Chiff and Fipple Forums

The Irish flute is a thoroughly modern invention, probably (as far as we can tell at the moment) dating from around the mid 1970’s. That’s 40-odd years ago. And it has been a raging success. A range of makers all round the world probably now provide most of the instruments in use by players today.

It’s my view that we need to start recording the history of this phenomenon before we lose too many of its actors. The recent unexpected death of well-appreciated Australian maker Michael Grinter serves to illustrate my point.

Ideally, we would have a keeping place for such a history, but that can come later. More important is making the start, and in that spirit, I plan to kick off the process and provide an interim keeping place, my website. It’s backed up by our National Library’s Pandora Archive, so even if something happens to me and it, nothing will be lost. With the luxury of time, we can look to a longer-term home.

Enough with the background, now we need to cut to the important question – what information do we gather, how to present it, and so on. I’ll put forward some suggestions, but I’d invite you to challenge or support them as you see fit.

I envisage an easy read. I don’t think we want a formal, database-type approach. I imagine we’d set entries out in alphabetic order by name, to make any particular maker easy to find, but then have a “chronological” listing of when each maker started to see if we can discern who might have influenced whom along the way. That would be a fair prompt question too. We might discern other cross-listings as we progress.

We could cook up a list of prompts to guide contributors, but we probably won’t get it right at first attempt. I think being able to update an entry at any time should be a given. “Damn, I wish I’d covered that!” shouldn’t apply.

We should encourage contributors to avoid claims and clichés - “arguably the finest (and clearly the most handsome) maker the world has ever seen” - and stick to the facts - “Terry sends most of his flutes to the US”. This is not a sales promotion, it’s a history.

But it’s a history of human beings, so I don’t think it should be too dry. If the maker had feelings, we want to know those feelings.

So that’s the broad plan. I’d be interested in feedback of any kind. Are there any questions you’d ask me over dinner? Other than "Who's paying?"

I thought perhaps next, I should attempt a first draft of my own listing. We can then lie around laughing and poking holes in it. Ah, the things we did on our holidays!

In the meantime, any other/better ideas?

What is an 'Irish' flute?

I have 2 keyless 6 hole flutes, & a 6 hole piccolo - they are not made in Ireland, & I don't play Irish Traditional Music on them.
So, I think, you need to define 'Irish'.

I am not sure flutemaking in Ireland should have a cut off point at the 1970s. Flutes were made here much earlier than that, I have seen a flute made by Coyne, who is perhaps better known as a maker of Uilleann pipes during the 19th century. There were others too, ofcourse.

Woah, an early setback to my plans for world domination!

I'll get back to you. (It's bedtime here in the Southern Hemisphere, and I've been burning the candle at both ends, and in the middle...)

Mr.Gumby wrote:I am not sure flutemaking in Ireland should have a cut off point at the 1970s. Flutes were made here much earlier than that, I have seen a flute made by Coyne, who is perhaps better known as a maker of Uilleann pipes during the 19th century. There were others too, ofcourse.

Coyne (the flutemaker) gets a mention as "Woodwind Maker, flourished Dublin first half 19th Century", although it's not quite clear whether it's Maurice ("bagpipe maker" at 149 Thomas St) or John Wm. Coyne ("Irish bagpipe maker" at 2 Essex Quay). But he probably wasn't making what we would call Irish Flutes. He was presumably making 19th century wooden flutes, similar to say Rudall & Rose. And so, yes, this goes to the question of definition that fatmac raised, just before my bedtime....

Should we dodge the question by calling our topic the History of Modern Irish Flutemaking? Or does anyone have a better suggestion?

As regards the title I think it's better to drop "Irish" from the title/description altogether, as it's misleading. Modern timber flutes are not made only in Ireland, nor do people play exclusively Irish traditional music on modern timber flutes. For example people play Swedish, Danish, French, Bretagne, Irish, English, Scottish, Welsh and classical music on modern timber flutes

Prehaps "The history of wooden flute making from 1970- " or "The history of modern timber flute making"

Irish flute? What is that? Beyond an example that geographically was made in Ireland?

It genuinely puzzles me when I hear the prefix 'Irish' and I say that as someone who listens to and admires some fabulous Irish players. My gut instinct is that term is a by-product mainly of the Irish-American diaspora and their association with a cultural concept that often has a peculiarly narrow and exclusive focus. It is pretty self-evident that there are many other influences on the flute and a wealth of history outside Ireland.

I think we might be able to agree on 'Celtic Flute', (as against 'Orchestral Flute').

"The History of the Celtic Flute & it's Makers."

If so, then makers of non wooden flutes could also be included.

Perhaps modern "simple system" flutes (keyed & keyless diatonic variations)? Might distinguish from tubes intended for other scales (like Chinese & Turkish music), or those with end cut embouchures, etc.

The problem here is that like it or not (and, with my historic bent, I detest it, refuse to use it and try to educate those who use it to me), "correct" or not, "Irish Flute" is an established and widely recognised term. Annoyingly it gets applied (and not just by the excusably ignorant) to antiques which certainly have nothing to do with Ireland or ITM (save that ITM use is their most likely function today, if any) as well as to modern-made instruments which are variously copies, modified copies, loosely-based-ons of C19th English flutes or sort-of lookalike total reinventions, not to mention the infamous Pakistani/Indian "flute-like objects".

I agree with Terry that all of the above, manufactured chiefly for use in traditional music (not exclusively "Celtic" - a term best avoided!) began to emerge in the 1970s. I don’t think any real period/historic makers in Ireland or of Irish origin are actually relevant.

Simple or traditional are the terms that work for me, especially when used together, though I'll grant 'simple/trad. flute' is clearer in print than speech. I've never accepted 'Irish flute' as a generic term for instruments not made in Ireland or playing Irish music, and can't see 'Celtic' as siginificantly better. To me the 'history of Irish flute making' (modern or not) conjures up a geographical image rather than one of classification.

Terry McGee wrote:The Irish flute is a thoroughly modern invention, probably (as far as we can tell at the moment) dating from around the mid 1970’s.

Well, since everyone else is picking apart the first post, I'll join in too.

How does that statement above jibe with modern (current) makers who are producing very close copies of the 19th Century designs, with the only changes being tweaked intonation for an A440 pitch? The only thing "thoroughly modern" about my Aebi Rudall-style flute seems to be the intonation adjustments. I'm no expert, but as far as I can tell, everything else seems very close to a vintage Rudall.

Thoroughly modern might apply to keyless models, and all the designs that are a mix-and-match of 19th Century designs, or new innovations (like some of your own flutes Terry, or Casey's ergonomic models). But there has to be room for the close copies too, in the description of whatever this thing is that we're all playing.

I'm guilty of calling it an "Irish flute" online and in conversation, but I try to follow up with qualifiers describing what that means -- "a wooden flute based on a 19th Century design, commonly used for Irish music these days." Something like that. I avoid using the term conical bore because a civilian won't understand that. Can't just call it a "wooden flute" because there are so many other types in the World Music categories. And I really try to avoid the term "Celtic" whenever possible, because it's so vague and subject to saccharin commercialization (i.e. visions of Celtic Women swinging their hair around while fiddling).

It's a quandary. A "simple system wooden flute based loosely or closely on 19th Century designs" might do it, but that seems clumsy. For my $.02, I'd probably stick with "Irish flute" as something with the most recognition factor (Google-ability), followed by a long disclaimer with further information.

Woah, at least I can be confident that I've got your attention. Morning all!

And yeah, I'm no more excited by the term "Irish flute" than you all, and for all the same reasons.

Fair point, Conical Bore - I probably should have used the expression "a thoroughly modern development".

I had toyed with using something along the lines of "wooden flute-making revival", but that would be vague and would ignore significant modern developments such as the keyless conical. It's more than a revival.

I'm attracted to Conical Bore's suggestion to use the expression, but start the introductory article with a definition, and take the opportunity to point out the term's inadequacies. But maybe to avoid the geographical ambiguities, we should make it something like:

The Irish flute : a history of its development.

or

The Irish flute and its makers around the world.

The earlier one might also invite us to incorporate people other than makers? Who might they be?

But perhaps we're putting the Carte before the Horst*? Write the novel first, and decide on the title later?

(*Horst was a maker in Altona, now part of modern Germany. Sorry, just couldn't help myself!)

How about:

“The History of The Flute That Shall Not Be Named!”

Terry McGee wrote:Woah, an early setback to my plans for world domination!

Thanks for including us in the world domination.

Terry McGee wrote: I'm attracted to Conical Bore's suggestion to use the expression, but start the introductory article with a definition, and take the opportunity to point out the term's inadequacies. But maybe to avoid the geographical ambiguities, we should make it something like:

The Irish flute : a history of its development.
or
The Irish flute and its makers around the world.

Yes, please.
I have to agree with jem. As much as people hate the term it, it is a widely established term. You would be writing for a specific audience and you need them to know what you are talking about from the title. I believe those who hate the term and those who are OK with it would both understand what the book would be about.

Having an article around the definition is a good way to go; though, if we are aiming for an easy read, I would honestly put it in the back as an appendix since putting it in the front might be off-putting to readers but it could be of interest to the technical reader or someone who read the whole book.

Terry McGee wrote: So that’s the broad plan. I’d be interested in feedback of any kind. Are there any questions you’d ask me over dinner? Other than "Who's paying?"

For Feedback:
I like the idea. In regards to the composition of the book, it almost sounds like it should be an anthology. I imagine the first article talking about "What is an Irish flute? Where did it come from?" and other articles about the different branches and directions that flute-making has gone. For example, I loved reading the Irish Flute Guide's interviews: (They can be found here http://www.irishfluteguide.info/interviews/ ) so I personally would love it if makers could contribute a short article or interview regarding their branch of the craft.

What I am trying to say is that since the history of the flute isn't a unified history, it would be worth getting the history from different people's point of view. Would it have to be flute-makers only? I'm not convinced that it would need to be.