Dear David and Vance,
I am sorry if you feel aggrieved that I have not replied to your messages. I
wrote to David on 17th December 2007 providing information on a modern
edition of Lauffensteiner. I last wrote to Vance on 2nd February 2007 to
provide a web address for a supposed portrait of Dowland, but I admit that
was rather a long time ago.
The various topics which come under discussion on this list will not appeal
to everyone. I am shocked though, David, that you think my recent discussion
with Jaroslaw is in any way some kind of war. Rather I see it as a useful
exchange of ideas, and feel I have learned much from it, digging out copies
of Mace and Geminiani from my shelves here at home, borrowing a copy of
Donington from a friend locally, and seeing what all these authors had to
say about performance practice. I very much appreciate reading Jaroslaw's
contributions, which have stimulated this research.
On a practical note, I never send the same message twice to people now,
unless by accident. I used to think it was a courteousy to do so, until I
received this PS following a message to the Lute List, in reply to one of
mine, from Gordon Gregory on 4th August 2000:
PS Thanks for sending a copy of your note to me as well as to the NG, but
I'm on the NG so I will get it anyway. Your way I get 2 copies.
By NG he meant Lute News Group, i.e. Wayne's Lute List. He made me
realise that sending the same message twice was actually a discourteousy,
since he would have to click on two messages to save or delete them, which
was an unnecessary waste of time.
Sometimes it happens that I duplicate what someone else has written. This
usually occurs when their message comes in as mine goes out, so the two
messages cross in the ether. Otherwise I try to avoid duplication. However,
if our messages are saying the same thing, that can't be too bad, because it
shows we agree on some things at least.
Best wishes to you both,
Stewart.
- Original Message -
From: vance wood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Lute List lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 6:57 PM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Source Wars
Ahhha, David:
You forget egos and music. You cannot separate the two and sometimes egos
show themselves in rude responses and --- no responses: I get that all the
time.
Vw
- Original Message -
From: David Rastall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Lute Net lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 1:41 PM
Subject: [LUTE] Source Wars
I assume that these source wars, where one person trots out his
sources, and someone else trots out his in rebuttal, are purely
academic discussions with little or no relationship to actual real-
world playing. Otherwise, if you guys need to be told how to play
musically, if you have to look it up in your historical sources, then
there is something fundmentally wrong with your own innate sense of
music making. At the end of Stewart McCoy's last post I felt like
saying congratulations, you just discovered musicianship! (not that
Stewart ever acknowledges any of my posts. He simply replies to the
list saying the same things I just said, without even the courtesy of
a cc). I wonder, though, whether anyone who considers himself/
herself a serious and accomplished player is going to be swayed
significantly by anything in those sources.
David R
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
