I have to say it's flattering to think that playing thumb-out makes
me exceptional, or cutting-edge, or both. It's pretty much the only
way I've played in my 25 years as a lute player, and in all the
seminars and whatnots I attended in the 1980's and 90's (in which I
played in master classes with most of the major gurus around), nobody
ever thought it was even worth remarking on (of course, it could have
been my playing on the whole that wasn't worth remarking on). Not
that hand position, or the relative merits of one or the other, was
not discussed, but no one ever discouraged thumb-out or suggested
that the thumb-out players (who were not rare) switch.
Meanwhile, David Rastall writes:
400 years ago there was the "technical changeover" in lute
technique. I think we can all agree on that.
Even if we don't take issue with the words, the meaning may escape
us. For example, you probably don't mean that in 1560 every lute and
vihuela player played thumb-in and in 1650 every player played thumb-
out. You probably don't mean to deny that there were local
traditions or schools or individual players who played thumb-in in
1750. But your words are susceptible of that meaning. I think the
best we can do is try to identify dominant trends and draw what
conclusions make sense.
Howard ("Martin Martyn") Posner
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
