OK Andy, now I really need some help. I embraced "fusion" as a new musical form back at the time of John McLaughlin's "Lifetime Emergency" and "Mahavishnu Orchestra". Despite its name, I never thought of it as con-fusion ("mishmash"). It was pure and new to me.

I also treasure Peter Gabriel and Paul Simon but with some inner reservations. It does seem evident that there's a powerful dynamic going on with merging "musics of the world". Even blues and jazz have African roots blended with Western harmonies. South American rhythms are African hybrids as well.

As for the Internet creating one world, I've heard such talk before. It's a repeating process, waves of technology making the world ever more connected - railroads, telegraph, and now the Internet. (Our planet has sprouted a rudimentary nervous system!)

Still, human cultures are strong living entities and IMO can stand their ground against evolving technology. Yes, the applied science of machines, processes and materials has a life of its own, an inevitable force in the world. Who will win, collective man or integrated machine?

Help! Emmett

Early "fusion" was great. It featured exciting musicianship and experimentation, and (maybe even more importantly) the popular appeal lacking in JAZZ. But ask some people (..cough...Wynton Marsalis...) and they might claim that there is such a thing as "pure jazz", while "fusion" has little if no value as a legitimate art form.

But then again, what are the origins of jazz, if not "mishmash"?

As for Gabriel and Simon, I love those guys too. But they could be accused of diluting African sounds to create listener-friendly music for western audiences. It's a valid argument, even if I feel dirty for raising it...

What if we take some Bulgarian folk music, throw in a didgeridoo and add some drum loops, are we making "world music"? Maybe not...but I would really have a problem someone calling it "Bulgarian folk music", when it's clearly not. My conclusion is that in the context of popular music, anything goes if the end result is great.

Gypsy Jazz. What a concept!
Zydeco. Cool.
Just thinking out loud.

As for the WWW, I've travelled a lot and lived on three continents (so far) and I can't with a clear conscience argue the "one world" point. I know the internet "reality" that we share doesn't replace the role of true belonging. But it does give us more frequent glimpses into the human condition on a global scale - including what they're listening to.

Sorry, I think I may have just added to the confusion, including my own.

Cheers,
Andy

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/mishmash

I dunno fellas seems like all music is related to me. Although, until I read the definitions I really wanted to join one of those newfangled mishmash bands. Guess I'll have to settle for some of the new fusion, country-rap or c-rap for short.

BTW Emmett spoke of folks who (claim to) hate country music, which I thought I did, but... once upon a time I worked for a Karaoke production studio as a mastering engineer of sorts. Anyway, at one point I was working on the Merl Haggard collection, and much to my astonishment I found I really liked the songs. They were wonderful sad stories set to music.

What I have found out is that in all genres (oh no labels) of music I like some & don't like some. I also find that my own definition of what I like may be subject to change over time.

Blah blah blah, sorry for the hodgepodge of thoughts guess I better go find a beer to cry into.

...or we could remove ethnology from the discussion and refer to a Duke Ellington quote -
“There are two kinds of music. Good music, and the other kind.”

Mishmash, mix'n'match, this'n'that, and now hodgepodge - a potpourri of eclecticism. I prefer in-depth studies and intense focus (it takes all kinds).

It seems I've always been striving for universal music, the abstraction of music, the physics of sound. I'd never call what I do "World Music" though. The world is just not big enough. (I might call it bird music.) {8=>} Emmett