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.
|
|
|
RE: When is it...not Flamenco??
|
You are logged in as Guest
|
|
Users viewing this topic: none
|
|
Login  | |
|
   
duende
Posts: 3053
Joined: Dec. 15 2003
From: Sweden
|
 RE: When is it...not Flamenco?? (in reply to Ron.M)
|
|
|
quote:
quote:
It's an evocation, a lifestyle, aspirations, hopes, dreams, love, loss, death. The song of the disposessed. It's romance, dammit! Oh, and compás. .
Sí,
.....and the Evil Thumb!
Ron
Hell yeaaa!!! 
_____________________________
This is hard stuff!
Don't give up...
And don't make it a race.
Enjoy the ray of sunshine that comes with every new step in knowledge.
RON
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Sep. 16 2005 7:24:25
 |
|
Kate
Posts: 1827
Joined: Jul. 8 2003
From: Living in Granada, Andalucía
|
|
RE: When is it...not Flamenco?? (in reply to Ricardo)
|
|
|
Hi Ricardo,
Just to explain what I was referring to in my post. The thread started off about 'flamenco or not' and then 'flamenco puro' entered the equation and I jumped in ( yes like a cat among the pigeons) when Miguel said it was ridiculous to try and define Flamenco puro, and I replied I thought it was a necessary distinction. This is from my perspective as a manager/agent not a guitarist.
So my first comment you quote was saying it was necessary to define ' flamenco puro'. The second quote was talking about how flamenco artists in the studio when recording 'flamenco puro' take great pains to get every aspect right. I'm not sure what the contradicition was. I dont claim to understand this but my conclusion has been that we should respect this aspect of flamenco and not dismiss 'Puro' as old stuff, it still exists and if anything it is even more relevant today when groups like OdB claim ' flamenco is dead' while claiming they are now flamenco.
Just like Paco said, it is possible to compose new flamenco puro. For example Emilio on his album had composed amost all of the tracks and his focus was on keeping it Puro, and yes he had bass and cajon on there but the consenus was that it was still puro.
As you quite rightly say, flamenco is meant to change, it is spontaneaous, of the moment, adapted to each player, singer or performance.
My definition of 'puro' would be the source, the heartbeat, the soul of flamenco. Its roots but also its blossoms and seeds.
That does not make it more or less than any other flamenco style, modern, jazz, pop, but it does mean it should be cherished and recognised and not dismissed.
I think among the flamencologists there has been a general consensus that Flamenco puro is being lost as the older singers go to the great juerga in the sky and the young have their eye on bigger rewards than paying their dues in Peñas. Foreign promotors want flamenco with a modern twist, lots of rythmn and little cante, less Gypsy and more ballet. Luckily I can be quite persuasive about the delights of a 'puro' performance and manage to persuade the promoters to take the risk on flamenco artists who may not have big names, big stage shows and massive record sales.
I enjoy all flamenco, it is a very wide church after all, and just because we refer to 'puro flamenco' does not mean that the rest of flamenco is somehow dirty, or debased.
Kate
_____________________________
Emilio Maya Temple
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B000CA6OBC
http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/emiliomaya
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Sep. 16 2005 15:02:29
|
|
Kate
Posts: 1827
Joined: Jul. 8 2003
From: Living in Granada, Andalucía
|
|
RE: When is it...not Flamenco?? (in reply to Miguel de Maria)
|
|
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Miguel de Maria
Kate,
I can understand how all the people in your community would agree on the style of music they have grown up loving and performing. It seems to me that when they say "puro" they are talking about a specific way of performing the music which is open to gypsies and people who were born in Granada (or Jerez, or whatever). Those who are from this area and follow the traditions are puro. Anyone else is a pretender.
HI Mike,
Sorry but mine was not a racist comment, I was not saying that anyone who is not Spanish/Gypsy is a pretender and cannot play 'puro' I have met many players from outside of Spain : France, the US, UK, Russia who play 'puro' flamenco.
I was simply saying that it is important to acknowledge that Flamenco Puro exists and, as you rightly say, not be pushed out and left by the wayside by people who have moved on to develop flamenco in other directions. That would be throwing the baby out with the bath water. Unfortunately Flamenco Puro does suffer from being labelled old, out of date, irrelevant and I think that is not only a shame but a great loss.
Initially I reacted to your comment that discussing flamenco puro was ridiculous. But hey look at the thread, its been a good discussion.
Kate
_____________________________
Emilio Maya Temple
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B000CA6OBC
http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/emiliomaya
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Sep. 16 2005 16:15:10
|
|
 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
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts
|
|
|
Forum Software powered by ASP Playground Advanced Edition 2.0.5
Copyright © 2000 - 2003 ASPPlayground.NET |
7.800293E-02 secs.
|
Printable Version
