Why is traditional music called “traditional”? No one calls Western classical music traditional, but the music of the Joseon Dynasty in Korea, which developed around the same time, is called traditional. When I thought about what constitutes traditional music, I came to the conclusion that it’s only called traditional when the genre has stopped developing. Classical music has not stopped evolving and is still being developed today under the name of contemporary music, and in electronic music, which arose from the development of technology in the 1900s, electronic instruments were also developed with the motto of classical instruments. However, if we consider Korean traditional music, the 35-year period of Japanese occupation from 1910 to 1945 was characterized by a severe cultural severance, which led to the loss of much traditional music. In addition to this, new musical genres and instruments from the West were introduced, and Korean music began to be called traditional music.

So, can we call a different type of music using traditional instruments traditional music? For example, if a jazzy performance is made using Korean instruments, can we call it Korean music? To answer this question, we must first consider whether the concept of type actually exists in music. The music of Bach or Mozart, which started with ancient religious music, began with the Baroque period in the 17th century and has been passed down to modern times, has also changed continuously with changes in technology and society. We refer to such music as baroque music, but it is probably impossible to define where it starts and ends. Of course, there may be an approximate point in time promised by society. For example, the advent of the piano, or the advent of musical notation or mean time, for example, historical events that have a great influence on the Western musical world. But I don’t think this is a clear distinction between types of music or schools of thought, so what about Bach’s music and Handel’s music, and what about Mozart, Beethoven, Chopin, should they all be called the same type of music, and what about jazz, rock music, or experimental electronic music beyond classical music? We all recognize that these are clearly different types of music, but we don’t have a clear idea of how exactly they are different and why we can say they are different. 

This categorization is possible from a broad perspective, but it’s not perfect when you dig deeper. If you’ve read this far, you might expect me to argue that since it is meaningless to categorize types of music, newly developed forms of traditional music can also be called traditional music, but nevertheless, I do not believe that music that mixes traditional musical elements with other musical elements can be called traditional music. This assertion is not because I view the development of this form of traditional music in a negative light. As I mentioned in the first paragraph, my definition of traditional music is “music from the past that has stopped developing,” and I cannot call these musical forms traditional music because they do not fit my definition of traditional music.

One side of the argument is that if we want to develop traditional music, we should return to the time when Korean traditional culture was disconnected and pick up where it left off. I’ve thought about this argument, and I agree with it, but I think it’s an impossible realm. The music that we now call traditional music was already disconnected by the influence of the imperialist era. As a result, it did not develop its own culture, and in the modern world, which is already returning to a Western-centered society, traditional music is deprived of the opportunity to develop itself. If we inherit the traditional arts of the period when traditional music was cut off and develop them from that time, they may have meaning as traditional arts, but the past has already happened and this society no longer exists as an independent society. In other words, even if we try to bring back the art of the time when we were cut off and develop it again from the modern era, this society has alreaAbout the direction of traditional music developmentdy been mixed, and Western society is at the center of it, so in fact, in order to develop our traditional art as our own traditional art, we will have to reject and block all other societies like a native on an island to be able to develop it, and even this will not be able to exist and develop itself under the influence of the art of Western society that has already been imported. In other words, traditional art in the East cannot exist on its own at the moment when it is already cut off and the center of culture is already set in the West.

Even if history were reversed and the center of history became the East, the art of the East would only change slightly in form, and the art of the East would only develop by fusing with the art of the West. Therefore, I think that the ideal way to develop traditional art is not to stick to traditional forms, but to fuse traditional art forms with various art forms in the world to reflect the current social situation. In that sense, the contemporary traditional music bands I mentioned in the last post are utilizing and developing traditional music in the most ideal way. My only regret is that there are so few bands that are willing to study and develop these musical forms. And of those that do exist, many are not very active. This can be seen as a low supply because there is no demand, but in my opinion, it is because the public is not yet aware of it enough to create a demand. Therefore, I hope that musicians with the same values as me will take the initiative to study and develop this music and work hard to establish it as popular music with a modern traditional art form, that is, contemporary traditional music.