> -----Original Message----- > From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On > Behalf Of howard posner > Sent: Monday, December 21, 2009 12:03 PM > To: Lutelist list > Subject: [LUTE] Re: Liuto forte > > On Dec 21, 2009, at 8:28 AM, Eugene C. Braig IV wrote: > > > That often played out in publication, but I don't know how big a > > role it > > played in novelty pieces in manuscript, especially given Bach's > > ties to any > > actual lute (rather than lautenwerk or via transcription by > > contemporary > > lutenists) seem rather tentative. > > You mean other than the extremely expensive lute Bach actually owned? >
Obviously not, and I should have been more clear. I was referring to what has survived of Bach's music bearing a lute designation or attribution. Especially if intended for actual rather than idealized hypothetical lutes (or lautenwerk), that music still seems to inhabit the realm of novelty amongst Bach's output. I have many texts on botanical taxonomy on my shelves, but I'm not a botanist. I own an excellent jazz guitar, but have left even less evidence that I'm an excellent jazz guitarist (for good reason: I'm not) than Bach did that he was a lutenist with professional aspirations to publish collections of lute music. Eugene To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
