|
Richard Jernigan -> RE: Historical Flamenco Guitar Tutors/Methods (Jul. 11 2016 22:48:04)
|
Many of you may know that the highly respected luthier and scholar of the guitar Richard Bruné reads the Foro, at least at times. His interest is not purely academic--he played professionally at Manolo Caracol's Mexico City tablao, "El Rincon de Goya."
Though Richard doesn't post on the Foro, he writes to some of the members, making significant contributions. Here's one:
"Hi Richard,
Saw the recent thread re historical methods for flamenco, which seems to have drifted into the realm of the usual "classical" vs "flamenco" dichotomy, thought I would weigh in on an observation. To begin, the term "classical" guitar (in any language translation) does not commonly appear until WW II and after. The earliest we have found this specific term comes from one of the Rio de la Plata area's guitar magazines from around the mid 1930's in which this term first appears in Spanish referring to the "guitarra classica" and the context is not exactly clear it is being used to distinguish a genre (as used commonly today) vs simply referring the the "classic" guitar of time immemorial. As you know, the term "classical" when applied to music has several distinct meanings ranging from referring to the music of the defined Classical era (Hayden, Mozart, etc) to its more recent iteration in which any kind of "high brow" art music is referred to as "classical," including baroque, renaissance, Alban Berg, etc. Most radio stations that still broadcast this kind of music call themselves "classical" stations as an example, and that is the vernacular usage of the term.
My point is, back in the day of Rafael Marín (and before,) this distinction of "classical" guitar as we commonly use and understand it today DID NOT EXIST, so trying to separate players into these categories is neither correct nor helpful in understanding the context of their lives and art. It was a non-distinction. As I point out in my "Cultural Origins of the Modern Guitar" paper, in Torres' day there existed a continuum of players from very literate to completely illiterate, and it was very common for players to include many genres of music on their solo programs, from transcriptions of opera arias to flamenco palos of their own composition. Julian Arcas was one case in point, and even the so called "first" documented flamenco guitarist, Francisco Rodriguez "El Murciano" published 24 variations on the Malagueñas palo through J. Castro y Campos (an Aguado student) which were edited by José Juzenga Castellanos. I'll go out on a limb here and propose that these might be considered evidence that "El Murciano" was a literate guitarist. On the other hand, Sabicas, who I knew very well (he played one of my guitars) was totally illiterate when it came to written music, yet on Elektra Vol II he has recorded his transcription of Rimsky Korsakov's "Capricho Español," along with his variations of the Arcas/Tárrega "Gran Jota," Monti's "Czardas," and Leucona's "Malagueña," along with other original compositions of his own, and they ARE "compositions," not improvised falsetas run together, so in a way, they are as much "classical" music as any written down composition might be.
The fact that Marín's method of 1902 is written out in both music and cifra indicates that musical literacy was an optional skill regardless of the musical skill of the player, so trying to define players of that era by their level of musical literacy is folly. As for the restrictive labeling of genres, this is completely useless from a musicological point, since these distinctions simply did not exist prior to WW II. Richard Marlow got it right when he pointed out this was something adopted by Segovia and his boosters to distinguish himself from the many other "Spanish" guitarists who were competing for halls and gigs in front of a developing North American audience. By extension, the distinction between guitars intended for "classical" vs flamenco did not begin to develop until after WW II, as I point out in the COotMG paper. Before WW II, Spanish makers simply made guitars, it was up to the players (literate or not) to decide how best to use them.
For those skeptical of this opinion I request a search of ORIGINAL references in print (any language) prior to WW II that would support this use of the term "Classical guitar." Maker's catalogs, guitar magazines, correspondence (published or unpublished), record/wax cylinder labels, program notes, program advertisements, etc, anything you can find to refute my contention is welcome.
You can use this on the forum or not as you may prefer, its an interesting discussion that merits further depth.
Best wishes, Richard"
|
|
|
|
