Interesting thread. Jim catalogues the main criticisms that people put forward about the Society's ownership of the House.

As a trustee of C#H I'd make the following comments.

Jim described the House as being "totally inadequate for the purpose of serving folk music and dance. It is unwelcoming and unfriendly - is there anybody who would claim they would be happy to introduce it as the headquarters of taditional music in the UK?"

I don't disagree - I find the House very austere after some of the other arts centres I've visited but it has to be said that those other places had considerable support via funding and/or membership. Is there a folk centre out there run by 4000 committed members, with a couple of halls, a cafe/bar (quality immaterial) and an important heritage library, that is better than C#H? I'm genuinely interested to hear of one. There's a lot that could be done with C#H if the support were there.


Jim also said " The House a horrendously expensive white elephant" which implies that the House costs money rather than generating it. Not so. The House generates income for the Society which it uses to fund the core activities of education, publishing and maintaining the Vaughan Williams Memorial Library.

He goes on to say " The majority of the people who use the building have nothing whatever to do with traditional music." It would be nice of the people who ran traditional folk music events were really rich and paid their bills on time and came back week after week with rebookings but it ain't so. The people who have the money aren't the folkies and the management have to pay OUR bills so what are they to do? Turn away paying customers and sit with empty premises waiting for folkies to arrive with fists full of green stuff? At least we have the satisfaction of better funded orchestras and dance groups paying money which cascades down to subsidise some folk activity rather than going to some other destination like a corporate organisation's share holders. Whatever we get from those non-folk people we reinvest in folk music.

Another comment - "It cannot even house a book/record shop" .   If Collets can't survive in Oxford St, London if Decoy Records can't survive in Deansgate, Manchester, do you really think a folk record/book shop can survive in Regents Park Rd? I don't think so. That's why I started the online folkshop for the Society. It's only a modest affair but it's growing slowly and I have a new version in preparation. It IS 2000+ and many of the specialist shops are giving way to the internet. I don't think we're far out of line here.

Further comment: "It seems to me that it is kept open solely for the benefit of a rapidly diminishing handful of London based dancers and a handful of privileged researchers who can afford the time and the fare to travel to London to use the library "
I agree that the House should be for the benefit of all and not just for the "North London Barn Dance Club" but every resource is of most physical benefit to those who live nearest. If the HQ were in Birmingham or Bristol then the same geographical restriction would apply (except the parking might (might) be easier. It wouldn't be so in Manchester that's for sure! There's sod-all parking!). But the House is used as a National Centre as well. The Cyril Tawney Memorial Day will be happening in the Spring, there have been CD launches, conferences, etc. OK, it's not as often as any of the trustees would like but it's not really the parochial picture that some people try and paint.

And in answer to the comment "the Society could concentrate on making its activities truely national rather than a Capital based body.", that's exactly what the Society is doing with its publishing and education outreach projects. Just because it;s not waved under people's noses doesn't mean it's not happening. There are local AND national projects.

Personally, I would not shed a single tear if the House were to be sold, and I hold no affection for it as a venue or a listed historic building ( I know quite a few people who are older than the House and a lot better looking). However, selling the House is not presently an option for a variety of reasons, including the wishes of the membership (at least those who vote at AGMs or serve on the Council). While it provides an income and allows us to slowly develop the library and services then it has a useful function. It may be that hundreds of people join the Society, propose to sell the House, turn up to an AGM and vote for it to be so, and that will be that. Feel free. That's the way these things happen.

My own vision would be to turn the large hall into a really big library but that's not going to happen given the general lack of support from the people who should care but don't. In the meantime I'm working to get as much of the library converted to an on line resource as I can with the budget I've got as I know that libraries are now so much more than bricks and mortar.

I don't know why Captain Birdseye started this thread - he seems to have a peculiar fascination with a Society he doesn't support - but at least it's given me some good indications of what people think and given me a chance to put a point of view forward.

Jim. This is not a personal attack. I shared many of the above opinions until I volunteerd for council and started to learn of the reality of the Society and its members. As an organisation it's highly flawed, but nevertheless has done and continues to do some amazing work, albeit quietly and in the face of some open hostility.

Johnny Adams
EFDSS Vice Chair - Director of Web Services
Expressing a personal; view rather than that of the efdss nc.