BBC Folk Awards 2009

Subject: BBC Folk Awards 2009- Rename Category
From: GUEST,Jiggers
Date: 15 Jan 09 - 10:59 AM

Hi,

See nominees for best album :

BEST ALBUM : Dreams of Breathing Underwater – Eliza Carthy ; Low Culture – Jim Moray ; This Earthly Spell – Karine Polwart ; Trespasser – Chris Wood

Although they are great albums, I don't consider either the Karine Polwart or the Eliza Carthy album to be folk CDs, they just happen to be by folk artists. If Eliza Carthy brought out a Techno CD then would it also be eligible for a folk award ?

I've not got the Jim Moray CD but my suspicion is that it is probably a folk hybrid CD.

I think this category should be re-named - best album by UK artist with a folk history.

Jiggers

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 15 Jan 09 - 11:22 AM

It depends on whether the candidates were chosen by listeners, or by a panel of non elected, Smooth Ops friendly, individuals.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 15 Jan 09 - 11:22 AM

Low Culture has 7 traditional tracks, Trespasser has 1.
What's your point and why does it matter?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: GUEST,Ian
Date: 15 Jan 09 - 11:31 AM

Folk is such a wide span of music anyway, I personally wouldn't be too worried.

It is a fine album by a fine singer and good luck to her. I have always enjoyed her take on music, and even when she takes it to different places, the echos are all there. (Mr Magnifico?)

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Jan 09 - 12:03 PM

Diane Easby wrote:
"What's your point and why does it matter?"

My point is clear enough and it mattered enough for you to respond.

If I did not know any better and I saw an album labelled "winner of Radio 2 Folk Awards Best Album 2009" - then I might expect it to be more deeply rooted in the traditional mould than some of the nominated albums.

This is just a remark, not a contentious issue.

Jiggers

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 15 Jan 09 - 12:33 PM

I also pointed out that Low Culture has 7 traditional tracks. This, presumably, is the sort of content that appeals to you, yet you described the album - which you said you hadn't heard, as "hybrid". I was attempting to discover just what you are on about. Me? I think it's not the category name that needs changing but the entire concept that "f*lk" is a Humpty Dumpty term that gives rise to whingeing that this or that isn't. It's a side issue and of little consequence.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: peregrina
Date: 15 Jan 09 - 12:35 PM

The Folk Award LAA and FCY awards have been announced on the Radio 2 Message board. Not very easy to find.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: GUEST,Jiggers
Date: 15 Jan 09 - 12:45 PM

Your presumption was wrong. I have both the Eliza Carthy CD and the Karine Polwart CD and think they are both great. I took a punt that Jim Morays album was off the beaten track.

Maybe if there was two categories for Best Album, then that perhaps would help a bit.

So you think a techno dance album would be ok to win the award then ?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 15 Jan 09 - 12:53 PM

Yes. I can''t remember if Ms Carthy's Red Rice actually won a Smoothops gong. but that's what it was.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Rasener
Date: 15 Jan 09 - 12:58 PM

I think when performers stop doing grass roots and are only interested in high audience figures and turnover, they should be excluded from these awards.

Folk is for the people and grass roots is so important. When artists forget that, they should forget the awards as well.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: GUEST,Jiggers
Date: 15 Jan 09 - 01:10 PM

I haven't heard that album. I must give it a listen. Its noticeable that you refer to a Smoothops 'gong'.

Also John said earlier :
It depends on whether the candidates were chosen by listeners, or by a panel of non elected, Smooth Ops friendly, individuals.


Is it actually the case that the whole ceremony award is mis-named ?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 15 Jan 09 - 01:10 PM

Of the four artists mentioned in this particular category, I've seen three in recent weeks and the notion that their sole interest lies in grosses is laughable. Can't speak for Ms Polwart as I don't know her but from what others have said, the accusation seems equally risible.

The fact, however, remains that these are industry awards and success in them boosts both profile and income. Performers actually find it a bit difficult to live on fresh air and grass.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 15 Jan 09 - 01:13 PM

Sorry, I am having an argument on another thread that's going quite well at the moment, but i doubt that that will last

Best wishes

L in C

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 15 Jan 09 - 01:16 PM

As I said in the previous thread (which I can't be arsed to look for), nominations this year are far more representative of what is actually going on than in previous years. The Smoothies haven't any room left on their faces for more egg.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Big Mick
Date: 15 Jan 09 - 01:23 PM

Jiggers, the word "folk", like it or not in todays world, belongs to the person using it. Your assumptions, given what we see today, as to what it should be are invalid. I believe you wrote that you assumed when you see folk used, that it would contain some traditional music. My daughter, when she hears it assumes it is acoustic. The fact is that she is more correct than you when it comes to these awards, as they are sponsored by commercial interests. It makes no sense to keep going on about that. Rather than folk, we should probably just use the term traditional.

I am with Diane as to the issue of gross profit driven motives. Certainly people enter into music because of their love of it. But they still have to eat and pay bills. We hope our music and message appeals, so that folks purchase it. When they purchase it, we pay bills, so we can continue to make music. See how nicely that works?

All the best,

Mick

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: GUEST,Jiggers
Date: 15 Jan 09 - 01:37 PM

Mick, you didn't get that right regarding my understanding of the term folk when ascribed to music. I said 'if I didn't know any better then ...'.

I think a Best Trad CD album and a Best non-trad Album might be fairer. Its two awards - so thats better for everyone - surely !

I am at a loss to see how The Villans statement is an accusation against any of the performers mentioned - where does it say that ?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 15 Jan 09 - 01:53 PM

"When I use a word, it means exactly what I want it to mean. The question is which of us is to be the master"

Alice in Wonderland (or as near as makes no difference).

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: GUEST,JM
Date: 15 Jan 09 - 02:41 PM

Hi,

Diane, I make it 8 - which one did you think was not traditional? And of the two remaining on the CD, one is very much a newly-written retelling of a rich vein of traditional songs, and the other is a bit of fun that gets mistaken for a traditional song daily at the moment.

Frankly, Low Culture is a traditional album "1954 definition" or otherwise.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 15 Jan 09 - 02:51 PM

8 it is (. . . grumble, grumble, these poncy CD covers that don't number the tracks . . . other than which, is totally fab).

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 15 Jan 09 - 03:01 PM

On 2nd thoughts, I was right 1st time. It hinges on 3 Black Feathers. Does it count as Original or Trad?Arr Bella Hardy?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 15 Jan 09 - 03:16 PM

. . . That should be Trad/Arr Bella Hardy.

Since I'm back I'll sort out the confusion over Trad and Non-Trad categories.
The way the Smoothies do it is thus: There is "Best Traditional Track" and "Best Original Song". (Different rules apply for white bunnies).
In the case of entire CDs, it's just "Best Album"

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Rasener
Date: 15 Jan 09 - 04:16 PM

>>I am at a loss to see how The Villans statement is an accusation against any of the performers mentioned - where does it say that ? <<

You are right Jiggers. I never mentioned anybody. I don't do that. Unless of course I am praising them :-) Basically I just made a statement and other people do not have to agree. :-)

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: peregrina
Date: 15 Jan 09 - 06:55 PM

Ahem! Three Black Feathers is an original song written by Bella Hardy using the conventions of night visiting songs.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 17 Jan 09 - 02:30 AM

Guest JM (wonder who that is?) says there are 8 trad songs on Low Culture. So if you take out All You Pretty Girls (Andy Partridge) which is up for Best Original Song, and Valentine (Adrian Shaw but with a trad tune), that leaves 8. Including, presumably Three Black Feathers which, although rewritten by Bella Hardy, bears considerably more resemblance to trad than the Lakeperson's Albino Hopping Creature which gave rise to Bunnygate a couple of years ago when the Smoothies managed to let through its nomination as Best Trad Track.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 17 Jan 09 - 04:04 AM

Ah Bunngate what a campaign that was.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 17 Jan 09 - 04:29 AM

I don't understand the Folk Awards, never have done, not since they changed the 'Public Vote' because they thought Show of Hands would just keep winning it.

So, they banned Show of Hands from winning something year after year, because THE PUBLIC would vote them in....BUT...the Folk Awards 'judges' vote in the same people, year after year after year after year...

I can see one or two new names on that list, and it once again, gives the impression that the folk world consists of around 5 people..many of whom are up for numerous awards.

I've always said that for me, the object of the Folk Awards should be to help as many *different* artists as it can, rather than nominating as many of the *same* artists for several awards, thus narrowing down the opportunities for others.

The Folk Awards is incestuous, imo.

Trying to get 'into it' if you are not within 'the inner circle' is akin to trying to join the Masons. You have to know the right people and be willing to join 'the lodge'...funny handshakes an' all.

It gives the wrong impression to the world and it will continue to convince people that the folk world is small, incestuous and deeply controlled by those who consider themselves big fish in a small sea and never want to share 'their sea' with other forms of marine life.

Bring Back The Public Vote. It was the ONLY thing of truth within the Folk Awards. They didn't like the truth and so they removed it after the very first year.

Pathetic.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 17 Jan 09 - 04:43 AM

These are the BBC Radio 2 Folk Awards and this is their 10th year.
Sometimes they hold a public vote for certain categories but usually they do not as the panel is made up of industry representatives who are supposed to know what they are doing.
This year, Phil Beer is one of the nominees for Musician Of The Year.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: peregrina
Date: 17 Jan 09 - 05:33 AM

Ms Easby: re the post a while back:

Three Black Feathers is not trad/arr, but written by Bella Hardy.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 17 Jan 09 - 05:50 AM

"Sometimes they hold a public vote for certain categories but usually they do not as the panel is made up of industry representatives who are supposed to know what they are doing."

They held their public vote for the first time ever a few years back, and that public vote was for the Best Live Act and didn't they make a HUGE song and dance about it too, got terribly excited, encouraged everyone to join in...

So...er....everyone did.

And guess what? Show of Hands won it, and all HELL broke loose. Within days they'd closed the 'Best Live Act' idea down, even though it was meant to be an ongoing yearly idea, as this is what they'd decided...But because Show of Hands won it...they changed it to something they KNEW Show of Hands 'officially' win, so it became the 'Best Dance Band' etc.etc..etc...

Probably Show of Hands may have won that too, but it was kept quiet.;0)

It was said, by some not too far away from this message, that the Best Live Act results had been 'rigged' HA!

What of course had happened was the Show of Hands fans, who number in their tens of thousands these days, (as do Seth Lakeman's) voted for the band they loved.

The following year, the judges voted on Best Live Act, and they voted Bellowhead in, despite Bellowhead, at that time, having only played live a very, very few times.

The public go to see the musiciains they love. They should be allowed to vote on that fact, in ALL music awards, not just the Folk Awards. WE buy the tickets, WE buy the CDs, and if an artist or band has a huge following of fans, it is because their music is outstanding and appreciated by thousands of people. It is also because they've worked their socks off getting their music out, playing thousands of gigs, headlining festivals etc..etc..etc. It's perfectly easy to just say that no band can be win two years in succession, and a yearly gap has to be left, to allow others to win and further their careers.

Show of Hands became the Banned Band with the Banned Band's Banned Fans, which in my book carries FAR more weight than some poxy Folk Awards Award, given out by an inner circle of fish to their favourite fishettes.

Sorry, The Folk Awards has a very long way to go to redeem any respect from me.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 17 Jan 09 - 05:51 AM

"they changed it to something they KNEW Show of Hands wouldn't 'officially' win, so it became the 'Best Dance Band' etc.etc..etc..."

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 17 Jan 09 - 06:47 AM

Oh come on Lizzy - the BBC Folk Awards are right up there with Jonathan Ross.

Perhaps you can poke it out with a stick.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 17 Jan 09 - 11:16 AM

Three Black Feathers is not trad/arr, but written by Bella Hardy

. . . which is what I implied when I said Low Culture has 7 trad tracks (as opposed to Trespassers with but 1).
Another contributor (Guest JM - ha! - not me) said they made it 8 trad tracks on Low Culture.
The CD has 10 tracks (all excellent).
AYPG and Valentine are definitely not trad, as I said before.
So what IS TBF? As far as royalties are concerned, it matters not whether it's listed as Trad/Arr or as Original (though after Bunnygate it would be as well to describe it as a self-composition). Which is what I suggested in the first place.

Sigh. Yawn, losing the will . . .

(Bella Hardy is at Walthamstow tomorrow).

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: GUEST,Liam
Date: 17 Jan 09 - 11:25 AM

Whether Low Culture has 10 or 11 tracks depends on how you count the hidden one about Adam Ant at the end.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 17 Jan 09 - 11:28 AM

Adam Ant ia no help at all in bumping the trad track total up to 8 . . .

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: GUEST,cardboard cutout
Date: 17 Jan 09 - 12:25 PM

"It hinges on "Three Black Feathers"

No, I don't think JM is basing his count on that track, but on "Valentine" - depends whether you count it as tune or song, I suppose.

And Lizzie, when did the BBC/ Smooth Ops. ever say there would be an audience vote in perpetuity, or that such a vote would be for "Best Live Act" in perpetuity?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 17 Jan 09 - 12:53 PM

I hold no brief whatsoever (as any fule kno) for Smoothops, but the fact is that they produce for the BBC exactly what the R2 Controller (whoever that is now) tells them to put on the tin: namely an Awards ceremony of vaguely f*lk-tinged music that reflects part of that network's output.

This, of course, is why it can be uncomfortably mainstream and way behind the times of what's actually occurring on the ground. Having said that, this year's nominations reflect reality rather more closely than previous years in which, particularly as far as the Horizon is concerned, tends to be a vaguely embarrassing catch-up process. That's why, although I'd like to root for Bella Hardy this year, I'll have to back Jackie Oates who ought to have won it long before now.

I know I'll regret asking this, but how in the name of any deity of choice, could a soft-rock, singer-songwriter duo possibly be a candidate (even by Smoothie rules) for a Best Dance Band award?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 17 Jan 09 - 01:01 PM

"I know I'll regret asking this, but how in the name of any deity of choice, could a soft-rock, singer-songwriter duo possibly be a candidate (even by Smoothie rules) for a Best Dance Band award?"

Well, you obviously *haven't* danced to their music! :0)

I'm not talking that whoopsy daisy larks in the morning kind of dancing..nooooooo....I'm talking REAL dancing!

Come on, kick yer shoes off, and let yourself GO!

Haul Away Joe!

:0)



Smooth Ops, on the old BBC board, no longer there, said that the Public Vote for Best Live Act was going to be the NEW BLACK! Days after Show of Hands won it, Mel, their 'host' on the board, said that they'd decided to change it, because Show of Hands would just keep winning it, year after year, after year, after year...

YAY! :0)

No, seriously though, even Steve and Phil would have felt that was unfair, but to do what Smooth Ops did, in the way they did it, and for er, certain people to say it was rigged..was unforgivable.

You get the Folk Awards you deserve I guess....and so...it's the same old same old, picked from a small group of people, when the folk world is bursting with incredible talent, all of whom need as much help as they can get...

I don't need to look at who's been nominated, because I already know..

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 17 Jan 09 - 01:37 PM

Steady Diane, steady.

Come on Lizzie we all no what dance Bands are

Maybe Bunnygate had an effect? No that's far too silly

L in C

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 17 Jan 09 - 01:44 PM


Maybe Bunnygate had an effect?
That is indeed what I am suggesting.

we all no what dance Bands are
Clearly "we" do not.
http://www.e-ceilidh.com/

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 17 Jan 09 - 01:46 PM

Yes, but we have different views on dancing. The Oysterband, for me, are a GREAT dance band! I've stood down the front in their shows, and people are leaping up and down all over the place! Why does 'folk dancing' have to be all that stuff we were made to do in school so long, long ago? Kids don't dance like that anymore..only a few..most want to have a really good time and throw themselves around a bit.

A great deal of dancing happens at a Seth 'Bunny' gig. :0)lol

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 17 Jan 09 - 01:50 PM

Yes, but ceilidh dancing is all 'arranged' stuff isn't it, where you have to do what you're told and dance 'the right way'...

Show of Hands and Oyster Dancing is wild and free...same with The Duncan McFarlane Band, superb to dance too..Heck, Otley Folk Club was heaving with dancing folk that night a few years back when I got to see Duncan and his band..Fantastic!!

By the way, WHERE *are* Duncan, his band, and....Tom Bliss????????

They should ALL get a Folk Award...

But nope, the same old, same old, same old...

There really should be an investigation into it all. Yeesh!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Howard Jones
Date: 17 Jan 09 - 02:46 PM

I see plenty of people dancing the "wrong way" at ceilidhs :)

Lizzie, what makes ceilidh dancing different from what you're describing is that you're dancing as part of a group, rather than as an individual or a couple. That doesn't make it better, or worse, but neither does it mean it's less "wild and free" either, there's plenty of opportunity to express yourself within the set figures.

There's a difference between a band which plays music which can be danced to, and one which plays for dancing. But you know that really.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 17 Jan 09 - 03:20 PM

Yeah, course I do, Howard. ;0)

Heck I've been to a few barn dances over the years...turned the wrong way, caused complete chaos. :0) I gave up line dancing, when a friend dragged me along, as I turned right when everyone else turned left so many times it threw the lot of them..most confusin'! I even did that ballroomy stuff when I were a young chicken, was fine on my own, but put me with a partner..hopeless!

I know Joe, I know..."talk about the music, Lizzie, not about yourself." lol

And now, back to Edward II and The Red Hot Polka

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 17 Jan 09 - 04:22 PM

all of which is bollocks.

SoH are a jewel in the crown of English folk music. they have played trad songs from day one. they have learned mastery of their instruments in sessions throughout the English folk club system.

the idea that their music bears no relation to folkmusic is just bloody fatuous.
Phil beer could piss rings round virtually any other trad musician in England - technique wise.

its such an insult to pretend they are doing something other than the music they devoted a lifetime to synthesizing their own unique contribution to.

shame on you! Show some respect for the effort they've put over bloody nearly forty underpaid, underexposed years.

Also no one's given them a BBC2 television spot despite a no-bottom recording budget, inability to write a hit that the public identify with - like what has happened with the usual lads and lasses that Smoothops shine their light on.

SOH could be playing indie trance hip hop and heavy metal dance music - and they'd still bear a stronger relation to English folkmusic than the usual suspects.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 17 Jan 09 - 04:39 PM

Yay! :0)

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 17 Jan 09 - 06:58 PM

Phil beer could piss rings round virtually any other trad musician

Hmmm, yes, some . . .

As I remarked much higher in the thread, he's up for Musician Of The Year and, based on the opposition, only John McCusker is a serious rival. Not that I have anything whatsoever against Martin Simpson or Tom McConville but how it works is what have they actually DONE in the past 12 months.

What I'd personally like to see is musicians involved in diverse, wide-ranging and interesting projects that the mainstream never hears about. Like Karen Tweed, Sam Sweeney, Elle Osborne, (non-W:C, not that I have anything against them either) Saul Rose, John Dipper, Adam Bushell, Laura Cannell, the Brothers Sutton, Emma Reid, Chris Walshaw . . . people like that who are not exactly R2, are they? And jolly marvellous old blokes like Reg Hall, Keith Kendrick, Pete Coe, Brian Peters John Adams or Chris Foster. R3, yes, maybe, but absolutely non-Smoothie. Context is all.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: GUEST,Liam
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 05:37 AM

The Best Musician Award really has been abused over its lifetime. McCusker and Simpson have both won it twice. One year Smooth Ops flew Chris Thile all the way across the Atlantic to collect it, in the period when Nick Baraclough's show had turned into one big promo for Nickel Creek. All of which gives the impression there aren't really many top-knotch British "musicians" and of course there may not be hordes but there are a LOT more than you would think by reading the list on the Folk Awards website.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: peregrina
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 05:51 AM

I think all this year's nominees are top-notch musicians.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Spleen Cringe
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 06:12 AM

Last paragraph of Diane's post of 6.58... spot on!. And Late Junction is probably the best show for folk music on national radio.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 06:12 AM

You'd be a clever old sausage if you knew what all those people had been up to in the last 12 months. i've seen Keith Kendrick about three times in the last two months - but I wouldn't like to guess what he's been up to.

i still think its a bit cheeky telling SOH that they don't play folk music.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 06:54 AM

"I think all this year's nominees are top-notch musicians."

Absolutely, they are, peregrina. And I doubt anyone would disagree with that.

What annoys some people is that it is only the same small group of musicians who are constantly put forward, over and over again, and that's grossly unfair.

Heck, I'd be up in arms if Show of Hands won the same award year after year, much as I love their music, and I'm sure they would be too.

They throw in one or two new artists, just to keep folk happy, but other than that, it's the usual 'private party' for the usual people.

It's wrong.

They should bring in a simple rule where the same artist cannot be nominated every single year, and that would open the gates for so many others, many of whom need support far more than those who are already at the top of the tree.

So, yes, celebrate those who've worked so hard to get to the top of that tree, but let them be nominated fairly on a 'rota' basis, so that others have a chance to climb.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Howard Jones
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 07:36 AM

Exactly. I don't think anyone's saying any of those nominated don't deserve to be there, just that they seem to be drawn from a small pool and there are many other worthy contenders who seem never to get a look-in.

I was confused to read John Leonard on the BBC site saying "I'm delighted to see so many new names nominated this year." It looks to me like the usual suspects.

This is damaging to the credibility of the Awards. It's a great thing for the artists to put on their publicity, and it must be frustrating for those artists who seem to outside the magic circle. But judging by the responses no one on here (who you would think make up a significant part of the target audience) seems to take the Awards very seriously.

The other problem with any awards is that folkies are notoriously stubborn and independent-minded. Most will say, "I don't care if so-and-so's won an award, I'll make up my own mind".

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 08:35 AM

Faustus, Lau, Megson and all the Horizon nominees are new(ish). Don't forget it's a catch-up process. Karine Polwart got the Horizon (supposedly for 'newcomers') only a couple of years ago, after a very long time (15 or so years) in the biz.

It's not 'representative' because only a few can be singled out. It's not a kid's party where everyone goes home with a prize. In the public vote for Best Dance Band, Whapweasel won. Why? Because more of the R2 audience had heard of them than any other band. Was it representative? Of course not. The Whaps are great, but who but a Smoothie would argue that they are a typical ceilidh band?

The Folk Awards are a mainstream, industry-orientated showcase. Other polls are available but don't offer the exposure. You can't have it both ways.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Sandman
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 08:55 AM

[imo]These awards are completely meaningless.
it bears the same relevance as any competition,they are only the best [a matter of opinion anyway]of those who have either entered or been nominated,that doesnt meant they are not good,but then there are thousands of musicians/ singers who are good,but are not considered.
the whole thing is a fart in a circus,and is reminiscent of the popular music world.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: GUEST,Liam
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 08:59 AM

'I was confused to read John Leonard on the BBC site saying "I'm delighted to see so many new names nominated this year."'

That is the same John Leonard who tried to pretend that Seth Lakeman's The White Hare was a traditional song, so there is fairly often a mismatch between what he says and reality.

The best way to shake up and change the Radio 2 Folk Awards would be to change the Executive Producer (Leonard). The same goes for the Radio 2 folk show itself. Smooth Operations have got very complacement and seem to have established some sort of tenure. Ten years is quite long enough and it is about time the BBC exercised Producer Choice and tried something and someone else.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Sleepy Rosie
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 09:01 AM

Sorry to go a bit OT, but what's a 'Smoothie'?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 09:05 AM

Smooth Operations is the outsourced production company that has the contract to run the Folk Awards and an hourly programme presented by one Mike Harding.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 09:08 AM

I meant to say "an hour-long, weekly programme". They also produce a number of truly crap comedy shows as well with some sort of connection with Count Arthur Strong and Mark Radcliffe.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 09:15 AM

It's also the same John Leonard, who, on the Smooth Ops website had a little 'joke' going. If you want to contact them, send in a complaint etc..you were taken to a page with a photo of their 'Customer Care Manager' giving two fingers up his public.

This was taken down last year?, or some time quite recently, after a few people complained. I complained about it years back, but it was completely ignored. I wrote a 'Dear John' letter on the board which was also completely ignored.

When I arrived on that board, I used to praise the Mike Harding show, and so I was Smooth Ops 'darling' for a while, that all changed when I started to shout out about them, and was one more thing that contributed to me being banned.

How can you get a team to listen to you when they are led by a man who has that arrogant attitude?

It must be around 5/6 years since I first found that Folk and Acoustic board, and in all that time, people have been saying exactly the same thing, that the same artists are nominated over and over, that none of the judges are known to us, other than Ian Anderson, or he once was a judge, and that the Folk Awards are NOT representative of the folk music world at all.

It's grossly unfair. It's like a monopoly. Year after year dozens of new artists are blocked from having their names put forward, by a man who, imo, doesn't give a shite about the music or his public, only himself, and his 'nearest and dearest' in the folk world.

Maybe it's time for placards and banners to be held high at the annual Smooth Ops party, which I've no doubt is paid for out of *our* money. Bring the protest songs to the very arena itsef and take over the Awards and finally, let the people be heard.

I always remember Bruce Dickinson a few years back, saying that more diversity was needed, desperately needed, to be brought back into music, and he was there to present an Award to The Oysterband for their 'Big Session Volume II' pleading that they'd be allowed to sing Steve Knightley's 'Country Life' (Show of Hands were joining them on stage) as it was such a great song..but nope..that wasn't permitted either.

John Leonard got it right with The Radio Ballads, but he should darn well stop nominating so many of his pals (or at least, they're 'pals' in my opinion, but I could be wrong - that's for Smooth Ops Lawyers) and listen to his public and then, listen to the MUSIC being produced by hundreds of bands and solo artists who are forever locked out of a Select Club, which has a Members Only sign on the door.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 09:17 AM

Here

Smoothy Central

The other sort od Smoothie are perhaps more fit for purpose

How to Make A Smoothie

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 09:19 AM

Sorry...following on from the Bruce Dickinson bit about diversity...

John Leonard needs to accept that far more diveristy is needed in the choice of artists nominated for various folk awards.



Here you go, Rosie:
Smooth Ops Main Site

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: GUEST,Liam
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 09:19 AM

That Guest on Smoothies was me

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 09:19 AM

..or even... 'diversity' :0)

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009--the cook-in sauce query
From: peregrina
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 09:46 AM

Posters in the BS section seem to have played a huge role in getting a discontinued barbeque sauce back into production--I think not by the thread as by writing in to the manufacturer or distributor, and then other sauce-slicking non-catters finding the thread by google and joining in the pressure. What was it--something like Woody's cook-in sauce?

So, anyone for a write-in campaign? About the awards? Asking for Late Junction to be returned to its longer time-span?

Or an alternative awards? So... the awards are bound to be annoying if you are really into folk. And it's clear that the exposure does matter to the artists. But no one forces you to listen?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 10:14 AM

Brilliant idea, peregrina.

Sadly, all I can do is try to inspire others to do just that, as you have done, because *no-one* at Smooth Ops will talk to me, having been told by the BBC they're not allowed to. (yeah, right..like they so want to talk to people anyway)

It's something that has needed sorting out for many, many years, and I doubt that any other genre of music has such a tiny selection of people being chosen over and over, from such a vast sea of wonderful performers.

It's NOT the performers fault at all, but those who run the Awards.

Go for it, peregrina! :0)

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 10:26 AM

The thing is captain - if you wanted to be considered for these honours - you'd have to try and BE like them - and from what I've seen of your work - you're not really a 'music industry' sort of artist.

nevertheless I can see how being nominated might be helpful to you.

i don't know what the solution is.

the thing is, you must realise that this gang - in the general scheme of things are pretty small time.

perhaps you need to think outside the box - this is a very exclusive club. and by the look of it - you're going to remain excluded - so the thing is - you must look to break the cycle that you're in, by another exit route - if that's what you want.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Kev The Clogs
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 11:06 AM

Diane Easby

"the panel is made up of industry representatives who are supposed to know what they are doing.
This year, Phil Beer is one of the nominees for Musician Of The Year."

Exactly what DO you want performers to be/sing/play, so that they fit into your seamingly, very narrow Folk needs.

I've crossed words with you before on this issue, as have many others.

"Phil beer could piss rings round virtually any other trad musician in England - technique wise." Here here weelittledrummer!!!!

Phil Beer's playing style and ability has inspired me to pick up two instruments and learn to play at the age of 44! SoH songs have encouraged me to sing in public and learn a variety of songs, both traditional and contemporary, equally at the age of 44!!

Do YOU sing or play anything? If so, are you any good? What do your peers say about you/your ability/your style?

We ALL have a right to be critical and to choose to listen or not listen to someone, but you always appear to be SO negative.

Lighten up - its this sort of entrenched attitude that gives us "older folies" a bad name.

I find that the BBC Folk Awards are an ideal way of giving people a taster of what is out there. When I first came into this folkie world about four years ago, I didn't have a clue as to who was who, what style they did, if they were any good etc. Yes, my peers made suggestions, but I found that lsitening to the CDs made me want to go and buy some more of a particulat artist, or not - great for a Newbee, nice for an open minded chilled folkie, not good for an entrencehed "it must be this way" type of person.

Depending on where people place themselves in these three categories, should therefore indicate their type of response to the original issue of this thread. If you are Number three on my list, DON'T buy or listen to, The Folk Awards because they will upset and dissapoint you. If you are a Number two, then you may learn a bit here of there or perhaps change your view. If you are a Number 1, then you will be drawn into our delightful, but sometimes frustrating, world of folk music.

Kev The Clogs

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 12:14 PM

Clogging person

I was pointing merely to the fact that Mr Beer is nominated for Musician Of The Year, as a counter to someone who was whingeing that SoH (but one of his bands) had been "overlooked".

I also said that, of those nominated this year, he was the most likely candidate in that category, challenged only by the one who used to have a mohican on his head.

I said, furthermore, that I held no brief whatsover for the Smoothies (nor for R2, nor even the BBC since I've not worked there for over 10 years) but that the outsourced production company was doing what it was paid (and therefore told) to do.

The answer to your subsequent questions are 'yes' 'yes' & 'no'. I am a writer, not a professional performer.

I recommend Specsavers to assist you to actually read and maybe even comprehend what I have written. You know me not at all, or you would be aware that my "attitude" is far from "entrenched", nor am I a "f*lkie" (I loathe the term for oft-explained reasons) nor even an "older folie" (though that sounds rather interesting).

Nor do I know who YOU are and if you HAVE spoken to me, I am entirely unaware of it.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 12:51 PM

To recap, I entered this thread because the OP was questioning whether the nominated CDs in the Best Album category were "f*lk" (don't give a toss, myself as I never use the term) and described Jim Moray's Low Culture (unheard!) as "hybrid" (whatever that is). He then asked me whether a "techno dance" album would be "OK to win". I said Ms Carthy's Red Rice was just that (in part, anyway).

I'm sure you're all getting the idea of how very "entrenched" I am. My entire raison d'être for arriving on this forum six years ago was as a result of the wholly unjustified stick the unenightened backwoodspersons were applying to Jim Moray's Sweet England.

Unless, of course, you mean my role in the battle lines against the Smoothies, in particular over their monumental Bunnygate cock-up. I was actually rather sorry for the poor Lakeperson because of the damage those idiots of Oldham could have inflicted on his career. Those (if any) who bother to actually read the thread will have noticed that I agreed with someone who speculated that the Smoothies just might have taken hold of their socks this year, so as not to let yet another White Hare on the loose.

Ah, the Lakeperson and the Beery one. Jolly nice chaps. They can play whatever they like (especially if it makes them a living) but, in the words of the sainted Ms Tabor, just don't expect me to listen to some of it. They know which bits . . .

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 01:06 PM

. . . finally, whatever does this mean?

"the panel is made up of industry representatives who are supposed to know what they are doing.
This year, Phil Beer is one of the nominees for Musician Of The Year."

Exactly what DO you want performers to be/sing/play, so that they fit into your seamingly,[sic] very narrow Folk needs.


The top line is mine. It describes how the Smoothies go about organising their beanfeast, which is nothing whatsoever to do with me.

The second line is from a clogging person rambling on about somebody or other's "narrow folk needs" (whatever they are).

Not my ballgame. The Smoothies run it. And screw it up. All by themselves. However, their efforts seem just a bit more sane this year. On y va.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 01:18 PM

"..I was actually rather sorry for the poor Lakeperson because of the damage those idiots of Oldham could have inflicted on his career..."


Heeheehee!

Oh, Sweetums, you DO make me chuckle!

On Friday, following a trip to A&E at Exeter, I was limping around the grounds of Exeter University, with my shepherd's crook type stick, having torn a groin muscle (ouch!) and Gandalf the Blonde came into being...

Well, (I know Joe, but I'm getting there) :0)...Well, my friend (who had taken me to A&E and then had to attend a lecture) and I went passed The Great Hall and memories of Seth's Sensational Gig came flooding in.

Oh what a night! A packed Hall, all standing, queueing right around the Hall to get in, people desparate for cancelled tickets, mighty long queue there too...and the biggest Tour Bus I ever did see! When Seth came out on to that stage, which was so beautifully lit, thousands of young people went absolutely crazy! They whooped and cheered, clapped and whistled, and as the thundering, pounding beats started, and Seth put his fiddle to his shoulder, the floor shook with the vibration of people dancing. They knew all the words, these youngsters...all of them stood there, singing songs of their part of the country, cheering when Seth mentioned a particular place here, or another there....all taking in the most famous singer of The New Tradition. And when he did his 'Kitty Jay' bit, where his fiddle almost self combusts, they went WILD!   When he stopped, there was a silence of around 5 seconds, as people stood there, stunned..then, deafening applause filled the air.

Of course, that night, we were doubly blessed, as Seth's special guests were Dan Donnelly (Fantastic!) and Steve Knightley, who absolutely wowed them with his songs! Phil was in the audience, and as Steve was singing, the group of chums behind me whispered, "Who's this bloke? He's great!" So I filled them in.."Ah, Show of Hands, we've heard about them." and they nodded..

Nothing can hurt Seth's career, he's a rising star, who'll just keep rising, as I've always said he would. Thank heavens he spread his wings and stuck to doing his music his way. It's been the saving of him. Seth is a one off, and he's bringing in thousands to folk music, absolutely thousands...but heck, didn't it take the Folk Awards a long time to finally give in and give Seth something! Gee Whizzzzzzz!

Yes, he got in under Ian Anderson's 'radar', as did Show of Hands...and bloody good job too!

Seth Lakeman - Our Dartmoor Bunny

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 01:28 PM

This thread's about Folk Awards Nominations 2009. In which not a single Lakeperson nor a Devonish Dishevelled person features.
Just leaving to see Bella Hardy(who does). I'm sure she'll be highly amused at the quaint things being said in this thread.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 01:49 PM

From Sweetums:

"..I recommend Specsavers to assist you to actually read and maybe even comprehend what I have written."




I just received this email a short while ago.   ;0)



"Good Afternoon Everyone,

We here at Speccsavers always like to keep abreast of what our public is hankering after. Having been informed by our West Country area manager that we appear to have a gap in our Designer frame market, we'd like to bring to you our latest range of Spectacular Spectacles for making a spectacle of yourself in.

These samples below are from our 'D.E.Design' designer range.

We very much hope that you enjoy them and look forward to you placing an order with us shortly.

Thank you.

Yours optically,

The Speccsavvy Team



Our 'I'm Gonna Need Alcohol To Read THIS Post!' frame

Our 'Holey Moley! Did She REALLY Say That About Me!' frame

Our "I Don't Care WHAT She Says! I KNOW I'm A Good Musician! frame

Our 'Know It All' frame, as modelled by The Designer herself

And finally, our 'Take That, Sweetums!' frame


And now, back to the Folk Monopoly...woops, sorry, the Folk Awards.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 01:52 PM

"I'm sure she'll be highly amused at the quaint things being said in this thread."

I'm sure she will! ;0) :0)

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 02:27 PM

From Diane:

"This thread's about Folk Awards Nominations 2009. In which not a single Lakeperson nor a Devonish Dishevelled person features."

Whistling casually smiley! :0)

BEST LIVE ACT

Bellowhead
BBC Cambridge 2007 | Official Site | Wikipedia

The Demon Barbers
Official Site

Lau
BBC Radio 2 Video Interview | Official Site | Wikipedia

Seth Lakeman
BBC Music Profile | Official Site | Wikipedia



Sweetums, may I recommend the 'Know it All' glasses from the new Speccysavers range? ;0)

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Kampervan
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 07:41 PM

Oh for God's sake Lizzie, give it a rest.

I also like Seth Lakeman and SoH, but I suspect that your praising them does them more damage than a 1000 detractors.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 07:52 PM

This thread was initiated by someone who hadn't even listened to Low Culture (although it's been out for around 6 months), in yet another attempt to discredit Jim Moray. The OP considered the Best Album Folk Award nominations were "not f*lk CDs". Best Live Act didn't come into it.

Having had it pointed out that Low Culture has either 7 or 8 trad tracks (depending on how you look at them), the OP has skulked off, never to be seen again. As the thread has drifted irrevocably off topic into previously far-too-frequently revisited West Country irrelevancies and other equally inane directions, it would be A Good Thing to close it (there's another kicking about somewhere). It's nowhere near where it started, it had a completely distorted initial point and the awards ceremony isn't for another two weeks anyway.

And yes, Bella Hardy does find it bizarre that there are those who meander mindlessly knee-deep into tripe rather than making / listening to music, though I'm not altogether sure she'd really have wanted them at the gig which was a triumph and Chris Sherburn came along too!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 05:23 AM

WHY on earth should this thread be closed down?

BTW, it's no good trying to wriggle out of it in your first paragraph, above this post, because you quite clearly stated earlier:

"This thread's about Folk Awards Nominations 2009. In which not a single Lakeperson nor a Devonish Dishevelled person features."

You were wrong. Seth Lakeman's in the Nominations, under Best Live Act.

By the way, Jim Moray Rocks!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 05:42 AM

The OP's original contribution was a whinge specifically about classification in the Best Album category.
The original thread, which progresses in the main in a more balanced, informed and orderly vein, is here.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 06:35 AM

Aha! I stand corrected...and offer my apology, with no wriggling. :0)

However.....the *title* of this thread is 'BBC Folk Awards 2009' and that shows on the heading above each post, as it also does on the main board....BUT, it says on the heading above the original poster's first post... 'BBC Folk Awards 2009 Rename Category

Either way, we've had both serious and humourous discussion in here...so nowt's been wasted.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Kev The Clogs
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 08:20 AM

Here here Lizzie!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 09:12 AM

Here here ¿Qué?

Hear, hear is an expression used as a short repeated form of hear ye and hear him. It represents a listener's agreement with the point being made. [c.f. Oyez, Oyez]

OK, so you agree with off-topic bollocks, spread across multiple threads.

Oh, and where did you learn stepping? Johnson Ellwood, champion Northumbrian clogdancer, taught me.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 09:44 AM

'ear 'ear

Johnson Ellwood, champion Northumbrian clogdancer, taught me.

Off topic!

OFF with her 'ead!


Thank you for staying tuned, but now, normal service has been resumed, so we're pleased to hand you back to The Folk Awards.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 09:52 AM

Next year's Folk Awards will include a stepdancing category. Possibly.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: GUEST,Jiggers
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 10:11 AM

Hi,

If "Skulked off" means logged off and went home then that is fine otherwise you are mistaken.

I have been accused of many things recently on this thread which concerns me as I have no argument with anyone and so wonder why I am getting this treatement.

For one, I was not detracting from Jim Moray. I went to a Jim Moray concert recently and have the Sweet England CD which I thoroughly enjoy. The word hybrid is not meant to be insulting, perhaps the word fusion might be a suitable replacement. Jim Moray wasn't even on my mind when I started the thread. I believe someone is trying to make me feel inadequate for not having listened to it, why so ?

The two albums on my mind when I started the thread, were the Eliza Carthy album and the Karine Polwart album. I just think that they are not typical of the genre (as defined by what I hear in sessions, at concerts, on the radio, folk festivals, read in books, play from books) and my conclusion is that I would like to see two Album awards :

1. Best Trad Album
2. Best Non-Trad Album

Unfortunately none of the contributions on this thread are actually going to help take this to the next level, which is to offer as a suggestion to the Folk Award organisers. The only positive I can take is that my expectation of a constructive response to such assuggestion is now very low.

One thing this thread has shown me is the ease with which some people misinterpret, misread and misunderstand postings. I think some of it is deliberate. This would make me reluctant to use this forum for any such matter again.

And finally, its not my fault that Mudcat forum didn't show the full title of the thread that I raised.


Jiggers

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 10:41 AM

1. Best Trad Album
2. Best Non-Trad Album


I think that's a very good idea, Jiggers. :0)

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: GUEST,Tom Bliss
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 10:54 AM

"Unfortunately none of the contributions on this thread are actually going to help take this to the next level, which is to offer as a suggestion to the Folk Award organisers."

People do make suggestions to the organisers, and you can yourself - either by writing directly to Smooth Operations via their website , or perhaps by contributing to the webforum which they themselves run.

Your suggestion has been made in the past. Perhaps if enough people suggest it, in the right way in the right place they may think seriously about it.

Tom

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Kev The Clogs
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 01:45 PM

OK DB, you've asked for for it - I can't believe that somebody can have their head so firmly inserted up their own backside as you have!!

"Here, here" was indeed a sign of agreement with the previous poster - Lizzie has at least been trying to add a little humour to the thread!!

"Oh, and where did you learn stepping? Johnson Ellwood, champion Northumbrian clogdancer, taught me." - who gives a tinker's toss who taught you to step! Didn't realise that we had entered into an arena of oneupmanship.

"Off topic bollocks" - not at all. It's called "conversation", just in a written format. When people are having a conversation, the focus of the conversation often changes (doesn't mean its going off topic) - As for the bollocks part, well Madam, if "if the cap fits".

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 05:51 PM

Hauling this thread a few miles back towards topic (a distinctly attention aux chevaux, 1954ish, retrogressive labelling exercise on the part of Guest Jiggers), the very last thing the Best Albums category requires is "humorous" (sans u), trivialising chit-chat. A CD is a vital tool in an artist's portfolio of achievements and direction and its presentation and subsequent reception can make or break careers. The topic is serious and important, though only because there is no viable alternative to the Folk Awards.

Ms Carthy is probably a little too busy right now to have seen such dismissive remarks about her highly personal latest oeuvre (yet), but having witnessed how proud she (and her parents) were at the DOBU launch, I'm certain she'll be at least saddened when she finds out. And Jim Moray (who very recently spoke out bravely about how deeply he'd been affected by cruel, dismissive comments about Sweet England and aspects of his stage presentation half a decade ago) is doubtless puzzling over the use of "hybrid", however much the jigging person claims it wasn't meant to hurt. The admission that the CD hadn't even merited a play was an especially low blow (pun intended).

These artists put their all into their productions. They are not, of course, silly or vain enough to expect everyone to hail everything they do as the very finest from the instore bakery and sliced too, but they do have a right not to be bombarded with brickbats telling them to call it "something else". There are, after all, many more than just me whose toes curl up and the terminally-damaged, past sell-by term "f*lk" and the way it is slung around nowadays, and who seek more descriptively accurate terms.

As for bombarding Smoothops with demands for extra Folk Award categories, it's a no-brainer. Apart from the fact that they couldn't be arsed anyway and, on past showing, fail to recognise a clear-cut difference (c.f. Bunnygate), they have to do what the network controller wants (and strictly within budget), or no contract extensions for Mr Leonard. It is, frankly, pointless to hope for change as long as R2 is involved. Smoothops fits in with the network's "follow though" ethos because it's the only way they have to go. It's what R2 does, and yes, OK, it's dumbed down and safe enough for some.

Any hope there can be lies in lobbying further up the BBC chain, not at network level. Other EBU broadcasters can provide 24-hour digital broadcasting of traditional music and, with governmental support, provide far more adequate platforms for their respective tradarts. So, find a trustee and bend back their ears.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 06:39 PM

"And Jim Moray (who very recently spoke out bravely about how deeply he'd been affected by cruel, dismissive comments about Sweet England and aspects of his stage presentation half a decade ago) is doubtless puzzling over the use of "hybrid", however much the jigging person claims it wasn't meant to hurt. The admission that the CD hadn't even merited a play was an especially low blow (pun intended).

These artists put their all into their productions. They are not, of course, silly or vain enough to expect everyone to hail everything they do as the very finest from the instore bakery and sliced too, but they do have a right not to be bombarded with brickbats telling them to call it "something else". "


Yup, I'm sure SoH and Seth felt equally upset when you slammed into them Diane, so many, many times.

As I recall, it was good ol' Jim Moray who was the first person to step forward to congratulate Seth Lakeman on his nomination for the Mercury Award, and er...you...who completely chose to ignore that, commiserating with every single other artist who wasn't nominated, instead. Then, began the campaign to have Seth disqualified from the Mercuries, which, again, as I recall, was driven entirely by you and Ian Anderson.

This of course, was *after* the campaign where you inferred that Show of Hands fans had cheated to get them voted in as Best Live Act.

Yes, you're perfectly correct, people shouldn't make low comments about artists, ANY artists.

And also, people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

Let he who is without sin......and all that.....

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 06:45 PM

Luckily, Specsavers have added a final frame to their above DE designer collection:

Our 'Do You Forget What You've Sometimes Said?' frame

I suggest you get a pair. :0)

Oh, and for those who aren't aware, I should just clarify, that obviously the Seth campaign didn't work, and although he didn't win the Mercury Prize that year, it was the stepping stone for a whole new path in his career.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 07:18 PM

This has absolutely nothing to do with the Folk Awards categories topic, but as I have absolutely no wish to enter into a private correspondence with madlizziecornish (good grief, may the firmament and higher heavens forfend), I am obliged to refute a series of wild assertions here on the forum in order that those with an interest in more ethical promotion of English music might be redirected to the actual point.

1. I have and continue to castigate various wannabe popstars of Devonish(ish) provenance on specifically musical grounds. I find they're actually quite nice chaps.

2. I always commiserate with long lists of performers who don't get nominations for this or that.

3. The Lakeperson's Mercury nomination was highly suspect on the grounds that the CD was released initially outside the time limits. I wouldn't be at all surprised if Ian Anderson made the same observation. Many did. It arises from an ability to read a calendar.


As for the future (if any) of the Best Album category of the Folk Awards under the present regime, is there any likelihood of it continuing (since no-one has yet been arsed to amalgamate threads passim floating about the ether, might it be conducted with greater semblance of orthographical exactitude (e.g. agreement expressed via correctly spelled "HEAR" x 2, else it's complete nonsense), and differentiation between "infer" and "imply" which are far from synonymous.

Who's for ambushing BBC trustees?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 09:00 PM

I knew a barrister once who had programmed his computer to make an announcement on bootup, rather than play the usual irritating Windoze tunes. It said "Good Morning, Ruler of the Universe" (it said it in the way that really needs those capital letters).

Looks like there might be a demand for such a product.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 04:00 AM

"1. I have and continue to castigate various wannabe popstars of Devonish(ish) provenance on specifically musical grounds. I find they're actually quite nice chaps."

So, you castigate those who can fill The Royal Albert Hall over and again, who are joined very happily on stage, and in the audience, by many from the traditional world, whilst finally admitting that they are actually 'quite nice chaps'

Well, I suppose your 'they're actually quite nice chaps' admission is a positive sign at long last, so hopefully, you may be able to work something else out too. That is that Show of Hands are doing more to take traditional and non-traditional songs OUT to 'the people' than any other musicians around. They may not sing them as you decree, but why the hell should they? They live in 2009, not in 1873. They perform music for people who are alive now, not for those who have gone before. Just as those who indeed 'went before' performed their songs for the people of their era. Show of Hands don't want these songs kept in museums, as others do. They don't want to be tied down to the confines of Cecil Sharp House, hemmed in by rules and regulations, where their clothes (and their minds) will become infiltrated with dust, damp and dastardly backwards ideas.

"2. I always commiserate with long lists of performers who don't get nominations for this or that."

You may well do, in private. However, strangely, the incident with Seth was the *only* time I've ever seen you commiserate with other performers, publicly, whilst choosing to offer no congratulations whatsoever to Seth.

"3. The Lakeperson's Mercury nomination was highly suspect on the grounds that the CD was released initially outside the time limits. I wouldn't be at all surprised if Ian Anderson made the same observation. Many did. It arises from an ability to read a calendar."

Had the same thing happened to one of your 'chosen' performers from within the fRoots 'radar-protected' inner circle, then I've no doubt that you and Ian Anderson would have done all in your power to ensure that the artist/s concerned had backing and support from as many as possible to enable them to go into the nomination category. OR, you may just have chosen to completely overlook it, entirely.

I do like a good dose of hypocrisy with my early morning cuppa, it makes me start the day with a smile. :0)

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 04:29 AM

As I was saying on the subject of adequate representation of English music in public service broadcasting and its categorisation (if any) in the BBC R2 Awards nominations, Who's for ambushing BBC trustees?

This body has not, however, any connection with the Mercuries. To be considered there, all you have to do is pay to enter. Nor does it influence the fRoots Critics Poll, won recently by Low Culture.
Confused of Sidmouth might expect to be hearing from Ian Anderson who is currently on tour with Blue Blokes 3. That's if he considers such inane ramblings meriting considered refute.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: GUEST,Tom Bliss
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 04:36 AM

Just to keep one important aspect of the thread going...

I understand your cynicism, Diane, and you're right about the pressures placed on Smoops by the BBC, but I know that John is open to ideas and reason, and is keen to make what improvements he can within the constraints. We discussed the issue of categories in detail and at length across his desk, and it was clear that he saw some (much?) merit in my argument, and seemed to warm to some of my ideas re re-categorisation. He certainly did take on board much of what I said about openness and BBC standards, and has made some changes accordingly - though not as many as I personally would have liked to see. That said, I changed some of my opinions as a result of what he told me too, and I came away reasonably content, though still wanting to keep up pressure for some small but significant improvements. Naturally he feels it's basically not broken (though willing to consider improvements, specially if they'll make life easier for Smoops) so is loath to put time, effort and risk into any major fixes. I don't think the awards are broken either, but I do have serious concerns about other issues within the 'folk industry' and see the awards as one of the few useful tools in the box. My suggestions for change are all around that. I always stress that I'm personally very happy with the basic end result - things are looking better than ever this year - and merely want to remove unnecessary confusion (Jiggers' issue goes to the heart of a big one), provide a smoother and more open process, and make the awards work harder in terms of PR benefit for 'folk.'

Yes, it might be a good idea to talk to some trustees (I try to bring the subject into the conversation if I'm talking to any suits - which I rarely do these days), but if so, then you would need to make a cogent argument based on a sound knowledge of the existing rationale and budget. Meanwhile, Jiggers might be better off making his or her suggestions where John might read them.

Tom

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Folkiedave
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 06:00 AM

Who's for ambushing BBC trustees?

I would be but there are problems about this.

The first is that it is hard to just complain to the Trustees. You need to be complaining about a particularl programme.

Then there are three levels of gatekeepers - the final one of which tells you it cannot be sent to the trustees and by coincidence seems to open any mail that gets sent to them. And then says (again) you can't talk to the trustees.

I went through this with regard to the closing down of folk programmes (and those with long memories will recall my appearances on "Feedback" with regard to the albino rabbit and the closing of Ali Anderson's radio show on Radio Newcastle). They seem very determined to not let people talk to the trustees.

And I tried the Freedom of Information Act.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 06:11 AM

there are problems

You don't say. Been down most of those avenues.
I had more in mind bumping into Michael Lyons in the BH lift (unlikely for me nowadays, though I was once in a lift with Frank Muir, Michael Grade AND Greg Dyke) or earbending him at his local pub (a better plan).
More practically, there's the short-term tactic of educating the panel and (if you're as diplomatic as Tom Bliss), gently twisting Mr Leonard's arm.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: GUEST,Tom Bliss
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 06:34 AM

The other short term tactic is getting onto the panel - they've been asking for volunteers.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 06:38 AM

Ooh, I'll volunteer! :0)

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: GUEST,Liam
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 07:50 AM

The Trustees are probably much more twitchy to what independent producers are doing in the BBC's name now. If you read the report into the Brand-Ross debacle, time and time again it comes through that the Radio 2 Controller had no real control over what that particular independent producer was doing. It was implied that the situation might not be confined to just Vanity Productions (Brand's company) and BBC Director-General Mark Thompson was actioned to get a grip on quite what was going on with the other producers and to report back.

Most of the trustees have other jobs. Finding what those are and writing to them at those addresses shouldn't be beyond the more determined folk agitator. But remember, the Trustees do not run the BBC. Their job is to ensure that those charged with that task do. Radio 2 either has or is about to have a new Head of Specialist Music. He might be the right person to target with suggestions.

I think you will find that the Smoothies asking for volunteers was just so they could tell the BBC they had, and not because they want any. They know how to tick the BBC's compliance boxes without in fact complying with the intended spirit at all. These are after all the same people who for years had a picture of John Leonard giving two fingers on their own complaints page. It only got removed when someone made a formal complaint to the BBC about it, around the time of Bunnygate.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Folkiedave
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 08:06 AM

That complainer was me.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: Folkiedave
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 08:21 AM

Where do I apply to get on the panel? I can't see it on the Smooth Ops site?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards 2009
From: GUEST,Liam
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 08:48 AM

It is deliberately hidden so that people don't apply, but Ian Anderson (bless him) spread the word wider than they intended, so they have had all sorts of what they regard as nuisance applications.

The Smoothies general pretend contact address is on their website, but previous experience is that they just ignore anything from the public. That they have all suposedly been put through the BBC's creating trust (or whatever it is called) programme makes it even sadder.