I found it interesting that castanets played in public were banned in Spain around the same time as the fandango ... the 1700's.

http://www.thefileroom.org/documents/dy ... fm/id/1132

History of castanets

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castanets

http://www.carmendevicente.com/castanet.html

http://www.esflamenco.com/scripts/news/ ... Pagina=135

What I find interesting is most involved in flamenco don't consider the castanets real flamenco and associate them with tourist flamenco. However these same critics consider the use of the cajon and bongo drums acceptable. The reason I have heard is because these modern percussion instruments are used with palos like Bulerias or Alegrias which everyone agrees are flamenco, but castanets were and are most common used in adopted palos like fandango and Sevillanas. Castanets are considered more Spanish folklore than flamenco by many.

What these anti castanets people seem to forget is the modern percussion instruments are most commonly heard with flamenco palos adopted from latin America, the rumba, etc. Sure they they can use them with a Bulerias, but in my opinion it gives the palo a latin American flavor. Castanets always sound flamenco to me. I think the reason we don't see many castanet players, is it is a difficult thing to learn.

Yes, I strongly dislike the use of a cajon, which I feel is not flamenco, and also diffuses the sound of solo guitar. Strictly speaking, since the cajon can be considered a musical instrument, then by definition the solo guitar is no longer a solo guitar performance, because now you have two instruments. I said this on that other flamenco forum, but most of them are into the modern stuff that passes for flamenco.

Since I am a relic of the past, and learned my flamenco in the 1950s, I continue to disdain castanets as an innovation introduced by traveling-troupe Spanish dance and flamenco artists to create a more "Spanish Color" atmosphere for flamenco performances, and so to ease getting the sometimes bitter pill of cante down the throats of non-Spanish audiences. Thus the only thing that tarnishes two of my favorite LPs of traveling-troupe 1950s flamenco--Sabicas & Co. Festival Gitana, and José Greco's Danzas Flamencas, is the occasional use of castanets. Carmen Amaya used them a lot, I think entirely to give the audiences what (she thought) they wanted.

Don't like cajons, ether. Or flamenco piano. Or bass.

Carlos

Hola Amigos
I would like to make some observations on this subject.
I wonder why?!!!!!!
I find I cannot make a proper text in favour or against any idea so I make here just some random observations and thoughts.
Some people just simply do not like palillos (castanets) and that really is fine. No one has to like anything.
With regards to the comment of Carlos I am not sure if this is what you meant but there was a time in Spain under the dictatorship when flamenco was the national embarrassment. The horrible costumes, the affectations and gestures of the singers and male dancers. Lots of poses that meant nothing. Girls with big smiles making circles with their arms while making a noise with the palillos.
Those were bad times.
I guess that any musical instrument can be played badly. Surely there was a time when some flamenco guitar playing was just noise just strumming, not even proper rajeo.
I have to admit and it is almost politically incorrect here in Britain but I love Spain and so I tend to feel that some Spanish folk music is kind of a cousin of flamenco. More so than electric bass guitar and sounds and feeling from musics from other countries.
If some flamencologo will find an explanation about the origins of flamenco and show which palos come from folk and show how that basic primitive simple instrument that is the palillos can in fact be a part of flamenco I think I will say yes sure fine. But I don’t need the work of the flamencologos. Yes I respect them but I do what I feel is right for me.
I love to give concerts with María José. I like making the music together. But I also very much so like the sound of the flamenco guitar alone. But I also so like the sound of flamenco guitar under the cante.
I smile when I hear modernists talk about palillos are not OK. As Sam has said they feel anything at all is Ok just as long as it has nothing to do with Spain!
That is OK they are happy and really I don’t want to try to convince them of anything else.
It is fine like that.
I am glad that Sam has opened this discussion because I think it is interesting.
Saludos

Tomás

I decided to recheck the accuracy of my long-held aversion to castanets as non-flamenco, so I looked again at Donn Pohren's The Art of Flamenco. Pohren states:"The use of castanets is an excellent way to destroy the jondo effect of a dance. The castanets, if used at all, should be used in such regional-flamenco dances as the sevillanas and fandangos de Huelva, and perhaps in a few other light rhythms. They should never be used in the baile grande, as they lend a distraction which is incongruous with the jondo and, worse, they detract from the hand and arm movements, the very basis of the feminine dance".

Also, Ehrenhard Skiera devotes most of a chapter on castanets in the book Flamenco: Gypsy Dance and Music from Andalusia. He writes: "There are sound reasons for pointing out that castanets do not belong to flamenco. They actually inhibit the expressive movements of the hands, which are an integral part of the dance. With few exceptions, they are never used in the baile grande (soleares, sigiuiriyas, etc.). However, there are many dances in which castanets are used--dances included in the current flamenco repertory, accepting a broad definition of flamenco. In truth all these dances [sevillanas, malagueñas, verdiales, fandangos de Huelva, zorongos] are better classified as Andalusian folk dances than as gypsy flamenco.......What's important, however, is that baile grande was originally danced without castanets, and dancers who care about its origins and about maintaining its stylistic purity do not use castanets in these particular dances [baile grande]".

Again, I think that castanets were increasingly introduced into flamenco in order to make flamenco more palatable, accessible, "Spanish-like", for the growing audience of those not familiar with the genre, but who liked and appreciated what they understood to be Spanish Dance. In this way, flamenco could be assimilated as a variant of Spanish Dance.

Carlos

Excellent responses and I understand both points of view. I agree history reveals that castanets were popular and used with dances like the Sevillanas and Fandango and not used by the gitano for more "pure" forms of flamenco. But here is my question ... since castanets were used in Spain by dancers as early as the 1700's when the audience in the tablaos or wherever were mainly Spaniards, how does this connect with the castanets for tourist theory? I agree that in the 1900's and even today the places that have fancy dressed dancers playing castanets in Spain are for tourist, however this wasn't the case in the 1700's. Perhaps this would make them Spanish folklore, but Spanish folklore is part of flamenco.

Now for Pohren and Skiera statements. I am no expert or even care much for dance, so I am sure they make valid points, but what if one is sitting and using the castanets as a rhythm instrument? If the use of castanets works with the cante, then how could one object or say it is not flamenco? For instance if a singer is singing Bulerias and using their knuckles to bang on a table, the sound in compas with the cante is accepted flamenco of the purist kind. This doesn't mean any table someone is banging on is flamenco, but it does establish the fact that the table became a legitimate rhythm instrument for the performance. Same would apply to castanets or even a cajon if they were used tasteful, however I give castanets more credit because of their historical significance.

My other point is I can find no other sources but the world encyclopedia that mentions the ban on castanets in the 1700's. I was unaware of this until I was reading about the fandango being ban for its sexual explicit moves and the castanets were also banned for inciting rebellion. I cannot imagine how the castanets incited rebellion and my opinion is since they were used by dancers back then performing these "vulgar" dances, they were ban by association if in fact the world encyclopedia is correct in their statement.

For rhythm instruments hands and tables please me more than anything else. Another point is for those that find the sound of castanets offensive and unflamenco, how can they take the rapid banging of a good dancers footwork? Carmen Amaya for instance ... it only takes a few seconds before the excessively rapid banging becomes annoying to me. Same with castanets, if used occasionally why could they not be used with a palo like Soleares? I think castanets became a show of flash, like we see in today's guitarist or over the top heel work, and the end result becomes unflamenco IMO. Some call this flamenco fire. Perhaps they are right, but when the performance is over, like any fire, the audience is left with ashes.

In summation it is my opinion that it isn't the rhythm instrument or even the guitar that is flamenco, it is how they are used in the performance of flamenco palos.

As has been said elsewhere, I think the single biggest problem with the use of castanets is with the female flamenco dancer. One of the most beautiful and flamenco aspects of the female dance is the exquisite use of the hands and fingers. Castanets inhibit the proper movement of both, and at the same time detract visually from the fluid motion of the bailaora's hands and fingers. Below I repeat two videos of the great bailaora Merche Esmeralda. Just watch the extraordinary and beautiful flow of her hands and fingers. If she had used castanets it would never have looked the same or as good.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9DWlngNFIdY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XIOty_3uNE

I think the subject of castanets can be boiled down to a few short axioms:

--Castanets were and are used, though not aways, for non-Gitano dance. This could be sevillanas,fandangos de Huelva, etc., as previously mentioned.

--Castanets have been associated with the above, and with "Spanish Dance" both in the minds of Spaniards and of foreigners, for a long time. Tchaikovsky and Rimsky-Korsakov, to name just two, incorporated castanets into their "Spanish" compositions.

--Gitano flamenco appears never to have incorporated castanets in the dance. To the extent that castanets began to appear in Gitano flamenco dance, it seems to have been the result of some flamencos realizing that maybe one could do better by giving the public what it thought it wanted.

--We are left with a personal choice as to whether we prefer the use of castanets in the previously-mentioned non-Gitano dances, some of which are regarded as flamenco (fandangos de Huelva, for instance), or not. Two of my favorite CD performances (of fandangos de Huelva and of verdiales) are with castanets, but an otherwise fine example of a danced siguiriyas is for me spoiled by the presence of castanets.

Carlos

A friend of mine belongs to a flamenco dance group near me and I've seen her dance to sold out crowds of 200 people a couple of times. I have to admit that I really enjoy the incredible racket she seems to be able to make with castanets whilst dancing what seem to be relatively uncomplicated routines. Maybe it is tourist flamenco, but I think it's great fun.

Angelita Romero (wife of Celedonio Romero and Pepe Romero's mother) is described as a world-class castanet player. The only evidence I've got as to her ability is on a Los Romeros recording of Torroba's Sonatina trianera so I don't know if the claim is genuine or not. How do you become a world class castanet player?

Alan