If there is one thing that the Mudcat Cafe is not short if, it is threads about what is and how to save traditional music. Today on the Facebook page (where we try to keep it to announcements of upcoming music events and links to online performances and photos) a question was asked about preserving the melodies of folk songs. The discussion can move over here.

For your reference, the discussions that happen here at Mudcat are linked (they'll appear at the top of the page soon) and make it easier to find all of the nuances and examples in one place.

It started:

FAO: Folkie Musos.
Should trad folk songs be preserved in aspic or reconstructed for the modern day? I don't mean lyrically, but the melody.
Think BellowHead as opposed to ?? finger in the ear "neee-ah'

There a chin-scratching emoji in the bottom line.

This is the full dump of the conversation before remarks were closed, line markers and all:

Sandra Robinson
Why not? my band like to keep folk in repertoire to demonstrate its not dead let it evolve! No eeeh- aaar finger I thr ear. It seems young folk artists have gone down the almost classical Playford ensemble style with a classical sound. Especially the English acoustic artists.
2h

Fred Keller
I think of it as a continuum. On one end are people "curating the museum," so to speak: Maintaining as pure a traditional form as possible for future generations. But if folk music is a living art form it must be made malleable, it must change, evolve, twist and turn. And that's the other end of the spectrum: The freedom to use the folk process ??
2h

Liz Conway
Fred Keller agree absolutely. I suspect trying to preserve it "in aspic"would be like trying to stop the tide coming in.
2h

Fred Keller
It's a question I've wondered about for some time. I write a lot of original music using traditional genre forms.
I personally believe part of the problem is that in this era of commercialized art and instant communication/transmission, folk music in the older sense (i.e., music by folk, for folk in a largely regional context) doesn't truly exist without intention. That means we all have a responsibility and an obligation to do both: Keep the old ways from becoming lost and to show how these old forms can be relevant and current.
2h

Sally LA Stamford
Author
For instance, I'm listening to this
https://jimmoray.bandcamp.com/album/skulk
Skulk, by Jim Moray
JIMMORAY.BANDCAMP.COM
Skulk, by Jim Moray
Skulk, by Jim Moray
2h

Mary Smith
Sally LA Stamford Personally I'm a fan of Jim Moray.
48m

Matt DeBlass
I think once music stops evolving and changing it stops being "traditional" and becomes "historical."
I also feel that finding a new take on an old song while still keeping a sense of its roots is one of the more challenging, but most interesting, things about playing traditional (or "traditionally inspired" if you're that kind of purist) music.
2h
Share
Kathy Wallis
I think there's room for both
2h

Sally LA Stamford
Author
We 'jazz songs up' but always start off studying the original roots of them first, to see which direction to go in.
2h

Susan Csikos
Since when are folk songs exempt from the folk process?
2h
Share
Sally LA Stamford
Author
?? Susan, I have just had a conversation with someone on WhatsApp about that...there are them wot don't want things to evolve
May be an image of text that says 'Hmmmm. 13:46 You know my views on shanties 13:47 Times they are a changing.... Thank god 13:49 Hmmmmm. You know my views on that too!'
2h
Edited

Steve Mundy
The tradition is a living breathing thing and constanly evolving as peoples lives and history changes. There's room for both in my opinion. Keeping things fresh helps keep it all going.
2h

Roger Watson
Sorry to disagree, but I think that it is the tunes which have stood the test of time and the 18th/19th century language and thematic context which have resulted in the songs being seen as museum pieces, despite the timeless themes of them. So my suggestion would be to make new versions of the lyrics in view of linguistic and contextual changes.
1h

Sally LA Stamford
Author
Roger
Oooh I dint think I agree. I love Olde English
1h

Roger Watson
Sally LA Stamford But we live in a society which speaks contemporary English. So, note my reference to museum. I'm not criticising those who prefer the earlier language of songs. I just feel that they ought to be aware that what they are doing is akin to what a museum does.
1h

Bekki Shining Bearheart
Roger Watson You could use this argument to get rid of songs sung in dialect- because they might be surviving in small pockets of the world, and only a few people speak them. Dictionaries are now getting rid of perfectly good English words to make room for "contemporary" English. A shame. This might even be considered ageist, given that those old words, and dialects, are often the language of the elderly. For my part, I feel that keeping the "antique' alive roots us in our past and connects us to the ancestors. It also often keeps alive values that might otherwise be left in the dust, such as caring for the earth, valuing agrarian lifestyles and similar. The majority of farmers don't farm with horses any more, should we stop singing songs about plough boys just because most people haven't a clue what they do? Or (heaven forbid) change them to tractor boys?? (By the way, just to highlight this, I tried to use the word "forfend" instead of "forbid" and it was given a little red line to indicate it might be misspelled (as was plough), because it is not recognized as a word! from an online dictionary: forfend /fôr-fend'/ transitive verb To keep or ward off; avert. )
42m

Bernard Cromarty
I don't believe in change for the sake of change. Evolution is good, but should be the result and not the aim.
1h

Jason Sarkey
These melodies were never "preserved in aspic" in any form until they were recorded by collectors or printed as broadsides etc. There were always variations and evolutions, and it's just as valid for today's folk artists to take part in that variation and evolution. Like what Nic Jones did for Annan Water, for example, that's a bona fide folk artist taking part in the evolution of folk music.
1h

Ros Walker
Surely there is room for all sorts of variation. Musicians and lyricists are creative people and whether you are re-creating something as it was in the past (a historical piece) or evolving it for today in some way, it’s all valid. Audiences may have preferences about what they want to listen to /see, and the artist will know how much they need to generate an audience.
1h

Mary Smith
The traditional melodies and words are, in effect, preserved by means of field recordings, broadsides, etc. So it's possible for anyone who is interested to consult the original version (although really there is no one "original" version - but let's say the version recorded from a traditional singer or musician. I think it's fine if modern singers/players want to experiment with variations of lyrics or melody. Some I like, some I don't - but that is a matter of personal taste.
1h

Jim Voorhees
I go back to what Billy Mccomiskey said at the end of a week of teaching Irish accordeon music. The week featured some fantastic music by leading lights of Irish music, some of whom jazzed it up, literally and figuratively. He said that people will play what they will, but in the end, it all comes back to Joe Cooley, a favorite of his and anyone who cherishes music from the Irish box. Which is to say that the best of the tradition will live on.
46m

Jim McLean
Do what you like. First question you should have is "why do I like this song?" Second question is "why do I think other people should hear this song?" Third question is "Can I perform it in such a way that they will appreciate the song like I did when heard it?".
If the answer to all three questions is Yes, then no problem.
41m

Jon Stone
Part of the folk tradition is for versions of songs to evolve with contemporary influences and styles (think House of the Rising Sun). We can always find older versions.
39m

Donald R. Meixner
The band I have been a member of for 34 years has gone to good lengths to keep songs in the public ear. This has had varying degrees of success. Removing the word "Gypsy" and looking for a substitute that keeps a song together without sounding racist is one of the more problematic examples. The same can be said of 150 years old pop tunes like Rings on Her Fingers but I think we have had better luck with that tune.