How can we make folk music more apealing

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Andy
Date: 29 Sep 99 - 11:17 AM

O.K. Can't totaly disgree with the statement but the thread of the argument still applies and the solution to the current problem which sems to be relatively Global is still no closer.

I could be flippant and state that you have country and Western to deal with too ! But I believe that would be counter productive and potentially inflamatory as the same arguments apply !

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: GeorgeH
Date: 29 Sep 99 - 11:34 AM

I hate and avoid "what is folk" threads so I'm not going to get drawn into one . . though the stretch of the imagination by which Kate Rusby is working in a different genre to Martin Carthy is beyond me . . . Though I'm not sure that's actually what Andy was saying.

So let me point this back the way I see it. There is a range of music which "we" like and which we see as relevent to this place. For any individual's selection from that music, there are a whole load of folks out there who have never heard it. And of those there are some who would like it if they did. That's before you come to the stuff which requires a little more effort to appreciate, which folks are likely to be led towards once they discover the musical riches we know and love . . .

Let me also make a distinction between "popular music" and just about all other sorts. Pop (and, to an extent, Rock) is largely consumed as background. Even at a pop concert the audience are not primarily out to LISTEN to the music. Whereas most other music ("classical", Jazz, "shows") carries an expectation that you actually make space to listen to it. And - to my mind - THAT's where Folk belongs. If it cross-feeds into "Pop" then so much the better, but that's still a peripheral part of it.

G.

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Frank Hamilton
Date: 29 Sep 99 - 11:45 AM

Andy,

The solution is simple to me. A greater appreciation for the folk traditions of each respective country is in order. Work that the Folklife Center in Washington is doing, the Smithsonian in DC as well, the work that the Lomaxes have done for the Library of Congress,recording companies such as Rounder Records, Folkways/Smithsonian Folk Legacy, Greenhays (owned and operated by the Jean Ritchie Pickow family), Arhoolie (Chris Strachwitz), Legacy and Blues Roots (Columbia) and others have done, and the countless wonderful books in the field of folklore and folk music.

In the UK, (correct me if I'm wrong George) The Cecil Sharp House, the radio broadcasts by Ewan McColl, "revivalist" folk interpreters such as the laudable Martin Carthy, Nic Jones, and our own imports such as David Jones and Louis Killen, the Comhaltas from Ireland, Tommy and Sarah Makem, ....there are so many that are doing the job and not begging the question one bit. These are not the popular music singer/songwriters.

As to Country and Western, this is a record company designation such as was the term Hillbilly music to isolate a market for sales. The music of Country and Western started from an interest in American folk music and soon became appropriated by the music merchants in a similar fashion to what has happened to the term "folk" these days. Loretta Lynn may be the coal miner's daughter but she is not singing songs of the coal mine where she grew up because that "don't sell". Sarah Ogan Gunning, Mike Paxton, Hazel Dickens, Pete Steele, Nimrod Workman, Merle Travis and others have sung of the coal miner's life. Merle Travis did not make all of his money singing coal miner songs, though. A wonderful book to read would be Archie Green's "Only A Miner" to give you some more background on "Country and Western".

Mind you, I have no gripe with popular music. I love it play it, and enjoy much of it but "it ain't folk music".

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: M. Ted (inactive)
Date: 29 Sep 99 - 11:48 AM

Frank,(or anybody) what did you think of my idea? Which was to create some sort of missionary effort to teach these "folksingers" some traditional folk songs and help them to learn how to think and play in tradtional styles--even if it's for only one or two songs--anyone game for this?

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Mark Clark
Date: 29 Sep 99 - 01:01 PM

Over the years I've often thought about the definition of folk music and, although I've constructed various hypotheses at different times, none has ever really stood the test of time. Einstein taught us that the act of measuring something necessarily alters the observation of that being measured. I wonder if folk music is like that. What if all the recording, cataloging and analysis of folk music continues to alter our perception of it? It's probably been twenty-five years or more since I began using the term traditional music to refer to the music I love best since, as others have pointed out, the term folk music lost much of its meaning in the U.S. due to it's appropriation by the music industry.

Of course the term traditional music is getting fuzzy as well. As I attend jam sessions, song circles and festivals I often hear songs that were originally popular commercial tunes being carried on as oral tradition. People have often lost sight of the commercial original and remember the songs as "the one Uncle Ralph used to sing" and pass them along to their friends and children without further attribution. Many of these songs have been sung and passed around long enough to be called traditional in many contexts. Sometimes I find myself wondering whether any song accessible enough to fit the genre and that people hold in high enough regard to keep and pass around is in danger of becoming a folk song one day.

As far as making folk music more appealing (more widely admired?) is concerned, I think that is largely a function of how entertaining we can make it. I strongly suspect that people a hundred years ago walked out on a performance they didn't enjoy just as quickly as people today. My own acquaintance with traditional music is entirely due to the commercial appeal of Gene Autry, the Weavers and the Kingston Trio. From those beginnings, I just kept "poling upstream" trying to find the influences that caused these wonderful performers to choose the material and presentation that made their music so compelling. I'm afraid I don't see any way to get others to start the journey except by attracting their attention with material and presentations that are primarily entertaining but leave the audience wondering how the music came to be. Most audience members will simply be entertained but some will go looking for its roots. A few will take the music and use it as a basis for creating something new.

- Mark

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: DougR
Date: 30 Sep 99 - 12:03 AM

Spaw: Encouraging folks to tune in on that Jesus Dance site is going to get you a reservation in a place hotter than July in Arizona! I'll pray for you when I can stop laughing.

DougR

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: GeorgeH
Date: 30 Sep 99 - 10:56 AM

Frank: Re: the UK - no correction needed. And there are others to add; I suppose the Howsons are probably the most obvious.

G.

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Frank Hamilton
Date: 30 Sep 99 - 02:03 PM

M.Ted, I think your idea is great. A little musicology would help. A knowledge of the background, history, culture and the evolution of the song would open the door.

Mark, I think we need to look at each song here. The earlier variants of folk songs don't necessarilly stem from "commercial" sources. IE: Barbara Allen was hardly a chart buster through the ages. There are many people who really don't know the difference and will call early popular music "folk". This is because they haven't been exposed to traditional sources.

Entertainment is different for people. I don't find some things that are called "entertaining" entertaining at all. People in the cities today are prone to walk out on much more than they ever have traditionally because the entertainment field has reached a glut. There is a lot more impatience on the part of an audience today due to TV and the availability of so much "entertainment". I find that the knowledge, background, musical styles, lyric content of traditional American folk music very entertaining personally. I could sit and listen to unaccompanied ballads done by a traditional singer for a long period of time. I don't need a song "jazzed up" or put in a framework of show business excitement to be truly entertained.

I think that most audiences who look for "entertainment" have gotten lazy. They don't care about what they hear as long as it is somehow stimulating for them, sensually or in some cases mind-numbing. Not many are going to look for the roots of what they hear. This is why traditional folk music is on the back burner these days when it comes to audiences interest. Here's the problem. There's not many places people can go to be educated about folk music or music in general. Here's the solution. There should be such a place. It should have folklorists, folksong collectors, musicologists, teachers, recordings of traditional music, books available on folklore and music, "revival" folk song singers who care about the music and whenever possible, traditional singers and musicians who can provide the necessary insight to the music.

What does not need to be done is for anyone who sings and plays a musical instrument to define themselves as a traditional folk singer when they are really part of the entertainment music business and have a vested interest in creating a career capitalizing on this image. Those singers who are in a song circle and remember IE: Hoagy Carmicheal's early popular songs as something learned from their Uncle Rufus as folk songs are misinformed.

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Margo
Date: 30 Sep 99 - 02:21 PM

Well, I'm doing my part. Four days a week I sing and play at my son's preschool. I have played piano, guitar, and concertina. The kids love it! Today I did an encore performance of The Little Engine that Could because it was so popular. Just my voice and the concertina. They're such a wonderful audience. A little noisy, but mostly attentive, and very appreciative.

Now that I think about it, most of the folk music I was exposed while a child was Burl Ives records. I really liked them, and still do.

Margarita

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Mark Clark
Date: 30 Sep 99 - 04:32 PM

Frank,

I agree wholeheartedly. I too love to listen to the original performances and actually own (and play) some of those old field recordings on Folkways. I share your view of "entertainment" and am rarely entertained by products advertised as entertainment. I imagine the facility you describe is what we all hope for the OTSFM. I too would prefer an educated audience committed to the authenticity of the music and aware of its heritage.

Still, not everyone who wants to talk about the weather is interested in meteorology. If we want to troll for new converts don't we need to begin by presenting some performances that are designed to capture the attention of those with no knowledge or experience of folk music? (I don't mean to imply that I have some idea how this is to be accomplished.) Please straighten me out if I'm off track but the early Weavers sounded (to an eight year old) unlike any of the popular music with which they were competing; still, On Top Of Old Smokey, and Goodnight Irene just blew everyone away. Neither of those performances was entirely true to the original but the effect was to help kindle an interest in folk music of all kinds outside of academia.

 

<< There are many people who really don't know the difference and will call early popular music "folk".>>

Yes, and there are many people today who will call contemporary popular music "folk." <g> Isn't that related to the same question that has been so often asked: are folk songs designed (dare I say written?) to be folk songs or is any suitable song kept and carried through oral tradition a folk song? Since I am unable to enforce any preferred definition I've decided I'm better served by resisting the temptation to define folk music and just continue to play and look for music that pleases my ear and my own sense of propriety. Someone should be working on the definition but probably not me.

Thanks for your considerable insight,

- Mark

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Frank Hamilton
Date: 30 Sep 99 - 06:23 PM

Mark, thank you for your thoughtful response. We do agree. I confess to my frustration. For four years at the OTS of FM I tried to interest students in traditional folk song material. We used the popular "folk type" songs of the day in hopes that we could create more interest in the traditional stuff. The idea was just to get people to play and sing and enjoy it. There were people who did gravitate toward the folk songs as there were those who were content to stay with the composed "folk style" songs by the popular artists. We had the same discussion about "what is folk?" that we have now with one difference in my view. The traditional music has seemed to become less important in the public perception because it's not so showy. You don't blow people away with folk music.

You of course are right about the Weavers. I think that one thing that distinguished them from other folk groups to follow was their interest and committment to traditional folk music. When I was with them, there was a slight tension about this. Lee reflected more of a traditional approach because of his background and I think he felt that this wasn't as important as being more in tune with the Weaver's sound. The group went in for less traditional tunes as they went along. I think the lure of the pop world got to Lee. I don't know that he wanted the Weavers to be as popular as the Kingston Trio but I had a feeling that he would have liked some of that. I think that Ronnie and Erik were more tuned into the traditional approach. Freddie is a fine musician but much more eclectic in his interest in music. They did sound different than many pop groups at the time or who came later. Their focus was as songwriters and adaptors who carried their political ideology into their music and I think they did this successfully.

You bring up the problem of academia and this is valid. It can alienate folks who haven't been exposed to traditional folk. Mainly, it's an attitude thing that I have encountered amoung die-hard "folkies" who have to do things the "right" way. This lead to a schism in the 60's where young people said in effect that they didn't want the creative limitations imposed on them by academic authorities and went into rock and roll because it was "freer". Unfortunately many folklorists and scholars had a more "hard nosed" attitude in those days about folk music and turned a lot of people off. There is also the adage, "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing". Because there's so much to learn about traditional folk music, it's hardly a "science" although some have tried to make it so.

I think that if we take the view that recently composed songs are folk songs, we run into problems. They haven't gone through variations and haven't had historical or cultural connections that are so important to the appreciation and understanding of the music. The very music itself is tied into history and social/cultural influences of a given group and if this is ignored, than folk music becomes whatever anyone wants to make it from acid rock to Pavarotti.

You may be right that restrictive definitions are not useful as much as information about trad folk. A lot of this is highly subjective with me because I grew up listening to Library of Congress field recordings, Folkways records, early 78's of "country" and blues, and music that Rounder has so admirably released. (I sat at the feet of my mentor, Bess Lomax Hawes.) I loved the so-called "primitive" sounds of the singers, many with "outdoor" voices and rich timbres who employed unusual ornamentation and nuances in their singing style that you couldn't hear by the "professional" singers on the radio or TV. Then when I heard many of these traditional sources live they presented to me an entirely different experience in listening to music. There was a raw power in their music which didn't so much as blow you away but pull you in. A blues musician in the back of town in Mississipi or Tennesee sounded so different than Eric Clapton or many of the rock and roll stylists playing popularized "blues". It was an intimate experience which would sometimes be out of place on a concert stage or in a night club which demands a kind of showy energy to please a crowd. This stuff was from the heart and sung not to please any audience or to hit the charts but because the singer was talking about his real conditions that were there in his cultural environment. How can you make this appealing to a large audience? Don't know. Maybe the answer lies in smaller audiences without the distancing effect of sound systems between the singer and the audience. I think there is room for the "revivalist" folkie to play concerts. Pete Seeger certainly is one of the greatest musical performers of this century and imparts the feeling of folk music without actually having come from any specific folk tradition, although some will disagree with that assessment who remember the association of folk songs with the left-wing and labor movement.

I'm back to square one. To make it more appealing, we have to know what it is.

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Harvey Gerst
Date: 30 Sep 99 - 08:36 PM

Tis a puzzlement.

Frank, I listen to your version of "Buffalo Skinners" and Roger McGuinn's version, and they're completely different in melody and chords. Your version is the darker and the heavier of the two, but which is closest to the original, I haven't a clue.

Yes, I know it's all part of the "folk tradition" but it's always part of the ongoing change and the re-definition of folk music.

On "Jay Gould's Daughter", we took a lot of liberties to make the song more fun for listeners, which possibly makes it more commercial - and less traditional.

Still if you were "dinking" around with that song on guitar, with various of your friends, I imagine Pete would come up with a harmony line similar to the one you used, and Lee would have done pretty much as it sounds on the album.

But, IF it were never destined to be recorded (i.e., just done for fun), would it be traditional or commercial? Does having Pete singing and playing banjo on it move it automatically from one realm to another?

Maybe it's intent that makes the difference. I see this as trying to define language by freezing it at some point in time and saying "that's what it is". But "folk music", like language, is more of a process to me - and it's always changing, which means it really can't be defined - at least in conventional terms.

I'll go take my medication now.

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: M. Ted (inactive)
Date: 01 Oct 99 - 01:37 AM

Frank,

Oddly enough, "Barbara Allen" was once something of a hit, having been on the Everly Brothers LP, "Songs Our Daddy Taught Us", which I recall as having been quite a big seller among the bobbysoxers, or whatever they were back then--

It also occurred to me that Don and Phil were probably the closest thing to traditional performers to ever hit the big time--That of course, was back when rock'n'roll was pure and innocent--

Now, should we make "Barbara Allen" the folksong of the month and try to teach it to aspiring singer/songwriters and maybe even see if we can get some alternative grunge band to do a "cover" of it on MTV Unplugged"?

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Andy
Date: 01 Oct 99 - 02:55 AM

Sadly I think we are in danger of getting in to a circular discussion here.

One valid point is exposure in the classroom voluntarily - Margarita repy above is very valid - sadly without being sexist this is often led by the girls as often we boys are at work or in positions where time off for such activity is not an option - a sad fact which will take years to change - but thankfully it is changing.

I have led maypole and barn dancing at my kids primary school - on meeting some of the kids a couple of years later they still remebered me in my morris kit and the live music and dance. The first step. Thinking about it I also played at their nursery before. Then (by gum I must be a disciple) I got my lodger and his children to a festival (zero folk background - kids into all the usal teenange nonsense) and they now love folk - Including he is addicted to Unaccompanied singing - even though he doesn't sing, he says can't ! Personal approach and enthusiasm go a long way.

We must not become elitist and we must not forget that we developed our craving for the history and background to the music and traditions after a first introduction - which was an entertainment, entertaining. The music in any shape or form must cover both areas very well and carefully in order to succeed. Some songs are to put it in the vernacular C**p but have a fascinating pedigree - should they be performed too often in public or kept for the workshops ? Some of the comments made about commercialism are partly defeated by mention of Burl Ives and the ilk - once CDs, vinyl etc. exist there is always an element of cemmercialism - no one is that philanthropic - it has all got to fit in to the jigsaw - bit of a complex 5000 piece on though. I must add this forum is great for looking for the pieces.

I think the Schools - by good informed performers with loadsa common sense is a great start - BUT - The schools can be reluctant and need to be careful there are a lot of wierdos out there, so can make us getting to them harder.

Just a few thoughts, hopefully not to controversial, sadly no answers or solutions.

A. XX

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Stewie
Date: 01 Oct 99 - 03:05 AM

I simply wish to express my surprise that, in the context of this discussion, no mention at all has been made of Snakefarm's 'Songs from my funeral' which in the British folk press at least has been heralded as 'exciting', 'e-folk's leading edge', 'taking traditional songs into the new millenium' etc. I bought it out of curiosity and I am not sure that I like it - but my daughter loves it.

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Frank Hamilton
Date: 01 Oct 99 - 10:25 AM

In my opinion, folk music may become commercial. But that's not it's intent. Commerciality has nothing to do with folk music. It's not music made for the charts. That doesn't preclude it's getting there. The idea of prettifying folk music to make it more accessible and popular is almost self defeating. Elitist may also be a view that somehow folk music isn't good enough on it's own but it has to be sold to a large public to validate it. For example, Joan Baez popularized many Appalachian folk songs. If Almeda Riddle singings any of them for the public, she is up for comparison to Joan's singing. Joan is a fine singer with a polished singing style that is more accessible to the public. The proof of this is that when folk music is talked about, Joan Baez name will come up. Few know about Almeda Riddle or Jean Ritchie. Both Almeda Riddle and Jean Ritchie as traditional American folk singers employ certain vocal ornamentations such as the raising of the seventh degree of the scale in an Ionian modal framework or bending notes, not arbitrarilly, but because this was a part of the cultural musical style of mountain singing. Joan doesn't do this. Joan as a "polished" popularizer of these songs rounds off the "rough edges". Her musicality is more informed by the popular and classical music of her day. The lush chord structures in her guitar dictate which way her voice will go. Nowadays, she isn't singing folk songs much at all but has gone the way of the singer/songwriter. Jean Ritchie by contrast has a lovely album called Mountain Born whereby she incorporates her traditional style with non-traditional elements of music but it works just fine. We don't lose sight of the "tradition" in her singing. The same can be said for Tommy Makem, the Bard of Armagh. There is a traditional "integrity" here that adheres to the respective cultures from where these artists came.

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: M. Ted (inactive)
Date: 01 Oct 99 - 11:25 AM

Just to continue in my very productive and action oriented direction--I have just been reading that Alan Lomax, many years ago, made the rounds to record companies in an effort to sell them on the idea of having their artists record folk music--

The fact that Nirvana covered "In the Pines" caused a lot of young aspiring guitar players to learn that song--I know because I taught it to a number of kids--

As to instrumental and singing technique, well, as it happens, these kids play and sing things their own way, which, although they cop a lot of stuff from records, has a lot to do with the way their friends and musician moms and dads, and who ever takes a couple minutes to show them something, play--what do you call that?

Which brings us to the magic question, is "Louie,Louie" a folksong?

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Harvey Gerst
Date: 01 Oct 99 - 12:22 PM

"Which brings us to the magic question, is "Louie,Louie" a folksong?"

Yes, but only if you use a dulcimer, as was originally intended. (It's a great mental image.)

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: M. Ted (inactive)
Date: 01 Oct 99 - 03:27 PM

I thought it was a tiple song--

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Frank Hamilton
Date: 01 Oct 99 - 06:35 PM

M. Ted,

I call that pop music which is music manufactured to make the songwriter some money. Kids imitate what they hear on the radio and recordings. When they imitate pop music, that's what they do. Re: In The Pines, haven't heard Nirvana do it. But the song has been around longer than they have. Or any form of rock and roll.

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: M. Ted (inactive)
Date: 01 Oct 99 - 08:07 PM

Well--only half kidding about "Louie, Louie" --it was, written, I suppose, with the intent of making some immediate money, but didn't,the song kicked around in Seatle as a sort of standard for garage bands, they discovered that they could play it for a half hour or more at a time, while their audiences danced, singing whatever words they could make up or remember--

The Kingsmen recorded it as a demo to get a job on a cruise ship or some such place, and they were asked for a vocal number--the singer didn't really know they lyrics, but fudged his way thru--

The recording got played someway or another on a local station, and, as these things happened, unplanned by anyone, it took off--

Hypnotically compelling, as the song was, garage bands across America learned it from the record, except that, since the singer didn't know the lyrics, no one else could figure them out either--in the manner of the Vanishing Hitchhiker and Mrs Field's Cookies and the Red Velvet Cake, stories started to circulate like wildfire about the allegedly filthy lyrics to the song--

There was a great hysteria in certain parts of the country, and, funniest of all, kids started making up their own dirty words to sing to the song!

The real lyrics to the song are folkloric enough, since they seem to be a collection of lyric fragments from other songs--but the story is a folklorists delight, and one could still do a respectable research project by collecting the various "dirty" versions--

Now I could ask you what you felt that Robert Johnson was doing when he copped licks off of Lonnie Johnson, and how that fits into into your paradign--was he just a kid imitating something he heard? Or maybe that is the folk process--

And of course folk songs predate their active bearers--and, as sadly was made evident in the case of Kurt Cobain--they live beyond their active bearers, as well--

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Frank Hamilton
Date: 02 Oct 99 - 11:02 AM

There are examples of popular songs going into the folk tradition. For example the following songs come from the minstrel show which was a commercial venture. Daniel Emmett wrote Old Dan Tucker, Dixie and Stephen Foster wrote Angelina Baker. These songs entered the aural tradition and were changed extensively. The North had their version of Dixie and parodies came up including the one recorded in Sandburg, A Horse Named Bill. Angelina Baker became a fiddle tune favorite of early country folk perfomres sometimes known as Angeline The Baker. Old Dan Tucker added versions and became a hoedown fiddle tune. The key is this, that they went through variants and time to get there so that they were no longer a commercial venture to gain popularity on the stage, screen, TV or radio. This might well happen with Louie Louie. Time will tell. It's a worthwhile project to collect these variants. Dirty songs are certainly part of the folk tradition. If they are reflective of a specific cultural group of people who have adapted the song to fit their own environment it may qualify as a folk song. We'll have to see if it stands the test of time.

As to the influence of Lonnie Johnson on Robert Johnson, this is musical material that is associated with African-American folk music of which blues is a part. Copping licks is the way folk music is processed. Woody Guthrie adapted some of his guitar styles from the Carter Family, probably Sarah Carter. Leadbelly was influenced by the ragtime pianists he heard in Texas. He also knew other blues guitarists. It was in the culture. Imitation is one way musicians learn from one another regardless of musical style. but the difference is that some musicians reflect their cultural heritage in a clear manner. Also, there is a time-tested musical environment that is inherent in folk music. It may be that rock and roll songs could become the folk music of the future or they could go the way of the current trendy fashions of the time, the popular music that vanishes when it's use is no longer expressive of a culture.

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Brian Clancy
Date: 02 Oct 99 - 12:28 PM

I played in Louisville, Colorado last night...a room full of twenty-somethings with a few older folks mixed in. Playing nothing but Irish ballads and pub songs they were all singing their hearts out asking for Waltzing Matilda (really--the only one they knew) and wanting to get up and dance and sing or clap to everything they could.

Many of you don't get it. You can't pontificate on a stool telling younger audiences that this music is good for them while you play folk music as though it was written for funeral parlors. You, yes YOU, have to put some ENERGY behind a performance.

Think about it....you fell in love with folk music when you heard Pete Seeger or the likes...they were real performers. Today's "Folk" performers, by and large, are just plain boring. Audiences are there, we just have to reach them by hard work. You get out of an audience just what you put in, regardless of their age or background. Quit blaming them when what folk singers really need to do is look at themselves.

Subject: chords req: Evangeline
From:
Date: 02 Oct 99 - 12:41 PM

Hi, I'm looking for the chords to the song "Evangeline" which can be found on John Allan Cameron's Glencoe Station album. Thanks.

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Jack (Who is called Jack)
Date: 02 Oct 99 - 01:38 PM

Frank, remember what Milton Berle said. Great comedians don't copy, they steal.

I've resisted posting to this thread, but here goes.

Just about everyone in america grew up taking american history and social studies units on the Civil War. About 90% of the time the subject was painful and dull. Along comes Ken Burns, and tells the same story and violoa, its a compelling story full of ties to the way we think and live to this day.

15 million people can't tear themselves away from a TV show which is pretty much a bunch of still photographs and letters interspersed with a narrative and score.

Hundreds of thousands rediscover Shelby Foote's narrative.

So how did HE do it?

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Frank Hamilton
Date: 02 Oct 99 - 02:02 PM

Brian, I think it's unfair to characterize the issue as folks pontificating. One can also pontificate about how a performer needs to sell his product by introducing more energy through show biz hype. I think that there is a sincere effort here to want to share the music that we grew up with. I think that there is a problem with this thread in that for me folk music is already appealing. It just needs to be introduced to young people.

There are other valuable ways to present music which require a different type of a listening attitude. One of the intriguing aspects of the folk music performance be it by traditional singers or "revivalists" is that the level of energy is different. It doesn't require a loud, sensual blaring of a rock band to make it happen. There are people today who are bored by anything that doesn't bludgeon them to death with some kind of surface razz-a-ma-tazz.

Jack, As to the way in which folk music can be hyped to the public, I think that there are different levels of performance and presentation. Some are geared for mass audiences as reflected by many of the pop stars and personalities. They are held in big stadiums to maximise revenue for the producers and artists. Other venues might be small concerts (house concerts are a great way that suggest the way folk music has been traditionally performed), school classrooms, even church or temple suppers. Small gatherings seem more suitable to maximise the experience IMHO.

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: M. Ted (inactive)
Date: 02 Oct 99 - 04:31 PM

Frank,

Why is the the fact that someone, somewhere did something for money make any difference at all?

Even dear, sacred Leadbelly played for money--and he learned all those songs in his wonderful and monumental repertoire because they were songs that people would pay money to hear--and all those witty couplets in the blues songs from Blind Lemon Jefferson and Charlie Patton were put in there to get a response from the crowd--and a few more nickels in the pan--

As to the Foster business, he tended to draw on operatic sources for his inspiration, and, as you know, the great operatic composers drew melodic material from folk music--so it was probably a folksong, an operatic melody, a Foster minsteral song, a dance number, and then a folk song again--which gets us nowhere--

I think we could go around on things til the cows come home, each of us as earnest as the day is long, and it wouldn't ever amount to much--especially since we actually like a lot of the same music(Except for maybe "Louie, Louie"), and we just put different labels on it--

I would say,"listen to this, it's a great folksong", you'd say, "yea, its great but it isn't a folksong", and I'd say, "Oh, Yeah? Here's five reasons it is" and rather than listening to the song, everyone has to listen to the discussion--

The crux of things is that I believe in teaching songs simply and letting people do what they want with them-- (because they do what they want, whether you want them to or not, and whether they know they are doing it or not--)

I have sat for hours trying to learn all manner of folk ornaments and to make esoteric discernments in style("Oh, no-you can't do that in a Piedmont Blues, that only goes in a Delta Blues!!) and it means something to me, but that stuff is a barrier rather than a doorway for most people, and if you insist on making it an issue, they vote with their feet--

When I taught blues guitar classes one of my students started a band at his school did Devo-style punk version of "Frankie and Johnnie"--It was a big hit when they played at the free concerts in the park--what could I say? I did teach them a swing rhythm, they just didn't like it that way--

I tend to view that as a success for folk music--(and anyway I think they grew out of it later, and started a "real blues band") but my guess is that it would not be acceptable to you--

As interesting a thread as this is, I'd like to go out and do something that is do-able--and am beginning to suspect that it isn't possible to come up with anything that can be done with the somgs that we all like that is both workable and philosophically acceptable--Tell me I am wrong--

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: M. Ted (inactive)
Date: 03 Oct 99 - 04:42 PM

So did I kill this thread? I didn't mean to, but it's been 24 hours and not a word from anyone on this--

So I'll post one last thing, and that is this--folk and traditional music may at times seem like a social movement of some sort--but everything really just radiates from the efforts of the individual--if people like what the individual is doing, they gather round and listen--the more compelling the individual, and the longer the individual persists, the more gather round to listen--it is just that simple--

What the people who gather around look like, what they wear, what they do for a living,and where they gather--all vary with the times as does what they like best and what they choose to learn for themselves--but it all happens because an individual somewhere decides to make it happen--

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: poet
Date: 03 Oct 99 - 06:41 PM

I'd like to put in my two pennorth. to Brian Clancy you have a good point, not in all cases but in the main you are right.

However I believe that we should start in clubs themselves. How many clubs are in the top room of a pub, Little hard chairs usually cold three flights of stairs to the bar and four to the toilets, How many performers (especially floor spots) insist on giving long lectures and explanations which are generally wrong before actually singing. How many Clubs Never start on time. lots of little things make for a BIG pain. How many clubs treat their guest performers like dirt ie leave them to find their own way to the club, fail to provide decent accomodation (a camp bed in someones garage was one I heard about) and worst of all how many clubs Short change the fee at the end of the night because they had a bad night on the door.

If your club is like any of this then take it and shake it.

make your custmers comfortable near a bar and toilet (not in the same room) start on time every time. Meet your guest somewhere easy to find (for me thats easy the airport)put him/her up somewhere in comfort look after them they will respond trust I know this from experience encourage the young if you make the evening a pleasant place to be you will get more interest.

AND NEVER RENEGOTIATE THE FEE AFTER THE GIG. THE DOOR IS YOUR PROBLEM NOT THE ARTISTS.Sorry if I shouted but really annoys me.

Graham (Guernsey)

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: sophocleese
Date: 03 Oct 99 - 08:09 PM

poet. I have to admit one thing, among the many good points, that you said really resonated with me. That was the 'long introduction' before any song. I have heard performers who like to give a thorough introduction to every single piece that they are doing. Sometimes the introduction is longer that the song itself, honest I have heard this, and it is ultimately boring as all hell. Lengthy introductions to some songs are appropriate but certainly not to all. A plot synopsis of a song is only necessary if you are planning on singing without pronouncing the words. If we want a folk song to be as interesting to others as we find it ourselves we need to have faith that it WILL be interesting on its own. Then we need to perform with that faith.

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Stewie
Date: 03 Oct 99 - 09:15 PM

Well said, MTed. If it wasn't for the commercial recordings of oldtime and blues artists of the 20s and 30s, many folksongs and tunes would not have been preserved at all. Traditional music is not a delicate flower to be tiptoed round and treated in a particular way. It's strong and resilient and its quiddity will withstand any innovation or supposed indignity that is brought to bear on it. A couple of young people in the Mojave Desert putting traditional music in the setting of samples and beats is as valid as what the folk rockers or the Kingston trio or the Weavers or the oldtimey bands did to it. If a new setting exposes a new generation to the timeless relevance of the old songs, I reckon that is great. Who knows, it might inspire a few of the youngsters to seek out the originals - just as many of us did in the 60s and the 70s.

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: M. Ted (inactive)
Date: 03 Oct 99 - 11:34 PM

Sometimes I think that a Ph.d in Folklore and a grant from the Smithsonian in the wrong hands can do more damage to folk music that all the record company execs, top 40 program directors, and music publishers put together--(present company excepted)

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Andy
Date: 04 Oct 99 - 07:10 AM

H*ll this thread is going to run and run !

Sadly however we are still gettign in to circular esoteric discussions as to what is folk ? Does the paymetn make a difference ? Even where it is performed ? (In the Folk club sense). All good stuff I read some of the mails and I am spitting others and I smile. Wher are we can we go.

Comments about floor spots explaining too long bring back old memories - most of us have been there - When calling dances I could give potted histories or full explanations - experience has taught me what to do when !

Please don't get on to quality of floor spots - we all had to learn. Money yes it is the Organisors problem - But it goes deeper - what about teh band which told it's caller (as for reasons beyond the callers control) as she didn't do much that night they were giving her less than the agreed fee !

At this rate Folk Musicians, Stand together Do not heed the ......... Keep your etc.....

Does any one feel we have got any closer to an answer, if so it missed me - sorry - Perhaps I'll be more constructive tomorrow.

Keep talking please we are bound to get soeme where in the end even if it is only broafdening our understanding so we can get the message out.

A XX

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: catspaw49
Date: 04 Oct 99 - 09:16 AM

Hey Ted----Stealing a line from brother Rick...."I love you, I want to marry you and have your children."

There have been, as you probably know, about 9 bezillion words written in this and previous threads on "The Meaning of Folk".......I'm more than willing to go with Sandy Paton's excellent definition of "Folk" and lump the other stuff into "Folk-Like"----but even that seems to be somehow unacceptable by some. Your point about money has always bothered me too......about the time someone actually makes a buck, that seems to throw them into the "Sold-out" category. I've quit even trying to participate in these threads.....generally I just read, get pissed, and move on. I did have to respond to your post.....Fight the fight my friend and know you are not alone. Some of us are just worn out though.

I like Frank Proffitt, and thanks to the likes of PPM, Arlo, and others, my wife will even let me play him when she's in the same room......and that wouldn't have been true 10 years ago.

Spaw

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Frank Hamilton
Date: 04 Oct 99 - 05:19 PM

Hi M.Ted,

It doesn't really matter if anyone made any money off of folk music. That has nothing to do with folk music. It's intent is not to make money. It's to perpetuate tradition. A folk song can start off as a composed song and go through a variety of changes. It goes into aural transmission. The key to the process is the changes that it goes through. Art and pop music are frozen and attributable to a single author/composer. Folk music works differently. It is in constant change but it requires a period of time to be distilled. Fragments of the song are found differently in many parts of the country. A theme, a legend and a style of singing persists that has nothing to do with whether it is deemed commercial or not. You can't pay for a folk song. You can pay for a commercialization of it though but it doesn't change the nature of the music except perhaps in the intent to commercialize it, it may bowdlerize it as in the case of the "folk revival" singers who "sweeten" it to make it more acceptable to the general public.

Stewie, the recordings of the 20's helped to recognize some of the American traditinal folk musicians but not all of them. The groundwork was done much earlier by collectors, folklorists and pioneers such as the Lomaxes who recorded for the Library of Congress Folk Arts Division. Some of these people were not professional entertainers.

M.Ted, I must tell you that I don't place a judgement on the commercialization of music. I happen to enjoy a lot of popular music. I have no problem with traditional folk musicians or "revivalists" or singer/songwriters making money at music. I have no problem with people taking traditional folk songs and doing with them whatever they want to. But bottom line, it ain't traditioanl American folk music. It's something else and that by me is OK.

As to going around in circles, I submit that information is being shared. If there are five reasons why it is a folk song, I would please ask for them. This would be useful information.

I think the problem stems from a misperception that there is a "validity" issue regarding music in general. I've often advocated that there is folk music that is unmusical and popular music that is very musical. These are subjective values but have nothing to do with the identification of traditional folk music.

As to the PhD's that do "damage" to folk music, I don't believe that what they say or do can affect what it is. They may damage someone's appreciation for it and here I'd be inclined to agree with you. But there are many "folk music authorities" who don't agree with each other on how to present it or what to do with it. But it will go on whether we like it or can recognize it or not. It requires time, change,(variation) and a connection to a cultural tradition.

Here's the problem as I see it. In American we have to have instant fast food, instant solutions, instant forms of communication, instant technology and instant folk music. I submit to you that that "instant folk music" is an oxymoron.

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: poet
Date: 04 Oct 99 - 07:00 PM

Frank I agree with almost every thing you said in your last post but the question was ! how can we make folk music more appealing. you are obviously a well read and experienced person if you avoid the question what chance have we got.
graham.

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: M. Ted (inactive)
Date: 04 Oct 99 - 10:59 PM

Just to be brief--I don't really know what folk music really is--and I have spent a goodly number of years performing just about every sort of folkloric thing from Michigan Lumberjack songs to Albanian dance music to hoppa-haoli music for Hula dancers--sometimes for people who never heard it before and sometimes for people who knew it better than I did--

I do know that the "people" don't differentiate between folkmusic and commercial music--I used to play occasionally Serbo-Croatian music at Churches and such, and the Serbs liked "Blue Eyes Crying' in the Rain" which they sang in Serbian and thought was an old Serbian song--on occassion, some one would translate a verse into English, and it would come out "In the rain, your blue eyes are filled with tears"--

And they all sang "Yugoslavio" (when there used to be such a place) right along with the Stare Gradske Pesme--(the old city songs, from before the turn of the century, which they tend to like to sing and dance to--Yugoslavio was written in the old folk style as part of a sort of Tito/ revisionist folklore revival for the country--it sounds sort like Alouette, in 7/8 time, and they dance to that, as well)

Anyway, I am working on a project, as we say, that, owing to this discussion, now is going to incorporate a a lot of traditional music, the only thing is, I am afraid it may get a little out of hand--for the purists, anyway--

I hope you all like it--I will keep you posted--

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: catspaw49
Date: 04 Oct 99 - 11:11 PM

Good job Ted!! Keep up the work.

Spaw

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Stewie
Date: 05 Oct 99 - 12:46 AM

Frank, at the risk of causing ire for further thread creep(if that's the correct terminology - it sounds like it should be dealt with by a dose of worm mixture), a quick response to your comments to me. I am aware of the work of the earlier folklorists, collectors and pioneers. However, in respect of recordings, isn't it a fact that some 200 of John Lomax's 250 cylinder recordings, made in Texas and Oklahoma in 1908-10, were lost because of his carelessness? The Archive of American Folk Song was established in 1928, a full 6 years after commercial hillbilly recording - at its most folkloric phase - was in full swing. The Lomaxes were loaned recording equipment in 1933 and their 1934 'American Ballads and Folk Songs' was based on a variety of sources, including commercial phonograph recordings.

Stewie.

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Frank Hamilton
Date: 05 Oct 99 - 08:37 AM

Stewie,

Not all of the Lomax recordings for the Library of Congress featured professional musicians who made recordings for the likes of Ralph Peer. Many of these were field recordings by unknown musicians and singers. Some of these recordings may have been made well past 1928 by singers who were not known on any record labels by such people as Sidney Robertson Cowell.

As to the loss of valuable documents, I don't know how many were lost. I do know that the Lomaxes, particularly John Senior was collecting folk songs before the Library of Congress. John senior's compiling of cowboy songs was not received with much support. Although we owe something to the recording process by the commercial labels in the twenties, this by no means represents the body of music called traditional folk.

Poet,

My suggestions have been 1. Smaller concerts, intimate venues, school classrooms, house concerts, and more field study to unearth more traditional material. I don't think that traditional folk music has to follow the "brass ring" of the commercial music business to succeed.

M.Ted,

Some folk music has been commercialized. But not all. The process of commercialization has nothing to do with folk music. But popular songs written in a contemporary vein or by established composers are not folk songs because they 1. have not gone into aural transmission, 2. don't necessarilly reflect a cultural sub-group, 3. have not undergone changes such as many variants, 4. are often composed to make money in the music business, and 5. are somehow frozen in a published form which if deviated from creates infringement of copyright law suits.

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: GeorgeH
Date: 05 Oct 99 - 10:56 AM

A few comments (some of which repeat what I've said before) . .

I don't think that answering a point someone's raised in a discursive thread can be construed as "avoiding the issue" . .

I never took any class in US history (ok, and it shows . . )

High-energy performance is ONE way to gain SOME converts to SOME parts of Folk . . but if you limit Folk to the material which suits that treatment you bowdlerise it . .

Much "entertainment" is pretty mindless . . so let's pitch ourselves in with those entertainments which expect at least a degree of attention from the audience . . .

I thought the song introduction lasts as long as it takes to tune this damn guitar . . .

I avoid "what is folk" like the plague, but IMO what matters with folk song is not whether we know who wrote the song, or whether someone's being paid to perform it, but a question of ownership - whether the community in which it is being performed feel it's THEIR song (rather than knowing it's owned by big music corporation somewhere). It's often pointed out that "Traditional" singers very often sang songs which were the popular songs of the day rather than traditional . . It's less often remembered that most (? much?) of the time those singers COULD (and if asked would) make a distinction between those songs which belonged to the community and those which they'd imported from elsewhere. Even if they might not get it right!

G.

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: M. Ted (inactive)
Date: 05 Oct 99 - 02:13 PM

I am supposed to be working on some proposals, and I keep getting sucked back into this fracas!!

I think that defining "folk music" is a perspective problem--a lot like the problem of deciding who "discovered" America--the question can be redefined from many different and valid perspectives, each redefinition produces a different set of answers--(Columbus, the Vikings, Chinese Buddhists, the Ancient Romans)--even more interesting because each set of answers tends to make another set seem absurd--

My favorite answer came from one of those "Kids Say the darnedest things" type things, and went something like " no one discovered America, it was always here, but no one used to what it was"

"Folk music" is the music that was always there, but nobody knew what it was---It was collected because it was there, and seemed intrinsically interesting--and then, collectors being what they are, explanations were called for and created later--different perspectives tending to render other ones absurd-

"Folk music" refers to a large, vague, body of music that "nobody use to know what it was" and any effort to define it tends to rule out things that certain groups feel are included, and to include things that other groups feel should not be included--

There are more specific genre words that we can use, like Sea Chanty or Kolo, or Hula or Work Song, or Strathspey, or Murder ballads, that we are more clear about, so they are easier to discuss--

Anyway, as far as your definitions go, Frank, they don't help much--popular music follows strict genre rules--lyrics tend primarily to be a fomulaic reworking of what ever set of folkloric images and ideas are temporally appropriate--the melodic material generally being the least reworked aspect of all, often just lifted--and it evolves through the "folk process" as well--

As to Aural transmission--all rock music is aurally transmitted--and the rock genres--such as heavy metal, grunge, and rap do reflect a cultural subgroup--they are create within the subgroup, utilized with in the subgroup, and when they are popularized, they flow from the subgroup to the broader culture--

And, as to issues of culture--what do you do when you present "Traditional music" to a auditorium full of kids, or a club full of yuppies(I only use this term in the best sense) but to commercialize it--come to think of it, even someone like Jean Ritchie is "commercializing", which is to say, marketing her music to an audience not of the culture that "folk-processed" it--

As a parting thought,we would have been much more focussed if the thread had been titled, "What can we do to make murder ballads more appealing?" or some such thing--

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Frank Hamilton
Date: 05 Oct 99 - 05:07 PM

George, I agree that folk songs are in the public domain. When the composer/writer ceases to become important and the song has variants, it's a folk song.

M Ted, Perspective has a lot to do with credibility.

Genre words or labels have intrinsic problems attached to them. IE: does Stan Rogers write sea chanteys? Can one write a kolo in 1999? Are all hulas folk music? Round and round we go. Miss Otis Regrets is a murder song ala Frankie and Johnny but it was written by Cole Porter.

I disagree that folk music is vague. It's discernable to those who know what it is. There may be some disagreement about what it is but it exists independently from popular, classical, art, or jazz. It doesn't arbitrarilly mean what you want it to me

Rap might be folk music in that the Griots from Africa might be the basis for it. We'll see in another hundred years or so. Heavy Metal and Grunge are recording company marketing terms. They are fashions and trends and I believe rather disposable in time.

Jean Ritchie represents her tradition well. She was born with it. Her singing style is that. It doesnt matter that she sells records to validate her being a traditional folk singer.

I think that to call a nebulous "vague body of music" traditional folk music is not helpful.

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: M. Ted (inactive)
Date: 05 Oct 99 - 06:38 PM

Well, actually, Stan Rogers did write sea songs, and to the degree that they could be used while doing the various tasks on a ship, they would be chanties--as to to kolo, poeple are writing kolos in 1999, I wrote a couple myself, a few years back--all you need is for the dancers to be able to dance to it, and it is a kolo--the same with a hula--does't have to be from anywhere or anyone special, if the dancers can dance to it, it's a hula--no problem there--

Miss Otis Regrets was a parody of murder ballads--

I suppose I should be humbled by your remark about folk music being discernable to those who know what it is--but I am kind of thick headed-- I sure would appreciate a list from you, examples of songs, styles, and artists, so we could beat this thing into the ground good and sound--

As existing independently from popular, classical, art, and jazz--None of those media could exist without folk music, so I find it unlikely that folk music could exist without them--

Grunge existed, possibly without the name, but certainly with out the fame before any of the record companies caught on to it--

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: GeorgeH
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 06:50 AM

MTed: And at the point when Grunge existed possibly without a name it was possibly a folk music . .

There are "active" folk musics in the western world. Kids playgrounds are one source; and in the UK many football terraces have their own songs which have a good claim to be a modern "folk" song. And a case can be made for the Rugby club songs. I haven't a clue whether there are any parallells in the US.

Some of these examples may demonstrate that not all folk music is good music, but that's another issue.

And aural transmission by keep listening to the tape you made from your friend's CD isn't quite the same as the folk process (IMO). Indeed, once it comes to "new" forms of music possibly being "folk" I'm not convinced we can usefully redefine Folk into the context of modern western civilisation . .

G.

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: M. Ted (inactive)
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 12:28 PM

Thank you George--I am also in favor of giving the folk artist status to the black and hispanic DJ's who couldn't keep their mouths shut, even while the records were playing, and started throwing in little toasts and roasts, and finally just dropped out the vocal tracks altogether, and made up their own--In addition to creating some interesting music, it was a great symbolic gesture for lovers of live entertainment everywhere--sort of a "Take Back the Night" thing--

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Frank Hamilton
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 04:51 PM

M Ted, I think we can do this. Let's talk about the Kolos written in 1999. Are they written by tambouritzan players or singers in that tradition? Are they widely known in the Croatian community as traditional? Did anyone learn this song from their parents or grand parents? Or in fact are they modeled after the folk music of Croatia in which they might be called a song in the "folk music style" without being an authentic folk song which is handed down from preceding generations? What song are we talking about here? And finally, are all kolos traditional folk music? You've written a kolo and that's fine. A person could have written an Elizabethan song or a Missippi Delta blues but would that be authentic folk music? Would it be part of that tradition? Would it have withstood the test of time? I don't think so.

Example: Ruz Marin (the Rosebush) has roots in the Croation tradition. It has variants found in different parts of the area. Makedenko Kolo is a variant of the Greek Samiotissa, (Girl from Samos). Both variants have been around for a while and have been used in folk dance circles. No one author/composer can be identified here.

Did Stan Rogers ever write a sea chantey that was used on shipboard as a halyard, capstan, long-haul or any other viable work-related song? If so,where did he learn it from? Where's the generational connection?

Grunge music was a trend, concocted by young rockers as a fashion statement. It was not generational and based on much but a show business point of view. It was a rebellious image created to appeal to this in young people. Definitely not generational. No viable predecessor with the exception of popular music forms in rock and roll.

Art music, classical, jazz et. al. may influence folk music and vice versa but they are still different forms from folk music. The tune for "Twinkle Little Star" was written by Mozart but survives as a folk song because it is generational and has many lyric variants. However it's connection to a unified sub-cultural group, (not a manufactured one for the music industry) is tenous. Still the tune survives although it's hardly attributable to Mozart these days. Louis Armstrong's early jazz music is closely related to folk music because of the cultural music roots that it emanated from. Maybe not the tunes themselves which were composed by early songwriters. St. Louis Blues was written in a "folk style" but Handy had some connection to the tradition of this stevadore work song so he wrote it in a "folk style". The tune and the lyric of the first part of the song has been used in traditional blues verses and hollers. Louis trumpet style has a lineage of musical elements that might be called traditional folk. The early brass bands of New Orleans had a connection to a generational culture that employed an amalgam of early blues, hymns, creole and hispanic elements that were learned by the player's forebears. I think that this is a key issue.

George, this is why I don't believe in modern folk songs. There may have been a tradition of football songs that have been handed down from preceding generations. Perhaps some of those songs have been around to qualify as folk songs but I'd be skeptical here. Certainly I'm not skeptical about Scarborough Fair. I think we can agree that this is a folk song because it has withstood the "test of time" and has many different variants. And we don't know who wrote it do we? (We know it wasn't Paul Simon).:)

Personally M Ted, I would'nt call many Hapa Haole songs folk songs because many of them were composed by Tin Pan Alley composers but the musical style of singing or playing them might be characteristic of a Hawaiian musical folk tradition. Slack key guitar certainly has venerable roots in earlier forms of Hawaiian music. There is a generational connection here.

George, I don't think modern civilization's technology extends world-wide. There are some cultures in the world that have never used a computer. Folk cultures existed when the Wright Brothers were flying airplanes and even today they may flourish where we least expect them to. Rap music may be a case in point. Also, the form of "break dancing", even "tapping" which could be related to earlier tap and clogging forms which have roots in other antecedent dances. Who invented "break dancing"? Who started the "tapping" craze? Did it stem from earlier clogging and tap dance teams? I think so.

I've said enough for the moment. Let's pursue this.

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Frank Hamilton
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 05:00 PM

Another point. If you want folk music to appeal to younger people, it's important not to compromise it in order to sell it.

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: James Douglass
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 08:01 PM

Shouldn't we just be concerned with the keeping alive of good, LIVE, acoustic music that reflects the human condition and potentialities for betterment; rather than quibble about what is genuine folk music? Enough already. We who play music from the heart, whether it be blues, jazz, "folk" (I just have to put the quote marks), or uncategorizable, as long as it speaks to an audience (rather than agresses), isn't that the REAL DIVIDING LINE? Between those who are living genuine moments and presenting themselves genuinely, and those who are part of some money scam? I'm sure no one will respond to this because I read the first 60 pericopes and not the last 30 of this thread, and it probably sticks out; but I've heard this discussion before.

Can't we broaden the mudcat to include all "heart" music? Since it's such a cool place anyway?

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: M. Ted (inactive)
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 08:03 PM

I haven't time to reply to you in the obsessive detail that you deserve--but I will make a couple of points--first, and sadly, the tamburica (sorry if I don't spell it Walter Kollar style) is not the much played by the younger musicians(at least among the Serb and Croatian nationals) the play accordian,and write and play songs, just like musicians tend to do--because they need material to play for the dancing--my little kolo was an U Seste that we stuck into a medley for the oldest reason of all, because we didn't know more than one tune for U Seste, and the dancers called for more--

As to the Hoppa Hoali music--most of it was written by Hawaiians, but even that that wasn't was played in the ethnic style--slack key guitar is very popular, but the ukulele and the steel guitar are just as traditional, if not more--

I think it is important to distinguish between folk music and material that happens to be traditional in the sense that you discuss, because the music of a particular subgroup, like worksongs, may exist as a body only as long as the subgroup exists--even if it is only a generation, the body may still be valid folkmusic--some elements may be passed along to other situations and other generations, and some might have been drawn from previous generations and such--that would be more in keeping with the idea of traditional music, as you are presenting it--