Hello everyone, I must take a little part in this C de P blog. Important : it's not easy at all for me to write in english, so please, be indulgent !
1°) It's not really "my" method. I put it down on a paper after several years of teaching & playing along with people who learned with Gaston Riviere (Frederic PARIS, Patrick BOUFFARD). Riviere's pedagogy should be understood with an historic point of wiew : he wanted, in the 50's, to have a lot of students who could play all together in gatherings, as a "HG marching band". If you're walking while playing, the "up-down" technique seems easier (on 2-times music, the feets are "down" on the beat). Yes it was quite military music... 2°) And here came the confusion between a aesthetic wiew (with one percussion per note, everyone will do the same, and the result will be more efficient) and a pedagogic one (you must learn first music with few long notes). In my teaching, I start with scottishes (slow and 2-times) and Riviere was coming to it after several years of practice (you must have the "coup de 4" before). 2°) To the beginners, I show a simple way to produce the percussion by striking the forearm (for the "up" & "down") or the arm (for the "push" & "pull") of my students. Yes, I hit my students ! 3°) We're not only talking there about a beginning of a percussion, but also about its length. For that, it may be necessary to use the wrist. P. Bouffard had differents ways to hold the handle at the top of the circle. It depends if he's playing a "up-down" with a legato (long up, short down) or not (both short). It would be easier to me to speak about that (and show). I hope some day we will meet each other (Michael, Simon...) and there will be someone to write (and translate) our discussions. Keep on turning ! Maxou J.F. "Maxou" HEINTZEN le bourg 03360 Valigny 04.70.66.60.01 / 06.87.43.63.65 ----- Original Message ----- From: michael To: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 10:07 PM Subject: [HG-new] C de P blog C de P blog Dear Paul and All. ‘One side will make you grow taller, and the other side will make you grow shorter.’ ‘One side of what?’ thought Alice. ‘Of the mushroom’, said the Caterpillar. There is a certain difficulty in explaining in text the precise point of a circle where action should be taken, so let us try to define what is up – or down. As Simon has indicated the confusion arises in part because of a misunderstanding, which I find surprising, for on p 16, para 3, it is writ ‘the instrument is tipped away from the body,’ and on p 31, para 4, ‘the strokes will not be in a vertical plane, but slightly oblique.’ When I refer to a stroke being given at 12 of the clock it seems to be assumed that I refer to a clock hanging on the wall with 12 at the top. But in order for the keys to fall we tip the instrument forward and this moves the 12 to a point approximating 1.30 on the wall clock. The ‘down strokes’ will then naturally become push strokes. But it is easier to describe these nominal points of the clock using 12, 3, 6, 9 rather than 1.30, 4.30, 7.30 and 10.30. Further, it is written on p. 34, para 7, ‘You should establish the tail piece as the starting point and return there at the end of each stroke,’ giving further confirmation, if any were needed, of the diagonal relationship of the two main strokes vis a vis the instrument. I can’t see myself describing all 7 strokes illustrated in terms of hand contact, for this would seem a mite cumbersome, but I must try it some time. With regard to the parts of the hand described on p. 31 1) the base of the thumb 2) the first joint of the thumb 3) the tips of the 1st and 2nd fingers 4) the side of the ring finger. There is an error. Line 3 should read ‘the tip of the 2nd finger.’ I don’t know where the idea of using two fingers in the neck of the handle came from, for as Doreen has just remarked, the shape of the knob shows where the fingers should go, and two is a squash. I have always used the 2nd finger only. There really isn’t room for two and I find one finger quite adequate. I had the impression that some people start the system level with the soundboard, which strikes me as being too far round, hence my initial query. The 3-stroke, p.52, para 4, should read , … ‘the strokes should be given at the two buttons…and at the tail-piece, making a triangle.’ Now, to discuss Maxou’s method. To play with this technique, which I understand is quite traditional and not a "new school" at all, the parts of the hand have to be used in the sequence: 1) the first joint of the thumb (my 3.00 2) the fingertips of the 1st and 2nd fingers (my 6.00 3) the side of the 3rd (ring) finger (my 9.00 4) the ball of the thumb (my 12.00 But now that you understand our techniques are much the same other than being a ¼ turn apart, I still ask 1) What is the advantage? And 2) How do you manage the 3-stroke in this system? In this system both the 1st and 4th strokes are at points of maximum force and this is fine when all four notes in a group are to receive the same stress, and having a strong final note might help to hold the rhythm. But in slower pieces of a more expressive nature the 1st note is the strongest (which may be done by stress or length), while the last note is the weakest, in which case my system would seem to be the more natural. In the 70’s I was not aware of any conflict between two methods and I wonder how long and where Maxou’s method has existed. Do they perhaps reflect the regional differences between the Bourbonnais (d/g) and Limosine (c/g) traditions? Each of these has its own traditional repertoire and 50 years ago some people regretted the new custom of playing both repertoires on either instrument, thus losing the association between quality of sound and repertoire. Each cultural region was distinct, with its own language, songs, dances, customs etc. But I stray now into ethnomusicology. At St Chartier in the 70’s I struggled to discover how to do the lift stroke (ring finger at my 9.00) as the moment of leverage is very weak at this point. I was able to observe leading players (including the young Bouffard) minutely, and observed that they twisted the wrist, thus giving an impetus to the wheel with the3rd finger. The other puzzle was the lowest stroke (my 6.00), since again the pull is weak, and I worked out that they must give a small snatch with the 2nd finger. No one imparted this information which now must be general knowledge! I also observed a number of players throwing up the index finger on each turn, which seems to be related to the loose hold described by Dupuit (and which he dislikes). But this is actually of no concern since the index finger is not involved making the ‘cage’ or doing anything other than being decorative. Of course there may be players who prefer to cling to the knob with two fingers, but I can see no advantage in doing so. I am sorry if our misprint has led people into a false habit. On a personal note, while I am responsible for much of the pedagogical content, Doreen was in charge of the c de p and other technical matters since she was the expert, having studied with Rivière (who kneeled to her at the end of the week), and then with Clastier and Marcheix, where I joined in. The above matters did not arise in my teaching because the players had already mastered the basics (apart from beginner’s classes), while in live teaching such matters are dealt with in a few seconds. Perhaps if I had done more teaching over the years these inconsistencies may have come to light sooner, and it did not occur to me to quiz my own work! I am indebted to Paul for pointing out these errors. So I think the ‘Muskett method’ (I lay no claim to this title) is not so out of step as has been thought, for it is only by a quarter of a turn. I am unable at present to assess the significance of this. But it is hardly surprising that Maxou’s way is the more popular, for he is a leading player and teacher, whereas I have only produced a book. I am very pleased the Method has found so much favour and that demand continues. It was written because Doreen found the need for a book to help her students, many of whom could read music, but it has found much wider use. As for a 4th edition, that is a major undertaking. We were aware that a number of subjects had to be omitted in order to keep the size and price down and I am not sure if beginners will want a larger volume. Any suggestions? In the meantime I shall add the above corrections to the C de P Supplement which goes with every book. Best wishes to all. Michael P.S. You might care to visit my new website so as to encourage the system to recognise it. (hurdygurdymethod.co.uk) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hurdygurdy" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hurdygurdy The rules of posting, courtesy, and other list information may be found at http://hurdygurdy.com/mailinglist/index.htm. To reduce spam, posts from new subscribers are held pending approval by the webmaster. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hurdygurdy" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hurdygurdy The rules of posting, courtesy, and other list information may be found at http://hurdygurdy.com/mailinglist/index.htm. To reduce spam, posts from new subscribers are held pending approval by the webmaster.
