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.
For those of you who love or hate her so much that you can't get enough verbiage about her, there is an entire journal issue--Romance Notes 63(2), 2023--of articles about her. The only one dealing with her and flamenco is that by un servidor, “Rosalía and Flamenco: A Musicological Perspective,” in which said author, in a non-judgmental fashion, surveys her various uses of flamenco cantes and estilos. The journal is only accessible via institutional subscription, but this article is posted open-access at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/jj_pubs/529/
It is like, they are not even letting her listen to the actual song as she acts it out in that video.
Reading academic musicological articles about Rosalia’s flamenco is like solving Einstein’s field equations for the dynamics involved with getting chicken McNuggets at the drive thru.
<<Reading academic musicological articles about Rosalia’s flamenco is like solving Einstein’s field equations for the dynamics involved with getting chicken McNuggets at the drive thru.>>
Ah, well, I could respond glibly along the lines of “By all means, don’t read it.” But what the heck, I will take a minute and try to explain why some ppl like me write such things, and some other ppl actually read them. I actually don't give a d-mn about Rosalia or her music, but following the flamenco scene, I could not but notice the veritable paroxysm that she provoked, with furious polemics resounding on FB, in YouTube comments, blogs, online magazines etc for at least a year. I collected hundreds of these. This sort of thing piques the interest of an academic like me, because it reveals how she touched some deep nerve, revealed some deep fault lines involving values, aesthetics, ideas of “authenticity” etc within the flamenco community. By studying this sort of thing we can learn about these values and how they have shaped and continue to shape the music itself and its reception, especially if we can see how the same sort of arguments have been waged since the very inception of the genre. So my first article about her explored this issue (without taking sides). Now, if someone is not interested in looking at flamenco from this conceptual and socio-historical perspective, then that person won’t want to read such an article. (And of course, flamenco practitioners have always regarded “flamencologists” with disdain.) Further, I noticed that these polemics were typically marked by what an academic like me would characterize as a lack of clarity and rigor. “Rosalia isn’t flamenco!” “Is too!” “Is not!” “Is too!” etc, often segueing to ad hominem insults. Even ppl who were knowledgeable connoisseurs argued with the same failure to clarify parameters, criteria etc. An observer like me might like to know, exactly what determines, for such connoisseurs, whether something “is flamenco” or is not? Vocal style? Use of cantes and estilos? Accompaniment tracks? So in this last, short article, which was solicited from me by the editors, I attempted to catalog her uses of flamenco forms (as a few other Spanish writers have done, but not in English, and not covering the breadth of her recordings). I don’t need to take sides, but let others, if they like, go one arguing about whether she is flamenco or not (or whether she is good or bad). But perhaps I have clarified a few basic things. And then, sometimes, I confess, I write an article just because the topic interests me, and I don't care at all if it interests anyone else. Oddly, some of those articles turn out to be the most widely read and cited of my output. But as I said, this sort of inquiry and approach is never going to be of interest to everyone.
exactly what determines, for such connoisseurs, whether something “is flamenco” or is not? Vocal style? Use of cantes and estilos? Accompaniment tracks?
Hi Steelhead,
not a connaisseur, but aficionado since some 20 years now.
Flamenco disciplines are cante, baile, toque, and nowadays some other instruments. Flamenco also has to do with folklore, ways of life, ethnics, Bullfighting and other things. Flamenco is strong poetry. From a musical point of view, it is polyrhytmic, and improvised in a framework of palos. Flamenco is communication between it's performmers. flamenco can be an adjective, and requires humility. Flamenco can also be innovation, which can be accepted widely (Paco, Camaron) Flamenco can make people cry or put them into extasy. Flamenco can hurt and be beautiful at the same time.
This list is probably incomplete. But you can check by yourself, which of the above points apply to Rosalias singing, and which don't. It is also about personal taste and habits.
This sort of thing piques the interest of an academic like me, because it reveals how she touched some deep nerve, revealed some deep fault lines involving values, aesthetics, ideas of “authenticity” etc within the flamenco community. By studying this sort of thing we can learn about these values and how they have shaped and continue to shape the music itself and its reception, especially if we can see how the same sort of arguments have been waged since the very inception of the genre.
Well, yet again I make the error that my foro buddy “steelhead” is the actual author “Peter Manuel” of the article, not the guy who came across some other guy’s article and was sharing it (plus I only read the abstract not noticing author). Sorry, open mouth insert foot, etc. However, I was really just making a joke about the concept in good fun (since we already had it out about her, and in that discussion where ever it is, this article could have reopened the discussion if necessary). Easier for US, or me anyway, would be: “hey guys I know you hate Rosalia but I wrote and recently published an article about her, check it out and give me your thoughts!”. And then I could stop making this repetitive faux pas every time.
So yes this thing goes way back in the genre, having to do with everyone being very protective of it in their home context. I mean things like when Paco cancelled his concert in Spain when his Name was billed next to Placido and Julio Iglesias in teeny tiny lettering in the news paper. That should show that flamenco in spain has been historically marginalized and the great artists have this inferiority complex about it, so guard it with PRIDE, and once you have pride about something you get all the baggage.
Starting with Planeta and Fillo, we read Planeta telling him not to use that scratchy voice, it is catching on but it is not “puro”. Hard to qualify but we get the idea. Much later you have someone like Enrique Morente changing some of the traditional details, and he admits in 1973 Rito, “some like what I do, others call me the Assassin of the cante”, meaning he ruined the beautiful art with his ideas. Along come Ottmar or Rosalia, and here we see a very simple thing: a misrepresentation of the LEVEL of expertise in the genre. It is really not a lot more than that. If the level is low, and the art coming out of said performer is blown out of contextual proportions, “becomes popular”, then there is gonna be a problem. I see this in each example described above.
Now when I refer to “level” or “misrepresentation” what do I mean? Only subjective taste issues? This performance here is BETTER than that one there? My analytical mind and approach goes 180 degrees the OPPOSITE direction. In every case that I see division, there is some TECHNICAL and specific thing that is happening that if said individual simply DIDN’T do that, or changed how they do it specifically, then there would not be all the controversy. I would have to go case by case and into the specifics. Some examples though: the old Planeta Fillo thing is likely about the vocal technique specifically. The physical sound when a melody is interpreted and how that sound is produced by the vocal cords. It is not a “that is how I sound” issue, but a technique one. Vocal technique is notoriously tricky to get, hence the bell canto school and divisions within.
Next Morente. Why the F is he mixing malagueña tercios and implied chords into the fandango naturales, or changing the chords for some styles, and a big etc. Is he CRAZY? Ottmar: “he is NOT flamenco”….well he did not learn the more orthodox strum for buleria or rumba (the two flamenco palos he interprets mainly). If he just got that strum right, paco would NEVER had said “every kid on the street of spain plays better than him”. The Rosalia. At first I did not mind her and blamed it ALL on her weird guitar player. He played as if he had just been roofied. That affects the way her cante comes out. But later I heard her with a “normal” guitar player, and realized she was just not very strong. I put examples of her orthodox Caña and her Malagueña del Mellizo to highlight the technical issues with her singing style. As in, if she wants to be “Picasso”, which she has every right to be if she wants, she needs to get her “blue period” work in order before she jumps into cubism. If she had SIMPLY done that, she would be on better footing. If Paquera sang “chicken teriyaki” I have no doubt in my mind it would be bad ass and highly respected, as comical as it would seem.
PS. Now that I understand YOU wrote the article, I will certainly take the time to read it, and any differing thoughts than above, I will add here.
easy , its like you say that MMA (mixed martial arts) is taekwondo , or BJJ or muaythai, and it isnt.... its MMA (MIXED)
even easier , its like you make a marguerita piza (cheese and tomato) and also put something else like pineaple ou ham , and ask or say , is this a Marquerita piza? its a piza with tomato and cheese....so its a marguerita...but i puted som extra , but stills marguerita?
Why Rosalia ? when a lot of other artists that put flamenco on their music , Fondo flamenco do it for more thant a decade... Jerez Blues... Pata Negra , Mestizas (house music with flamenco)
I remember a foro member writing that if she showed up at YOUR juerga, you'd be stoked. As someone who has played for a handful of non spanish singers, I'd say that may be pretty accurate for many of us that don't live in Spain.
As far as this tangos, I like it. I've heard way worse. I think it comes down to "can you make the sound?"
People online used to rip Toddk for playing with a pick, but he made the sound. Turned out he could make the sound without a pick. No surprise. I'm not comparing him to her, just pointing out that it's the sound that matters.
I had a dancer say this long time singer was a great guy, easy to work with. I said he sounds like nails on a blackboard, and I'd rather work with ****s who sound good.
Rosalia has a distinctive voice, and it , along with marketing, has made her a huge star. She'll never be Paquera, but if she comes over to my house, I'll bust out the guitar and have a big smile when she plugs in the auto tune and sings that tango.
Still not buying her records.
How about Eduardo Guerrero? The guy has the chops but I find him more distasteful than her.
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