In his article Lex has commented on a number of things which I have said in
the booklet on stringing published by the Lute Society - "Baroque guitar
stringing - a survey of the evidence".
In such circumstances it is usual to be allowed the right of reply.
Lex has been told that he can write a short letter in response which will be
included in the next issue of "Lute". As far as the Lute Society is
concerned that is the end of the matter.
Lex has said
"If you would have sent me your text before publication "
As I have explained twice it was my intention to send it to him but due
circumstances beyond my control I was not able to do so. I apologised in
my original message for not doing so. He didn't send me
a copy of the text of his article.
"I would have (tried to) made it clear to you that you read things in my
words that are not there."
When it comes to reading things into his words that are not there it is
really a matter of the pot calling the kettle black!
As regards Carre and French guitarists... in his article Lex has said a
number
of things which I only have time to paraphrase ...
1. No printed solo repertoire is known (in France) from before 1663 so
we must suppose that simple music was transmitted aurally.
This is nonsense. Just because no music was printed in France doesn't mean
that only simple music was transmitted aurally. As I have
pointed out music printed in Italy would have been readily available
elsewhere and some Italian books specifically include helpful information
for French and other players. People from England and France regularly
travelled abroad and studied with Italian lutenists/guitarists. Bullen
Reymes is a well known example. Incidentally Granata apparently asked
friends in Paris to send him copies of French lute music and Foscarini has
included arrangements of French lute music in his books so it was a two way
process.
2. From 1640s on Italian virtuosi visited Paris - Foscarini, Bartolotti,
Corbetta .......they would have performed an advanced battuto-pizzicato
repertoire on guitars in Italian tuning and notated in Italian notation
which would have been incomprehensible to some. This repertoire would have
been out of reach for most French dilettanti...
What patronising thing to say. There were just as many
Italian dilettanti buying little books by Millioni and playing simple music
transmitted aurally. Corbetta's 1648 book
was probably printed in Brussels and he published at least one book which is
missing in the 1650s probably in France. We simply don't know what method
of stringing Bartolotti used as he has not mentioned it in either of his
books.
3. ..there may not have been much work playing the guitar...
It is anyone's guess how much work there was. Apparently Lully employed as
many as eight guitars in some of his operas so there must have been at least
some work for them.
4. Corbetta left for London in 1660 ... Italian guitar music does not
seems to have fallen on fertile soil...
Lex then goes on to say
"Corbetta's music transcends the scope of the re-entrant tuning....perhaps
his advice to add a bourdon to the 4th course to conform to the
then-emerging French tuning was a sort of "rapprochement" or
"compromise-concession" to French guitarists"
I think my comment "Eisenhardt's suggestion that musicians in France (and
presumably in England too) were so unfamiliar with Italian guitar music,
including that of Corbetta, that they opted for what he seems to regard as
an inferior method of stringing is not very convincing" sums up what he has
said fairly accurately.
Which brings us to Carre. It is certain that Carre and Corbetta
knew one another and it is quite clear that Carre was familiar with
Corbetta's music and that of Bartolotti. At least as far as Carre is
concerned Italian music seems to have fallen on fertile ground. Perhaps he
copied Corbetta's comments on stringing.
Lex says "in 1671 Robert de Visée was probably still a young boy". He is
thought to have been born between 1658-60 - certainly old enough to have
started to play the guitar and lute in 1671. He dedicated a Tombeau to
Corbetta in his 1682 book so he must have been familiar with his music and
held it in regard.
there is very little French solo music from before 1670 and almost no
Italian guitar music in French manuscripts from before that time....
How do you know? Have you never heard of the term "accidents of
preservation". The Gallot manuscript - which Lex has dismissed in a
note - includes most of the music from Corbetta's 1643 and 1648 books, about
20 pieces which are definitely by Bartolotti and passages copied from
Foscarini and
Carbonchi. But players didn't need to copy the pieces into manuscripts -
because they could have purchased the printed books.
"The end of the passage from Sanz 1674 is interesting, but certainly not
crucial for our understanding of his ideas".
The point I was making is that Lex has referred to this passage in Note
61(not Note 62 - a misprint in my article)
but has not included it in the English translation of the passage on p.31 of
the article. He seems to think that what Sanz says refers to the
re-entrant tuning whereas the opposite is actually the case.
A few points about Castillion.
1. He says that he has recently taken up the guitar after not haveing
played for about 20 years.
2. He says that he has copied the music into the manuscript for his own
use.
3. He says that he hopes that the manuscript will be of some use to other
after his death. He died in 1757.
I hope that after my death other people find some of the things I have
written useful but I am writing about what I do now...
I think I will have to reply to Lex's comments on the Italian tuning
separately.
Monica
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lex Eisenhardt" <eisenha...@planet.nl>
To: "Monica Hall" <mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk>
Cc: "Vihuelalist" <vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu>
Sent: Friday, September 02, 2011 10:06 PM
Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Lute 2008 - Carre etc.
1. The reference to the law suit between Carre and Corbetta and the
printer Bonneuil which isn't widely known and does indicate that Corbetta
and Carre were aware of one another's work and probably knew one another.
2. Details of sources from which Castillion has copied information.
Interesting information indeed. But what is it supposed to prove about
their method of stringing?
In you new article you say: 'Eisenhardt's suggestion that musicians in
France (and presumably in England too) were so unfamiliar with Italian
guitar music, including that of Corbetta, that they opted for what he
seems to regard as an inferior method of stringing is not very convincing.
Carré and De Visée almost certainly knew Corbetta personally, would have
heard him play and were obviously familiar with his music.'
If you would have sent me your text before publication I would have (tried
to) made it clear to you that you read things in my words that are not
there. Saying that I seem to regard any method of stringing as inferior is
'a tad disingenuous'.
Nowhere have I denied that Corbetta has been of great influence on the
guitar scene in France. But we should keep an eye on chronology. For
example, in 1671 Robert de Visée was probably still a young boy. Or that
there is very little French solo music from before 1670 and almost no
Italian guitar music in French manuscripts from before that time. The
great craze came later. Since we (or at least I) were discussing the early
days of the 'French' tuning in France, the 1680s are not relevant.
3. Details of Italian books which circulated in France and Italian
sources which French players must have been familiar with.
Who in France was familiar with what Italian book exactly?
Any hard evidence, in particular for the years 1640 - 1670?
4. An English translation of what Corbetta says in the Italian preface
and Donald Gill's interpretation of it not included in Lex's article.
With due respect for Donald Gill, this doesn't change anything with regard
to my argument.
(And your translation is not complete, as the 'anche' (also) from
Corbetta's Italian text is no longer there. Why?)
5. Details of the one English source of information about stringing
which clearly indicates the French tuning in staff notation and includes
a possible reference to Corbetta who spent much of the last 20 years of
his life in England which Lex hasn't mentioned.
I had no intention to be complete. In my article (Lute 47, p.27) I say:
'In France, England and the Netherlands there certainly were players who
preferred the 'French' tuning, but at the same time other musicians in
those countries probably adhered to the re-entrant tuning or to the tuning
with two bourdons.'
6. Some observations about Sanz - including an English translation of
a crucial passage which got left out of Lex's article.
The end of the passage from Sanz 1674 is interesting, but certainly not
crucial for our understanding of his ideas on stringing. I wrote (p.20):
'Sanz's continuo exercises are exclusively in punteado and only if we
follow his advice to use bourdons for accompaniment will the bass always
be in the correct position.'
Since you are saying in your article (Lute 48) that my comments on
Castillion are misleading:
The translation (yours?) of Castillions instructions on the website of the
Lute Society reads: 'it is essential to put an octave [une octave] on the
fourth course; it is absolutely necessary. One even finds amateurs, whom I
imitate, who similarly put an octave on the fifth course; they call it a
bourdon.
In your new article I read that Castillion says that 'he and other players
_now (in 1730)_ often use a bourdon on the fifth course as well.' This
would of course better support your idea that Castillion saw the use of
bourdons as something new.
Finally, we don't know if he made this manuscript for his own use only. He
ends his preface: '. . . may heaven allow this book to fall into the hands
of some amateur, able to play from my efforts, after my death.'
Lex
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
