... It's obviously a bit of
popular-press fluff, not even quite "gray literature," but that stuff
tends to reach much more of the general public than scholarly
literature ever will. > Eugene
I agree.
The interesting thing to me on this topic is the response it is getting
from the Lute list. Yes, you lutenists who have been at it for 20 - 30
years already know this, but I think that in all likelihood, the rest
of the
music world does not. An article like this on a "guitar site" (nose
upturned?)
will probably reach a lot more people, and therefore could be a good
thing,
bringing more attention to lutes from other musical disciplines.
Something
I have noticed in reading liner notes to CDs / LPs is that, for example,
keyboard afficianodos sometimes seem to be unaware that a Bach piece
was also arranged by the man himself for other instruments. The same is
true for violin, etc.
"Any press is good press - even bad press." I personally think that
the more
people write about these things, the better. And if you have pertinent
info that
this writer doesn't seem to have, maybe they would like to know about
it?
Knowledge, especially accurate knowledge, is best shared with the world.
And anything done to place the word Lute in front of a wider audience
is going
to be good for lutes and lutenists.
I'll look forward to future responses.
Tom
However, there is at least a fair amount of reference to primary
source material (the manuscripts themselves). It's obviously a bit of
popular-press fluff, not even quite "gray literature," but that stuff
tends to reach much more of the general public than scholarly
literature ever will.
Eugene
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Stephan Olbertz Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 4:35 AM Cc:
[email protected] Subject: [LUTE] Re: [LUTE] Re: Re: Bach´s Lute
Suites: This Myth is Busted
Am 25.04.2012, 22:27 Uhr, schrieb Daniel Winheld <[email protected]>:
The article was aimed at the guitar crowd,
And that's probably why the article is a bit superficial. ;-) A real
contribution would need to be in scholarly style. No references here,
no mentioning of newer literature (e.g. by Negwer, Dierksen, Hofmann,
Ledbetter), lots of statements without evidence.
Regards
Stephan
still clinging to illusions
of lute. It's tough letting go.
But he put it all together very nicely, I thought.
On Apr 25, 2012, at 11:18 AM, Braig, Eugene wrote:
While I enjoyed this read, I didn't see anything particularly new
here. For example, Hopkinson Smith specifically named all the
sources of Bach's original "lute" music in the liner notes he
drafted for his recording of this music around 30 years ago. He
also stated their evident non-lute provenance. I have heard Paul
O'Dette unequivocally state on more than one occasion something
like "Sorry, Bach did not write for the lute." Etc. I suspect
that anybody who is still clinging to the notion that Bach
knowingly composed lute music after having had some exposure to
some reference of the source material either really, really wants
to believe so to somehow legitimize the lute or is a fan of modern
classical guitar who wants to somehow legitimize the perceived
ancestor of his/her own instrument.
Best,
Eugene
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, April 25,
2012 11:58 AM To: [email protected]; Luca Manassero Subject:
[LUTE] [LUTE] Bach´s Lute Suites: This Myth is Busted
A very interesting article. I can't wait to see the responses
from
the rest of the list! I am reminded that Walther Gerwig did an
arrangement of Bach's Cello Suite No.1 in G major, BWV1007. Very
nice and beautifully played - in Renaissance tuning!
Tom
--
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
Erstellt mit Operas revolutionärem E-Mail-Modul:
http://www.opera.com/mail/
Tom Draughon
Heartistry Music
http://www.heartistrymusic.com/artists/tom.html
714 9th Avenue West
Ashland, WI 54806
715-682-9362
