 sj |
||
|
||
Singer/songwriters(again)
|
|
|
Subject: RE: Singer/songwriters(again) From: Jeri Date: 28 Oct 08 - 11:45 AM I didn't realize we were having a spat of any sort. You really think I sounded bitchy? And I wasn't even trying! Ron, don't leave the 'e' off, or the anagram winds up being reversed to be 'Nigel Spencr' instead of the whole name. |
|
Subject: RE: Singer/songwriters(again) From: WFDU - Ron Olesko Date: 28 Oct 08 - 11:53 AM Sorry Spleen - I did not mean to forget your "e"! As I read these posts, I am beginning to think that there is more of an issue with the term "singer-songwriters" in the UK than there is in the U.S. I don't recall anyone taking exception to the term, nor do I see any reluctance to singer-songwriters being part of the "folk" community (except from hardcore traditionalists.) It is just a term, it does not have to be logical to work. As I said earlier, it is what it is. Country music is a terrible description for the style - what country are they referring to? Rock music? Rocks just sit around, but rock music makes you move. |
|
Subject: RE: Singer/songwriters(again) From: Spleen Cringe Date: 28 Oct 08 - 12:12 PM Jeri, "outing" me, or whatever you're trying to do by repeatedly (well, twice) using my real name rather than my chosen pseudonym, isn't big, clever or even funny. What point are you trying to make? Whatever it is, you've made it, albeit badly. Now please leave it out. |
|
Subject: RE: Singer/songwriters(again) From: JedMarum Date: 28 Oct 08 - 12:22 PM There are "bigots"* on both sides of this issue. I am a singer songwriter; not by design and that is not a self-described term, for me. But by definition; I write much of the music I play. I never intended to be a songwriter. I started out being a song singer and I wrote a few songs in my early days - but as time wore on, I wrote more and more of what I sing. Today, some shows I do I sing only my own songs, but most shows I try to mix - and most albums I try to mix. To me, the honest to God truth is, I play what I love and what fits the occasion. I really and truly don't see or feel the difference between my songs and the others I sing. I frequently do not tell the audience whether I wrote the song or not - but focus my intro on the story behind the song. I don't do that on purpose, it happens because that fact is not important to me - or at least not as important as the story the song tells. On my first visit to a Folk Alliance gathering, I was there for 30 minutes and I decided that I hated singer-songwriters! OK - I'm joking, but it did put me off that the entire focus of the event was on the current form of new songwriting. I know I am a bit of crusty old folkie, but I wanted to sit and jam with some pretty goodpickers - but every room was song circle after song circle, everyone admiring one song at a time, in dead silence (except the songster) - and paying homage to song in turn. They were lovely songs written by talented folks - but damn it, I wanted to play! I decided I didn't fit the Folk Alliance format. I did like the people and they ran a very good event, but it just wasn't my cup of tea. *NOTE: Bigot is probably a strong word for my comments. I use it with a wink and bit of tongue-in-cheek. I just want to describe the folks who have extreme points-of-view and who lump all others into one camp or another. |
|
Subject: RE: Singer/songwriters(again) From: JedMarum Date: 28 Oct 08 - 12:26 PM I really do resent the attitude that a singer songwriter is some sort of a higher calling and that they are proven to be much more worthy performers. I know the attitude is not prevalent, but it is out there. In my passive/aggressive way I always tell those folks that I am NOT a songwriter! ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: Singer/songwriters(again) From: WFDU - Ron Olesko Date: 28 Oct 08 - 01:26 PM "the entire focus of the event was on the current form of new songwriting." Some very good perspective and excellent points Jed! (By the way - your new CD is brillant - if you don't wish to call yourself a songwriter, that is your call - but you are EXCELLENT at whatever you do!!!!!) One thing to note about the Folk Alliance, something that Rich Warren of "Midnight Special" brought up in a recent discussion in another forum. The Folk Alliance was created to be an "alliance" of organizations and individuals to perpetuate this music. It is indeed a fact that contemporary singer-songwriters have gained the focus of the gatherings, but what ever happened to the "crusty old folkies" who would organize and change things????? I'm not directing this at you Jed, but at all the tradition based artists who do not participate in changing perspectives and criticize others who are doing something to perpetuate themsleves. The "singer-songwriters" who have created an audience and a genuine movement in this country deserve credit. While some are turned off by the stereotype of "introspection", they end up missing an entire canon that speaks to all sorts of topics. It is like using the song "Kumbayah" and saying that is reflective of all traditional folk music. These singer-songwriters have effectively worked through Folk Alliance and created a network of opportunties and watched the audience for their style of music grow. I am not advocating singer-songwriters over traditional folk. I like both. If I want to insure my car is working properly, I check more than fill up with gas - I also need to check the oil, belts, battery, radiator, and even wiper fluid among other items. It alls up. Traditional folkies might not need the Folk Alliance, they might be very happy with the way things are. However, if you want to create change - it only takes one person to make a difference. You can't wait for the other guy to do it. |
|
Subject: RE: Singer/songwriters(again) From: Big Mick Date: 28 Oct 08 - 02:00 PM Man, you folks make my head hurt. There is one hell of a lot of bandwidth giving up its life for a discussion that just isn't that complicated. For me, very similar to my friend Jed, it is about whether a song touches me in a particular way, or evokes a certain feeling, or speaks to a specific cause. If I like it, it is up to me to interpret it in a way that gets the audience to understand what is being presented. The need to classify folks that write songs is just so unnecessary. As I have said before, Woody Gutherie could be considered a singer songwriter. So could MacColl, as Dick pointed out. I consider Jed to be a multi-talented writer of lyrics that describe so many facets of the human condition, an empath that has the ability to look at a letter from a long ago era, read a book about a historical figure...... and then apply the lessons learned by his sensitive soul and tell the story. Jeri is another that has similar abilities. Jed then combines this with excellent musical ability and there you have it. I just don't see the need to classify either of them comparatively with others, or to denigrate/praise the fact that they write songs. They are simply very good at what they do, and I want to sing what they write. I think the term being used as a title, instead of as a description, is the problem. I am very much in the Deb Cowan camp. If a song appeals to me, on whatever level, I will sing it. Makes not a whit of difference to me if it was written several centuries ago, or yesterday. And I applaud those that have the ability to capture the story/emotion and put it to words. All the best, Mick |
|
Subject: RE: Singer/songwriters(again) From: Desert Dancer Date: 28 Oct 08 - 03:34 PM Just to make life (even more) interesting, according to the DT, Red River Valley was written by James Kerrigen in 1896. I'm not aware of much folk-processing of the lyrics, either. 'Course he's not singing it much any more... :-) ~ Becky in Tucson (who's recently been dragged kicking and screaming out of the "all trad all the time" mode) (a little way, at least) |
|
Subject: RE: Singer/songwriters(again) From: Jeri Date: 28 Oct 08 - 03:45 PM Spleen, figuring out your acronym isn't hard. I didn't think I was revealing a secret or 'outing' you. I figured you didn't care. If I was wrong and this is a big deal to you, I'm sorry. At the bottom of all this is a problem with personalities meaning more than music. It's what haters of singer-songwriters perceive is the problem with singer-songwriters, and it's what I perceive is wrong with hating singer-songwriters. If you need labels to tell you whether you like or dislike music, you don't really know much about the music. And Mick, you got it. I don't understand why some folks care enough about this to fight about it. |
|
Subject: RE: Singer/songwriters(again) From: JedMarum Date: 28 Oct 08 - 04:49 PM Ron - I hadn't considered the "work to change, or reintroduce additional aspects of folk" to the Folk Alliance, but it is a point well taken. The truth is I'd still be involved with FA if I could afford it. My business costs are so high as it is, I've simply let my membership slip. I keep thinking I'll go back to it one day ... and maybe I will, but the flip side of that coin is booking the time off to attend the events. All of those are solvable problems, but they are problems for me. I truly did enjoy the people and the time I spent at the couple of events I went to. Thanks for playing the music - and for your kind words. I love the album and hope it'll do well. You are the first on FolkDJ to report playing it - you may have been the first to receive it. I have another 150 or so, waiting to go out the door - but I lost my check from the festival I played in LA last weekend!!! Can you believe it?? First time I've ever done that (and hopefully the last). Anyway - I can't afford the postage until the check is reissued! I really don't mind the songwriter title. I guess I just came at songwriting through the back door and it more describes my music then it does me. I understand Utah's comments though; I think he might say being a singer songwriter is does not automatically make you a bard. It is always the quality of the music that matters, when performed - you have to deliver the story, one way or another. I have seen too many very very talented young and indeed gifted songwriters. I would never apply the negative connotations the SS term may have, to them. So I'm careful about any disparaging comments on the subject. |
|
Subject: RE: Singer/songwriters(again) From: JedMarum Date: 28 Oct 08 - 04:50 PM Thank you Mick - and right on DebC. |
|
Subject: RE: Singer/songwriters(again) From: WFDU - Ron Olesko Date: 28 Oct 08 - 05:15 PM "I guess I just came at songwriting through the back door and it more describes my music then it does me. " I had Eric Andersen on the show this past Sunday and he said something very interesting. We were discussing his early days in the Village "folk scene" and he said that many of his peers started writing songs because they felt they could not find songs that related to the subjects they wanted to sing about. Eric was interested in the poetry of the Beats and his songs were more in tune with those styles. When I thought about it later, that struck me as being the same spark that created the traditional songs that we now consider folk. For whatever reason, someone was moved to write "Red River Valley" and through the years, others have adapted and used that song to fit their own needs. I agree with the sentiment that many have expressed - it is the song and not the label that really matter. I also agree that I am not fond of a singer-songwriter who uses his or her songs as a report on their latest session with their therapist. Yet at the same time, there are some very personal songs that I feel are important - because while they are written in the first person, they speak about issues that all of us face. A love song is probably the most personal song you can think of, and our traditional folk collections are filled with them. |
|
Subject: RE: Singer/songwriters(again) From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 29 Oct 08 - 12:46 AM From: Jeri Date: 28 Oct 08 - 03:45 PM And Mick, you got it. I don't understand why some folks care enough about this to fight about it. Nothing to fight about...just do it! Check out my other post...not complicated |
|
Subject: RE: Singer/songwriters(again) From: WFDU - Ron Olesko Date: 29 Oct 08 - 09:20 AM "I don't understand why some folks care enough about this to fight about it. " That is something that we can't help you with. You need to figure that out for yourself. If you understood the passion that many people have you would understand why it is discussed so often and with such vigor. I think the biggest issue you and others face is labeling it a "fight". Having a passionate discussion and LISTENING to all the views is not a fight. |
|
Subject: RE: Singer/songwriters(again) From: Spleen Cringe Date: 29 Oct 08 - 10:27 AM Can I just agree with Ron? Both on the specific post above and some of his general points? The below is in the context of none of it mattering that much - and five minutes to spare... First off, it does rack me off when you get sanctimonious twaddle about how if you tend not to particularly like a type of music (in my case, the James Taylor and Co style of singer songwriting), it's then taken as a given that you simply don't get or understand music. Would I be correct in thinking that the posters who think I'm being unreasonable here would apply the same inclusive, tolerant standards to, for instance, grunge, disco, death metal, techno, post rock, hip hop, grime and free jazz? Or is it okay to largely not like anything in those particular genres? Put it another way - when you go to a record shop do you look at everything in there from A-Z or do you go to the racks where the sort of music you like is more likely to be? Personally, as a music obsessive on a limited budget, I owe it to myself to spend my money wisely. I exercise my right to critique someone's music every time I open my wallet and still pass it by on the racks. I suspect if that wasn't acceptable to them, they wouldn't put it out there. Just because the artist is a singer songwriter, critical faculties should not be suspended: Bruce's 95% rule still applies. Ironically, despite displaying my abject ignorance about music by not liking James Taylor type stuff, I'd put money on my tastes being considerably more eclectic and broadminded than those of many of the contributors to this thread... it's just that my heart doesn't tend to leap with joy at the thought of another middle aged white heterosexual bloke (or woman) with an acoustic guitar, sorry and all that... although some of them sometimes surprise me, which is always quite nice. PS Jeri - no apology required - I was just curious as to your motives, more than anything, which you've now clarified. |
|
Subject: RE: Singer/songwriters(again) From: matt milton Date: 29 Oct 08 - 10:30 AM I suspect that one big reason why this discussion persists is that some people are quite adamant that there is a line to be drawn between singers of traditional material and singers who sing songs they've written influenced by traditional material. No matter how deep and how manifest that influence might be, for some it still musn't be thought of as 'folk'. As for me, when I say I like folk music I am thinking of Bert Jansch, Dave Evans, Gillian Welch, and Mary Hampton just as much as I am Cyril Tawney, Shirley Collins, Walter Pardon et al. For me, it's all part of the big picture. (The absurdity of the "it's not folk if it's a song written by a contemporary performer" stance is abundantly clear in the case of performers who sing both traditional and their own material. At what point do they cease to become 'folk' singers? How many original songs are they permitted per album before their license to folk is revoked? What's the ratio?) However, I don't think of, say, Joni Mitchell or Joanna Newsom or Newton Faulkner as folk. Their music quite simply isn't rooted in folk the way the other names I mentioned is. They're singer-songwriters who happen to use acoustic instruments. It's quite rare that I enjoy this kind of singer-songwriter. Early Leonard Cohen is about the only one I can think of (and anyway, you can hear a rich Spanish folksong influence on those records so they arguably don't count.) The only recent exceptions I can think of are Citizen Helene (myspace.com/citizenhelene) and Gemma Garmeson (myspace.com/gemmagarmeson). So I'll continue to call myself a folk singer rather than a singer-songwriter, even though I sing hardly any traditional folk songs. I play at a lot of singer-songwriter open mics, and what I do doesn't sound remotely like what they do. |
|
Subject: RE: Singer/songwriters(again) From: Spleen Cringe Date: 29 Oct 08 - 10:30 AM Speaking as another middle aged white heterosexual bloke* * And as a social worker, I don't do self loathing... |
|
Subject: RE: Singer/songwriters(again) From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 29 Oct 08 - 10:30 AM Nothing to fight about at all!!...If you don't like it, don't buy it!! |
|
Subject: RE: Singer/songwriters(again) From: Big Mick Date: 29 Oct 08 - 12:49 PM Actually, Spleeny, you make my point when you said: In the comment you used the term as a description instead of a title. Fair enough, as everyone is entitled to what they enjoy or don't enjoy. But when you use the term as a label for anyone who writes their own music, or use it in such a way that one cannot describe their art without negative connotation, I think it is a problem. How would Woody be able to describe the fact that he writes and sings songs? How about Jed? As usually happens on our beloved Mudcat, we have parsed it to death once again.... ***chuckle*** All the best, Mick |
|
Subject: RE: Singer/songwriters(again) From: WFDU - Ron Olesko Date: 29 Oct 08 - 12:53 PM "How would Woody be able to describe the fact that he writes and sings songs?" If Woody were around today, he would probably call himself a singer-songwriter and certainly would be accepted by that audience. However, I suspect that if Woody were around today - he would be making rap music. |
|
Subject: RE: Singer/songwriters(again) From: GUEST,Jim Knowledge Date: 29 Oct 08 - 01:56 PM I `ad the Devil in my cab the other day. He looked well pleased with `imself, a great big smile and `is tail all fresh and lively like. I said, "You look a bit chipper Nick. What, `ave you lost a tanner and found a bob?" `e said, " Nah, I bin reading all them bits on that Mudcat about that lot that write songs and then go and sing `em. From what I can see, it looks like I`m gonna get some more converts." I said, "What, are they all out there singing about sinning then?". `e said, "Nah, many just aint `appy with what they`ve done so they`ll `ave to come to me `cos everybody knows THE DEVIL `AS THE BEST TUNES!!" Whaddam I like?? |
| Share Thread: |