Evonda Hollis Aas 337 June 6, 2013 After reading the articles about each of the authors views

on the relationship between Africa and the blues, it seems that the main issue of argument is whether or not Africa is directly related to the blues culture and the quality of the research on it. Author Paul Oliver is of the mindset that the blues may have originated in Africa. In his writing, he points out Savannah as a particular important source for stylistic elements of the blues. Another point made by Oliver is that in Africa there were entertainers known as griots who had characteristics similar to that of todays blues performers. Among these similarities were their traveling lifestyles, a preference for stringed-instruments, and lowly social status. In contrast, writer David Evans is skeptical of there being a strong link between the Savannah particularly in Africa and the blues. He backs up his opinion by stating that there is no concrete evidence of a fully developed musical genre similar to blues in Africa. In his article he makes the decision to respond to each point of Olivers argument. To summarize his responses, he states that while the information about Africa may be true, Olivers choice of concentrating on Savannah is not exactly true. He also goes on to point out that griots similarities to black musicians cannot be restricted to only blues singers and that blue musicians were not actually not restricted to a certain social caste. He then goes to on point out the weaknesses in Olivers genetic and physiological argument regarding Savannahs role in the origin of the blues. I learned a lot about the different theories that writers have about the connection between Africa and the blues culture. While both writers made valid points, I find myself leaning more towards Evans opinion on the association. Paul Oliver made points that had merit, but Evans responses proved that with quality research those points could be argued and proved invalid.