Regarding the recent discussion on "hocchiku", I was wondering which
schools/people use this term to distinguish their instrument from
"shakuhachi". I ask this because, in my latest trip to Japan, I had the
opportunity to meet many Myoan shakuhachi players in the Kansai and Shikoku
area; but although they might refer to their "shakuhachi" as "hoki" (ritual
or holy instrument) as opposed to "gakki" (musical instrument) in a
discussion on the nature of their attitude toward the instrument, and
probably would go along with the description "hocchiku" (ritual or holy
bamboo) to describe their shakuhachi, I never heard them using this specific
word. So I am wondering if "hocchiku" is in fact a relatively recent term
initiated by people in response to the perception that the shakuhachi was
increasingly taking on a secular or strictly artistic role, and/or if it is
an old term used by the komuso to distinguish their instrument from, say,
the hitoyogiri or some other bamboo flute. From the description of the
hocchiku and its dimensions, and my very limited knowledge of shakuhachi of
the past, it seems to me these modern-day hocchiku are decidedly larger and
thicker than the Edo-period shakuhachi. However, big and thick shakuhachi
has been used by at least as far back as the time of Myochin Sozan (a
contemporary of Higuchi Taizan) - although, having said that, it's true
Myochin's huge shakuhachi actually had a fairly narrow bore (made by very
heavy lacquering), which makes playing them and their sound quality
distinctive from the hocchiku flutes described elsewhere. What is Mr.
Kodama's view on the ideal neiro (tone color) of the hocchiku?
Related to the question of who in the shakuhachi world prefers the term
"hocchiku" to "shakuhachi" is the term Alcvin mentioned - "kyotaku". I've
seen one person/school use this term to describe their shakuhachi, and that
is the Nishimura Koku of the Tani-ha Myoan school. Are there others, or do
most people who use "hocchiku" use "kyotaku" interchangeably, and
vice-versa?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sandra and Alcvin Ramos" <ramos@telus.net>
To: <Shakuhachi@communication.ucsd.edu>
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 7:17 AM
Subject: Hocchiku
> Dear Shakuhachi list,
>
> As a reply to Tom's informative writing on the difference between
> Hocchiku and Shakuhachi, I have to make some corrections as to his
> comment about Kodama-san's comments about Hocchiku. Kodama-san is here
> with me now so this reply is possible.
>
> Kodama-san said that what he was actually trying to say was that
> Hocchiku are equal to ji-nashi shakuhachi flutes. A piece of bamboo is
> a Hocchiku regardless of length and thickness of bamboo diameter and
> wall and wideness of bore. However it must have 5 holes (4 in front and
> 1 in back) and relative balance between the 5 tones (ro, tsu, re, chi
> ri). But he said that it is easier to capture the particular "neiro" or
> tone color of a Hocchiku with the bigger, thicker variety of flutes
> that are about 2.4 or longer as a opposed to shorter ones regardless of
> thickness and size. Also, depending on the piece, this will determine
> what length of flute is most appropriate. For ezample, playing Tsuru no
> Sugomori or Saji on 3.0 is not appropriate. A 1.8-2.2 is much more
> suited for those pieces. Whereas pieces like Shingetsu or Shin Kyorei
> are much better for the longer flutes. Hocchiku are also referred to as
> "Kyotaku".
>
> Thanks Tom!
>
> Alcvin
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Feb 03 2003 - 09:09:51 PST