Brisson, J. (2015).

Exoticism in multicultural choral repertoire: A comparison of Lydia

Adams Mikmaq Honour Song and Stephan Hatfields Nukapianguaq. Canadian Music
Educator/Musicien Educateur Au Canada, 56(4): 30-34.

Brissons paper describes the importance of selecting multicultural choral repertoire that
stays true to its traditions. He demonstrates this by comparing the authenticity of two
multicultural songs. The first one, Mikmaq, is considered to go against many of its own
religious views and therefore has been deemed inappropriate in educational settings, where the
second, Nukapianguaq, is seen as a faithful appreciation of Inuit culture.
He begins by talking about the guidelines that should be used for selecting multicultural
repertoire. These guidelines include checking to see if the composer/arranger is from that culture
(authenticity), if the lyrics are in the original language, and if the material includes an audio tape
so you can see how it is meant to be performed. We want our performances to be a just
representation of Inuit culture, therefore certain precautions must be taken.
The first song, the Mikmaq Honour Song, is a perfect example of what not to do. It is an
atonal piece that begins with a cluster of hummed notes which move up and down the chromatic
sale in a stepwise motion throughout the piece. It has very little melodic structure, and the
humming continues until the conductor signals for the choir to all hum the same note, at which
point the sounds and calls of wild animals begin. The song is meant to be a sign of peace for the
Inuit, but the reason this arrangement is seen as problematic is because it is built on stereotypes
of their culture instead of realistic history. The tone cluster actually has no connection to
traditional music and the animal sounds are purely stereotypical. In trying to arrange a song for
Inuit tradition, Adams arranges a song on what she thinks are the traditions. This connects back
to earlier in the article where it mentioned the guidelines for selecting choral repertoire. The
piece needs to be checked for authenticity, and if someone is arranging a new version, the
arranger should be of that cultural background as to not make any assumptions about their
tradition. I would never try to arrange a classic Italian nursery rhyme because I know nothing
about Italian tradition, so why would someone take an Inuit song and rearrange it if they know
nothing about the Inuit tradition?
Brisson uses the second song, Nukapianguaq, as an example of a proper, traditional Inuit
song. The chants in his arrangement include chants that he experienced first-hand from multiple
Inuit communities while traveling across Canada. Throughout the whole piece, traditional
methods such as throat singing were included, and instruction was given on how to perform it in
a way that stays faithful to their culture. For example, Hatfield instructs the choir to use an airy,
throaty, rumbly tone, deep in the throat to try and achieve the required quality of voice.
Brisson brings up interesting point: multicultural music is supposed to be multicultural;
however it is mostly designed to fit into western context. That sort of goes against the purpose of

being multicultural. In order for multicultural music to truly be multicultural, we must perform
the pieces in the way they were originally meant to be performed, and make sure the songs that
we choose are accurately representative of the culture.