|
Ricardo -> RE: Rosalia (Again?!?) (Sep. 18 2024 14:13:36)
|
quote:
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. [:D]
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? [:D] 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.
|
|
|
|
