, Noel has written about ninety songs. He has sold one song, though the major focus of his songwriting is for his band, Knundrum, to perform, vis-à-vis both their albums and their live performances. Songwriting is a creative process for him. He writes “when the mood hits”. He says it is a gut feeling. The notes and the words come to him due to some drama in his life, or he creates drama so that he can write a song. Songwriting is a release. His first song was inspired by a breakup with a girl and he needed an outlet to vent. That first song was named “Separate Ways.” He says he learns from his songs though sometimes it takes years for him to learn the lesson. Music, he says, is the greatest teacher I have ever had. Negative incidents initiate his songwriting, though ultimately his songs have a positive vibe. His songs speak of life’s experiences, a peaceful, better world, and relationships with nature, thus interpreting situations in positive ways. There is something to learn from his songs.
Noel likes creating music. Sometimes creation comes together at one sitting, and other times over a long period. Lyrics come to him spontaneously, often outside the period when he is songwriting. He gets the lyrics out of his head and onto paper, whether for a song now or later. Like art, Noel says the key to his writing songs is to determine when the song is complete. He has some lyrics that are still “not done” after seven years. With the lyrics documented, he develops four chord progressions to develop the melody for the lyrics, and the rest is in his head. He remembers all his songs, even when they are in the formative stages. Then it becomes a team effort by the band. Noel plays the melody, with the band becoming part of the creative process to fill in the harmony, the rhythm, and the beat. In their repertoire, they have instrumentals as well as lyrical songs.
The band is in the studio during the year and on the road in the summer. They are currently working on album five and six – one is a studio album and one is a recording of a live performance from one of their shows. They are also working on a DVD recording; the visual is complete and the music recording is now underway. The band averages about 14 live shows a year, one or two a month. Their songs are accessible online, with royalty income for I-Tunes, Rhapsody, Music Match, Verizon, and Cingular downloads.
Noel says Knundrum’s sound is distinguishably theirs. He calls it world fusion, a jazz eclectic fusion genre, or new age folk rock. Their website describes it as “bluegrass fused with new age folk rock and psychedelic jazz." One can listen to his music by accessing www.knundrum.com. When asked how Knundrum gauges success with its live audience, Noel’s reply was multi-faceted. The tangible indicators include repeat bookings by the venue, onsite purchase of CDs and DVDs, supportive emails by audience members, and thank yous at the performance’s end. The emotional indicators are the goose bumps he gets during some performances, feeling the vibes of the audience and reacting to their callbacks at the performance’s end.
Though he is in music because he loves it, ultimately it is a chosen vocation. Noel sees his music as his legacy, for others to enjoy one hundred years from now. He is proud of his family’s musical and dramatic heritage and sees himself as adding to that tradition. Noel foresees a future in music that will sustain him and the other band members. His gut feeling is that his musical career will work out eventually. The challenge is keeping the band interested and together long enough for this to happen.
This blog entry is my response to Encounter Project Four, Material Culture (Artist).
Sunday, March 30, 2008
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Folklore Performance - Verbal Art
It is clear that the folklorist looks at performance differently than I have. The knowledge gained from this chapter has broadened my understanding of performance. An analytical point-of-view can now be added to my assessment of a performance, which should deepen my connection and comprehension of the performance as an audience member. It has also provided me the opportunity to better interpret a folklorist’s perspective and the pitfalls in the evaluation of a performance, as a folklorist is both an observer and a participant.
I already understood the general definition of performance, “an expressive activity that requires participation, heightens our enjoyment of experience, and invites response” (128). However, the message in this chapter is that folklore performance is more than just its entertainment value. It brings the performer and the audience together, creating an event, encouraging “lively communication . . . through the sharing of folklore” (173). It had not occurred to me that conversation between people could be a folklore performance, or said another way, “verbal art” (133). To think that telling an unrehearsed story or reciting a proverb in a casual setting, is conversational performance makes performance as much an everyday occurrence as the more obvious performance in venues where preparation, rehearsals and more structured surroundings are utilized (141).
The markers that frame a verbal performance, that is the signaling of its beginning and end, are now recognizable to me as playing a role in the performance (133). There are different kinds of performance markers that are subliminally understood, depending upon what type of verbal text is to be framed. As examples:
· for storytelling, “Once upon a time” and “They lived happily ever after”,
· for proverbs, “You know what they say, …”,
· for jokes, “Did you hear the one about …”,
· as gestures or tonal signals, as in eye contact or lowering one’s voice for emphasis,
· as evaluative markers, like laughter, and
· as customary markers, like “knock on wood” (142-143).
These categories of verbal folklore can be used as sparks for change, as in political jokes or trickster antics (153), and they also can express continuity, connecting to and reinforcing folk traditions, as in the story of the miner father’s lunch bucket (146).
The authors brought clarity by the comparison of fine art performance to folklore performance. Folklore performance is evaluated by “community consensus”, by those in the audience who are within and outside the folk group (157). Fine art performance is only a personal evaluation, either by the person looking at the object or by the critic, with specific, formal knowledge of the art form. Folklorists are interested in the group’s interaction and reaction, not the individual’s. Folklore performance texts combine the artistic, or aesthetic, and utilititarian qualities, typically having a practical role in the community to teach a lesson, to emphasize a moral value, or to pass on history and heritage to “reinforce past group aesthetic” (157). Fine art typically has no utility and is new and artistic for art’s sake.
Context is important to a performance assessment. One should understand the relationship between the listeners, the text and the performers’ expressions (137). Additionally, both the physical context (the setting, the text and other physical elements) and social context (broad elements of community and culture) of a performance not only can affect each performance differently, but also can affect differently the performance’s interpretation by the audience (149). In performance, ultimately it is people who are the key to the sharing of folklore: the performers with their expressions of the text, and their skill and competence to do so, and the audience with their aesthetic reaction, their history with the art form and their judgment of the performers.
This blog entry is my response to the Chapter Five Reflection Question.
Works Cited
Sims, Martha C., and Martine Stephens. Living Folklore An Introduction to the Study of
People and Their Traditions. Utah: Utah State University Press, 2005.
I already understood the general definition of performance, “an expressive activity that requires participation, heightens our enjoyment of experience, and invites response” (128). However, the message in this chapter is that folklore performance is more than just its entertainment value. It brings the performer and the audience together, creating an event, encouraging “lively communication . . . through the sharing of folklore” (173). It had not occurred to me that conversation between people could be a folklore performance, or said another way, “verbal art” (133). To think that telling an unrehearsed story or reciting a proverb in a casual setting, is conversational performance makes performance as much an everyday occurrence as the more obvious performance in venues where preparation, rehearsals and more structured surroundings are utilized (141).
The markers that frame a verbal performance, that is the signaling of its beginning and end, are now recognizable to me as playing a role in the performance (133). There are different kinds of performance markers that are subliminally understood, depending upon what type of verbal text is to be framed. As examples:
· for storytelling, “Once upon a time” and “They lived happily ever after”,
· for proverbs, “You know what they say, …”,
· for jokes, “Did you hear the one about …”,
· as gestures or tonal signals, as in eye contact or lowering one’s voice for emphasis,
· as evaluative markers, like laughter, and
· as customary markers, like “knock on wood” (142-143).
These categories of verbal folklore can be used as sparks for change, as in political jokes or trickster antics (153), and they also can express continuity, connecting to and reinforcing folk traditions, as in the story of the miner father’s lunch bucket (146).
The authors brought clarity by the comparison of fine art performance to folklore performance. Folklore performance is evaluated by “community consensus”, by those in the audience who are within and outside the folk group (157). Fine art performance is only a personal evaluation, either by the person looking at the object or by the critic, with specific, formal knowledge of the art form. Folklorists are interested in the group’s interaction and reaction, not the individual’s. Folklore performance texts combine the artistic, or aesthetic, and utilititarian qualities, typically having a practical role in the community to teach a lesson, to emphasize a moral value, or to pass on history and heritage to “reinforce past group aesthetic” (157). Fine art typically has no utility and is new and artistic for art’s sake.
Context is important to a performance assessment. One should understand the relationship between the listeners, the text and the performers’ expressions (137). Additionally, both the physical context (the setting, the text and other physical elements) and social context (broad elements of community and culture) of a performance not only can affect each performance differently, but also can affect differently the performance’s interpretation by the audience (149). In performance, ultimately it is people who are the key to the sharing of folklore: the performers with their expressions of the text, and their skill and competence to do so, and the audience with their aesthetic reaction, their history with the art form and their judgment of the performers.
This blog entry is my response to the Chapter Five Reflection Question.
Works Cited
Sims, Martha C., and Martine Stephens. Living Folklore An Introduction to the Study of
People and Their Traditions. Utah: Utah State University Press, 2005.
Monday, March 3, 2008
A Christening Ritual
An event of special meaning to me and my family was the christening of my nephew and godson, Hugh Maxmillian McCrea III. A christening is an a ritual, a “ceremony . . . that enact[s] deeply held beliefs or values” (Sims & Stephens, p. 94). My brother and sister-in-law, as Catholics, planned to raise their child with their same religious beliefs and values. Hugh’s christening marked his new beginning, signifying a change in his status - his new identity as a Catholic, named for his paternal grandfather and father (Sims & Stephens, p. 105). The christening was meant to be a “significant expression of” family identity and Catholic beliefs and values (Sims & Stephens, p. 95). His christening was a naming ritual, and as well it had some attributes of a rite of passage ritual not only for the baby, but also his godparents (Sims & Stephens, p. 110, 120).
Hugh was born in November, 1979. The following January the christening took place. This was a high-context ritual as it was a formalized, planned event (Sims & Stephens, p. 99). It was planned in advance with invitations sent to family and close friends. As godparents-to-be, both my brother-in-law and I were required to attend a training class at the church to understand what it would mean to be a godparent throughout Hugh’s life. The christening was structured and controlled, conducted by a Catholic priest and held in a formal setting with everyone dressed in their finery (Sims & Stephens, p. 95, 99). Hugh wore the traditional baptism costume, a long, white cotton and lace gown, silk booties and a christening cap that tied beneath his chin (Sims & Stephens, p. 95). He was wrapped in a silk baby blanket.
This was a standard, repetitive ceremony, patterned after other Catholic christenings (Sims & Stephens, p. 95). However, the traditional protocol was not completely followed as I am a Protestant, and it is not standard for a non-Catholic to be a godparent. Because I was not a member of the Catholic Church (not in their folk group), the Church required me to prepare differently, taking extra steps to ready for Hugh’s christening.
The christening event was a combination of both a sacred ritual and a secular ritual (Sims & Stephens, p. 102). The christening was held in a local Catholic Church in Houston, Texas and was a religious, sacred Catholic ceremony including prayers, religious music, bible scripture, blessings, the symbolic anointment of water on Hugh’s head symbolizing the cleansing of his soul, and the announcement of his name and that of his godparents, all reflecting an action-driven tradition (Sims & Stephens, p. 97). The formal christening brought together verbal (prayers and songs), customary (gestures and movements) and material (costumes) folklore (Sims & Stephens, p. 95). The celebration that followed the christening at my brother’s home was a secular, less formal conclusion of the event, with food and drink, laughter, baby gifts and fanfare, and a few diaper changes. The party was a way to congratulate the parents and godparents, and a chance for friends and family to personally welcome Hugh into the family and the church.
The christening was framed initially with everyone arriving at the church at the designated time, taking a seat and then the music beginning, heralding Hugh, his parents, and his godparents-to-be to the altar (Sims & Stephens, p. 97). The conclusion was framed by the party reception and a toast to Hugh’s future.
This Christening ceremony was an outward expression, emphasizing Hugh’s parents’ beliefs in their religion and their love for his grandfather, so much so to name Hugh after him (Sims & Stephens, p. 96). Hugh’s christening initiated “an important stage of his life”, a newly baptized baby with new godparents who also entered a new stage in their lives, one committed to helping support and guide Hugh’s future (Sims & Stephens, p. 94, 113).
This blog entry is my response to the Chapter Four Reflection Question.
References
Sims, M. C., & Stephens, M. (2005). Living folklore. Utah: Utah State University Press.
Hugh was born in November, 1979. The following January the christening took place. This was a high-context ritual as it was a formalized, planned event (Sims & Stephens, p. 99). It was planned in advance with invitations sent to family and close friends. As godparents-to-be, both my brother-in-law and I were required to attend a training class at the church to understand what it would mean to be a godparent throughout Hugh’s life. The christening was structured and controlled, conducted by a Catholic priest and held in a formal setting with everyone dressed in their finery (Sims & Stephens, p. 95, 99). Hugh wore the traditional baptism costume, a long, white cotton and lace gown, silk booties and a christening cap that tied beneath his chin (Sims & Stephens, p. 95). He was wrapped in a silk baby blanket.
This was a standard, repetitive ceremony, patterned after other Catholic christenings (Sims & Stephens, p. 95). However, the traditional protocol was not completely followed as I am a Protestant, and it is not standard for a non-Catholic to be a godparent. Because I was not a member of the Catholic Church (not in their folk group), the Church required me to prepare differently, taking extra steps to ready for Hugh’s christening.
The christening event was a combination of both a sacred ritual and a secular ritual (Sims & Stephens, p. 102). The christening was held in a local Catholic Church in Houston, Texas and was a religious, sacred Catholic ceremony including prayers, religious music, bible scripture, blessings, the symbolic anointment of water on Hugh’s head symbolizing the cleansing of his soul, and the announcement of his name and that of his godparents, all reflecting an action-driven tradition (Sims & Stephens, p. 97). The formal christening brought together verbal (prayers and songs), customary (gestures and movements) and material (costumes) folklore (Sims & Stephens, p. 95). The celebration that followed the christening at my brother’s home was a secular, less formal conclusion of the event, with food and drink, laughter, baby gifts and fanfare, and a few diaper changes. The party was a way to congratulate the parents and godparents, and a chance for friends and family to personally welcome Hugh into the family and the church.
The christening was framed initially with everyone arriving at the church at the designated time, taking a seat and then the music beginning, heralding Hugh, his parents, and his godparents-to-be to the altar (Sims & Stephens, p. 97). The conclusion was framed by the party reception and a toast to Hugh’s future.
This Christening ceremony was an outward expression, emphasizing Hugh’s parents’ beliefs in their religion and their love for his grandfather, so much so to name Hugh after him (Sims & Stephens, p. 96). Hugh’s christening initiated “an important stage of his life”, a newly baptized baby with new godparents who also entered a new stage in their lives, one committed to helping support and guide Hugh’s future (Sims & Stephens, p. 94, 113).
This blog entry is my response to the Chapter Four Reflection Question.
References
Sims, M. C., & Stephens, M. (2005). Living folklore. Utah: Utah State University Press.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)