From: johnl@yang.earlham.edu (John Fiskio-Lasseter)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.music.classical.guitar, part 2
Date: 22 Aug 92 18:23:33 GMT
Organization: Earlham College, Richmond, Indiana

In article <8200.6667@stratus.SWDC.Stratus.COM>, davidd@hobbes.swdc.stratus.com (David Deisley) writes:

> I second Jack's suggestion of a group that encompasses not only classical,
> but any fingerstyle playing, as I have interests in both.

I know I've already expressed my opposition to this before, but David's 
reason *FOR* expanding the scope of the group brought to mind something 
else I wanted to add here.

Granted, David and Jack both have a point that (a)"Fingerstyle" players 
have a lot to learn from classical technique, and (b)probably the majority 
of classical players have an interest in fingerstyle guitar, as well (I 
do).  

But I also have an interest in the Irish bouzouki, the cittern, and the 
mandolin; and I play all three of these fingerstyle as well as with a 
pick.  I would not, however, like to see discussion of these instruments 
included in rec.music.classical.guitar -- Everything I know about playing 
them I was able to teach myself from the classical training I have on the 
guitar, but nonetheless, THEY ARE NOT THE SAME INSTRUMENT.

You can probably see what I'm getting at here.  Sure, fingerstyle players 
have a lot to learn to learn from classical technique.  I incorporate it 
all the time in an effort to get my stuff away from the standard Travis-
style fingerpicking.  But the guitar as it is played classically is a 
different instrument from the guitar as it is played "fingerstyle" -- 
whether that term refers to Travis-picking, Leo Kottke, Pierre Bensusan, 
or Michael Hedges.  If you don't believe this, try playing one of the two 
styles exclusively for a month or so, and then see how much effort is 
involved in getting back to the other style.

One other reason I want to put forth against this idea, and then I'll shut 
up.  Part of the point of having a r.m.c.g. is to have a forum where the 
classical guitar can be discussed in a clear focus;  this is currently 
impossible on alt.guitar, and I think a lot of people have been driven 
away from posting to or even reading the group because there is very 
little there to interest them.  Now I understand that your point, David, 
is that many people like yourself have an interest in *BOTH*.

But anyone who is familiar with "fingerstyle" guitar playing knows that 
the term encompasses an enormously diverse range of styles and techniques 
-- just listen to the three performers I mentioned above.  So where do we 
start to draw the line?  Chet Atkins has inspired countless fingerstyle 
players -- however, he plays an electric guitar most of the time.  For 
that matter, there's all those jazz greats like Joe Pass who play an 
electric guitar, fingerstyle, exclusively.  Again, Pass has been an 
inspiration to a lot of guitarists.  And what about the slide players who 
play fingerstyle, like Leo Kottke or the late Merle Watson?

Great artists, all of them; but by this point we have completely strayed 
away from anything classical playing technique, composers, etc.

Okay, I'm getting into dead-horse-beating land, so I'll stop.  To 
summarize from this and my previous post, I oppose the inclusion of 
anything except articles directly related to the classical guitar for 
these reasons: 

(1)The techniques involved in classical playing are too different from 
   those involved in "fingerstyle" playing (this includes, by the way, 
   not only the movement of fingers, but ability to sight read, adapt 
   to prescribed fingerings, arrange one's own fingerings, interpret 
   compositions, and other issues which do not even occur in "fingerstyle" 
   playing. 
(2)Classical players have had a difficult enough time as it is establishing 
   their instrument's legitimacy in the "art music" world.  Including 
   discussion of "fingerstyle" playing can only further the general 
   prejudice that exists against the instrument.
(3)Although many players (probably most) have an interest in both styles, 
   they are, for all intents and purposes, DIFFERENT INSTRUMENTS.  Thus I 
   think the inclusion of issues pertaining to fingerstyle guitar-playing 
   are as inappropriate to r.m.c.g. as discussion of Appalachian fiddle 
   playing would be in a rec.music.classical.violin group.  
(4)Because "fingerstyle" encompasses such a vast range of styles, I think 
   that inclusion of these styles in r.m.c.g. would obscure the focus that 
   is the original purpose of the proposed group -- discussion about the 
   techniques, the history, the great performers, the composers, and the 
   music for the classical guitar.

Okay, 'nuff said.

Peace,
-- John
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
|John Howard Eli Fiskio-Lasseter  |     "Is obair-la\ to\iseachadh"   |
|Earlham College Computing Center |    ("Beginning is a day's work")  |
|e-mail: johnl@yang.earlham.edu   |                --Gaidhlig Proverb |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: news.groups