Dear Bruce,
I enjoyed reading your well thought -out response..
I really only want to quickly comment on two points at this time:
1)When I teach Jin Nyodo's pieces, I tell my students not to mark the
page..If they do they are to do it in pencil..lightly...zerox the marked
copy...and then erase the original..I don't believe that you can really
learn these pieces with the annotations..And anyway, as my teacher once
said to a student who started to take notes," What if I want to teach the
piece differently next week ?".. But in all seriousness, it is wrong for
students to "pass-around" annotated copies of the notation.. And so that
mistake, does not seem to warrent making a larger mistake of using
notation without a teacher..
2)While there have been some comments as to the beauty of JIN NYODO's
handwriting, there is something left out..JIN NYODO's calligraphy
certainly reflected the spirit of his personality--- strong, unwavering,
direct, etc., but it is also barely legible at times !!! This is even more
of a reason that it OFTEN needs explanation..When I use the original JIN
NYODO notation to teach the pieces, instead of my teacher's (KURAHASHI
YODO), I agree with my students that the most difficult thing about the
piece (HORAI , for example), is reading the notation !!..
I think that this is a very healthy and productive dialogue...
Thanks for listening,
Ronnie Nyogetsu Seldin
On Thu, 9 Dec 1999, Bruce Jones wrote:
> >From: Ronald Seldin <nyogetsu@panix.com>
> >Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 10:17:19 -0500 (EST)
> >
> >I really feel that I have to give my opinion of this latest
> >"direction" of releasing notation of masters (usually deceased-
> >YAMAGUCHI GORO, JIN NYODO, etc.)..
> >
> >I feel that it is an unhealthy direction for the future of HONKYOKU,
> >no matter how fascinating it is..
>
> I'm on both the shakuhachi@weber list and the sfbayshakuhachi list,
> so I'm seeing more comments than some of you folks (and, when I get
> a chance, I'll see about forwarding the sfbay traffic to the shaku
> list here).
>
> A couple of things about these discussions strike me. On the one
> hand, I do not want to argue with the position that one cannot
> really learn the shakuhachi without a *good* teacher (and I've had
> two excellent ones). That said, I'm curious about how the
> publication of sheet music could damage the shakuhachi community.
>
> After all, it has been possible to purchase books of Honkyoku
> notation in Japan for years. In the summer of '98 I picked up a
> very nice accordian fold book by Notomi Judosho, with the
> traditional 36 pieces in it. The hand is a bit difficult to read in
> places and, as is traditional, the notation is more suggestion than
> instruction. One of my teachers has a half dozen such books,
> including a copy of the book I purchased thinking it was Goro
> Yamaguchi's script but was not - only mostly the pieces on the CDs.
> While the notation runs close to what's on the CDs, it's not exact
> enough to make any claims about learning to play like Goro
> Yamaguchi, or "studying" with him, by working between the notation
> and the performance. At best, one gets a better sense of what
> Yamaguchi-sensei might have been up to in his playing by comparing
> the two.
>
> Given that, where are we? One way to approach the problem is to ask
> the question: how might the existence and availabilty of
> these "books" affect the community? From my perspective, they pose
> no danger at all. Of course, some unscrupulous people might take
> the notation and set themselves up as teachers, but then there have
> always been frauds in the komuso (small k) world and the existence
> of readily-available notation isn't likely to increase their numbers.
>
> Is there some other disadvantage that I'm missing?
>
> On the other hand, I can see at least a couple of advantages to
> these books. Many of the pages of photocopied sheet music that
> I've been given or have seen floating around at the residencies in
> SF, have been covered with the additional notes of interim owners.
> In some cases, its so difficult to tell what is from Jin Nyodo's
> original notes and what's been added that the actual notation is
> obscured.
>
> I like to have originals because I can photocopy a piece when I
> get it, mark up the copy until it's useless and make a new photocopy
> to mark up again. With this method, I know what has been added
> and, more importantly, the additions make sense to me.
>
> If you try this with photocopies as your "original" (or, as is too
> often the case, photocopies of photocopies) and the quality
> deteriorates quickly, loosing the small details from the original.
>
> The second advantage is that it is very nice, when you've mastered
> a piece to the point that you no longer need your marginalia, to
> sit down and open up the fanfold book and play from published copy.
> Then the notation serves its proper purpose, not an instruction
> but a reminder.
>
> Owning the notation won't do a thing for anyone's ability to play,
> only persistence, acceptance and good teachers will do that. On the
> other hand, as Z. Braverman noted on the sfbay list, Jin Nyodo's
> calligraphy is beautiful, that alone making the sheet notation worth
> having around.
>
> bj
>
> -
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jan 12 2000 - 13:24:03 PST