Arthur,
I'm curious about the "lutenist who may not be
named" as well. Trustworthy as this fellow probably
is, there have been bigger hoaxes before so we have to
remain sceptical until the lutenist's name comes out
or there is some verifiable publication. The
Segovia/Ponce frauds for example didn't happen so long
ago as to be unthinkable today.
For those who might not know, Andres Segovia and
Manuel Ponce conspired to pass off Ponce's original
guitar compositions as the work of past masters.
These included "transciptions" of piano pieces (sic)
by Allesandro Scarlatti, a Suite in A minor by Weiss,
and the Sonata Classica by Sor - all entirely the work
of Ponce. While today it seems incredible that anyone
could be fooled for a minute (Ponce was a mediocre
composer at best) these sham works were recorded and
published in the 1950's under the baroque composers'
names.
Since these pieces were vouched for by such giants
in the field, they got passed around and accepted as
part of the repertoire. For years, Segovia and Ponce
fooled audiences, critics and musicologists. John
Williams' Wigmore Hall debut included the "Scarlatti"
and "Weiss" pieces. Heitor Villa-Lobos tried to argue
that the "Weiss" was so good that it must in fact be
by J.S. Bach(!). When the master guitarist and
respected composer were finally discovered, they
claimed it had all been just a little joke. Ha-ha.
I believe that all of these pieces are still in
print under Ponce's name.
Chris
--- Arthur Ness <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Paul Pleijsier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Arthur Ness" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: "Lute Net" <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
> Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 3:19 AM
> Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: Respighi
>
> | As a total outsider in this matter, I just wonder
> why the Italian
> | "living and breathing" "master lutenist" is
> unnamed as of yet.
> | Paul Pleijsier
> ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
> Dear Paul,
>
> I was told the name of the lutenist by several
> persons at the Francesco
> conference in 1997, but I did not recognize the name
> and subsequently
> forgot who it is. And I've never considered it so
> important that I'd seek
> out the name from my colleagues in Italy, or from
> Thomas Schall. The way
> the name was mentioned casually, the lutenist was a
> "household name" to
> those participating in the discussions. It was ten
> years ago.
>
> I never expected it would be so controversial. And
> the
> controversy is due solely to ugly comments by
> Matanya Ophee and now
> Eugene <what's his name?>. They are demanding
> information to which they
> are
> not necessarily entitled. and seem to think they
> will get the
> information by suggesting that we are liars, and by
> using other unkind
> epithets ("looth
> fairies"), and by characterizing the lutenist as a
> "phantom." But I don't
> have the information they seek, and under the
> circumstances, wouldn't tell
> them even if I knew.
>
> The re-discovery of the manuscript was hot news at
> the conference. And
> several different persons told me about it. Sort of,
> breathlessly
> uttered, "Did _you_ hear . . ." And I did have an
> extended discussion
> about the discovery with at least one leading
> Italian lute scholar,
> who thought he was on the track of the person who
> purchased the manuscript
> shortly after
> Chilesotti's death in 1916. He named a famous
> Italian
> composer/musicologist (but not
> Respighi) who resided in northern Italy, not far
> from Chilesotti.
> Possibly it may be his family who still owns the
> manuscript. But that's
> just a guess, particularly because the manuscript
> seems never to have
> appeared on the auction or
> antiquarian markets, which are closely monitored by
> some of us.
>
> In 1997, noone told me the identity of the owner of
> the manuscript (it is
> possible noone knew)--information I surely would
> have tucked away for
> future reference in my 37-column article
> on the sources of lute music in the New Grove
> Dictionary of Music and
> Musicians. It was well-known that my revisions for
> the next edition were
> then in progress. That is probably the reason why so
> many people told me
> about the
> manuscript. When a new manuscript is discovered, I
> usually hear about
> it within a very short while.
>
> Two persons on this list have given me additional
> information privately
> about the Chilesotti manuscripts (plural). The
> present owner of the Codice
> Lauten-Buch manuscript may have been known to a
> "mentor" of one reader
> here, but the mentor is now deceased.
>
> The important matter is that Dinko Fabris (a leading
> Italian lute
> scholar, and an expert on the biography and works of
> Chilesotti) was able
> to determine that the manuscript was not destroyed
> in a fire.
> =====AJN (Boston, Mass.)=====
>
>
>
>
> To get on or off this list see list information at
>
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
>
