That the world is now global is obvious. How we should be global is less clear. Having recently taken over the reins of the International Musicological Society (IMS) as its President, I’ve been reflecting on the notion of a global musicology. The mission to the IMS is to bring together the world of musicology (defined in its broadest sense), and to foster international collaboration. But there is no perspective from which you can see a global musicology. So what kind of vision should we seek? Is there such a thing a "musicologie Sans Frontières"? The ideal is to be global and local at the same time - that is, "glocal". For an international society like the IMS, it is vital to be global with a local vision, whereas for national societies it is the other way around; it is vital to be local with a global vision. It is this relationship that is the issue for a global musicology.
This is not a purely academic issue since as music societies we are not just an arena for the study of global musicology; we are a living manifestation of it. Together, we represent its members, its networks, its resources, its history in the making. As music societies, we should embody a global musicology both in the sense that we represent a counterpoint of histories and a diversity of music and disciplines. As such, we express both the glorious ideals of a global musicology – to be inclusive, collaborative, open – as well and the reality of all the methodological and political problems that such ideals entails. These problems have to be critiqued, worked through and work out, with solutions that do not simply paralyse us with fear but lead to an abundance of generative ideas. In this paper, I explore ways in which we can work together towards a global musicology.