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.
Notice that Ricardo has chosen to omit P*t*n*r*s. Even writing the word may be too much for him !
Argh! Now you've done it!
Corrected the spelling for you. ("The Scottish Play" of flamenco. Perhaps it might be safer to refer to it as The Scottish Palo. That should cause enough confusion to avert any disaster.)
Notice that Ricardo has chosen to omit P*t*n*r*s. Even writing the word may be too much for him !
Argh! Now you've done it!
Corrected the spelling for you. ("The Scottish Play" of flamenco. Perhaps it might be safer to refer to it as The Scottish Palo. That should cause enough confusion to avert any disaster.)
Or the Voldemort of flamenco, the Palo That Shall Not Be Named... in which case, don't worry, there's probably a Harry Potter spell to protect you from it... or a potion... or a special cloak...
either way, it didn't seem to bother these two enough to stop them recording it (despite what they might have said in interviews):
This is a bit of a myth. Paterna believes (wrongly) that La Petenera was born there and invented this palo. They have a statue of her at the entrance of the pueble and every year have a concurso of Cante por Petenera. At least 200 people and maybe 10 cantaores turn up. Still no bad luck.
Are these examples of each palo that will prove all palos are to be liked by all members? Ie to win any doubters over?
Not to to “win anybody over”, but considering your chosen list of song forms, this provides the opportunity for the “dislikers” to single out a performance there that they don’t like. This is fine of course, but in my experience, the main reason for not liking something that is a beautiful if not important (somehow to someone) creation within the genre, is due to lack of information (ignorance) about the form itself. Thus I provide a starting point, rather than blind-due-to-whatever-first-impressions predilections that people have, from which they might consider to question “why would someone like this form that I simply don’t??” Perhaps an education in the subject will change minds (it has happened to me too many times).
This is a free forum where anyone is permitted to remain close minded of course.
The omitted song form “Bulería por Soleá” is absolutely one of the most fundamental yet distinct forms from the family of Soleá, of which you have bulerías, only, and along with Siguiriyas, and the rest. I guess it has gotten tossed into the mix with Soleá so often that now a days people no longer distinguish it, but Merce at least is still alive and understands. The Toná family of cantes being omitted was understandable (since it is a “guitar forum” as Morante always points out).
Petenera, Caña, Polo, Apolá de Triana, Soleá Petenera de Silverio, Romances, Abandolao, Ida y Vuelta, Boda Gitana, etc, tons and tons of “Other” material unspecified that I did not list as this was not about providing a comprehensive list. It was simply to provide options as stated above for folks that “don’t like” certain forms that might be listed in the poll. Kitarist tried to rope me in to the “dislike=hate” which is not how I feel, rather, it means “don’t care about” to me, which is a form of negativity that runs lower on the spectrum, but is negativity none the less. For sure certain taboos around song forms (such as Petenera, Payo versions of Alborrea, Villancico off season, etc.) forced some of us to remain ignorant about it, therefore “don’t care about learning more about it” type attitudes. It is understandable, however, as is always the case, learning new info about some musical form makes us at least appreciative if not moving out of the camp of “dislike” to “enjoy”.
the main reason for not liking something that is a beautiful if not important (somehow to someone) creation within the genre, is due to lack of information (ignorance) about the form itself. Thus I provide a starting point, rather than blind-due-to-whatever-first-impressions predilections that people have, from which they might consider to question “why would someone like this form that I simply don’t??” Perhaps an education in the subject will change minds (it has happened to me too many times).
Completely agree actually. I'm gonna dive in to your rumba and siguiriyas examples. And see how I get on.
To be honest the main reason I avoid siguiriyas is that I don't really feel (rightly or wrongly) That I am worthy of it. Like it's too deep for a Englishman from London with middling Spanish to really get.
To be honest the main reason I avoid siguiriyas is that I don't really feel (rightly or wrongly) That I am worthy of it. Like it's too deep for a Englishman from London with middling Spanish to really get.
Try listening to it in the car when your in a bad mood
To be honest the main reason I avoid siguiriyas is that I don't really feel (rightly or wrongly) That I am worthy of it. Like it's too deep for a Englishman from London with middling Spanish to really get.
We all have our joys, loves, regrets, pain and anguish, whatever our background. Play it your way, reflect yourself through it. Although, I totally get what you mean, the connexion is going to be totally different, but if you love the music, you can make it work. I don't understand Spanish at all, apart from what I translate from Morante's posts ;)
This poll isn’t negative, it’s very informative. It lets you know that among us are some heavy douchebags. 😂
How can anyone who’s serious about flamenco vote against any of the Big Four Palos? Solea, Buleria, Algeria, Siguiriya?
Anyone voting against any of those before canceling billsh¥t like Farruca is crazy. Then the second sacrosanct group is Tangos, Tientos, Rhumba and Sevillianas. After that you can cancel.
Any palo coming out of or is a relative of the big 4 is essential to flamenco, really the things that are not essential are, in my opinion, most of the ida y vuelta stuff. All the palos related to Solea structurally are absolutely sacrosanct- the palos that are regional which are combinations of the big four are also sacrosanct, the example would be the Fandango por Solea from Lebrija. Or the different species of tangos and tientos.
Then the other sacrosanct palos are family specific cantes, for example Alegrias del Pinini
The cuts should be Ida y vuelta non essential stuff.
To be honest the main reason I avoid siguiriyas is that I don't really feel (rightly or wrongly) That I am worthy of it. Like it's too deep for a Englishman from London with middling Spanish to really get.
Try listening to it in the car when your in a bad mood
In some regions that could encourage road rage. Siguiriya is good when you are constipated and need a cathartic push to extrude the dark bread loaf.
Once I heard a very top level dancer say she doesn’t like Alegrias as much as the other big 4. I asked her why, she said “ it’s way too happy to be fun to dance.” ~
Posts: 14833
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
RE: Least favourite palos? (in reply to estebanana)
quote:
How can anyone who’s serious about flamenco vote against any of the Big Four Palos? Solea, Buleria, Algeria, Siguiriya?
In terms of “Big” I would try to distinguish between “important” versus “large repertoire”. To me large repertoire is more “important”, in that case, FANDANGO is the biggest umbrella of songs, with Soleá being second biggest. From there I feel the other forms to be derivative of those…and by forms I mean cante melodies. Compás to me is an interpretative “treatment” of how these naked cante melodies could be accompanied and there we have 4 basic treatments:12 count, abandolao, 8 count (to include the triplet Tanguillo/zapateado etc), and martinete/siguirya that does not have its own name, but applies to cante melodies like Serrana/Liviana, etc, but lets call it 5-count for fun. Unfortunately, aficionados don’t always distinguish Compás from cante melody and lump things together as they see fit.
Cante Melody: Soleá (derivatives Bulería, Tiento-Tango, etc., relate to Romances), Fandango, (Cante Levante being related but separate and enormous), Toná (martinete, siguiriyas, etc. related but separate, but not so enormous), Serrania (Caña, Serrana, etc.), ida y vuelta, Sevillana/aflamencada songs. It is easy to find solea type melodies in Sevillana/Bambera/Petenera, etc, and rumba gitana, boleros, cuple, etc. But there is a reason for the formal structure of the early list melodies so I consider this list a hierarchy of sorts. I consider Alegrias and other Cantiñas to be melodically related to Fandango. So the subset of Fandangos driven by Soleá compas instead of Abandolao could fit the cantiñas family of songs IMO. So the three big and distinct umbrella forms are Fandango, Solea, And Toná. Not liking any of those would be the “problem” as a flamenco aficionado, for sure.
Compás Treatments: Abandolao:Fandango, Sevillana, most cante Levantes. 12-count-Solea buleria Romance, cantina, etc, some fandangos, Caña/polo, re-interpretations used for Petenera and guajiras. 8-count-Tiento tango, rumba, certain cantes mineros, certain ida y vuelta melodies, Farruca, etc. 5-count-siguiriyas, Toná and certain cantes sin guitarra, Serrana, Liviana…a relatively small group of melodies by comparison.
Keep in mind there is a deep relationship between Abandolao and 12-count, the 12-count and the generic altering 6/8-3/4 pattern, and the 12-count and the 5-count by accents to a 6/8-3/4 as well. A strong factor to keep in mind is that the typical use 12-count is actually a 10+2 count mentality. The so called “Jaleo” bridges the 12-count with abandolao as well. So lines between cante accompaniment “treatments” can get blurred, where as melodies will be more strongly distinct when adhered to in orthodox fashion.
How can anyone who’s serious about flamenco vote against any of the Big Four Palos? Solea, Buleria, Algeria, Siguiriya?
In terms of “Big” I would try to distinguish between “important” versus “large repertoire”. To me large repertoire is more “important”, in that case, FANDANGO is the biggest umbrella of songs, with Soleá being second biggest. From there I feel the other forms to be derivative of those…and by forms I mean cante melodies. Compás to me is an interpretative “treatment” of how these naked cante melodies could be accompanied and there we have 4 basic treatments:12 count, abandolao, 8 count (to include the triplet Tanguillo/zapateado etc), and martinete/siguirya that does not have its own name, but applies to cante melodies like Serrana/Liviana, etc, but lets call it 5-count for fun. Unfortunately, aficionados don’t always distinguish Compás from cante melody and lump things together as they see fit.
Cante Melody: Soleá (derivatives Bulería, Tiento-Tango, etc., relate to Romances), Fandango, (Cante Levante being related but separate and enormous), Toná (martinete, siguiriyas, etc. related but separate, but not so enormous), Serrania (Caña, Serrana, etc.), ida y vuelta, Sevillana/aflamencada songs. It is easy to find solea type melodies in Sevillana/Bambera/Petenera, etc, and rumba gitana, boleros, cuple, etc. But there is a reason for the formal structure of the early list melodies so I consider this list a hierarchy of sorts. I consider Alegrias and other Cantiñas to be melodically related to Fandango. So the subset of Fandangos driven by Soleá compas instead of Abandolao could fit the cantiñas family of songs IMO. So the three big and distinct umbrella forms are Fandango, Solea, And Toná. Not liking any of those would be the “problem” as a flamenco aficionado, for sure.
Compás Treatments: Abandolao:Fandango, Sevillana, most cante Levantes. 12-count-Solea buleria Romance, cantina, etc, some fandangos, Caña/polo, re-interpretations used for Petenera and guajiras. 8-count-Tiento tango, rumba, certain cantes mineros, certain ida y vuelta melodies, Farruca, etc. 5-count-siguiriyas, Toná and certain cantes sin guitarra, Serrana, Liviana…a relatively small group of melodies by comparison.
Keep in mind there is a deep relationship between Abandolao and 12-count, the 12-count and the generic altering 6/8-3/4 pattern, and the 12-count and the 5-count by accents to a 6/8-3/4 as well. A strong factor to keep in mind is that the typical use 12-count is actually a 10+2 count mentality. The so called “Jaleo” bridges the 12-count with abandolao as well. So lines between cante accompaniment “treatments” can get blurred, where as melodies will be more strongly distinct when adhered to in orthodox fashion.
So you’re basically saying that anyone who doesn’t like Solea family palos plus the other important one is a douchebag ? lol 😂
He and others attribute peteneras to Mexican huapango aflamencado.
What was new to me is he traces to Guatemala the particular huapango which came to Spain--specifically to the Petén region of that Central American country.
The son huasteco is a form within the huapango genre. Its dance meter is compounded of 3's and 2's. A number of versions called "Petenera" are associated with travel to Spain, North Africa and other exotic destinations.
Go to 9:52 for a modern Mexican petenera
I remember the son huasteco from the sierra huasteca mountains of eastern Mexico. In the late 1950s-early 1960s the student Speleological Society of the University of Texas explored some of the world's deepest caves in the sierra huasteca. They were far from any road. Supplies for week long expeditions were freighted in over mountain trails by mule train.
The arrieros (mule drivers) sang as we hiked, often slower than in the video--a walking pace rather than a dancing tempo. Still with characteristic excursions into falsetto, some long sustained and harmonized by two or more singers.
The local language is a member of the Mayan family, though geographically isolated from its cousins further south.
The son huasteco is a form within the huapango genre. Its dance meter is compounded of 3's and 2's. A number of versions called "Petenera" are associated with travel to Spain, North Africa and other exotic destinations. I remember the son huasteco from the sierra huasteca mountains of eastern Mexico. In the late 1950s-early 1960s the student Speleological Society of the University of Texas explored some of the world's deepest caves in the sierra huasteca. They were far from any road. Supplies for week long expeditions were freighted in over mountain trails by mule train.
The arrieros (mule drivers) sang as we hiked, often slower than in the video--a walking pace rather than a dancing tempo. Still with characteristic excursions into falsetto, some long sustained and harmonized by two or more singers.
Malaguena Salerosa is one of my two favorite songs in the Son Juasteco style. It has been sung and recorded by dozens of groups, but in my opinion the finest recording was by the old gringo folk duo Bud and Travis, with Travis Edmonson taking the lead with a falsetto that was so beautiful it would send chills up your spine. Although Malaguena Salerosa is often listed as authored by Elpidio Ramirez and Pedro Galindo, it is most certainly a traditional song of unknown authorship that long predated those two.
Interestingly, Travis Edmonson grew up in Nogales, Arizona. My grandparents and mother, who lived in Mexico, had to leave Mexico in the '30s when the Mexican government nationalized the Union Pacific Railroad's Mexican line, as my grandfather was superintendent. They moved to Nogales when my mother was 16, and my family knew the Edmonson family. Travis Edmonson went to the University of Arizona in Tucson where he studied anthropology. He spoke fluent Spanish and was interested in the Pascua Yaqui Indians, who were living in Arizona, having been driven out of Mexico by the Mexican government. Travis compiled a Spanish-Yaqui dictionary, the first of its kind.
Travis Edmonson teamed up with Bud Dashiell to form the folk duo Bud and Travis in the early '60s. They recorded a lot of songs in Spanish, as well as the well-know folk tunes recorded by everyone from Peter, Paul, and Mary to The Kingston Trio. Their Spanish is impeccable, and in my opinion they harmonize better on the Spanish songs than many of the Mexican trios and groups.
I mentioned earlier that Malaguena Salerosa is one of my two favorite songs in the Son Juasteco style. The other one is Cielito Lindo Son Juasteco. It has nothing to do with the song "Cielito Lindo" that, along with "Guadalajara." is probably the most requested song by gringo tourists visiting Mexico. It is stunningly beautiful as interpreted by Bud and Travis, and, again, Travis takes the lead with his falsetto that sends chills up one's spine. Both Malaguena Salearosa and Cielito Lindo Son Juasteco are on the CD entitled "The Best of Bud and Travis."
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white, With the name of the late deceased, And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here, Who tried to hustle the East."
He and others attribute peteneras to Mexican huapango aflamencado.
Your link did not work. When people “attribute” flamenco forms to things, I often wonder what they think they are attributing exactly. The compas treatment, the harmonic moves, or the melody? Here is a good example:
What constitutes “Petenera” to me, is the cante melody, which is not really involved in this video except in the BACKGROUND, on the piano at about :54-1:20 or so. That melody is basically the main one also associated with Romance as well (El negro interprets in Rito and the researcher points out the connection to Petenera), that gives rise to the Am-E7-Am, harmony, then resolve to G-F-E.. The transport to relative major goes higher in pitch, and is a main feature of Silverio’s Soleá Apola, which some aficionados point out and call it “Soleá Petenera”, as it is basically a Petenera melody set to the Compás treatment of Soleá. Any 4 line verse of Soleá text might work with that structure.
So the Mexican thing is clearly, and I don’t think ever disputed, as “ida y vuelta”, and not surprising therefore the compas treatment also used for Guajiras works with the melody. It implies it FIRST comes from Spain, goes to the americas, is transformed, then returns with new elements. IMO researchers don’t seem to emphasize that the melody I am describing gets LOST in the Americas (they are not doing that Andaluz melody that gives rises to the Am-E7 see saw), and therefore, we have to ask if the cante is PRE or POST the “vuelta” part of the round trip. My opinion, based mainly on the fact that “Romance” is invoked by the oral tradition as related, is that the origin is NOT Mexican anything. It is simply being observed to have gotten there from Spain, and developed ON ITS OWN independently. I would further point out that music from the ANDES way down south, has more commonality with your Mexican compas and phrasing and melody, than it does to the flamenco versions. Perhaps MOST telling here, is the TEXT itself, saying nobody knows how to SING the Petenera, ONLY THE SAILORS. Because it had already been transformed in Americas, ironically with this actual melody which is different.
What struck me was the wide divergence between the peteneras of La Niña de los Peines and the fairly modern Mexican version, given that they are said to have a common ancestor.
The Mexican musicians in the video appear to be highly trained, perhaps professional folklorists. Aside from their polished virtuosity, they convey pretty well the character of the folk sones huastecos I was exposed to in my youth.
Pastora's version, though it retains the compás, has almost completely lost its dance character, though I could imagine someone like Antonio Gades or Vicente Escudero deciding to take it on.
Posts: 3431
Joined: Jan. 20 2004
From: Austin, Texas USA
RE: Least favourite palos? (in reply to BarkellWH)
Bill-
There is a dance tempo version of Cielito Lindo at 5:03 on the video in my earlier post.
In the intro the jarana player says that in the sierra huasteca they call the compás seguidilla. The quinta player demonstrates the basic zapateado at the beginning of the piece.
What struck me was the wide divergence between the peteneras of La Niña de los Peines and the fairly modern Mexican version, given that they are said to have a common ancestor.
What divergence? The progression is sort of there, as I described earlier. The melody is different that fits the same progression, basically. The rhythm is “tanguilloish” to me, and is standard to many “American” Latin rhythms, on down from Mexico through the Andes as I mentioned. Tracing a song form using elements of Huapango to a region with the name “Petén” is, not unlike the “FAndango” word used by Indian Natives there as well, not really relevant to flamenco music formal structure, and the way of this type of research in general. (Trace the name, not the MUSIC formal structure or melody). Back to melody and harmony….clearly European. Where did those “guitar” looking things come from? So Spaniards handed their guitars to these Indians and they made up these songs??? Then, sailors brought the Indian created songs back home? And same all down to South America? It seems to me an important step of transmission is missing from the story.
quote:
Pastora's version, though it retains the compás, has almost completely lost its dance character, though I could imagine someone like Antonio Gades or Vicente Escudero deciding to take it on.
“Lost” what character? It is assumed it had it from Mexico? Again, it is, to me, not a fair assumption, understanding how cante functions with dance and compas in general. It is similar to claiming no one can dance to Montoya’s record of solo guitar, as it has “lost” its dance character, therefore the palos have been “changed” from the original conception. This would be a false conclusion of course. As would be the Sevillanas I posted above has restored the Mexican dance characteristic of the Petenera (dedicated TO Pastora). That is to say, “dance character” is not something to apply to cante flamenco in general, UNLESS it is a specific rhythmic vocal expression. Thus any cante can be “danced”, and not only one speed or manner.
To put a perspective, a lot of the Latin American music seems close to the Renaissance Romanescas or Pasamezzo forms:
What struck me was the wide divergence between the peteneras of La Niña de los Peines and the fairly modern Mexican version, given that they are said to have a common ancestor.
Tracing a song form using elements of Huapango to a region with the name “Petén” is, not unlike the “FAndango” word used by Indian Natives there as well, not really relevant to flamenco music formal structure, and the way of this type of research in general. (Trace the name, not the MUSIC formal structure or melody).
I pointed out the specificity of the Petén reference as a particular instance of this sort of "research." Unfortunately the internet still lacks an emoji for irony.
Your criticism of the word "lost" is apt. When I mentioned the supposed common ancestor I was clearly thinking of the separate evolutionary paths of the son huasteco and Pastora's version. I carelessly implied a stage where the common ancestor was a dance piece, while I didn't really mean to.
However, I was aware of sones huastecos long before I started to pay attention to flamenco.
RNJ
Edit: Hernandez Jaramillo says that at the end of the 19th century peteneras was a very popular dance in Spain, though "You probably won't read it in flamenco books."
Ricardo: Thus any cante can be “danced”, and not only one speed or manner.
For example, Maria Pagés in Saura's 1995 film Flamenco. Jose Menese cante, Jose Antonio Rodriguez guitar. First time I saw flamenco peteneras danced, but pretty much as I envisioned it.
No bailaora, cantaor or tocaor was injured in this perforemance.
Back to melody and harmony….clearly European. Where did those “guitar” looking things come from? So Spaniards handed their guitars to these Indians and they made up these songs??? Then, sailors brought the Indian created songs back home? And same all down to South America? It seems to me an important step of transmission is missing from the story.
Here's something we can be sure has made just a one-way trip from origin to performance: Cielito Lindo por bulerias by Pastora Pavon, with Melchor de Marchena blasting along on guitar.
The piece was written by Quirino Mendoza y Cortés in Mexico in 1882. Despite its continued overwhelming popularity, this is the only flamencofied version I have ever heard.
Here's something we can be sure has made just a one-way trip from origin to performance: Cielito Lindo por bulerias by Pastora Pavon, with Melchor de Marchena blasting along on guitar.
The piece was written by Quirino Mendoza y Cortés in Mexico in 1882. Despite its continued overwhelming popularity, this is the only flamencofied version I have ever heard.
So that is a great example of “Compás” treatment I was talking about earlier, where the bulerías is the setting rhythmically and the melody is freely or casually expressed on top, like a skilled surfer. But it is quite dramatic, in this case, that unlike the “Soleá” type melodies she sings around that Mexican letra intruder, the tonality switches, AS does the tessitura or melodic range, where she must drop WAY down below tonic in order to transport the melody exactly. (Camaron copies her with his own huapango examples). The importance of strict adherence to MELODY in this case, is a general rule of what we mean when we say “it is about the cante”. The freedom to transport melodies in this manner is generally how things are done in flamenco…within good taste parameters. I am quite certain there would have been puristas outraged about her doing this type of thing, somewhere out there during those days, but she set a standard for Bulerias at least, such that it became acceptable to do this ever after. Another example was Porrina interpreting Fado por bulerias.
So most of us around here get the idea of “aflamencada” interpretations of non-traditional melodies, but the researchers that hunt for “common ancestors” for the flamenco forms seem (to me anyway) to not emphasize this issue that the cante melody is the root of the forms, concerning themselves a bit too literally with the accompaniments and superficial elements that decorate the themes. Cielito Lindo is composed in 1882 as you say (I take your word for it), but at the same time you pointed us to an older (son Huaxteco version or “seguidilla”) version with traditional accompaniment. If you see what I am getting at…similar to Malagueña Lecuona. Sabicas and Paco take it and re-contextualize it, as in it was composed and had a one way journey, supposedly. But the inspiration for the “composition” is ORIGINALLY Andaluz…so it is still ida y vuelta. Likewise I have to wonder about the cielito pop song….if Lecuona is “fakemenco”, is Cielito lindo “fake-juasteca” by analogy?
Anyway, wiki linked to this, the lyrics owing to 1617 time frame in Andalucia, and some basic math here, Serrana having the similar lyric content and regional origins, and Siguiriya compas to boot, if you add the seguidilla copla or lyrics syllabic meter of 7+5, you notice that those odd meter expressions as rhythms give rise to Siguiriya/serrana compas. So we return to “ida y vuelta” LOL.
Romualdo Molina and Miguel Espin, 1992, Flamenco de ida y vuelta, chapter 4
Jose Manuel Gamboa, 2004, Una historia de flamenco, 242-43
Jose Miguel Hernandez Jaramillo, 2009, La peternera preflamenca como forma musical: Naturaleza genérica y rasgo estilísticos (1825-1910), PhD Dissertation, Universidad de Sevilla
In the Sevilla publication Hernandez attributes the Guatemala theory to Molina and Espin, but implies there is not a lot of support for it.
This Hernandez reference is taken from Steelhead's bibliography. But when I read it online, Hernandez refers several times in passing to Mexican and Guatemalan theories of the origin of peteneras, and promises to dig into them more deeply in his PhD thesis.
But when I look up his thesis, I find it is about jarabes, and his PhD was earned at the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de Mexico.
Of the others, I have read only Gamboa, without coming across Guatemala.
In Steelhead's book I have read the prehistory section and the history section up to Chacon and Manuel Torre. It is well written and it's balanced on controversial issues, of which there are plenty in flamencología.
In fact, having spent 43 years earning my living as mathematician, physicist and engineer, I find the--shall I say--"fluidity" of flamencología both amusing and frustrating. I am reminded of Richard Brune saying that among flamencos of his acquaintance, "flamencologist" was a curse word.
But Brune couldn't resist writing a little flamenco lore, and the great Antonio Mairena contributed a lot of it--much of it controversial.
Printable Version
(Watched most before anyway) ... 
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