David Runnion wrote:

>You know, I know this will sound horrible to some, but I wonder if
>anyone shares my feeling: This new acronym, HIP, makes me slightly
>uncomfortable. It is of course sort of cool, sort of, well, hip, but
>there is something vaguely snobby, elitist, and insulting about it.

I agree it sounds terrible.  Also I'll let you into a secret I don't know
what the 'I' stands for.  But, I understand the sentiment implied.  Whether
the expression is snobby or not varies according to whom is using it at the
time.  As a seeker after truth snobbery has no place in my own feelings.

>...  I play on modern instruments.  Fine.  They're not the same
>instruments as Bach or Mozart heard, perhaps, mine was made in 1937, but
>they're pretty close, basically it comes down to steel vs.  gut strings.
>And I resent the implication that since I don't play on gut strings and use
>slightly more vibrato than a "HIP" performer, that I am not playing in a
>"historically informed" way.

Another confession here.  I am a vegetarian.  Slowly I am moving to a
completely vegetarian outlook on life IE wearing synthetic shoes as well.
So I have a real problem over gut strings.  Although I strongly prefer
authentic performance this is a difficulty.  Isn't there some kind of
synthetic string that sounds like gut?

If you resent the implication that your use of vibrato is not of the
historically required amount then logically it must be that your view
of historical correctness is different from the HIP performer.

Thus it seems to me that you believe that you are playing the correct way
but it's just that you disagree with the research.  It this is the case
then further research might alter your thinking or that of the authentic
movment.

>I think a lot about the historical perspective of whatever work I am
>performing (see previous post Re: Amadeus, a decidedly hip, unHIP film)
>and the implications by the HIPsters that I am somehow not HIP strike
>me as false and misleading and rather insulting. How is it possible *not*
>to be historically informed if you are a conciencious, thinking musician?
>Why are certain performance practices (attack, bow stroke, dynamic range,
>rubato interpretation of subito pianos and tenuto marks) less historically
>informed than others.

This introduces the concept of shades of grey in the degree of authenticity
exibited.  There is nothing inherantly incorrect with a performer partially
adopting aspects of historical performance practice.  However, as with all
things in life, whatever decision is made one should be able to justify.

Personally, I am far more concerned about things like ensemble size and
type of venue than the degree of vibrato used.  It is an oddity to have a
piano trio played in hall seating 500 people which is forced upon us by
circumstances.  But, to record the work in a similar venue would be truly
bizzare.

>I am *not* putting down original-instrument performers in the least.
>Some of my best friends hardly vibrate at all in Mozart.  Please understand
>that.  But the term HIP is, to me, as offputting as Politically Correct,
>and as insulting.

Yes, I hate the term 'politically correct' too especially when people say
it and display the inverted commas with their fingers at the same time.

Bob Draper
[log in to unmask]