Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.
This is becoming a sidetopic very often, but somehow it is left unspoken imo. It is always said that the guitarrist is very low in the hierarchy, yet in the shows i see and hear guitarrists incorporating an important part in pieces, including spanish groups. On a wider scale, the art in general, guitarrists can be seen as the composers of the music (solo and any kind of accomp), right? Or is it just my perception?
Does the current reputation of the guitar represent its artistic value or not? (no matter how un- or im-portant you think the guitar is). With artistic value i not only mean stage performance, but also the development of music. I have no experience so i am asking.
It is always said that the guitarrist is very low in the hierarchy
I think its because historically the guitar came much later after the Cante. Its a common beginners mistake to assume Flamenco is all about guitar music. The cante came first and compas was made by palmas, footstamps, bells etc. The guitar originally made a simple accompaniment based around a few chords. Falsetas were added to provide breaks between the letras and solos were basically instrumental interpretations of the song (a good example is Pepe Habichuelas Granaina). Today guitar acompaniment is more complex both harmonically and technically but it still follows the singer, so to answer you question, the singer still plays a big role in composing the song and without the different cantes you would not have the different toques.
More importantly the guitarist follows the singer and the dancer so in that sense its lower in the hierarchy of making a performance.
However it would be difficult to argue against the role of the guitar today in the development of the music and it would certainly be hard to imagine putting together a full flamenco show without a guitarist. The introduction of dancers in Shows during the "golden age" meant guitarists developed rasgeos and other techniques to match the footwork. The higher level of technique led to the possibility of more complex musical ideas. Now solos are composed as entities in themselves that stand up to artistic scrutiny. However the best soloists still have their roots in the flamenco cante. The danger of removing oneself to far to harmonies from other genres is that while being technically amazing, it loses its "flamenconess".
Posts: 357
Joined: Dec. 5 2008
From: New Jersey USA
RE: The role of the guitar (in reply to Pimientito)
Pimiento, your reply to Deniz is perfectly stated. Well Done! As you point out, cante was and is the beating heart of flamenco, and the primary role of the guitarist was and is to provide tasteful, unobtrusive, supportive accompaniment to the singer.
I was going to start a whole thread on this topic but ......
I recieved this DVD for christmas.
I have watched it in parts and once all the way through and I really didn't enjoy it at all. Aside from the camera work which is just bad (you rarely see a wide angle shot of the dancing - just tapping feet and then close ups on Joaquin's pretty boy face) I really didn't get much out of it. I was hoping for some clear interaction between the music (guitars I hoped) and the dance.
The previous posts might makie me give it another try but I think this thread outlines one of the great dilemas of Flamenco. There are those who like the guitar but hate the singing, others who could care less about the dancing etc. etc. in various combinations In this particular case the focus is on the dancing with very very little guitar. (I despise flutes in a big way so that really turned me off too)
There are a few great musical moments but overall I wouldn't recommend it for fans of flamenco guitar.
Stoney
Images are resized automatically to a maximum width of 800px
His show is really just a Dance Extravaganza and very glitzy.
(eg: The dancer's dresses are made by top Paris fashion houses and cost thousands of dollars....which also helps to attract the female audience to the big shows.... He's a smart cookie.)
He's a genuine enough Flamenco, but his interest is more towards Flamenco/Modern Dance fusion and big stage productions.
He trained in Ballet and Modern Dance in Madrid I believe.
For all the actual Flamenco content there is in his shows, I would personally give them a miss....but I bet my wife would want to go!
He isn't really about Modern Flamenco at all. It seems to me to be retro flamenco (as in lots of cante and unacompanied cante) combined with schmalzty broadway type stuff - hence the "Modern dance' title.
I for one was turned off from the first moment. It starts with a fedora in the spotlight and a hand reaches in, cheesy hat tricks ensue. Too Michael Jackson for my taste.
Bottom line, I truly enjoy Flamenco dance when it's in a "flamenco" setting - numerous dancers and couples. This just didn't capture any authentic gypsy feel. It could have been broadway tap.
If I may gracefully add another category to the erstwhile Capt Bob's flamenco classifications, I believe Joaquin Cortez should be filed under "Bedroom Flamenco".
this thread outlines one of the great dilemas of Flamenco. There are those who like the guitar but hate the singing, others who could care less about the dancing etc. etc. in various combinations In this particular case the focus is on the dancing with very very little guitar. (I despise flutes in a big way so that really turned me off too)
so true it depends on the background you have, i came to flamenco through guitar playing, so i had no idea about cante and baile and i'm trying to discover it step by step. the most important for me is to have a "natural" interest for cante, baile even poetry. statements like "if you don't accompany cante you don't have a clue 'bout flamenco" or "accompaning baile is the one only thing" seem like a quite common place. it's important to open the horizon to all flamenco disciplines, but in a relationship with your background and interests. it seem to be a no go simply saying "i play flamenco guitar, and i never played for a dance class, i'm absolutely not interested in cante" but it's one way among many others.
RE: The role of the guitar (in reply to estebanana)
quote:
be filed under "Bedroom Flamenco".
That puts me in mind of the time I suddenly turned up midweek at John Filmore's class at the Dundee Guitar Festival.
All the others had been there from the start. (including Jim Opfer).
I entered the class while everybody was playing, silently excused myself and sat down, opened my guitar case and took out my guitar.
Filmore looked at me in a puzzled way and eventually stopped playing and said.. "Who are you?... I mean.. have you booked for this course or anything?"
I explained that I hadn't, but was just down to see the Nuñez concert and the organizer said I could pop along here if I wanted to....I wasn't a player or anything....just a Bedroom Guitarist.."
"Bedroom Guitarist?", he said, with sudden interest. "Yeah...like I just play around with my guitar at home", I tried to clarify.
"Damn...what a let down", he said,
"I thought we were in for some interesting stories here..."
and another story.... I played a couple of pieces at the London Pena Juerga in October. I was explaining to the audience that I had been playing for a couple of years but hadn't performed much, and it made me nervous, that I was much better practising at home on my own. I heard myself say:
"I'm really good in my bedroom."
To which someone responded "you can come home with me then", and the guy sitting next to my husband nodded and smiled in a 'well done mate' sort of way.
Well it broke the ice anyway. I don't think anyone heard my playing after that. Quite a good distraction technique really
RE: The role of the guitar (in reply to Pimientito)
quote:
ORIGINAL: Pimientito Its a common beginners mistake to assume Flamenco is all about guitar music.
Thats pretty extreme. Somewhere between that and "guitar is the lowest" there must be another opinion imo. I was thinking of Rafaela Carrasco's show where half of the pieces had no cante, or Canizares who had no cante at all and where the dancer (who mainly did palmas btw) accompanied Canizares on the Zapateado (hey i like that idea ). Ok the standard flamenco show works different. But even when guitarrists are accompaning they seem to play more solo oriented stuff than before. Although it may be just accomp. the guitar can create alot of texture in a performance. There might be also stuff that maybe never was composed to accompany anything.
quote:
it would certainly be hard to imagine putting together a full flamenco show without a guitarist.
That is another reason why i cant understand the statement with the hierarchy of the guitar. You can make a show without cante or baile. Its happening all the time. But never without a guitarrist. Everybody knows that.
Just for the record i enjoy accompanying as well as playing (easy) solo stuff. Nonetheless i am a guitar player and music is kind of a second language for me, so, i would not want to trade roles with a singer or dancer.
RE: The role of the guitar (in reply to Pimientito)
BTW i would really like to know how much cante is present in the compositions of the guitarrists (i mean when they are not accompayning and just work out stuff that they MIGHT use as accompaniment but also as a normal solo falseta). I dont deny that the toques evolved from the cantes, historically. Im just interested in what defines a toque TODAY and where the guitarrists draw their inspiration from. And whether anbody cares about what guitarrists are creating, or is it just the other guitarrists who are interested in what guitarrists do??? (im getting the feeling...)
Parroting the opinions and statements made by some the most respected flamenco artists throughout history is important in avoiding ridicule from the flamenco community.
When any artists collaborate, it is important to work together on creating something unified. If one sees another persons role as unimportant this will come out in some way during a performance.
I remember watching a video recently where Ramon Jeminez was playing an alegrias falseta. Sara Baras was listening intently to the way he was phrasing the idea and began trying a few footwork ideas that would highlight and combine with the falseta. Making the most of what is available is a better thing to focus on than who's role is more important.
Totally agree, KMM177. In this video the cantor and the guitarist seem to play off each other AND the audience, especially in the second part. At one point the guitarist even tells the cantor when to start :)
I remember reading somewhere (I think it was in one of Don Pohren's books) that an audience was important to early flamencos, and in fact audience encouragement/support was considered essential if you were to coax the fabled duende out.
Hey Deniz I think I explained pretty well in the first answer but I will expand a bit on what you asked because I used to have a similar opinion. I think I can talk about this fairly well because 1. I am a guitarist who got interested in Flamenco guitar playing whilst living outside of Spain. 2. I moved to Spain and have seen the role of the guitar in Flamenco on a day to day basis over the last 10 years in its natural environment.
Over that time my point of view has changed from when I lived in England. I first got interested in Flamenco after listening to pirate recordings (it was hard to find flamenco CDs in the UK back then) of Tomatito, Vicente, Paco, Gerardo etc. who were clearly superior guitarists to any other type of guitar playing I had heard previously. It was the virtuosity and composition in those recordings that made me want to play flamenco. It seemed to me that the solo playing of these guys had reached an artistic pinnacle that in some ways was ruined by having people screaming and stamping over the top of it
quote:
I was thinking of Rafaela Carrasco's show where half of the pieces had no cante, or Canizares who had no cante at all and where the dancer (who mainly did palmas btw) accompanied Canizares on the Zapateado
I think there is a big difference between a flamenco guitar show and a flamenco show. When you go to see a show like Canizares you are looking at a level of playing that maybe only a couple dozen people in the world can achieve. It is difficult to talk about guys like Paco de Lucia in the General world of Flamenco because he is an exceptional talent. Ricardo made the point last week that Pacos playing was so good that people applauded the falsetas louder than the cante and this was embarrassing for both Guitarist and singer. For that reason Paco started playing solo shows and used the cante to augment his composition rather than use his playing to augment the cante. Since than this has led to modern virtuoso players giving similar concerts. Thats why we have Vicente Amigo, Gerardo Nuñez, Canizares, Niño Josele etc. able to perform at an incredible level using the cante and baile as an augmentation to the composition. If you live outside of Spain it gives the impression that this is what Flamenco is.
That is why a lot of people on this forum think that playing a virtuoso level of guitar makes you a flamenco artist. I cant blame anyone because as an outsider thats what I used to think too.
The fact is though that every single one of those virtuoso guitar players has an encyclopaedic knowledge of accompanying Cante and Baile and probably knew a high level of palmas and cante themselves before they even picked up a guitar. They would definately have started by staying out late with their friends and playing and singing until daylight. Only 2 nights ago I was in a juerga where someone picked up a guitar and someone else started singing. The guitarist handed the guitar to someone else and started singing himself. Then the guitar got handed round to someone else. Then i got handed the guitar before handing it on. This carried on for 4 hours. There were at least 15 competent guitarists and 2 virtuosos in the room. There were no fancy elongated falsetas or compositions. Some of those guys could have given a concert but they remained playing short punchy falsetas.
That is flamenco!
Everything else is decoration on the cake. If you come to Spain and you dont know compas, or you play complicated falsetas with no aire, you wont get anywhere, noone will listen to you and you wont learn.....and actually this is good news for everyone here because it means you DONT have to play to the level of Paco de Lucia to be a very good flamenco guitarist. In fact most singers and dancers will like it much better if you play simple things well.
quote:
Im just interested in what defines a toque TODAY and where the guitarrists draw their inspiration from.
The toques have to draw inspiration from the cante. Modern accompaniment has a lot of Jazzy chords, inversions, passing chords, modulations.etc. All of that can be put into your composition but the root is the cante every time. Its the centre of the common argument over the difference between modern flamenco and "flamenco nuevo" and why everyone gets so upset about artists like Ottmar liebert. Without the root in tradition its not flamenco. Vicente Amigos taranta from "de mi corazon" is one of the most perfect examples of an incredible composition based on a song. Its modern and yet 100per cent Flamenco.
Of course people care about what guitarists create and aficionados who know the cante can hear that in a good guitarists playing. The guitar is all important in the creation of the energy and atmosphere of a concert but it is a mistake to think that composition is everything. Its only a small part of what flamenco is.
Wow are you guys serious you wouldnt reccomend the Joaquin dvd ?
Sure the dancing i cant take it or leave it but the musiceans !! we keep talking about how important the music and the cante is..well in this the music choreography and letras selection and accompaniament is pretty much world class, that alone makes it worth having it...loved it so much that i extracted the audio to a cd..
and noones ever had 6 or 7 singers like this in a show togheder that i can think of
and the same goes for his first concert that was on vhs i think. cant remember the name he had a group of female dancers and also had a modern dancer with him...the music and musiceans in that was brilliant too..
hes a litlle doc i found on it, the whole thing had amazing music, its worth sitting through the **** to get to the music...again musiceans and music world class..the part at 2:23 always drags my heart out of my chest ..throws is on the floor , stomps on it and puts it right back in...in a good way ..id love to find a good copy of that concert it had the most amazing letras
if i had to only pick a single moment on what makes flamenco special i would pick the instant emotions the part at 2:23 can stir in you...and how it makes you feel...you ears stop listening and your heart takes over..and you feel as you do when u wanna cry but cant get it out
there arent that many dvds on flamenco dance shows ...i got all of them and take all i can get still..
Stoney ..i do kind of understand your initaial reaction ..i think i felled the same when i first put it in, i feel like that about every single album and everything the first time, always takes time for it to setlle on me...but soon enough you will absoluteley love the music..
the Alegrias, the Women buleria solo, the SPB..
That alegrias is probably the best and happiest and fastest and most suited i have ever heard for a dance show absolute fav..
and from the production point of view, it is the biggest, most ambitious flamenco show i have seen on dvd..
I am not too crazy about joaquin BUT he danced alone for the whole concert...do you know how much power and stamina it must take ? i have never seen anyone do that..
I kind of feel the same about Juaquin as i do about Saras dancing..saras probably a step up from Joaquin...but when it comes to productions and ideas and getting the best musiceans and picking the best music and letras for the numbers, and respect and putting alot of thought into the music and it working perfectly with the choreographies..they are both probably the top 2 names..genius acctualy
hers an example of saras show and how perfect and uplifting and suited the music and letras picked is to the dance...absolute perfection..its another level..the way the music works with the dance and the letras and the build up and the guadianas entrance..and then guadiana takes it to another level..absolute perfection thats a litlle beyond just good dancing and good singing..its using all the elements perfectly and knowing when to push it and when to slow it and when it can go up more and when to keep it tense and when to leat it breathe
obviously alot of thought went into the music working with the dances ..alot more then the usual flamenco show..its one thing to be a greate dancer but to be dancer who can see the big picture and use the dynamcis correctly and using music and guitar perfectly to always go up its another ..its the difference between a Michael Jackson concert and everyone else..Michael had a greate understanding of dynamics and when to push and when to stop and when to push more..and what works where....how to get the absolute most out of every moment
the reason deniro is deniro ..has impacable timing and knows what works well and what reads well on camera and what dosent.. how to get the most out of every moment and draw you in and knows how to keep you focused ..even if he does nothing..hes a brilliant actor but hes even more brilliant at exploring and using time and pauses to his advantage..again ..one thing to be a greate actor ..another to know how to show it
i know it seems as if I am getting of the subject but i mention it cause this people have a pretty good grasp on the bigger picture..music selection and timing and dynamics..and are smart enough to look outside of just what they are doing
I saw Eva la yerbabuena last year and as a dancer both Sara or Juaquin dont compare, but the show and the ideas and the way the music interacts and presentation ...she could take a leaf out of their books imo..
RE: The role of the guitar (in reply to Pimientito)
lol
thanks mate, happy new year to you too
and to the topic, the role of the guitarist goes so much beyond everyone elses in shows ..and in flamenco in general, but more so in performances.. sets the whole tone ..keeps it all togheder..makes it all work togheder...the only one who needs to know what everyone else is doing too..
the dancer can do his job and go home, the singer can do his job and go home..the guitarrist has to stay back and learn everyone elses stuff too as well as his the dancer is responsible for the dancing , the singer is responsible for the singing, the guitarrist is accountabile and responsible for everything and everybody and his own stuff
hes the silent musical director...he brings the singer and the dancer togheder..the bridge and the driving force..and accentuates and makes both of them look even better..
a dancer can do an amazing brake or a singer can sing an amazing letra but its the guitarrist that adds the finishing touch and puts in the thing that makes it into an amazing brake or an amazing letra..its what the guitarrist does between whatever the dancer ir singer pauses that determins it, its as important to flamenco and the mood as the correct length of silent pauses between notes to music..u dont really think about it and its not in your face but its absoluteley there and necesary and the determining factor..theres no good dancing or good singing without good guitarring..
so yes the singer leads but the guitarrist makes it or brakes it
the same footwork escobilla can have no impact or an amzing impact depending on where the guitar takes it
so all thow silent and in a suporrting role, its the most important piece of the puzlle..the captain
in a show..guitar solos and falsetas is the least of a quitarrists problems and worries, its also the least thing you ever get to practice in any rehershal.... always too busy learning what everyone else is doing..so your falsetas and solos always feel the least prepared..i sometimes dont even have time to begin to even worry about an intro so il just improvise one or its always the last thing that comes in.. lol
..the guitarrist is also the one that everyone gets to blame for whatever.. like a goalkeeper in football
without question the guitarrist is hardest worker, most aware and bussiest guy on any stage.. everyone else just needs to worry and know their 10 or fiteen minutes of hard work
The above posts inspired me to look again at a reproduced poster that advertises a flamenco presentation to be held in Granada on Sunday the 1st of September, 1929. The poster goes on to say (translated)--
Huge Not-to-be-Missed Concert of Opera Flamenca With the Best Artist of this Genre The Outstanding Master of Masters (The Unique-No Imitators) MANUEL TORRES (Niño de Jerez) (The Authentic), 30 Years of Continuous Success at the Summit of El Cante Teacher of Two Generations of Cantaores Granadinos! Do Not Miss this Opportunity to Hear on Sunday The KING of CANTE GITANO!!
We notice no mention whatsoever of any guitarist--no Juan Gandulla "Habichuela", no Hijo de Salvador, no Miguel Borrull or Javier Molina, all of whom we know accompanied Manuel Torres over 21 years of recording cante. This perhaps helps illuminate the primacy that cante and cantaores had within/among the community of aficionados of flamenco during its long period of relative stasis.
This is not to detract from the importance of the guitarist at that time in flamenco--the pairing of cantaor and tocaor is/was, and should be, a partnership of equals in the full utterance and expression of flamenco. As has been pointed out, we can see this relationship on so many YouTube videos--look at Terremoto with Manuel Moreno "Morao", for example, or see any of the footage of Diego with The Sisters or any of his collaborators.
It may well be true that the guitarist is the one who ultimately makes it all happen--and surely then didn't get the recognition he deserved--but it's just a historical fact that cante is why everybody was there, and what they were there to hear.
I just assume that the guitar was made for accompaniment, and that origin of the guitar is more of a tradition in the way that it is seen and herd. Later on the guitar would develop with the idea of solo instrument. So we have to look at it's origin to understand what is the role of the guitar in the flamenco as it is for tradition. And then we would assume further that the cante is made for telling stories, and or the sharing of the real content, which is the ideal in the flamenco. Dance and rhythm are elements and verve, for example the dance makes it a kind of physical thing of art and beauty, and rhythmic and emotional interperitation. The rhythm, really accents and keeps the pace of the rhythm, and as for the palmas gives us a sense of community, but the cante once again shares ideas which are incorperated in to the lives of the people. The total outcome is a kind of overall communal participation.
That's the way that I see it, I may differ with a lot of people but it has to be something along the lines of it's introduction in to the art, or it's origin and tradition, and purpose. And you know, we all see it as we see it, so it's something that without somekind of reason, or philosophy, is just another interperitation, of the real element and it's parts, and what is the whole or total outcome of its parts.
RE: The role of the guitar (in reply to Pimientito)
Im not sure how much of it relates to my post, but thx anyway. It is interesting to have the view of someone, who is soaked up in juergas in Spain. I respect that, but you are using again extreme examples, like that guy that comes to spain with no compas. Thats not me, and i dont think any less of singing and dancing. I respect everybody who can hold 12 beats together.
I wasnt comparing the Carrasco show to Canizares, i used them both as an example to show what i think is an antiquated opinion about the guitar, which maybe was true in a time without, as you say, virtuosos giving concerts, and where the accompaniment itself was different from today (im speculating here). "Elongated falsetas": Isnt it more a question of setting than whether flamenco or not, what you play in a juerga or in a concert situation? Nobody says you have to be a maestro of guitar to be flamenco.
The fact is, what you call "decoration of the cake", is what separates those virtuoso players among each other, and not only them. As you say, they ALL have a high knowledge of accomp, and palmas, and etc... so it cant be that. It is also what separates different group performances and programs. I mean, why should international touring artists invest so much time in an artistically "fine tuned" program (with compositions and choreographies), when all they have to do is just get 15 people together who clap sing and play? This is not to diminish juergas. But to find out the motivations of artists.
Last point, to have "cante in ones playing": I can sort of guess what you mean, but i find it subjective, like an imaginary base that flamencos can agree on because of their tastes, but not because of something you can measure in the music or so. Example: Ottmar plays here the andalucian cadence. Is there cante in it or not? I dont know, but i dont really like it, especially not compared to "real" buleriasses.
Printable Version
(im getting the feeling...) 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread