Does it matter what music is called?

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Jul 08 - 02:57 AM

Ron
"I understand that he also knew the difference between true traditional folk songs and these oher styles. My question is, if you recorded Walter singing both styles, what would you label the record as?"
Sorry - just woken up - will try to join in later.
We didn't issue albums of Walter's songs, they were done by Bill Leader, then by Mike Yates. Most of our recordings of him were interviews of him talking about the songs and music.
Some of his his opinions are to be found and debated in two articles on the Musical Traditions website, by Mike Yates entitled 'The Other Songs' and by me, 'By Any Other Name'.
Mike's recordings were issued as 'Put a Bit of Powder on it Father' on the Musical Traditions label.
Walter learned virtually all his songs from his Uncle, Billy Gee and other members of his family. He took an interest in them as a young man, and when he returned from the army in 1946 began to write them down in notebooks. His notebooks indicate that he was differentiating between the different types of songs as early as 1948 and he spoke at length to us about the differences, both musically and poetically.   He referred to them as 'music hall' parlour ballads, popular songs and folk songs.      
Have taken the liberty of PM-ing you a copy of an article Pat and I wrote on Walter for a festschrift for collector Tom Munnelly last year.
More when I've woken up
Jim Carroll
PS It is not my intention to make people feel that their opinions are unwanted or invalid; it is not how I feel; I'm sure I get more out of arguments than I put into them.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: TheSnail
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 08:07 PM

IMHO, I'm sure you may have perfectly valid reasons for not going to folk clubs. That is not the issue. It is your sweeping -

Folk Clubs are fast becoming a waste of time, partly as Jim Carroll says, because its possible to spend a night at one and not hear a single folk song and partly because of the people there who will insist to you that what you just heard was indeed folk music.

...that I am challenging. You say yourself that "Of course some of them featured actual folk" so you know that it's perfectly possible to spend a night at one and hear plenty of folk music. That is certainly my experience. Go to the ones that give you what you want and leave the others to those who want something else.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 06:57 PM

None taken. It is often hard to understand as I had difficulty with your economist note. No offense meant, and none taken.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: Phil Edwards
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 05:57 PM

Hmmm. I think there's been some transatlantic misreading here, at least on my side. Divided by a single language and all that. No offence meant.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 05:43 PM

You certainly are a Pip!!

I was not "challenging" Jim's statement about 1000's leaving, but asking why something has not been done about it by those who are leaving. YOUR statements made some implictions that I also questioned the inevitable results that you claim would occur.

Simply asking questions should not be grounds for you to start a linguistic challenge. This is not an arguement as you claim, this is a discussion with different points of view being raised and questions asks. I am not saying that you or Jim are wrong, just wondering why you indicate that it will occur.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: Phil Edwards
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 05:22 PM

Ron, if you're going to shift between descriptive ('what happens') and normative ('what ought to happen') at will, it's going to make it basically impossible to argue with you.

You began by challenging Jim's statement that 'thousands' had been driven away from folk clubs by the lack of traditional music, on the grounds that if that had happened somebody would have started an equivalent number of traditional clubs. I explained why I didn't think you could assume that anyone would have done.

Your reply seems to consist of saying that what I described shouldn't happen, and I shouldn't assume that it had to. But I agree that it shouldn't happen, and I don't assume that it has to. I'm just saying that it's perfectly realistic to say that, very often, it does. And if it happens enough, you can get the results Jim describes.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: M.Ted
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 05:04 PM

The idea, Ron, is that the economist won't bother to even look to see if the dollar is there, because he assumes that even if there was a dollar on the sidewalk, someone would have picked it up already.

There are flaws beyond number with this example--first being that in America, the economist is not going to be walking down the sidewalk, he is going to be driving, or, if he is in New York, riding in a Town Car, and the meter is going to be running, so if he was to stop to pick up a dollar that he saw on the sidewalk, it would actually cost him money.

Furthermore, as everyone knows, that money on the sidewalk belongs to some homeless man, because these squares of pavement are his territory, and anybody else that touches it is in big trouble.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 04:56 PM

"So we've gone from "that would never happen", through "that would never happen here", to "that should never happen" "

No, I have not changed. I speak of what I see here in the United States.

It is not as hard as you make it seem. One person can make a difference, but if you are lacking someone with the dedication to do tha - or if you enjoy complaining instead of fixing, the grave you did is your won.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: glueman
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 04:54 PM

I always wondered what 'shrill' meant.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: Phil Edwards
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 04:48 PM

There is no excuse for letting something die. It sounds like a group of people seeing a body in the street and letting it bleed to death because no one is bright enough to pick up a phone and call for help.

So we've gone from "that would never happen", through "that would never happen here", to "that should never happen". I guess that's progress.

But no, I don't think it does sound like ten people collectively deciding not to do anything to save the music they love. It sounds more like ten different people individually deciding not to go to a particular club any more, and none of those people happening to have the energy, dedication and spare time to start a new club.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: glueman
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 04:39 PM

Ron, I'm a Brit and reckon you have a point. The decline of the folk club is down to a number of issues: an aging audience, a certain unfashionability, infighting by cliques about what is and isn't folk music, distance between enthusiasts, rising fuel costs and so on. The same decline isn't seen at festivals where the most uncompromising music will gain an audience and there's always a youthful contingent. Groups like Mawkin Causley and Bellowhead (best national radio live act three years running) as well as Rachel Unthank's crossover into the mainstream show there's an audience for folk however you define it, but most club gates are insufficient to book performers outside their locale.

Even a sucker for lost causes like myself sees the writing on the wall for clubs as we know them. There may be a club opning nearby soon in which case I'll give it a go, with a healthy dose of realism about how it'll turn out.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 04:05 PM

Maybe I'm slow, or maybe it is because "economist" is something that I could never be - my wife won't allow me to touch a checkbook, but your analogy is not sinking in my thick skull. Must be a Brit thing.

I guess that is the difference with our countries. By your description it sounds like there are more people with dedication, thicker skin, spare time and the spirit of volunteerism to run "our" version of folk clubs, which are very different than yours.   Rather than having 10 people sit around to wax poetically about how bright the old lightblub shone, one of our folks would think about how easy it is to change the damn bulb and see the bright light once again.

I think you are stuck with your model of a "club" - meaning that you need a venue that serves beer to be a home. (It also leads to the joke that you need to be half in the bag to enjoy British folk!!!) In this country, our "folk clubs" are run in church basements, coffeehouses, public schools, libraries, and other gathering spaces that would rent space.   Even more important, people sing in each others homes and we also promote folk concerts.

There is no excuse for letting something die. It sounds like a group of people seeing a body in the street and letting it bleed to death because no one is bright enough to pick up a phone and call for help.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: Phil Edwards
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 03:48 PM

Ron - you're arguing like the economist who never looks down, because if there were a dollar bill on the sidewalk someone would have picked it up. HTH.

To answer the question, there are plenty of people with enough talent and self-confidence to perform in a club, but people with the dedication, patience, thick skin and spare time to actually run a club are few and far between. Venues willing to host a club don't grow on trees, either. If ten people drift away from a folk club, the likelihood of one of them starting a new folk club is actually pretty slim.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 03:31 PM

Okay Pip, that is a little too British for me to follow.

What is stopping others from forming a club with the music that traditionalists want to hear shared?

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: Phil Edwards
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 03:21 PM

if "thousands" of people stopped going to clubs for the simple reason that they weren't offering the music these folks were interested in - someone would have come along and opened a venue that caters to this audience

You're arguing like the economist who never looks down, because if there were a pound coin on the pavement someone would have picked it up.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: GUEST,In My Humble Opinion
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 02:36 PM

One of many reasons for not going to folk clubs and all of them valid I assure you... and there goes a perfect example

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: TheSnail
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 02:33 PM

GUEST,In My Humble Opinion

Festivals for me are the way ahead, besides I'd rather be outside that in a little room upstairs, or in the back of some pub.

Fine but that's a different reason from the one you gave before.

Must go.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: TheSnail
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 02:31 PM

Yes, Glueman, it was you but it's not an uncommon phenomenon. If you never go yourself (and maybe sing a traditional song) you'll never find out. The fat lady is singing Child ballads and more in the clubs I go to and so are a lot of her friends, fat and thin, short and tall.

Just off to play some tunes.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: GUEST,In My Humble Opinion
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 02:29 PM

Festivals for me are the way ahead, besides I'd rather be outside that in a little room upstairs, or in the back of some pub.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: TheSnail
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 02:23 PM

...and that's enough to justify "Folk Clubs are fast becoming a waste of time"?

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: glueman
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 02:23 PM

The man from '73 may be me who knows? I do keep an ear and at least one nostril to the ground and my spies tell me folk clubs aren't known for their fondness for folk music. One doesn't wish to mark (twain) their demise yet but it sounds as though the fat lady is warming up and it isn't something she stole from Bert Lloyd.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: GUEST,In My Humble Opinion
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 02:18 PM

Of course some of them featured actual folk, but many were passing off the singer/songwriters as folk, when in many cases it would (the music) be best described ast soft pop/rock, yest I had one person absolutely insist that it was indeed folk, I left in disgust, even leaving half my beer on the bar.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: TheSnail
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 02:13 PM

GUEST,In My Humble Opinion

..last week is the answer to you first question, and at leat 25 to 30

Then I humbly apologise. The last person I asked in similar circumstances said 1973. I didn't bother with the supplementary question. Did none of those have any folk songs?

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: GUEST,In My Humble Opinion
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 02:07 PM

Ahhh..the numbers game, alright Snail, I'll play..last week is the answer to you first question, and at leat 25 to 30 is the answer to your second question (I do have a family that requires my attention occasionally, odd as that may seem to some)) Right do I win a prize or something?

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: TheSnail
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 02:02 PM

Jim Carroll

I, and thousands like me stopped going to clubs when it became possible to spend a night in one and not hear a folk song.

This is a line you trot out quite often, Jim, and it has me baffled. Weren't any of those thousands involved in organising the clubs? Didn't it occur to the organisers that they were driving their audience away?

GUEST,In My Humble Opinion

Folk Clubs are fast becoming a waste of time

As a matter of interest, when did you last go to a folk club and how many have you been to over the last, say, five years?

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 01:57 PM

"Argument isn't browbeating, it's the exchange of ideas."

Exactly right. When someone is made to feel that their opinion is unwanted or invalid, then we have roadblocks that quickly block others from enjoying the prize.

Perhaps things are different in the U.S., but if "thousands" of people stopped going to clubs for the simple reason that they weren't offering the music these folks were interested in - someone would have come along and opened a venue that caters to this audience. On the other hand, if it only caters to a small minority - why bother?

In the U.S., our interest in folk music was not tied as closely to the clubs which is perhaps there seems to be less of a perceived threat. Traditional music was always more of an "underground" taste.

It seems the media and commercial interests are easy targets to blame, but I happen to feel that people have more sense than they are given credit for. Just as YOU discovered music that spoke to you through the clubs in YOUR day, people today discover their own style.   In effect, the clubs were taking traditional music out of a natural environment and having the songs "covered" by other individuals. While the style of music has changed, it seems that the "tradition" of going to a club to hear and make music has simply evolved with the time.

Jim, if I am not mistaken I am sure you are the same Jim Carroll who was responsible for collecting so many wonderful songs and source singers in Ireland and Great Britain. I am very grateful for the work you did (and probably still do) and I have played some of the recordings that you made that were commercially released.   I am curious about something, and I am not asking this to stir up an disagreement - this is a sincere question that I am about to ask.

The songs you collected from Walter Pardon were, I believe, learned largely from an oral tranmission from his uncle. My understanding is that Pardon's songs were not being sung elsewhere and he sang a number of Music Hall songs. I understand that he also knew the difference between true traditional folk songs and these oher styles. My question is, if you recorded Walter singing both styles, what would you label the record as?

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: GUEST,In My Humble Opinion
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 01:35 PM

Folk Clubs are fast becoming a waste of time, partly as Jim Carroll says, because its possible to spend a night at one and not hear a single folk song and partly because of the people there who will insist to you that what you just heard was indeed folk music. (Argument isn't browbeating, it's the exchange of ideas.)

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 01:18 PM

Sorry Ron and Ruth,
I, and thousands like me stopped going to clubs when it became possible to spend a night in one and not hear a folk song.
Of course folk music wasn't invented in clubs, but for me and many of us it was where we went to listen to it, and the clubs gave rise to the hundreds of records of the real thing.
Argument isn't browbeating, it's the exchange of ideas.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 09:54 AM

"I am interested in the fact that the confusion surrounding the term 'folk' had decimated the clubs and stands to destroy the club scene altogether "

That speaks to the point that I was making earlier. The confusion with the word "folk" is nothing new AND it more of an individual indulgence issue.

Folk music, that is - traditional music of specific cultures, was NOT invented in clubs. The clubs became more of a social gathering to share the music and if you boil it down - the scene has nothing to do with "tradition" of where the music came from but is more of an entertainment function. You created a "tradition" during the folk revival when clubs sprouted up. Decades later, the clubs have evolved.

The danger is NOT in having a "scene" destroyed. The music that you and others thankfully preserved and shared will not be forgotten. The works of Shakespeare are not forgotten simply because subsequent generations continue to write plays. It is not a question of being forced to listen to something you do not enjoy. Celebrate the music that you enjoy and has meaning to your culture, but do not browbeat someone else who thinks differently. Wrapping the great gift you have given us in a diffent color wrapping paper is not going to change the content of the beautiful art inside.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 08:35 AM

I think the club scene has far more to worry about than misinterpretation of the F word, to be honest.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Jul 08 - 08:10 AM

Ruth,
Not really interested in rarefied discussions - I know where I go to find those.
I am interested in the fact that the confusion surrounding the term 'folk' had decimated the clubs and stands to destroy the club scene altogether - (with the help of PRS and IMRO).
I'm sure neither of us would be happy to see that happen.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 15 Jul 08 - 11:38 AM

Jim, my response was somewhat facetious (did you see the little smiley face at the end?)

You may feel that folk is still a very specific word describing very specific musics and processes. I agree that in the rarified environment of certain internet discussion groups, organisations such as EFDSS, and amongst the friends within my own folk community, we all more or less agree a definition. No problem.


"Why should we abandon a word that has had a valid use since 1846 and is still very much in currency in its proper sense? - Apparently to include a handful of square pegs (who don't even like folk music and find it overlong and boring) into our particular round hole - sorry Ruth - I found Kung Fu Panda more convincing."

The problem is that when you go beyond those groups into the wider world, suddenly the parameters all change. The definition widens beyond any usefulness or meaning. There is nothing that we can do about this, but if we all hope to be understood by people in the "real world", outside of these rarified communities, it's something we have to acknowledge. Amongst all the people using the F word, we are, in fact, the handful, Jim. We're the square pegs.

If you only ever want to talk to other scholars and hardcore enthusiasts, that's fine. But ifyou're interested in the dissemination of traditional culture to a wider, more mainstream audience, I reckon it's kind of important that we understand how the F word is being used, perceived and commodified out there.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: Phil Edwards
Date: 15 Jul 08 - 11:31 AM

I'd like to see evidence that past music was more prolific AND community centred AND constant in all of pre-Edwardian Britain.

That would be an awful lot of evidence. Besides, that's a lot more than I've been arguing. What I'm saying is that people like to have a bit of music while they're working, socialising or relaxing, and that it's only very recently that we've been able to get all that music from recorded sources - so there used to be a lot more music-making than there is now.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: GUEST,In My Humble Opinion
Date: 15 Jul 08 - 11:07 AM

The '1954 definition' is akin to the American Constitution, there people who will rewrite to suit their own needs, thus rtendering the original totally useless

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 15 Jul 08 - 11:05 AM

"The oral tradition - and the 1954 definition - is about communities and societies where people can, by and large, answer Yes to all four."

Could you show us where the 1954 council definition says that? The copy I have does not mention that stipulation, but perhaps you have something different.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: glueman
Date: 15 Jul 08 - 10:27 AM

"about communities and societies where people can, by and large, answer Yes to all four"

I know of no historical record that pertains to those conclusions. There were certainly work songs, there was leisure and community singing but the image you portray is of a background of continual music making. I'd like to see evidence that past music was more prolific AND community centred AND constant in all of pre-Edwardian Britain.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: Phil Edwards
Date: 15 Jul 08 - 09:53 AM

"how does the 'new folk music' relate to the existing one"
Different community, different time, different technology - same reasons for existence.

No. As I said yesterday:

"Do you sing while you work? Do your workmates? Do you sing at home to relax? When your friends or family want some music of an evening, do they suggest having a few songs?

"The oral tradition - and the 1954 definition - is about communities and societies where people can, by and large, answer Yes to all four. Those conditions may still obtain in some parts of the world, but they certainly don't in Britain or the US. Folkies pass songs along, but that doesn't make us a community."

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 15 Jul 08 - 09:34 AM

"Why should we abandon a word that has had a valid use since 1846 and is still very much in currency in its proper sense?"

That statement could also be made as "Why should we cling to a word that has been in use ONLY since 1846 and has always been controversial about making proper sense?"

"Nobody has even attempted to answer any of the major questions"
I think we have, either you missed our answers or simply ignored them. You do not have to agree, but you should recognize that there is more than one opinion to something that is NOT a "yes" or "no" question.

"how does the 'new folk music' relate to the existing one"
Different community, different time, different technology - same reasons for existence.

"do I have to go and get my 8 volume set of The Greig Duncan Folk Song Collection re-bound"
Of course not, unless you have worn out the cover. That is an excellent collection of folk song.

"where do we go to listen to music we used to know as 'folk'"
Good question. Of course, the places YOU went to listen to 'folk" music was either the source, or a manufactured setting where people mimicked the music that was collected.   The question should be, why are people creating places to listen to the music that YOU knew as "folk"? I'm sure that there are people wondering why there are fewer places to hear any tradition that they grew up with.

"where do I send my PRS cheque (silence again)"
Sounds like a Brit thing and since I have no idea what a PRS cheque is, perhaps I could suggest you make it out to cash and I will send you an address.

"what do we idiots who have been working on folk music now have to identify it as"
The obvious answer is - folk music. With a qualifier as to what "folk music" you are referring to, as I assume you have always done.

"what ARE we going to do about 'folktales'"
Continue to enjoy and share them. I would suggest reading Pete Seeger's book on the subject of storytelling. Best way to carry on the tradition.

"oh - and why does the phrase 'pig-in-a-poke keep creeping into my mind? "
My you have a dirty mind!! :)   

"Who ever claimed that it didn't - the 1954 definition is an international one - It seems to me that - having convinced us of the need for change, you then need to pop across the channel and make a start at convincing all the other eejits "
So many eejits and so little time!    Seriously, there is no need for CHANGE. If you accept the 1954 definition it can be applied to modern times. No one is stealing your tradition. You just need to observe it as a living entity.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Jul 08 - 03:04 AM

"Jim - I don't want a different definition; I want a different word"
Why?
Why should we abandon a word that has had a valid use since 1846 and is still very much in currency in its proper sense? - Apparently to include a handful of square pegs (who don't even like folk music and find it overlong and boring) into our particular round hole - sorry Ruth - I found Kung Fu Panda more convincing.
Nobody has even attempted to answer any of the major questions - how does the 'new folk music' relate to the existing one, do I have to go and get my 8 volume set of The Greig Duncan Folk Song Collection re-bound, where do we go to listen to music we used to know as 'folk', will the change put more bums on seats or will it compound the confusion, where do I send my PRS cheque (silence again), what do we idiots who have been working on folk music now have to identify it as, what ARE we going to do about 'folktales', oh - and why does the phrase 'pig-in-a-poke keep creeping into my mind?
I'm afraid my response remains 'come back when you've thought this through'
"To use a term such as "folk music" is perfectly acceptable to me if it includes music from the Balkans, Italy, Spain, China, Nigeria and other countries of the world - and the various regions and traditions in each".
Who ever claimed that it didn't - the 1954 definition is an international one - It seems to me that - having convinced us of the need for change, you then need to pop across the channel and make a start at convincing all the other eejits - good luck folks (whoops - sorry).
Jim Carroll

Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 14 Jul 08 - 08:30 PM

"The stuff *needs* to be sold under false pretences to get established at all"

I kinda doubt that logic. In this country, if it were labeled as "rock" or "country" it would at least be eligable for commercial radio airplay and a chance at being covered by the media.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: Jack Campin
Date: 14 Jul 08 - 07:32 PM

: From: GUEST,In My Humble Opinion

Another GUEST we've never heard of before Why are you concealing your identity?

:: and virtually nobody gives a shit about it any more
: The same can be said about alot of people regarding the British Tradition

Again, for the hard of thinking: I was giving an example of what happens when you label singer-songwriter music accurately, with all the additives listed on the tin. I don't think the difference between Turkish and white Anglo-American cultures in the fortunes of s/s music is entirely cultural (they have a potential market of middle-class weekend rebels there too, albeit a slightly smaller one). The stuff *needs* to be sold under false pretences to get established at all, and white Anglo-America is where that's happened to the largest extent.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: glueman
Date: 14 Jul 08 - 05:39 PM

Perhaps modernism and folk will create cereal music. Ba-dum, tschhh.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 14 Jul 08 - 05:37 PM

Tootler.
Interesting, but April article. Wonder if it had any influence on Folk musicians being invited to take part in the Proms. Can you post any articles in the press on reactions to this please? Wonder what the classical critics made of the Folk content.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: Tootler
Date: 14 Jul 08 - 05:30 PM

Interesting article

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: Phil Edwards
Date: 14 Jul 08 - 05:09 PM

Surely you must see that's very funny?

Actually I've never been much of a one for laughing at the losing side.

What I do think is very funny (at least in the sense of funny-peculiar) is the number of people who airily dismiss the idea of defining 'folk' as reactionary and futile, but who turn out to be fiercely attached to a definition of their own - and, in most cases, either unable or unwilling to say why they're attached to it.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 14 Jul 08 - 05:02 PM

And does that reflect some ill?

Touche mon ami!

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 14 Jul 08 - 05:01 PM

Well, not a belly laugh but I'm having a chortle!

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: GUEST,In My Humble Opinion
Date: 14 Jul 08 - 04:58 PM

*and virtually nobody gives a shit about it any more*

The same can be said about alot of people regarding the British Tradition or whatever you want to call it, and all the arguing in the world simply isn't going to change that.

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: glueman
Date: 14 Jul 08 - 04:56 PM

The question was 'does it matter what music is called?' The answer is 'to some extent' but it's not worth every tenth thread. The hardliner/pedant/folk police's favourite word applies to a lost, past tense, museum piece music that they insist is under threat because it's been adopted by living music.

Surely you must see that's very funny?

Subject: RE: Does it matter what music is called?
From: Phil Edwards
Date: 14 Jul 08 - 04:45 PM

You're wrong there Pip and as a quick shufty at any record store rack will confirm.

If the only question were how the word 'folk' is currently used this discussion would have been over before it began.

Really, that's an idiotic argument. For the last five days we've been discussing how the word 'folk' should be used. You've got one view about that, I've got another. Neither of us is going to have our mind changed by market forces. (In a couple of years' time, when the nu/weird/twisted caravan has left town, the 'folk' racks may be full of trad material again. That won't prove anything either.)