OK, I meant a 'last word' on the specific topic. I have to respond to this more general posting (see below).
On 9/14/07, Sergio Vandekier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I invented nothing, what I have said was based in my own experience as I was > growing up in Buenos Aires, in my discussions with tango historians > themselves or with members of my family and friends that had lived the facts > by them explained; also in readings and in the knowledge of Argentine > Culture and history in general. Please no strawman arguments. I never said or implied you invented anything - I even pointed out in some cases which specific pieces you are referring to or provided more details on the evidence you give. > All along these years I run into foreigners (never one Argentine) that > disputed historical facts as generally accepted basing their conviction in > their own deductions and beliefs or in books written by foreigners. They > were mostly Europeans or from Latin America. This is so vague (what subjects or claims or facts are we talking about) or personalized (people _you_ have run into) as to be unfalsifiable. There are Argentines whom you've never met that question some of the most common stereotypes about tango - like the 'born in brothels' claim. Of the more famous ones Arturo Penon comes to mind (Pugliese's first bandoneon from 1969 on). I haven't had time to check the bios of all authors of the peer-reviewed research articles or dissertations I've looked at to know if any of the Latin-American sounding names are actually Argentine. Why would that matter though? > > Disgusted with this situation I finally decided to quit writing in Tango-L, > in my own stupidity I thought it was interesting to share this little known > fact of tango women dressing as men, big mistake! It is fairly well known that some tango women dressed in manly clothes. Not just Azucena Maizani, but also Mercedes Simone (at least on occasion). But this interesting trivia isn't the totality of what you shared - you brought this up in the context of it being evidence that tango was a men-only dance/world until possibly the 1920-30s. I also gave you an alternative explanation (with examples from this and other branches of musical performance) for this phenomenon, but you ignore it or at least seem not to be open to the idea that alternative explanations might exist. > > I thank you and all the foreigners that did a "systematic research of our > history" I have family in La Plata. Am I in the club now? Or am I a proxy-foreigner? Or a proxy-Argentine? Am I more credible because of blood connection? > never mind the arrogance of believing that we are totally unable of > knowing or investigating our own history. Another strawman argument - I have never claimed that you are unable (never mind 'totally unable') to know or investigate your history - why would I make such a dumb and idiotic claim? I also never claimed the scientific research I am referring to was done exclusively by 'foreigners' - I actually do not know the nationality of the authors and I do not much care as long as their logic and evidence holds up to scientific scrutiny. The scientific method is not subject-bound or topic-bound - the same basic concepts apply across all areas of inquiry. > Here I must concede the fact that tango, having being considered something > "depicable, proper of the lower classes" was neglected as a subject of study > by Argentine intelectuals. Despite of this we could paper the road from here > to the moon with all that has been written about our popular dance and > music. First, I think you are also blurring the lines between opinions and scientific inquiry. I am more interested in the latter and less interested in extrapolations exclusively based on the former, though in a field where so much is oral history we have to take both in tandem. Second, a related concept is that when I provide some counter-arguments to yours, it does not imply that I consider the opposite claim to have been proved beyond a shadow of a doubt. I merely hope to show that other possibilities (or shades of gray) must be allowed for consideration. Science is never about being 100 percent, but we can estimate what is more likely and always keep an open mind to revise our theories. Third, systematic scientific research means, among other thing, not to pick and choose (when equal-weight or equally-(un)certain) what evidence we should include and what we should ignore. One of the consequences of that is that theories are always open for revision when new data are found. Another is that you can have a book written in 1936 that was systematic in the sense that its theories may have covered all facts available in 1936. The underlying reason for all this is that we never have a complete and exhaustive set of observations about a certain reality or phenomenon, and in cases when our incomplete set is extremely small, as with tango, great caution and a tolerance for uncertainty is required when extrapolating from it to what the reality might have looked like. Consequently, on this subject I am willing to tolerate a lot of uncertainty and the possibility that your exact set of specific claims is the correct one, so long as you can provide convincing arguments and data and a theory that not only holds up for all your claims in a coherent and self-consistent manner but also explains away all the contradicting arguments and data. I do not see the tolerance for uncertainty in you though, even though you are dealing with a similar extremely small set of observations. > Summary it is best not to write about the following subjects: Tango History, > Gender roles in tango, Tango Styles. If you do you will get tangled in a > discussion that will never end. > > Have a good day, Sergio With best regards, Konstantin Victoria, Canada _______________________________________________ Tango-L mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/tango-l
