|
There is certainly
a clear difference between the għana sung
today, which is sung by specialists in a particular
setting, and the għana still very much alive
up till the end of World War II at least, which was
the domain of no one in particular, being sung by
most blue-collar workers as they went about their
daily chores. Għana today (associated almost
exclusively with Spirtu Pront) is much more
stylised and has also changed in content. Even the
music is different: the 'għana of the
villages' (which for lack of a better term is how I
shall refer to the għana of the past)
utilised not only guitars but also the accordion and
various percussion instruments, while għana
today uses only guitars, which again tend to be
played by specialists whose music is much more
elaborate than it was forty or fifty years ago.(3)
 Perhaps
the most interesting feature about the history of
għana is that there are two versions of it.(4)
The first was given largely by middle-class people,
but also by a number of working-class informants who
were not għannejja themselves (though some
were aficionados). This interpretation goes that
għana in the past was 'good', reflecting 'the
sweetness of the people (peasants)' as one
middle-class informant put it, but it has now been
'corrupted' by the present singers who have mixed
politics with it, and who in fact have often
quarrelled seriously among themselves because of
politics. The second version is that of the
għannejja themselves and it is the reverse of
the first. They see the 'old għana' as having
been characterised by brawls, whereas now it is
'more elevated, like poetry'. The two 'histories'
may be placed side by side thus:
outsiders:
'sweet' ---------> 'corrupted'/politics
practitioners: brawls --------->
'elevated'/'poetry'
It is not something novel for something deemed to be
'folk-singing' to be variously regarded; for
example, Greek rebetika music has also been
labelled in diverse and contradictory ways (cf.
Gauntlett, 1983). However I believe that here there
is an additional reason behind this. I suggest that
while the two historical versions are referring to
the same għana when talking of the present,
they are referring to different phenomena when
talking about the past.
The outsiders are referring to the għana that
used to be sung to accompany work, the spontaneous
though not always accurately rhymed 'expression of
the people'. The għannejja, however, are
referring to the għana that used to be sung
mainly at night, certainly during the hours of
recreation, by young men. The għannejja used
to compete with each other to see who was the most
quick-witted in a song-duel which consisted of an
exchange of often very direct insults. These singing
sessions often broke out into fist-fights and the
police had instructions to break up sessions
whenever they came across them.(5)
Of course, there is some overlap between these two
types of għana, notably in the past tradition
of going to sing beneath a young nubile woman's
bedroom window. But even here, the main difference
between the two is clear: whereas a serious suitor
would have been more likely to sing a standard
quatrain, his main objective being to communicate
his interest as well as to show off his voice, an
għannej would have been more likely to
extemporise a cheeky quatrain, or even a downright
insult. The main object of the first type of
għana was to communicate, the importance being
placed on the voice rather than originality, while
with the second type bravado was what mattered.
While a different past is being referred to in the
two versions of the history of għana, the
present they refer to is Spirtu Pront, whose
predecessor, it is easy to see, is that competitive
għana of the men who used to congregate at
night. This explains why women, who used to sing
when doing their household chores, do not
participate in għana nowadays. Their singing
was tied to a way of life that has now disappeared,
whereas għana was always concerned with
issues that traditionally, in the Mediterranean,
preoccupy men (e.g. honour). It remains to be shown
why it was that the competitive għana came to
be equated with għana in general, and how it
evolved to its present form.
The pivotal point in the story of the transformation
of għana, both in the sense of how it came to
be associated with one genre and in the sense of how
that very genre changed in content and form, is the
first official għana competition held on the
national feast day of St. Peter and St. Paul (L-lmnarja)
in 1953, which was organised by a folklorist, G.
Cassar Pullicino. What I suggest happened was that
most of the men who came forward to compete were in
fact men who were already used to compete amongst
themselves through għana; and since this
event, being the first time Maltese officialdom
showed an interest in għana, effectively
converted għana into 'folklore', għana
became associated with the Spirtu Pront
genre. It was essentially the form of 'hijacking'
that Weber describes in connection with messages of
redemption, in speaking of how the message is
redefined decisively when the main social class of
believers changes (1969: 22).
Fixing a date for such a major change of course
disregards the fact that some changes had been going
on before this date. Thus, għana had been
transmitted on the wireless since 1935 while a
number of records of għana were also cut in
the thirties. However 1953 was the decisive date. As
one għannej told me, 'it was after the
lmnarja competition that the police allowed us to
sing in public places.' And it could be added that
it was after 1953 that the għannejja were in
some respects welcome to sing. They became the focus
of interest of some anthropologists, sang at Labour
Party rallies, and by the seventies were asked to
perform in hotels and were sent abroad by the
government to participate in folklore exchanges. The
highlight must have come with the 'Freedom Day'
celebrations of 1979(6)
when the għannejja performed at a cultural
evening held at the Manoel Theatre, the 'inner
sanctum' of Maltese theatre- and opera-goers.
The 1953 competition also affected għana
vis-a-vis content and form. The content changed
because the għannejja now saw themselves as
representatives of Maltese tradition(7)
and this role encouraged them to sing more on social
issues. The form changed because the għannejja
adopted many of the competition rules. The relevant
rules were these: the għannejja had to stick
to a subject selected beforehand otherwise points
were lost, as also happened if mistakes in rhyming
occurred.(8)
There was also a time-limit set on each bout. The
għannejja embraced these rules. Sticking to the
subject became very prized, even if it meant singing
just about a bottle of wine (a popular example with
my informants); rhyming was made essential; and they
limited their own bouts to one hour, holding another
after that if necessary. Around this time the idea
of signalling the end of the bout by the gadenza -
two quatrains rather than one - was introduced,
while increasing emphasis was made on
double-entendre, as direct insults broke up the
community of għannejja (Herndon 1971:
154-155), and 'lowered' għana in the eyes of
outsiders. Other major changes were caused by the
introduction of the tape recorder in the late
fifties. Easy or repeated rhymes were now quickly
found by aficionados and the beginning of the song
became more stylised with singers staling who was
singing, where and when, in order to distinguish one
tape from another. The availability of cassettes
also meant that emigrant għannejja could
dispense with the necessity of having a guitarist
playing by having a tape of the music sent to them.
Finally, the għannejja also began to hold
'public' evenings of their own, usually at Labour
Party clubs.
It is the association of the għannejja with
the Labour Party that more than anything else makes
the greater part of the middle class see them as
having 'corrupted' għana. For with the
interest in folklore that arose after World War II,
there was also a change in the way the working
classes were regarded. They were no longer called
'low' but the 'little people'(9)
when talked about in the past or in the abstract.
This was a concomitant tendency to the very urban
propensity, also present in Malta, to associate
'tradition' with the countryside. Thus the
għannejja were regarded as quaint when they sang
in national festivals, in a showcase so to speak,
but rather rattled the upper classes when they did
not conform to the idyllic mould.(10)
Thus għana is a rather disembodied entity to
the upper classes, pure in its pristine self, but
corrupted by its practitioners. The għannejja
also have this notion however, despite their seeing
themselves as having improved the level of singing.
For brawlers are chastised as 'lowering' għana
and are said not to be 'true' għannejja.
There is also the semi-mythological notion that
'corruption' set in when għannejja began
asking to be paid for singing. Not only money but
also technology played its part in corruption, for
the introduction of the tape-recorder meant that
outwittal at the hands of another għannej was
permanently recorded and circulated. This made some
għannejja try to win at all costs, resorting
to directly insulting the għannej and even
his family if necessary. Hence għana is no
longer seen as a practice rooted in their lives but
rather something which has been given to them,
unworthy though they may at times be, to keep alive.
Although in actual fact the historical għannejja
were brawlers, by keeping għana undefiled by
such incidents, as well as by having raised the
standard of singing the għannejja feel that
they are more genuine singers than their historical
predecessors. Thus, for the għannejja
għana is an independent, disembodied entity too. |
