My refined research question did not emerge only from theoretical research. It developed through a series of conversations, interventions, observations and moments in which my initial assumptions were challenged.
My earlier research focused on how music could preserve Venezuelan cultural identity through migration. This framing assumed that Venezuelan identity already existed as a relatively identifiable cultural archive that could be protected and transmitted. However, my conversations with artists and my public research actions began to complicate this assumption. They suggested that cultural identity is not simply preserved: it is selected, interpreted, performed and transformed according to different contexts.
My conversation with Alberto Stangarone was particularly significant. Alberto explained that, while living in Venezuela, he did not necessarily listen to music that could be considered entirely traditional or folkloric. Migration made him more conscious of Venezuelan cultural codes because he needed to recognise and position himself in relation to them from abroad. In his creative practice, these codes were combined with electronic music and sounds circulating through the internet and other international contexts. This showed me that migration can produce a more conscious relationship with cultural origin, but that this relationship does not necessarily result in preservation. It can also produce hybridisation, reinterpretation and new cultural creation.
The Venezuela Remixed listening session and DJ set at Behind This Wall challenged another assumption. I expected the intervention to create recognition among Venezuelan or Latin American participants. However, there were no Venezuelans in the audience. People from different backgrounds nevertheless listened with openness and connected with the music through their own experiences. This suggested that cultural appreciation does not always depend on sharing the identity or nationality associated with the music.
At the same time, I could not clearly understand how the audience was interpreting what they heard. The music was shared, but the listeners’ processes of interpretation remained largely invisible. The digital participation mechanism received 15 views, six starts and only two submissions. Rather than treating this as a failed intervention, I understood it as evidence that playing music and providing a QR code were not sufficient to generate meaningful participation. A more facilitated space was needed in which listeners could exchange music, memories, questions and interpretations.
These actions introduced appreciation and cultural creation into my question. Appropriation emerged as a further tension concerning power, authorship, attribution and the commercial use of cultural codes. At this stage, appropriation is not a conclusion produced by my interventions. It is a question that the next iteration must test through specific musical cases and conversations with Venezuelan and non-Venezuelan listeners.
Consequently, my research question evolved from asking how Venezuelan musical identity could be preserved to asking: How might a participatory space for sharing Venezuelan music raise critical awareness of how Venezuelan cultural identity is appropriated, appreciated and re-created?
The intended long-term purpose is to contribute to how Venezuelan music and cultural identity are interpreted and transmitted by future generations. However, this intergenerational dimension remains a hypothesis that will require further external testing.