[Harp-L] Harmonicas and respect: I'm with Hunter



Richard wrote:
I utterly reject the idea that Little Walter was handicapped as a musician by his alleged lack of theory knowledge,

Phil's original comment, or at least Richard's excellent responses, brings to mind, or all things, the Homeric epics.


For several hundred years it was simply a given that Homer himself was a myth because the Iliad and the Odyssey were created in pre-literate times, and it would be impossible for a blind story teller to compose two sublime novel-length poems without the ability to write them down. The general view was that these poems were accreted over time by a long line of poets.

Then in the 1880's it was revealed that Bulgaria, which was still pre-literate, had a long history of epic poets who "wrote" beautiful stories that were much longer than the Homeric epics - without ever writing them down. Poets would tell their stories for a living, repeating them word-for-word at each recital. Homer was vindicated.

We really have no idea what level of knowlege of music theory Little Walter had or needed to create his amazing style. We have some idea that when Howlin' Wolf created his devastating music he had a lesser knowlege of music theory because his biographer tells us that after he moved to Chicago he took extension classes on the subject. (Don't you LOVE knowing that?)

My own personal definition of Music Theory is "How certain musicians and composers did what they did In The Past." All the great "trained" composers extended the theory, whether you're talking about Debussy or Charlie Parker.

Or for that matter Little Walter, who was schooled by both SBW's and any number of other swinging blues musicians. They may not have taught him about Plagal cadences and dotted sixteenths, but he learned how they made their magic and then made his own. (And come to think of it, Parker wasn't exactly trained at Berklee.)

Depicting such musical illiterates as Walter or Muddy Waters or Robert Johnson as simpletons (which I kinda don't think Phil was actually doing) mistakes knowlege of musical theory for the ability to invent beautiful music. (For every Berklee student who graduates with the ability to excite, 10 graduate with the ability to put you right to sleep. I've worked with both kinds.)

Whether it's the silly rumor that Irving Berlin had "a colored boy" in his back office composing all that music, or that Shakespeare "couldn't possibly" written the Shakespeare plays, people who cite these 'givens' mistake technical knowlege for the magic that it's supposed to help us to create.

When Phil said that we need more Howard Levy's I believe he meant that we need more people who are blazing new musical trails for diatonic harp. I think that's exactly what Little Walter did, too.

When he said we need fewer Little Walters, I think he may have meant that we need more players to take Walter's innovations to very new places, until Walter becomes an influence rather than a model. Hard to argue with that. That is, we all start by sounding like someone else, but the best of us go on to make music that is all our own.

All props to Phil and Richard, with a special shout-out to people who are exactly like me, wherever they are.

K




This archive was generated by a fusion of Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and MHonArc 2.6.8.