Re: [RedHotJazz] Oh no, not Flo again
- I dare say this is partly to my address so I may as well address it.
I corresponded with Ernest Virgo over many years, though there was a lot
more correspondence on his side than mine owing to his determination to have
his theories and unsupported assumptions accepted as facts and incorporated
in Blues & Gospel Records. He was sincere and serious but his methodology
was fatally flawed. I dare say he was right more often than I was prepared
to allow, but precisely the problem with people whose methods are so
completely unscholarly is that no one who doesn't accept arguments "ad
hominem" can ever tell.
Many of the connections he pointed out to me which others had not heard they
had not heard because they were not there.
Yes, Michael, we are talking about the determination of so-called facts by
committee, generally unsupported by anything than might usefully be called
research. Don't get me wrong, these methods have a major part to play in
suggesting lines of inquiry, and Chris Hillman for one has used these
methods as the basis for serious work which has uncovered a great many
genuine connections, but if even a fraction of the effort that has been put
into these exercises had been put into real research we would know a lot
more about who really did what.
And yes this is a hobby horse of mine!
Yes, Michae;l, it means that a group of people
on 14/09/2009 18:30, fearfeasa at fearfeasa@... wrote:
> The late Ernest S. Virgo would have been the first to deny that heon 15/09/2009 07:23, Michael Rader at Rader.Michael@... wrote:
> considered Nelson "chameleonic." There are quite a few posters on this
> board who are unjustly dismissive of Ernest's abilities; I can't
> understand why, when it is apparent that the majority of them never knew
> the man. I had a long and fruitful collaboration with Ernest and was
> always amazed by his thoroughness and by his ability to make connections
> which others of us had not heard.
> It is high time to give him the credit he deserves!
>Howard Rye, 20 Coppermill Lane, London, England, E17 7HB
> When you say the identity "had been determined", by what means? Recording
> files, interviews, newspaper items? Or was it agreement among a select band of
> listeners? If the latter, then anyone has a right to challenge it (as I
> suspect Chris Hillman is going to do in his new book). We have the example of
> "Flo" on this list, where majority opinion favours Arville Harris and I still
> have serious doubts. The panel method is time-honoured but still not
> completely reliable. Were the findings on Nelson ever published? It would help
> to say where instead of requiring people to go digging through their files.
Tel/FAX: +44 20 8521 1098