RE: Cultural Flamenco Questions Thread (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: Cultural Flamenco Questions Thread: http://www.foroflamenco.com/fb.asp?m=244363



Message


Ricardo -> RE: Cultural Flamenco Questions Thread (Mar. 7 2014 19:56:14)

quote:

ORIGINAL: gmburns

quote:

ORIGINAL: Morante

quote:



Meanwhile Paco realised that he would not make money with records, so formed his sextet and began to play to big audiences. Nowadays this is still the only way to make money in flamenco.


This is interesting. I didn't know this, though I guess it makes sense. Live flamenco is much better than recorded for sure. It doesn't always work for other genres (ever seen Smashing Pumpkins in concert? Didn't think so, and there's a reason why you're not admitting it if you did).

So continuing to perform is still the way, except that how one performs seems to have changed.



It is not only about flamenco, but music in general. Unless you are a pop giant or have a hit single, it is simply not lucrative to make money from recordings. Recordings are an artistic statement or calling card, not a source of major income. Especially in the digital age which has cheapened the value of recordings to practically nothing. Musicians need to PLAY to make money, and if they can't get enough work playing then they must teach. And if they refuse to teach, the last resort before get a slave job is grants and awards.




gmburns -> RE: Cultural Flamenco Questions Thread (Mar. 7 2014 23:56:31)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricardo

quote:

ORIGINAL: gmburns

quote:

ORIGINAL: Morante



Meanwhile Paco realised that he would not make money with records, so formed his sextet and began to play to big audiences. Nowadays this is still the only way to make money in flamenco.


This is interesting. I didn't know this, though I guess it makes sense. Live flamenco is much better than recorded for sure. It doesn't always work for other genres (ever seen Smashing Pumpkins in concert? Didn't think so, and there's a reason why you're not admitting it if you did).

So continuing to perform is still the way, except that how one performs seems to have changed.



It is not only about flamenco, but music in general. Unless you are a pop giant or have a hit single, it is simply not lucrative to make money from recordings. Recordings are an artistic statement or calling card, not a source of major income. Especially in the digital age which has cheapened the value of recordings to practically nothing. Musicians need to PLAY to make money, and if they can't get enough work playing then they must teach. And if they refuse to teach, the last resort before get a slave job is grants and awards.


makes sense, but nowadays folks know how much they're going to make before they go on stage. it's less about impressing in the moment but building up a strong resume.




gmburns -> RE: Cultural Flamenco Questions Thread (Mar. 12 2014 14:08:50)

quote:

ORIGINAL: gmburns

So what's it mean to perform, exhibit, etc.?

I get this sense that flamenco has two lines with regards to this question: the line that wants to be a star and the line that just wants to be. This isn't really a starving artist sort of question (and that great art comes from great moments of desperation with the last chunk of bread sitting on the table), but more of a question of which is more flamenco: to perform or not.

I know I'll get lots of "well, there are performances, therefore it's just as much flamenco as the instances where one doesn't perform" comments, or something like that. That's fine, I expect it. However, I suspect that flamenco is much more than just the dances and music and performances, that it's something that comes from a way of life, and that people who don't perform don't do so not because they are anti-exhibitionism but more treat flamenco as if they are tying their shoes: they wear shoes, so they tie them (flamencos play because that's what they do).

Am I wrong?

(ps - this is nothing against those who perform)


I might have found a suitable answer to this in Sevilla's book on page 249 (Curro Dulce):

"El Gordo sang softly... ...The reunion was an intimate ritual in which they sang to each other... ...These men had sung the same cantes, the same verses, for each other dozens, if not hundreds, of times..."


And I found a gem on the same page that makes sense to all artists: "Yet it was always new, as if for the first time. Details changed, melodies evolved, and new ideas sprang forth. Sometimes, in moments of inspiration, something completely new appeared, as if by magic, as if taken from the air. Those were the moments they waited for, the reason they continued to gather and to sing."

So these two are related, but for me the first part explains more about why one doesn't feel the need to perform. This is the in the chapter of Curro Dulce, who from what I gather was more gypsy than performer. According to Sevilla he only taught his children and preferred to perform in private with friends and family with gypsies, though he certainly performed elsewhere.

But in short, it was more about sharing experiences as opposed to presentation, which I believe anyone can identify with if one thinks about it. There's always an activity in your community that you'd rather do in private and with friends than publicly for money. It's just that these private flamencos were very good and chose an activity that we normally associate with performing.

The second blurb above just describes how art happens. Practice every day doing the same thing without seeing anything different and wham! you get something new out of the blue.




Page: <<   <   1 2 3 4 [5]

Valid CSS!




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