Folk song collecting. Good or bad?

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 08 Jun 00 - 12:15 PM

Well, I modestly submit that Digitrad is the Biggest (available) and Best collection extant. I think it has value, not in enshrining anything, but rather in suggesting songs to folk who have either never encountered them, or never heard them. It also ha a fair amount of what I consider crap.

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 08 Jun 00 - 12:16 PM

Well, I modestly submit that Digitrad is the Biggest (available) and Best collection extant. I think it has value, not in enshrining anything, but rather in suggesting songs to folk who have either never encountered them, or never heard them. It also ha a fair amount of what I consider crap.
Use it as you wish; take from it what you wish. Change what you wish.

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 08 Jun 00 - 03:30 PM

Collectors essential. Arrangers delightful. There is no "wrong" way to do a song. A version might in theory be totally and universally disliked, but that would not make it "wrong" - unless the intention was to reproduce and that intention not effected. But the biggest danger is the loss of resource, which takes me back to the head of this post...now read on.

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: Malcolm Douglas
Date: 08 Jun 00 - 04:16 PM

The simple act of recording a song from tradition and disseminating that record will always tend to distort the tradition; this is pretty much inevitable.  In fact, the publishing of folksongs by collectors such as Sharp has given rise to far less distortion than did the enormous popularity of the Broadside during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries; songs were collected from tradition and widely distributed throughout the UK and Ireland, leading to other versions disappearing in the face of printed "standard" versions.  In this way, a lot of English songs became established in Ireland, and vice-versa; since melodies were often not given, the itinerant ballad-sellers simply sang them (that was part of the marketing process) to tunes that they knew -and since a great many of those ballad-sellers were Irish, this led to a large importation of Irish melodies into the English tradition.  Often these melodies displaced the original English ones; not necessarily because they were better, but simply because they were more widely-heard.

Today, the same process is underway; this time it is commercial sound recordings that are the agent of change.  A great many people only hear one or two recordings of any particular song, and tend to assume that these versions are the definitive ones.  In many cases, the lack of background information given with recordings leads people into any number of misapprehensions, such as the widespread belief that Dirty Old Town was written about Dublin.  Some irresponsible performers promulgate all manner of fanciful nonsense when they do provide sleevenotes, leading innocent listeners to believe all kinds of foolishness.

The Digitrad itself is not immune from this effect; contributions have to be taken on trust, and I've come across -as I'm sure have many others- all sorts of "information" attached to songs which is either unproveable or just plain wrong.  The authority of print should not be underestimated; people will believe things they see written down.  It's just as bad, to my mind, to fail to provide proper credits for songs -some people simply transcribe from recordings and don't bother to read the notes or look at the copyright information on the label.  Of course, many people will consider that sort of information irrelevant, and me pedantic for wanting it: I'd say that that would be a rather short-sighted viewpoint, particularly as the Digitrad is taken very seriously as a source of information.  Nowadays, collectors of folkmusic are careful to place the material in its proper context; the source of the song or melody is just as important as the music itself.  I think that's a healthy attitude, and one that we should all aspire to, insofar as we are able, when disseminating material by whatever means.  We owe it to the music, and to those who will come to it in the future.

Malcolm

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: sophocleese
Date: 08 Jun 00 - 06:38 PM

Dick, I think the digitrad is wonderful. Thank you.

There are a lot of songs which I have learned that I have never heard because nobody around me sang them, they are beautiful songs that move me and speak to me. I am grateful to the collectors of the past, present and future. It is because of these collectors that we have a large body of songs to draw from that are not dictated to us by those with power and money to do so.

Shambles I don't think you can justly compare the collection of independent living creatures, butterflies or eggs, with the collection of abstract entities, songs, which only live when humans give them voice. The creatures may die but the songs just lie dormant until woken by others.

Collectors may or may not misrepresent people and follow their own biases in their collections, but I'm glad for the enthusiasm that led them to believe that these things were worthy of collection. Paternal attitudes at the turn of the century were part of the time and collectors didn't escape them any more than we escape being influenced by attitudes in our time. But they still thought that there were songs that needed to be shared and saved and they did what they could. It might have been a sadder world if they had held back for fear of being thought precious. Just because a song is written in a book doesn't mean that others weren't or aren't singing it and altering it at the same time. It allows for a multiplicity of alterations over time.

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Jun 00 - 07:44 PM

The analogy with egg collecting doesn't really stand up. Every egg you collect is a bird that might have hatched. That's got no parallel in song collecting.

A much more apt metaphor is that of a seed bank, which exists to ensure that the seeds of plnats are available to be planted again when the occasion arises.

The real danger - if such a word is appropriate in this context - is the one indicated by Malcolm, of the range of songs in use being whittled down to merely those which get recorded by the right people and distributed by the right channels. This is the same process that occurs in industrialised agriculture. A seed bank is some kind of defence against this, and a collector of songs provides the same service to future generations.

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: The Shambles
Date: 09 Jun 00 - 10:07 AM

Well the butterfly/egg analogy was not meant to be an exact one, more of a way of provoking thought. It seemed to work however and the responses have made me think some more.

Sophocleese says: "Shambles I don't think you can justly compare the collection of independent living creatures, butterflies or eggs, with the collection of abstract entities, songs, which only live when humans give them voice. The creatures may die but the songs just lie dormant until woken by others".

Butterflies were "independent living creatures" until they were collected, then they were dead and then become to some extent "abstract entities".

Traditional songs were alive when humans were giving them voice and only become "abstract entries" after being collected. They may not loose all of their 'life' during the process of lying dormant but the process does not help and certain elements of their past relevance and vibrancy are lost. Giving them voice again may make them re-live to some extent but can also on occasions make them resemble 'Frankenstein's Monster.

"It's life Jim, but not as we know it".

Kevin says: "The analogy with egg collecting doesn't really stand up. Every egg you collect is a bird that might have hatched. That's got no parallel in song collecting."

It depends on how you view the song you collect. It appeared to be necessary for the early English collectors to pronounce the individuals and the tradition that spawned the song as dead. Maybe reports of that song's death were exaggerated?

Could it be that the song still continued it's natural evolution to find itself, at a later date competing unsuccessfully against the transcribed, arranged and generally recognised 'Frankenstein's Monster? Could it be that this was a major cause of the void in the English tradition?

Could it be that every song you collect is part of a tradition that might of hatched?

"A much more apt metaphor is that of a seed bank, which exists to ensure that the seeds of plnats are available to be planted again when the occasion arises."

I do see your point but a seed with the genetic material 'blown' out of it is exactly the same as a collected egg. The purpose of collecting seed is different to collecting eggs, I accept. Of course the collected songs are more than empty shells but still not containing the complete genetic message

.

This is taking it to an extreme I know but even if you could retain all of the genetic material from a Jurassic seed or egg, the resulting life would now have to endure conditions that would have changed so much as to make it's existence impossible.

In that sense does not Environment = Tradition if Seed = Song?

I like the DT too. It is a very valuable resource a credit to it's originators and very much a living thing. I am proud to say that a creation of mine forms part of it. Not a Frankenstein's Monster, but possibly more of Trojan Horse? I think it might well form the part of the DT that Dick refers to as crap? But I didn't collect the song. (smiles).

There is also a very valuable and entertaining resource for original songs called The Mudcat Songbook. My thanks also go to The Keeper Of That Book.

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: Art Thieme
Date: 09 Jun 00 - 10:49 AM

Well, I had thought I'd never look into this thread 'cause it seemed like a preposterous question. After looking in, now, I feel that way even more.

From my point of view, there is practically no value to this thread. No way can the value of folksong collecting be validly questioned---except, maybe, to provoke an argument between those who adhere to a well-loved reality and those others who, by putting forth an impossible and divisive and silly argument, seek to make a home for them and theirs in other avian's nests. Alchemy aside (turning historical musical documents into dead moths etc.) --- that is an argument much like ones that are encountered in the pages of Alice In Wonderland.

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Jun 00 - 04:55 AM

I don't think that any of the posts on this thread actually did question the validity of folk song collecting. Sandy took the time and trouble to explain and to some extent, defend the questions that were raised about some of the downsides of the process.

It is the idea that anything is unquestionable that worries me and when and if something is considered as such, it is probably a very good idea to question it. When we were young, were used to think the questioning of the unquestionable was unquestionably a good thing to do?

The best way to communicate a folk song/tune is by hearing it live. Next best is a recording and lastly, the printed page. There are a few gifted 'sight' readers of music who can read the melody from a page as most of us would read a poem but this is not true for all. The page however is not the starting point.

The idea that you look for and find folk music on a page of a book is one that is very common in England. Why and how this preposterous concept came to be is what has prompted this thread and also this one. What is it with the English. Someone said something about maps earlier in the thread.

In truth how often does it happen that a song is lifted from a collection, 'cold', that is without hearing it sung, referred to or on being familiar with another version? Sometimes this is done consciously and these are the ones most in danger of being the 'Frankenstein's monsters. Thankfully that is not the way that the majority of people now use collections.

Divisions in music are the last thing that I want to see. To me there is only one nest. I wonder if the older and wiser Pete Seeger of today would be quite so sure that 'pulling the plug' of the electric Bob Dylan at Newport was such a necessary thing to attempt?

The original music of the past is now being referred to as traditional music. The original music of the present will then form the main part of the traditional music of the future. The DT has recognised this and that is it's great value as a collection. People today sing the original creations of Ewan McColl and Richard Thompson without knowing the 'recent' origin of them, and without seeing them in any collection.

Does old = gold and new = spew? Not in my (song) book.

I stared this thread say that it was a view from England. I think the paranoia about the 'dangers' of the singer songwriter, is very much a view from America.

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: sophocleese
Date: 11 Jun 00 - 12:42 PM

Shambles, I'm thinking about what you've written. Some interesting points but you appear to have a bias against those who sight read, and you are confusing those who use collections with those who collect.

"The best way to communicate a folk song/tune is by hearing it live. Next best is a recording and lastly, the printed page. There are a few gifted 'sight' readers of music who can read the melody from a page as most of us would read a poem but this is not true for all." What happens when you cannot hear the music live because you're stuck away among people that listen to an entirely different style of music? A style of music, through radio perhaps, that seeks to place a greater and greater distance between those favoured few who make the music and the rest of us uncultured, unmusical peasants who must be grateful for the chance to hear it? Murray Schaeffer (Sp?) opined that recording was a death knell for traditional folk as people began to see the recorded versions as the only version and ceased to transmit the tunes live. Those who were collecting the tunes at the beginning of last century didn't have the recording devices we now have and take for granted. Written music is a short hand way of transmitting specific musical knowledge in the abscence of the performer, and it can work reasonably well. There are a few gifted peformers who can hear a song once and then play it back well but this is not true for all.

Years and years ago here in Canada and the States the ground apparently trembled with the sound of the herds of buffalo. We can no longer hear that sound, the buffalo have been killed and driven away and have almost died out. If it were not for the writings of those who were here at the time of the buffalo we would not know what had been done and what had been lost. Folk song collectors were often moved by a genuine interest in the people whose songs they were collecting and were led also by a feeling that something was passing and that it should not go unmourned and unnoticed.

In another thread folk music, traditional music, is likened to a river. I think of the tunes and songs more as vessels. Some are more durable than others, some have cracked and been repaired, news ones are being made, some don't last very long, others broke long ago and can only be seen or used carefully and sparingly, others are packed away in an attic trunk and wait for some future explorer to open the box and wonder what this thing is, for some we only have a description of how our ancestors used leaves, hands, or bark to make a cup. In all cases the singer, the musician, is the water that fills the cup and shares it. So when I take granny's old mug off the shelf, with the chip repaired with china bond and hold it in the wrong hand as I hand it to my guest, does it matter when the water in it is good and refreshing?

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Jun 00 - 01:00 PM

As I've heard it Pete Seeger wanted to take an axe to the power cable because the sound system was so bloody awful, rather than because of the electric Dylan as such. I've been a concerts where I've felt like that too.

"When we were young, were used to think the questioning of the unquestionable was unquestionably a good thing to do?" But the question is, is it all right to question whether that is true? And is that question itself open to question? And are we in sight of a logical black hole here?

My feeling is that it is beyond question that collecting folk songs is a good thing; it is also beyond question that that, like all good things it is possible to misuse the work of song collectors, and that some song collectors have been guilty of that themselves from time to time.

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: Art Thieme
Date: 11 Jun 00 - 04:15 PM

The name of the thread is FOLK SONG COLLECTING---GOOD OR BAD ?

That is a question. And it is a question about the validity of folk song collecting. Is it GOOD or BAD ? In my previous post I gave you my answer to that question.

It cannot be bad !

Art

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: SeanM
Date: 11 Jun 00 - 05:08 PM

Could it be agreed on that collecting itself is not good or bad, but the uses that the collection are put to?

M

"Folk songs don't educate people. Folksingers do."

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Jun 00 - 05:25 PM

Headlines are always approximations for the topic under disacussion. Art is of course right, and FOLKSONG COLLECTING - GOOD OR BAD? answers itself ("Good").

The real question is "What good are collections of folk song?", or "How can we best use folk song collections?"

That probably wouldn't have pulled in the posts - but in fact, most of the time, that is what we have been discussing.

And I don't think there has been much disagreement. It seems to be generally agreed that:

We should use collected versions as sources, to be treated with respect, but not treated as holy writ.

We should recognise that they are only a sample of what has been sung.

And we should recognise that the folk process does not cease to operate when a song has been collected, and that we are part of it, for better or worse...

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Jun 00 - 06:45 PM

This was an honest try at having a debate on a subject that was of some interest to me. It was obviously of some interest to others, who have taken the trouble to contribute constructively to this debate. My thanks go to them and especially the peacemakers.

The last post said it all..........Unquestionably.

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: Frankham
Date: 11 Jun 00 - 07:58 PM

Hi McGrath, Need to set the record straight about Pete at the Newport Festival. The only reason he got mad is that he thought that the audience would not be able to discern Dylan's lyrics which he has always felt to be important. The band was overpowering him in Pete's estimation.

Regarding the collecting of folk music, I feel it's so important to emphasize the human connection to the appreciation for folk music. The people who sang it are as important to me as the music itself and in my view the two things are inseparable. When it becomes a dry, academic pursuit without the love and feeling that comes from a great folk performar, the word "folk" no longer applies. The great collectors that I knew or know such as Ken Goldstein, Wayland Hand, Wayne Daniel, Alan Lomax, Archie Green and others bring to their work a reverence and passion that spells love to me. How can this possibly be a "bad" thing? We owe what we know of folk music to this day because of the collectors. Otherwise there would be no Mudcat.

Frank

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Jun 00 - 08:27 PM

Yes, that was my understanding of the Pete Seeger episode at Newport. The fact that sound recordings of the Dylan set at Newport sound fair enough doesn't necessarily mean that that was how it sounded to the people in the crowd.

Another example of the eery nature of the Mudcat here - I'd just posted about Pete Seeger and Newport, up the tread, and I went down and switched on the wireless, and someone was talking about the altercation between Alan Lomax and Albert Goldstein on the same occasion. And that's not the stuff you nkormally get on Radio 4.

What set the spat off, apparently, was Alan Lomax being a bit sarcastic about how long an electrified had taken getting its equipment and sound system set up, contrasting it with how the old-time blues performers had earlier been able to walk on and play.

In which case, I'm wholly in sympathy with Alan, because that kind of thing is bloody infuriating. I get irritated by the way so many people try to make out that there was a hysterical panic reaction on the part of a folk establishment to electrified Dylan and so forth, because there wasn't.

Thread drift there. But I think the argy-bargy about collectors has more or less reached its conclusion.

There are still lots of interesting things we haven't touched on about collectors and collections, and the relationship between them and traditional singers on the one hand, and revival singers on the other. But perhaps there should be a new thread for that kind of thing, either now or later...

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: The Shambles
Date: 13 Jun 00 - 07:03 AM

Do we really owe the creation genre of 'folk' to the collectors? If we do, is that creation really such a good thing?

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: GUEST,Nancy-Jean
Date: 14 Jun 00 - 08:32 AM

A vote for good. When I hear a song which stirs me up enough to want to learn it and share it with others, I am participating in an age-old tradition. Who I am today is a result of people who had input into my "formation". Part of that "formation"--for this human being anyway--is playing tag with musical traditions, catching the best of what is thrown my way and passing it along. I don't give a "flying fig" about method,etc. If it gives me joy, and I don't harm anyone with my little song, I think music has served it's God-given purpose. I'm "fur it" and all the better for it.

Nancy-Jean

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: GUEST,Rich(stupidbodhranplayerwhodoesn'tknowbetter
Date: 14 Jun 00 - 06:55 PM

What contemporary traditional musician (if that's not a contradiction in terms) hasn't benefitted from being able to examine the roots of the music he or she is playing. Whether it's a book or recording, its vital to see where our music is coming from. A recording of a song can be viewed as the painting or as the canvas. It is part of the ongoing process of evolution that keeps a tradition alive. There are wonderful renditions being played today of music that would have been long since forgotten if they hadn't been saved on some lasting media. In Irish music, for example, Both Chief O'Niell and Michael Coleman are gone but new musicians are still learning the tunes that O'Niell printed and that Coleman recorded. Not note for note and ornament for ornament, but with the new life that comes from being played by new people. Ironically when the Coleman 78s were recorded, he was criticized for causing too much progress in that the recorded format was deemed a threat to regional styles of playing.
We play old types of music. If our predecessors hadn't collected our roots for us, we wouldn't have any music to worry about to begin with. And truth be told, if you listen to some of the old material that's out there, I'm not sure we've benefited by the tradition going forward. A lot of the "progress" can be better described as degeneration.
I really like McGrath's "seed bank" analogy. I wish I had thought of it.

My $0.02,
Rich

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Jun 00 - 04:21 AM

Rich said "If our predecessors hadn't collected our roots for us, we wouldn't have any music to worry about to begin with."

I do know what you mean and I am sorry to quoted you out of context, but "worry" is what the genre that the collectors have created, has made us do. Worry, debate, study, exclude, preserve defend and generally do our duty, instead of just playing, creating and enjoying the music.

The provenance or history of a song or tune may be interesting and valuable but can hinder the aesthetic appreciation of it. Which is after all the song or tune's primary function. However the title of the tune or song can sometimes be it's main attraction. When that happens, it does make the musician feel a little superfluous to the proceedings. As the following tale will hopefully demonstrate. When Rich mentioned Chief O'Niell, the wheels in my brain started whirring…..

At a session recently, a person who was listening asked for Chief O'Niells Favourite. I started to play it. Or more my mind started to play it, my fingers decided to play something else, another hornpipe but not the one requested. I carried on playing it, intending to go in to the requested tune after. Before I could do that, the chap stood up, thanked me, said it was a great tune that, he had always liked it and left, quite happy. My playing may have been the problem, I know but there were a number of good souls helping me out.

In fact many musicians do not know or cannot recall the titles of the traditional tunes they play. At this session, a convention has emerged when asked for the title of a tune that you can't remember. There is a collection of paperback books, in the pub. You scan along these titles until you find one you like and that then becomes the title of the tune. ….I heard a great tune there recently called, A Hundred And One Curries!.

Rich, I think that your struggle with the term "contemporary traditional musician", just about sums up the tangle we are in. For music is always created and ONLY exists, in it's entirety, in the present.

I think Donovan's, ' Catch The Wind', describes what the very best collectors quite understandably, attempt to do.

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Jun 00 - 07:59 PM

I have mentioned this before, I think, but I looked and could not find it.

Jacky Daly, ex Patrick Street et al, had a medical problem. As a result of this he was unable to remember any of the titles to the vast number of tunes in his head. The interviewer said something like "that must be terrible". He replied that it could have been worse, if the situation was that he could remember the titles but could not remember the tunes and how to play them.

That I feel, was how most musicians would view it?

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: sophocleese
Date: 15 Jun 00 - 11:01 PM

I don't know Shambles, why make it a choice between titles and music? It is possible to have both. For a lot of people names involving words can be easier to remember than tunes without words. Others remember tunes more easily than titles. Fortuneately there are also people who remember both and can bridge the gap.

And don't forget that there are a number of frustrated musicians who come here saying "Help I can't remember the rest of a song that goes something like..."

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: The Shambles
Date: 16 Jun 00 - 06:40 AM

The ideal situation is to have both, we at least appear to agree on that. Jacky Daly did not have or want to have a choice between them. He was making the most of a bad job. He just slightly felt better about the hand that he was given, rather than the one he could have been given.

In these sad and unfortunate circumstances, I feel that most musicians would share that view. For it is music that we are talking about.

The provenance of a tune, which is the main attraction of it to some, goes with the title of the tune. The actual music that is played under that title, would appear, on occasions to be less important or interchangeable.

This is also true of classical music. I have heard people spout on about when why or how the composer did certain things in the piece playing, to discover that it was a different piece or even a different composer.

The situation when you have some words, makes this less likely to happen, in the case of songs. The fact that it can and does happen with tunes, is surely enough to at least make us think about why we are first drawn to certain songs and tunes?

To me, it is always the aesthetic attraction of the music. In the case of songs, it is that wonderful combination of words and music but it is never the title, or provenance of it. That comes later.

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Aug 24 - 01:44 PM

Dear Joe. When I sing a song at my Captain's Bar in Edingburgh I always like to tell the story of how i heard it for the first time and sing the song. When I sing traditional songs I sometimes change the words. When I had my band Bravehearts sometimes we would fight about the songs if the tune is being used for other songs one example falls when my friend wanted to sing the Hearts song and it was not a good song to sing. I review and collect a lot of songs from recordings by the singers who recorded them first or near enough. I like discussing the the 18th and 19th century a lot and it gives me thought about how we know them. I know myself it is not easy to write a straightforward folk song .

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: The Sandman
Date: 04 Sep 24 - 07:18 AM

both

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: GUEST,Nick Dow
Date: 04 Sep 24 - 10:25 AM

To answer Shambles question, there is a downside to collecting Folk songs that showed itself in the mid 20th century.
I was sat on a permanent Gypsy site in Dorset with Mr Danny Cooper, and Queen Caroline Hughes daughter Mrs. Carrie Warren. I was assured that they knew all the songs. When I asked for a rendition Danny Cooper said 'We can sing them OK, but we don't need to' upon further enquiry he said 'We don't need to sing them, we've got this.' and produced Peter Kennedy's cassette tape of Caroline Hughes and proceeded to play it.
There is no easy answer to the question, and no one is to blame. Unfortunately there is no good or bad, right or wrong answer. Just an uneasy subjectivity.
So what is left behind? Well sometimes a pride and satisfaction for the singer, and sometimes the opposite, when Carrie Warren hears her mothers song 'Sheep Crook and Black dog' sung by a Folk Rock band on the radio, and her family are not even recognised. 'We ain't going to be made a fool of again.' she said to me. 'No one can own a traditional song' said an incredulous singer in a Folk event as the story went over his head. Every action has a reaction, we just have to live with it.

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: GUEST,Rossey
Date: 05 Sep 24 - 01:52 AM

The problem is that 'collecting', is pretty much an ego trip with people wanting their names associated with a 'collection'.   Fine if you are going back in time to the earlier part of the last century with the material collected.. but today collectors and even organisations like ITMA are tampering with, and damaging copyright.   In the UK there are clear copyright laws, and most works are either already recorded or noted to be in copyright (life plus 70 years after the death of the author/composer). Just because a generation down someone has forgotten the writer of a song they are singing, and was taught the song from someone else, does not mean that the song itself is without paternity or copyright.   Field recordings of modern age songs create misunderstandings over their status and origins.. Many stories that people pass on about the origins of modern age songs are often rubbish.

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: The Sandman
Date: 05 Sep 24 - 04:58 AM

Peter Kennedy was a mixture of good and bad, to his credit he was the only person able to collect the moving cloud from neilidh boyle, but he left a bad taste with a lot of people he collected from who felt they were ripped off.
he also seemed to think he owned the songs because he collected them

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: Nick Dow
Date: 05 Sep 24 - 05:01 AM

So I and other collectors were on an ego trip, and not primarily interested in the songs but promoting ourselves and the research that I and others are making into later songs creates misunderstandings and is often rubbish. Thanks for that Rossey. Some people might say it would be worth reconsidering your opinion.

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: GUEST,An Bailitheoir
Date: 05 Sep 24 - 05:59 AM

'his credit he was the only person able to collect the moving cloud from neilidh boyle'

Séamus Ennis recorded Néillidh in 1940 playing 'The Moving Cloud', a decade before Kennedy turned up.

Get your facts right!

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: GUEST,Rossey
Date: 05 Sep 24 - 06:11 AM

I am saying that people talk crap even about modern songs the ITMA lot have added to that.. their 'field recordings' contain modern copyright material that shouldn't be in there, and old stuff that clearly should. I have no idea who Nick Dow is and what stuff is involved, but modern folk music isn't 'folk' as it used to be when people went round with tape recorders in the fifties, when there were Victorians still alive etc, as it is often copyright song MCPS/PRS registered material with originators. Just because yer granny once sang it and taught you it, doesn't make it traditional.

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: GUEST,Nick Dow
Date: 05 Sep 24 - 09:19 AM

Rossey. With respect- Would you be so kind as to supply your definition of traditional? While you are busy defining, if it is not too offensive for you could you explain why three generations of singers, who still perform for example, 'Down in the fields where the buttercups all grow' fail to qualify under your traditional banner due to the song once being copyrighted, whereas a song like 'A rosebud in June' gleaned directly from the stage in the 18th century is generally included in many collections and repertoires as traditional. While you are at it, if you would not mind, do you agree with the contentious view that states that 'A Folk painting is less of a Folk painting if we know the painter'.
These are serious questions and if you have a love and interest in Folk music, they are worth considering.

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: GUEST,Rossey
Date: 05 Sep 24 - 10:05 AM

I am referring to modern songs.. (not the real traditional music of days of yore).. which people think they must be traditional cause their parents once sang it, but which only date back to Chuck Berry or the Beatles days, sometimes the 1970's. People have wonky memories and because a song is well known it often gets thought of as being there forever, like Flower of Scotland, Fields Of Athenry, Massacre of Glencoe, 40 shades of green and many other songs of that period. Those are the famous ones, but there are equally less famous equivalents, but which come from modern copyright period creation. There are different aspects, traditional in style, and traditional from a copyright perspective - and in tape recording singers there may be a conflict in the copyright aspect as song copyright is 70 years after the life of the originator's demise, and only becomes traditional/public domain after that point (unless truly anonymous like football chants, or children's play songs). Also people have wonky memories and create false narratives around folk style song.   I am not talking about the classic collecting period of days gone by.. when copyright was not so much of an issue with songs that were genuinely old and sung by families, but the collecting of songs that are modern period copyright works and their inclusion in databases with the assumption that they are traditional, through being around a generation or two.

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: The Sandman
Date: 05 Sep 24 - 10:41 AM

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: GUEST,An Bailitheoir - PM
Date: 05 Sep 24 - 05:59 AM

'his credit he was the only person able to collect the moving cloud from neilidh boyle'

Séamus Ennis recorded Néillidh in 1940 playing 'The Moving Cloud', a decade before Kennedy turned up.

Get your facts right!" QUOTE
you too have your facts wrong
here courtesy of musical trsditions

Seamus Ennis had met Neillidh Boyle in 1942 when he worked for the Folklore Commission and had notated tunes and stories from him.

Ennis returned in 1945 with Kevin Danaher and recorded the second batch of 12 tunes on the first CD. This is the first recording where we hear Boyle play a slow air and the wonderful tone he was able to produce on the fiddle. The listener can hear the echo of Boyle's mother signing the songs as Gaelge in the bow and finger work of the musician. There are two brief dance tunes in this group, Dulaman na Binne Buidhe and the Boys of the Lough that must be some of the most powerful fiddle playing ever recorded. Each is under a minute long, but the rhythm is flying and there's great attack on the fiddle that shows why Boyle was in demand for dancers. Again there are variations, and inversions that are sometimes reminiscent of the way Paddy Fahy twists tunes into new forms. In this group we get the first of three renditions of The Moving Cloud, probably the only one of Boyle's compositions that has survived.,
Seamus   Ennis recorded him in 1945 not as you mistakenly state 1940, GET YOUR FACTS RIGHT

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: The Sandman
Date: 05 Sep 24 - 11:09 AM

my point, is that Kennedy collected a vast amount of material, which was good, but he did not always treat his source performers with respect, so he was both good and bad

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: The Sandman
Date: 05 Sep 24 - 11:16 AM

Neil Boyle (1889-1961) born 26th. November, 1889 to Paddy Boyle and Nancy Sweeney at Easton, Pennsylvania; died at Dungloe on the 8th. August, 1961. It was another family of Donegal fiddlers, the Dohertys, who insisted that Peter Kennedy should do everything possible to make a recording of ”Neily“ because of his quite exceptional style. In the first place, he learned much from his grandfather, the famous Padraig McSweeney; secondly, because he claimed to have learned from ”the little people“, and thirdly, John, Michael, and Simie Doherty told us that he had written a number of his own compositions [including The Moving Clouds on this recording], which were now sought after by other fiddlers but jealously guarded by ”Neily“ himself. Although he had previously made a number of 78 rpm records for Regal Zonophone and many broadcasts, in the first place Neily refused to record. However he finally agreed to talk about ”The Present State of Irish Music“, and learning from the ”wee folk“, and in so doing, started to illustrate his talk. In this way Peter succeeded in making this remarkable recording. Because the house had no road access, Peter needed to use nearly half a mile of microphone cable in order to operate his tape machine from the car batteries, using the car horn as a signal. On playback, Neil was pleased with the result and gave his permission for publication….”

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: Nick Dow
Date: 05 Sep 24 - 11:28 AM

Thanks Rossey. You are effectively arguing for a subjective approach to tradition. So we are back to a Folk pot is less of a pot if we know the potter'. In the same breath you are arguing for qualifying degrees of Tradition. i.e. traditional style. age, etc. It does rather beg the question of exactly which tradition we accept as 'valid' and which is 'invalid'. Wonky memories are rather useful to the continuity of Folk songs. Last time I looked it was not a crime to be subjective, and I will admit I usually hide behind it in the argument of 'What is a folksong'. replying that I might not know what a Folksong is but I know what it isn't. However if you are entering a world of publication, or indexing, you might end up in the next volume of 'Fakesong' if there is one.
Baring Gould made value judgments we reckon we know better, until a song proves sexist or racist and then it's stamped upon. That said there is no excuse for poor research, but alleged 'False narratives' bring us into the area of the discipline of context. Welcome to the academic jungle, from one lost soul to another.

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: GUEST,Rossey
Date: 05 Sep 24 - 12:11 PM

Thanks for your reply. The painting analogy is also interesting, as I can admire a modern painting with all its beauty and meaning, but I cannot legally reproduce it in a book without permission, as (C) equally applies for life plus 70 years on an art image. It is amazing though how quickly these false narratives can arise.   Someone wrote a book a few years ago where they mention a Scottish song, as being an example of a politically incorrect bar room type thing taken over to America.   The only thing was it is actually a 1974 song written by my late father in heather and haggis tartan style (very obviously of the 50's-70's white heather club ilk).   It didn't exist until 1974. No recordings were made until 1974. Newspaper publicity on the song came out in 1974. There are no antecedents and it is a totally original work, that my father wrote to order for a TV show. Yet this American took it as being authentic, and way out of period!   The Mudcat Cafe is one place I do love to be able to get to the bottom of origins of songs, and give due credit to those who did write them (with AI there is now an alternative reality on all this).

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: GUEST,An Bailitheoir
Date: 05 Sep 24 - 12:12 PM

It was a typo.

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: GUEST,Nick Dow
Date: 05 Sep 24 - 12:29 PM

Yes now we're in agreement about rubbish. (The book that is not the song) The same thing in reverse has happened when I was compiling Secret Stream Volume 2. The Gypsy folk sing a song called 'Jimmy Doyle the Poacher' with a chorus (Ran tan diddle ay dan Jimmy Doyle the poacher) The original song was Canadian with a few different words and no chorus, my publisher contacted the owners and they wanted an obscene amount of money to include it in the book. Result is a song with a place in the Gypsy song tradition was not included. A folklorists lot is not a happy one.

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: The Sandman
Date: 05 Sep 24 - 12:43 PM

two typos, in fact 1940 instead of 1945, since he reorded him in 1945 it was not a decade, before Kennedy. you are very forward to attack my facts, yet you make two so called typos. laughable ,

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: GUEST,An Bailitheoir
Date: 05 Sep 24 - 01:11 PM

I admitted my minor error. You have not rescinded your spurious claim that Kennedy was the only person to have recorded Mr. Boyle playing 'The Moving Cloud'.

Apologies for the diversion. I won't comment again on what is a very worthy thread.

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: The Sandman
Date: 06 Sep 24 - 02:29 AM

Sharp and Baring Gould should be judged in the context of their time.

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: The Sandman
Date: 06 Sep 24 - 03:30 AM

Sharp bowdlerised some of the song texts, especially those containing references to sexual intercourse. Given the prudery of the Edwardian era, these could never have been published in full (especially in a school textbook), but Sharp did note such lyrics accurately in his field notebooks, thus preserving them for posterity.

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: GUEST,Nick Dow
Date: 06 Sep 24 - 05:28 AM

Agreed. The point I was making is that we have our own red lines today, for exactly the same reasons as you point out above. Take a listen to J

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: GUEST,Nick Dow
Date: 06 Sep 24 - 05:30 AM

Flaming computer! Take a listen to Jumbo Brightwell singing Banks of the Nile (if you need to) and the modern problem will be apparent.

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: The Sandman
Date: 06 Sep 24 - 12:31 PM

Well i suppose you have to do what sharp and did keep the original, i cannot find the recording does he sing n######?

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: GUEST,Nick Dow
Date: 06 Sep 24 - 01:44 PM

Yes he does Try You Tube

Subject: RE: Folk song collecting. Good or bad?
From: The Sandman
Date: 13 Sep 24 - 04:22 AM

it has to be good overall