At 04:38 PM 10/27/2005, Vance Wood wrote: >So it could be argued that if being a purist is the >essence of good Lute practice could it not also be said that playing a >modern reproduction Lute using modern wood working tools from computer >generated plans under unnatural lighting conditions is also as much an >anachronism as using nylon strings? Should not the purist play only real >museum instruments strung with gut?
The extremist could also argue you would need an audience that is not clad in synthetic fibers in possession of infrequently washed ears that had never been corrupted by Beethoven, Stravinsky, Britney Spears, cell phones, car horns, or digitally recorded music to have a really true and proper early music performance. After hearing Stravinsky, chromaticism in a Dowland fantasy just isn't as spicy as it would have been in is own time. For all the fine scholarly efforts of the finest scholarly types, HIP practice remains hugely speculative. There's nothing wrong with that; pick what rings true and enjoy for whatever features you personally enjoy, purists be damned. I am of the camp that feels players need to justify their interpretive decisions to themselves first and foremost. Playing music passionately and confidently makes for better music, wherever a musician finds his/her convictions. Best, Eugene To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
