[Chen Zonghua] A brief discussion on the reflection on the evaluation criteria of intangible cultural heritage

[Abstract of the paper] At present, in the protection of intangible cultural heritage (hereinafter referred to as "intangible cultural heritage "), there are serious deviations in the evaluation standards, which are prominent in the original ecological folk song competition.

The evaluation misunderstandings in the original ecological singing method reflect the serious problems in the music evaluation standards that have long been in the mainstream position, which is universal in the protection of "intangible cultural heritage".

Only by correcting the issue of evaluation standards in a timely manner, breaking the monistic evaluation system, and establishing a diversified art evaluation mechanism can we truly promote the protection of folk art.

Accompanied by diverse art evaluation mechanisms, there should be diverse lifestyles.

Only "intangible cultural heritage" protection based on understanding is the basis for the practical realization of diverse evaluation standards and diverse survival styles.

At present, while achieving important results, domestic "intangible cultural heritage" protection has encountered many problems, and many of these problems are due to theoretical deviations in evaluation standards to a certain extent.

Since these theoretical deviations are more prominent in the original ecological theory and the protection practice of original ecological folk songs, this paper plans to take the original ecological singing competition as a case study and focus on the theory and protection practice of original ecological folk songs to reflect on the current "intangible cultural heritage" protection.

Evaluation criteria issues are reflected in order to provide reference for further theoretical construction and protection practice work.

Original ecological theory is a China-style "intangible cultural heritage" theoretical form.

In the current context of China, the main scope of discussion is the field of ethnic folk music, which is inextricably related to ethnomusicology theory.

This theory positions original ecological folk songs as follows: Original ecological folk songs are an important part of mankind's intangible cultural heritage.

They are folk singing music forms that are sung in specific areas, are less influenced by foreign music culture, are pure in style and have not been processed and refined, are naturally formed in the lives of working people, and are continued through folk word of mouth.

The term "original ecology" borrows the concept of "ecology" from natural science.

It originally refers to the survival and development state in which organisms and the environment interact with each other.

Borrowing this concept to folk songs should mean that various forms of folk songs are attached to various ethnic groups and regions form a symbiotic relationship of interactive influence with their ecological environment.

Factors such as different customs, dialects, natural geographical environment and living styles in various places will inevitably lead to different cultural connotations and artistic values of folk songs of various ethnic groups and regions.

Therefore, when evaluating them, we must not treat them simplistically.

Use one standard to unify different musical cultural products, or use the standards of one musical culture to evaluate another...

This has actually become an important evaluation principle for judging "oral intangible cultural heritage" and has long been common sense in cultural research.

However, we continue to violate the above evaluation principles in the protection of original ecological folk songs, especially the performance of various competitions of original ecological folk songs is the most obvious, which exposes our major problems in the issue of "intangible cultural heritage" evaluation standards.

problem.

In the various so-called original singing competitions held today, when evaluating, a more prominent phenomenon is the use of a single criterion to evaluate different folk singing methods.

The main manifestation of this evaluation misunderstanding is to examine and evaluate the folk singing of various regions and ethnic groups based on the academic concept of "scientific" singing.

There are currently two main singing methods that are positioned as "scientific" in China.

One is Western opera singing, that is, bel canto singing, and the other is modern national singing.

What these two singing methods have in common is that they are based on Western bel canto.

The vocal techniques are used as the yardstick, and the evaluation of original singing methods is mainly based on modern national singing methods.

First of all, aside from the controversy over the concept of "scientific" singing, as far as the evaluation process of the original singing competition is concerned, it completely adopts a rigid and uniform evaluation standard, which is obviously contrary to the characteristics of art, because the biggest characteristic of art lies in its particularity.

It obliges individuality and pursues standardization, which will not truly reflect the original appearance of folk art.

Moreover, the modern national singing method of the academic school is no longer purely original singing method from the perspective of vocal techniques.

It is a modern folk singing method formed by the fusion of bel canto singing and folk singing method.

Therefore, it is used as a criterion for judging the original singing method.

The standard is similar to the situation in music history research when classical standards are used to measure realistic or romantic works.

It is a kind of criticism that completely disconnects the criticism standard from the object of criticism, and the head is not right.

For original folk songs, their unique values and characteristics are not only reflected in the music style, accompaniment form, and performance form, but also in the uniqueness of the music singing style, that is, they are based on different language systems, aesthetic concepts, Thinking methods, psychological structures, etc., each unique singing method formed.

These unique singing methods formed in practice must not be easily erased simply with "unscientific" evaluations, nor can they be arbitrarily accused based on "scientific" ink lines.

Secondly, the singing method cannot be assessed based on whether it is "scientific singing".

Commentators believe that the real yardstick for whether a singing method is reasonable or not depends on whether it can survive healthily for a long time and be widely spread, whether it can withstand long-term practice, and be passed down from generation to generation, and whether it can Accurately convey the national spirit and national cultural psychology, and reflect its own unique aesthetic concepts.

Original ecological singing methods obviously meet this standard, because original ecological folk songs are musical styles closely integrated with their respective cultural ecology and are a concentrated expression of the special aesthetic concepts and aesthetic experience of national life; the choice of its artistic treatment and singing methods is also completely determined by the aesthetic concepts of the aesthetic subjects living in this cultural environment.

These artistic treatment and singing methods have gradually been fixed and passed down orally from generation to generation.

They are the most wonderful and appropriate for people in their own ethnic areas, but they may be unacceptable beyond "conventional" sounds for audiences in other ethnic groups and regions.

This is exactly how people who insist on scientific singing make judgments, which was extremely obvious in the "Youth Song Competition".

Some experts and singers generally expressed doubts about the singing methods of some original singers, and focused on discussing the issue of the "degree" of singer voice control.

As far as the issue of "degree" in song singing is concerned, on the one hand, the feeling of whether "degree" is appropriate is a direct reflection of music aesthetic experience.

Due to different aesthetic standards, different ethnic groups will inevitably have very different understandings of this issue.

Specifically speaking, each type of original folk songs is closely integrated with specific life scenes, production styles, life concepts, etc.

The singer's grasp of the length and length of song phrases, the strength and weakness of the breath, as well as the use of some unique musical expression vocabulary are entirely determined by the aesthetic concepts generated in this cultural environment, and there is no fixed principle of universality.

Therefore, we say that any song that comes from the singer's soul and can convey the cultural connotation of the nation and express the emotions of the nation is the most beautiful and best song for the appreciating group with the same cultural background and the same aesthetic taste.

As for the "aesthetic fatigue" that some experts call it, it does not exist for this group.

Moreover, some original singers can sing loudly on the "unfamiliar" stage, freely express their emotions, and enter a state of selflessness.

This kind of vocal technique, which is naturally used based on the needs of artistic expression, has no trace of a chisel.

How can it be considered unscientific singing? In fact, it is precisely because of the different standards for sound evaluation by different cultural groups that the seemingly "rough" and unpolished singing voice of the original singer is far from the "refined and standardized" voice of the academic school.

Therefore, in the opinion of many experts, original singer lacks a scientific and artistic grasp of vocal techniques.

However, if we conduct a practical investigation on the pronunciation method of the horse-head piano sound such as the Mongolian long-tune tune, and the pronunciation method of the Tibetan singer's throat swinging, we will find that this kind of unique sound is actually made by a person who has not mastered any pronunciation techniques.

This only shows that different aesthetic concepts will inevitably create different sounding techniques, and artistic expression needs are the basis for the formation of sounding techniques.

On the other hand, different musical functions inevitably lead to different understandings of "degree".

Original folk songs are used in many ethnic groups to meet the communication needs of people, or are used as tools for survival activities.

Whether they are practical or not becomes their primary function.

In singing practice, they are often "regarded as something with a clear purpose." For example, love songs are sung in some ethnic festivals to find a mate; some mountain people living in remote areas shout loudly with long voices in order to let the other party hear the message they want to convey...

In all these cases, the aesthetic and entertainment functions of music do not occupy an important position, and practicality is the primary purpose.

Therefore, for people living in these native environments, the singer's ability to make a practical and "appropriate" sound is the highest level of expression.

Under this special requirement, the aesthetic standards of original singers for sound are completely different from the standards of stage performance.

What we the public are usually accustomed to is performances on stage and TV media-singing with aesthetic and entertainment functions paramount.

Such singing is assisted by modern technological means such as microphones.

Naturally, the singer's volume and breath control are required to be moderate.

Therefore, the audience trained by the stage is also accustomed to the moderate volume of the stage and the "standardized and standardized""scientific" singing method.

They are very concerned about the extraordinary and wild sounds made by the original singers.

They will inevitably feel noisy and harsh, and they will inevitably feel difficult to understand and accept the special singing techniques and expression techniques they use, or even think them to be backward and unscientific.

Of course, during the competition, there was indeed the phenomenon of some original singers "roaring" in pursuit of high notes under the influence of performance requirements such as TV programs and evenings.

This phenomenon just proved from the negative side that original folk songs are not survival creatures on the stage.

Stripping off the soil on which they rely for survival, their vitality is no longer fresh.

As Li Song, the judge of this competition, said: Original singers are like turnips with mud burned by the spotlight.

Based on the above analysis, we can see that we should be very cautious when trying to evaluate the original singing style.

We must consider comprehensively the cultural ecology of its production, including its background, function, national aesthetic psychology, special music form and music system, etc.

Evaluate it by its own standards.

It is too simplistic and rash to generalize and negate with the word "science".

If we are still limited to a single system of standards, not only will we not be able to understand the original ecological folk songs, but their true value will also be obscured.

What is even more terrifying is that they may change and shape themselves under the pressure of strong words.

Adapt to the requirements of strong words and automatically die out.

Looking at the problems existing in the evaluation standards of original singing methods, we cannot help but reflect on the music evaluation standards that have been in the mainstream position for a long time.

It should be said that there are serious problems with this evaluation standard.

It can be said that the problems arising from the evaluation standards of original ecological folk songs are universal in the current "intangible cultural heritage" protection, so they must be corrected in a timely manner.

Regarding how to correct this problem, commentators believe that we must first subvert the monistic evaluation system and establish a multi-dimensional art evaluation mechanism.

Still taking music as an example, the music evaluation standards that have long been in the mainstream position show the profound influence of Western centralism on the development of music in my country.

Nowadays, when the domestic vocal music industry evaluates singing methods, whether the singing method is "scientific" has become the main evaluation boundary.

The non-scientific singing method, as opposed to "scientific" singing method, is understood from the perspective of singing techniques.

It should refer to the singer's discordant broken sounds, hoarse sounds, etc.

during singing, as well as the appearance of unnatural vocalization conditions such as incoherent breath and stiff body.

It should be said that these problems rarely exist in the singing of many original singers.

Their singing is usually harmonious and natural, and they can sing continuously and tirelessly.

This is obviously a vocal technique that suits human physiological conditions.

Even based on the current evaluation standards, these singing methods cannot be defined as non-scientific.

So why is it positioned as an unscientific singing method and given harsh treatment? The key crux is that influenced by the concept of evolution, people unconsciously believe that Western Bel Canto and the modern national singing method of the academic school established based on Western Bel Canto are the most reasonable and standardized singing methods that conform to the laws of human body sound.

Because ethnic minorities are backward and primitive nations, their art is also unscientific, and their vocalization lags behind the professionally trained vocalization methods in colleges.

They can only be regarded as living fossils in the history of music development.

Putting aside the serious deviation of this understanding from the principles of contemporary cultural anthropology, first of all, this understanding is non-historical.

Even for Western bel canto, which is currently advertised as "scientific", its emergence was not accomplished through scientific experiments and scientific design, but was summarized through the practice of the vast number of folk artists.

Even today, there is no formula for sound techniques that can be applied in these two singing methods.

The singing techniques that singers are talking about now are still different personal experiences and experiential things.

In fact, just like Bel Canto, any singing method that can be easily expressed and conveyed through long-term exploration in practice is reasonable, and everything else comes second.

From the perspective of artistic generation, the singing methods of various ethnic groups and regions are basically the same as the emergence of bel canto.

They make a difference.

It is a reflection of the different cultural code systems of various ethnic groups, and there is no distinction between them.

As Gombrich said: "What distinguishes us is not their level of craftsmanship.

It's their ideas, and it's important to understand this from the beginning, because the entire history of artistic development is not a history of technical proficiency, but a history of changes in concepts and requirements." Therefore, for various independent music forms belonging to different cultural systems and music systems, people cannot measure one form according to the standard of another.

Secondly, the concept of evolution is not applicable at least to the history of artistic development.

This has been explained many times in the works of Marx and other thinkers and art historians.

The more new it appears, the more scientific it is, nor is it the present.

Always better than the past.

In addition, the discourse hegemony implicit in this theory of social evolution is extremely harmful to the protection and development of art.

Lessons from history are enough to warn us.

Luo Qin also gave an accurate description of this:"Social evolution does not take cultural differences in space as a concept, but takes advancement or backwardness in time as a standard...

The result is to deprive others of their right to survival and destroy others 'social operation and interrupt others' cultural extension."

In short, from a theoretical perspective, the traditional monistic evaluation system lacks rationality.

Diversified artistic existence requires diverse evaluation mechanisms.

Only by establishing a diversified evaluation mechanism can it be possible to build an equal platform for diversified dialogue, so that the original ecological singing method, Bel Canto singing method, modern national singing method, etc.

can be on the same platform for equal dialogue and mutual promotion.Only in this way can we make a more fair evaluation of various music styles and promote their protection and development.

Only then can the development of folk art like folk music obtain a truly relaxed and reasonable environment, so that it will not be far away from the vitality and complexity of the original development state.

It should be said that this is not simply a change in mechanism, but more essentially a reflection of a change in understanding.

This is the most important conceptual guarantee for protecting and developing "intangible cultural heritage" including original ecological folk songs.

Accompanied by diverse evaluation standards should be diverse lifestyles.

As far as original ecological folk songs are concerned, their way of survival is original ecology, that is, their natural occurrence, development and inheritance in their living environment.

However, activities like competitions have gradually tried to root original folk music in new and different living environments, and the tendency of non-folk music has been continuously strengthened.

This is in line with the "people-oriented principle and the whole principle of protection" that are followed by the protection of intangible cultural heritage."The principle of protection and the principle of living protection" are seriously deviated, and at the same time they are also contrary to the purpose of protecting and developing original folk music.

When it comes to competitions, bringing original folk songs to the stage for competitions has caused them to "mutate".

Because the original ecological folk songs are originally spiritual products born in a unique living soil, which are connected to the natural, cultural environment and social life on which they rely for survival, and have become an important way to maintain the material and spiritual life of the people or nation in a certain area.

The way is inseparable from their survival and development for a moment.

Once moved to the stage for a competition, although its notes, melody, repertoire, musical instrument configuration, and personnel combination have not changed, the venue for the performance, The identity of the singer has changed, so the music function at this time.

The cultural meaning of singing has also changed, in terms of its own meaning and function.

This activity becomes completely an activity that is "alienated".

A truly original folk song, as Mr.

Qiao Jianzhong said: "In addition to the original style and singing style...

the singing environment must also maintain its original state." To truly protect and develop original ecological folk art, we should completely return its cultural form to the original ecological environment and avoid organizing activities similar to the original ecological folk art competition.

Moreover, we should display and promote a nation's traditional art and national spirit.

There are all kinds of more appropriate ways.

This issue has aroused the thinking of many scholars.

Further, if you want to promote and promote the protection of "intangible cultural heritage" of all ethnic groups, you must respect its culture, implement comprehensive protection measures in all aspects including environmental protection, and protect the overall culture of the nation.

Consider the development of the nation itself, rather than relying on discourse hegemony, and, driven by commercial interests, abuse the concept of original ecology and original ecological cultural forms without restrictions, and blindly make original ecological art stage and non-folk.

In fact, this practice is accelerating the alienation of original ecological art and accelerating its extinction process.

This is not without lessons in history.

Of course, the prerequisite for protection is understanding, and understanding is the basis for the practical realization of diverse evaluation standards and survival methods.

This requires first truly unlocking the code system and grammar system of each ethnic group's culture, so as to open the door to the treasure house of folk and national art of all ethnic groups and regions, and grasp their true significance.

This is extremely critical to protecting national and folk culture.

On the one hand, protection with understanding can be real protection, and excavation without understanding the meaning will only be destructive or even devastating; On the other hand, although the living environment of folk art cannot be static and it is always in the process of change, as long as the roots of national psychology, spirit and soul of national art can be grasped, no matter how the external environment changes, the core of national culture and the soul of national art will not change.

In this way, folk art will be passed down from generation to generation and will be carried forward in new and continuous development.

(Source: Henan Social Sciences)