How can we make folk music more apealing

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: M. Ted (inactive)
Date: 07 Oct 99 - 12:59 AM

James--

Frank and I are going around in what seem like silly circles, but it is all in a good cause--I don't think either of us cares to restrict any of the music that is discussed or performed or whatever, in the context of Mudat or anything, but I think we are very concerned about finding ways to asssure that the music that we love continues to be heard, and preserved or...well that is where the questions start to come up--

First, we have to figure out what music we are talking about, then we have to figure out what to do--would it be good if more commercial artists played it--or would it be better if artists who were raised in the tradition were encouraged, and on and on--and it is all very vague and frought with dispute--

The one thing I know is that, at times, I feel a a painful sense of loss when I hear some old recording of say, the Blue Sky Boys, or of the only surviving recording of some barely remembered bluesman, or the wonderful voices of Serbian men, singing the about forgotten battles with the Turks, or how beautiful their long disappeared village was-

And I want to do something to keep it alive, even though the world it came from is gone--

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Escamillo
Date: 07 Oct 99 - 01:39 AM

Just to say that this is one of the reasons for which many people are in the Mudcat: it is a place where you can always learn something important. A lack of intervention does not mean that we don't read a thread. We are here listening. Thanks !
Andrés Magré

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: GeorgeH
Date: 07 Oct 99 - 05:23 AM

Frank: A small clarification; when I said we can't redefine folk into "the context of modern western civilisation" I meant that to imply that there ARE still cultures where Folk is live, well and ongoing; i.e. I agree entirely with the point you made.

And - unusually for a discussion verging on "what is folk" I don't think we're going round in circles to no point; certainly I'm finding each loop of the spiral turns up new points of interest and new questions to ponder.

James: I'd say Mudcat already includes all the music that any mudcatter feels inclinded to talk about here. But I think it's vitally important to recognise Folk music (in all its variety) in its own right. To me that importance is far more sociological than musical (if only because the variety of folk music makes it impossible to define Folk music in purely musical terms). It matters enormously to me that the people who history effectively ignores can produce a vibrant, compelling and richly diverse music. THEY deserve that we continue to recognise their contribution to our culture.

G.

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: M. Ted (inactive)
Date: 07 Oct 99 - 12:28 PM

I think that this point that you make, GeorgeH, is a really important one--"the people who history effectively ignores can produce a vibrant, compelling and richly diverse music"

The question that I always end up wrestling with is-- to what degree did they produce this music, and to what degree did they, because of their isolation, preserve something more wide spread from a time gone past?

It is no accident that the great repositories of folk and traditional music(whatever these things turn out to be) tend to be places like the Appalachians, the Balkans, the Cape Breton Islands, The Bayou, etc etc that are geographically isolated, and that the people who preserve or continue these traditions are also isolated from the mainstream by religion, ethnicity, language etc

The odd meters and peculiar scales that seems unique to Balkan Music were prevalent in the music that existed in the rest of Europe before the composed court and church music became popular during the Renaissance--and that that these same meters and scales-appear, often as isolated examples, in other remote areas--such as Brittany--

I wonder as I wander through all of this--what is going on? Are traditional songs and music forms being preserved, or are they evolving, through the "Folk Process"?

Frank, you say that you don't believe in modern folk songs--because they have to be passed down from generation to generation--and presumably pretty much intact, to qualify as folk songs--

I am afraid that this thread will end if I agree with you on anything, but Icome pretty close to agreeing with, or at least understanding this point--

The question that I have is, how can a folksong be still be a folksong when it goes through the "folk process", and is substantially reworked in the course of transmission?

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Frank Hamilton
Date: 07 Oct 99 - 03:06 PM

M Ted, I think you've asked a very important question. It may be the key to the discussion about what is folk mmusic. "How can a folksong be a folksong when it goes through the folk process?" I recall Sam Hinton's quote of Charles Seeger's metaphor, "A folk song on record or in a book is a snapshot of a bird in flight."

The "folk process" I believe is misunderstood. Changing a folk song around arbitrarilly in my view does not necessarilly indicate a "folk process". In order for a variant to be sucessful in it's change, it has to not only be acceptable to that cultural community from whence the changer comes, it has to be created by someone who has assimilated those cultural nuances by being part of that musical culture so thoroughly that the history of that culture continues in the creating of the "new" version. This is the key. It's not writing for a marketplace that creates this new variant as in pop music. It comes out of the context of a specific tradition. When song variants are written about coal miners by someone who has come out of that tradition and comments on the prevalent time he/she finds him/herself in order to reflect the values of that community, I would call this a budding folk song, It matures as it is accepted by the community and is passed down through generations.

Woody Guthrie is close to his roots. The songs that he wrote which were contemporaneous with his time may well pass into aural tradition. The reasons that they may become folk music is that he was in touch with his musical/cultural tradition. Most of the music for the songs that he composed can be traced to earlier tunes. He borrowed heavilly on his roots and the songs of the Carter Family. Bob Dylan attempted to do the same thing. He used "Nottamun Town" for his "Masters of War" and "Patriot's Game" for "God On Our Side". Even the first part of the tune "Blowin' In the Wind" sounds similar to the first part of the Nova Scotian melody of "Marianne". The difference between Dylan and Woody is this. Woody came from a specific cultural sub-group, the Oklahoma share cropper community which assimilated rural music by country performers through a birth right. Dylan used eclectic tunes for his poetic statements and fused them with a show business image as a youthful rebel which caught on with the young people at the time. Dylan was never a part of a spcific folk culture. As a matter of fact, he appropriated Woody's style, garb, vocal mannerisms and references in a self-conscious way because it served him on stage. He abandoned that later when the music market changed. The fact that he is a talented songwriter and performer is irrelevant to the discussion of what is folk.

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: GeorgeH
Date: 08 Oct 99 - 09:12 AM

Drat you Frank H . . A posting where I can't find a single idea, thought or suggestion to disagree with!

Thanks for an excellent encapsulation.

G.

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: M. Ted (inactive)
Date: 08 Oct 99 - 12:02 PM

George, you're not trying hard enough! Everything thatFrank says brings up another question-(a sign of a good discussion!!!!)

I agree that acceptance of a song is a key to it's becoming part of the folk culture--and there is a process of weathering that takes place--although I do not think that material must be changed materially over time--

I think that there is something else that is critical--a there is a quality that I call "luminous coherence"--that is to say, certain songs(and stories), have elements that are so compelling, .that communicators want to keep them intact, as much as possible--

An example might be, "Roses are red dear, violets are blue, Angels in heaven know I love you", or "never speak harsh words to your true lovin' husband, he may leave you and never return"

A sort of core, which can stay intact, regardless of the vagaries of memory--sometimes it is only a line, other times it is a verse or even a whole narrative-

Also, there is another quality that makes something part of a culture, rather than just a moment--and that has to do with a sense of its past--

A real traditional song, or folksong, has to evoke a sense of history and community among its listeners that has nothing to do with the text of the song--it helps listeners to visualize a world that a song is part of, and it bonds them to it--

Next Question--

The question of how to deal with Woody Guthrie is a real fundamental one--he may have come from a folk culture, but most of the work that he did came after he was out of his element, and a significant amount of it was intended to forward various political and social goals--

His WPA work of course, and there is the touchy business about his long time association with the Communist party--so many of his songs (don't get me wrong, because I love his songs, and if not for Woody most of us wouldn't be here--) intentionally advanced ideas that were consistant with the Communist party line--

Now down get me wrong--I don't object to using music for political purposes--my father worked with the the UAW, and we knew "Joe Hill" and many other songs from the union halls--and I don't object (in the main) to any of the ideas that Woody expressed--

My question is--how do we classify or deal with the deliberate use of music and other folkloric materials to advance political ideologies and to foster nationalism? The material is always presented as being authentic, historical, folkloric and of the people, and yet it isn't, because it has been newly created, but in a way that it has all the perceived positive attributes of folk music--

This may even be the problem at the root of our discussion--

You brought up Bob Dylan, whose music has always been identified with folk music,--but really was a poet (Robert Bly told me so!!) -- Though he did not have come from an identifiable folk tradition-- Dylan became the central figure in the 1960's manifestation of the "Bohemian" culture traditionally associated with the Greenwich Village and Lower East Side communities in New York City, which was self defined as "a folk music" culture. In actuality it was defined by its strong connections to artistic and social movements that were reaching a fruition at that time--

And because these movements have figured so prominently in the culture of America and the world since, the popular definition of Folk Music is still tied to it--

The definition is further muddied, because, along with the interest in and the revival of tradtional and folk music in this mileau, there was a parallel (and often overlapping) popular artistic movement of singer/songwriters who used folk instrumentation, folk melodies and folk motifs, also stemmed from this mileau, and were self-defined as folksingers.

I've been working on this too long today--the worst thing is that I keep wanting to expand and clarify the points--

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Frank Hamilton
Date: 09 Oct 99 - 11:24 AM

Thanks George. I appreciate your compliment.

M Ted, Most folklorists would disagree that a folk song would not be changed over a period of time. Variants.

Communicators may want to keep some elements of a song in tact. But not all of them. And not the whole song.

I agree with the statement about evoking a sense of history or past without specifically referring to a historical incident. It might be a mythological theme rather than an actual event or an event that's been elaborated on to idealize say Jesse James or Billy the Kid. Nobody knows who the real John Henry or Casey Jones was but they have an idea about some of the people who the legends were based on.

Much of Woody's work did come after he left his environment but he still carried those musical elements with him. These are written songs and perhaps like "This Land" budding folk songs. Time will tell.

Woody was thrown out of the CP. He was too radical. His songs are consistent with his social views. He was never a slave to any party line. In those days, many were naive about Stalin. There was an idealism in the air. Nobody in the folk music world that I knew took orders from the Kremlin.

In dealing with the use of songs for any propaganda purposes, we have to determine if this is the case. Then we have to prove it. A song used explicitly for propaganda purposes has a very short shelf life unless it is a national anthem which is usually composed and never changed like a folk song.

Many of the songs created by the left-wing movement were not folk songs but based on folk material. And some in the case of the Little Red Songbook of the IWW were based on popular songs of the day and written as parodies. There may be some songs that emanate from the labor struggles of the past such as coal mining songs that are closer to the folk tradition. I maintain that a song like "If I Had A Hammer" is not a folk song but a composed song that had popularity in the left-wing community for a period of time.

I lived in the Village and observed the Bohemian community during the 50's. Many were as far away from Bob Dylan as you could get. There was an interest in Jazz and there were the folkies in Washington Square, some of whom thought Dylan was not so hot. He, by no means, would have reflected the views of the people I knew in that circle at that time.

Later in the 60's there was a self-conscious attempt to define that community in New York as a "folk community" but seeing what happened to the popularity of music after this flurry before the "folk scare", when young people embraced the Beatles and rock and roll, there is little to support any generational connection of a folk tradition.

The popular misconception of folk music is tied to all kinds of performers these days from John Denver to the Indigo Girls.

The attempt to redefine folk music is a self-conscious effort on the part of the music industry, music show business practioners and ancillary participants to sell their product. This has nothing to do with traditional folk music.

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: martin o'neill
Date: 09 Oct 99 - 05:10 PM

I'm origionaly from Belast Ireland, a life time of playing irish traditional music\folk music on stage both in this great country and in Ireland\Europe.Just back from the All Ireland Fleadh ceol.Pink Floyd are one of the loudest folk bands around.The culture of the Ballad does not have the same roots here as it does in Ireland\Europe.A lot has to do with the messenger or performer if you like.There are some awful folk melodys that performers insist on singing just because they are''Folk songs''.Asking how can we make the music more appealing is on the same par as asking why Americans insist on associating the Scottish bagpipes with the Irish........answer.....they don't really care nor feel the need to to sit through a beautiful folk ballad 6 verses long.

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: poet
Date: 09 Oct 99 - 06:13 PM

I am probably a biot late in this dicussion to re-raise this topic from earlier in the postings but i am not a little irritated by the casual brush off about money Quote:- Folk music is not about money unquote. you are quite right it is NOT basically about money. However the singers you employ to sing Have to make a living. the club that employs the singer has to break even ( thats usually all they care about). Your private singaround(circle) does not spread the word it only encourages Clique 'ism the word is only spread through public performance and that in this modern day costs money. As an organiser of folk clubs and a regular annual festival both of which owes me approx £8000 pounds which I have written off as the price you pay for the music i love. and as a musician who will happily play for a pint of lager even if I must pay for it myself, just to be able to perform my music. I take grave exception to people (purists) who casually expect other people to organise and finance there opportunities to play while saying the money does'nt matter. I and all the other organisers out there are not profiteers we just need to break even. I know an organiser who every year takes out a mortgage on his house to run a festival in the UK, one day its going to go wrong and he,s going to be in the shit can any of you armchair purists say the same. I'm sorry you hit a sore spot there.

Graham (Guernsey)

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: poet
Date: 10 Oct 99 - 07:12 AM

My word I must have been in a bad mood last night this is the second apology i've had to post.

Grovelling a little.

Graham.

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: M. Ted (inactive)
Date: 11 Oct 99 - 02:01 AM

Frank, if I said that I thought that folksongs wouldn't change over time, I didn't mean that, exactly--

I do think that tradtitional material can stay remarkably intact over long periods of time--in terms of melody and text--although it can be startling how much change in performance style can take place in a relatively short period of time--

My point on Bob Dylan was just to indicate how the popukar image of Folksinger came to include one who composes their own material--not to reduce the bohemian culture to a dylan fan club--

As far as the use of folk music for nationalistic purposes, the thing that comes to mind are the former eastern bloc folk ensembles, such as the Bulgarian Koutev Ensemble(which is familiar to most people because of the recently popular albums of women's singing--a couple cuts of which have even ended up in American TV commercials), which consist of dance and music that has been professionally choreographed, arranged, and performed--

As to the influence of the CP on folk music, I Can do no better than refer you to Howard Fast's book,"Being Red" in which he explains the "from the top down" policy structure of the American Party, as well as being very specific on the creation of the Party's folk music cell and some of it's efforts--

No one that you know may have been aware of where the decisions came from, but I am sure that they will acknoledge that there was extreme pressure to conform to the party line on all issues--

In this regard, I cannot help but think about The Alamanac Singer's ""C" for Conscription" which derided congress for implementing the draft at the onset of WWII--I have always understood it as support Stalin's Non-agression pact with the Axis--

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Slanted and Enchanted
Date: 11 Oct 99 - 06:44 AM

Hello, Mudcatters. I am not a regular member, and this is the first discussion I have read and posted to.

I thought that you might be interested in the viewpoint of one of the "kids" that you are trying to introduce to folk music. I am an 18 year old who has been interested in folk music for several years. Although my main musical tastes run in a more contemporary vein, I enjoy traditional folk music, especially played live. I believe that there are many younger musicians today who are carrying on the tradition of folk music. Although it may not always be immediately recognizable as such, modern musicians are playing folk or at least count folk as a major influence. I'm not referring to singers who television and radio commonly label as folk singers. Most of these individuals or groups play rather boring (in my opinion) acoustic pop that has little to do with folk.

Folk today (as often in the past) is a movement outside the popular musical taste. Indie (independent or underground) artists such as Will Oldham, Lou Barlow, Songs:Ohia, Neutral Milk Hotel, and Beck (his indie album, "One Foot in the Grave" is one of the best modern folk albums ever) are writing music in a definite folk vein. While they may not be playing folk music in the traditional sense, they still follow in the spirit of folk music. I think that the true nature of folk lies not in the music itself, but in the spirit. The ideal of an unpretentious music containing the ability to tell a story and to express oneself freely with whatever instruments (or lack of intstruments) one has at hand definitely underlies the folk ethic. Folk shares this theme with punk . This individuality and lack of gloss probably guarantees that folk music will not gain a mass following. As someone pointed out in an earlier posting, one of the reasons that Bob Dylan has gained a large audience is his image as a rebel. Maybe that is where he departs from his folk roots.

I hope that this was a useful contribution to your discussion. If anyone would like to email me, my address is [e-mail] I will try to respond as quickly as possible.

-Bruce

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: GeorgeH
Date: 11 Oct 99 - 07:29 AM

Bruce, thanks for an interresting contribution. We can and do argue endlessly about "what is folk", but certainly your "unpretentious music containing the ability to tell a story and to express oneself freely" is, as you say, an important feature of "the spirit of the music".

As I commented before, this discussion keeps turning up new points of interest.

G.

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Ed, England
Date: 11 Oct 99 - 08:34 PM

Goodness, this is a lengthy old discussion.

I'm not sure that, as was earlier suggested, folk music existed and survived for some altruistic reason, ie presevation of traditions. Making a few bob from playing for a dance, or singing a good entertaining song in pub for a pint is not a modern phenom. And folk custom is not free from the smack of commercialism. For example, The North Waltham Mummers in Hampshire, England used to go out and perform around the area on Christmas eve, Christmas Day and Boxing day. Their families hardly saw them. But they could make damn near 2 or 3 weeks wages aver the Christmas period, which was quite handy in a farming community in the depths of winter. It wouldn't be too far from the truth to say that many of the customs, songs, tunes and dances survived long enough to be collected by Sharp, Broadwood etc because they were still a way of turning a few bob, as they say. This doesn't mean to say that the protagonists didn't love what they were doing. After all, no matter how good the wages, if the job stinks, you'll leave eventually. But they would change and mould a song or a tune as the fancy took them, no differant from a modern performer. They were, after all, entertainers. An unfortunate side effect of the collectors "saving" these things from obscurity is the crystalising of them, in word, melody or step. These records ofcourse should be treated with respect and more especially gratitude. They are a priceless record of countless (well okay not literally countless) beautiful tunes and lyrics, with the power to move you like nothing else can. But they are not the whole movie, more a series of stills. Stuff happened before that point, otherwise people would still be dancing estampees, and stuff happened, and is still happening, after it.

I run a club in Surrey, and the intro thing gets me a bit. It is interesting to hear sometimes that a variant of a song came from so and so singer, but to then have the performer try to render a faithful copy of that persons style is, well, pointless. Let's hear what this performer has made of the song. That has to be more important if the perfomance is to have life, and therefore run the risk of being entertaining. If a performer tries to do anything but his own version of a song or dance, it can be no more than an historical reconstruction. Hmmmm educational.....

Well that's muddied the waters a bit.

Goodnight.

Ed

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: M. Ted (inactive)
Date: 12 Oct 99 - 01:00 PM

Ed, thanks for a very clear perspective--I liked it, because I agree with it--as you point out, word, melody, and step are are all the in the stewardship of entertainers, who though they may not actually need to eat, like to eat--and it tends to color their perspective on what and where, and how to play--

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Frank Hamilton
Date: 12 Oct 99 - 02:53 PM

M Ted, your comment rergarding the so-called "party line" in relationship to the people that I knew is material for another thread. I disagree that many of the people that I knew of leftist circles in folk music were strictly adhering to a party line. The CP in this country was never that well-organized. Browder supplied a connection to the folk music and the working class somewhat formally. But you recommend Howard Fast's book which I will read skeptically since he is a former "true believer" who took an 180 degree turn. For an objective view, I would recommend that you read Micheal Denning's book, "The Cultural Front" for a meaningful look at the historical relationship of the left wing movement and the arts.

Regarding "C for Conscription" this was not just a view at the time held by the CP. It was a national view. During that period, not many realized what Stalin or Hitler was up to including the US who supported Hitler at the beginning and later referred to Stalin as Uncle Joe. The song reflected the mood of the country at that time. The mood of the country changed after Hitler invaded Russia.

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: M. Ted (inactive)
Date: 12 Oct 99 - 07:07 PM

The American CP enforced ideological discipline-as I undertand it, many people, Woody Gutherie, for example, were kicked out for being at variance from the "Party Line"--

All of the Communist Party organizations throughout the world were very closely connected to the Kremlin, and were subject to strict hierarchical direction--the Party in the US being no exception--

The CP in the US was, at one time, very powerful, in American domestic politics--The US Party has contributed more to effort of the world communism than is generally discussed--and American party members have played a significant role in directing the Central Committee, from the beginnings until surprisingly recently--

As to your feelings about Howard Fast, well, I cannot forget that he went to prison, did not testify against his friends, and stood with the party much longer than most people of prominence--I will warn you that he is a writer of the "And then I wrote a book that was translated in 22 languages and inspired people all over the world"I will read Denning's book--

I brought this subject up purely within the confines of our discussions about what is and isn't folk music--you have pointed out that commercial interests have manipulated content and even definitions of folk music--I was commmenting that the content and definitions had been manipulated for ideological and nationalistic reasons as well--

The degree to which individuals associated with folk music the have knowingly carried out directives of the CP is a topic thread that I don't want to start--I believe that I mentioned something to the effect that the party used folk music for propaganda purposes--folk music being "The People's Music" and the Communists have done a great deal to create and propagate images and icons that elevated the working person to mythic proportions, but this is not a big secret--

I only point out that great people's choruses singing carefully selected and professionally arranged(and occasionally rewritten) folksongs and wisecracking troubadours whose "folksongs" always decry injustices done to the working person and whose punchlines always target the "fatcats" are selling something too--

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: GeorgeH
Date: 13 Oct 99 - 01:17 PM

Personally I am sick to the back teeth of the tired old argument about "communist party line". In a US context, and from where I'm standing, the "discipline" it sought to impose is INSIGNIFICANT compared to that enforced by "McCarthyism". Despite the claims of the right wing, and despite the attempts of the Kremlin, many of those in the CP DID demonstrate their own individuality, not least in their work for the Folk Revival. But it's hardly surprising that CP members/supporters sympathised with or created "pro labour" songs. And what the hell that, or the state's use of a re-created and orchestrated tradition for propagandist purposes (actually I'd disagree that the purpose was "propagandist" in any meaningful sense, but that's another issue) has to do with the subject of this thread I totally fail to see. At least the Communist block states were supporting a derivative of their national music and dance - as well as more "classical" music and theatre. The fact that their regimes were obnoxious doesn't invalidate everything that they did - just as the fact that the US and UK allow (in general) their citizens a high level of personal freedom doesn't prevent their Governments from perpetrating great wrongs - within their own societies and internationally.

Excuse the rant!

G.

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: Frank Hamilton
Date: 13 Oct 99 - 01:17 PM

M Ted, now that you've explained your position I can agree with some of it. The CP was not as organized as many would like to think it was, however. It didn't reach certain people who were members and then ex-memebers because like so many political parties including Democrats and Republicans it was never swallowed hook line and sinker by many of it's members. The Party as far as I was able to tell, and I was around a lot of ex-CP'ers, did not create the propaganda to sell their songs. The individual songwriters did. They were not in agreement with everything. As far as the efficacy of the CP, the proof is in the pudding. The membership dwindled in America and people left because it was so doctrinaire. This didn't mean that the ex-CP'ers joined the Young Republicans however or did a total castigation of the CP. The CPUSA did some laudable things such as influencing better race relations and organizing important unions. But the overall left-wing was strong in the country regardless of the CP which played a small part in it. The myth that someone like Woody or Pete took orders from the Kremlin is laughable. They had their own ideologies which they were trying to sell through their that were highly individualistic. I don't say that all of their songs were great and some of them reflected their ideological views which were inspired by how they perceived the Soviet Union at the time but by no means were they "puppets" or dictated to by anyone. You'd have to know Pete or Woody personally to know this.

Regarding Howard Fast, you don't have to warn me about the author of Spartacus and other fine books. But forgive me if I don't think he may be the historical oracle that some would like to attach to him. He might be resentful if he felt he were abused or betrayed in some way. This well might color his perceptions. Denning, on the other hand offers an academic overview of the era without having to lick any wounds.

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: How can we make folk music more apealing
From: M. Ted (inactive)
Date: 13 Oct 99 - 03:38 PM

George, (and Frank too--)can I give you a big hug or something? Your comments are good, and pithy, but we don't disgaree--my point is really a small one, at least one that relates to the external factors that compromise the "folk process" that shapes and transmits folk music--

--I love Pete Seeger, and have great admiration for his unyielding optimism and good work--he has been an encouragment and support to artists and writers all over the world, and has especially important in fostering their use of music and art as a tool to overcome political oppression--and as for Woody, well, where would we be without him?

I was once an active performer of Balkan and Russian folk music(with forays into Hungarian and Polish and others) and relied heavily for these State sponsored ensembles for material--many of my friends had studied and collected behind the former Iron Curtain, and I had great but unfullfilled plans to roam the Planina, tambura slung over my shoulder, singing songs about Jane Sandanske--but the music that they play and the way they play it is not necessarily "authentic"--

McCarthy, and all his hangers on, well, you know about them--and in recent years, I have come to understand that he never knew or cared an iota about "The Red Menace", he was just a two-bit politician who had found his gravy train and did anything and everything to stay on it--

Anyway, Howard Fast, at this point, is a writer whose work was popular in another time--

My view of history is that there is a perpetual tug of war going on between two groups--the common people and those who have managed to accumulate some degree of power over --as a student of history, I am well aware that there have been many periods when the the great masses were virtual or actual slaves to the landowners and the clerics--

Even as we sit, there are are powerful forces who try to lever their advantage to get more control of our lives and of our property because they see an advantage to themselves in it--

Now I am going to try to work back toward topic--

In our little world of landowners, clerics, and the great masses, each domain has it's music--courtly music(the landowners and aristocracy) religious music (the clerics) and folk music (the folk)-

It develops that the richest of these three types of music is folkmusic, owning to the fact that A)since there are more common folk than any others, they have created and accumulated way more music B)Most of the musicians are common folk (even today, the pop superstars often start out that way)

Since there is a ready made body of music residing with the folk, anytime anybody in any of the other areas needed new material to work with, they just went out and collected a few folk tunes or dances or whatever and worked then into a symphony or a book of hymns or minuets, or whatever--

Now this did a lot for courtly music and clerical music, but it also began to have an odd effect on folk music--

the courtly or classical (which were, in effect, "commercial" began to feed back into the folk music--this began as a trickle--church melodies being carried back to be sung in the fields and court musicians taking popular court dance music and playing it for the old folks at home--

The trickle expanded to a good sized stream when it was discovered (with, for example, opera) that courtly music could be performed profitable for folk (or shall we call them "popular") audiences--it wasn't long before "courtly" or "classical" music was being written for the popular audience--not long either before it was written to imitate and expand on the folk music that was popular--

Somewhere in here we find Beethoven, who was the first composer who wrote chiefly for box office receipts, rather than commisions from patrons, and the Strausses, whose waltzes were a popular craze, paralleling later crazes like the jitterbug, the twist, and disco--

The dance, I believe was derived from an older folkdance called the Landler, and the melodies were often developed from those played by rural folk musicians--

And then comes musical theatre and cabarets and records and songbooks, all targeted at the popular audience, and all aware that it helps to claim a connection to the people's music, if you want to sell to them--

Now, everybody listens to this music and, in the days after is popularity has faded, but the sweet rememberence of it still glimmers bright in memory, comes to regard it as some sort of tradtitional or folk music, being as it is so essentially connected with their earliest recollections of the world--even more messy, a bunch of people write songs that sound a lot like the music that they liked so much in the first place--

And so a few people try to recreate this roots-seeming music because it means so much to them--now the question is, how are they to preserve this music, and what. exactly, is the music that these people are so set on continuing?