iDIDJ Australia Didgeridoo Cultural Hub

[ididjaustralia]

Does a didgeridoo that was made and/or painted by any Australian Indigenous person qualify as authentic?

_________________
iDIDJ Australia - Didgeridoo Cultural Hub
E-mail: info@ididj.com.au
Web: www.ididj.com.au
YouTube: www.youtube.com/ididjaustralia

[mahoran]

We start all over again ? )

_________________
no matter how thin you chop, it has always two faces!!!

[martin]

-- a cut and paste of some of my points from the youtube comments --

For me the heart of this question is in the actual meaning of authentic. If we are to be honest then authentic should refer to the cultural origins of the object and as such for me an authentic didgeridoo would come from Arnhem Land made by aboriginal people that have a continuous cultural connection to this instrument. If painted then it should also be painted by an aboriginal person in the same situation as the maker.

If one wants to consider parts of Aboriginal Australia where the didgeridoo is a relative newcomer then one needs to also confront other issues. Several generations of artists and musicians can mark the beginning of a tradition or cultural practice. When that relatively "new" pratice can be referred to as traditional with "authentic" products depends on some subjective judgement to be made.

_________________
http://www.fluiditj.com

[kdidj]

This is my first post from the old discussion, however the format here enables it in one post. There were further points of discussion but to reiterate all would take too much time!

Does a didgeridoo that was made and/or painted by any Australian Indigenous person qualify as authentic?

This is an interesting question as any answers are dependent upon how one defines 'didgeridoo' and 'authentic'.

If we accept that the didgeridoo originated in the Top End of Australia, in an area where the Aboriginal Clans and Tribes have it as part of their cultural tradition, then arguably any didgeridoo made by an Indigenous Australian from elsewhere could be considered not authentic.
This is where the definition of 'didgeridoo' becomes important for, broadly speaking, it has come to describe an instrument comprised of a hollow tube which is played by vibrating the lips and producing a drone which is then affected by tongue movement, vocal accents, breathing etc.
Traditionally of course, these instruments were crafted from bamboo, pandanus trunks or termite hollowed eucalyptus stems however today a number of materials are used to create instruments one could call 'didgeridoos', including plastics, polymers, metal and wood that is manually hollowed
'Authentic' can be defined as: not false or copied; genuine; real

However if we adopt a second definition perhaps my perspective will become more clear:

'Authentic': having the origin supported by unquestionable evidence; authenticated; verified

This definition refers to 'origin', defined as: something from which anything arises or is derived; source;

It is the reference to the origin or source which informs my view on this subject. It is understood that the didgeridoo is endemic to the Top End regions referred to above so, if we accept the definitions of 'authentic' and 'origin' stated above it would appear that instruments crafted in this region, or by Indigenous Australians from said region, would be considered authentic whereas instruments crafted elsewhere or by Indigenous Australians from other regions would not.

My interest in the didgeridoo is entwined with the culture from which it derives, so authenticity to me is dependent upon the relationship any instrument has to its cultural context. These tourist type instruments you mention Guan are to me not authentic at all, but to others they may feel that as it is from Australia, and apparently crafted by an Indigenous Australian, it is an authentic piece of cultural regalia!

To each their own I suppose although because I am aware of the instruments cultural and historical background my decision may be more informed than others.

As far as intellectual and custodial rights are concerned, I feel it correct to say that the Indigenous peoples of the aforementioned Clans and Tribes who hold the didgeridoo as part of their culture should hold the rights to the instrument, or at least those instruments that can be classified as having come from these people.
We have to understand that these instruments fit into a long-standing tradition of song, stories and dance and are an integral part of the religion of the region. For this reason I believe we are not in a position to say that these people can not have the sole custodial or intellectual property rights to the didgeridoo. Afterall, without these people we wouldn't have the instrument at all!

Of course there are many facets to this debate, but I thought it best to state things as I see them and see how the discussion continues.

Kyle

_________________
www.kdidj.com
www.myspace.com/kylemaplesden

[martin]

Actually, I really mean the Top End, as Kyle says, and not simply Arnhem Land - which is probably too restrictive.

This raises another question of defining boundaries.
On Guan's site where he speaks of the didgeridoo in the Kimberley region.
The didgeridoo entered this region in the (late) 19th century. The music style that they play is Wangga. I would say that the instruments that they make there are authentic also - they have a particular cultural origin, within the song and dance of that area.

_________________
http://www.fluiditj.com

[White Knight]

I think it would be great to be able to use a word like "authentic", or "traditional", or something else to be able to express the cultural significance of a didgeridoo. "Authentic" to me leaves too much in the open. "Traditional" at least implies that something has been passed down the generations (in my opinion anyway). However, I think general terms are too often missused to be a common way of a briefer identification.

To me, I would rather know the background or story behind a didgeridoo/yidaki. Who was it made by... who painted it... what (if any) does the artwork signify... what clan is the artist/crafter from... and any other important information (key/wood type, etc).

Sorry... I also find it hard to simply give a direct answer to the question.

Allan

[kdidj]

Good point Allan. Traditional does imply a continued period of use.

_________________
www.kdidj.com
www.myspace.com/kylemaplesden

[flyangler18]

Quote:

Traditional does imply a continued period of use.

And the fact that it also has a function within a genre of musical performance that has a social function beyond simple recreational playing within Top End communities, be it through wangga, gunborg, manikay-bunngurl, lirrja, dhanga, etc.

Such use can not be reliably applied to context in other parts of Australia.

_________________
www.jdidj.com

[Josh Staley]

What exactly are intellectual and custodial rights with regards to the didgeridoo? What does that mean for the peoples of the top-end to have those rights?

Ultimately, defining an authentic didgeridoo is going to be problematic. There are always going to be levels of authenticity, and different understandings of its meaning.

I think using the word traditional is definitely a better way to go, as its meaning is less ambiguous in this sense.

In the end, the people's of the top-end traditional connection with Yidaki and Mago can be used to effectually position their product at the high-end of the market. That is something that no other group has, and I think its a powerful selling point. Effective marketing can be used as means to educate potential buyers of the traditional use of this instrument and its cultural significance to the area from which it traditionally comes. I think that Ididj is a perfect example of that kind of approach.

I think buyers are discriminating enough to make good choices when given the information. However the sticky point of price remains. Undoubtedly many would choose to buy the mass-market souvenir type didgeridoo even with all the information, because of economic reasons. There is always going to be a market for low-quality inexpensive didgeridoos. I personally don't see why that niche shouldn't be filled by those willing to do so, no matter what their personal origin.

I understand that some of those who fill that niche do so through environmentally degrading practices such as indiscriminate clearcutting. Thats not good, but it allows another opportunity to use effective marketing to get the message out. Additionally some kind of certification could be set up, much like they have done hear in the States with logging. Some timber is certified by an independent group as being sustainably harvested (ie selective cut, sound environmental practices etc). A similar kind of certification could be offered for didgeridoos.

[flyangler18]

Quote:

What exactly are intellectual and custodial rights with regards to the didgeridoo? What does that mean for the peoples of the top-end to have those rights?

Intellectual property rights cover such things as artistic expression, musical traditions, etc with respect to customary law, that is, knowledge that has been passed through generations. For indigenous Australians, it is connection to 'country' that grounds (no pun intended) traditional knowledge of ritual, songs, ceremony, dance, etc. It is the performance of this knowledge through song and dance and didjeridu that demonstrates an intimate personal connection to their traditional ways, as well as 'ownership' of that knowledge through birthright.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/special/rsjproject/rsjlibrary/ilb/vol3/no77/3.html

How does it pertain to didjeridu? Well, as a cultural practice of Top End peoples in ceremonial contexts, then it is given the same intrinsic protections as song and dance.

There is space to reconcile customary law and practices with that of the dominant culture. There have been several land rights case where 'ownership' of land was demonstrated through large bark paintings, using sacred designs that are intimately connected to the landscape as a generative and creative force. And even when Yolngu and other Top End Aboriginal groups sell their instruments, they certainly didn't sell the rights to that knowledge!

Jason

_________________
www.jdidj.com

[Josh Staley]

Quote:

How does it pertain to didjeridu? Well, as a cultural practice of Top End peoples in ceremonial contexts, then it is given the same intrinsic protections as song and dance.

What does that mean in a practical sense? That no others should make didgeridoo? Or they must need the permission of people from the top-end to make didgeridoo? Or pay them a fee if thy do so? How would you like to see those rights exercised?

I think its somewhat unrealistic to only allow certain groups to be able to sell wooden tubes. Its such a simple concept that it seems impossible to really control. Protecting traditional designs, totems, songs, and dances makes sense to me, even protection on using the term mago or yidaki to describe an instrument. However, I feel like placing the same protection on the instrument in general is going too far. Especially instruments of such simplicity.

[flyangler18]

Quote:

However, I feel like placing the same protection on the instrument in general is going too far. Especially instruments of such simplicity.

And I think this is the central obstacle to overcome- because for Top End people, the didjeridu(when made by those people) is a totem, a symbol of identity and authority, and a musical instrument. \

Excerpted from the iDIDJ page on 'sacred origins':

Quote:

Djalu is fond of saying that a didgeridoo made by a traditional owner or custodian has spirit. The spirit is in the instrument itself, a genealogy dating back to the first didgeridoo. An instrument made by a non-Indigenous person, on the other hand, has no spirit but is merely a musical instrument like a trumpet or a trombone. The same applies to didgeridoos made by Aboriginal people who do not have the instrument as part of their cultural heritage.

Ultimately, I'm not sure how to reconcile this. For me, there is a certain 'soul' that instruments from Arnhemland and surrounding locales possess, a 'soul' lacking in more modern instruments or generic didjeridu from other parts of Australia. This is palpable because of the long cultural tradition that Top End peoples have in connection with didjeridu. There is meaning and symbolism implicit in traditional instruments that others simply lack.

I don't know how to eliminate the exploitation through inferior instruments of dubious origins, other than to simply stop buying them and to encourage others to do the same!

_________________
www.jdidj.com

[Clay]

Using the term traditional does seem to fit a bit better. Kyle's definition of "lips vibrating in a hollow tube" seems to be what one can define as a didgeridoo manufactured anywhere in the world. A hollow log eaten out by termites, or a bamboo stick could easily be seen as authentic. I find things that are regarded as traditional to be something special. It doesn't have anything to do with $$, it has to do with the roots of the whole thing. As a player, I want to learn about that in order to formulate my own way of playing.

Most likely, those that will post and use this forum will already understand the acoustic distinction between those didgeridoos purchased as souvenirs and the Yidaki and Mago acquired from dealers like ididj. To fully understand the cultural implications of mass-marketed "authentic" didges one must become aware. How do you acheive that? This is a good start.

Now, I've never been to Australia and I have no idea where these gift shops that sell "authentic" sticks are. Are these different than some of the stores we find online that claim to sell "authentic" didgeridoos? Or do they sell other Australian souvenirs, as well? These tourists are, more than likely, looking for a conversation piece when they have the Jones' over for the slide show of their trip to Australia. They probably bought it at a shop not too far from where a painted Aboriginal man was playing for the crowd. The only real way to educate these folks is to put a reputable dealer in these areas where tourists could have a chance to find them.

For the didgeridoo enthusiast, or player, you would hope that one would seek out as much information as possible. Since we've become an online shopping community, having ididj as a cultural hub and dealer is invaluable to those who wish to learn more.

[Josh Staley]

Quote:

Ultimately, I'm not sure how to reconcile this. For me, there is a certain 'soul' that instruments from Arnhemland and surrounding locales possess, a 'soul' lacking in more modern instruments or generic didjeridu from other parts of Australia. This is palpable because of the long cultural tradition that Top End peoples have in connection with didjeridu. There is meaning and symbolism implicit in traditional instruments that others simply lack. I don't know how to eliminate the exploitation through inferior instruments of dubious origins, other than to simply stop buying them and to encourage others to do the same

Yeah, ultimately we can just try our best to get the information out there and hope that informed people will make the right choices.

I am still not sure filling a niche that would not otherwise be filled could be considered exploitation. (ie the selling of crap didgeridoos for decoration) If the market exists someone will fill it. The people of the top-end could start making the cheap crap too if they desired, but it seems like they take their craft very seriously, which is why it should belong at the top of the market in terms of desirability. I understand that when you buy a didgeridoo from the traditional makers that you are getting something special, something more than just an instrument. Thats why I ordered one myself.

Years ago, I bought a bamboo didge that has aboriginal style artwork on it. It cost me $20 and I never for a minute thought the painting was legit in a traditional sense. Its was clearly mass-produced. I didn't really care what was painted on it, I just wanted a didgeridoo for little cost. Quality has a price, and I think most consumers know that intrinsically. The market for expensive high-quality stuff is always going to be smaller than the market for cheap mass-produced junk.

Strangely, if it weren't for that cheap mass-produced imitation, I would have never known about the real thing. If I had walked into the shop and seen price tags in the hundreds and thousands, I would have walked right out and given up on the whole idea.

[Josh Staley]

Quote:

Now, I've never been to Australia and I have no idea where these gift shops that sell "authentic" sticks are. Are these different than some of the stores we find online that claim to sell "authentic" didgeridoos? Or do they sell other Australian souvenirs, as well?

Most sell other souvenirs too, like kangaroo key chains, models of the Sydney opera house, boomerangs, fosters beer mugs, etc.

I agree that more shops retailing yidaki and mago in tourist areas could do a lot. Many want a cheap token of their vacations, but lots of tourists have a lot of money and would undoubtedly pay more for the finely crafted pieces from the top-end. The difference between the traditional and the mass-produced is obvious at first look.

I come back to my earlier point that the best way to change the market is though effective marketing of all the points we have been talking about.