At 04:28 PM 2/2/03 +0000, David Kilpatrick wrote:
Are we talking brain dead, heart dead, or loss of consciousness? Patrick Murney, the last harper we know who played on wire strings, died in 1880. Of course, Denis Hempson died many years earlier, in 1807 and since he was the last wire harper we know who played with his *fingernails*, I personally think that's the death knell. Of course, for things to get to that point, the harp was certainly in decline long before then.Late 1800s? More like late 1700s,
<<I find a mystery why the wire-strung instrument fell into disuse, as to my ear, it is the better instrument.>>
I doubt it will come as a surprise to anyone that I agree with you! True Story: when I first inherited my wire harp, I called a local celtic harper looking for lessons. She suggested I get a nylon lever harp, and get rid of my harp! (I believe her exact words were, "get a real harp.") But the whole reason I was attracted to wire was for its sound! The nylon harp has nothing like the same sound.
<<I think it may be impossible for us to know what people expected to hear 500 years ago - what the inflection and accent of the music was.>>
Agreed. I played harpsichord in a chamber orchestra when I was in college, and we had inflamed debates over how Mozart would have played his music! If we can't find ready agreement on the "inflection and accent" of Mozart, how can we hope to find agreement for music far older, often of no known composer? But don't let that stop people from playing that music.
My old piano professor made his specialty the music of the American Ragtime era...Scott Joplin and all those cats. We have recordings of Joplin playing (actually, I think they might be some sort of piano-rolls that were made by him) and they're really awful. If that's what Ragtime is supposed to sound like, I've had enough of it... Of course, it's the terrible recording, and not Mr. Joplin's talent! But does that mean we give up on studying those piano rolls? Do we abandon that music? Certainly not, we'd only be robbing ourselves.
There's also the whole issue of *context*. Chant is the clearest example. Someone might sing chant precisely as it was sung 800 years ago, but what if it's in a concert hall instead of a worship service? Is it still authentic? Will it sound the same to us today?
David Francis wrote: <<That's one of the things that makes it so good - the
fact that these adventures start on and return to solid ground.>>
Hear Hear! We need the solid ground so that we can move ahead, innovate, and create music that won't "fizzle out before becoming part of the tradition" (apologies to Toby.)
--Cynthia Cathcart
http://www.cynthiacathcart.net/
Posted to Scots-L - The Traditional Scottish Music & Culture List - To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
