Is the mandolin a lute?

[Simen Kjaersdalen]

To get away from the rain, I went into a cafe yesterday. I was this really place called The Cafe Bipolar. Two men sat there drinking coffee and discussing... The mandolin! It was a noisy place, and I could not her every word, but I understood that the topic was: "Is or is not the mandolin a lute?" The person A - the mandolin player - meant that it was, and even claimed that the mandolin was the only true survivor of the lute-family. The person B - the lute player - got really and claimed that the mandolin - due to the way it was played - could not be called a lute.
So - who of the two were right? Any suggestions?

[MandolinoNapoletano]

In my opinion, of course. A lute in my eyes is -- hmm rather let's see what wikipedia offers -- "Lute can refer generally to any plucked string instrument with a neck (either fretted or unfretted) and a deep round back, or more specifically to an instrument from the family of European lutes." Ahh yes, the mandolin is a lute.

[John Flynn]

Then is "mandolute" a redundancy?

[allenhopkins]

Then is "mandolute" a redundancy?

No; it's either (a) a North African 10-string instrument derived from the oud, or (b) a model of mandolin made by Weymann in Philadelphia in the late 19th/early 20th century, featuring an arched, pressed top, oval body, round soundhole, and -- in the more expensive models -- "recessed" sides like a violin's.

Here's a Wikipedia article with a little info on both types. Since the word "mandolute" has acquired specific references, using it to describe all bowl-back mandolins would seem to be an over-generalization.

[John Flynn]

That was a joke.

[Rob MacKillop]

I've played lutes for a lot longer than I've played the mandolin. It seems to me there are two basic models (in the most simplistic sense) of mandolins, one of which very much belongs to the lute family.

The six- or five-course, gut-strung mandolin(e) played with fingers or plectrum, although not termed a treble or soprano lute, nevertheless was constructed in a similar way. Lutes, of course, came in all sorts of tunings, so we can't say that is a defining characteristic. To me, this kind of mandolin is a lute.

The four-course, wire-strung mandolin with the bent soundboard seems to have another lineage, and seems to me to have more in common with the guitarra battente


which was wire-strung in double courses and with a bent soundboard, and was mostly played with a plectrum, although fingers seemed also to have been used.

So, my answer would be both yes and no...

[mrmando]

In the broad "lute family" sense of the term, sure, it's a lute, as is any fretted instrument descended from the oud. But if by "lute" we specifically mean something that belongs in the narrower category of Renaissance lutes, then I would think the modern mandolin doesn't qualify.

[hank]

Mandoloot is what they want in the classifieds.

[vkioulaphides]

To get away from the rain, I went into a cafe yesterday. I was this really place called The Cafe Bipolar. Two men sat there drinking coffee and discussing... The mandolin!

Cafe Bipolar, eh? Tell me, then: did this discussion between the two men take place during moments of uncontrollable euphoria, or of bottomless depression? Come to think of it, Simen, although there are no establishments called exactly so in Manhattan, I can assure you, my friend, that MANY social gatherings (e.g. in SoHo, the Village, Tribeca, et al) would qualify perfectly for such a moniker.

Seriously, now: I cannot, and will not enter into any argument(s) of what the mandolin "truly" is, or is not. The only thing I "read" into the lute-vs-not-lute debate is a matter of attitude, the manner in which the performer approaches the instrument— and I am thus divorcing the question from organology, wedding it instead to performance-practice.

Some mandolin players, especially for example the adherents of the so called Modern German School, approach the mandolin in a VERY lute-like manner; others, of olden, Italianate heritage —myself included— less so. Further down the line, choice of repertoire differs accordingly. On a deeper, pedagogical level, we of the Less-Like-a-Lute side of the aisle have a more violin-like approach to the instrument, especially as regards left-hand technique, the geometrical/ergonomic approach to the fingerboard, fingering itself, position-work, etc. My daily bread-and-butter, when I practice the mandolin, are my daughter's violin books, scales, etudes, etc.

So I will leave aside the vexed question of what the mandolin IS. My take on the matter is this, in short: you find what works for you, you build your own approach to the instrument, and... enjoy music as it ought to be enjoyed.

Oh, and... if I ever find myself in your neck of the woods, Simen, I hereby invite you cordially to coffee (or whatever other beverage-of-choice) at the Café Bipolar. I'll make sure I bring along my own Prozac, just in case...

Cheers,

Victor

[Rob MacKillop]

Now, as someone new to the mandolin and this cafe (mandolin cafe), I confess I am fascinated that there are lute-like and violin-like approaches to the instrument. Can you be more clear about this, please?

Rob

[vkioulaphides]

I will at least try, Rob, although of course the discussion of this topic cannot be exhausted before exhausting its participants themselves.

In a crude, simplistic outline, then:

"New German School" mandolinists place their (left-hand) thumb behind the neck of the instrument, much like lutenists and guitarists do; consequently, they approach the fingerboard with the other, er... fingering fingers —for lack of a better term — also like a lutenist or guitarist would: the fingers descend upon the fingerboard rather upright. (A picture, of course, would be worth at least a thousand words. Being a lutenist yourself, I'm sure you will have no trouble visualizing what I am trying to describe.)

"Italian School" mandolinists, au contraire, put their left-hand thumb around the neck of the instrument, much like a violinist/violist would; ditto on the naturally consequent, "slanted" approach of the fingers to the fingerboard. Incidentally, the charmingly reminiscent term for this technique is martelletto, i.e. "little hammer". The image is of the little "hammers" of a (long obsolete) typewriter: the fingers are to be thought of as swift, efficient little hammers, striking lightning-fast and lifting away from the fingerboard, as if it were the cylinder of a mechanical typewriter.

The topic goes on, and on, and on: more-like-a-lute players use soft, gummy, rubber picks; less-like-a-lute players use picks of more rigid materials; the former commonly use flat-wound strings, whereas the latter use round-wound strings (often bronze, also carbon-steel); the former use big, bulbous, lute-like German instruments, while the latter use slenderer Italian, or Italianate instruments. The topic truly runs on interminably...

It would be prejudicial, not to say outright foolish, to say that either approach is "better", or "superior", or more-this and less-that. Top-tier players who espouse either approach to the instrument play up a storm; clumsy, hack amateurs like myself have only their own deficiencies to blame, not the "School" they ostensibly belong to.

Truth be told, Rob, words are a dreadfully poor substitute for immediate, musical experiences. So, go out and get yourself a few recordings, CDs perhaps, or even listen to some of the finer players on their numerous postings on YouTube— ever the all-inclusive, low-cost alternative. See what you like, listen to what strikes you as the finest and the best, draw your own conclusions, be your very own mandolinist.

Cheers,

Victor

[eadg145]

Nice discussion, but I'm distracted. Rob, I'm really digging that image of the guitarra battente. Holy smokes! Frank Lloyd Wright's lute-o-lin!

cheers,

David

[billkilpatrick]

"a" lute - yes ... "the" lute - no.

[Rob MacKillop]

Thanks, Victor. That really helped a lot. I know we are dealing in sweeping generalisations, but they still have some validity.

David - the chitarra battente has been largely overlooked, but I am sure there is something connecting it with the mandolin.

Rob

[Bob A]

On the whole, and despite Victor's erudite and insightful comments (none of which I would dispute, at all) I have to say that the original bipolars had it wrong from the start. The mandolin was not evolved from the lute, nor the other way around. Both are evolved more or less along the same branch of the wooden musical instrument tree, from some primeval ancestor. While it's likely that said Ur-chordophone had a skin belly and probably some sort of gourd resonator, availability of tools to make a belly from wood brought things along nicely.

Of course, that's a structural look at the affair. Victor's approach, from the angle of function, is more interesting, but possibly derivative. Does the tool come before the use, or is it formed by the intended function? I dunno.

I'd certainly support the descent from the oud, for both instruments. Yet another reason to celebrate our Semitic brethren for their contributions to what passes for civilisation.

[vkioulaphides]

Victor's approach, from the angle of function, is more interesting, but possibly derivative.

Quite so, Bob, quite so. In diplomatic terms, it's called "drop the hot potato, discuss its serving instead".

You are absolutely right. I just don't joust with organologists-- prickly characters, at times.

Cheers, and Happy Holidays to all celebrants!

Victor

[Simen Kjaersdalen]

Oh, and... if I ever find myself in your neck of the woods, Simen, I hereby invite you cordially to coffee (or whatever other beverage-of-choice) at the Café Bipolar. I'll make sure I bring along my own Prozac, just in case...
Victor

Thank you for that, Victor!

You know, one of the things that made the discussion so hot, was that the mandolinplayer claimed that the classical mandolin came close to the original lute, as it came with the crusaders, "a four-stringed instrument that was plucked using a quill for a plectrum." He also claimed that the lute-player was "plucking a corpse", since the lute died in the baroque, leaving only the mandolin. So, one can understand that the lute-player got a bit upset...
Here is another part of the mandolinist-monologue that really interested me:

"You know, brother lute-player, that the four courses of the mandolin is magic! The arabs knew that four was the number of the corners of the world, and four were the numbers of the elements - earth, water, wind and fire. The G - that is rock, solid ground. Above that the water gently flows - that is the D. The A - that is wind, calming or stormy, the bridge between the material and the spirutual. And the E, finally, is fire, always stretching up, through the heavens. When I play the mandolin, I can feel the elements play, like a symphony, I can hear the angels sing in four voices." The lute-player then answered: "And I can hear Sandviken (that is the the local asylum) is calling you."
The Mandolin-player went over the top (as they always do at this café), but his approach to the instrument was doubtlessly polyphonic and lute-like. I guess he belonged to the german school...