Insofar as it (New Age sound/song) was by definition a plucking of “local” sounds or voice that ipso facto resonated across borders, one is driven to ask: what aspects of pre-existing, non-transplanted Chinese “terrain” or cultural vocabulary made this possible. The answer I think lies very largely in the musical and instrumental vocabulary of “prairie” China: Mongolia and Tibet, perhaps slightly less Xinjiang (at least Tuva). The regional element at any rate is explcit, for Prof. He tells us that his writings have been pulled forth by the ideations of Tibetan and Mongolian sound. Just listen and he bears himself out.
Ironic all this: the Kulturmasters of Beijing have always hoped for a global presence in music and stage, but have never accepted the idea that it would spring from subordinated non-Sinophonic cultures, least of all from a (putatively) “backward” Tibet. In culture-diplomatic terms, this ethnic wrongfooting has for the time being been made acceptable by the positives it creates in relations with the UN and eco-preservationism in general, but there is no dodging the fact that this unwanted child or children are and will remain orphans or at best invitees de politesse on the state-controlled media. Just as in the 1960s, in the US, “Folk” from its birth carried anti-establishment overtones within “youth” culture, so also does this sound mix of prairie and mystery insinuate, justify or even actuate alienation (removal, vacation), in lyrical and not ABRASIVE (“underground camera”) terms, making its persecution as anti-social noise (heavy metal) very awkward indeed….(now only if the performance were to engage with formal congregational worship…. but alas it doesn’t)/span>