A New Taxonomy of the Bowing Cycle; and a Redefinition of the Bow Hold
A working theory: a new taxonomy of bow technique, and the subsequent redefinition of the bow hold.
Stripped to its core, all bowing can be reduced to four essential phases: it LANDS, it RIDES, it LIFTS, and it is CARRIED.
Categorizing bowing by traditional bow strokes (like détaché and spiccato) creates the misconception that they are separate physical techniques, each with its own mechanics. It obscures the reality that they are all governed by a single physical system and are thus highly transferable.
The over-reliance on traditional stroke definitions causes two things:
It leaves blind spots in our understanding of nameless techniques for bow control, like the release after a Mozart slur, which is largely undefined beyond a vague "lift." To begin with, the technique behind a lift requires far more investigation than it generally receives. Moreover, the Mozart "lift" is structurally more accurately defined as a Lift, a Carry, and a Landing. The problem is rarely the lift itself. Rather, if the technique of the lift is faulty, it creates problems for the subsequent carry and landing.
It induces a stilted, mechanical musicality. Organic phrasing is a continuous flow between these four phases, not a rigid sequence of independent, non-transferable strokes.
Consequently, this new taxonomy of bow technique organically redefines the bow hold as well. Whether the bow is landing, riding, lifting, or being carried dictates exactly what the hand must do. This renders the age-old semantic debate — whether it is a "hold," a "grip," — obsolete. Defining it as one fixed thing to cover everything we do when we play is, in fact, illogical. Depending on where we are in the cycle, it is sometimes a grip, sometimes a cradle, sometimes a catch.
By shifting our focus to the first principles of bow technique, bowing stops being a collection of isolated tricks and becomes a unified system that creates a more complete and natural musician.