Mediation and its definition in folk music

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: GUEST,Pseudonymous
Date: 01 Mar 20 - 03:23 PM

@ Steve: I am following what you are saying with interest. I thought the McCarthy article was a good lead.

I also found online a collection of Motherwell's own poetry with a memoir by John MConechy. Harker cites this in his bibliography, and it is where he found the information about Motherwell's active support for 'Orangeism' and his being called to London to answer questions about it.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: Brian Peters
Date: 01 Mar 20 - 03:21 PM

Hi Al,
Thanks for the warm words, but I don't know that I do have anything engraved on tablets for the benefit of modern practitioners. Most of the young singers and musicians that I know are pretty good at finding out stuff for themselves. However, I'll tell you about my bailiwick (ooh, missus!) since you asked.

I've made my living from music for over 30 years, and I've always sung and made music informally as well, just for the pleasure of it. Reading Bert Lloyd in the early days inspired me to look at the songs as more than just entertainment - there are many layers beyond the actual song: the history of the time, the evolution of the songs themselves, the stories of the people who sang them, and the work of the collectors who preserved them. I disagree with people who pop up on Mudcat from time to time to tell me that analysis somehow damages the songs because they already 'speak for themselves'. Of course they can be enjoyed purely as songs, and I never forget that as a pro I'm there to entertain every audience I play for - but all the layers are there for those of us who want to explore them.

I've always believed in digging for songs that aren't the same ones that everyone else is doing, and that's taken me into the work of F J Child, and the collectors like Sharp, Gardiner, the Hammonds and so on. That's led me in turn into research and teaching, which frankly hasn't been a bad career move, since quite a lot of my work over the last decade or two has been in teaching. A number of years ago I began a project with my American friend Jeff Davis (whose music is wonderful, BTW) on Cecil Sharp's Appalachian collection - we took our presentation to the Library of Congress amongst many other venues. That made me appreciate the incredible feats of endurance, perseverance and intellectual curiosity that Sharp had shown in his travels with the indefatigable Maud Karpeles and, the more I found out about him, the more I respected his work. I also began to realise that a lot of negative comment I'd read about him was palpably untrue. Fakesong is not the only source of misinformation about Sharp, but it has been very influential - especially in the field of cultural studies - even though many researchers into folk song itself have more or less dismissed it. So I tend to view it through the prism of the attack on Sharp which, though obviously not the sole focus of the book, seems to have been the starting point (given the 1972 paper) and the centre of the attempt to debunk the notion of 'folk song'. It's been interesting to me to find out more about, for instance, the work of Motherwell in the course of this thread.

Sharp was writing over a 100 years ago, and produced his theoretical work (the first attempt, really, in the field) only four years after collecting his first song, so obviously he got some things wrong - though Roud and Bishop, for instance, are very positive about his work on modal scales. Anyway, although I sometimes enjoy a good argument on Mudcat, and like to correct misinformation when I see it, I've no intention of getting into a fight about Cecil Sharp in this thread, despite some wildly ill-informed comments above.

This probably wasn't what you wanted at all, Al, but I'm trying to explain what motivates me in the context of the present discussion.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: GUEST,big al whittle
Date: 01 Mar 20 - 01:27 PM

in practical terms though, do these great thinkers on the subject have a message for modern practicioners of the craft?

Ir seems to me, that Brian Peters might think so. I'd love to hear his thoughts on the matter.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 01 Mar 20 - 12:10 PM

What this means, as I will demonstrate, is that much of the material in MA&M had already been mediated, possibly several times, before it was published in MA&M. Much of the material in the latter half of the book comes directly from Motherwell's own collecting and any mediation appears to be minimal, i.e., small corrections to orthography, and such as dialect being made consistent, which was standard at the time.

There are 65 items in the book of which 21 items come directly from M's own collecting, the great bulk of these collected in Kilbarchan in 1825 from the likes of Mrs Lyle, Laird and Thomson.

As stated the early half of the book is made up of items from other published collections as follows:-
Scott's Minstrelsy, 7
Percy's Reliques, 4
Cromek, 1
Finlay, 2
Jamieson's Popular etc., 3
Herd, 1
Sharpe, 2
Johnson, 2
Ramsay, 1
Maidment, 1

There are also 5 modern imitations in the first half.

Another 7 are collations from several sources (by M)
Broadside , 1
Peter Buchan's Gleanings (mainly from broadsides), 1

And the other 6 are from James Nicol via Peter Buchan.

I intend to look closely at the Nicol contributions and look at Child's opinions on these as well.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 01 Mar 20 - 11:57 AM

Before I post my findings I think in view of the combative nature of this thread I ought to point out a few realities highlighted by McCarthy.
Despite Motherwell's name appearing on the cover of Minstrelsy Ancient and Modern he was not directly responsible for about half of the items it contained as these were edited by SOE before he took over. I have worked out that the whole was originally published in 12 perhaps 13 parts and that M didn't take over the editorship until about the end of the 6th part although before that he contributed advice and notes no doubt. (I've not managed to find out who the original editor was but it should be easy enough to do so.)

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 01 Mar 20 - 10:43 AM

Anyway,
before the mud-slinging erupted we were discussing Motherwell's excellent contributions. I have had another thorough look through McCarthy's excellent article and it has prompted me to go through Motherwell's Minstrelsy in detail analysing the sources using his own notes and those in Child based on the Mss.

To repeat my wishes expressed earlier in a slightly more coherent way.
We already have easy access to:
Child's notes in ESPB
Crawfurd 2 vol set by Lyle.
What info there is in Minstrelsy A&M, but there must be a lot of useful unpublished material left in the manuscript and notebook, particularly the bawdy stuff. Who else would dearly like to see this published? Both of these are available in Glasgow and at Harvard.

I've done a bit of number crunching with Minstrelsy and will post the results later tonight.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: GUEST,Big Al Whittle
Date: 01 Mar 20 - 06:59 AM

The reason I have become a non member is that I don't want to get tempted into one of the many games of cowboys and indians that you and your mates have running below the line, Steve. It just ends up with name calling and silliness.

this thread is something different. It is about how people who have spent much of their lives working in the medium of folk music view their roles, and the respective roles of main players in the game - their philosophy.

to me Jim Carroll is most compelling when he talks about his own engagement with singers rather and his own motivation, rather than swapping shots with the 'meaning of life' brigade. you have the feeling none of them could climb into the ring and do a couple of rounds with a genuine philosopher. Its all instinct and woolly thinking.

Similarly Brian Peters is a singer and performer and musician that I have enormous respect for. i would love to hear of his thoughts behind his role, and how he delineates his bailliewick.

definition is for entymologists and crossword puzzles.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Mar 20 - 06:53 AM

Cmaon lads and lasses
There is one thread of any real interest to many of us on the go here - don't give the powers that be the excuse to close it pul--eeze
The garden's far too wet to do any work in it and it will be for most of the year
Jim

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: GUEST,Peter Laban
Date: 01 Mar 20 - 06:05 AM

And again Steve, ditto to all of that.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Mar 20 - 06:00 AM

The litany of recent abusive posts from "guests" prompts me once again to call for an end to anonymity on this forum. There is not one single good reason why anyone discussing folk music should not be signed in. A bad reason is that they wish to be disruptive. I am following this thread with avid interest but I lack the depth of knowledge to say much. The likes of Brian, Steve and Jim do possess that knowledge and I want to hear what they have to say without the constant barracking, especially of Jim. HiLo appears to know nothing about this music (at least, he/she never says much about it) and KarenH/"Pseudonymous" is on a one-woman mission to discredit Jim. It's rubbish and I'm sick of it.

As a compromise, I might suggest to the moderators that any guest post that isn't in the format "Guest, full real name" should be deleted.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Mar 20 - 05:11 AM

"More relevantly, he did not rate Sharp's theory much and he described it as Darwinian as opposed to Spenserian"
That again is a hastily snatched totally undigested quote - go read rge whole book
Wilgus's 'Folk Songs Scholarship.... is an overview of 20th century folk song reasearch - it is unequaled by any other study in my opinion
He examines the collectors and researchers in the context of their time, (which Harker totally failed to do) and highlights the weaknesses and the strengths
Taking a single criticism to use as a stone to hurl in an argument more or less sums up the attitude of the Harker- worshipers
I have little doubt that if Destructive Dave's interest had been in science or medicine he would have chosen Galileo or Faraday, or Boyle or Newton as his targets
We should be capable of learning from those who came before - not pulling down their work in order to replace it with the latest theory

Thank you Cj - much appreciated
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: GUEST,Pseudonymous
Date: 01 Mar 20 - 03:58 AM

Oh by the way somebody recommended Wilgus. I imagine that his section on African American songs stirred up some controversy. More relevantly, he did not rate Sharp's theory much and he described it as Darwinian as opposed to Spenserian, and I think on this thread we agreed with that.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: GUEST,Cj
Date: 01 Mar 20 - 03:54 AM

Searching through decades old comments for ammunition eh, Pseud? Methinks the lady is obsessed, somewhat.

When I read Jim's posts, there is sometimes bluster to get through, on occasion there is lazy keyboard work and sometimes he does seem to be swatting at flies that nobody else can see, but there is always a point to what he brings to the discussion and that point is usually made from experience and knowledge.


Whereas, your posts have the same amount of bluster and fly-swatting, but at the heart of them there is almost always bitterness and trolling. I've long since dismissed almost all you type as your "point" seems to be nothing more than having a constant go at Jim and his life's work.

And one thing more - constructing "proper" sentences doesn't make you right, and in this instance, it certainly doesn't make you come across as a decent person.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: The Sandman
Date: 01 Mar 20 - 02:55 AM

I am not alone in finding it interesting that such a right-wing character should be so interested in old songs, some of which were being sung by people of low social status."
not unusual[ and debatable wheter it warrants the term interesting] at all BASCAM LUNSFORD WAS RIGHT WING AND VERY INTERESTED More latterly Nick Griffin [national front] and then someone on this forum called Georgina Dale who stood as a BNP candidate

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Mar 20 - 02:45 AM

I don't care what he denied - he belonged to an organisation that followed the policies of Trotsky - simple as that
I'm not criticising his for that - on the contrary
From the beginning you have made politics an issue in your undermining of Walter Pardon and the source singers - a 'leftie plot' - you raised it here with Harker, as if we objected to his politics
This has no place in this discussion - another 'straw man' to avoid the real issues
Harker made the social, class, political status of Sharp in the same way - not as an intelligent argument but as a bludgeon to beat the pioneers for being new to their game and reflecting the post-Victorian attitudes of their times
Their strength was that they overcame their class prejudices, went out on the 'folk-face and got their hands dirty, and gave us the culture of working people at its very best - and sweated in order to do so
People tend to forget the state of Sharp's health when he ventured into the Appalachians and brought back all those wonderful songs and ballads
HERE
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: GUEST,Pseudonymous
Date: 29 Feb 20 - 07:30 PM

But it would be a boring world if we all thought the same way about everything

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: GUEST,Pseudonymous
Date: 29 Feb 20 - 05:08 PM

Actually, Harker has denied being a 'Trotskyist'. When I read this, I corrected my own incorrect statement to the effect that he was one.

Nobody is claiming that Harker could predict the future, least of all Harker.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Feb 20 - 03:03 PM

"Whatever one thinks about Harker's brand of left-wing politics
Nothing to do with his politics - some of us sympthise with them to one degree or another
He was a unsubtly crap writer and a poor researcher - he lacked the the fore-knowledge to deal with his chosen subject

Harker's politics, far from being new, date back to the Russian Revolution - and earlier - Harker is/was a self-declared Trotskyist
Your persistent Harking (pun intended) on politics, which you have persisted in since you re-arrived here is perhaps indicative of your own - which, I'm sure, nobody has the slightest interest in - we deal with our politics below the line on this forum
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: GUEST,Big Al whittle
Date: 29 Feb 20 - 02:19 PM

' a revival which thinks Neil Young is a folk singer'

"Southern Man" by Neil Young

Southern man, better keep your head.
Don't forget what your good book said.
Southern change gonna come at last.
Now your crosses are burning fast.

Southern man.

I saw cotton and I saw black.
Tall white mansions and little shacks.
Southern man, when will you pay them back?

I heard screamin' and bullwhips cracking.
How long? How long?

Southern man, better keep your head.
Don't forget what your good book said.
Southern change gonna come at last.
Now your crosses are burning fast.

Southern man.

Lily Belle, your hair is golden brown.
I've seen your black man comin' round.
Swear by God, I'm gonna cut him down!

I heard screamin' and bullwhips cracking.
How long? How long?

Filli me oory oory aY!

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 29 Feb 20 - 02:05 PM

It's not difficult to understand why M would have had an interest in these ballads. Ever since Percy published the Reliques middle and upper classes had taken an interest in traditional songs and ballads, and in Scotland this had also been fuelled by numerous early publications, Scott's Minstrelsy being arguably the most influential. By 1824 M was a relative latecomer to the scene.

Scott himself was pretty right wing.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: GUEST,Pseudonymous
Date: 29 Feb 20 - 01:53 PM

Motherwell's work is available on archive.org.

A number of editions are available, here is a link to an 1827 version dedicated to Sharpe.

https://archive.org/details/minstrelsy00mothgoog/mode/2u

At the risk of being dull, may I point out it isn't strictly accurate to say "all we get from Fakesong is the usual litany of political comment". I won't quote, but page 55 of Fakesong disproves the remark. It discusses Motherwell's focus on collecting from oral tradition. Harker praises this in both Ritson and Motherwell. McCarthy quotes Harker on this (page315).

McCarthy believes that in the early days of putting out the Minstrelsy Motherwell did put together composites, and argues that 'Hindhorn' is one such composite. McCarthy prints a letter sent to Scott asking him if he can help him to 'correct' a so-called flawed version of a song taken down from recitation. This is how McCarthy dates a change in heart in Motherwell, attributing it to the reply from Scott. But I cannot find Harker discussing the 'fake' composite: he is more interested in the fact that Motherwell changed and developed as a collector rather than an editor. Had Harker been focussed merely or even significantly on discovering 'fake songs', he would have missed a trick here.

Whatever one thinks about Harker's brand of left-wing politics, I am not alone in finding it interesting that such a right-wing character should be so interested in old songs, some of which were being sung by people of low social status. McCarthy also touches upon this. He calls Motherwell a 'High Church Tory' and wonders what M's informants made of him.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: Brian Peters
Date: 28 Feb 20 - 03:20 PM

It’s very telling to compare McCarthy's approach to Motherwell with that of Harker. Although he is diplomatic in his references to Fakesong it’s clear that, while it may be a ‘helpful handbook’ (I said the same myself), the scholarship falls down when you get into the detail. Harker has misunderstood the relationship between Motherwell and Crawfurd, who he seems to believe was the go-between who actually collected in the field, whereas in fact Motherwell collected the vast majority of the songs himself, and had formed the view that oral sources were of prime importance some time before meeting Crawfurd. Perhaps the most damning comments (albeit delivered in a velvet-gloved hand) related to Harker’s characteristically disparaging remarks about the singers’ identities having been ‘suppressed’ by Crawfurd: “Crawfurd’s texts remain unrecognised because they were non-existent... Crawfurd had no part in gathering or selecting texts for the Minstrelsey.” So it was Motherwell who concealed his informants’ names, not because he didn’t value their contribution, but because “an editor should respect the anonymity of his sources.”

Where McCarthy praises Motherwell on the grounds that his introduction “exhibits unexpected insights into oral process in ballad composition”, and that he exhibits “a keen understanding of balladry as a living art,” all we get from Fakesong is the usual litany of political comment: “arch reactionary...”; “wielding a truncheon on behalf of the state..”; “violent denunciations of reformers...” “'instinctively' Tory ideas and 'monarchical principles'...”; “naive and mystical notion of cultural history...”; “his attitude to working people remains patronizing..”, and so on and so forth. McCarthy, on the oher hand, praises Motherwell for his ability to cross the class divide and persuade his sources to trust him. It’s refreshing after Fakesong to read content that’s concerned with the subject’s actual work, rather than the author’s own preoccupations.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Feb 20 - 03:08 PM

The end result being that we have a revival which thinks Neil Young is a folk singer
Jim

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: Brian Peters
Date: 28 Feb 20 - 02:39 PM

"who rejected it and on what grounds"

Take a look at Steve Roud's comments in 'Folksong in England' and the 'New Penguin Book of English Folk Songs': Fakesong has “warped the debate ever since” is one of several disparaging comments. And he's not the only one to have made that kind of judgement.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Feb 20 - 01:56 PM

Just about everybody
Harker told several conference audiences that he was no longer accepting bookings to speak because of the hostile reception
I was at two
It was rejected on the grounds that it flew in the face of a century's scholarship and failed to convince all but a few
Jim

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: GUEST,Hilo
Date: 28 Feb 20 - 01:53 PM

Who rejected it, I truly am curious ? I have just gotten the book through inter library loan, so I feel unable to comment. but I would like to know who rejected it and on what grounds,

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Feb 20 - 01:42 PM

Apologies - I thought you suggested Motherwell wrote a book - my mistake
We've all read Harkers book - it was soundly rejected thirty years ago
What is "silly" is that someone could come here, linger for five minutes, and tell us we're "silly" because we don't agree with her
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Feb 20 - 01:25 PM

"It's just silly to describe Harker's book as 'attempting to destroy' anybody."
WE've ben here a hundred times and you have never responded
Which Mother ell book ?
He anthloged ballads - he never wrote "a book"
Until you do you will have no part in this
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: GUEST,Pseudonymous
Date: 28 Feb 20 - 01:19 PM

In particular, it would be silly to describe Harker as 'attempting to destroy' Motherwell. I have read Harkers' book, including what he says about Motherwell, so such a remark would tend to confirm me in a suspicion that the poster simply had not read (and/or understood) Harker's book. Nobody is denying that Harker's book has its flaws, but there seems to be little point in trying to hold a rational discussion about it unless one is prepared to get to grips with what it does and does not set out to do.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: GUEST,Pseudonymous
Date: 28 Feb 20 - 12:50 PM

"On the one hand, Dave the destroyer attempts to undermine Motherwell with the old usual out-of-context sniping - "idealist", subsequent to yhe nobs... et al, but he blasts his own legs from under himself with his own summing up the people he had spent an enire book attempting to destroy: "

It's just silly to describe Harker's book as 'attempting to destroy' anybody.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Feb 20 - 10:59 AM

Delighted to b reminded of McCarthy's article - the antithesis of everything Harker stood for
Not only does he give a balanced view of Motherwell's work, warts and all, but he puts Harker's contradictions in context
On the one hand, Dave the destroyer attempts to undermine Motherwell with the old usual out-of-context sniping - "idealist", subsequent to yhe nobs... et al, but he blasts his own legs from under himself with his own summing up the people he had spent an enire book attempting to destroy:

"Their contribution was crucial. Without their collecting, and irrespective of their mediations and their motives we would not have had hundreds of songs recorded and published for posterity."
(McCarthy quoting Harker)

All the collectors were 'guilty' of that, though you wouldn't have guessed it reading 'Fakesong'

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 28 Feb 20 - 10:12 AM

I meant to add, it very much looks like M's famous intro was indeed part of the 1827 complete work.

If it hasn't already been published at some enormous price way beyond my pocket, then I'd say M's mss are arguably the most important items that still need publishing. Okay so most of them are in Child but it would appear that there is a lot of useful information along with ballads, on the singers for instance. No need to republish Crawfurd/MacQueen as that's already available in 2 volumes and remaindered copies still turn up. (Emily Lyle made a superb job of this).

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: GUEST,Pseudonymous
Date: 27 Feb 20 - 01:13 PM

Hello Steve
Glad the ref was useful, sorry about typo on dating. I found the article interesting.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 27 Feb 20 - 12:58 PM

Yes, reread the brilliant article. It has lots to say relevant to this thread and previous thread, is respectful of Harker's article of the previous year, although inevitably picks out the faults in reference to M. BTW the article is in the 1987 Journal, (Vol 5, No.3) not the 85.

McCarthy taught lit & folklore at Uni of the Ozarks in Clarksville Kansas and presumably used the copies of M's mss at Harvard. In his little bio it says he was preparing a book on the prolific contributor to M, Agnes Lyle. Sounds vaguely familiar although I haven't got that book (Should have it). I do have his 'The Ballad Matrix' of 1990.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: GUEST,Pseudonymous
Date: 27 Feb 20 - 12:29 PM

Hello Steve

You put this:

"I don't think you'd get many people to agree with you that what Percy did was part of the folk process."

Just to clarify that it wasn't me who was saying that it was. Of course, you did not mean to imply that is was me, but it is possible that his post might be read that way by someone who had not followed the thread.

Let me know what you make of McCarthy. He says that 'fascicles' of the book on Minstrelsy began to appear in 1824, and that at first Motherwell was just a contributor but that in time he became editor as well and that the complete work was published in 1827.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 27 Feb 20 - 10:34 AM

Thanks, Pseu. I have all of the EFDSS Journals. I'll have a re-read of McCarthy but it probably hasn't got the info I need. That Motherwell took over the process is complete news to me. I know he paid other collectors but I thought the actual publications were all his own work.

Of course the 'folk process' is a type of mediation, but it is very different to the mediation of the editors. I don't think you'd get many people to agree with you that what Percy did was part of the folk process.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: GUEST,Pseudonymous
Date: 27 Feb 20 - 06:18 AM

Regarding Motherwell

There is a Folk Music Journal piece by William B McCarthy dated 1987. 'William Motherwell as Folk Collector'. I have only skimmed this, but I learned from it that Motherwell took over The Minstrelsy part-way through the process. McCarthy seems to be arguing that there was in effect a change in editorial process part-way through.


At one point McCarthy says that an introduction was promised in a piece published in one part (it seems to have been published bit by bit). If I read this correctly it would imply that there was no introduction in the original versions of the early parts at least.

This piece is on JSTOR and I think if you google you will find it. Some interesting and - rational - discussion of Harker's work in it also. As I say, I have only skimmed it, so it is worth checking what it says for yourself.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Feb 20 - 05:39 AM

"Surely this is the folk process?"
It most definitely is which is the opposite to the way Harker used the term mediation as a stick to beat the collectors and to prove that the songs were "fake"
Gershon Legman devoted a fifty page chapter to 'The Merry Muses' in his wonderfully symbolically-titled 'Horn Book'
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: Jack Campin
Date: 27 Feb 20 - 05:26 AM

Burns often identified sources in his letters, but doesn't seem to have thought a wider public needed to know.

Sharpe's largest single oral source was his childhood nurse. On paper he used a ragbag of stuff like the notebooks of Robert Mylne and the tunebooks of rural instrumentalists. Laing was more extreme, dumpster-diving outside lawyers' offices for historical documents.

For song texts, I suspect the slip songs and chapbooks were more reliable than the artier and more prestigious publications - after all they were expecting to sell the stuff back to the same class of people who created it. You see that very clearly with tunes - fiddlers' tunebooks are way more usable than any of the posh copperplate-engraved coffee-table collections.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: GUEST,Cj
Date: 27 Feb 20 - 04:58 AM

'By mediation I mean not just simply the fact that people passed on songs … but that in the very process of so doing their own assumptions, attitudes, likes and dislikes may well have significantly determined what they looked for, accepted and rejected.'

Surely this is the folk process? Consciously or not, we all err to what we prefer or are capable of.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: GUEST,Derrick
Date: 27 Feb 20 - 04:19 AM

Who was C K sharpe?

See here,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Kirkpatrick_Sharpe

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: The Sandman
Date: 27 Feb 20 - 03:55 AM

Who was CK Sharpe, do you mean Cecil Sharp?

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: GUEST,Pseudonymous
Date: 26 Feb 20 - 02:53 PM

"And, I repeat, why not say that the besom-maker sang (or recited) it to Dixon?"

May I suggest a possible reason? Let's go back to the definition we have been using, though it isn't ideal:

'By mediation I mean not just simply the fact that people passed on songs … but that in the very process of so doing their own assumptions, attitudes, likes and dislikes may well have significantly determined what they looked for, accepted and rejected.'

Harker has been discussing the various sources that Dixon made use of. He speaks approvingly of the few occasions when Dixon used singers as a source and the besom-maker was one of these. It may be that Harker wanted at this point to emphasise that the humble besom-maker, just like the other kinds of source, will have had his own attitudes and assumptions about the song. These will be part of the culture that Harker argues was too often ignored or 'manufactured' by collectors.

I can see one might imagine that Harker thinks of a performance of the play as in some sense 'authentic' and that the man will be 'mediating' that 'authentic' version, but I don't think we need to think that way in order to come up with a reason why he uses the term at this point.

I'm not sure that Harker is saying that there is any 'unmediated' version, if this makes sense? Because each and every version will be an interpretation?

Til

But I do agree that it can be a bit irritating when he repeats words.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 26 Feb 20 - 02:47 PM

A repeat request please which no one answered last time. Motherwell's famous influential essay on how collecting and publishing should be carried on. Was that in his original Minstrelsy as well as later editions, or did it just appear in later editions, and if so at what point did it appear?

Sharpe was behind a lot of the early publications and some of the manuscripts were in his possession but I'm not aware he published anything substantial on the ballads. Macmath appears to have finished up with a lot of this and then passed it on to Child.

What publications of Burns actually give his sources? Very little identified in Johnson. My little paperback of Merry Muses doesn't have sources but the original may have.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: Jack Campin
Date: 26 Feb 20 - 09:05 AM

Personally I don't have a massive beef with collectors of this period not identifying their sources. It simply wasn't a requirement then.

May not have been a requirement but it was often done when the source was an individual singer. Burns usually did it and C.K. Sharpe was pretty consistent about it.

It was not common for people to identify broadside sources, though.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: Brian Peters
Date: 26 Feb 20 - 09:00 AM

Thanks Steve, no smoking gun but interesting stuff. I do have one of Mary Ellen Brown's books, and must look at it again.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 25 Feb 20 - 03:00 PM

1800 Scotland and 1900 southern England were different planets. I don't see any point in comparing them.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 25 Feb 20 - 02:36 PM

Hi Brian,
Sorry to disappoint but I only have the claims of contemporary and later scholars and the correspondence to go by. Chambers has something to say on Hogg and his reliability and of course Lang defends Scott. The best source for Scott's tampering is his own later regrets and admittance, but once again we will not be certain of the extent of it. There are strong claims that some of the people who were sending him material were mediating it before they even sent it to him. I can recommend the books of Mary Ellen Brown on this period, particularly those that present the correspondence of the collectors.

Personally I don't have a massive beef with collectors of this period not identifying their sources. It simply wasn't a requirement then. The collecting and editing and publishing were the important aspects to them.

One possible reason for not tampering with Mussel-mouthed Charlie's repertoire is his pieces were well-known in Aberdeen and collectors in that area would have spotted the tampering straight away.

Regarding the 'political reactionaries' I have no recollection of reading this angle. Scott was a staunch loyalist, militarist, and very much part of the establishment, but I have not encountered any influence of this in his ballad making or editing, and I have to confess I have not read any of his novels.

As for Sharp's collecting methods, I have nothing but praise for the man, always have had, always will have. I am eternally grateful for what he did in that respect. You already know what my beefs are and I'm not repeating them.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: Brian Peters
Date: 25 Feb 20 - 12:33 PM

Just to get us away from all this abstraction for a moment, here's a direct question for Steve (genuine curiosity, not attempted point-scoring). While I was checking through Harker I found a comment regarding James Hogg, the Ettrick Shepherd, who apparently regularly tampered with his informants' material except in the case of 'mussel-mou'd Charlie' (an itinerant ballad-seller in Aberdeen), and Mrs Betty Cameron of Lochaber:

“Both remained staunch political reactionaries as well as being culturally conservative to the end, and so could have their songs 'copied verbatim' for Hogg's 'betters', without benefit
of further mediation.”

I’d be interested to know whether you have independent information about Hogg’s reliability, and whether it’s really true that he left certain songs unedited because they came from ‘political reactionaries’.

Just by the way, I was interested to notice that both Scott and Hogg are chastised for not identifying their singers, instead using terms like 'country singer', 'old woman', 'girl', 'blind old man', or 'old persons residing at the head of Ettrick Forest'. One might have expected praise for Cecil Sharp for, not only noting meticulously the names of every singer, plus time and place, but also taking photographs of them and, in some cases, giving quite a bit of detail about their singing. If one had expected it, one would have been disappointed.

Subject: RE: Mediation and its definition in folk music
From: Brian Peters
Date: 25 Feb 20 - 12:09 PM

"that doesn't imply that what he's saying is meaningless. He could say much the same things about Sharp a few years earlier without using the term, so it doesn't do anything essential for his arguments."

It may not in that specific case, but the problem arises when the term used to describe Sharps alleged 'doctoring' is applied willy-nilly to Bishop Percy, F J Child, and a working-class Yorkshire mummer. Not least because his discussion of Sharp in both pieces is riddled with inaccuracies, whether accidental or intentional, and displays clear bias. I would be the last to say that there's nothing worthwhile in Fakesong but, as I said on the other thread, when the scholarship in a specific area you know something about is so badly flawed, it makes it difficult to trust anything else, and the slapdash use of 'mediation' doesn't help. However, I would guess that Steve G finds some merit in the chapters on the collectors pre-Child, which were the ones I found useful, at least as an introduction to characters I knew little about when I first read the book.

I tend to agree with Jim about obscure technical language, in our field especially - I much prefer to read plain, informative English. Wading through some of the high-falutin' musicological stuff I quoted above made me wonder whether the use of that level of jargon is a device to show how clever you are, or a device to disguise how clever you aren't.