Roman, I think you should speak for yourself only. Me, I have nothing against technology, and I believe that that is true for other lutenists here. And I love atonal and experimental music as well as early music and have played music by Takemitsu, Stockhausen and Kagel with great pleasure, in the past. I think most people who love early music do not do so from technofobic reasons.
Regards, Jelma van Amersfoort On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 10:24 PM, Roman Turovsky <[email protected]> wrote: > Arto, > There a worldwide reaction to technology, manifesting inself in heightened > interest in handmaid and traditional things. > Interest in Early Music in general and in the lute in particular is part of > that same process. > RT > > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "wikla" <[email protected]> > To: "David Rastall" <[email protected]> > Cc: "Roman Turovsky" <[email protected]>; "Lutelist" > <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 4:29 PM > Subject: [LUTE] Re: The reason we play lutes > > >> >> This is something I strongly disagree! Roman said that "EM revival in >> general was a >> reaction to this type of (neo)modernism". I do not know, if Roman refers >> to >> 20's, 30's, >> 60's or 70's by the "EM revival", but in any of these cases I cannot see >> any reaction >> to "(neo)modernism". What I CAN see (at least in cases of 60's and 70's) >> is >> a reaction >> against the established style of making the 150th version of Beethoven's >> 5th - every >> time tuning the strings a little it higher... Or all the 1000's of cases >> playing Bach >> by piano or by symphony orchestra... At least in my experience the persons >> who preferred >> EM to the "establishment" were just the same who also enjoyed the modern >> music. >> >> Another matter is (luckily!) that nowadays our "EM" aesthetics are a >> "must", if you want >> to perform music of "Bach and before". But I still wait they'll do also >> Sibelius (et al.) >> in the "HIP" manner, in the way he heard it. That still is definitely not >> the case. >> >> Arto >> >> >> On Sun, 4 Oct 2009 22:25:46 -0400, David Rastall <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> On Oct 4, 2009, at 3:11 PM, Roman Turovsky wrote: >>> >>>> EM revival in general was a reaction to this type of (neo)modernism. >>> >>> In that context, anything is possible. I knew a college professor >>> back in the day who was a composer. He called his work "radical-neo- >>> post-diatonicism." The weird thing was that he was deadly serious >>> about it. That's really how he wanted to be known! I have enough >>> trouble with Charles Mouton, without having to contend with neo-styro- >>> HIP. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> David Rastall >>> [email protected] >>> www.rastallmusic.com >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> To get on or off this list see list information at >>> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html >> >> >> > > >
