RE: Son of Modern vs Traditional (conclusion) (Full Version)

Foro Flamenco: http://www.foroflamenco.com/
- Discussions: http://www.foroflamenco.com/default.asp?catApp=0
- - General: http://www.foroflamenco.com/in_forum.asp?forumid=13
- - - RE: Son of Modern vs Traditional (conclusion): http://www.foroflamenco.com/fb.asp?m=148505



Message

orsonw -> RE: Son of Modern vs Traditional (conclusion) (Oct. 22 2010 7:32:45)

What purpose or use has this theory if the actual form the music takes is irrelevant?

Or maybe it's just not useful to me as a musician and I've strayed onto an acedemic thread? Please forgive my ignorance if this is the case.

Even reading tab is a struggle for me, I mainly learn by copying. I really like what is often descibed as a modern syle- lots of contratiempo, sharp technique, different tunings and alternative positions to por medio, por arriba. So I guess I am learning modern flamenco in a traditional way.

From my own experience and others' I think many flamencos still learn by copying not theorising? It would be intersting to know if the canoroto players and others use a lot of music theory. I imagine perhaps it's a mixture of traditional oral/copying and music theory?



X -> RE: Son of Modern vs Traditional (conclusion) (Oct. 23 2010 19:03:33)

Hey, orsonw,

quote:

ORIGINAL: orsonw

What purpose or use has this theory if the actual form the music takes is irrelevant?


Thanks for your input. I'd try to answer your question, but I don't understand what you mean by "the actual form the music takes is irrelevant."

As I mentioned earlier, I think people ask the modern vs traditional question because they want to play or compose flamenco that "sounds modern" (or that "sounds traditional," if that's their aim). So it's not so much for learning, but for playing/ composing.

I also say that the criterion I come up with doesn't help, though starting from theory might make it more likely they compose something more modern-sounding. Jake Mossman's whole-tone bulerias falseta is a good example (in the transcription he gave me, though, he'd transposed it to tangos).

Anyway, I'm glad you're learning all that good stuff. If anyone tries to start a debate with you by jumping on your definition of modern style:

quote:

...lots of contratiempo, sharp technique, different tunings and alternative positions to por medio, por arriba...


I'd say ignore and just go on doing what you're doing (rendering debates on this topic moot was why I started off on this tack in the first place). Lots of luck!



orsonw -> RE: Son of Modern vs Traditional (conclusion) (Oct. 23 2010 21:31:36)

Thanks for the reply, you needn't answer this post- I see the debate could go on indefinitley, and I'd rather be playing the guitar!


quote:

I'd try to answer your question, but I don't understand what you mean by "the actual form the music takes is irrelevant."


You say if exactly the same falseta was arrived at by modern theory or traditional methods then it would be modern when the modern player came up with it and traditonal when the traditonal player came up with it. So in your theory the form that the final piece of music takes isn't what defines it as modern or traditional.



edguerin -> RE: Son of Modern vs Traditional (conclusion) (Oct. 24 2010 8:20:15)

So how about a strictly subjective definition?
I.e.: Modern is what I (the subject) perceive as such.



XXX -> RE: Son of Modern vs Traditional (conclusion) (Oct. 24 2010 8:24:30)

a subjective definition is a contradiction in itself.



edguerin -> RE: Son of Modern vs Traditional (conclusion) (Oct. 24 2010 8:31:57)

Not in the philosophical sense of (radical) Subjectivism.
So what I'm suggesting is a Subjective Theory of Flamenco Esthetics [;)]



Page: <<   <   1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software powered by ASP Playground Advanced Edition 2.0.5
Copyright © 2000 - 2003 ASPPlayground.NET