The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #99963 Message #2001092
Posted By: Jerry Rasmussen
19-Mar-07 - 10:44 AM
Thread Name: It isn't 'Folk', but what is it we do?
Subject: RE: It isn't 'Folk', but what is it we do?
In reading George's recent post, it struck a note with me (staying musical here.) These last couple of weeks, I've been compiling some of my favorite tracks of African music (mostly South African, because that happens to be what I enjoy most.) In putting together the compilations, the thought never occurred to me to try and label each song as folk, traditional, new folk, or contemporary. Some of the songs are certainly "folk, in the traditional sense. Some are based on traditional songs, done in a more contemporary way. Ladysmith Black Mombazo might seem to be "folk" or traditional, and yet their style has evolved considerably from older styles. There is an exciting vitality to the music that shows very little regard for labeling.
When I am performing, I don't say before each song, "This is a folk song," and then, "This is not a folk song, but it has a traditional feel to it," "This is a song I wrote, so it's not a folk song.." I will talk a little about where the songs come from, because I want to give credit where credit is due. But, questioning the authenticity of each song as to whether it is or is not a folk song would have the same effect on me as a centipede would have if they started concetrating on the movement of each leg. I'd fall flat on my face. If I want to toss in Blue Monday, from Fats Domino, right after Three Nights Drunk, or Blues In The Bottle, that would seem perfectly natural. Give each song it's propers.
I never believed in "Separate But Equal." It never works.
The vitality in African music comes from the freedom of rejoicing in the music for what it is, and making it personal to the singer. (That's very traditional, by the way...)