--- Nelson Zink <zink@newmex.com> wrote:
> Peter,
>
> > As for me or others jumping on you, I think you invite it by being
> so
> > cocky about what you write here.
>
> I'll accept that. And I'll ask you to accept that you're not paying
> attention. Let me give you a couple examples from your most recent
> post.
>
> > All I was saying, as Bill Fletcher and I believe Ed Beaty pointed
> out,
> > was that I'd like to see an actual flute, not just pronouncements
> that
> > it can be done. I think it's overly cheeky to state unequivocally
> that
> >it can before it is actually done.
>
> That is what makes me crazy. Where is there a pronouncement that it
> can be
> done? Much less a pronouncement by me? Show me any unequivocation.
> Show me
> anything. There are times I wonder if playing the shakuhachi induces
> reading
> impairment.
I'll email you off-list about this--I don't have my own internet access
right now, and I'll look throught the archives for examples where it
sounded to me that you were claiming--well, I've said it already. But
I'll look again, though it won't be today or this week.
> > This is why I wonder about your breathing techniques as well--how
> rooted in
> >practice and experience are they?
>
> I have no idea what you think you read. The piece is about the ways
> and
> means of strengthening the diaphragm. Period. I know something about
> it
> because I have a partially collapsed lung and have spent some time
> dealing
> with the problem. I know that to get full deep breaths one needs a
> well
> functioning diaphragm and that means one which has adequate muscle
> tone. The
> piece is about how to get a full deep breath, what one does with that
> breath
> is outside my expertise.
Hmmm, it's on your site in the shakuhachi section, isn't it? I posted
my doubts about it after a beginning player wrote in thanks for the
exercises.
This is why I've been outspoken. I'm not trying to be bossy or
arrogant; in fact, I didn't want this to be about me or one of my
flutes. I know that many others share my feelings about this issue, but
they are more politic than I am. As you can tell I care deeply not only
about shakuhachi and its tradition, but about traditional cultures,
especially in Asia where I've spent half my adult life. I've witnessed
Westerners appropriating those aspects of certain traditions which
appeal to them and discarding the rest, which amounts in the end to a
kind of cultural dismemberment, and the dilution of centuries of
accumulated wisdom for the purpose of making a buck, achieving an
oh-so-mystical cachet, and so on.
Back in the '80s in China I was at what passed for a fancy department
store, and there were velvet black-light paintings for sale, really
garish stuff like you'd see in a novelty shop in the US, in the art
department. People were oohing and aahing at them like they were great
art. They just didn't have the context to judge them. I see the same in
the US when I'm there--people wearing shirts with pseudo Chinese
characters on them, or that say "Kamikaze" on them, or really awful
examples of sumie. I'm not criticizing them, or even laughing at them,
as they're blamless, of course. But it makes me passionate and adamant
about trying to transmit what I'm learning over here as I've learned
it.
Japanese use the term "jitsu" (reality) to describe that quality of art
that is indescribable but unmistakeable. BTW That's also why I think in
terms of hours rather than years of playing--that's the reality, after
all, though quality is just as important. Since I play outside here a
lot, people often ask me how long I've played, so recently I decided to
say hours--and after my last post I realized I should do a serious
calculation and came up with more like 8000 than 6000. In any case, the
actual hours times (plus?) the intensity is the reality, the "jitsu" of
one's practice.
We can always improve on these traditions, but unless we try to import
them as they are we'll never have a context to begin with. I'm just
trying to provide that, even if it makes me seems like an "ishi atama"
(stone head). And I'll admit my passion can cloud my reason, maybe my
listening/reading ability. So I'll introspect on that.
> Now, in both cases you've taken me to task for things I didn't say or
> write
> and things I don't necessarily believe. I shouldn't be held
> responsible for
> your fantasies. I have to speculate that playing the shak does not
> improve
> one's focus of attention, if anything it appears to do the opposite.
>
Bruce addressed this better than I can.
> Marko asked for some help in the way of sound samples, etc. You have
> a flute
> you're pretty proud of--something pretty unique. Are you preparing to
> send
> in some sound samples?
Preparing, no, prepared, maybe. I'll think about it. And again, I
wasn't trying to brag about that flute; having a nice instrument either
means you have the money or you got lucky, or both. Nothing more.
> Which brings me to another issue--contribution. The first time I was
> aware
> of Marko he asked for some beginners help and was brushed off about
> like
> everybody who makes the same appeal gets. I'll accept without
> question that
> you're a practiced and accomplished player. So how come we don't get
> any of
> your wisdom? Why is everybody who's so knowledgeable so stingy?
>
> You don't like my breathing page, can you do better? Send it to me
> and I'll
> put it up. You know some things that might help others? I'll put up
> as many
> pages as you want. I'll bear the cost, I'll maintain it. I've put
> most
> everything I know on the subject out there, free to the world. Have
> you?
> This list is not know for it's generosity. People really want to know
> how to
> play the shak. You can point out my arrogance, but I think the sword
> cuts
> both ways.
I would also like more imput from shakuhachi elders like Ronnie, Riley,
and wish others would join the list and contribute, but I suspect that
at least the two I mentioned are too busy to weigh in more than they
do.
As for myself, I feel that my posts usually generate a debate that
strays from my original point, or are met with a resounding silence. To
be honest, I've thought of unsubscribing for a while on a few occasions
as I feel unable to get my point across effectively in this format--it
just doesn't suit me, as I'm not a quick thinker or writer.
> We get a couple of contradictory messages from good players on this
> list:
> 1) "It's not the instrument, but the playing that counts."
> 2) "I've got a Mejia era 1.8 with to die for sound."
>
> I actually believe the first one and I'm not a player. And of course,
> everybody loves old flutes. But for at least part of Watazumi's life
> he
> actually practiced #1. The man walked his talk and has my admiration.
Speaking of myth, what I've been told by someone I trust would know is
that what you read in the liner notes about Watazumi using an old
laundry pole and so on is just that. He had a ji-nashi maker he worked
with, he picked the exceptional flutes out for himself, and sold the
others to his students--at very high prices no less. Not to say he
wasn't an amazing shakuhachika, but a certain amount of lore about him
or other earlier players is just that.
As for Al's comment about the mouth/throat. Exactly, everyone's
physiology shapes their sound. Opening the mouth/throat will open the
sound, so to speak. So it is a symbiosis, but I disagree (not that you
said this, but it's been stated elsewhere) that a since a great player
can make a garden hose sound good, the instrument is secondary. A great
instrument in that player's hands will still sound better; moreover,
you should search for an instrument that fits you, and which you like
the sound of, regardless of whether it's considered "great" or not.
Peter
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
_____________________________________________
List subscription information is at:
http://communication.ucsd.edu/shaku/listsub.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 06 2004 - 14:09:35 PST