> --- On Fri, 3/26/10, David van Ooijen <[email protected]> wrote: >> There is so much 20th century baroque performance practice >> (I call it >> the esperanto early music style) around that is not hip >> whatsoever.
To which <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm a little confused with the way the term HIP seems to be bantered around > in early music circles nowadays. It was my understanding that HIP > (Historically Informed Performance) came about as a response to the older use > of the idea of "authenticity." I've just enjoyed reading The End of Early Music, where HIP was defined as Historically Inspired Performance, a good choice of words. I'm not excluding myself from my Esperanto/non-hip statement and I'm not saying it's a bad thing. I'm not trying to make a point, even, it's just an observation that many choices in early music today are opportunistic ones. I bring the same theorbo for Monteverdi as I do for Marais as I do for Bach (though usually I bring my 'Italian' archlute for Bach ...). That cannot be right, although I wouldn't call it wrong either. I play Dowland and Purcell on the same lute in concerts, even on recordings. To say 'I know they used gut but I'm using synthetics on which I play historically inspired so now it's ok' isn't right either, but who am I to say it's wrong? Baroque guitar in the Maria Vespers was a recent point of debate. Octave stringing when playing Dowland a current one. Generic 'Handel' continuo for anything from Caccini to Hasse. Continuo bands full of happy pluckers and strummers that turn anything into a mix of a Brasilian carnaval band and free jazz. Singers that sing their Bach like their Mozart and their Monteverdi like their Bach. Valotti for 17th century music, ET for Monteverdi , Baroque viols for Renaissance music. &c, you get my point. All understandable choices made for practical reasons. Fun to play, often great musical results, nice work and income for us, but hip ...? >> We modern early-musickers gave up on the chimeric pursuit of "authentic" performances when it was realized that there never was a consistent "olden" style in use in any place or time > Thus, a HIP performance simply means being informed about the sources. One > can be perfectly HIP by choosing not to utilize information that is > ambiguous, incomplete or contradictory. One could also put in a HIP > performance on modern piano, trumpet or electric guitar by studying texts > about period phrasing, accentuation and ornamentation. I'd even go so far as > to say that HIP-ness sometimes even involves doing something that we know was > NOT done if it enhances the musical experience for modern audiences. << I summarise this as 'I've read the book but will do it my own way because I know better anyway.' Of course we know better, we are the musicians that have to tell the story to the audience. That will only work if we do it our way. The final choice is ours and rightly so. But don't call it hip when you're just doing it the way you like. David - Dowland to Monteverdi tonight (8-course and theorbo), two Bach Johannes Passions (the 'common' but never performed in this way during Bach's time version and the 1724 version) tomorrow (archlute) -- ******************************* David van Ooijen [email protected] www.davidvanooijen.nl ******************************* To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
