My disagreement is based on 1.DAS' prose: I find it wooden at best. 2. His pseudo-intellectual "lyrical" divagations on the subjects he shouldn't have touched (per Witgenstein's (unheeded) famous piece of advice): Venereal Paleochristianity, Cicero as the father of counterpoint, conflation of Rome and a certain chair, and other silly things. RT
----- Original Message ----- From: "Rob MacKillop" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'lute list'" <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu> Sent: Sunday, March 05, 2006 12:49 PM Subject: [LUTE] Re: Your advice, please ... >I disagree with you, Ed, when you say it is hard to criticise the book. The > facts are facts, but the interpretation is often misleading and > irrelevant. > I can't accept his comments on Fuenllana, and I don't think there is one > mention of the lute in Scotland. Clearly he doesn't think Scottish lute > music worth bothering about, and although all the surviving manuscripts > come > from after 1600, there is plenty of evidence that the lute formed part of > the Scottish musical makeup for three or four hundred years prior to that > date. James IV employed ten 'lutars' - worth a mention, I would have > thought, but then I will probably be accused of being parochial. OK, so > Scottish lute music was never mainstream, but that doesn't mean it > deserves > to be ignored or reduced to footnote about the lute in Britain. > > So it is a fascinating account of the mainstream school of lute > playing/publishing, and nothing wrong with that, I guess, albeit a > somewhat > old-school approach to history writing. But I was hoping for much more. It > left me wondering what else he had left out. Greater coverage and > less-subjective judgements and speculation would have been more > favourable, > imho. > > Rob > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ed Durbrow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 05 March 2006 17:13 > To: lute list > Subject: [LUTE] Re: Your advice, please ... > > You can read my review here: > http://www9.plala.or.jp/edurbrow/luteinfo.html > > > On Mar 5, 2006, at 1:06 PM, Roman Turovsky wrote: > >>>>>> Smith's book is less scientific and bit superficial in my opinion >>>>> >>>>> But also covers a lot of ground within the limited space! >>>> And some very shaky ground too. >>>> RT > > Ed Durbrow > Saitama, Japan > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www9.plala.or.jp/edurbrow/ > > > > -- > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > > > > >
