Dear Ron, I just found the use of the term gimmicks rather disturbing as it could be construed to mean performance elements and conventions that we know were regularly used back then and are not used now, largely because of their incompatibility with the 21st century classical music mindset. Countertenors are like the over emphasized role of recorders in early music, a modern phenomenon. But in the end it is scat singing accompanied by hammered dulcimer, where the money is, try finding any historical evidence for that ;)
I certainly did not want to criticize your approach, that is very personal, as it should be and as you say the audience is the judge in the end and they seem very happy. All the best Mark On Mar 11, 2012, at 8:25 PM, Ron Andrico wrote: > Thanks, Mark. Yes, I went back and re-read the article. Kenny's > mention of Dowland songs was to reinforce her premise that a projected > voice with extrovert ornamentation was used in early 17th century > English performance. Of course, it was - in public music for the > theatre. Likewise, I think she was promoting the use of the > countertenor voice, which was under a bit of criticism at the time > (2008) as an inauthentic 20th century construct (and she is known as an > accompanist for Robin Blaze). Both Andrew Parrott and David Hill have > written on how we have misconstrued evidence as to what was a > countertenor voice and just how it may have been used. David Hill, who > calls himself a 'reformed countertenor' with tongue-in-cheek, thinks > Alfred Deller's popularity at the time of the early music revival may > have had quite a bit to do with acceptance of an inauthentic singing > approach. > Nevertheless, Kenny mentioned the Dowland setting of Lachrimae from an > ms source with only treble and bass as an example of how such a song > would have been used in public performance as a vehicle for improvised > accompaniment and ornamentation, which takes it out of the > introspective realm. In my experience, people can and do use factual > historical evidence to support whatever idea they may be promoting at > the time. For instance, I can show you pictorial evidence that Swedish > organists were pigs and Italian lutenists were monkeys. I'm a little > to lazy to do it at the moment, but I'm sure I could write a full > length article to advance these ideas. > Again, thankfully, we have a multitude of approaches to interpreting > old music and a case could be made for all of them. Certainly, > Panatgruel's success speaks for itself and we love what we've seen in > your videos. We enjoy a certain amount of success with our approach as > well and I'm sure we both have got it right judging by audience > reactions. Isn't it grand? > Best, > RA >> Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2012 18:55:33 +0100 >> To: praelu...@hotmail.com >> CC: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu >> From: l...@pantagruel.de >> Subject: [LUTE] Re: Saturday quotes >> >> Liz kenny talks about Flow my tears and other Dowland songs that > would certainly fall under the introspective category. I would > certainly not describe the article as ponderous or overtly speculative > as it quotes a great deal of evidence from the period. >> >> I would also recommend an excellent book by Christopher Marsh "Music > and Society in Early Modern England" (Cambridge university Press 2010). >> Probably one of the first books to discuss the actual role that music > played in the lives of people in Renaissance England. >> >> All the best >> Mark >> >> On Mar 11, 2012, at 5:18 PM, Ron Andrico wrote: >> >>> Thanks for your comments, Mark. I read Liz Kenny's article a few > years ago and decided to politely reserve judgement. I have to say, so > many ponderous academic articles purportedly describing possible > motives and speculative modes of historical musical performance wind up > making me very sleepy. I think I recall, she was deliberately focusing > on non-domestic repertory. But, as you certainly know, the proof is in > the pudding and an effective performance is just that, no matter what > the approach. >>> >>> Thankfully, there are many vastly different approaches to > performing old music. We choose an approach that suits our > personalities, and our motivation is the more introspective 'chamber' > music corner of the repertory. I've done more than my share of > theatrical music (from different eras both real and imaginary), and > that is certainly a valid and effective approach as well. But the long > and short of it is, I look terrible in panty hose. >>> >>> As we took pains to point out, we don't pass judgement on those who > focus on the more extrovert repertory and use visuals to enhance > performance art. But it's just amazing what can be done without props. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> RA >>> >>> >>> >>>> Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2012 14:08:36 +0100 >>>> To: praelu...@hotmail.com >>>> CC: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu >>>> From: l...@pantagruel.de >>>> Subject: [LUTE] Re: Saturday quotes >>>> >>>> Reading this I can't help but feel that you are pressing for an > aesthetic that is more a reaction to our modern world than one that > reflects a possible 16th century cultural atmosphere.... >>>> >>>> Check out this excellent article by Liz Kenny... >>>> "The uses of lute song: texts, contexts and pretexts for > `historically informed' performance" Early Music 2008/02 >>>> >>>> Here us a bit of the opening.. >>>> >>>> "Our enthusiasm for printed sources has obscured other ways of > approaching these songs, and has artificially divided them from the > songs of the next generation. What looks like a perfect balance on > paper may or may not have remained so when the songs were performed, > and the seductive solitude evoked by a book to be kept and treasured at > home may not have always represented composer `intentions', if indeed > we can separate these from performer intentions. The `miniaturist > aesthetic' of privacy, secrecy and the `esoteric' often define this > repertory. `Iconographical representations of the lute in performance > of instrumental or vocal music ... consist- ently depict a theatre of > privacy and solitude ... apart (or distanced) from public, courtly > culture.' This may have been true of one group of performers--the most > iconogenic--but it ignores what others were doing in other contexts, > very definitely in public." >>>> >>>> The end (with lots of interesting stuff in-between....) >>>> >>>> "Early 17th-century musicians faced a challenge which their > modern descendents have no trouble recognizing: that of adjusting their > personal creative ambitions to different sorts of audience or consumer > demand. This is not compatible with a philosophy of one `right' or even > one generally preferable style of modern performance based on a careful > sifting of his- torical evidence, if the sift eliminates evidence > incom- patible with any single interpretative thesis. Modern ideas of > `public' and `private' are not always helpful: traces of 17th- century > public practice are to be found in privately circulated manuscripts, > while widely available printed books facilitated solitary music- > reading. To illuminate this repertory from scholarly angles we need not > a normative musicology but a more cheerfully disruptive one: we might > then use its tools to sharpen a new set of interpretive skills. As > Robert Spencer said `I see nothing upsetting in that' " >>>> >>>> All the best >>>> Mark >>>> >>>> www.pantagruel.de >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mar 10, 2012, at 5:43 PM, Ron Andrico wrote: >>>> >>>>> We have posted our Saturday quotes on performing lute songs > with no >>>>> gimmicks: >>>>> [1]http://wp.me/p15OyV-lv >>>>> Ron & Donna >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> References >>>>> >>>>> 1. http://wp.me/p15OyV-lv >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> To get on or off this list see list information at >>>>> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> -- > > -- >
