This is hillarious - I work in the field of "library science", and the fact that I know personally quite a few special collections catalogers who - to stay polite - are quite full of themselves, makes the anecdote extremely juicy. Incidentally, "library science" is the only "science" in the U.S. that can provide you with faculty status just with a Master's Degree. And that went straight to some of those poor people's heads... In any case, talk about misreading documental evidence: this story should be engraved on every future librarian's forehead just so they remember who they are. Together with the appropriate subject heading: "Husbandry, Shepherding, Homosexuality, Early works to 1800" LOL, Alain
Arthur Ness wrote: >I think it would be a mistake to cite what are additions and corrections to >Zuth's work as a demonstration that his work is poor. (Some of that is really >obscure information.) For his time, his Handbuch is quite thorough. And >Matanya knows about the Bergier, Ungay, entry because I told him about it. > >It stems from a mistake in the ca. 1890 card catalogue at what is now the >Berlin Staatsbibliothek (the one on Unter den Linden). The composer reference >is on the large catalogue card for Mus Ms 40032, that immense Neapolitan lute >book (viola de mano book!) now in Cracow. It is the title of a chanson by >Crecquillon, not a person. But it appears several times in difcerent versions >in that manuscript, so the cataloguer thought it was a composer's name. S/He >didn't know it was the same piece done up with different divisions. > >Ready reference materials were not known in those days. That's why it is >such a shame that Ophee published the Codice Lauten-Buch without taking a day >or two to track down the composers and correct titles. His edition ignores a >century of musical scholarship. It's just another Chilesotti Rip-Off. No >better than the zillions before his. > >There's another place in that same manuscript with the mistaken name. Several >pieces in that manuscript have Van Gheligo in the margin. One's a motet >movement by Josquin. Is Van Gheligo some Dutch lutenist who made the >intabulation? No it's Italian for Gospel, "Vangelo." It is one of the very >few iindications that lute might be used during the Mass. Here when the >celebrant walked to the lectern to read the Gospel of the day, the lutenist >would play that Josquin motet intabulation. > >ajn > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Matanya Ophee > To: [email protected] > Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 2:13 PM > Subject: [LUTE] Re: [LUTE]Madame Robert Sidney Pratten, Victorian guitar > virtuosa > > > Arthur Ness > Thu, 25 Aug 2005 07:56:03 -0700 > > >I didn't realize that in addition to being a music hall tenor he was > >a comedian > >as well. He must have been tremendously popular. It is Zuth in his Handbuch > >that says that Shand was an American. I wonder where he got that notion. > > Same place he got the spelling of Shand's teacher as Sidney-Pratten, > and the name and that famous lutenist Bergier, Ungay. A most reliable > reference book, uh? > > Actually if you want to know what Zuth's contemporaries thought of > his work you can look it up here: > > http://www.orphee.com/fryk.htm > > The text in red, BTW, are the annotations made to Fryklund's text by > Kenneth Sparr. > > > Matanya Ophee > Editions Orphe'e, Inc., > 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. > Columbus, OH 43235-1226 > Phone: 614-846-9517 > Fax: 614-846-9794 > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.orphee.com > http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ > > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > >-- > > >
