Steelpan

Chapter 12: Popular Culture and Nationalism addresses points of contention surrounding who is entitled or seen to be the producers of nationalism. Essentially, the arguments fall into the category of the elites, or that of “the masses” and the elites. The former positions nationalism as “reserved” for a certain class, giving the sense of entitlement and ultirmate power. In this case, the “commoners” are seen are responsible for national sentiment. However in the latter this “sentiment” is recognized as “popular nationalism” which speaks more to the concerns of the people, and in the wake of multi forms of media, allows for greater participation.
I found that the author did a great job in framing both he issues and benefits of either side. In this way, I found that the reading was not forceful in outlook, but rather provided a balanced position (at least in contrast to other readings for the week). I especially liked how the power of the elite to define the feelings of the masses was brought to light, and that in wake of either outlook, people will continue to believe in what they want. Touching on the tendency for the elite to engulf popular culture spoke to the potential for manipulation and robbery, but also was framed to be an indicator of rise in popularity and ability to reach greater demographics. In its recontextualized state, the popular culture can become butchered, but sometimes altered to the point of becoming anew.
The gap that exists between popular culture and the elite seems to me to embody a space of hybridity, and I think that this is an idea that is touched on within the article, and I especially liked the quote "…concepts of local and foreign, elite and popular, high and low obscures an important reality; that musical experiences of real people do not respect those boundaries".

The Steelpan, Caribbean Identity and Culturally Relevant Adult Programs addresses the rise of Steelpan within Trinidad and Tobago, and shares how its defiant and resistant birthing has been both continued and lost within the Diaspora. Walrond addresses a need for females of Caribbean heritage to have access to programs which will aid in their individual development and sense of identity. A lack of culturally relevant programming, as well as poor educational experiences are positioned at the root of this cause. Issues of drop-out, and lack of community are cited, and Walrond points to steelpan groups for woman as needed to remedy this issues. While these parallels are not directly stated, it seemed to me to be the underlying message.
My reading of Steelpan, Caribbean Identity and Culturally Relevant Adult Programs article left me feeling unsatisfied, and in general, greatly confused as to how the author hoped to back his thesis with the arguments made. In drawing on the experiences of a select few young women, I found that his large claims were poorly supported. Although many of his points have been brought up in previous articles read in this class, and other classes of mine, I had a difficult time understanding how the idea of steelpan adult programming for woman could prove to be a solution worth making note of. This is not to entirely discredit the benefits of community bonding, and cultural re-connection, but rather that this idea seems too small scale in comparison to the issues brought to light.
I think that steelpan groups are a great idea, but do not think that this article frames this initiative in a way that serves to solve the issues that are addressed. I have learnt several art forms derivative of my heritage, but I do not think that they have given me greater sense of identity, anymore than any other kind of group I have taken part in.
I found that Walrond undercut the value of community groups at large, and in so doing left the idea of steelpan womans groups seeming half explored and short sighted.

Do you think that community groups designated to ones cultural heritage are more likely to bring about a sense of identity than those which are not linked to culture? Should these be promoted as beneficial to those whose culture they are derivate of? Or can these benefits be felt more widespread?