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.
Major cognitive dissonance going on here. I will leave the groupthink to the group.
And what would that "cognitive dissonance" be, Miguel? It has been my experience that many who throw out the term "cognitive dissonance" do so inaccurately, but I would be very interested in your application of the term to the remarks made in this thread.
As to "groupthink," is that how you refer to opinions that are reached independently from several quarters that are at variance with your own? Hypothetically, if I were having drinks with you and a couple of your friends, and if I were the sole member of the group to praise Mozart as alive and well today while you and your colleagues all said his music was a dead museum piece, would you consider you and your colleagues to be engaging in "groupthink"?
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white, With the name of the late deceased, And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here, Who tried to hustle the East."
One perspective on classical music is to say that it is both dead and alive, in this sense: The music of Bach, say, is dead, in that people just aren't writing Baroque music anymore (they may again, who knows?), but it continues to be played, heard, loved. So perhaps we had better distinguish between composition and performance when we discuss classical music.
_____________________________
The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing.
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white, With the name of the late deceased, And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here, Who tried to hustle the East."
Classical Music and Flamenco have both been through their periods of growth.
Neither is dead. None of the members of this forum will ever be genuine Flamencos, as we are not Spanish gypsies suffering the bigotries and hardships of the past. We don't pick up a hammer and tap out compas on an Anvil and wail about our dead children. Not even the descendants of Spanish gypsies are really Flamencos now, as the scene is so marketed (I cant remember the word I really mean). I feel that it's only really Flamenco when it is a Juerga, not a show because then it is genuinely heart felt emotion, rather than emotion on tap.
However if you are influenced by Flamenco (most of us here are), then use it as the basis for your own new art (all art is plagiarised: just see the documentary "Everything is a Remix"), or just follow the already trodden ground of the Puro.
As far as 'classical' music is concerned, I tend to prefer to use the term Orchestral Music, and describe Orchestral music of the Common Practice Period as 'Classical'. If you are a fan of Arvo Pärt, you will realize that Orchestral Music is not yet dead, even if Classical music is now just in a post creative interpretive phase with nothing much new coming in. I certainly see M de M's point.
as human beings we are all flamencos because we all suffer (some much more than others) for flamenco truly captures that common bond we all share in life...pain and suffering...and sometimes joy
Among the first "classical" pieces I seriously engaged with was Beethoven's 3rd Symphony in E-flat, the "Eroica." I put "classical" in quotes because many hear the Eroica as the opening salvo of the Romantic era.
When I was 12 I bought the LP of Toscanini and the NBC Symphony. Toscanini's performance is firmly grounded in its Classical roots, with vigorous tempi and few big tempo changes, compared to say, Furtwängler. I bought the miniature score, studied it, and memorized the piece to the extent that I knew the major sections, the order they came in, the key changes, and I could pick out what I heard as the leading melody of each section on the piano.
That was 65 years ago. Two years ago the Austin Symphony began their 100th season with a performance of the Eroica. The Toscanini recording is mono. I have at least a half dozen recordings in stereo, but you might say the Austin Symphony performance was in 3-D. You could visually follow the motives as they went from instrument to instrument, section to section. I had known the piece intimately for 63 years, but I was moved, elated even, to vividly enjoy Beethoven's mastery of orchestration.
Beethoven, the man died in March, 1827. For me Beethoven, the music lives on.
Later in the season the Symphony did Stravinky's "Rite of Spring." When I was a kid trumpeter it was at, or perhaps just beyond the limits of the Washington Summer Symphony. Now it's almost a warhorse. On CDs I have things written year before last, which I enjoy and listen to regularly.
For me at least, "classical" music is alive and well.
As for the death of cante, I can't say I am as familiar with the scene as some others, but this 17-year old cantaora offers some hope to me.
What she gives us here is pretty much Antonio Chacon, but she does it very well, and with passion. As good as she is at such a young age, surely she will go on to develop more individuality, giving cante a future, don't you think?
As for the future of baile, I nominate Paloma Fantova as an example. At times she reminds me of Carmen Amaya, whom I saw in her last performances in New York in 1961 or 1962. But Fantova has her own way with the dance. Not an essay in "high art", rather pure energy, passion and grace.
Flamenco is a proper noun, flamenco is a noun. I use neither is a title. I use the proper noun to indicate the people who originally evolved the art, and the noun to include even people like Vicente Amigo who are inspired by the art but played no part in its original growth.
I understand what you mean by 'flamenco is a spirit not a title'. However your post seemed to make my grammar usage sound ingenuous, and as such I wanted to be utterly clear...you then decided to tell me to 'skip the grammar'. I considered that to be just a rude remark, since grammar is central to concise discussion about anything. You may as well say fjkhaseflajksrgbfedmnbaejhfs because that skips grammar, spelling, meaning, and punctuation :P
RE: What is flamenco today? (in reply to Cloth Ears)
quote:
As far as 'classical' music is concerned, I tend to prefer to use the term Orchestral Music, and describe Orchestral music of the Common Practice Period as 'Classical'. If you are a fan of Arvo Pärt, you will realize that Orchestral Music is not yet dead, even if Classical music is now just in a post creative interpretive phase with nothing much new coming in. I certainly see M de M's point.
_______
The actual "classical period" in music lasted about 30 years. I call it chamber music or symphonic music too, or symphonic band or whatever, by ensemble.
You mean Ricardo who wrote: "well, if you care about singing at all it is obvious that the cante has died a slow death."? It doesn't seem incompatible with the impressions of mine that I shared. Incidentally, I also love classical music, a museum art form, but the heydays of Bach/Mozart/Beethoven are long gone.
Ok, ok, to be CLEAR....I don't mean dead as in the glass menegerie way of classical music. And yes Classical music is also "dead" in the sense the forms are FOSSILIZED at this point and interpretations are not the point....we don't, for example, play a Bach fugue or Beethoven Sonato Allegro and within the interpretive perfomance "improvise" or create new melodies and harmonies, fleshing out the original idea AS THE ORIGINAL COMPOSERS WERE INFACT DOING....no, classical music is note for note played and interpretions are left to things as basic as dynamics, tempo, phrasing, etc. Even basic **** like transposing like Bach did to his OWN PIECES is rarely done. And when it is done, like Segovias classical guitar rep in some cases, even those SPECIFIC versions get fossilized and re hashed by guitar students. And Modern or contemporary "classical" music is an obvious oxymoron of terminology...yet we get the point. "Orchestral" is not fair if it is played on piano only...yet we still get what the genre is. Sure what ever THAT junk is, is still alive.
Flamenco forms are different. And when afcionados get in a ruffel at some young whiper snapper singer doing M. Torre, or A. Chacon with their OWN messed up interpretion, and shake their heads...it is not because they did not adhere to the note for note version. As Morante alludes to without being specific, a GOOD cantaor can take the original form and tastefully add individuality and expression with the ACTUAL notes and rhythms being unique, while keeping true to the original creation. It is not like improvisation in Jazz, nor is it like transposing a classical work. It is done in the moment and in a way to even LEAD the accompanist....even lyrics, tied to melody/harmony, can be suddenly altered from iconic form to be suddenly current and meaningful in context....it's quite special.
My point of it being "Dead" is that it is simply out of the expressive understanding and technical ease of execution of the new generation compared to the old. They sing Chacon or Gloria...but compared to the masters, the interpretation falls short interms of ability of the singer to execute the actual notes and rhythms and add feeling and personality. It's obvious to anyone that studies cante seriously. I already gave my personal opinion of why I think that might of happened. What we are left with are Camaroneros that can do a close copy of Camaron versions...without being too much of themselves in the end result. It's fine, but it is not moving forward from there. As an anology you had Caracol, then Paquera....she was called a "caracolera" because she copied his style but in the end her own personality was so strong and unique and powerful in the details of the scales and rhythms and expression, key, etc...that she stands as her own strong personality and example of FORWARD evolution of the art form. Her great nephew Jesus Mendez??? well, no offense he is great at what he can do relatively speaking...but know for a fact he started too late to contribute in the manner I am speaking. He doesn't really possess the physical ability...aficionados are left to their old records for exemplary versions. He has recorded with some much better fidelity and guitar falsetas of course...
There is one more ugly fact of why I personally feel the evolution was stiffled...it has to do the the orthodox square box compas style and over used specific letras/melodies required of ANY and all proffessional talented cantaores imposed by the BAILE... an internal suicide of sorts, but that is another can of worms.
Ricardo, a Most Excellent summary of where cante is today, compared to where it was. Perhaps the situation can be summed up in one word: Personality. Cantaores of yesteryear had it in spades, both in their ability to put their own stamp on each version of each palo, but also in the idiosyncratic qualities of their voices themselves-- you can pick out a Paquera, a Pastora Pavon, an Agujetas, an Aurelio, a la Fernanda, a Vallejo out of a vocal crowd in an instant, blindfolded, after just a few words. Today, not so much.
_____________________________
The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing.
Flamenco forms are different. And when afcionados get in a ruffel at some young whiper snapper singer doing M. Torre, or A. Chacon with their OWN messed up interpretion, and shake their heads...it is not because they did not adhere to the note for note version. As Morante alludes to without being specific, a GOOD cantaor can take the original form and tastefully add individuality and expression with the ACTUAL notes and rhythms being unique, while keeping true to the original creation. It is not like improvisation in Jazz, nor is it like transposing a classical work. It is done in the moment and in a way to even LEAD the accompanist....even lyrics, tied to melody/harmony, can be suddenly altered from iconic form to be suddenly current and meaningful in context....it's quite special.
Any chance you could elaborate/explain this more? I'm not sure what some of this means. I have been thinking for some time (months) about posting some questions about cante, like "what makes good cante good?" I'm wondering what you mean by "messed up interpretation" and "a GOOD cantaor can take the original form and tastefully add individuality and expression with the ACTUAL notes and rhythms being unique, while keeping true to the original creation."
so if a good cantaor can change both the notes and rhythms (do you meant pitch and duration of notes?), what stays the same?
you go on to say
quote:
the interpretation falls short interms of ability of the singer to execute the actual notes and rhythms and add feeling and personality. It's obvious to anyone that studies cante seriously.
so here are you saying not to change the notes and rhythms, but keep them and add personality and expression?
I have been listening to cante for 20 plus years, but through various circumstances have had not so much opportunity to accompany cante. I guess I don't really know how to go about studying cante seriously..... any suggestions?
so if a good cantaor can change both the notes and rhythms (do you meant pitch and duration of notes?), what stays the same?
Somewhat on this topic. I try to take lessons with Juan Bacan when he's in town and he seems to have this old school profound understanding of what you can and can not change. In fact, i'm pretty sure he couldn't sing something the same way twice if he tried. It does make listening to him amazing and interesting but learning from him crazy difficult. Anyhow, I've yet to pin point EXACTLY what stays the same but it's in there somewhere. When he used letras that I was familiar with I could always identify it but it was always sang differently. The accompaniment didn't change necessarily, same chord changes in same places, it just sounded different within everything in between. I still don't comprehend it but it's very cool to hear in person.
Posts: 14797
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
RE: What is flamenco today? (in reply to mark indigo)
Good questions...what stays the same we can think of as an outline or skeleton of the melody. If you look at norman's site you will find examples of different soleas...what distinguishs them is the specifics of the FIRST line of verse (in case of 3 liners) or 1st and 2nd (in cases of 4 liners)...there needs to be adherance to the skeletal outline in order for the style to be accurate. The delivery of it can include embelishements including decorative notes (appagiature type thing) above or below target notes, and TIMING...the rhythmic location relative to the guitar accomp or other compas reference.
While we can't use the final stanzas of the letra to define a style (the melodies where the chords go to relative major then final resolve to phrygian), you can see that we at least have even more room here for some interpretive creativity or personality.
More obvious example of what is allowed to change, take for example buleria....you probably recognize where in por medio the singer can sing a B natural to pull in the E7 chord to the guitarist, again first line of verse has this option. It can be delivered in many ways, but after all it need not be delivered at all...the singer could have pulled you to Dm instead by somehow getting to a D at the right time...idea that a good singer can do this on the fly but also leading the attentive guitarist by the nose. In the case of second line of verse (guitar goes C7-F typically), you have room here again for personality...Paquera being one of the few who does crazy scales and stretches the time of this single line of verse like nobody else....opting for a final resolution (Bb-A) that is almost always the same simple counter beat syllable thing.
Fandango same deal, there is the skeleton of fandango de Gloria for example, then how the singer delivers with deliberate conviction and accuracy the right notes. In a case like this (there is the por medio version and the Arriba version, so only two skeletons to deal with), the skeleton itself is already a complex challenge to get accurate, so there is seeming less room for personality. When you know what the skeleton is (derived from hearing hundreds of examples) it becomes clear who really has skills and who doesn't. But when splitting hairs between two or more great singers, it is just taste.
Hope that helps somewhat. Here is an example of fandango de "el currilla", interpreted by bunch of greats. IMO, Platero is far the best. Perhaps the skeleton is more clear with Fernanda. Mairena example used is not even the right skeleton. http://youtu.be/9XgXcjB0Hy8
quote:norman's site http://canteytoque.es/ In case you haven't been following the site for years and/or are psychic
thanks. I did get Ricardo's reference to Norman's site. I spent some time on there a few years ago (actually nearly 10 - time flies!), but at the time found it really overwhelming - information overload - where to begin?!
what stays the same we can think of as an outline or skeleton of the melody. If you look at norman's site you will find examples of different soleas...what distinguishs them is the specifics of the FIRST line of verse (in case of 3 liners) or 1st and 2nd (in cases of 4 liners)...there needs to be adherance to the skeletal outline in order for the style to be accurate. The delivery of it can include embelishements including decorative notes (appagiature type thing) above or below target notes, and TIMING...the rhythmic location relative to the guitar accomp or other compas reference.
Thanks for reply, I think those "skeleton melodies" are what I have been having trouble hearing. Sometimes I find it easier to get a melody from when a dance teacher or guitarist "sings" than when a cantaor/a sings - I assume the problem is I find it difficult to hear the melody in amongst the ornamentation/embellishments, and the guitarists/dancers are singing just the skeleton tune...? (I put "sings" in quotes 'cos they are the first ones to say "I am not a singer", at least in the sense that they don't have a full on flamenco voice etc.) the first line/second line thing might help, I will listen out more for that.
quote:
More obvious example of what is allowed to change, take for example buleria....you probably recognize where in por medio the singer can sing a B natural to pull in the E7 chord to the guitarist, again first line of verse has this option. It can be delivered in many ways, but after all it need not be delivered at all...the singer could have pulled you to Dm instead by somehow getting to a D at the right time...
yeah, I hear that change, I can at least hear in the melody when that chord change is coming, can anticipate it, assumed they were different melodies, but you are saying they are variations on same skeleton melody? That would explain I guess for example why I hear things like the old chestnut por Tangos "Triana" sung both ways, pretty much always the same first line, many, many variations of rest of the verse - is that also the kind of thing you are talking about?
Posts: 14797
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
RE: What is flamenco today? (in reply to mark indigo)
quick answer to all your questions is "yes"... for the buleria case, on norman's site you will see it refered to as "buleria corta"... where he has focused on buleria por solea, or as guitar players we think of it as "solea por buleria"....but it is the same skeleton melody that goes to B natural, regardless of the tempo. Obviously at slower tempo there can be more embelishments.
The double edge sword of the singing Bailaor or Bailaora...yes they have the skeleton, but it is also tied into a boxed concept of phrasing....so when they hear a singer going out of the box they call it "wrong" and impose their dance concept to the singer (that should be otherwise free)...a sort of artificial selection imposed on otherwise talented singers (as we have done as humans to pets and cattle). Of course this was not consciously done, but a big part of what I see as the "death" of cante.
Printable Version
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