Re: gilded script on the inlay

[Joshua Horowitz <horowitz...>]

Okay, I'll be more careful with my humor. I don't use emoticons because I 
still have an old-fashioned weakness for double entendres and a mischievous
respect for ambiguity, so nothing in my mail was intended to inspire anger,
but rather levity. I would, however, like to steer this discussion out of
the sandbox of the CD/Transcription issue and plunge headlong into this
elusive issue of "how much information does one need to perform music?"

Judith, you and I both come from the school of, "Learn as much as you can
from all the old recorded sources possible and get your butt out to some
toothless informants to internalize their style." But the fact is, most
people making music in this (or any ethnic music) field don't have this
perspective to the same degree. Some listen to a few old recordings and are
happy with that, some are more comfortable dealing with the written music
and go directly from there. To expect everyone to develop an advanced case
of the musical equivalent of anal fixation is to invite cultural
constipation on an epidemic level.

Sure, we can bemoan the demise of artistry which our fields have witnessed
since the dawn of the recording industry. But as soon as we do this, we
invalidate the contributions of other people, whose perspective may not
include going out into the far corners of the earth and gingerly placing
minidisc mikes into the nostrils of their newfound octogenarians, hoping for
some last gasps of musical wisdom.

Kick me for saying this, but there may be something to be said for the
modern agents of change, which include

mis-remembering verses; mis-learning tunes from written rather than sound
sources; mis-interpreting texts and generally missing the point.

All of these are genuine catalysts of change, and whether we choose to
accept them as valid or not, they are an inseparable part of the modern
musical landscape. And most of the "mis-whatevers" were probably formerly
also catalysts for musical change and variance. Again, kick me for writing
this Judith. Really.

But remember all those Renaissance paintings which depict Moses with horns
coming out of his head? They were based on a misinterpretation of a biblical
passage in Hebrew which was misconstrued as meaning "the horned one." One
painter copied the other and before long we had a new genre of Moses
depictions. Are they invalid as artworks today?

Again, kick this ass. Please. Josh

>From: Judith R Cohen <judithc (at) YorkU(dot)CA>
>To: World music from a Jewish slant <jewish-music (at) shamash(dot)org>
>Subject: gilded script on the inlay
>Date: Wed, Jan 16, 2002, 1:53 AM
>

>> Our contract
>> > does not include the production of a CD, nor does it include the tune
Quando
>> > el rey nimrod nor leather binding and gilded script on the inlay.
>
> OK, give me a break here. WHo said anything about Nimrod or leather
> binding? I've already SAID it's great that these are mostly unknown
> songs.Others (and I agree) have already SAID it's a great edition on
> good-quality paper. And what does either have to do with the music being
> available to hear? As for the "gilded script", what's the point of this
> sort of sarcasm, which is atypical of you?
>
> I'll say it once more and then I'll stop because I'm not interested in
> making this a fight.
>
> It is not a daunting task technologically or economically to include a
> cd with a book, or to produce one and sell it later, as a companion,
> annnouncing in the book that one plans (does not contract oneself
> legally, plans) to do so.
>
> It is not an unreasonable thing to expect.
>
> No one, including myself, has said a word of anything but praise for
> your book.
>
>> , to criticize what is NOT included in a production is a
>> potentially endless task.
>
> A normal part of disucssing a book, cd, article, or anything else IS in
> fact to discuss what isn't there as well as what is there.
>
> Discuss, not accuse.
>
> You may not have the notion that not having a recording lessened the
> quality of your work, fine.
>
> I do feel it lessens NOT the quality, but the relevance and importance
> of it, precisely BECAUSE it is such a good book. If it weren't, who
> would care?
>
> Finally, a question:
>
> Let's say a certain repertoire of Yiddish song from an area not
> well-represented on extant recordings.  with all its nuances,
> variations, differences -
>
> or, say, Jewish instrumental music from Transylvania as on that Muszikas
> recording - or some other lesser-known klezmer repertoire -
>
> were ONLY available in a volume of great transcriptions, but most of the
> people who bought the volume to learn to perform the music were ONLY
> working from - wonderful - transcriptions, and had heard very little if
> any, people who grew up with Yiddish song or with klezmer performing it.
> They'd only heard some arrangements, and not sung in traditional style,
> of other Yiddish songs from different areas, or other klezmer, and most
> of them had not heard early recordings or documentary recordings;
>
> But they say, Oh, there's a pronunciation guide, terrific
> transcriptions, and some good introductory notes, and after all I HAVE
> heard several people who also don't know the tradition very well singing
> /playing arrangements of it. So I can learn this ok, I really don't need
> to know what it sounds like.
>
> And one more time,
> everyone LIKES the book, Josh. Me too.
>
> I talked with several friends and colleagues yesterday at the music
> department, which is focused on ethnomusicology but also a lot on
> performance - jazz, popular music, world music ensembles - far from
> being a stuffy western art music cubbyhole. The immediate reaction of
> every single person was "great-looking book! how's the cd that came with
> it? - it didn't? why not?...."
>
> You seem to have two very different issues here:
>
> -what your contract and publishing conditions were;
> - whether it's important to include a CD.
>
> And you seem to be simultaneously arguing for both having wanted to
> include one and the publisher not agreeing;
> and for thinking it isn't important to have one.
>
> But I guess that's it, I've been more redundant than I wanted to be
> already. Judith
>
> 

---------------------- jewish-music (at) shamash(dot)org ---------------------+