Kellie - Posted - 08/28/2024:  18:06:52

I'm not sure if they do, but schottisches are a German creation meant to imitate Strathspey rhythms I'm pretty sure. Page 8 of Farland's national School of banjo has one such composition. I think it's meant to be snapped but it's not written like that.

rcc56 - Posted - 08/28/2024:  21:54:54

Yes, depending on who is playing them.

We have the internet now. Listen to older British Isles recordings dubbed down from 78 rpm records to learn more about the old traditions of their dance music. A lot of the modern players are not particularly well versed in those traditions.

rcc56 - Posted - 08/28/2024:  23:19:27

You might also look for pages from old Scottish and Irish tune books. They are usually written with fiddle, flute, or accordion in mind.

Also check out Scottish fiddler Aly Bain, a founding member of the Boys of the Lough, and a very fine musician with a strong traditional background.

Pomeroy - Posted - 08/29/2024:  01:06:54

'Rules' needlessly over-complicate what is childlike simplicity. A schottische is dance music. And like any dance music you simply need to feel the rhythm and flow to 'get it'.

Better still, watch the dancers...

Edited by - Pomeroy on 08/29/2024 01:21:46

Pomeroy - Posted - 08/29/2024:  01:17:29

Honestly. In 15 seconds...

Edited by - Pomeroy on 08/29/2024 01:22:29

Pomeroy - Posted - 08/29/2024:  01:31:29

youtube.com/watch?v=seU2tTOWccg

Watch indigenous dancers and listen to indigenous musicians. Simple.

Edited by - Pomeroy on 08/29/2024 01:45:46

Joel Hooks - Posted - 08/29/2024:  06:20:59

I'll address the OP question and not schottisches in general.

The question is about interpretation of "Alice Schottische" found on page 8 of the "National School for the Banjo".

Here is the scan I made of that book:

archive.org/details/national-s.../mode/1up

Understand that this is 8 pages deep in an INSTRUCTION BOOK on how to play banjo.

Reading the preface "In its preparation care has been taken to make it entertaining as well as instructive, and while the author has endeavored to render the exercises, études, etc., full and complete, he has, at the same. time, tried to make them as attractive as possible, consistent with usefulness."

Alice Schottische is one of these "entertaining as well as instructive" etudes. I doubt it was intended as repertoire, but rather a piece for teaching.

The intention is to get you comfortable with the concepts explained on page 7. This piece introduces the thumb glide (x-x) and does include a "snap" (called a "pull off" for some reason today) for the slur in measure 7. It also uses accidentals.

I don't like this book for learning, and I think it is one of the WORST for self teaching. It is not well graded, it does not introduce concepts systematically, and in general it jumps right in to techniques before they should be introduced.

Cleary this book was intended for use with a teacher that could offer additional exercises and one on one study.

To the OP, I believe that this is a poor choice to use for learning. I also feel that unless your goal is specifically historically informed performance of the late 19th century classic era repertoire, that starting with A notation is also a bad choice.

I am a broken record on this, but the best banjo instruction book ever published for teaching is the "Mel Bay Banjo Method" by Frank Bradbury.

If it makes you feel any better, Bradbury studied with Bacon and Farland.

Kellie - Posted - 08/29/2024:  08:45:39

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joel Hooks

I'll address the OP question and not schottisches in general.



The question is about interpretation of "Alice Schottische" found on page 8 of the "National School for the Banjo".



Here is the scan I made of that book:



archive.org/details/national-s.../mode/1up



Understand that this is 8 pages deep in an INSTRUCTION BOOK on how to play banjo.



Reading the preface "In its preparation care has been taken to make it entertaining as well as instructive, and while the author has endeavored to render the exercises, études, etc., full and complete, he has, at the same. time, tried to make them as attractive as possible, consistent with usefulness."



Alice Schottische is one of these "entertaining as well as instructive" etudes. I doubt it was intended as repertoire, but rather a piece for teaching.



The intention is to get you comfortable with the concepts explained on page 7. This piece introduces the thumb glide (x-x) and does include a "snap" (called a "pull off" for some reason today) for the slur in measure 7. It also uses accidentals.



I don't like this book for learning, and I think it is one of the WORST for self teaching. It is not well graded, it does not introduce concepts systematically, and in general it jumps right in to techniques before they should be introduced.



Cleary this book was intended for use with a teacher that could offer additional exercises and one on one study.



To the OP, I believe that this is a poor choice to use for learning. I also feel that unless your goal is specifically historically informed performance of the late 19th century classic era repertoire, that starting with A notation is also a bad choice.



I am a broken record on this, but the best banjo instruction book ever published for teaching is the "Mel Bay Banjo Method" by Frank Bradbury.



If it makes you feel any better, Bradbury studied with Bacon and Farland.

---

I understand. I have read through The first book by Mel Bay. I just found it too easy and not musical enough for any of the pieces to be worth keeping as well as not going into length about all the keys. I got through the first volume in an afternoon, and I do find it better instructionally, but last night I realized I'm to the point where I can play Farland's setting of Annie Laurie. I can read A notation very slowly if I remember that I'm reading in A notation lol. And I've got to say it sounds amazing on one of his banjos. Yes it is true that Farland intended this book to have a teacher with it, but if one understands all the concepts from Frank Bradbury's book, it's not a cakewalk but it is made easier.

I just like Farland's music more and I'm unsure if anyone's ever played quite like him based on the recordings.

This is the well-tempered clavier of banjo books. The pieces aren't easy and they're meant to have a teacher, but they teach about composition and technique at the same time. Just not in the most methodical way for beginners. Especially not beginners to reading sheet music. It really does throw you into the deep end, but I came out of it learning how to doggy paddle at the very least.

Joel Hooks - Posted - 08/29/2024:  08:57:14

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kellie

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joel Hooks

I'll address the OP question and not schottisches in general.



The question is about interpretation of "Alice Schottische" found on page 8 of the "National School for the Banjo".



Here is the scan I made of that book:



archive.org/details/national-s.../mode/1up



Understand that this is 8 pages deep in an INSTRUCTION BOOK on how to play banjo.



Reading the preface "In its preparation care has been taken to make it entertaining as well as instructive, and while the author has endeavored to render the exercises, études, etc., full and complete, he has, at the same. time, tried to make them as attractive as possible, consistent with usefulness."



Alice Schottische is one of these "entertaining as well as instructive" etudes. I doubt it was intended as repertoire, but rather a piece for teaching.



The intention is to get you comfortable with the concepts explained on page 7. This piece introduces the thumb glide (x-x) and does include a "snap" (called a "pull off" for some reason today) for the slur in measure 7. It also uses accidentals.



I don't like this book for learning, and I think it is one of the WORST for self teaching. It is not well graded, it does not introduce concepts systematically, and in general it jumps right in to techniques before they should be introduced.



Cleary this book was intended for use with a teacher that could offer additional exercises and one on one study.



To the OP, I believe that this is a poor choice to use for learning. I also feel that unless your goal is specifically historically informed performance of the late 19th century classic era repertoire, that starting with A notation is also a bad choice.



I am a broken record on this, but the best banjo instruction book ever published for teaching is the "Mel Bay Banjo Method" by Frank Bradbury.



If it makes you feel any better, Bradbury studied with Bacon and Farland.

---

I understand. I have read through The first book by Mel Bay. I just found it too easy and not musical enough for any of the pieces to be worth keeping as well as not going into length about all the keys. I got through the first volume in an afternoon, and I do find it better instructionally, but last night I realized I'm to the point where I can play Farland's setting of Annie Laurie. I can read A notation very slowly if I remember that I'm reading in A notation lol. And I've got to say it sounds amazing on one of his banjos. Yes it is true that Farland intended this book to have a teacher with it, but if one understands all the concepts from Frank Bradbury's book, it's not a cakewalk but it is made easier.

I just like Farland's music more and I'm unsure if anyone's ever played quite like him based on the recordings.

This is the well-tempered clavier of banjo books. The pieces aren't easy and they're meant to have a teacher, but they teach about composition and technique at the same time. Just not in the most methodical way for beginners. Especially not beginners to reading sheet music. It really does throw you into the deep end, but I came out of it learning how to doggy paddle at the very least.

---

Bradbury's book, as most tutors, are not intended as repertoire (though many of them do contain full solos).  You made it clear in the past that you are not interested in the classic era repertoire, so no book from that era will conform to what you are looking for.



If you were interested in classic era music, and you have already mastered completely the Bradbury book (which I find amazing that you were able to fully develop every skill and exercise in that method in so short a time).  You should be able to play any published solo at a polished concert level.  Bradbury's manuscript arrangements really show what he was capable of.  As do his formal and informal recordings. 

Kellie - Posted - 08/29/2024:  10:40:22

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joel Hooks

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kellie

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joel Hooks

I'll address the OP question and not schottisches in general.



The question is about interpretation of "Alice Schottische" found on page 8 of the "National School for the Banjo".



Here is the scan I made of that book:



archive.org/details/national-s.../mode/1up



Understand that this is 8 pages deep in an INSTRUCTION BOOK on how to play banjo.



Reading the preface "In its preparation care has been taken to make it entertaining as well as instructive, and while the author has endeavored to render the exercises, études, etc., full and complete, he has, at the same. time, tried to make them as attractive as possible, consistent with usefulness."



Alice Schottische is one of these "entertaining as well as instructive" etudes. I doubt it was intended as repertoire, but rather a piece for teaching.



The intention is to get you comfortable with the concepts explained on page 7. This piece introduces the thumb glide (x-x) and does include a "snap" (called a "pull off" for some reason today) for the slur in measure 7. It also uses accidentals.



I don't like this book for learning, and I think it is one of the WORST for self teaching. It is not well graded, it does not introduce concepts systematically, and in general it jumps right in to techniques before they should be introduced.



Cleary this book was intended for use with a teacher that could offer additional exercises and one on one study.



To the OP, I believe that this is a poor choice to use for learning. I also feel that unless your goal is specifically historically informed performance of the late 19th century classic era repertoire, that starting with A notation is also a bad choice.



I am a broken record on this, but the best banjo instruction book ever published for teaching is the "Mel Bay Banjo Method" by Frank Bradbury.



If it makes you feel any better, Bradbury studied with Bacon and Farland.

---

I understand. I have read through The first book by Mel Bay. I just found it too easy and not musical enough for any of the pieces to be worth keeping as well as not going into length about all the keys. I got through the first volume in an afternoon, and I do find it better instructionally, but last night I realized I'm to the point where I can play Farland's setting of Annie Laurie. I can read A notation very slowly if I remember that I'm reading in A notation lol. And I've got to say it sounds amazing on one of his banjos. Yes it is true that Farland intended this book to have a teacher with it, but if one understands all the concepts from Frank Bradbury's book, it's not a cakewalk but it is made easier.

I just like Farland's music more and I'm unsure if anyone's ever played quite like him based on the recordings.

This is the well-tempered clavier of banjo books. The pieces aren't easy and they're meant to have a teacher, but they teach about composition and technique at the same time. Just not in the most methodical way for beginners. Especially not beginners to reading sheet music. It really does throw you into the deep end, but I came out of it learning how to doggy paddle at the very least.

---

Bradbury's book, as most tutors, are not intended as repertoire (though many of them do contain full solos).  You made it clear in the past that you are not interested in the classic era repertoire, so no book from that era will conform to what you are looking for.



If you were interested in classic era music, and you have already mastered completely the Bradbury book (which I find amazing that you were able to fully develop every skill and exercise in that method in so short a time).  You should be able to play any published solo at a polished concert level.  Bradbury's manuscript arrangements really show what he was capable of.  As do his formal and informal recordings. 

---

You're right! This book is much better. I did remember reading through the whole thing but I think I only read through half. However I will go back and learn Farland's music as well. Thank you, Joel! This book has kind of opened my eyes. How do you remember all the chord positions though? 

Pomeroy - Posted - 08/29/2024:  12:19:26

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joel Hooks

I'll address the OP question and not schottisches in general.



The question is about interpretation of "Alice Schottische" found on page 8 of the "National School for the Banjo".



Here is the scan I made of that book:



archive.org/details/national-s.../mode/1up



 

---

I quickly referred to the specific schottische via the link. This looks entirely typical of a schottische. So now I'm genuinely puzzled in what sense this specific notation needs 'interpretation'?

This is simple, familiar music, that any vernacular musician would recognise by ear immediately and anyone who can read notation would recognise in written form immediately. The OP uses the phrase 'meant to be snapped'. This is a de ja vu moment that brings to mind another (American) 'classic banjoist' telling me categorically that hornpipes are meant to be played dotted.

It concerns me that the modern construct of 'classic banjo' presents in this way that functions to invent and project 'rules' that are irrelevant to indigenous musicians for whom these tunes are natural home territory. The paradox of this rigidity is that a member of that community then assumes a 'role' to interpret their own nonsense to people who know no better...and are therefore liable to believe it!

I doubt 'The Interpreter' has even played in an English, Scottish or Irish session. What relevance - or say-so - the tiny, remote, contrived community 'classic banjo' has in relation to these traditional forms is truly mystifying.

Edited by - Pomeroy on 08/29/2024 12:33:47

rcc56 - Posted - 08/29/2024:  14:28:58

The British dance traditions pre-date the birth of the 'classic banjo' tradition by at least a couple of centuries. Most of the music was and still is conceived with the following instruments in mind: Violin, flute, tin whistle, harp, pipes; and/or later on, button accordion.



That's why British Isles folks generally prefer tenor banjo for their music. By its general nature, most of the music is much easier to execute on a four string instrument tuned in fifths.



If you want to learn the most about the authentic British dance tune tradition, listen to the British traditional fiddlers, pipers, flautists, and accordionists, and read the literature that was written for their instruments.  There's a ton of it in print.

Edited by - rcc56 on 08/29/2024 14:29:45

Joel Hooks - Posted - 08/30/2024:  08:19:01

LOL! "English, Scottish, or Irish session"... "vernacular musician"... it does not take much to trigger you Mike.

This is an etude for the natural key of the banjo, in an instruction book written by a Canadian wool mill worker turned professional banjoist published in 1890. This is not something to be overthought.

Also, I'm not sure why the real but specific tradition of what we now call "classic banjo" upsets you so Mike. I can't speak to one individual's claim about hornpipes. I know that the special interest of "classic banjo" is small today. But in 1890, in the US, in New York (or New Jersey where Farland, and Fred Van Eps, lived) it was well represented.

It is okay that you are discovering info about 1870s England, that is great.

I mentioned "interperation" because that is how I understood the OP's question, which is a perfectly good question to ask. My answer is that the "intention" of the composer (Farland) was to play it exactly as written to develop learning the banjo with no interpretation outside of what is in ink needed. Sorry if I was not clear.

Wyrd - Posted - 08/30/2024:  10:25:38

I would add that songs in the style of common dances (etc.), but not actually part of a dance tradition, are not unusual as part of beginner lessons for a number of instruments, not just classic banjo.

They’re meant to be a familiar rhythm pattern to the novice player that can be used to highlight certain techniques.

When I started learning classical harp there were also plenty of waltzes, schottisches, polkas, etc. that were not part of any folk tradition.

Classical music (not classic banjo, but western classical) has plenty of advanced pieces that are waltzes or other dance structures not meant to be danced to. Then there’s ragtime and jazz versions of traditional dance structures that were, in some cases, meant to be danced to developed later (and ragtime certainly overlapped with classic banjo).

There is certainly value in traditional music and traditional repertoires, but you can’t ignore that people have been taking traditional music structures and squishing them into new popular styles for a very, very long time, too. And because they’re familiar structures they make great beginner lessons.

Pomeroy - Posted - 08/30/2024:  11:44:19

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joel Hooks

 I know that the special interest of "classic banjo" is small today. But in 1890, in the US, in New York (or New Jersey where Farland, and Fred Van Eps, lived) it was well represented.



 

---

This very curious statement concisely crystallizes the strangeness of 'classic banjo' when referred to as if it derives from a 'genre' or cohesive historic activity. Strange to the point of having an Esher drawing-like impossibility in the sense that his artwork at first glance appears plausible until we examine more closely and understand the paradox at it's heart. Historic activity cannot be 'representative' of an artificial, arbitrary and retrospectively applied modern definition.

Self-selectivity can easily slip into mythologising and distorting in relation to the historical record. This is the Walter Mitty aspect we can observe in the way 'classic banjo' presents today.

banjoboyd - Posted - 09/05/2024:  10:38:11

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pomeroy

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joel Hooks

 I know that the special interest of "classic banjo" is small today. But in 1890, in the US, in New York (or New Jersey where Farland, and Fred Van Eps, lived) it was well represented.



 

---

This very curious statement concisely crystallizes the strangeness of 'classic banjo' when referred to as if it derives from a 'genre' or cohesive historic activity. Strange to the point of having an Esher drawing-like impossibility in the sense that his artwork at first glance appears plausible until we examine more closely and understand the paradox at it's heart. Historic activity cannot be 'representative' of an artificial, arbitrary and retrospectively applied modern definition.

Self-selectivity can easily slip into mythologising and distorting in relation to the historical record. This is the Walter Mitty aspect we can observe in the way 'classic banjo' presents today.

 

---

I find this objection to be rooted in a strange kind of pedantry rather than genuine concern for the truth. Would it be controversial to state, "The approach to playing the banjo that we retroactively call 'classic banjo' today—which centers on the performance of composed solos using fingerstyle technique—was well represented in the musical culture of major American cities in the 1890s"? I hope not. Of course, it is pointless to even have a specific term for something if people insist that the term needs to be carefully defined/qualified every time it appears. 



Drawing a categorical box around something (always more of an art than a science) does not carry with it an assertion that 1. things outside the box don't exist, or 2. to the extent that things outside the box do exist, they must be represented by the things inside the box. I have read pretty much everything there is to read on the subject of classic banjo (and no, I will not qualify the term again) as far as contemporary scholarship is concerned, and I have not encountered these kinds of assertions being made. So I have no idea where they come from. My impression is increasingly that they are anecdotal. 



You seem be making a similar assumption with regard to schottische. Yes, it is an indigenous dance. But outside of that original context, it is just one of many dance-derived musical forms adopted and adapated by composers of both popular and "art" music. Polka, mazurka, waltz, jig (in both the Irish and American sense), hornpipe, march/gallop, cakewalk, etc. When someone like Farland composes a schottische, it makes reference to the "real thing," but it's not claiming to be the "real thing." He didn't write it for indigenous or "vernacular" musicians. It's likely that many of the people in North America who bought his book at that time had never heard/seen a real schottische performed. The question about snapping the rhythm ("Scotch snap" is yet another term with specific cultural origins that has since taken on a more general meaning) is legitimate given that swing/syncopation is not always notated. 

 

Pomeroy - Posted - 09/06/2024:  04:25:54

quote:

---

Originally posted by banjoboyd

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pomeroy

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joel Hooks

 I know that the special interest of "classic banjo" is small today. But in 1890, in the US, in New York (or New Jersey where Farland, and Fred Van Eps, lived) it was well represented.



 

---

This very curious statement concisely crystallizes the strangeness of 'classic banjo' when referred to as if it derives from a 'genre' or cohesive historic activity. Strange to the point of having an Esher drawing-like impossibility in the sense that his artwork at first glance appears plausible until we examine more closely and understand the paradox at it's heart. Historic activity cannot be 'representative' of an artificial, arbitrary and retrospectively applied modern definition.

Self-selectivity can easily slip into mythologising and distorting in relation to the historical record. This is the Walter Mitty aspect we can observe in the way 'classic banjo' presents today.

 

---

>Drawing a categorical box around something (always more of an art than a science) does not carry with it an assertion that 1. things outside the box don't exist, or 2. to the extent that things outside the box do exist, they must be represented by the things inside the box. I have read pretty much everything there is to read on the subject of classic banjo (and no, I will not qualify the term again) as far as contemporary scholarship is concerned, and I have not encountered these kinds of assertions being made. So I have no idea where they come from.< 





 

---

Indeed, to label or categorise doesn't necessarily imply that what is outside that label or 'box' doesn't exist. To make more a informed assessment we need to look at each specific example and it's context. When we do that in relation to what is an American label 'classic banjo' and 19th century banjo activity as a totality (not just that occurring within the US or that activity outside the US that is restricted only to US musicians and/or what is a 'fit' with US activity) it becomes apparent very quickly the role/influence this specific retrospective label tacitly functions to omit and obscure. No-one in the research community here that I am aware of makes any judgment that this influence and effect of omission is intentional or even a conscious process. Cultural bias in relation to any context arises in part from an exclusive or over-focus which in itself is true circular fashion, shaped by the omission inherent in that bias. It is precisely why intelligent persons as you describe yourself: "...so I have no idea where (X or Y) come from." The mechanism of cultural bias has been written about at length and the patterns are easily available to anyone interested to read more.

To be pedantic is defined as to be engaged with unnecessary detail. No historian or researcher would refer to broad omission and neglect, in any context and for whatever reason, as unnecessary detail. The omission and neglect of what is not a 'fit' with modern American selectivity in regard to 19th century banjo activity is a case in point. It doesn't surprise me in the least that a person can consume all the modern literature on 'classic banjo' and not see the issue. That circumstance is precisely illustrative of the process herein described.

The solution is simplicity itself; it is to widen one's focus.

Edited by - Pomeroy on 09/06/2024 04:40:59