I think it could have been that in south america as elsewhere the common people were somehow attracted by the music of the rich and imitated them (as well as vice versa the folk music had influence on the music of the rich - for example see the "sarabanda"). Also I guess musicians were usually recruited from common people but expected to play the music of the rich. So a certain development and exchange could have happend. A good point by Ariel is that appropriate instruments would be available for everybody. Although I am not so sure that this was the case for south america.
Best wishes Thomas Am Sam, 2004-06-12 um 14.22 schrieb Roman Turovsky: > >>> Well, I don't think original south Americans had any necessity of > > playing > >>> Spanish music, is that's what you meant. > >> I am not sure at what point exactly attraction turns into necessity, but > > if > >> it didn't we wouldn't have HANAC PACHAP and other goodies of the > > sort...... > >> RT > > That's right, but still we don't know if that comes from attraction or pure > > colonization. > > Obviously we can't tell, but what I meant is that probably south Americans > > had no reasons for imitating vihuelas, as probably Spanish music had little > > meaning to them, more if we consider how the "conquistadores" did their > > business down there. Pure speculation, however. > > aa > My understanding that Jesuit approach at the Missiones was not exactly > definable as colonization in the strict sense of the word, and the music > there was the part that was meaningful to the both parties involved... > RT --
