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.
RE: Can a white man play the blues? (in reply to Beni2)
quote:
I thought that was what Steingress was trying to avoid, the conflation of race/ethnicity and flamenco?! At least, that is how I read him. I will look into Mandly. Thanks.
He's trying so hard to avoid it that he completely excises race as a genuine factor in his analysis, which is a standard-issue class-reductionist move. He rightly identifies the problem with conflating gitanophilia (or "gitanismo," as he puts it) with gitanidad, since gitanophilia is a fetishized imitation on the part of other people, but in attempting to resolve that problem, he collapses gitanidad entirely into the idea of a multiethnic lower class, which effectively erases the ways in which gitanos were both part of and separate from those lower classes due to their racial difference, their frequent status as manumitted slaves and the ways in which they were portrayed as a criminal element. Being "gitano" was not, as Steingress asserted, simply a socio-economic marker that would later (in the late 18th and 19th centuries) be fetishized/exoticized.
As a rule of thumb, anytime I see class-reductionism, I stop taking the analysis seriously and instead try to take concrete information away from what I'm reading while ignoring the argument. Luckily, there's plenty of good research to be gleaned from Steingress, even if his conclusions are sometimes ideologically suspect.
K. Meira Goldberg has the best and fairest critique of Steingress in her recent book, "Sonidos Negros: On the Blackness of Flamenco." A lot of my takes on him are articulated more even-handedly and generously in that book's introduction.
RE: Can a white man play the blues? (in reply to tf10music)
quote:
he collapses gitanidad entirely into the idea of a multiethnic lower class, which effectively erases the ways in which gitanos were both part of and separate from those lower classes due to their racial difference, their frequent status as manumitted slaves and the ways in which they were portrayed as a criminal element. Being "gitano" was not, as Steingress asserted, simply a socio-economic marker that would later (in the late 18th and 19th centuries) be fetishized/exoticized.
I did not read it that way. It seems to me that he uses "gitanidad," "gitanismo," and "gitanesque" as concepts that acknowledge the role of the gitanos while at the same time acknowledging the plural or multicultural nature of what is slowly coalescing as "flamenco." As for "race," so many difficulties in that concept, especially in an interdisciplinary context, but point taken. I'll check out Goldberg.
Flamenco-related Timeline 1740 - 1881 (in reply to kitarist)
You will notice a few sources/findings that I have not mentioned before - some highlights:
1740-1750: a manuscript only discovered in 1995 shows gitanos were demonstrating their art in the homes of Sevillanos and were respected singers and dancers as far back as the 1740s.
1792: 'flamenco' first used in a non-Flemish way, in a tonadilla "La Discordia", where it seems to refer to a flamenco aire, to mean a state of being a bit agitated or something similar.
1834: Actual oldest reference to a cafe cantante dedicated to flamenco - in Ronda; 14 years before the 1847 confirmed use for flamenco and 8 years before the 1842 cafe cantante in Sevilla usually quoted as the first.
Images are resized automatically to a maximum width of 800px
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
RE: Flamenco-related Timeline 1740 -... (in reply to kitarist)
This has been a real labor of love for you, Konstantin, and the product shows it. You put in a lot of research and drawing together of disparate threads to produce what is probably the first ever time-line related to flamenco. Have you thought about copyrighting it and perhaps publishing it as part of a larger piece on the history and development of the term "flamenco" as it relates to the music (and those who play it)?
Well done, amigo.
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."
Posts: 14801
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
RE: Flamenco-related Timeline 1740 -... (in reply to kitarist)
Awesome work! Couple questions.
1. Did you read ie is there open access to the 1740 Triana book? 2. What was the reason/cause/crime that resulted in the 1749 round up? 3.is there access to the 1797 book of letras por polo, seguidillas and Tiranas (and what is that exactly?) 4. What is the source regarding Cafe del Teatro 1834, and what evidence is there it was for cante/flamenco? 5. Summer in Andalucia, what exactly is said about Fandango origin?
Also I have it in my mind that the Calderon event description refers to 1838?
Posts: 14801
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
RE: Can a white man play the blues? (in reply to Beni2)
quote:
The "Tio Conejo" archetype (that Ricardo brings up) is important in my opinion. He finishes that first excerpt by stating that "From this fact we will create a swap meet of dress and language." Flamenco is not intended as a synonym for gitano here. It is a general term for the way of life (song, dance and other cultural domains) that a limited slice of the population participates in under the ubrella term "flamenco," a way of life where majos, gitanos, ruffians, bohemians, etc. mingle and contribute cultural ideas and behaviors, a true market "swap meet" or cambalache.
But the passage refers to language spoke as in gypsy language. The way of life interpretation presupposes flamenco is known as that music form/ way of life no? And that is the thing that would be new info at that time period. “Flamenco” would then mean Flemish language in that context imo. Of course music description would change things but then why the flamencologists don’t point that out if it in in the play?
RE: Can a white man play the blues? (in reply to Ricardo)
quote:
But the passage refers to language spoke as in gypsy language. The way of life interpretation presupposes flamenco is known as that music form/ way of life no? And that is the thing that would be new info at that time period. “Flamenco” would then mean Flemish language in that context imo. Of course music description would change things but then why the flamencologists don’t point that out if it in in the play?
All of the Tio Conejo post confirms Steingress' conclusion in my opinion. "Flamenco" in this context does not mean Flemish. It is a catch-all term for incomprehensible communication similar to when someone says "It's all Greek to me." That is the point Steingress makes (whether ort not he collapses or conflates race and class). To speak "Flamenco" is to speak incomprehensibly and since Caló and the jerga and germania were also incomprehensible, everything fell under that metaphor of "Flamenco." Only later did it come to be a sometimes-synonym for gitano.
As for way of life, it was still evolving and I would say that a "whole flamenco way of life" did not emerge in a way we (today) would recognize until about 1860. And it is not until 1881 that Schuchardt and Demofilo recognize flamenco as such. Although they are important primary sources, they are also responsible for many of the biases and misreadings of/in flamenco.
I would add that if you want to understand flamenco as a whole, you have to understand the history of the cante jondo. It is the glue that holds all of flamenco together, even the liter forms. Just my perspective.
RE: Can a white man play the blues? (in reply to Beni2)
quote:
All of the Tio Conejo post confirms Steingress' conclusion in my opinion. "Flamenco" in this context does not mean Flemish. It is a catch-all term for incomprehensible communication similar to when someone says "It's all Greek to me."
But it isn't that at all. Tio Conejo is responding to the Director who is asking him (after showing off his command of gitano speak including in a few lines above what I quoted) "I know how to speak Gitano, eh?"
Conejo responds "As much as [you can speak] Flemish"; he is mocking the director. Conejo understands what words and phrases the director is trying to pronounce, of course, so the analogy to "it's all Greek to me" does not work in this context, IMO.
In any case note that the scholars were essentially reading Conejo's answer to say "As much/well as a flamenco [person]"; sort of a straight praise for the director's language abilities, which is neither here nor there and makes even less sense given the play.
RE: Flamenco-related Timeline 1740 -... (in reply to BarkellWH)
quote:
ORIGINAL: BarkellWH
This has been a real labor of love for you, Konstantin, and the product shows it. You put in a lot of research and drawing together of disparate threads to produce what is probably the first ever time-line related to flamenco. Have you thought about copyrighting it and perhaps publishing it as part of a larger piece on the history and development of the term "flamenco" as it relates to the music (and those who play it)?
Well done, amigo.
Bill
Thank you, Bill; this means a lot. My first and overarching desire was to learn more about flamenco and gitano history and share if I found anything interesting with my friends here on the foro. As to original research, apart from actually compiling the timeline and making some connections, there isn't that much truly novel that wasn't known before, so to me it does not contain enough new facts or analysis for a publication, though I am open to collaboration.
There are some tiny bits, though, apart from putting it all together:
Faustino Nunez found the tonadilla 'La Discordia' reference, but did not know the specific year at the time of publishing his "Guía comentada de música y baile preflamencos (1750-1808)" in 2008, only saying "from the nineties of the XVIII century"/"en los anos noventa del siglo XVIII" which is what everyone else was quoting as well. I found the actual manuscript of that tonadilla and was able to pin the year specifically to 1792.
Dating the 1807 'El Tio Conejo' reference to Dec 25, rather than Dec 30 (then realizing it is not about the 1830s sainete).
Finding the manuscript of the 'El Tio Conejo osea los Gitanos de Cadiz' sainete so its creation can be pinned to 1830 definitively (not earlier; but also not later as some had suggested).
Throwing shade on the existing popular interpretation of the word 'flamenco' in the sainete as a reference to gitanos as a group.
Amazingly, all else was previously known/published in various nooks and crannies of flamenco scholarship and the internet and across different times; yet so much was news or at least it updated and deepened - and changed - my understanding.
I will post shortly all the primary sources and access links to the ones that are available - which is almost all of them. Also will update the timeline image as a result of Ricardo's questions.
RE: Can a white man play the blues? (in reply to kitarist)
quote:
The text and its google translation are.. not very clear to me - what does this even mean and how does the text indicate anything about a sainete/pieza or its plot? Isn't this just a description of some new painting or statue (whatever is wax portrait/statue) that is to be exhibited by a certain Don Luis Chiappe (there was no such person authoring sainetes/tonadillas; I checked)? Does this text make sense as a description of a play (not to me)? Or is the google translation throwing it all off?
The "Aviso" on the last page. 1808, different place, but same person (well, same name anyway), same wax sculptures. Maybe a temporary art exhibition that moved from town to town?
On the link you gave from the 1807 newspaper, there's a "Teatro" section right after. If "El Tio Conejo" was a play, wouldn't it have been listed in the "Teatro" section like the rest (La Florentina, Las Fiestas del Alcalde Juan Tuerto)?
So I'm with you in thinking the 1807 one wasn't a play. Dunno whether it's necessarily a coincidence though. If there was some kind of exhibition that made the rounds, it could very well have become the inspiration for the play some years later, no?
As for the use of "flamenco" in the play, honestly no idea. Whether he's saying "like Flemings" or "like flamencos", in both cases it sounds sarcastic to me. The supposedly French guy's Spanish is just plain awful. I wouldn't be comfortable concluding anything about it without other sources . It's just too much conjecture for comfort.
edit: and great work BTW! I just haven't had the time lately to look into it, but I can tell you put a lot of effort into it. Well done!
_____________________________
"Anything you do can be fixed. What you cannot fix is the perfection of a blank page. What you cannot fix is that pristine, unsullied whiteness of a screen or a page with nothing on it—because there’s nothing there to fix."
RE: Can a white man play the blues? (in reply to Piwin)
Great find and points, Piwin, and thank you! No I hadn't seen that but it confirms that it is not about the play (the 1807 notice). About the use of 'flamenco' in the sainete - since the scholars were trying to pin on this specific instance a novel use of 'flamenco' meaning a gitano, I think the onus is on them to provide the extraordinary (or at least clear enough) evidence for it. Failing that, I default to the established meaning of the word as 'Flemish'; the threshold for establishing novel use is not met to my mind in that instance.
I did learn that the "new Castilian" is indeed a euphemism for 'gitano' which began to be used after the 1633 prohibition of the word ‘gitano’ by Philip IV.
RE: Can a white man play the blues? (in reply to kitarist)
quote:
Failing that, I default to the established meaning of the word as 'Flemish'; the threshold for establishing novel use is not met to my mind in that instance.
Fair enough, but what is the goal if not to determine the date the "flamenco" concept is first used as a placeholder for 1. a musical complex, and/or 2. a synonym for gitano, and 3. to try to understand the polysemy of the concept and the complex and complicated relationships between each conceptualization?
RE: Can a white man play the blues? (in reply to Beni2)
quote:
Fair enough, but what is the goal if not to determine the date the "flamenco" concept is first used as a placeholder for 1. a musical complex, and/or 2. a synonym foot gitano, and 3. to try to understand[]
Posts: 14801
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
RE: Can a white man play the blues? (in reply to kitarist)
quote:
About the use of 'flamenco' in the sainete - since the scholars were trying to pin on this specific instance a novel use of 'flamenco' meaning a gitano, I think the onus is on them to provide the extraordinary (or at least clear enough) evidence for it.
Technically the 1792 usage is enough pre-supposition that the word “flamenco” might have been used as the adjective we need ... but agin we don’t have the context concha refers to. Music, dress, dance? However if it IS music “aire”, then the play could be using common accepted knowledge that flamenco was music and people that did it ie, it can still be sarcastic, that being not only did he not speak Greek well, but he speaks just like a Pathagorian mystic.
For me it is weird that as deeply imbedded in the culture and language Borrows was, he never noticed gitanos use the “flamenco” descriptor. He constantly refers to their songs as “couplet”. He does describe, in Extremadura, beating compas with a stick, snapping fingers and clapping compas, dancing, and playing guitar and singing, with versus that don’t suggest any specific palo, but surely it was IMO, tangos or bulerias.
RE: Can a white man play the blues? (in reply to Ricardo)
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ricardo
quote:
About the use of 'flamenco' in the sainete - since the scholars were trying to pin on this specific instance a novel use of 'flamenco' meaning a gitano, I think the onus is on them to provide the extraordinary (or at least clear enough) evidence for it.
Technically the 1792 usage is enough pre-supposition that the word “flamenco” might have been used as the adjective we need ... but agin we don’t have the context concha refers to.
We do! The only catch is that it is a manuscript, so it was beyond me to try to decipher long stretches of text without knowing the language - but someone fluent could easily read more. I wanted to post about it anyway, so this is a good time do it.
So this is a tonadilla escenica, which is like a small theatre play with music, and partly sung, partly spoken - musical-adjacent? (You probably know this, but maybe not so others reading) The manuscript by Pablo del Moral is at the "Memoria de Madrid" digital library and can be accessed from here: http://www.memoriademadrid.es/buscador.php?accion=VerFicha&id=340080 as a pdf file.
It runs for 22 pages of libretto and music for the duo; then the sheet music for the accompanying instrument parts: first and second violin; first and second oboe; first and second trumpet; and a double bass - all in all 70 pages.
And here it is, on page 11. Amazing that this was written just about 230 years ago!
Here is the transcribed section leading up to that, basically the entire "Parola" - I think meaning this is spoken, not sung - section. Google's translation is weird at times, but scholars commenting after Nunez (who found the reference) seemed to think, just like he did, that this was a use not to do with Flemish in any way.
One scholar thought it signifies being "chulo, insolente" and "Este significado aproxima, como venos, la figura del flamenco a la figura del majo."
However, there is a lot more text before and after, and I hope that expanded context can provide clues as to a more precise intended meaning (or confirm the existing interpretation).
quote:
For me it is weird that as deeply imbedded in the culture and language Borrows was, he never noticed gitanos use the “flamenco” descriptor.
Well he must have (thus his attempt at explanation that Piwin found in the text; and 'flamenca de Roma'), but he and other Brits who wrote about Spain at the time could easily have been confused (or careless) what the scope of the use of the noun 'a flamenco/ flamencos' was - they seemed to think it refers to gitanos as a group rather than to just the subset of gitanos who practice [the art of] flamenco.
I suspect they slipped there - in their interpretation of the context - they were meeting 'flamencos' and assumed all gitanos are referred to as 'flamencos'; hence trying to look for reason why gitanos as a group would be called that. I think they never were, just like they are not now - it only ever applied to the subset practicing the art.
Images are resized automatically to a maximum width of 800px
RE: Can a white man play the blues? (in reply to Ricardo)
quote:
Can we get a timeline? It is all muddled in my head right now. There was 1790’s news story of someone singing fandangos
BTW Ricardo, I noticed you also seem to look for historical information on flamenco or adjacent (andalucian?) cantes/bailes like fandangos etc. In the timeline I posted (to be revised shortly) I was trying to include highlights that are more integrated or to do with the use of 'flamenco' (or historical events for context). If we also include references to names of dances/cantes, the timeline would extend much further back - to 1604 for the moment.
So, two questions: 1. Are these additional milestones/references of interest? 2. Should they be included in the 'flamenco-related timeline' or listed separately?
Posts: 1805
Joined: Nov. 8 2010
From: London (living in the Bay Area)
RE: Can a white man play the blues? (in reply to BarkellWH)
quote:
I don't think any genre of music can be said to only be played properly by a particular ethnicity or race to the exclusion of other ethnicities. Whites can play blues and have for decades, just as non-gitanos can play flamenco. The ability to produce music transcends ethnicity and race.
‘I think it was Long John Baldry singing “Rock Island Line” that brought matters to a head. His accent just cracked me up. I was laughing so hard they had to take me out of the room. The next week I was hauled before the club’s Audience Committee, who took me to task saying no matter how funny you think it is, you don’t start laughing in the middle of a performance.’
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
RE: Can a white man play the blues? (in reply to Paul Magnussen)
quote:
‘I think it was Long John Baldry singing “Rock Island Line” that brought matters to a head. His accent just cracked me up. I was laughing so hard they had to take me out of the room. The next week I was hauled before the club’s Audience Committee, who took me to task saying no matter how funny you think it is, you don’t start laughing in the middle of a performance.’
Peggy Seeger
"Rock Island Line" is a blues/folk song that since the late 1920s has been recorded by a number of singers, both black and white, from Leadbelly to Johnny Cash (as well as lesser-known singers). Although not a particular fan of Wikipedia, I quote an interesting extract below regarding the history of "Rock Island Line."
"Lonnie Donegan's recording, released as a single in late 1955, signaled the start of the UK skiffle craze. This recording featured Donegan, Chris Barber on double bass and Beryl Bryden on washboard. The Acoustic Music organization makes this comment about Donegan's version. "It flew up the English charts. Donegan had synthesized American Southern Blues with simple acoustic instruments: acoustic guitar, washtub bass and washboard rhythm. The new style was called 'Skiffle' .... and referred to music from people with little money for instruments. The new style captivated an entire generation of post-war youth in England."
"Pete Seeger recorded a version a cappella while he was chopping wood, to demonstrate its origins."
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."
RE: Flamenco-related Timeline 1740 -... (in reply to Ricardo)
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ricardo Awesome work! Couple questions.
1. Did you read ie is there open access to the 1740 Triana book? 3. is there access to the 1797 book of letras por polo, seguidillas and Tiranas (and what is that exactly?) 5. Summer in Andalucia, what exactly is said about Fandango origin?
2. What was the reason/cause/crime that resulted in the 1749 round up?
From 1700- “The Bourbon period” (Philip V ascended to the throne after Charles II‘s death in 1700, died in 1746, followed by Ferdinand VI); up till 1760s was a hellish period of state oppression for the gitanos:
Royal ordinances, ostensibly to deal with ‘gypsy banditry’ on Spain’s roads: Jun 12, 1695 (Charles II); repeated 1717, 1726, 1727, 1731, 1738, and 1745 (Philip V); updated 1746 (Ferdinand VI):
Relocating all gitanos to 41 towns, but settlement ratio cannot be more than 1 gypsy to 100 no-gypsy families. The 1746 order attempts to remedy the conflicting requirements by adding another 34 towns, for a total of 75. Can only work the land; cannot engage in other trades/professions “and especially not in blacksmithing”; complaints by gitanos cannot be heard by higher tribunals.
Consequences: Displacement of a significant number of gitano families already settled in towns and villages not on the list of 41; making it impossible to earn honest living in economic downturn times by restricting both movement to find work and the type of work.
In 1747 plans start for a general incarceration into forced labour of all gitanos in Spain. Bishop of Oviedo presents idea to the king. In 1748 an agreement with Rome removes the ecclesiastical sanctuary protection for gitanos.
On Jul 30, 1749 secret order issued to round up all gitanos from 54 of the 75 towns (the ones with most populous gitanerias). Uses the town registers for those who complied with the ordinances, so in fact it was those who attempted to abide by the law that were targeted. 9,000-12,000 were incarcerated initially.
Examples of towns and number of gitano families on register: El Puerto de Santa Maria (157); Sevilla (130); Murcia (49); Lorca (47); Ecija (35); Granada (32); Antequera (22).
‘The women and younger children were to be held in establishments that were part gaol, part factory in Seville, Valencia, and Zaragoza, where it was intended that they would spin yarn to pay for their upkeep.‘
‘The men were destined for hard labour in penal colonies or, in most cases, the arsenals of La Carraca (~1,200 men) then being extended, Cartagena, where they slept in decommissioned galleys, and for some, eventually, La Gratia (El Ferrol). Boys of over seven years of age were sent with them, 'so that they might learn some trade.’ Also the mercury mines at Almaden.
Oct 28, 1749: order to release those who can prove they ‘had indeed lived decently and worked as others did’, their belongings were to be restored to them. Despite that, many remained jailed as their towns did not vouch for them as the town councils had sold their belongings or were not willing to give them back.
Jun 16, 1763: General pardon by Charles III . But it was not until 1765 that all 165 remaining gitanos in Cadiz and Cartagena were released – a total of 16 years.
quote:
4. What is the source regarding Cafe del Teatro 1834, and what evidence is there it was for cante/flamenco?
Tenorio González, María de la Paz. "Ronda, ciudad pionera en los cafés cantante." Revista de investigación sobre flamenco La Madrugá, N. 12, 2015. Open access here: https://digitum.um.es/digitum/handle/10201/51413
It relies on primary sources from Archivo Municipal Ronda (listed in the article). Also a 1838 census info to confirm. The cafe itself had existed since at least 1818, but it is in 1834 that it is mentioned that “el cual disponía de tablao” for the first time.
quote:
Also I have it in my mind that the Calderon event description refers to 1838?
Correct - I hadn't done the legwork to see if I can figure out when Calderon was in Sevilla. Turns out he was a governor for just 10 months - Jan-Nov 1838 - and had to flee after that, so his writings on Triana/Sevilla are dated to 1838 precisely.
Posts: 14801
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
RE: Can a white man play the blues? (in reply to kitarist)
quote:
Well he must have (thus his attempt at explanation that Piwin found in the text; and 'flamenca de Roma'), but he and other Brits who wrote about Spain at the time could easily have been confused (or careless) what the scope of the use of the noun 'a flamenco/ flamencos' was - they seemed to think it refers to gitanos as a group rather than to just the subset of gitanos who practice [the art of] flamenco.
Well I actually read both his books... scanned em rapidly over several days. I notice the Fleming thing right away but Piwin had commented on that while I was still going through the Zincali book, before I could point it out. I feel flamencologists that noticed FLamenca de Roma (or was that YOU?) missed Fleming because of the English translation. I don’t think Piwin would have noticed either had I not brought up the point several pages before that, but I will let him answer that himself. Borrows came to my attention and others I assume, thanks to that article page both Devilhand and yourself pointed to, and later I noticed Borrows work getting honorable mentions.
I want to point out that having read both his books, it is extremely surprising to not see the “flamenco” word used ever. During the “Fleming” exposittion, he is giving the reader history, so it appears at the beginning of the book. AFter mentioning the situation as described, he never brings it up again. Why it is weird is because the bulk of his writings are as verbal and physical interactions with people. He is quite proud of his command over a dozen languages, and it gives him a power to impress, converse, and eavesdrop sort of like a magic power, and he never ceases at pointing out his ability to the reader by proving it. So he always provides the actual text in whatever language (spanish, calo, French, German, Greek, Latin, Hebrew, ARabic, etc you name it), then provides his personal translations, which are never the literal google kind, but always carefully worded. He takes pains to rhyme in English whatever songs he hears. WHile we don’t have the MUSIC in his book, we have lyrics and superficial descriptions of how things were sung, danced, played on guitar. He never admits to any musical training, but I suspect he has some based on what I read (he sings himself at times). The two books taken together are SUPER “flamenco’ for our purposes, especially the Zincali dictionary, which I made use of on a gig with a Cantaor just Friday night (He wanted to translate Ketama’s Chupendi, which I found in fact in the Zincali dictionary on my phone 😂). I am 100% sure that at least SOME of the music he describes seeing was Flamenco as we know it.
So with all that considered, and the geography and depth of trust he gained with the various Gitanos, it is VERY STRANGE, he never once points out the music or people as “flamenco”, especially in context with the evidence we see on the timeline pointing to a common knowledge in the region. I mean the 1838 event in Triana...the guy was LIVING THERE AT THE SAME TIME....but mentions no such activity. It is like while he is writing about Gypsies in his room, there is a Juerga going on outside that he is missing. All those letras and stuff (where you got Flamenca de Roma) come from the mind of a Gitano lottery seller on the streets of Sevilla who relates a story about being abducted by Toreros to sing and recite Calo poetry that he had memorized (this illiterate gypsy guy had a photographic memory or had at least committed a lot of books to memory that he couldn’t read, all that was used by Borrows). Both books point to the Sevillano Toreros having a gypsy fetish for the calo, and into singing songs and speaking broken calo or reciting poetry. (He encounters some in Madrid of all places). I mean you can’t get a more “Flamenco” first hand account if you went there today. But not a SINGLE mention of “Flemish” or “Flamenco” in his writings, actually.
Thanks for all the rest you provided. The spanish language stuff will take some time to go through. Yes I am concerned with FANDANGO, because it IS FLAMENCO music, a huge part of it, with the other two being Siguiriyas and Soleá family. I want to see musical DNA such as the Felix Lopez Harpsichord piece, and not all the other garbage they tend to present that is superficially “like” flamenco. WE need harmony and melody, more than 6/8 compas. A proper timeline will included the known CONCRETE musical examples, which are few, plus the letras and verbal descriptions, which seem to be in abundance. If you mean to keep this ONE timeline about the word “flamenco” only, I get that and that is fine. But in my head is running musical stuff mainly.
RE: Can a white man play the blues? (in reply to Ricardo)
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ricardo
quote:
Well he must have (thus his attempt at explanation that Piwin found in the text; and 'flamenca de Roma'), but he and other Brits who wrote about Spain at the time could easily have been confused (or careless) what the scope of the use of the noun 'a flamenco/ flamencos' was - they seemed to think it refers to gitanos as a group rather than to just the subset of gitanos who practice [the art of] flamenco.
I feel flamencologists that noticed FLamenca de Roma (or was that YOU?) missed Fleming because of the English translation.
It is both in a way While I pointed out the few bits that seemed truly novel (i.e. not mentioned by anyone before I found them) in my reply to Bill, there were a few other bits that started as my own discovery followed by me finding out it's been published, though perhaps not well known outside a tiny/niche audience. Both 'flamenca de Roma' in Borrow and the same in Merimee's 'Carmen' were in this category. They had not missed the flemings reference in Borrow either.
quote:
I want to point out that having read both his books, it is extremely surprising to not see the “flamenco” word used ever. During the “Fleming” exposittion, he is giving the reader history, so it appears at the beginning of the book. AFter mentioning the situation as described, he never brings it up again. Why it is weird is because the bulk of his writings are as verbal and physical interactions with people. He is quite proud of his command over a dozen languages[] So with all that considered, and the geography and depth of trust he gained with the various Gitanos, it is VERY STRANGE, he never once points out the music or people as “flamenco”
An explanation just occurred to me - it is precisely because Borrow takes so much pride in his deeper knowledge and understanding of gitanos that he does not himself refer to gitanos or their art as 'flamenco'(*) - he knows they are not Flemish and thinks he knows it was a confusion that started this labelling; thus he knows better than to use it us that would amount in his mind to propagating an ignorant mistake. An analogy could be made to someone knowing that indigenous peoples in North America are, of course, not 'Indians', knowing that that label only came about because at first it was thought the ships had reached India (so out of ignorance), and choosing not to use that term as to not propagate this naming confusion.
quote:
Yes I am concerned with FANDANGO, because it IS FLAMENCO music, a huge part of it, with the other two being Siguiriyas and Soleá family.
OK, what about cantes/bailes like caña, polo? For example, the 1604 reference is to a caña.
quote:
If you mean to keep this ONE timeline about the word “flamenco” only
It is already beyond that.
(*) That usage would have been pretty novel at that time so it would still have sounded 'strange' to his ears; now it is a differnet situation as the usage has fully established the second meaning separate from 'Flemish'.
RE: Can a white man play the blues? (in reply to Ricardo)
quote:
I don’t think Piwin would have noticed either had I not brought up the point several pages before that, but I will let him answer that himself.
Could be. I don't really remember. All I'll say is that if flamencologists missed that today, then either their purpose wasn't to explore the etymology of the word (so they had no reason to look for it), or it was just a rookie mistake. I mean, once you lay out what the main etymological theories are, it should be an obvious next step to just control+f the lexemes that might be relevant. That's all I did. I don't remember exactly what I looked for, but basically lexemes related to birds, Flemings, fire and peasants. Something like that anyway.
@kitarist Thanks for the links!
quote:
it is precisely because Borrow takes so much pride in his deeper knowledge and understanding of gitanos that he does not himself refer to gitanos or their art as 'flamenco
Could be. If so, then it might give some credence to the idea that "flamenco" is a term that was reappropriated by gitanos. I mean, somebody was calling them that or Borrow wouldn't have mentioned it at all. But if the gitanos had been calling themselves that, then he probably would've used the term himself and not dismissed it like he did. Meaning that Borrow's book doesn't fit all that well with the theories that say "flamenco" started as some kind of in-group code.
_____________________________
"Anything you do can be fixed. What you cannot fix is the perfection of a blank page. What you cannot fix is that pristine, unsullied whiteness of a screen or a page with nothing on it—because there’s nothing there to fix."
Posts: 14801
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
RE: Can a white man play the blues? (in reply to kitarist)
quote:
An explanation just occurred to me - it is precisely because Borrow takes so much pride in his deeper knowledge and understanding of gitanos that he does not himself refer to gitanos or their art as 'flamenco'(*) - he knows they are not Flemish and thinks he knows it was a confusion that started this labelling;
The point is, he quotes them and the term was not used. Even by toreros. I can understand himself avoiding it on principle but NOT the people he interacted with and quoted. He loved leaving in people’s linguistic errors in particular. The toreros call their own spoken calo “crabbed gitano” for example. One of his most interesting interactions in the Bible in Spain book, was with a blind teen girl racially mixed gypsy that spoke Latin and she corrected some of his vocabulary regarding how it was used in her area of La Mancha (or near Sevilla I can’t remember). I mean he is very explicit so either it wasn’t used or he deliberately didn’t want his readers to know it was used. (By that I mean there could have been a taboo regarding flamenco music specifically, hence it not making public appearance until 1840s onward, and Borrows respectfully might have not revealed that in his books. That is my own grandiose speculation).
quote:
OK, what about cantes/bailes like caña, polo? For example, the 1604 reference is to a caña.
Well, thanks to that book you provided seguidillas Tiranas and polo letras, a very detailed description of the music and dance was provided. It is this sh1t:
Most of the book intro was slamming the foreign Italian music influence wanting to champion the above folk tradition. The book is next broken into 3 sections. The implication to me was all three derive from seguidillas manchegas, so that the lyrical arrangements and content constitute the differences. Seeing also the 3/8 tiranas score of your tonadilla in D major confirms to me the relationship. Thusly, the letras provided in the three sections correspond to seguidillas , a different type of seguidillas, and tiranas/polo respectively. He has more specific seguidillas derivative language to describe them (referring to estribillo usage or not, lyrical subject matter, etc). Please see Vol 1 link you provided page 58 (actually recounts to page two after this), page 113, and page 165 (these lyric sets are for both tiranas and polos).
This means that in the same manner that seguidillas are NOT flamenco Siguiriyas, neither are the polos THE Flamenco polo as we know it. I further suspect the referenced cañas are equally not flamenco Cañas, and in fact I now feel all three names were stolen, like we know Guajiras rumba tango etc are only names, but stolen and used as convenient titles to “flamenco” songs, for no musically specific reasons. It is a habit we see, and thusly we can assume there is no reason to assume printed names of forms are in fact the flamenco ones we know.
Ironically the 4 line letras can work for solea just fine and bare certain resemblances to letras I know. I still have to find time to go through your tonadilla (lava pies is a Barrio in Madrid, so good chance not flamenco music related, and “aire” referred to air as is in cold breeze caused the guy to shiver not wiggle). The 1740 book is 7 pages of sloppy hand, so only one page of info doesn’t reveal much more than the bullet points you supplied. (Glad I did not purchase the 30e facsimile!😂)
Posts: 14801
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
RE: Can a white man play the blues? (in reply to Piwin)
quote:
Could be. If so, then it might give some credence to the idea that "flamenco" is a term that was reappropriated by gitanos. I mean, somebody was calling them that or Borrow wouldn't have mentioned it at all. But if the gitanos had been calling themselves that, then he probably would've used the term himself and not dismissed it like he did. Meaning that Borrow's book doesn't fit all that well with the theories that say "flamenco" started as some kind of in-group code.
Did you read the book and also the Bible in Spain? Please keep in mind, both payo and gitano selective group in Andalucia golden triangle geography are the “flamencos” and nobody else. There is a continuous trend to equate gitanos exclusively to flamenco music and this is wrong. And proud payos like Aurelio (racist?) are flamenco artists for sure and would never want a term equated with THAT race tied to himself if it were EVER the case the word flamenco meant gypsy. I suspect that flamenco only ever meant Flemish until it meant this music and the performers of it, gypsy or not.
RE: Can a white man play the blues? (in reply to Ricardo)
quote:
And proud payos like Aurelio (racist?) are flamenco artists for sure and would never want a term equated with THAT race tied to himself if it were EVER the case the word flamenco meant gypsy
Good point. I stand corrected.
_____________________________
"Anything you do can be fixed. What you cannot fix is the perfection of a blank page. What you cannot fix is that pristine, unsullied whiteness of a screen or a page with nothing on it—because there’s nothing there to fix."
Posts: 14801
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
RE: Can a white man play the blues? (in reply to Piwin)
I forgot to add earlier that in regards to the “gypsy fetish” and toreros, although Borrows does not explicitly call it flamenco, the entire group of individuals he calls (by their own admission I assume), “Los del Afición”. The songs and poetry they needed to guard sounds suspiciously flamenco related IMO. The lost document that contained info provided (where Flamenca de Roma appears), was a compiled source by Luis Lobo, which was someone involved that wrote it all down in book form. The lottery ticket gypsy relays the info to Borrows from memory. It is all very curious.
The second one by A. Viaene from 1954, pp.16-19, goes through various theories of the flamenco etymology (as of 1954) and is not impressed, I think. At one point he says
"It may be accepted that flamenco 'gitano' [] is of Romanesque origin and is linguistically unrelated to the Germanic 'flaming > flameng' formed flamenco 'vlaming'"
and
"the old catalan 'flamenc': [meaning] fresh in complexion, blushing." (!!)
Also, earlier he mentions Merimee's 'flamenca de Roma' footnote.
Another interesting bit: "Such was the success of this exalted way of singing and dancing that it entered the church: the Album Flamenco, compiled by 'Alejandro y su amigo Alberto' and printed and published about 1895 by the Boys' Orphanage of the Sacred Heart in Madrid, is actually a collection of religious songs in flamenco style."
I wonder if fluent Dutch speakers here can get more out of the preview and/or correct me if I misunderstood something? Anyway, please take a look at the pdf linked above if you can.
RE: Can a white man play the blues? (in reply to Ricardo)
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ricardo
Interesting , but same error equating flamenco to only gypsies.
I wouldn't read it that way - "flamenco 'gitano' " was just their inelegant way to say "flamenco in that non-Flemish meaning"; the rest of it (not quoted) was clear to attach the meaning to the folklore/art and its practitioners, not to the persons as an ethnic group.
Printable Version
While I pointed out the few bits that seemed truly novel (i.e. not mentioned by anyone before I found them) in my reply to Bill, there were a few other bits that started as my own discovery followed by me finding out it's been published, though perhaps not well known outside a tiny/niche audience. Both 'flamenca de Roma' in Borrow and the same in Merimee's 'Carmen' were in this category. They had not missed the flemings reference in Borrow either. 
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