RE: gilded script on the inlay

[lipkowitz <lipkowitz...>]

Actually, Bluegrass does, in part, owe its drive and improvisational sense
to Jazz.  Bill Monroe spoke of listening to Jazz on the Radio.  Bluegrass is
a thoroughly 20th century music and its early practitioners were attempting
to create a modern sound.  Jazz was part of that.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lori Cahan-Simon [SMTP:l_cahan (at) staff(dot)chuh(dot)org]
> Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 11:34 AM
> To:   World music from a Jewish slant
> Subject:      Re: gilded script on the inlay
> 
> Stuart,
> 
> lipkowitz (at) aa(dot)edu wrote:
> 
> >I think that they are not only modern catalysts, but, rather, the way in
> >which music and art grows and changes--particularly as it crosses
> borders.
> >
> >
> >Isn't bluegrass the "failure" of white, southern musicians to play Jazz
> >"correctly."   
> >
> I'm not sure I understand you here about bluegrass.  It doesn't come 
> from jazz at all, as far as I know.
> 
> > Early Western, classical music might be thought of as a
> >botched attempt to reproduce Islamic art music. 
> >
> Would you elaborate on this, please?
> 
> >I'm not suggesting that
> >anything is permissable.   Art needs stability and tradition as well as
> >innovation.  But the agent of innovation is often error.
> >Stuart
> >
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From:       Seth Austen [SMTP:klezmusic (at) earthlink(dot)net]
> >>Sent:       Friday, January 18, 2002 10:26 AM
> >>To: World music from a Jewish slant
> >>Subject:    Re: gilded script on the inlay
> >>
> >>on 1/16/02 11:17 AM, Joshua Horowitz at horowitz (at) budowitz(dot)com 
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >>>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.
> >>>
> >>Josh,
> >>
> >>This is a great point! I think there are many instances where we learn
> >>from
> >>a flawed source. Once people started recording music into a three minute
> >>medium of 78's for distribution and sale in a commercial marketplace,
> that
> >>completely changed the tradition as it had previously existed. And yet
> we
> >>all gather around our coveted sound reproduction devices, hanging on
> every
> >>note of these reissues as wisdom handed down from on high. As well we
> >>should, I might add. But our sources are not accurate resprentations of
> >>what
> >>the music sounded like at a Jewish wedding, or a Saturday night house
> >>party
> >>for that matter. They are accurate representations of what it sounded
> like
> >>in a recording studio, with a producer telling them, no don't do it that
> >>way, do it this way instead. No, that song of your repertoire isn't
> Jewish
> >>enough, or blues enough...
> >>
> >>Many ethnomusicological recordings can also reflect the bias of the
> >>collector. How many collectors didn't record something because it didn't
> >>support a point they wished to make?
> >>
> >>OK, you can all kick me too.
> >>
> >>Seth
> >> 
> >>-- 
> >>Seth Austen
> >>
> >>http://www.sethausten.com
> >>emails: seth (at) sethausten(dot)com
> >>klezmusic (at) earthlink(dot)net
> >>
> >>
> 
> 

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