Re: Shakuhachi vs. Hochichu (again)

From: HeirPhoto@aol.com
Date: Tue Mar 11 2003 - 15:09:50 PST


--part1_84.c337d2d.2b9fc6be_boundary

In a message dated 3/11/2003 5:21:04 PM Eastern Standard Time,
tom-tom@gaea.ocn.ne.jp writes:

> So it seems that Tony's information is out of "date" or at least the date
> he gives for the development of filled shiny bores doesn't correspond with
> historical fact.
>
Tom,
Thanks for your input....that's exactly why I asked. I can find little info
that identifies the differences between the earliest instruments and those
that came much later and what I have found seems questionable. My
"speculation" that followed was based on nothing more than a logical
progression of a simple instrument to one evolving and becoming more finely
tuned and refined. In fact it may have done just the opposite.

The book "The Shakuhachi" seems to imply the more contemporary instruments as
Jinari and leaving out any mention as to what the early ones were. They
mention a Komuso shakuhachi as being earlier but say nothing of how it
differed in construction.

I am really curious though if the plain bore, large flutes really were a
later development as one of the threads implies. Did Watazumido develop this
or did he rediscover it?

Tom, your post from last year this time provided the best description of
Hochiku I have seen. Any thoughts on it's development?

Best,
Tony Miller

--part1_84.c337d2d.2b9fc6be_boundary

<HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=
=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0">In a message dated 3/11/2003 5:21:04 PM Eastern Standa=
rd Time, tom-tom@gaea.ocn.ne.jp writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT=
: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">So it seems that Tony's informa=
tion is out of&nbsp; "date" or at least the date he gives for the developmen=
t of filled shiny bores doesn't correspond with historical fact.<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
Tom,<BR>
Thanks for your input....that's exactly why I asked. I can find little info=20=
that identifies the differences between the earliest instruments and those t=
hat came much later and what I have found seems questionable. My "speculatio=
n" that followed was based on nothing more than a logical progression of a s=
imple instrument to one evolving and becoming more finely tuned and refined.=
 In fact it may have done just the opposite.<BR>
<BR>
The book "The Shakuhachi" seems to imply the more contemporary instruments a=
s Jinari and leaving out any mention as to what the early ones were. They me=
ntion a Komuso shakuhachi as being earlier but say nothing of how it differe=
d in construction.<BR>
<BR>
I am really curious though if the plain bore, large flutes really were a lat=
er development as one of the threads implies. Did Watazumido develop this or=
 did he rediscover it?<BR>
<BR>
Tom, your post from last year this time provided the best description of Hoc=
hiku I have seen. Any thoughts on it's development?<BR>
<BR>
Best,<BR>
Tony Miller</FONT></HTML>

--part1_84.c337d2d.2b9fc6be_boundary--



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 06 2004 - 14:09:32 PST