Don't we all... Mixed blessing indeed! Eugene
-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Monica Hall Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 1:35 PM To: A. J. Ness Cc: Lutelist Subject: [LUTE] Wikipedia Dear Art Yes - I just did. What a lot of meaningless jargon. Wikipedia is a mixed blessing but it does have one advantage - it can be updated very quickly. The entry for Santiago de Murcia gives his correct biographical details but Grove On Line still has the largely fictional biography of him - in spite of the fact that I complained about when it was first written and more recently after Alejandro Vera had unearthed his baptismal and burial records. A lot of the other entries relating to the baroque guitar in Groves are also inaccurate but the current editorial staff couldn't care less. Moral of this tale - never believe what other people say.... I must plead guilty to occasionally amending Wiki entries myself when I have nothing better to do! Monica. ----- Original Message ----- From: "A. J. Ness" <[email protected]> To: "Monica Hall" <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 3:37 PM Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: Nazi rules for jazz performers > Dear Monica, > > Take a look at the article "Pitch" in W'pedia. It's pure jargon. > Sometimes > these articles are written by persons without an understanding of the > subject manner. So they emphasize (or try to emphasize) what they cannot > understand, as here. And bibliographies are usually deficient of the > basic > sources, e.g., Ellis and Mendel. > > A few years ago there was an article in the Boston Globe about two high > school students (ca. 17 year olds) who (between the two of them) had > written > 1000 articles for the Wikipedia. That is an explanation for the poor > quality of many articles. But looks good on a college application. (As > does playing the lute.<g>) > > Arthur. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Monica Hall" <[email protected]> > To: "Mark Wheeler" <[email protected]> > Cc: "Lutelist" <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 8:42 AM > Subject: [LUTE] Re: Nazi rules for jazz performers > > >> Well - I would take anything Wikipedia said with a large pinch of salt. >> I have just finished reading Hywel Williams study of Charlemagne and the >> Carolingian Empire which has a couple of pages on the subject of spread >> of >> Roman chant northwards. He says nothing about the clergy being forced to >> use it on pain of death. >> >> I can't quote the whole section in the book but needless to say it was >> much more complicated than that. Among other things chant as performed >> in Rome did not remain static. There were significant changes to it >> during the period in question. >> >> What Williams concludes by saying is - >> >> "A uniform chant remained the Carolingian goal and a New Hymnal was >> issued during the reign of Louis the Pious (Charlemagne's son). But >> Gregorian chant as it evolved during the next two centuries was a >> synthesis of Carolingian, ancient Roman and the Gallican plainchant which >> had prevailed under the Merovingians". >> >> Monica >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Mark Wheeler" <[email protected]> >> To: "Tony" <[email protected]> >> Cc: <[email protected]> >> Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 1:11 AM >> Subject: [LUTE] Re: Nazi rules for jazz performers >> >> >>> Ironically fitting for this thread, the domination of Gregorian Chant >>> over other forms of chant came through the use of extremely draconian >>> methods... >>> >>> "Gregorian chant appeared in a remarkably uniform state across Europe >>> within a short time. Charlemagne, once elevated to Holy Roman Emperor, >>> aggressively spread Gregorian chant throughout his empire to consolidate >>> religious and secular power, requiring the clergy to use the new >>> repertory on pain of death." >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregorian_chant >>> >>> Mark >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mar 14, 2012, at 12:01 AM, Tony wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Thanks Gary >>>> I tried to find information about what the church prohibited in >>>> medieval and renaissance Europe( some of you here may have some >>>> useful >>>> links) While searching for the Council of Trent I came across this >>>> list, a summary of approved music >>>> >>>> The Church's doctrine on liturgical music can be summarized in seven >>>> points .... >>>> >>>> 1 Types of Music Appropriate for the Mass. The music of the Mass and >>>> the Sacred Liturgy of the must be either Gregorian Chant, or must be >>>> similar to Gregorian Chant. The primary example of music similar to >>>> Gregorian Chant is Sacred Polyphony, exemplified by the compositions >>>> of >>>> Palestrina. >>>> >>>> 2 Characteristics of Music Appropriate for the Mass. The music of the >>>> Mass must have "grandeur yet simplicity; solemnity and majesty," and >>>> must have "dignity," and "gravity," should be "exalted" and >>>> "sublime," >>>> should bring "splendor and devotion" to the liturgy, and must be >>>> conducive to prayer and liturgical participation, rather than >>>> distracting the listener from prayer. It must be music that befits >>>> the >>>> profound nature of the Mass, which is the Sacrifice of Jesus Christ. >>>> As >>>> Pope Paul VI put it: "The primary purpose of sacred music is to evoke >>>> God's majesty and to honor it. But at the same time music is meant to >>>> be a solemn affirmation of the most genuine nobility of the human >>>> person, that of prayer." >>>> >>>> 3 Types of Musical Instruments Appropriate for the Mass. The >>>> instrument >>>> that is most "directly" fitted for the Mass is the classical pipe >>>> organ. Other instruments, however, can be adapted to the Mass, >>>> including wind instruments, and smaller bowed instruments. >>>> >>>> 4 Types of Music Prohibited in the Mass. All secular and >>>> entertainment >>>> styles of music are utterly prohibited in the Mass. The introduction >>>> of >>>> inappropriate music into the liturgy is regarded as "deplorable >>>> conduct." >>>> >>>> 5 Types of Instruments Prohibited in the Mass. All "noisy or >>>> frivolous" >>>> instruments are prohibited for use in the Mass.The specific >>>> instruments >>>> named by the Popes have included guitars, pianos, drums, cymbals, and >>>> tambourines. "Bands" also are prohibited, as are all automated forms >>>> of >>>> music (recordings, automatic instruments, etc). >>>> >>>> 6 Adapting Musical Traditions of Indigenous Cultures, and >>>> "Universality." The musical traditions of particular cultures can and >>>> should be incorporated into the Sacred Liturgy, but only in such a >>>> way >>>> that they will be recognized as sacred ("good" in the words of Pope >>>> St. >>>> Pius X) by people of all cultures. That is, all such music must have >>>> the characteristic of "universality." >>>> >>>> 7 Preserving the Church's Musical Tradition. The treasury of the >>>> Church's sacred music is to be carefully preserved, rather than >>>> discarded >>>> >>>> aEUR|written in 2002 ..... [1]http://www.matthewhoffman.net/music/ >>>> >>>> I guess compiled by a traditionalist - I know people who go to >>>> churches >>>> in the UK and Latin America where these rules are vigorously flouted >>>> >>>> And resumably the lute is a 'noisy' instrument associated with >>>> thedreadful frivolities of pianos and guitars >>>> Tony >>>> >>>> --- >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> References >>>> >>>> 1. http://www.matthewhoffman.net/music/ >>>> >>>> >>>> To get on or off this list see list information at >>>> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html >>> >>> >>> -- >> >> >
