David T, David R,
On 2009-02-03, at 17:30, David Rastall wrote:
On Feb 3, 2009, at 1:19 AM, David Tayler wrote:
I'm old fashioned, I guess; I think the old ways are better.
You mean your father and grandfather's or the Bocquet and Mouton way?
As I'd objectively appreciate and trust the first solution (at last
you should remember), I'd be much concerned about the second, as I
know close to nothing.
We love to change the past in order to make it better. Or so we
rationalize. Didn't JS Bach add his own basso continuo to one of the
Palestrina masses. Yikes!!! But Bach himself, who I think had great
respect for the "stile antico" would have thought that he was
improving the piece by bringing it up to date.
A piece of music consist of an abstract structure and a performance
in certain way. Bach, I suppose, did nothing to improve the abstract
structure, just performed it his way, as continuo is a matter of
''performance practice''.
The question is, what exactly were the old ways? Did the old ones
play their allemandes and bourees with their local lute god's
fingering and ornament instructions propped up in front of them. I
imagine they all did at first, but sooner or later one has to go
beyond the primer stage and get into the music on one's own terms.
This is simply at certain time and place a fashion of doing things
one or the other way, like wearing jacket or a long coat. Often there
is a guru who dictates it through his publications or popularity.
Most follow him...
Segovia once likened all the rules and regulations involved in
learning music, as a scaffolding: eventually the scaffolding has to
come down, and the building will then, hopefully, be able to stand on
its own...
We lived up to a time when computers can present such an abstract
vision of a piece. But people, by nature, all the time dress it with
something extra. We too, with our lutes, just differently then
Segovia. Unfortunately we have no recording of Dowland and Sor ;-)
Thus, there is no objective image of a piece+execussion, as there is
no objective history -- we are creating it always anew. Sad?
Inspiring? Dangerous?
I also think one learns more form one note of a great player than a
whole book of deconstructionist.
Absolutely! Deconstruction is temporary; music is forever.
So you both think ''deconstruction'' as a method is bad. Hm, I wonder
if we all think about the same. But I fear you are permanently
deconstructing the music lying on your music stand and joining up
together some way..., aren't you?
DR
dlu...@verizon.net
J
______
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
