ABSTRACT
The relationship of the ‘local’ and the ‘global’ in popular music is one of the most complex, controversial and significant issues of the new millennium. Scholars have been drawn into the debate from across disciplines and with reference to work on musics from around the world. Arguments are not just academic; they are emotional and political, and concern the personal and the political, the micro and macro. Indeed, in straightforward analytical terms, as descriptions of networks and power relations, ‘global’ and ‘local’ are ill-defined, offering multiple vantage-points. Whatever else, though, they have become vital for reassessing questions of cultural imperialism, and that is what I am interested in here. I want to consider the creative and commercial relationships of the ‘local’ and ‘global’ in terms of ‘world’ music: how were these categories established, upon what terms; how are they maintained, to whose advantage (or disadvantage)? For most musicians, the creation and performance of music means involvement in a process: relationships produce music, relationships between musicians and relationships between musicians and their publics. It is in relationships that communication happens and meanings are produced and felt. The question that interests me, then, is the nature of the local and global networks that motivate and propel the ‘world’ music scene and the relationship processes involved.
