Jews, Gypsies and Cliches

[Joshua Horowitz <horowitz...>]

>From Josh Horowitz:

I just received another letter from a klezmer enthusiast/researcher who
was asking questions about Jews and Gypsies. Below is his letter and
then my (as usual long-winded) answer...
 
Hello.
My name is Francesca Comisso. I am a young university researcher
(Sociology). Prof. Mark Slobin has suggested to me to contact you and
kindly
gave me your E-mail address.
Now I'm studying the history (and customs) of the Hebrew and Gypsy
population. The era considered is between the 19th century and first
half
the 20th century. The geographical area concerned is Eastern Europe.
In particular I was looking for a point/moment of contact between the
Gypsy
and the Jewish people. I directed my research towards their music.
The tentative conclusions I reached after months of research are the
following. They are not many but unfortunately sources are scarce!

a) Quality bibliography is scanty too, unfortunately.

b) In the geographical area covered (see above) there were some
professional
Gypsy musicians (itinerant) and some professional Jewish musicians
(itinerant).

c) I gave my attention to the concept of professionalism (1).

The following could be said. Superficially it seems that Gypsy and
Jewish
repertoires have merged together, but as a result of a deeper analysis
it
would be better to state that Gypsies and Jews have practised their
musical
professional activities in the same areas (and therefore acquired
similar
historical and social conditions). As a result, both groups performed
Bulgarian, Hungarian, Romanian, etc. repertoires, modifying them and, in
part, hybridising them with the ability of adaptation and transformation
characteristic of professional palayers.

d) Professionals = that made a living out of music

This is rare characteristic in traditional cultures, where it is usually
people with other jobs who are the musicians, offering their services to
community when required (festivities, marriages, etc).
Gypsy and Jewish professionalism had, in  the first place, a technical
skill
unequalled by other musicians. In other words, they used to add to the
local
repertoires the ability to play them better than the local musicians. In
other words, they used to add to the local repertoires the ability to
play
them better than the local musicians: this is the reason why they were
more
in demand for important occasions. But they had to be paid, albeit a
little,
normally the signing on fee was minimal, and they earned more money
during
the day by playng melodies on request for the participants of the party.
In
addition to their musical skill, their professionalism was also evident
in
the competence they had in knowing various repertoires (which they
needed to
perform well in order to satisfy the needs of the different
ethnic-cultural
groups present in those areas).

e) Afterwards they must have devoleped their own repertoire, which W.
Feldman defines as "transitional" (2), mixing various elements. But this
was
only a part of their repertoire. It is possible that the main proportion
of
their music was simply what the audience asked for: well played local
dances
to animate the party. Therefore, their role as "cultural contaminators"
needs to be put into prospective.

f) The majority of klezmer music was recorded on 78rpm records in the
USA.
Could it be therefore considered, in this sense, a product of the
culture of
emigration? But the question could be seen also from another point of
view.
"Klezmer music" is produced in the USA. The klezmorim played in Europe.
Today we call Klezmer both. If we are cultured we say "European
klezmer", to
define the songs of the klezmorim. Besides, I think that Feldman himself
has
just completed a new record (the previous one, in 1979, started the
"klezmer
revival"), with the title "European klezmer music".

g)In addition I find it very interesting that both groups of musicians
(Jews
and Gypsy) used to pass down this way of earning a living and organise
castes (of a lower rank, as far the Jews were concerned). I know that
Beregowski collected a lot of original material, but that his project of
interviewing the klezmorim and their audience could never be
completed...

In order to continue my research I need to solve many problems.
All the people I approached told me that what I am doing is very
interesting
but... and they stop at that.
I am convinced that I need to find some regional specificities to the
phenomenon in order to continue.
Could you help me, peraphs with some suggestions?
Forgive me for bothering you as I know that you are certainly very busy.

Thank you in advance for your attention.
bye-bye
dott. Francesca Comisso (ITALY)
...excuse me for my english, but..
_________________________________
(1) By the term "professional" I do not intend to refer to the current
sociologiacal meaning and even more not to the one which is prevalent in
sociological language (working activity higly qualified, performed by
educated people who have followed a long and focussed period of study;
etc.)
but simply to any working activity carried out regulary in exchange for
cash
payament.

(2) Walter Z. Feldman,  "Bulgareasca/ Bulgarish/ Bulgar: The
Transformation
of a klezmer dance genre",  Ethnomusicology, Winter 1994, pp. 1-35.

************************************************************************

from Josh Horowitz:

Dear Francesco,

your email brings up a lot of points. It will be easier if I lay them
out first as I understand them and then place them in my own context so
as to be able to answer them. I'll extract the following themes:

1) Itinerancy
2) Quality of Jewish/Gypsy renditions in comparison to local musicians
3) Relationship to employers
4) The US phenomenon of klezmer having defined the present known genre
5) Sources for Research

1) Itinerancy
The idea of the wandering musician comes for the most part from the
upper classes, the reasons for which I'll explain below. The
professional caste of klezmorim was highly stratified: This hierarchy
was structured loosely as follows:

A) klezmorim at the top of the hierarchy were those who were
acknowledged outside of their immediate sphere, for instance by rulers,
landowners and by the established concert world. They money was gifts
from the nobility.

B) Then there were composers at the Hasidic hoyfs (courts) who were
supported by their community and didn´t need to hit the streets. They
generally had regular salaries.

C) Next, there were professionals, and semi professionals (who worked
their main jobs in other trades). They received tips, table money and
tantsgeld (money for each dance) and serviced a defined radius within
reach of a days journey by coach, depending on the roads. 

D) and then there were the itinerant klezmorim who were constantly on
the move to play, often for non-Jewish engagements. They also received
tips, table money and tantsgeld (money for each dance) when playing
weddings, but they often played fairs and street gatherings and were
generally not able to penetrate areas which had organized guilds.

It's my guess that the classes of A and B were probably not under the
jurisdiction of the highly developed Guilds which existed throughout
Europe, though this needs to be investigated. Class C was indeed under
the jurisdiction of the guilds. If they happened to get a gig in a
territory of another band, this would have to be worked out. There were
fights also. Class D was the lowest and most highly romanticized, which
I will write about later, because they actually had the least visibility
and influence on the genre we know today as klezmer music

2) Quality of Jewish/Gypsy renditions in comparison to local musicians
To say that Jews and Gypsies played better than local musicians is to
disregard the very specific styles and abilities which *local* musicians
create. The Jewish and Gypsy professionals URBANIZED much of the
regional music they played, but this urbanization is specific to the
tastes of only certain groups. There are and were phenomenal rural
musicians. Many of these had their own guilds as well. In some regions
all of the musicians fell under the jurisdiction of ONE guild.

3) Relationship to employers of C and D
Evidence shows that more often than not, musicians had to PAY a sum or
give up an item of collateral in order to play a gig, and not vice
versa. This was in order to secure their place. The employers mistrusted
musicians and wanted to be sure they showed up on time and did their
job. In one region in Poland , when Jewish musicians were paid a base
fee for coming, this included only the kale badekns and mitzveh tants.
All the other dances and listening tunes were generally paid for
separately. An interview I did with a Gypsy musician who played with a
Jewish kapelye before the war in Romania told me that they even had a
chalkboard for keeping track of the tunes played. On the left side the
musicians marked down the dance or tune played  and on the right side
the name of the person who *ordered it* and the price. In another region
(Galitsia) the bass player had a cup with a lock on it hooked to his
belt. The guests would put their money in the cup and the musicians
couldn't steal the money. After the gig they unlocked and divided the
contents. Guests also put money into the tsimbl holes or tucked it into
the sound holes of the cello and violin. Generally the primas (1st
violinist) or badkhn (master of ceremonies) was in charge of the
finances.

4) The US phenomenon of klezmer having defined the present known genre
While it's true that the so called *revival* of klezmer music is based
primarily upon materials recorded in America, the genre itself is older.
Today, however, I don't think we can talk so easily about *American* and
*European* klezmer. Even a closer look at the 1930's will show you that
in Europe, there was a fashion of popular (i.e. jazzy) *Klezmer*
renditions.  

5) The sources
If you want to find out what's happened, find out what's happening. I
have to admit that I get very frustrated when I hear about lack of
sources, not because of the seeming lack of sources, but because there
is an ABUNDANCE of sources. There still are and always will be Jews who
remember. There still are and always will be Gypsies who remember. There
still are and always will be Jews and Gypsies who are playing their
music NOW. There are even documents still to be found. I hope you are
planning on doing some field work for your study. Because
even if you don't learn a thing about your subject and your informant
wants to talk about joint ailments the whole time, what you will
discover is that the history you are looking for is perhaps a projection
of what you want to see, and not necessarily the way things were or are.
It's important as a researcher to be confronted with this, because the
more you dig, the more you realize that what we've been handed down by
way of history is, at worst, an upper class romaticization or
deprecation of the phenomenon, or at best, an atomic perception of one
witness. The fact that there are less written sources about a subject
should make us open our eyes to certain mechanics about what history IS.

In the case of Jews and Gypsies we're almost ALWAYS dealing with
historical narrative or iconography which has been created by a class
which never penetrated the milieu it is portraying. It's intention is
often romantic, sometimes political. And the extent to which these
cliches have remained and been accentuated in the present day, even by
practitioners of the genre is incredible. The 19th century image which
have been handed down about Jews and Gypsies is nothing more than a
cartoon caricature of a complex, highly stratified, very sophisticated
musical culture. 
The same portrayers of history often did force Jews and Gypsies to act
out the cliches projected upon them, and these cliches also did become a
selling commodity for the musicians, and in this way the dynamic has not
changed to the present day.  The following quote, sent to me by Paul
Gifford, shows this:

1830s.  Leszno (Lissa), Poland.  "Jewish musicians constituted a
specific class.  They played almost all instruments. The Zymbel player
was esteemed as a great talent.  Like the Gypsies, they were natural
musicians and did not read music. They performed at happy festivities
and were honored well. But if a wedding party in a rich family took
place and they wanted to earn adequate payment, they appeared in a
peculiar costume. That consisted of a long caftan and an enormously
high, funny hat of quilted cloth." (Ludwig Kalisch (b. 1814), Bilder aus
meiner Knabenzeit [Leipzig, 1872], p. 141f., cited in:  Wolf, 28: 155). 

And there's more where that came from. 

I would like to elaborate more on all this, because it's central to the
Jewish/Gypsy theme. For me the interesting question is not *Did Jews and
Gypsies play with each other?* We know that they did. What is more
interesting to me would be the following concepts:

1) What was the hierarchical structure of Jews and Gypsies when they
worked together?
2) What cliches were projected upon them and by whom? 
3) What purpose did these projections serve?
4) To what extent and in which areas did Jews and Gypsies take on these
cliches and accentuate them and did this affect the style of the music? 

There are 2 people who have worked or are working on the subject of this
upper class projection in the area of *Gypsyology*. One is the
Australian, Adolf Sawoff, who has written on the idea of this projection
in the literature since the 16th century Picaro novellas, and the other
is Gerhard Steingress, Sevilla, who has written a landmark book on Cante
Flamenco, specifically about the misconception that Cante Flamenco is a
*Gypsy artform* and was in fact a politically manipulated style from the
beginning which was expanded upon by Gypsies. His ideas are very
applicable to the area of klezmer music. Adolf is an informant of mine-
very nice and communicative. If you would like to have contact with
either, they would both be more than happy. If this subject proves
interesting to the list, we can continue. It hits at the core of many
misconceptions we have about what has happened with what we today call
klezmer music. 

I'll give a few written sources at the bottom of the page. They are
many, many more. Thanks also to Paul Gifford for his tireless search of
sources... Take care and good luck... Josh

Poland:
 (Ludwig Kalisch (b. 1814), Bilder aus meiner Knabenzeit [Leipzig,
1872], p. 141f., cited in:  Wolf, 28: 155).

A. T. Sinclair, "Gypsy and Oriental Musical Instruments, " The Journal
of American Folk-lore 21 [1908], p. 207).

Jercy Ficowski, "The Polish Gypsies of To-Day," Journal of the Gypsy
Lore Society, 3rd ser., 29 (July-Oct. 1950): 93-94.

Hungary/Transylvania
Sarosi, Balint,"Die Volksmusikinstrumente Ungarns" in Handbuch der
europäischen Volksmusikinstrumente Serie I, Band I, VEB Deutscher Verlag
für Musik Leipzig, 1967.  In the same source, Sarosi writes that already
in 1830, there appear reports of Jewish Folk musicians by Rothkrepf
(1830, 38), especially in Toponar (Somogy, the region where the Cymbalom
above is from). 

Concerning Jewish Folk groups in the 19th Century in Hungary, Sarosi
cites Ödön Beke, Csokonai Dorottyájának toponári muzsikusai (The folk
musicians of Toponár in the poem "Dorottya" from Csokonai),  in:
Irodalomtörténeti Közlemények (Historical Literature News), Budapest 
1960, 476-480; 

L.Schloss, Jüdische Zigeunerkapellen in Ungarn (Jewish Gypsy Groups in
Hungary), in: Mitteilungen zur jüdischen Volkskunde (News regarding
Jewish ethnography), Vienna 1907, 3. Ungarische Übersetzung: L.Lakatos
(=Schloss), Magyar zsidó cigányok, in: Magyar Izraelita Irodalmi
Társulat Évkönyve (Yearbook of the Israelitic Hungarian Literature
Society). Budapest 1910, 200. 

Concerning a Jewish folk group which played around 1800 in the time of
the Mardi Gras , see Döme Lugosi, A szegedi zenekultúra története
(History of the Music culture of Szeged), in: Muzsika. Budapest 1929,
December, 24.

---------------------- jewish-music (at) shamash(dot)org ---------------------+