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.
|
|
|
Flamenco Puro
|
You are logged in as Guest
|
|
Users viewing this topic: none
|
|
Login  | |
|
   
Exitao
Posts: 907
Joined: Mar. 13 2006
From: Vancouver, Canada
|
 RE: Flamenco Puro (in reply to kkrause1)
|
|
|
Almost all definitions of 'puro' all boil down to the single concept of keeping Flamenco true to its origins.
Yes, the other side of this double-edged blade is that there is a 'sucio' or that there are impuridades. And there will be discrimination against payos &c, and there will be an avante garde that says "to Hell with the puristas!"
One could argue that all attempts to preserve (ethnic) culture(s) will eventually smack of bias and xenophobia - if a phenomenon is like a bucket of white paint, how many droplets of other coloured paints can we mix in before the paint is no long white, but blue or green or orange? (Do not confuse this analogy with a racial or colour-based argument.)
But without a position that attempts to anchor Flamenco to its roots, how long until 'globalised' flamenco becomes something that resembles true flamenco in nothing but the basics of technique?
Pretty much all of you will agree that Cooke and Liebert are not flamenco. Some will argue further that the Gypsy Kings are not either.
If not for the concept of flamenco puro, many of you may be content to be the next Ottmar or Jesse.
You all know that to gain respect within the flamenco community as an artist you will have to be flamenco enough. And even if you despise the idea of 'puro' you will know when something is or isn't 'flamenco'.
While the idea of pureza can head you down a slippery slope of bias and intolerance and will likely never find a universally accepted definition, you must have a clear ideal of what flamenco is. I hope that, whatever your definition of 'puro' is, that your dedication to your flamenco ideal earns you praises of being "muy flamenco!"
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Nov. 17 2006 10:25:19
 |
|
sonikete
Posts: 735
Joined: Jan. 9 2004
From: Sweden
|
|
RE: Flamenco Puro (in reply to kkrause1)
|
|
|
If you look at vicente amigo, tomatito or josele they do things that they themselves doesnt consider flamenco, but play out of curiosity, personal expression or wanting to develop and communicate with other genres of music.
Jazz, rock and classical musicians sometimes play flamenco and flamenco musicians sometimes play classical, jazz or rock, i dont see any problem there.
A guitarist could be able to play things that could be considered very "puro" by some people but at the same time have an ability to play other types of music, that moves them or they find interesting.
But just as paco doesnt becomes a classical guitarist just because he plays rodrigo or de falla - a classical, rock or jazzguitarist doesnt become a flamencoguitarist just because they play paco.
Every music has different requirements, traditions and formative rules and "pureza" as a compliment usually, with a few exceptions, is reserved for artists that are born into it, gypsy or not.
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Nov. 17 2006 17:46:07
|
|
 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 |
0.109375 secs.
|
Printable Version
