I've become accustomed to using these two terms (plains-style and woodlands-style) to refer, respectively, to flue in block and flue in flute, and also to general sound characteristics (sharp and clear vs. rich and warm, which I've since discovered is simply not always true). I see these terms used by flute players and makers all over the internet and elsewhere. Ed Hrebec, though, informs me that he's bothered by these terms because they aren't accurate. Both styles, he says, were created by plains indians.

I'd like to hear others weigh in on this subject. I want to be accurate, but I'm getting tired of saying things like "so-called" plains or woodlands style. Should we just drop the terms altogether and start referring to flue in block, flue in flute or some other terminology? Are the terms merely descriptive, or are they meant to be historical designations as well? How important is this issue to you?

Before Hawk Little John's Woodsong flutes there was no "Woodland" flute or tuning...only American Indian Flutes. Hawk's flutes have a distinct sound and look which became known to fans and imitators alike as woodland.

Native peoples were innovative, and used whatever materials were at hand and would get the job done. I would tend to agree that both methods of making the flute were probably used in some parts of the country, but not necessarily all parts of the country.

El-Flute-a-dor summed it up. The term "woodlands" has entered the vernacular of the flute world, but it was coined by Hawk.

It does not refer to the design of the flue or anything other than the sound of the flute. There are some folks who get upset about the use of this distinction (Plains vs. Woodlands) because it is a modern, made-up term, but I think it is actually a very useful term, and just like the jargon that has grown around wine tasting or anything similar, there is value in having standard terms of description that everyone understands.

Language is always liquid and changing, so I think we should embrace the additions to it that make it easier to communicate.

Paul;
Yes the flutes we are playing are plains style courting flutes. They have had a lot of of influences both past and present. Hawk's flutes were soft and mellow. He used a large bore and a blunted fipple to create that mellow smooth sound. I had the same question so while interviewing Coyote Oldman on one occassion I asked him about it. He has studied a large number of aritfacts from various museums and found the Native folks used both methods of putting the flue in the bird or in the body of the flute and they used brass or leather plates and some times birch bark. They used obviously what they had at hand. odell Borg used leather spacers at first and if you find one of his flutes made this way it is very collectible! You can see and hear alot of old flutes on Doc Olivers site Wildhorse Mountain flutes. Hawk indeed created a style he called "Woodland". They are still in fact plains courting flutes. He had a sound he wanted to produce much like Scott Loomis a contemprorary who was very highly regarded in the flute world and still is at the other end of the spectrum. Pat Haran on some of his bass flutes used a combination of these techniques. The plains style flutes had a louder more piercing sound. They had a sharper cutting edge and tended to be smaller in bore. These two camps had much more distintiveness than I think is present today 5-6 years ago and the differences have blended over time are very sublte today. We did an experiment one time at a flute circle. I went into the other room and played an Ed Hrebec flute (plains style) and a JP Gomez, then a Ellis and Petersen (woodlands style). No one could guess the correct flute with any consistency. I would tell them I will play one plains flute and then one woodland (of course I did not tell them the order! I ain't that bright but I ain't that stupid either! ) These folks knew these flutes too as they had several of each maker in their collection. So I think it may be useful as Geoffrey says to use the terms but when I do I use the word "style". The flute can be made with various spacers as I mentioned or you can use a splitter outside the flute such as flute maker Ed Kort does and others. The BIG problem with a moveable spacer, some makers fix them so they don't move, is that in performance if the flute gets bumped you can loose the sweet spot and have to align both the spacer and the bird which can get a little touchy in a pinch. So to me the use of the terms has some meaning and frankly you can take a woodland style flute and make it sound pretty plainsy and vice versa. For me I use the terms much less often for the reasons I have alluded to than I used to. Hey just another two cents worth!

Great info Noisy Bear! An excellent summation.

And yes, those movable spacer plates are tricky. I made Plains style flutes for the first three years of my career, using both brass and wood lamintate spacers. At one point, Mac Lopez (www.whirlwindstudios.com) was selling my flutes and he called me up and said, "Do me a favor and glue those spacers down, will you?". As he described it, there was no real advantage to them being movable, and there was the great disadvantage of them slipping when you don't want them to. As he put it, "There are enough things to keep track of already, especially for a beginner. A moveable plate just makes them freak out."

I took to gluing them to the flute with epoxy and it worked great (both for brass and wood). I'm pretty sure Noisy Bear has one of my brass plate Plains-style flutes.

I would like to explain why I feel the way I do about people calling flutes Plain style and Woodland style..... I do it out of respect for Dr. Richard Payne. I talked with Doc several times before his passing and he made it quite clear to me that he hated the term Woodland voice for the simple reason that it was so historically incorrect. He told me that although the Woodland Indians did have flutes they were nothing like the Plains Indian Flutes. Most were made from Reed and none of them had blocks. He felt strongly about preserving the Plains Flute and the history surrounding them. So, yes, the metal spacer flutes - Plains style flutes, the flue in the block flutes - Plains style flutes and the flue in the flute flutes - Plains style flutes. All of these methods were used by the Plains Indians. He had asked me to help him preserve this information by letting people know the truth, so I do. You would be surprised at how many people think that the flue in the flute is a Woodland Indian design. I personally agree with Doc and would like to see the Plains Flute (the instruments we have all fallen in love with) and the history surrounding them, be preserved. Wouldn't you?

Having a couple of Gomez and a couple of Petersen flutes in my collection (admittedly not in the same key), I have to say the results of this experiment astonish me. Playing them, the difference seems huge, which makes me wonder how much the perception of sound is influenced by the feel of the flute. If the results are really valid (and I don't doubt you, Noisy Bear--just trying to wrap my mind around this) then it would seem any descriptions of sound--i.e,. rich, crisp, mellow, piercing, etc.--are meaningless, at least from a listener's perspective. Perhaps we can only detect volume and projection (loudness and resonance), and "temperature" (cold, warm), as Colyn suggests elsewhere. Yet even when I listen to audio clips online I hear big differences. I wonder how much of my perception is influenced by knowledge of what kind of flute is being played. As you suggest, the results might be different in a "blind" test.

I have flutes on order from both Ed and Geoffrey, so I can start to expand my awareness of sound characteristics. When I get them, I'll have two overlapping keys--an E from Colyn and Geoffrey (both woodlands) and an F# from Gomez and Geoffrey (plains vs. woodlands). I ordered these keys specifically so I could start making some comparisons of my own, even before I expand into other keys--or so I can expand into other keys knowing what I like best. I should note, though, that I enjoy all these flutes despite their styles. It just may take a long while before I can get a flute in every key from each maker.

I'm reminded that there's a track on Elysium Calling's Shapeshifter CD (#9 - "Cielo Obscuro") played on a low D pennywhistle. I never would have even guessed it wasn't an NAF flute. Only the liner notes clued me in.

Ed, my apologies, but I find myself struggling with descriptions. Would you (or Doc) prefer that I say above both flue in flute and flue in block vs. flue in flute? That seems awkward and confusing compared to the shorthand plains and woodlands style. Let's face it, most everyone as far as I can tell is taking liberties with historical accuracy--everything from lathes and endcaps to exotic woods and selling on the internet, not to mention letting women play. Just some thoughts...please don't take it out on the flute I have on order from you.

While preservation may be a laudable goal, it is rarely achieved. Just as today, most of the flutes that are being made, have no more than a reasonable resemblance to flutes that were crafted 200 hundred or more years ago. I know of only one maker who actually faithfully reproduces the exact design found on the Anasazi, and he doesn't make flutes to sell.

In the end, the expectations and demands of the buyer, will dictate how flutes are made, and while the makers may strive to maintain a degree of authenticity, that is all they will be able to do.

Remember, Michael Allen made a truly authentic Lakota replica, with grandfather tuning, but he had so many complaints with how it played, he discontinued it. That is my point.

I like all my flutes from all my flute makers......or I wouldn't be keeping them....but I freely admit, I am not musician enough to play a flute made by hand, with tuning that requires all manner of cross-fingering to play it. So, I really don't think I would buy flutes made in the "Authentic" way.

Nor do I think Native peoples would expect us to, in today's world, as Native peoples were very innovative, and learned how to use modern things as quickly as they could, to their own benefit. In the words of some of the makers........if they had had power tools, they woulda used them! I believe that statement, fully.

As for the woodlands vs. plains "sound"......that is an environmental sound factor, discriminated by the maker, based on what pleases the ear, and creates a feeling of belonging, in my view, as I have lived in a lot pf places, and understand how one environment vs. another affects different people in different ways. Whether Hawk coined the phrase or not, his intent was to show that he was after a different sound quality, and he strived to achieve it. That said, he made some great flutes, and some less great flutes, like any other prolific maker, no matter how highly sought after, they may now be. I have played both versions.

That is just it though.... Hawk didn't design the Flue in the Flute. The Plains Indians did. See what I mean about how people can be misdirected.

Paul, as I stated, I do this in honor of Doc. It is up to you whether you want to preserve the Native Flute historically or not. I personally feel obligated and I say flue in the block or flue in the flute types. I hold no grudge if people call them plains or woodlands. I just won't. :-)

Paul,

I think you have hit on an important point in that it isn't just the sound of the flute. I think it is the total experience of hearing, feeling, and expressing that makes the sound what it is. Even our own mood can affect that. It's the total experience of playing and connecting that I think is important.

Though I must add that the flute maker does have a tremendous impact on that - more so than the wood, in my humble opinion. (And, I might even add that I think the spirit of the flute maker plays a big part in that, too. I think there is a spiritual connection going on but can't quite get my hands on that aspect - yet.)

Since I greatly respect those using the term woodlands style, I would like to figure out a way to fit this term in modern flute terminology that is not contrary to the original terms used to describe this wonderful, magical instrument. As Ed has stated Dr. Paine was clear that this term was not historical, but as Rick has stated the flute is constantly evolving and should not be held back from future progress. Micheal Allen told me one time that we would all be playing diatonically tuned Toubat style Native American Flutes if it was not allowed to evolve. I do own 3 Toubat style flutes and they are a hoot to play, but I do not think I would be near as crazy about the flute if that was all I had around the house. Besides, my wife and children would throw me out of the house if I continued to make the flute warble while they were trying to sleep

I wonder if the phrase "Native American Plains Flute" applies to all Native American Flutes with a block and a two chamber configuration. That being said, "woodland style" is a subset of these flutes with the defining characteristic being a warmer sound due to some similar construction techniques. I would ask anyone feeling this is an accurate starting point to elaborate or expand on what makes the woodlands flute a unique subset. In the name of science, I will need to get more Woodlands Style flutes so I can better study them and define their unique characteristics. What I will do in the name of science


As an example of this subset classification, I use the term "Southern Plains or Kiowa Style Flute" for some unique flutes with a different style sound mechanism. My friend Russ Wolf makes a flute with a fipple shield rather than a spacer plate or wooden fipple. We usually call the flute a "Kiowa style" flute since in independent research all the Kiowa flutes in the museums he or I have found are made using this style of sound producing mechanism. Other tribes did use it but the Kiowa seemed to use this method exclusively. It has a brass, lead or other mailable metal fipple shield thus making the flute sound very hollow in timber and very tinnish.

Might this be a good direction to go in order to reconcile the two terms? Just curious what the group thinks. Off to the Renaissance festival with my lovely Queen ,Two Princesses and the little prince

Mark

Ed, I do see your point. Thanks for the clarification. I'm all for accuracy in the historical record, and also for preserving history. I'm not, however, in favor of speaking Old English or washing my clothes by beating them on a rock by the creek just because those traditions preceded the ones of my day.

Having said that, I would love to find accurate representations of traditional flutes that also sound as good as yours do--whether concert tuned or grandfather tuned. In fact, it seems to me that concert tuning can be compared to modern English. Things change. I teach Old English epics in my lit course because I believe in the importance of understanding the foundations of culture, but I have to teach them in modern translation not only because we can no longer read the old language but also because the old language is no longer adequate to express new ideas.

Oh, boy...I can picture you now carving evil symbols inside my flute.

Peace.

I believe there is a big difference between preserving the past and honoring it. I don't have to continue the beliefs of my very conservative daddy to honor him. He was a great person. I don't agree with all of his beliefs but I respect him for having his beliefs and staying true to them. And I can have my different beliefs and still honor him.

I don't think we need to honor tradition for the sake of tradition and I don't think that is what anyone is suggesting. Buyers do have a lot of impact on the market. And our knowledge and adaptation to modern life affects how we do things. But I also think that sometimes something is lost in modernization. Seems like there's a purity or something - don't know what.

We aren't going back to washing our clothes by beating them with rocks by a river (at least, I'm not!!) That has been improved upon. Flute making has evolved and improved, too (at least by our standards). But we also realize that the great flutes we have today are here because the Native Americans made them and we have their expertise to expand on.

Paul, I swear we have to be kin! You posted this as I was writing it!!

Mark,

Thank you for your dedication to the field of science. Your unselfishness is unparalleled. You are a wonderful example for us all to follow!!

I think I'll do just that! Thank you, o great leader!

Tootie, I agree. I'm particularly interested in the idea that our mood changes the sound. This is particularly true for some reason of my JP Gomez F#. Some days I don't connect with it so much, but most days it strikes me as the most sublime sound on earth. In the first case, I would describe the sound as almost thin or reedy. In the second case, I would describe it as rich or pure.

On the other hand, I have never picked up my Colyn Petersen E without tapping into that sense of the sublime. I always connect with it, and for that reason it has become my favorite flute so far.

Something else I've noticed is that occasionally a particular note, which I haven't yet isolated (and not always on the same flute), will cause a ringing in my left ear as if they are resonating in tune, or maybe just a bit out of sync since it can be a little distracting or annoying if I sustain the note for long. This suggests to me not just a psychological factor in characterizing sound but also the possibility of a physiological factor.

I know Nakai says just play the damn flute, and believe me I do. Still, I'm newly fascinated by the subject of sound.

[quote name='pvanheuklom' date='Apr 13 2008, 11:44 AM' post='2540']
Tootie, I agree. I'm particularly interested in the idea that our mood changes the sound. This is particularly true for some reason of my JP Gomez F#. Some days I don't connect with it so much, but most days it strikes me as the most sublime sound on earth. In the first case, I would describe the sound as almost thin or reedy. In the second case, I would describe it as rich or pure.

It's like hearing my students at school. Depending on my mood, their voices can sound like an irritating noise or a beautiful sound of joy (most days it's that!) It happens with people as well as flutes.

On the other hand, I have never picked up my Colyn Petersen E without tapping into that sense of the sublime. I always connect with it, and for that reason it has become my favorite flute so far.

My E from Geoffrey is like that. It's sound is always beautiful to me (despite my playing) and it is by far my favorite.

Mark, now you have me thinking about yet another research project--in addition to characterizing sound. I think it would be interesting and worthwhile--maybe someone has already done this to a large extent--to identify various flute constructions beyond the categories of plains or woodlands styles using only descriptive language rather than abstract names. (I'm thinking here of fipples and spacer plates rather than southern or Kiowa, plains or woodlands) This may be one way of addressing Ed's objections, while at the same time broadening our (my) awareness of more than two styles. I would imagine that construction--as has been suggested elsewhere on the forum--is inherently linked to sound characteristics.

It must be the academic in me...I like to classify and analyze things. Can you tell? Now I just need some uninterrupted time to get started...

Ed,

I totally appreciate your wanting to give proper respects to Doc Payne, but if you'll forgive me for saying so you are only going half way. It doesn't seem consistent to insist that a modern term is invalid and yet to use the pentatonic minor scale on your flutes That is a contemporary modification (thanks to Michael Allen). And, as pointed out in this thread already (using various metaphors) a maker who believes in preserving a historical distinction is going to use pine sap as glue, with leather bindings to hold the halves together, is going to hand carve the flute, etc., etc.

I honor you for your gesture to Doc Payne, but I can't reconcile it with power tools, Gorilla glue, and standardized tuning.

As mentioned above, the NAF was not created in a vaccum, and it is not very old (historically). The Native Americans probably got the idea from a European flagolet or something anyway, and just adapted it. Europeans and their orchestral instruments were in America a couple of hundred years before the Plains flute came along. So in terms of preserving history...well, it seems a bit muddled.

And while I'm on a rant...

The notion of authenticity and "tradition" are theoretical in any case. Every culture on Earth, throughout it's history, has been influenced by other cultures. They move around, conquer, blend, destroy each other, adopt each others art (Roman architecure borrowed from the Greeks, for example) and ultimately become an ever-evolving soup.

The idea of tradition is informed by our experience of time. If something stays the same for 200 years, people call it a tradition. But a historian looking back over 2,000 years might see that tradition as one small phase of a continuously fluctuating evolution. There are no traditions by that measurement...only phases of growth. How many cultures on this planet have been swallowed up by time and other cultures? Europe came within a hair of being swallowed up by the army of Ghengis Khan---if the Khan had not died while his army was at the gates of Vienna, our whole world would not exist. He would likely have taken over the known world, possibly even getting around to crossing the sea and utterly wiping out the cultures that were in existance here 700 years ago, flutes and all.

You see my point. Change is the law of the universe. The peoples who occupied what we call America (I won't call them Natives in this context...they came from somewhere to get here) saw some cool instruments that these white people were carrying around. They copied them, adding a new twist. White ethnomusicologists saw them and said, "Cool!" and started taking notes. 100 years later, through the efforts of various people (including Doc Payne) they are "rediscovered" and taken into the waiting arms of the modern culture that is currently occupying this land. They add a new twist, and voila'! Something new is born.

Woodlands is a new term. Anyone who gets involved with the flute will quickly come to know that it is a modern, made-up term that doesn't mean anything--its just another descriptor. It's useful, it's timely and it's here to stay (for the moment), so we might as well get behind it. It's going to change eventually anyway .

Mark, perhaps the "woodsland" concept, was simply more of a reference to the region of the Eastern Woodslands and the peoples from that area, who were in fact, referred to as "woodsland tribes", long before the issue of the NAF ever came to the attention of modern times.

Since Hawk was of that region, and those tribes, he may have simply borrowed a "concept" to apply to his sound.

Those of you who do historical research may discount the differences in the sound........but since I have the same Cherokee ancestry, and have lived within an hour of where Hawk lived, I can relate to where he was coming from, with that "sound".

I am sorry too Geoffrey but what you just said has absolutely nothing to do with what I was saying. I never said anything about how flutes were made etc. I was talking about a phrase that was being used incorrectly, in my book. All I said was Doc asked me to keep people straight on this issue so out of respect and honor for him I told him I would and this is why I let people know the real deal.

I guess if you got enough people together (the majority) and had them all calling cats dogs that eventually cats would be called dogs. This doesn't make cats dogs though, does it? Woodland is not a modern term. It is a word that is being used incorrectly because it associates the flutes that we make with the Woodland Indians, which just isn't true. This is the difference, and I don't think it is the right thing to do. In my book, you and I both make Plains style Native American Flutes.

It is because of Doc that we have these instruments today and I know how mad he would get when people used the term Woodland voice on a plains flute. Because of this high regaurd I will honor his wish. As you probably would also if he had asked you to. It is the correct and respectful thing to do.
Oh, Enough said....
The End!

Not to disregard all the different views here, but I think the important thing is to remember to be very thankful that we have these very special instruments - whatever term you want to use for them.

I am thankful for those who discovered these flutes and for those who continue to make them in the way that they each feel is appropriate. We have flutes made from a variety of woods and other materials and finished in many different ways. As we have discussed in another thread, each person looks for the flute or flutes that he/she connects with. That is more important to me than the type of wood or the finish.

Just as there are a variety of flowers for us to enjoy, there are a variety of flutes and makers. Pick the ones you like and that minister to you, and enjoy!

So, after you stop and smell the roses, pick up your flute and play!

I don't care what you call the "Critters" all I know is I'm gonna try and play as many as I can for as long as the Creator gives me Breath to do so! Many Blessings...Robert

Ed,

It may be possible that we are misunderstanding each other a bit here. I totally get the fact that Doc had a preference about the nomenclature around the flute. I get the fact that using the term "woodlands" might inaccurately associate the flute of the Plains indians with other tribes who didn't have a flute tradition (or at least not that sort of flute). I also appreciate the fact that you are trying to remove confusion by educating people about this fact.

Now, I think your analogy about calling cats dogs is not totally accurate. In our language "cat" designates a specific animal. The word "woodlands" is a non-specific term. It can mean (literally) land that is covered with woods. It can also refer to something that comes from such a land (i.e. woodland animals, woodland tribes, woodland fairies, etc.)

So, bearing that in mind, let me revisit the term "woodlands" as applied to flutes. Just because Doc hated the term doesn't mean anything in this context--no one is arguing that there ever was a "woodlands" flute. The crux of my argument about the term is really an argument about language and the ever-changing nature of language, traditions, etc..

Hawk Littlejohn came from the woodlands. He made flutes. His flutes had a characteristic sound that was different from the other flutes being made at the time. He put a label on it: "woodlands". He could just of easily called them "Sweet Round-Voiced Gentle-sounding Flutes Based On The Plains Flute But Made Differently By An Indian Who Lives In The Woods", but I think you'll agree that it is a mouthful. He chose a different label that was easy to say, to remember, and was a nice distinction. He wasn't trying to confuse people or to suggest that there was some other source for the block flute--it was just marketing. Totally valid.

Like many marketing terms, it caught on, and found it's way into the modern flute parlance. You and I have different stances: You honor Doc Payne by respecting his preferences around this. I think that in the world of the contemporary NAF, having terminology to describe the flute is useful. As more people get to use this term and to learn what it means, it is one more way for folks to try to describe something that is tricky to describe--I think that this has value.

My illustration about flute-making was intended to point up the inconsistency behind such a stance as Docs. I don't know if Doc made any "contemporary" NAFs, but if he ever tuned one to a pentatonic minor scale (for example), then he already took a step away from preserving "history". For all I know, he never did actually do such a thing. But my remarks about your own flute-making (and that of any modern maker) is that it seems a bit inconsistent to champion terminology that is aimed at preserving "history" while simultaneously making flutes with modern tools, materials and tunings that bear only a partial resemblance to the historic instruments that inspired them.

With all due respect to Docs feelings, it seems a bit goofy. What you and I make are a modern interpretation (one might say evolution) of an instrument that has been changing all along. Here is a question: Since the block flute is probably a knock-off of a European orchestral instrument, could we say that the Indian flute-makers were altering a tradition? If they were sitting around calling it a "courting flute" (in their own language, of course), could some ethnomusicologist come along and say "Hey, the proper term for that flute is a European Woodwind, because that is what you are interpreting with this creation! Sure, you put a block on it, and you have changed the tuning, but it is clearly a fipple flute and belongs in the flageolet family of instruments!" You see what I'm driving at?

Nothing is original. No place or people can claim to have created anything in a vacuum, isolated from outside influences. So putting so much emphasis on the so-called origin of the NAF, and discounting a made-up, modern descriptor ("woodlands") just seems arbitrary. Maybe it was Docs pet peeve, but that doesn't mean that there isn't room for the language of the flute to evolve along with the flute itself.

Hmmmm...maybe we should ship this thread to the agree to disagree forum?

Friends:
Just a few random thoughts on this topic:(now that I am rereading it I guess more than a few)
We have a reasonably good outline on how the NAF has progressed over the last 20 years here on these pages.
The old players of the 20th century, Turkey Legs, Belo Cozad, etc loved the warble. NAF's until the very modern times were built to warble. Warble flutes are limited per an interview I am now doing with Doc Oliver to a few keys, G-and F# mainly. So those low base flutes we love , might not exsist if they had to warble (of course someone would have solved the problem?) Mark Holland used the warble in a recording not long ago and I reallly enjoyed it. I thought it might catch on but it just hasn't. Contemporary players don't like it!! So you budding flute makers want a receipe for a failed flute business? Just make warble flutes. Jeff Calavan even made a line of warble flutes in the pentatonic tuning, I have one. He thought they would catch on with the minor tunings. How many of you have one!
I met Doc Payne and spent some time talking, wish I could have gone to his home as Mark has done. I can tell you he felt the flute should have been diatonicly tuned. He said as much in Taos but publically gave Michael the credit for the innovation of bringing the pentatonic tuning to the NAF. And as Mark said he did it to sell flutes. Guess what they sold and continue to sell by the thousands, who would have thought 20 years ago a person could make a living making and selling NAF's? Well many folks owe their living to Micahel's innovation. Good thing he was not too wedded to the traditions? ( I love traditon by the way but another topic for another forum)
Hawk was a beloved person, wish I could have met him. He had a great influence on the resurrgence of the NAF. His style flute, soft quiet meditative, gave way to the needs of modern artists. These flutes were less expressive due to the limited dynamics and sometime some tunning issues (this problem is still pandemic in the flute world). The recordings of this instrument started as ambient, meditative sounds, that painted a soundscape and was primarily a solo instrument project. It wasn't long before Nakai and Michael started using other instuments (as the flute was tuned to a western tuning) Then folks like Mary and Mark came along with songs that had distincive melodies. Now a studio will hardly produce a CD of just flute music. The industry norm is the flute in concert with other instruments. As Geoffrey says things keep changing. Geoffrey and Colyn had to change their sound from the soft meditative instruments to ones that played with some volumne as use of this instrument with other instuments requires them to play louder even with amplification. I have actually watched and been involved as their line has changed over time to meet the demands of the current market place.
I have to say the terms woodlands and plains seems to be here to stay. I use it myself with the qualifier "style" Actually the two camps have moved together towards each other over time and some makers Like Barry Higgins say on his site he tries to marry the best of both styles into is line. Sometimes folks like Doc just cannot stem the tide of change. I appreciate Ed's efforst to keep a promise and I understand where he is coming from as I share many of his sentiments. Hawk ahd such an impact on this isnturment I think it is fitting to use this term in honor of him! On a final note as I was doing an article with Michael for the VOW I referred to the tuning as pentatonic. The flute plays 5 notes plus the octvae.......oops that makes six notes. So as Dr. Joyce Grendhall had to point out that is actually hepatonic not pentatonic. There is this distinction in the world of academia. In all defference to Paul and Tootie my attitues toward academia are not all positive. Ever read and old science text book that gives information as fact. Guess what ten years later what was taught as fact we now know was an error. And so it goes. More to say but my hands are tired!! You know hepatonic just does not have the same "ring" to it! If you took the time to read this ...thank you for your indulgence!!

...ya know..., the funny thing is: this is exactly what I call the flutes I make. ...'cuz hell, I never even seen a flute in real life 'till I started making them.

...and if I may add my 2 cents in this topic, as a certified archaeologist, we are taught, that the TERM "woodland" is not only a "place" in America, it is also a TIME FRAME ( "modern woodland" : from 1800 AD to the present day!... thank you Brian M. Fagan for giving us yet another time frame in america to complicate things...LOL)...SO technically, any indigenous "american" (or we will use the term "native") who makes a flute of any kind or style, be it in New Mexico, or in a factory in New York , any day after January, 1 1800...it is automatically labeled "technically" in archaeological terms as a "WOODLAND" flute by date of manufacture, not style, or location

disclaimer:White folks who makes flutes, do not fall under this category, as we are simply Native American style flute makers that make flutes that have been modified to fit modern tunings ....... ...so that gets me off the hook

...matter of fact Geoffrey, if you dont mind, I would realy like to add this to my website if and when I ever sell any of my flutes...
"Sweet Round-Voiced Gentle-sounding Flutes Based On The Plains Flute But Made Differently By An Indian Who Lives In The Woods"

Great thread!

Noisy Bear: a fantastic, birds-eye view post.

Michael, that is just whacky "This is the dawning of the Age of The Woodlands..." (cue music from Hair)

Geoffrey
I don't know why you are puting all the weird spins on this and that is why I put in the cat and dog thing, but you know good and well where I am coming from. Woodland is most definately a specific term! What! Come on dude. You know that it is meant to say that this design was from the Woodland Indians which you know isn't true and you also know that this was Doc's point also. So you can put all these odd little things out there to twist this all you want but I think I have made my point and I think that you know it as well. Like I said, if people want to use this term, then they can but I am going to let people know the truth for the reasons I have already listed. I am finished now with this thread. :-)

Ed,

I can't agree with you on any of that. Where did you get the idea that by using the term "woodland" Hawk meant to suggest that there was a Woodland tribe? I have never heard it used in that context. I believe that his intention was to describe the voicing, not to suddenly say "Guess what! There are Woodland indians who invented a whole different flavor of flute!" Nobody would be silly enough to believe that--of course they are all "Plains" flutes! He was trying to make a distinction.

I got your point, but I respectfully suggest that you are missing mine.

...just out of curiosity, who added the "loon head" to a loon head flute?

Some bird brain, most likely

Doc is the one that told me, that is why he didn't like the term Woodland because people were thinking it was from the Woodland Indians and not the Plains Indians. It was Doc. This is because the Woodland Indians did make flutes which were made from Reeds and they did not have blocks on them at all. I mentioned this in my first post. A lot of people think this Geoffrey that is another reason why I think it is important to straighten this out. Also, you keep saying that Hawk came up with this but you also know there was another individual that had his hand in the whole Woodland thing but I am not going to get into that one here. Like I said.... I have told you what Doc told me and my reasons for standing behind him on this and since he was the foremost authority on the Native Flute I will continue to follow his wisdom on this matter.

It was probably a Plains Indian. Ha! No seriously you may want to go to http://www.wildhorsemtnflutes.com/ if you have never been there before and check out some of the old bird head flutes. Most of the older flutes I have seen look more like ducks to me so not sure on the loon thing.

thank you for the link brother...some great stuff there....WOW...I might have to try and reproduce some of these "crazy" looking flutes for my personal collection...

Well, I certainly support the notion of alleviating any confusion that people might have about the tribes that made this sort of flute. Standing behind Doc and educating people is a worthy endeavor.

But here is a question: If the term Woodlands has "caught on" (which it clearly has--it is in widespread use at this point), and even though it is a totally contemporary descriptor and marketing tool created by Hawk (assisted by his friend, and my mentor Mac Lopez), is that a bad thing? I mean, setting aside Doc's concern?

You see, I talk to people all the time, and I've been asked about the term probably a hundred times by customers. They ask, "What is a Woodlands flute?" and I say, "It is just a term that describes this type of voice on a block flute", and they say, "Ah! I see--that's great" and now we have a common language. They are now officially educated (they don't think that the Woodlands tribes made the block flute) and they have a word that will serve them in their quest for the flute of their dreams.

The poplularity of the NAF has done more than create a bunch of players--it has created a bunch of "enthusiasts", who don't just love the flute, they love the history, the culture, and the spiritual tradition from which this flute evolved. I don't think there is any real danger of people forgetting that the Plains tribes are responsible for this particular interpretation of the fipple flute.

The point of all my talk about language, culture, tradition and change was to say this very simple thing: Why fight it? The term "woodlands" has caught on. It has arrived in the vernacular. Do we try to stamp it out by telling everyone it is "incorrect terminology"? Is there real value in that approach?

Anecdote: My mother was an English major, and worked at one point as a technical writer. My brothers and I were raised to use language correctly, right on our mothers knee, so to speak. Certain things were not tolerated: using the word "irregardless" for example. "Irregardless" is totally incorrect English--it is a double negative and quite improper. The correct term is "regardless". Well guess what? The use of the word "irregardless" was so widespread that it entered the vernacular and a few years ago was officially put in the English dictionary as a legitimate word.

That is actually how language evolves. Todays slang is tomorrows correct grammer.

Todays "woodlands" is tomorrows officially accepted sub-category of the NAF.

I guess it could also be argued that the term "Woodlands Indians" does not come from the Native peoples themselves and is a classifisation invented by outside "authority".

Dr Payne, Hawk Littlejohn, Carlos Nakai, Michael Graham Allen, ect, ect all have and continue to contribute to the greatly popularity of the instrument that we have grown to love. Truth be told that instrument is the "Native American STYLE Flute"..............

Like Carlos said "Just Play the Damn Flute"

Wise words, Greybeard.

Maybe or maybe not.... You see in 1804 around the time of the Lewis and Clark expedition, there was a clashing of cultures continent-wide which brought about an anormous amount of Indian words into the English language. These words were known as loan words. It is hard to say where the words Woodland Indians actually derived from when it is used to describe the Native Cultures of 1000BC - 1000AD. But this is probably a whole other topic. :-)

Gee, I have missed much of this very active discussion. On the other hand, I have been amused in catching up, by the humor in the posts. Dan, I have to agree with you a bit, that Ivory Tower thinking, often gives me pause to shake my head.

So, in that vein, may I remind everyone, that for all Doc Payne did, and in spite of his being a free sharing and inspiring person, that he was, after all, an academian, and a scientist, and his interest tended to go in that direction, and for that matter, most flute makers probably are also oriented in that direction. I think, though, before we accept too readily, the things he taught about the flute, as gospel, we need to look at other points of view, not only in historical perspective, but also in flute history. There is usually more than one point of view, that carries validity, and only discussion, and research can resolve the differences that might be found, among various historians.

Of one thing I am certain.....whether plains style, or woodsland style, whether cane, wood, bamboo, bone, or clay........the main thing to consider about the NAF, is that it is an instrument of expression, perhaps more so than of music, per se, and that as an instrument of expression, it appeals to a wide cross section of people, from various backgrounds, and cultures, and is to be valued for that special characteristic.

Within myself, I have a relationship with the woodsland concept, and what that means, although I will be the first to admit, it is difficult to verbalize. Suffice it to say, that to those who understand it, it has special meaning, and to those who do not see a distinction, it should not matter.

All too often, we think we know something, only to be proven wrong. Only a couple of years ago, a 5000 yr. old Connestee settlement was found in NC, proving that the ancestors of the Cherokee were there, much longer than previously thought. Not too very long ago, a flute from a mastodon tusk, was found in Germany. Our knowledge is ever expanding, and all too often, proves to us that what we thought we knew, was incorrect.

We all need to have tolerance for other points of view, and be flexible in what we think, as we could find ourselves on the wrong side of truth, at some point in time.

Let us all seek that which we relate to, and not present obstacles those doing the same......but in a different way.

At least I got my taxes in the mail, while all this was going on.

Mark......were there any flutes at Scarbourough Faire this year??

A valuable observation, Rick. I think you have touched upon the germ of my own argument. Sometimes the perspective of the scientist/ historian/ academic is at odds with the somewhat more liquid nature of reality. I came to the flute more as an artist and experimenter--I have limited experience with the science part of it, only a smattering of the history, and I'm not much of an academic in general. So my relationship to them has always been that I thought of them as a facinating instrument with lots of potential for being manipulated (we've all seen the wild fusion flutes that are coming from the NAF--the alternate tunings, double-barrels, etc..) I've never seen them as a Sacred Cow in any respect.

My own view of the nature and purpose of humanity is such that I don't even see them as coming from the (so-called) indigenous residents of this continent. With all due respect for the incredibly rich culture of the tribal peoples, they were just a link in the chain. They were not the creators, they were the adaptors of a stream of creation that already existed. So when I examine what this flute is in contemporary terms, all the edges become blurry--which is a good thing, I believe. It is no longer what it started out as. It is no longer a "Plains flute" --it left that far behind. It is not a "woodlands flute". It isn't really even a "Native American flute" anymore. It is useful to call it that, so people know we aren't talking about a recorder, bansuri, silver flute, etc. when we use the word "flute". It has evolved into something else--something wonderful that has lovely roots that we should all honor. But that is about the limit of my own reverence for history. If we call it a block flute, that might prove useful in separating it from the potential quicksand of classification. However, I think "Native American Style flute" is a good compromise that most of us have made.

In any case, I find this a compelling topic and I want to thank everyone who has chimed in and added to it so far--I hope it will become one of those educational threads that give substance to a forum like this.

Mark......were there any flutes at Scarbourough Faire this year??

Hi Rick,

I only saw the same flute maker who has been there every year. I think he is associated with Eric the flute maker and had cane flutes. His booth was very busy and I had seen them many times before so just mossied(sp?) on by.

It lunch time so I think I will go sit outside on the plains and play my woodlands flute while enjoying the Comanche winds

Hi Folk's,

I have gleaned this thread with great interest.

I must commend those of you who are participating for your well thought and articulated argument also on the very respectful way in which the debate has happened...
Though I have several thought's about the subject I will reserve them til I read the thread more thoroughly.

A question : There have been several instances through this debate where it "seems" that Native Peoples perspective on this issue is not considered . Are the origin stories of the flute or the people themselves discounted as myth?
I listened to an "OLD" man talking about the flute. He suggested that along with other ceremonial items the flute was at first a womans tool then the men had the opportunity to use this tool now it belongs to all people. Each gender had the objects for about 1000 years each...

We must be cautious to not allow our views which may be academic, scientific, Eurocentric to completely obscure our vision of other possibilities...

" Just a link in the chain"...is it possible that rather than an idea begining in one area of the world and spreading that it could be happening simultaneously in various place's?

The Yidaki (didgeridoo) is said to be one of the oldest instruments (40-60,000 yo) originating with the Yolngu of the Northern territories of Australia. In the Amazon there is a group of indigenous people who use a length of bamboo in a very similar way...

The "Old" man mentioned above was a flute maker who had been building flutes for a very long part of his life. He described his flutes as Eastern Woodlands flutes with the distinction being who he and his people are, the materials(indigenous to his home) used and in fact the voice of the flute.
For many generations this mans family (mothers side) built flutes specificlally for prayer/ceremony.

I heard Kevin Locke say that what distinguishes the type of flutes he plays (plains) from eastern woodlands flutes (besides the maker/materials) is that the breathy nature of the voice is ment to mimic the strong winds on the plains, his home...

I will continue to read this post and maybe have something to contribute. Again Thank you for the respectful way this discussion has happened

Hawk, perhaps we tend to overlook too easily, the variances created by tribalism, throughout the ages. To lump all tribes into one school of thought about flutes and flute playing, is simply incorrect, as there are no indications that such a situation actually existed.

Indeed, my own research into the tribes of the 1700-1800's, would indicate that there was plenty of discord among Native peoples, and that was not necessarily caused by Europeans.

In my life, I also had the opportunity to know peoples from many places, and to live in Europe, and I have found tribalism and conflict, alive and well, in all parts of the globe.

Just as the plains peoples tended to be nomads, in search of food, woodsland peoples tended to live in one place, and in fact the Cherokee lived in "longhouses", and by the time of the removal, had already adapted to cabins, become plantation owners with slaves, and much more. They were very "adaptable" and recognized the value of "bending with the wind".

The peoples of the northwest, were quite different from those in the northeast, etc.

Being indigenous, does not mean being alike, at all.

Hawk,

I do believe that there are (so-called) human inventions that have taken place simultaneously around the globe by people who are not apparently connected. I also believe that throughout ancient human history, there has been WAY more travel, exploration and trade than we can substantiate with historical evidence. Just recently, the Chinese (who for various political/historic reasons have downplayed this chapter in their history) revealed the existance of a HUGE fleet of trade/exploration ships that had gone to just about every corner of the globe, back before Marco Polo. There is evidence of the influence of Chinese language and artifacts among the Indian tribes of California for example. They had enormous ships, on a scale beyond anything else on Earth at that time, and they traded and spread their influence across the globe. Some of these ships were wrecked in remote parts of the globe and the travelers were forced to join whatever culture was at hand. Then at some point (apparently) the new Emperor decreed exploration to be unlawful/taboo/whatever, and systematically dismantled the entire fleet and buried just about every reference to its existance.

The evidence supporting this is fairly new. But it illustrates just how mingled the worlds cultures really are. Vikings making it to America, Polynesians making it to South America and probably populating North America. Ancient Greeks and Persians running all over the place. How many sea-faring cultures actually traveled to different continents? Who knows? Some water-traveling ancient might have taken a digeridoo to South America! Some people speculate that the South Sea islanders are the remains of the culture of Atlantis (sunk in some tectonic heave) that were scattered all over the Southern Hemisphere and whose technology and influence were incredibly advanced and far-reaching.

I don't have any pet theory on this, and most of this history I hear from people I know who are students of history. But collectively it gives me a sort of birds-eye view of the evolution of humanity.

Regarding the various Creation/Origin myths of different cultures--they are ubiquitous, and many are quite similar. I mean no disrespect to peoples on any part of the planet when I say that myths are...well...myths. They are symbol stories that are meant to teach and provide a conceptual framework for people to access Spirit. I'm not saying this as a scholar, but as someone who believes in a Spiritual cause to the universe. Even as a believer, I see Myth as cultural constructions that inform the understanding, behaviors and traditions of people everywhere, but that are not "true stories". I don't really think that a woodpecker drilled holes in a branch and taught the people how to make flutes. I'm not putting down anyone who does believe this, by the way. I think the spiritual pictures that myth paints in our imagination is incredibly important, however. These images are what give spiritual inspiration! I heard a quote (I think it was from Goethe, but I won't swear to it) that stated that the "Soul thinks in images", and that is why myths and fairy tales exist--as a way to enliven and "educate" our Spirit. In that sense, nothing is more true. So I'm not discounting any of these origin stories at that level--what I consider the most important level. But I do not take them literally when discussing the evolution of a physical instrument throughout human history.

So in discussing the people who lived on this continent before the Europeans came. These people came from somewhere long, long before, and who knows what traditions, practices, technology they brought with them? Who knows what was brought to them? Clearly, these people had flutes for a very long time, but the block flute seems to be something newer, and it bears a striking similarity to European instruments. That doesn't mean that this was their inspiration--I think it likely, but I can't possibly know that. I don't think it likely that the block flute was a spontaneous creation unique to the people who lived here first.

By stating this, I don't mean to take anything away from the tribal peoples--I can't say that emphatically enough. Proper respect is something due to every human being, regardless of their beliefs. It may be an annoying thing to the ears of some folks to hear statements like those that I've made above, but that is the nature of differing beliefs--often, they sound annoying to our ears if they are not our own But herein lies the beauty of a "forum" on the internet: People from all over the world can get together, share beliefs, discuss perspectives and occasionally agree to disagree, all the time expanding their tolerance and understanding of other people. As someone once said, "There are as many different beliefs as there are people in the world".

Hey Michael, There is an "Ojibwe" Story of a Chiefs Daughter who Loved Loons and told the People that they were Sacred Birds and one day while out on the lake she seen a Loon that looked hurt so she was trying to reach out for it and fell into the Lake and drowned. The Chief was devastated by the loss of his Daughter and fell into a state of despair. Then a few days later a Loon came up by the shore by the camp and was calling out to the Chief but couldn't wake him so the Loon asked an Elk that was there to Bugle and wake the Chief which it did and then the Chief heard the cries of the Loon and went to the Lake and looked into the eyes of the Loon and He thought surely his Daughter's Spirit had been turned into this Loon. He wanted so much to be able to communicate with the Loon so he asked the Medicine Man how to do this and He told him to Pray for an answer from the Creator to show him how. and it came to him to make a Flute so that he could play the Mournful song of the Loon to communicate with it. Now thats not the "Story" word for word just a quick interpretation of it. Maybe thats when they started putting "Loon Heads" on the Flutes??? Many Blessings...Robert

Thank You Robert,
That was a nice little story........
Ed

PS:

A friend of mine has specialized in "Old Style" bird head flutes. They are super to look and and to play. I have one in the works from Tiger Striped Myrtle that I provided. Check them out here:

http://www.villageflutes.com/

Hawk

"A question : There have been several instances through this debate where it "seems" that Native Peoples perspective on this issue is not considered . Are the origin stories of the flute or the people themselves discounted as myth?
I listened to an "OLD" man talking about the flute. He suggested that along with other ceremonial items the flute was at first a womans tool then the men had the opportunity to use this tool now it belongs to all people. Each gender had the objects for about 1000 years each..."
I am curious about this: We have early European acounts of natives, Cherokee for instance playing the flute both men and women when they arrived (Europeans that is). The earliest plains flute is from the early 1800's. So if they were playing flutes it must have been another variety? Perhaps a rim blown flute or knotched flute? I wonder if some of the older tribal traditions surrounding the flute have been co- mingled with the more modern plains flute? What I am guessing is that there is an older flute tradition among Woodlands tribes that predates the NAF. As their culture was eliminated, changed, and evolved the flute tradition disappeared due to outside influences but has reemerged with the plains flute as a substitute for the orginal flutes they had?? The plains flute was definetly a man's flute not for use by women, talk to Mary Youngblood about this issue!
We know that all (most for sure) cultures had some form of flute, they are recored in the Bible and some of man's earliest other writings. So I wonder if the tradition you cite may be explanined in this fashion?
BTW not all oral tradtion is trustworthy but neither is it falacious just because it is oral. We still don't know for sure that Atlantis exsistsed do we?? I know the Bible spoke of a places and peoples historians thought did not exsist, such as the Persian King Darius just to find the record was perfectly accurate.
I was in Acoma in NM a few years ago. Our guide was a local Native man who graduated from Stanford with a degree in Native studies? I asked him about their flute tradiditon and he told me they did not have one. Later the next day I saw a flute fom Acoma in the musuem in Alburque. So he did not even know his own traditions, yes I know many Americans don't know our history either. I throw this out as I wonder if some of the traditions Native folks speak of are really true to the original tradition?? That is in no way anything negative toward my Native brothers. Hey may wife and I can't even get a story we both experienced on vacation together in sync. Makes you wonder if we were both there! Any way just curious?? You got me thinking