Our ready ear is very much influenced/spoiled by functional harmony,
I'm afraid. I suppose it went wrong so often (then) because the trick
of finding the appropriate harmonies was to add 'middle voices' to a
bass and soprano.
I think you are mistaken here because throughout the 16th century general
practice was to add contrapuntal parts to a tenor voice. The shift to
working from the bass took place at the beginning of the 17th century. The
practice of basso continuo was new and not well established at the time many
of these songs were composed. It started off as a way of creating a
keyboard accompaniment to mainly polyphonic works.
Underlying this discussion is the idea that it is somehow inferior or
amateurish to accompany the songs in this way. This in my view shows a
lack of historical insight and sensitivity to changes taking place at the
time. A kind of 21st century superior and censorious attitude to what
people did in the past.
Triadic harmony was new, original, exciting and in tune with other
developments taking place at the time i.e. accompanied monody. The guitar
was ideally suited to be part of this change and certainly contributed to
developments in harmonic thinking. It is of its time.
It is not helpful to suggest that "the harmonic language of alfabeto is
somewhat one-dimensional." This is a bit like saying that Wagner's music is
superior to that of Mozart because he used larger forces and more complex
and colourful harmony. An evolutionary view of musical history which went
out of fashion in England years ago.
If we are trying to figure out what was possibly done in the 1620s and
30s, to reach an optimal performance of the most beautiful songs,
respecting the
ambience they were performed in, then we should not only think of what
the general strumming public did.
No.. we should think about what writers at the time said about what they
were trying to achieve. I have already quoted Marini and Milanuzzi who
presumably prepared their own books for the press and indicate that they
thought it was necessary and satisfactory to suggest a different way of
accompanying on the guitar. Do you think they were writing for the
general strumming public - if indeed such a public existed.
That could of course also
be interesting information (for a gig in 17th c costume).
Your views seem to coloured by the need to please a 21st century audience.
This is understandable but if we are trying to understand what these songs
meant to people in the past and what gave them pleasure we should leave our
personal prejudices at the door.
Monica
> Finally if you've ever performed Cesare Morelli's (Pepys guitar
teacher) arrangement of 'To be or not to be....' (an experience of
novelty rather than artistic merit I can tell you) from the later 17th
century you'd not rush to suggest strumming to songs was little
employed by then - little written down maybe. And Morelli, supposedly
a 'professional' of sorts often gets the harmonisations 'wrong'........
No, but I've done Stairway to heaven, does that count?
Lex
--
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
