traditional music is for entertaining

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 12 Nov 14 - 04:08 PM

Can't fault it. My own experience backs this up completely.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,MikeL2
Date: 12 Nov 14 - 09:53 AM

High Guest JP

I am with you on this. You talk a lot of sense.

Regards

MikeL2

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,John P
Date: 12 Nov 14 - 09:48 AM

"It's bleedin' obvious that traditional music is for entertaining. Arguments arise when people try to insist on their own narrow definition of what constitutes 'entertaining'."

I second the second and give a second thumbs up.

More broadly, arguments arise when people try to tell other people how they ought to play, listen to, enjoy, or introduce music.

It is bleedin' obvious that anyone who gets up in front of others and performs music is engaging in an act of entertainment. Some people are better at entertaining than others; for my tastes, the people who are on the extremes of both sides of this thread are the worst. I really don't want to hear more talking than music, and I really do want to have the songs introduced in at least a minimal fashion. "Here's a tune from Wales" is a thousand times better than no introduction at all.

And I want the entertainer to be sensitive to what sort of audience he or she is playing for and to speak appropriately. I wish that both the pedants and the silent types would spend a bit of time honing their entertainment chops while they are honing their musical chops. Some might be better in classrooms while others might find their natural audiences in comedy clubs. But in any event, they are inflicting themselves on others -- I would be thankful if they tried to acquire some skill and sensitivity before they do.

I've spent most of my life playing traditional music and there are pros and cons for different performing situations and for different levels of knowledge on the part of the audience. If I'm playing in a folk club, I'll share a lot of information about the origins and development of the music and tell about my sources and a few stray thoughts on the nature of traditional music. But the delivery of this information is as important as the information itself; if it's not entertaining then it's not, well, very entertaining. A pro for playing for a knowledgeable audience is that they already have a good idea of what I'm up to -- I don't have to explain everything to put it in context. The con is that the many members of the audience will have very specific ideas about how I ought to play music and are not shy about sharing their feelings in negative terms.

A more general audience will get a shorter introduction that tries to relate the song to the experience of people who haven't experienced traditional music before, while still being entertaining. The con, of course, is that more basic explanations are often required and some people just go away shaking their heads about the weird musicians they saw today. The pro is that they don't have pre-conceived notions about whether or not I'm playing the music correctly and they don't care if I don't tell them who I learned the song from. A big pro is that there is usually someone in the audience who has never heard anything like that before and who gets completely turned on by traditional music. That's the best part.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Brian Peters
Date: 11 Nov 14 - 09:14 AM

Cheers, Vic!

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Vic Smith
Date: 11 Nov 14 - 08:54 AM

"get a life, the lot of you"

... says someone who's clicked on to Mudcat, read the thread, and taken the trouble to post to it.
Brian Peters for the second time - 

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Brian Peters
Date: 11 Nov 14 - 08:37 AM

"...meet up in the pub on Saturday night to have high-brow technical discussions"

I started going to folk clubs to have a sing, a drink, and a good time - I don't remember any 'highbrow technical discussions'. I'm also having a laugh at someone, sheltering behind their anonymity, telling complete strangers they're 'anally retentive' and accusing them of boorishness in the same breath.

It's bleedin' obvious that traditional music is for entertaining. Arguments arise when people try to insist on their own narrow definition of what constitutes 'entertaining'.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Brian Peters
Date: 11 Nov 14 - 08:26 AM

"get a life, the lot of you"

... says someone who's clicked on to Mudcat, read the thread, and taken the trouble to post to it.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,guest
Date: 11 Nov 14 - 07:39 AM

that's an important point-it's not to be taken seriously is it? beside child abuse by our leaders, the devastation of climate change and a myriad other things, who the f....cares about 'opinionated old codgers' and their views, whatever they are- there are plenty of those in positions of real power- get a life, the lot of you

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Janie
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 09:55 PM

Hmmm....

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 08:37 PM

all very well - but what if its not entertaining but people want to preserve, because they think its worthwhile.

i'm not saying the two are mutually exclusive. but there's no rule saying just because its traditional. it will be entertaining.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,Proper Traditional Musician
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 03:47 PM

For entertaining? Absolutely. What we call "Folk" is routed in working class social music. Ordinary, working class people generally did not meet up in the pub on Saturday night to have high-brow technical discussions. They wanted to be.....entertained. To tap their feet, have a drink and generally forget the stresses and starins of their lives. This whole argument just sums up how middle class, boorish and anally retentive "Folk" is following the "revival". Of course it's always a problem when so many school teachers are involved with anything.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Musket
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 03:44 PM

Whats the storyline?

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 02:17 PM

"Just because you don't understand the somewhat exciting journey folk and traditional roots is on at present,"
Perhaps it's the way you tell 'em - whoops, soory - by your reckoning, 'Strangers in the Night' is a ballad.
"so am equally puzzled about how so many people provoke all this alleged 'aggro' from Bob. "
I've described our experience at the Musical Traditions; others have described theirs elsewhere - are we to ssume that celebrité allows people like Good Ol' Bob to behave in such a fashion, or is it that us "opinionated old codgers" just don't have a sense of humour to allow us to appreciate the finer qualities of his character?
Being a good (or popular) performer, does not excuse his boorish loutisheness
Adios Jim
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Musket
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 01:58 PM

The last outpost of ballad singing? Ballads are still being written, adapted from traditional roots and performed.

Just because you don't understand the somewhat exciting journey folk and traditional roots is on at present, don't come out with sweeping statements that were questionable forty years ago, never mind now with folk and acoustic roots dominating the albums, tours and festivals.

Juat don't expect today's artistes to sit in a pub in a circle, that's what old men do...

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,jim bainbridge
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 01:12 PM

You're dead right Vic- this is a discussion for opinionated old codgers, so by definition I should never have got involved. (what was that you said?)
I've played with & enjoyed Bob's company for many years (45 or so) and have never has a cross word so am equally puzzled about how so many people provoke all this alleged 'aggro' from Bob.
Wasn't aware of the source of the quote which started all this, nor its context. Somebody told me the other day about the book in question, but think I'll carry on reading my John McGahern, thanks very much.
Here's to the music, it speaks for itself, one way or the other without all this analysis & bad temper.... adios amigos

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 11:39 AM

lot of thread drift here. i mean the usual suspects argy bargying away.

i suppose really it depends what you consider to be your tradition. what you feel is your perceived tradition that you are handing on.

there is no guarantee that the music in your tradition will entertain me. for example a lot of the world music that Froots identifies with doesn't really do it for me. but its someone's tradition, that they value and want to preserve.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 11:26 AM

" I am never going to believe the "Song Catcher" schlock that the people who sing or play traditional songs are all dirt poor"
Some of the finest ballad singing in the United States come (or came) from 'songcatcher' country - the Appalachians - read Sharp, or Richie, or Scarborough.
The last outpost of ballad singing in Britain and Ireland was the impoverished and illiterate Travellers
That may have changed now we no longer have a creative oral tradition, but these were the makers and passers-on
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,Phil
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 11:16 AM

What usually makes these little conversational hand-grenades so... um... productive is that they can be understood in three or four different ways. What generally happens is that the person who wants to start the... er... discussion makes a point using an extreme version of the statement, then rapidly relocates to a milder version when it comes under attack, before returning to the more provocative version for a counter-attack, and so on. Hours of fun.

In this case, the statement that "traditional music is for entertaining" could mean:

1 - Traditional songs should be sung well, so as to entertain the people listening
or
2 - Traditional songs should be sung and performed in an entertaining way, so as to draw in people who think they don't like it
or
3 - Traditional songs should be sung without any extraneous material, unless the material's also entertaining (so a historical introduction to The Dolphin is out, but Tony Capstick's introduction* would be fine)
or
4 - Traditional songs should be sung by entertainers, along with whatever else they entertain people with

I'd agree with 1, both agree & disagree with 2 (not everything can be made entertaining), but strongly disagree with 3 and 4.

*The name of this song is The Dolphin ... which is also the name of a pub in Rotherham where they used to have right rough strippers on. Weren't those strippers rough though? (continues)

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Airymouse
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 09:59 AM

I tend to get sidetracked, so like the passenger trains in the US it takes me a long time to get anywhere. I think education, except musical education, which I don't have, has nothing to do with   with the music we all share. I am never going to believe that the person who knows the chemical table backwards and forwards has a better appreciation of traditional music than the person who can't read. After all, the music we like is not literal; it's oral, or for instrumental music ,aural. Likewise, I am never going to believe the "Song Catcher" schlock that the people who sing or play traditional songs are all dirt poor, illiterate, country folk who have never seen an automobile or a TV set.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,Fred McCormick
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 09:13 AM

Hi Vic. Love it, love it, love it. Can I put that on my CV?

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Musket
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 09:09 AM

Public school Bellends?

Presumably chav bellends appreciate songs about whaling or reed cutting whilst public school bellends can't understand what the song is about?

Ask Bridge, he might have some insight into this subject

😇

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Vic Smith
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 08:40 AM

I am not very well known as a singer.....

Perhaps not, but you are a fine- voiced, entertaining one whose name is well-respected in traditional music circles throughout these islands and at such events you are always called on to sing. Though you are probably best known for your interpretation of traditional songs. your CD The Song I'm Composing - which I am listening to again as I compose this - is something of a neglected masterpiece, concentrating as it does, on the great and varied selection of songs that you have written. Funnily enough, despite your careful, thoughtful songs, it is your compositions that are strictly in the Irish humorous tradition, such as The Goat Replies and The Bacon Butty, that I hear sung around folk clubs.

Your name was one that met with unanimous enthusiasm when the suggestion of booking you came up at our folk club committee meeting.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 08:13 AM

"Though, that's not to say there aren't 'working class' folkies
who are culturally intolerant, or who aspire to emulate the posturing and pretentions of public school bellends.."
Certainly not confined to folk music - ever tried drinking with a wine buff, or a train spotter, or a jazz fan, or a car enthusiast... - I've got twin sisters, one who supports Liverpool, the other Everton - you don't want to be there on Saturday, when they're talking about "real football"!!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 07:38 AM

Jim - my sarcy comments weren't aimed at you...

or anyone else like us from more humble upbringings..

Though, that's not to say there aren't 'working class' folkies
who are culturally intolerant,
or who aspire to emulate the posturing and pretentions of public school bellends...😏

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 06:55 AM

"The more you analyse entertainment the less entertaining it becomes."
I'm with Wimberly (Folklore in the Englih and Scottish Ballads)
"An American Indian sun-dance or an Australian corroboree is an exciting spectacle for the uninitiated, but for one who understands something of the culture whence it springs it is a hundred fold more heart-moving."
Understanding and passing on some of what you know about a song is a million miles from "analysing entertainment", and most people know that.
"educated articulate over opinionated people"
Don't know any public school educated people, most folkies I rub shoulders with received the same bog-standard state education I did.
Of course, we all realise working people with a poor education are incapable of understanding the complexities and subtleties of any art form - even the one they created and proliferated themselves!!
Arguments about "narrowness in musical tastes" usually stem from the fact that (speaking for myself) find most modern pop music shallow, ephemeral and unsatisfying - you want to see my collection of jazz, blues, classics, opera, swing, bluegrass.... come up and see me sometime - wonder how many Lady Gaga fans can make the same offer.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,ST
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 06:43 AM

On the original question – whether you give (want) any background etc depends upon the environment you're in. In some places where the audience is not gathered to listen to "traditional", or even "folk" music it may not be appropriate; so at an open mic, karaoke-style set up or a in heaving, noisy pub bar it's probably best just to sing anything entertaining, whether traditional or not. In other contexts (and, possibly contentiously, I'd put folk clubs in this category) it adds to the enjoyment to know something about what you're listening to – particularly since the very nature of traditional song is that it does have an historical story in addition to the story contained within the lyrics.

If you don't actually know anything about the background, the concept of the song being "traditional" is superfluous anyway – without background it's just a song. How would you know you were singing a traditional song if you didn't know its history and provenance? Isn't the provenance part of what sets traditional song aside? By claiming an interest in "traditional" songs we are showing that we have looked into the background of the song – so we've already moved into the "education" sphere.

Obviously the original comment ("not for a further education class") was phrased to imply the worst sort of presentation of the background to a song. No-one wants to listen to something badly presented whether it be a song or a lesson/lecture but to suggest that you should never talk about, or have the opportunity to learn about, where the song came from and the journey that it has taken seems to me to miss some of the essence of what distinguishes traditional song from any other song.

In addition, did Mr. Davenport, never find enjoyment in learning something new? At some of the evenings I go to I gain a lot of pleasure from learning about the songs. When I stop wanting to learn it'll be time to give up completely.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,Fred McCormick
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 06:40 AM

Jim Banbridge. My point about Patsy McCann was first of all that Davenport used it as an excuse to defame MacColl, yet again. For crying out loud! The man's been dead 25 years. Do I seriously have to listen to yet another diatribe, every time Bob Davenport opens his mouth?

Secondly, I was offended at the aggressive way in which he turned on me when I pointed out a simple fact of history. If Bob Davenport cannot rationally discuss something as incontrovertible as that, without behaving as though he's about to start a fight, then I really have no time for him.

GSS. "can you do this Jim? Fred? lets hear you". What the fuck has that got to do with it? Tell you what Dick. I am not very well known as a singer, and I haven't had your illustrious career, but I suggest you wait until you've listened to me singing before you start casting remarks like that around!!!

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Vic Smith
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 06:31 AM

It is paradoxical that Bob Davenport was an advocate of performing songs without introductions and yet one of his great singing heroes (like mine) was Gordon Hall and we often talked about Gordon when we met. Yet no traditional singer that I met was more analytical about his songs, nor was there one who sought more information about their background in very long phone calls - as I and others, Reg Hall, Keith Chandler, Bob Copper, Terry Masterson and Bob himself amongst others could attest to. If he felt the need or was in the mood, Gordon would sometimes share this information when introducing a song. I conducted a radio interview with Gordon once to ask him about his songs and their place in his family. I had no idea of how long the interview was to last when I started but in fact it turned out to be the longest in my 25 years of conducting studio interviews with singers and musicians for my weekly programme - it lasted nearly two hours and even then I felt that Gordon had only just get going. You can read a full transcription of the spoken part of the interview minus the songs that I asked him to interject into the piece by clicking here


And now an aside..... I can't say that I knew Bob very well, but I did book him on many occasions for clubs, concerts and festivals and I spoke to him whenever we met at other events. Our longest converstion, funnily enough was when we were both booked to sing at the Gordon Hall memorial concert in Horsham. I always found Bob to be an utterly charming polite communicative bloke. I have heard so many stories from so many people about the other side of Bob and how difficult and challenging he could be that I know that they must be true; but I find the different impressions puzzling.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 05:43 AM

Yeah.. Mudcat reeks of ignorance and intolerance in the prevailing hostile attitude towards any genres of popular music...

Maybe mudcat is a magnet for educated articulate over opinionated people
who are perhaps lacking a vital spark of humility and genuine innate intelligence...???

[but that's public school education for you....😜]




"RE: traditional music is for entertaining"

.. depends..

what's the reasonable dividing line between over long song intros and a lecture illustrated with musical examples/specimens...

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Musket
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 05:27 AM

The more you analyse entertainment the less entertaining it becomes.

For that matter, the more you try to compare genres as better or worse as music, trying to inflict personal taste as being definitive, the more your arse is on view.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 05:05 AM

"Surely if people are to learn something from traditional music they must first be entertained by it,"
This is, of course, true - it is the case with any art form -
If it catches your fancy as a song, there is no reason whatever that you should not follow it up if it has more to offer, and there is equally no reason why you should not want to pass that information on, if you feel it might be relevant or 'entertaining' even, though how much of this you can manage during a performance is a matter of judgement.
Introductions can be too long - they can also be unnecessary - I've never understood why some singers feel it necessary to recount the plot of their songs before they sing them.
You can overload the audience with information, but a little background can help with the appreciation of the song - there are bad introductions, just as there is bad singing.
I've spent the last six months annotating the songs we collected in West Clare, and have been staggered at the amount of information we've turned up about some of them (I've included one at the bottom of this posting - fine for a website, a definite no-no for a club performance - far too long)   
I chose to comment on Bob Davenport' attitude because his was the name raised - plenty of other examples to choose from of people who resent any form of introduction to a song or a piece of music.
In the 1980s we were asked by Librarian Malcolm Taylor to bring some of the people we were recording to sing, play and talk for a few hours at Cecil Sharp House - it turned out to be one of the best evenings I have ever been part of
We assembled three friends, Tom MacCathy, piper, whistle and concertina player from West Clare, Fergus MacTeggart, a magnificent fiddle player from Fermanagh and Mikeen MacCarthy, a Traveller singer and storyteller from Kerry.
They had never really met each other before, but they sat in front of a room-full of people and played, sang, told stories and reminisced about life and culture in rural Ireland, from three totally different aspects, with questions being thrown up from the audience.
Pat and I sat up there with them like a couple of spare pricks at a wedding (in case the proceedings flagged) - totally unnecessary.
Malcolm had to drive everybody out of the room at the end of the evening, and the chat and swapping of yarns and information went on in the street for some time after.
During the interval, somebody came over and asked why we didn't stop all the talk and let them just sing and play - it was the only negative feedback we got from that evening   
As I say, one of the best evenings I can ever remember - certainly the three lads were talking about it for years after - Tom MacCarthy and Mikeen becam friends; Tom, who was a Council carpenter in Hackney, used to drop into Mikeen's caravan during his lunchtime - his family still talk about it.
Jim Carroll

The Sons of Granuaile
Michael 'Straighty' Flanagan
Inagh

You loyal-hearted Irishmen that do intend to roam,
To reap the English harvest so far away from home
I'm sure you will provide with us both comrades loyal and true
Or you have to fight both day and night with John Bull and his crew.

When we left our homes from Ireland the weather was calm and clear,
And when we got on board the ship we gave a hearty cheer.
We gave three loud cheers for Paddy's land, the place we do adore,
May the heavens smile on every child that loves the shamrock shore.

We sailed away all from the quay and ne'er received a shock
Till we landed safe in Liverpool one side of Clare and stock
Where hundreds of our Irishmen they met us in the town
Then 'Hurrah for Paddy's lovely land', it was the word went round.

With one consent away we went to drink strong ale and wine,
Each man he drank a favourite toast to the friends he left behind.
We sang and drank till the ale house rang dispraising Erin's foes,
Or any man that hates the land where St Patrick's shamrock grows.

For three long days we marched away, high wages for to find.
Till on the following morning we came to a railway line.
Those navies they came up to us, and loudly they did rail,
They cursed and damned for Paddy's lands and the sons of Granuaile.

Up stands one of our Irish boys and says, 'What do you mean?
While us, we'll work as well as you, and hate a coward's name.
So leave our way without delay or some of you will fall,
Here stands the sons of Irishmen that never feared a ball.'

Those navies then, they cursed and swore they'd kill us every man.
Make us remember ninety-eight, Ballinamuck and Slievenamon.
Blessed Father Murphy they cursed his blessed revenge,
And our Irish heroes said they'd have revenge then for the same.

Up stands Barney Reilly and he knocked the ganger down.
'Twas then the sticks and stones they came, like showers to the ground.
We fought from half past four until the sun was going to set,
When O'Reilly said, 'My Irish boys, I think we will be bet.'

But come with me my comrade boys, we'll renew the fight once more.
We'll set our foes on every side more desperate than before.
We will let them know before we go we'd rather fight than fly,
For at the worst of times you'll know what can we do, but die.

Here's a health then to the McCormicks too, O'Donnell and O'Neill
And also the O'Donoghues that never were afraid
Also every Irish man who fought and gained the day
And may those cowardly English men in crowds they ran away.

Irish immigrants fleeing the Famine and the mass evictions were met with prejudice and violence in many of the places they chose as their new homes.
This account, from Terry Coleman's 'Railway Navvies', gives a vivid description of the reception many of them received when they landed in Britain.
It describes the plight of the men who took work as railway navvies in the English/Scots border country.

"Throughout the previous year the railways had been extending through the English border country and into Scotland. A third of the navvies were Irish, a third Scots, and a third English: that was the beginning of the trouble - easy-going Roman Catholic Irish, Presbyterian Scots, and impartially belligerent English. The Irish did not look for a fight. As the Scottish Herald reported, they camped, with their women and children, in some of the most secluded glades, and although most of the huts showed an amazing disregard of comfort, the hereditary glee of their occupants seemed not a whit impaired'. This glee enraged the Scots, who then added to their one genuine grievance (the fact that the Irishmen would work for less pay and so tended to bring down wages) their sanctified outrage that the Irish should regard the Sabbath as a holiday, a day of recreation on which they sang and lazed about. As for the Scots, all they did on a Sunday was drink often and pray occasionally, and it needed only an odd quart of whisky and a small prayer to make them half daft with Presbyterian fervour. They then beat up the godless Irish. The Irish defended themselves and this further annoyed the Scots, so that by the middle of 1845 there was near civil war among the railway labourers. The English, mainly from Yorkshire and Lancashire, would fight anyone, but they preferred to attack the Irish. The contractors tried to keep the men, particularly the Irish and Scots, apart, employing them on different parts of the line, but the Scots were not so easily turned from their religious purposes. At Kinghorn, near Dunfermline, these posters were put up around the town:
'NOTICE IS GIVEN
that all the Irish men on the line of railway in Fife Share must be off the grownd and owt of the countey on Monday th nth of this month or els we must by the strenth of our armes and a good pick shaft put them off
Your humbel servants, Schots men.'
Letters were also sent to the contractors and sub-con¬tractors. One read:
'Sir, - You must warn all your Irish men to be of the grownd on Monday the 11th of this month at 12 o'cloack or els we must put them by forse
FOR WE ARE DETERMINED TO DOW IT.'
The sheriff turned up and warned the Scots against doing anything of the sort. Two hundred navvies met on the beach, but in the face of a warning from the sheriff they proved not so determined to do it, and the Irish were left in peace for a while.
But in other places the riots were savage. Seven thousand men were working on the Caledonian line, and 1,100 of these were paid monthly at a village called Locherby, in Dumfriesshire. Their conduct was a great scandal to the inhabitants of a quiet Scottish village. John Baird, Deputy Clerk of the Peace for the county, lamented that the local little boys got completely into the habits of the men - 'drinking, swearing, fighting, and smoking tobacco and all those sorts of things'. Mr Baird thought that on a pay day, with constant drunkenness and disturbance, the village was quite uninhabitable.
A minority of the navvies were Irish, and they were attacked now and again, as was the custom. After one pay day a mob of 300 or 400, armed with pitchforks and scythes, marched on the Irish, who were saved only because the magistrates intervened and kept both sides talking until a force of militia came up from Carlisle, twenty-three miles away."
The writer goes in to explain that the worst of the riots were to follow.
This song describes the situation in Britain, specifically in Liverpool; we have never come across it before and can find no trace of it.
A similar song 'Seven of our Irishmen' (Roud 3104), sung by Straighty and by Pat MacNamara, deals with those who landed in America and were targeted as possible recruits for the U.S. army.
Ref:
The Railway Navvies;   Terry Coleman 1965

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: r.padgett
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 04:37 AM

Traditional music and folk song in general is to be listened to as by and large it tells a story encompassing many different areas of life and facets

Songs can and do have a place in the historical progression of life and interested ppl can and do go on to find a lifetime interest in history and social happening spurred on by folk songs, traditional and otherwise such as Industrial songs of the last 150 years

Pop songs by and large (with inevitable exceptions) tend to be more relient on accompaniments and pa's with repetitive passages and catchy tunes relegating story telling to a minimum ~ in my view

Ray

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 04:34 AM

Re the original topic, a skilled performer should know when 'telling a story, eg anecdotes' without lecturing enhances the enjoyment of the performance, but as much as performing the song/tune, this has to be done well to be entertaining.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Dave Sutherland
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 04:15 AM

Having stated that the original quote in this thread was made by Bob Davenport I cannot see how the discussion can ensue without any further reference to him? I will readily admit that Bob was my main influence on my entry into the world of British traditional music and song back in the sixties but in the intervening years he has made many provocative statements (or had many provocative statements attributed to him) such as "The worst thing about folk clubs is that there are too many folk songs sung in them" or looking forward to the day when we can dance around a bonfire made of Northumbrian pipes. I have heard him make or illustrate the original statement on various occasions during live performances however I must echo Fred on the way that traditional song has enriched my life over the last fifty years in the same fashion.
BTW I never yet heard Fred Jordan introduce a song as his opinion was that in the time taken up talking about songs you could have fitted in another three items. Fred could get away with that but not every singer could.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: The Sandman
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 03:42 AM

my point is.....I wanted your opinion on Fred criticising me for introducing a song with back ground information,I am pointing out that Bob is not the only person to have made remarks like that, dependent on your response will influence my opinion on whether i think you are prejudiced against Bob Davenport, that is my point ,can you understand that, is it loud and clear.
I think Bobs point is that presentation AND TRADTIONAL MUSIC is important and has to be entertaining,that audiences should not be talked down to, I interpret his comments to mean that he has no objection to further education classes about folk music per se, but he objects to a certain kind of presentation which involves lecturing audiences in the manner that he thinks is a further education class manner.
These are not necessarily my opinions., but my interpretation of Bobs statement.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,Howard Jones
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 03:42 AM

Surely if people are to learn something from traditional music they must first be entertained by it, otherwise they won't listen any further.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 05:09 PM

"can you do this Jim? Fred? lets hear you?"
Bob is not being criticized for his ability to entertain - just on his behaviour towards fellow artists and performers - let's hear you on that one, or doe celebrity bring immunity from criticism in your book?
What's your point?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: The Sandman
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 01:55 PM

People who have something meaningful tosay about traditional music are in much shorter supply and are worth listening to." corect and there are many who have something meaningless to say about traditional music, and there are some who can sing it and make it entertaining, and many people who also try to lay down rules and argue about definitions who are talking hot air, no names no pack drill.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 01:30 PM

Alternative answer ---


☹☹☹boohoohoo☹☹☹

Take yer pick, Dick

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: johncharles
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 01:22 PM

"BOB entertaining
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yde-74PWNvc
can you do this Jim? Fred? lets hear you?"
an old guy singing a modern song of which there are hundreds of covers, some better than his some worse. there are thousands of singers entertaining people every day of the week. People who have something meaningful tosay about traditional music are in much shorter supply and are worth listening to.
john

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 01:08 PM

"I dont think MGM, would be seriously offended by my calling him a silly billy or a booby"

.,,.,.

Oh, I 'spect he'll survive

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 01:01 PM

Everybody on this thread is expressing an opinion. Bob was giving his opinion. We don't have to agree with him. I respect Bob as a performer and a friend. I wouldn't ask him any academic questions though!

IMO the guest of 7.25 am had the right idea. We've all given our opinions. What else is there to do apart from all this mindless name-calling?

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Vic Smith
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 12:55 PM

The pattern of this type of thread is that once the insults start they accelerate quite quickly and then the people who are here to discuss and give and take points drop out. This would be a great pity because already some interesting points have been made.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: The Sandman
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 12:50 PM

Vic Smith, I dont think MGM, would be seriously offended by my calling him a silly billy or a booby, they are terms he has used himself in the past.
you however have an agenda, if you have a problem with anything i have said to you which is perfectly true[ i have it all in print], take me to court if not get off my back and shut up.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,Punkfolkrocker
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 12:49 PM

"One thing I do find strange however, is that these threads often hinge on statements that were made or positions taken up decades ago and focus on people who are either dead or no longer active....

...Here we seem to get bogged down in historic situations, particularly the 50 year old Davenport/MacColl differences.
Perhaps we are reflecting the age of contributors here.
Strange, isn't it?"

I thought it might be a bit impertinent if I asked "Bob Davenport ? who the f@ck is Bob Davenport !!!???"

Sooo I just googled some youtubes..

In a previous Music Technology Forum I was one of the older 'sages' when I was in my early to mid 40s.

Now, my next big birthday celebration in only a few years will be my 60th..

Yet here at mudcat I almost feel as if I am a young delinquent tearaway...???

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 12:46 PM

Fred can answer for himself - as far as I'm concerned he responded to your original point - you cannot choreograph these discussion, people will answer them in any way they choose.
"so when he says something it ought to be discussed "
Whhich is exactly what is happening here - or would be if you allowed it to take place without your censure
One more time!
""Traditional music is for entertaining it is not for a further education class""
Both are possible and, in my opinion. highly desirable - only a tyrannical folk-bobby would suggest otherwise.
As far as Frwd Jordan's opinion is concerned, I covered it in my first posting
"if they have any sense, people will take anything on offer from any of these - they all go beyond simple 'entertainment'"
We've recorded many hours of field singers talking about their songs - what's your point?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: The Sandman
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 12:43 PM

BOB entertaining
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yde-74PWNvc
can you do this Jim? Fred? lets hear you?

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,punfolkrocker
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 12:38 PM

Eddie Upton of Folk South West is a positive example of a performer good at combining both entertainment & education..

I've not seen him for about 15 years, but I'd guess he still is...

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Vic Smith
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 12:35 PM

it appears to me that a lot of unnecessary animosity arises out of very little...... OK- back to the entertainment business...

Would that it could be so, Jim, but just look at the opening post. It contains a reference to a insult perpetrated in and carried over from a previous thread and sadly, Mike Yates did not know this and questioned why it was here.
I wrote at 09 Nov 14 - 05:28 AM -
I reserve my opinion about the intentions of this thread but will refer back to this post if my suspicions are justified.

My suspicions were that one of the main purposes of the thread would be to call for another round of insults to break out and this has been the case - see the post at 09 Nov 14 - 11:33 AM. The pattern of this type of thread is that once the insults start they accelerate quite quickly and then the people who are here to discuss and give and take points drop out. This would be a great pity because already some interesting points have been made.
One thing I do find strange however, is that these threads often hinge on statements that were made or positions taken up decades ago and focus on people who are either dead or no longer active. Meanwhile there are very many interesting positions being taken up by younger performers who have developed a love of traditional music and seem to me, when I talk to them, to have developed a different take on the music. They don't ever seem to share their thoughts on Mudcat. (Causley, Moray, Askews etc, etc,) Here we seem to get bogged down in historic situations, particularly the 50 year old Davenport/MacColl differences.
Perhaps we are reflecting the age of contributors here.
Strange, isn't it?

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: The Sandman
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 12:29 PM

I also fail to see the relevance of this remark from jim carroll
"Pretty well in character for someone who once described Jeannie Robertson as "a terrible singer" (we have a recording of him doing so) what has his opinion of jeannie robertson" got to do with the original statement
"Traditional music is for entertaining it is not for a further education class"
you have also not answered my question in relation to Fred Jordan.