HYBRIDITY, CULTURAL DIFFERENCE AND THIRD SPACE
Hybridity is a concept originated in the field of biology in the study of genetic variability, and later it has become a key concept in postcolonial theory, media studies, and social sciences. Hybridity helps us understand the mixed culture of the globalized world. In Kraidy’s definition:
”Used to describe mixtures of cultures, races, languages, systems, even paradigms, hybridity emerged in the 1990s as a master trope, a necessary heuristic device to understand a world in flux.” (2017, p. 90)
Homi K. Bhabha, a critical theorist, Harvard professor, and one of the most influential contemporary postcolonial thinkers has written a lot about the concepts of hybridity, difference, and Third Space. According to Bhabha, it is important to understand that cultures are always hybrid. They are constituted in an ongoing process of huge amounts of influences and elements - culture is always in motion (1990, p. 210-211). When we make any claims or definitions about a certain culture they are always made from a point of view in place and time and they are always subjective. The concept of hybridity is controversial, for even though it can be seen as potentially culturally progressive phenomenon of mixture, the framework for cultural hybridity is usually that of the dominant culture (Kraidy, 2017, p. 91), which in the case of postcolony would refer to the culture of the colonizer and in the case of globalized media, to the American.
This is why Bhabha prefers the concept of cultural difference to cultural diversity, a term so much loved by cultural relativist liberals in the West. To him ”diversity” refers to a system where the culture in power gives the space for diverse cultural minorities under its wings, but at the same time gives them their definition and limits from its own perspective. The ideal of multiculturalism is based on the utopian universalist idea, that all cultures can coexist easily and beautifully, but this statement often has the hidden, unuttered sidenote: as long as they are contained by the West. (1988, p.18-19). With the concept of cultural difference, Bhabha emphasizes how important it is to see the actual difference between cultural practices and let them ”articulate in challenging ways, either positively or negatively, either progressive or regressive ways, often conflictually, sometimes even incommensurably” (1990, p. 208).
Bhabha depicts the state of this ”alien territory” where new culture is ”contextualized” with the concept of Third Space. Understanding the intrinsic hybridity of cultures and the aspect of cultural difference, new cultural practices and meanings can be forged in a Third Space, that is not predefined by essentialism of the original cultures (1988, p. 20-22). In Bhabha’s words:
”...third space displaces the histories that constitute it, and sets up new structures of authority, new political initiatives, which are inadequately understood through received wisdom” (1990, p. 211).
MUSICAL COLLABORATION BETWEEN CULTURES
Artistic collaboration is the process of several artists joining forces to achieve something together. In practice, this might mean performances, learning, exhibitions, research, or as in this case, records. It is agreed by some researchers that openness, willingness to learn from each other, and respect of different views and eagerness to discuss them are intrinsic to successful artistic collaboration (Barbour, K., Ratana, D., Waititi, C., & Walker, K. 2007. p. 51). According to Nikos Papastergiadis, the Professor in the School of Culture and Communication at The University of Melbourne, to co-operate, artists need to learn each others’ languages, set common goals and discuss the eminent differences. These traits are not always easy or at all self-evident (Papastergiadis, 2000). Papastergiadis states that artistic collaboration is easily taken for granted, but for it to become meaningful and satisfying the people taking part need a set of skills and a state of mutual understanding that takes goodwill, time, patience, and maturity to emerge. This can be contradictory to some of the stereotypes there are about being an artist: individuality, vision, stubbornness, even a sort of ”me versus the world” -attitude. Nevertheless, even if the process sounds quite challenging put this way, a great deal of learning and refining one’s world views and artistry is going to happen all the way. In his words:
”Collaboration can create a new third way of seeing the connection between things or it can deepen the rift in between. To see a bridge may be as useful as to witness the gulf, either way the difference of others needs to be recognized” (2000).
Nathan Riki Thomson, a musician and Head of the Global Music Department at Sibelius Academy, UniArts, Helsinki, contemplates on the concepts of hybridity and third space in his exposition ”Sonic Conversations for Double Bass, Berimbau and Sámi Joik: Shaping Identity in the Third Space” (2020). He applies the Bhabhian concepts to his work with intercultural dialogue and collaboration in music. Thomson emphasizes the role of negotiation and exploration in musical collaboration and the importance of openness, mutual respect and equity. He sees these collaborations between musicians as generating a third space that emerges, while individuals, already culturally hybrid in themselves, are taking part in an activity with an outcome that is ”something that would not have existed if this particular process, between these particular people, had not taken place” (2020).
According to Thomson, equality, equity and non-hierarchical dynamics are essential to meaningful collaborative artistic processes, but he also raises the notion that some artistic processes might have a sense of mutual ownership and collaborativeness even if they are more or less led or facilitated by a certain individual. Thomson calls for active re-evaluation and consideration in intercultural artistic collaboration to ensure that all individuals are heard, valued and respected (2020).
According to Toby Wren, an Australian jazz guitarist who has collaborated with Indian Carnatic musicians, there should be a sense of responsibility for giving credit to the cultures and individuals involved when presenting interculturally hybrid music. (2015, p. 45). In his thesis, Wren builds an extensive framework on the ethical issues of intercultural musical work. (2015, p. 31-50, 87-93) Problematizing the exploitative nature of many world music projects lead by Western artists or companies that have unequally profited the western counterparts of those collaborations, he raises questions on how is it possible to do equitable intercultural collaboration and why should it even be done. According to Wren we live in a deterritorializing digital age which not only gives a huge potential of worldwide hybridity but makes it the new norm. Through understanding and respecting the cultural differences instead of trying to hide them behind a neoliberal world village agenda, and paying attention to power structures (especially between the West and the third world) it is possible to constitute international cultural processes that are”... characterized by the way that they engage across cultures, creating situations in which musicians can contribute ideas, rather than just sound for a Western global soundtrack” (2015, p. 39).
In this exposition, I am using the word intercultural to refer to any kind of entity or activity that involves different cultures or representatives of different cultures as participants, regardless of the nature of the connection between the cultures at hand.