Review: Walter Pardon - Research

Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon - Research
From: GUEST,Pseudonymous
Date: 07 Jan 20 - 04:10 PM

'package' definition; present (someone or something) in an attractive or advantageous way. I cannot see how anybody could deny that this has happened in the case of Pardon.

Somebody took offence (as I interpreted the tone of the comment) to my use of the expression Pardon industry. Again, I stick by it, meaning it as per this definition: informal an activity or domain in which a great deal of effort is expended. as in "the Shakespeare industry". Obviously the Shakespeare industry is bigger, but I think it fair to say that there has been a Pardon industry.

Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon - Research
From: The Sandman
Date: 07 Jan 20 - 05:39 PM

but I think it fair to say that there has been a Pardon industry.
if you think that you are either are a fucking imbecile, or somebody who likes to say something controversial for the sake of it,because you seem to have no intellectual justifcation for the statement. however i wish you well, have you ever thought of taking up brain surgery

Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon - Research
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Jan 20 - 06:10 PM

A bit crude there, Dick, but there are elements I can glean from your expressed sentiment that I can definitely go along with.

Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon - Research
From: Joe Offer
Date: 07 Jan 20 - 06:32 PM

Well, "Pardon industry" does seem like a strange term, but the amount of annoyance at the term is also rather strange. Best to just go on with the discussion and not get obsessed about one person's choice of words, dontchathink?
-Joe-

Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon - Research
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Jan 20 - 06:50 PM

Hmmm. Depends on the person.

Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon - Research
From: The Sandman
Date: 07 Jan 20 - 09:57 PM

Pardon industry has all sorts of connotations, i think it is insulting to people like Jim and Pat, who collected and befriended and cared for Wlter Pardon it is also an insult to the memory of Peter Bellamy, none of these people made money out of Walter, they actually cared and befriended Walter and enriched his life. as he has enriched many others by carefully providing a vast repertoire.
Jim and Pat and Peter plus others[ Sam Richards TishStubbs] involved with visiting Walter differed from Peter Kennedy who i believe regarded the songs as his own and lost interest in the source singer musician after he had collected,
here is the dictionary definition for industry.
economic activity.
their collecting was not done for economic reasons, therefore in my opinion your wording is inaccurate and deliberately provocative or trolling, however since the moderation of joe offer is inconsistent , i am hardly surprised that he allowed this trolling

Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon - Research
From: Joe Offer
Date: 07 Jan 20 - 10:40 PM

Yeah, Dick, you can clog up threads with indignation over real or imagined trolls, or you can talk about the topic of discussion. I suggest you do the latter.
Or aren't you man enough to ignore a minor provocation?

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon - Research
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 08 Jan 20 - 03:38 AM

I'm with Joe.
Just a suggestion. When people start using abuse and offensive language, rather than suspend the thread, just delete their unwanted contribution.

Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon - Research
From: GUEST,Pseudonymous
Date: 08 Jan 20 - 04:44 AM

In comparison the material commercially available from Dick Miles doesn't really seem to amount to a Dick Miles industry. Fewer articles, no films etc etc.

Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon - Research
From: The Sandman
Date: 08 Jan 20 - 04:48 AM

man enough?well there is a sexist phrase.
i am talking about the topic and the phrase [Walter Pardon industry], that is a description of WalterPardon that is topic, plus your lack of handling of trolls and provocation of jim carroll.
the use of the word industry to describe people who befriended Walter Pardon is offensive. to his friends who included Jim Carroll.
so is using sexist phrases like man enough.what has man enough go to do with anything, are you woman enough to be a moderator.

Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon - Research
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Jan 20 - 05:56 AM

Well I haven't got a bone to chew in this particular spat, but I would suggest that dredging up the word "industry" in this context was, at best, an extremely clumsy move. It did seem a bit daft to me. Even the twee "cottage industry" might have been better. Moving on.

Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon - Research
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Jan 20 - 06:51 AM

I think we shoud examine the implications of this accusation of there being a "Walter Pardon Industry" and who was involved
If it is true, it's founder was the late Peter Bellamy, who, at the request of Walter's nephew, introduced Walter to the folk scene
Shortly afterwards, Walter was a booked as a guest at the Norwich Folk Festival and showered wit praise on Norfolk Radio
Bill Leader immediately recorded Walter and produced two excellent albums of his song, assisted by Dave Bland - Walter was interviewed by Karl Dallas - all presumably became founding board members
I was first made aware of Walter's arrival by our friend, Bob Thomson, a ballad song and broadside aficionado who was later poached by Gainesville University and became a senior English Lecturer there as Professor Robert Thomson
Walter was invited to represent folk music in the United States for their Bi-Centennial celebrations in 1977 - Bert Lloyd became a great admirer of him during that trip
Mike Yates produced four excellent LPs of Walter for Topic Records, the notes of the first (I think) was written by Bert Lloyd
EFDSS presented him with a Gold Badge in 1983
Mike Yates, Martin Carthy and Norma Waterson, Roy Palmer, Vic Smith Pat and I, and many many others continued to write talk, and in various other ways, express our admiration and gratitude for Walter's contribution tup to his death in 1996
In 20014 a three day festival was held tin his native Norfolk to celebrate his centenary
If Walter was "hyped to fame" by "an industry" - there are some high-up names who took part in the subterfuge

I have received several messages asking why I am involved with a forum which is now allowing scurrilous attempts to denigrate one of Britain's most important traditional singer - I have yet to come up with an answer
One of those messages linked these attacks on Walter with attempts a few years ago by a poster who styled herself as "Karen", to prove that one of Ireland's most respected field singers, Tom Lenihan had learned some of his most important and rare songs from early records of Slack blues singers (The main song in question was 'St James's Hospital')
I have no idea if it is the same person, but if it is, I must say I find it extremely disturbing

I have been suspended twice for objecting to behaviour such as this - at present I am under further threat that if I continue to object to such behaviour I will be suspended again
If this happens, I formally request that my name be removed from the membership list of this forum - I do not wish to be associated with anything that seeks to openly denigrate and demean some of the most important and generous benefactors to our folk music
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon - Research
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Jan 20 - 07:14 AM

Sorry for the above typos
This is the song Tom Lenihan learned from "a BLACK BLUES SINGER"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon - Research
From: The Sandman
Date: 08 Jan 20 - 07:41 AM

PSEUDONYMOUS.I have survived by trying to take a pride in my work much as Walter might have done in his carpentry, by continung to try and improve,revival singers can go in and out of fashion, that was psartly the reason i moved to ireland, because the uk folk revival has become more involved with hype over the last 40 years. however i think it is unfair to say that source singers are hyped in the same way as some of todays revival singers.
I honestly do not think there was a Walter Pardon industry, he has not been hyped, but more presented as how he was, there are always grey areas when does promotion stop and hype or an industry start.
is letting the folk revival know of the existence of Walter and his repertoire an industry, no, i do not think so whereas the promotion of people like billy bragg or ed sheeran probably is an industry , because more commercialism is involved ,what commercialism was involved with WalterPardon, very little imo

Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon - Research
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Jan 20 - 09:25 AM

"Discussion of moderation is one thing that can get a thread closed, Jim"
Do you not see anything wrong with that Dave
I wish to prevents the attacks that have been taking place on Walter and am told I will be suspended if I do so
I have made my position quite clear on my actions if that should happen again
I know of no other way of dealing with this situation
So far, your input has been to say you have a problem with source singers - I would have expected roars of indignation at what has happened here from all folk song lovers
Instea,d you make it clear you regard keeping a thread open more important than defending the reputation of giants like Walter
Your prerogative of course
I suggest we end this for fear of getting the thread closed - if it's not too late
Jim

Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon - Research
From: GUEST,Pseudonymous
Date: 08 Jan 20 - 09:41 AM

@ Sandman: I did not criticise your web site; in fact it looks good. Nor am I by any means criticising the fact that you earn money through your skills. As did Walter Pardon himself, though probably not a great deal.

What I do think is that you may need a better dictionary. The word 'industry' in its original sense meant something like diligent work, and it is often used to describe a particular form or sector of productive work.

So whereas I would not describe the web site of one man as an 'industry', the collective output of the writers and film-makes and record and CD producing businesses associated with Pardon did seem to me large enough to merit the word 'industry'. It was striking.

It seems to me that folk enthusiasts seeking to obtain or perhaps preserve a reputation as an authoritative source of theory and information about Walter Pardon or anything else might consider whether making over the top and inaccurate assertions about other posters, often twisting what they say, whether these be me or the other people who have experienced and complained about this sort of thing, in a public forum such as MUDCAT café. I can only say that the fact that some MUDCAT posters had or laid claim to be 'scholarly' given what I had seen of their powers of discussion and reasoning on MUDCAT came as something of a surprise to me.

I will not discuss moderator actions as we know this is not permitted and that it can and has in the past resulted in people being suspended, though sometimes people seem to fail to realise or at least to admit to it.

I was going to post another reference, one I don't think has been mentioned in this thread. Sadly, it is an obituary, one written by Mackenzie and Carroll. I found it on JSTOR. I think the ref is FMJ 1996 p264-265. It

I also have a question about the repertoire. The MUSTRAD information (repeated in a post above here) gives Pardon's repertoire as being at least 282. "The Walter Pardon Repertoire contains the titles of 182 songs we are aware that Walter knew." http://www.mustrad.org.uk/articles/pardon2.htm

However in the 'Not a Simple Countryman' piece it states that the authors had recorded over 200 songs, with a solid base of over 100 complete songs.

I am not sure how to reconcile these two statements.

Is Yates counting songs not wholly known as part of the repertoire, and if so have I missed where he records 100 less than complete ones?Hillery comments that a singer's repertoire can change over time. On that basis, I am wondering whether the learning of new songs by Pardon during his engagement with the revival might account for some of the difference between the two figures. Is Yates counting songs not wholly known as part of the repertoire, and if so have I missed where he records 100 less than complete ones?

(NB this is different from stating that out of 200, there was a solid base of 100 complete songs)

So we have been told on MUDCAT: "Most of his songs were intact, but those that weren't he filled out from printed texts given to him by friends in the revival. This 'filling in' was done extremely tastefully; that's why, I believe, they are so good. Probably 'Dark Arches' is the best example of these, which he had as 2 verses and a chorus."

The Not a Simple Countryman features transcripts said to date from between 1975 and 1973, but they are not dated. I think this is a shame, though a minor matter.

There is also a point on MUDCAT that Walter's repertoire of music hall material was particularly interesting in that they were early pieces, many of which he had learned from a neighbour, Harry Sexton. However, the same poster said that Walter's family never sang in pubs, contradicting the information that his Uncle Billy had sung in pubs provided elsewhere by the same poster.

I think it might be worth repeating those snippets on this thread, so that people coming to it for info on Pardon get as much as they can in one place

There is a lot of recorded material on Pardon on the British Library web site, by the way.

Thanks. Over and out. Have a nice day, everybody!

Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon - Research
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Jan 20 - 09:52 AM

If you persist in using a term that is clearly getting up people's noses, please don't be so rude as to suggest a dictionary. The great thing about English is that it is a colourful and complex language containing many different ways of saying things. You don't have to say "industry" and by saying it you are not persuading anyone of anything except that you know how to irritate. Maybe that's what you're about. Who knows.

Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon - Research
From: Joe Offer
Date: 08 Jan 20 - 10:01 AM

OK, so that's enough. This thread is about 500 messages too long. We all now know that Dick Miles and Jim Carroll are offended by the term "Pardon industry." If left unchecked, Miles and Carroll will go on for months expressing their indignation. And as soon as they settle down a bit, Pseudonymous or some other troll will come in and wind them up again. If I do away with Pseudonymous, some other troll will come in, so what's the use in doing away with Pseudonymous? A long chain of trolls have gone after Miles and Carroll over the years, and Miles and Carroll have never failed to respond with their delicious, melodramatic indignation. And note how Miles and Carroll are able to generate sympathy from otherwise-normal participants (and, may I note, turn that sympathy against any moderator who would dare try to bring Miles and Carroll under control).

Mr.Miles and Mr. Carroll are classic "victim" types in the game of Internet forums. They are part of the troll-victim equation that can bring an Internet forum down, if somebody does not intervene occasionally to break the equation. Nobody likes trolls, so the obvious solution is to give in to the demands of the oh-so-persecuted victims and eliminate the trolls. The trouble is, the victims will then draw more trolls in short order, and the game will go on. Mr. Miles and Mr. Carroll have been playing this game for years, and I think it's time to break their side of the equation.

But there's a problem. This is a folk music forum. It thrives on discussion of folk music, and Mr. Miles and Mr. Carroll do know folk music and have occasionally contributed valuable information to this forum. So, if a moderator tries to do anything against them, they can generate all sorts of sympathy and outrage against anyone who would do such a thing to these valuable icons of folk music.

But the problem is, we still have two classic "victims" who have been paralyzing Mudcat threads for years, and they will continue to do so unless they are forced to stop. So, what's a moderator to do, to deal with these toxic victim personalities? I have tried all sorts of tactics over the years. I've tried reasoning with the victims - I corresponded daily with Jim Carroll for a good 6 months, attempting to deal with his demands that I eliminate Iains. I try the occasional insult, like questioning whether Mr. Miles is man enough to put up with minor insults like the "Pardon industry" quip that Pseudonymous has exploited so adroitly. Ten years ago, I gave Mr. Miles a "certified asshole" award. He brings that up occasionally as proof of what a horrible person I have.

So, right now, my effort to control the endless victim-troll game, is to try to control the victims who have plagued us for years. Mr. Miles and Mr. Carroll are both under orders to stop responding to trolls. And if they can't do that, then I will have to take action to control them. Mr. Miles and Mr. Carroll are two very high-maintenance Mudcatters. I can deal with most people in a few minutes, and they go away happy. But Miles and Carroll go on and on and on, and they will never be happy.

Sympathize with these classic victims if you will, but realize that they're playing you for suckers. Sorry, but I cannot allow public discussion of how I'm handling this, and I'm not going to allow discussion of Walter Pardon for a while. If you wish to discuss anything with me or with Max, email [e-mail] or [e-mail]