Dilworth, Brompton's Book Of The Violin, calls Petherick's views bizarre. I agree with that.
Dilworth fails to address why, then, if it was so bizarre, The Strad, in 1906, devoted a full length, well illustrated, book to Petherick's views on Del Jesu and Giasalberti / Ballarini.
Petherick had just authored a book on Stradivari in 1900, two years before the Hills came out with their book on Stradivari. Pure coincidence?
Petherick was by then a respected and acknowledged string instruments expert, admitted to British courts as an expert witness on violin attributions, according to his cover page.
Who were his clients, as an expert witness? The Hills? Others of the violin trade? Who?
Was there no scholarly peer review back then to arrest this apparent scalawag? Who were his expert peers, anyway?
The Hills did not touch the subject of Guarneri, in book form, until 1931, 25 years after Petherick's book. Why?
If one cannot believe him on Del Gesu, what about his views on The Repairing And Restoration Of Violins , or on Stradivari? Good questions, as these books are also in print.
No comments:
Post a Comment