Does Folk Exist?

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Jul 09 - 03:44 PM

"To be clear, some doctoral or post-doctoral research evidencing precisely how effective 'the process' is as a way of defining what's commonly described as folk music would be most welcome."
whatever happened to:
"I choose not to let it anywhere near the music I love because I understand what it can reveal and what it can't."
How about some evidence straight from the horses mouth.
The Irish and Scots Travellers held on to their singing and storytelling traditions far longer than any other communities in these islands TOTALLY WITHOUT ACCESS TO LITRACY.
It was still possible to record full texts of song from them right into the mid-seventies including many of the Child ballads which had disappeared from the repertoires of field singers - 24 verse version of Lamkin, a similar length version of Young Hunting, The Outlandish Knight, The Grey Cock, Edward, Lord Randall - living examples of an oral tradition.
Of course,, this might not suit your own particular agenda- but you can't win 'em all.
I asked for evidence - all I got was waffle - no surprise there.
Business as usual
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 25 Jul 09 - 03:00 PM

To be clear, some doctoral or post-doctoral research evidencing precisely how effective 'the process' is as a way of defining what's commonly described as folk music would be most welcome. I have no problem with change as a vehicle of transmission, I hesitate to bracket all folk songs as substantially changed because the index of transformation is not defined in a meaningful way. Taken as a whole my instinct is some traditional music is clearly common whereas others appear to be taken as common music on trust.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: GUEST,Michael Morris sans cookie
Date: 25 Jul 09 - 01:46 PM

"I'd be extremely interested in a post modern theory of folk music if there's one available. I'm not a post modernist but it sounds like a cat among stool pigeons. Or the role of the songwriter in folk, re-appraising the craft of Bert Lloyd, something on gender and if you have a psychoanalytic reading the folk revivalist I'm all ears."

"I know what research is at the higher academic levels. I choose not to let it anywhere near the music I love because I understand what it can reveal and what it can't."

Make up your mind, Glueman.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 25 Jul 09 - 11:50 AM

"I believe the serious face of folk music stops people getting access to the tradition as much as the inclusion of pop in clubs. Youngsters simply won't run the gauntlet of BS to be told what is and isn't 'authentic'."

When I was a 'youngster' (a long, long time ago) I became interested in folk song because it 'rang my bell' more than the pop music of the time and it was "the serious face of folk music" which kept me interested. I didn't have to run any "gauntlet of BS" but I did get to meet some of the great names of the time and to listen to both their music and their wise words on the subject (I don't remember any 'BS').

I must admit that I do get a bit fed-up with you droning on about "acts of faith" 'glueman'. The theoretical background to folk music is based on thousands of hours of observation and research undertaken by some very talented and insightful people - whereas your vague musings seem to have been dreamed up in odd moments between scratching your arse and picking your nose. To dismiss all of that hard work in favour of a few arbitrary notions and prejudices seems to me to be the height of arrogance.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Jul 09 - 11:31 AM

"one of those things that sets the dogs nodding."
What evidence do you have that 'the folk process' does not exist?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 24 Jul 09 - 09:55 AM

Disagree oh thunderer. Not at all crass, just aimed at winkling out shibboleths and acts of faith from the realities. Folk means different things to different people, the so-called process is one of those things that sets the dogs nodding.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Jul 09 - 09:45 AM

"I choose not to let it anywhere near the music I love because I understand what it can reveal and what it can't."
Then why make crass statements about its existence, origins... etc?
All ill-informed bollocks really
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Will Fly
Date: 24 Jul 09 - 08:47 AM

Yes - I confess I did know it was by Mozart, actually - and of course I can choose to play anything in any style I want to (and frequently do), regardless of any knowledge I may or may not have about a tune. I was just making the point that knowing something about the origins of a tune need not necessarily detract from either playing it or listening to it. As you can see from reading my previous paragraph, we were quite happily jazzing our way through the Bach gavotte...

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: TheSnail
Date: 24 Jul 09 - 08:17 AM

Will Fly

You might laugh at my ignorance, but I only found out, from the Senior Member at a recent Surrey session, that Michael Turner was a local man. (His violin apparently hung in a local museum). Now, I've played "Michael Turner's Waltz" many, many times without knowing that. "What does it matter?" I hear you say. Well, knowing that, I won't attempt to play it with grace notes, phrasing and other techniques which are taken from an Irish or a Scottish, or even a Northumbrian tradition.

But did you know that it is actually written by Mozart? Michael Turner's version differs a bit from the original and it's changed in subtle ways over the years as it's been played in sessions so why not play it in an Irish, Scottish or Northumbrian style if you want to? I've heard that it's a popular busking tune in France where it's known as Dave's Waltz and it's used for a traditional American Hymn.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 24 Jul 09 - 08:06 AM

That's a fair point PR. I believe the serious face of folk music stops people getting access to the tradition as much as the inclusion of pop in clubs. Youngsters simply won't run the gauntlet of BS to be told what is and isn't 'authentic'.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Phil Edwards
Date: 24 Jul 09 - 07:50 AM

You don't have to know a damn thing about folk music to get it

but you need to have the chance to hear it.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Will Fly
Date: 24 Jul 09 - 07:46 AM

Some idle musings on music and research - from the viewpoint of one whose interest is more in melodies than songs. (Nothing against the old songs, but I only sing one or two of them myself and prefer my narratives in other formats).

Me and my mate Ian were having one of our weekly or fortnightly afternoon jams - coffee, guitars, fiddles, viola, mandolin - just busking through this and that. We were running in a jazzy way through a Bach gavotte in Am - probably from one of the lute suites, but I can't remember which for the moment - and, when we stopped for coffee, we remarked on the resemblance of the implied chords to stuff like St. James' Infirmary. Which got us speculating - in the light of our joint view that, as far as chord progressions are concerned, Bach has been there, done it and printed the T-shirt - how far composers like Bach, Purcell, etc., had both drawn from and contributed to the traditional music of their day and afterwards. How much had filtered back and forth along the chain, particularly where fiddle tunes were concerned. How Gay's "Beggar's Opera" had drawn on popular tunes, etc., etc - just chewing the fat.

A fascinating topic, and one which we may well spend some time on investigating further from scores and tune books - and a topic which has probably been well researched already, for all I know.

How, in the name of the sainted J.S.B., how can synergy like that, and knowledge of synergy like that be detrimental to me playing the music and some other bugger listening to it, Glueman? You might laugh at my ignorance, but I only found out, from the Senior Member at a recent Surrey session, that Michael Turner was a local man. (His violin apparently hung in a local museum). Now, I've played "Michael Turner's Waltz" many, many times without knowing that. "What does it matter?" I hear you say. Well, knowing that, I won't attempt to play it with grace notes, phrasing and other techniques which are taken from an Irish or a Scottish, or even a Northumbrian tradition.

It's only a trivial example, but knowing more about the roots and springs from which music flows can only be beneficial, perhaps at a level of which we're not immediately aware.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 24 Jul 09 - 07:32 AM

Not going down the grumpy music route again. I know what research is at the higher academic levels. I choose not to let it anywhere near the music I love because I understand what it can reveal and what it can't.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Jul 09 - 07:25 AM

"Jim, research and music in the same sentence make me come over all nasty. If research means listening to donkey's years of folk music, I'm a researcher."
We've all done that and come to different conclusions.
I take it that you have nothing to back up your conclusions other than your good word - and you've more than shown us what that's worth.
So we're left with armchair musings - ah well.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 24 Jul 09 - 06:41 AM

I took my father-in-law to one of Eliza's gigs recently. A man for whom the term easy listening could have been coined. He loved it and has spent the intervening weeks telling his lounge-core friends how brilliant she is.

You don't have to know a damn thing about folk music to get it but no amount of attribution will bring you round if you don't.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Phil Edwards
Date: 24 Jul 09 - 06:39 AM

The point is - and this has been a large part of my reason for getting into these ridiculous arguments all along - the old songs groove. It goes like this - the fourth, the fifth... - they hit those intervals that evoke sweetness and sadness and joy (and sometimes all three), and then they hit them again. The kinds of effects that a contemporary songwriter would try to evoke by the end of the second middle-eight (I know, I've done it) - the old songs just go straight for it. There are subtleties and shadings, but they're carried on a big, definite framework: this is a song about love and death and you are going to feel it.

And that's why I love them. And that's why I feel short-changed if I go to a folk night and I'm the only one singing them.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Phil Edwards
Date: 24 Jul 09 - 06:22 AM

Brian: The way into folk music will be always the sound, digging the groove

glueman: I've never met a singer of traditional songs who didn't do it for the joy of singing

me: no recording can ever capture the pure joissance of simply being there, which is one of the things I love about [singarounds]

Suibhne: I've never heard a traditional song I didn't like. Well, maybe one or two.

(I might have muddled some of those attributions.)

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 24 Jul 09 - 06:11 AM

I'm for releasing folk from the addendum because it attracts too many for whom the sixth toe has become the whole point. People who shout 'what are your sources' or for all I know 'Judas!'

The way into folk music will be always the sound, digging the groove. If people want to bring their own hang-ups or go on a musical treasure hunt it's their prerogative but their opinions will always be after the fact.
On SOP's modelling analogy a new ready to run, weathered and detailed by the owner, serves equally as well as scratchbuilding, though scratch is fine so long as the builder doesn't bang on about it as the whole point. Arriving fully formed from it's originator doesn't mean we can't make our own mark, but it would be silly to say the postman who brought the package was part of the process.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Brian Peters
Date: 24 Jul 09 - 05:50 AM

Hope it's not swine flu, Suibhne. Get well soon.

glueman:
"The convoluted backstory is purely for those who want validation for singing a song. Most people do it for the same reason a bird sings, to remember they're alive. Not to continue some half-arsed notion that they're involved in a process."

Not sure what happens on planet glueman, but here on Earth I've never met a singer of traditional songs who didn't do it for the joy of singing. The 'convoluted backstory' is an addendum for those with enquiring minds.

And thanks, Jim, for the eloquent post on song evolution.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 24 Jul 09 - 05:44 AM

Just to say I feel like shit today & I've lost track of this one completely so I'm phoning in sick.

In response to Shimrod back there I'd just like to say that just because I feel all music can (and does) operate as folk music in terms of context & process, that doesn't mean I'm wanting to see that reflected it in folk clubs. The context of a Folk Club is sacrosanct to a particular faith and I have my ideals of what sort of thing I might expect to hear there - just as when I pick up a copy of Railway Modeller I expect to see an exquisitely modelled NER rural branch-line terminus circa 1934 with scratch built locos and rolling stock. You get the idea.

Anyway, keep the faith. For the rest of the day I'm going to be curled up on the sofa under the duvet watching DVDs of Magma's Mythes & Legendes concerts filmed at the Triton re-unions back in 2006. Here's a taste:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FlJKKtgreqw

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 24 Jul 09 - 05:07 AM

Jim, research and music in the same sentence make me come over all nasty. If research means listening to donkey's years of folk music, I'm a researcher.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 24 Jul 09 - 05:03 AM

Loving your stuff eliza, never seen a bad gig. Always thought you were the solution not the problem.
Siding with songwriters, whenever they lived, not the bluddy people.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Jul 09 - 08:20 PM

"Jim is looking at a grand old house through a keyhole and claiming he has a firm knowledge of its interior"
Glueman:
I have no expectations whatever of getting an answer on this one as I have come to realise that these unsubstantiated sweeping statements are designed solely to score points - but here goes anyway:
Where have I ever claimed that I have a 'firm knowlege' of anything - sorry - still learning.
What do you base this statement on?
Have you looked at our work? Are you familiar with the interviews we carried out with traditional singers? If so, where did we misconstrue them? What aspects of our researches do you think we messed up on? Where is your own research to contradict anything I have claimed? So far all you have put forward have been unqualified vaccuuous statements. Is there anywhere we can go to to look at your own work? So far all we have are armchaire musings WITH NOTHING TO BACK UP ANYTHING YOU HAVE CLAIMED.   
"Never believed in the evolution of the folk song in any meaningful sense"
One of the most popular songs we recorded from Irish Travellers was 'The Blind Beggar'. It was probably written during the reign of Elizabeth Ist, based on a living character and was entered in the stationers register in a 67 verse form in 1672. We recorded at least 8 distinct versions of it from various singers, where it had been pared down from its 67 verses to between 6 to 9, as well as at least the same number of incomplete sets.
Is its transition through time and distance and the fact that, after more than three centuries it remained in the oral tradition and has obviously been adapted to a thoroughly singable form right into the latter half of the 20th century not significant enough for you?
The Unfortunate Rake probably originated at the end of the 18th century as a street ballad. It is almost certainly the most widely travelled of all our folk songs. Some time in its history it split into two distinct forms; one from a man's point of view, the other from a woman's.
It is variously known as Sailor/Soldier/Cowboy/Young Man/Young Girl/Lad/BoyAirman/Trooper/......., The Whore's Lament, When I Was On Horseback/House of The Rising Sun/St James's Hospital/St James's Infirmary/St James's Workhouse..........
Why does "Never believed in the evolution of the folk song in any meaningful sense" come over as 'vaccuuous armchair smugness'?
On the other hand I may once again have got it all dreadfully wrong, so once again - on what do you base your claims?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: GUEST,eliza c
Date: 23 Jul 09 - 08:05 PM

glueman...
pedants feeling involved!!!!!
:-D
xe

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 23 Jul 09 - 04:07 PM

'folk music is no different to any other kind of music'

I'll have a slice of that. The convoluted backstory is purely for those who want validation for singing a song. Most people do it for the same reason a bird sings, to remember they're alive. Not to continue some half-arsed notion that they're involved in a process.

It's hard not to believe the whole thing isn't an elaborate scam to make pedants feel involved.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Brian Peters
Date: 23 Jul 09 - 03:56 PM

"I think it [the folk process] has been misrepresented by the collectors, with the evidence falsified to fit their agendas... becoming aware of the extent that A L Lloyd messed with the songs I'd long believed to be traditional not only shook me to the very core."

Cobblers. Lloyd, we know, altered songs. His main reason seems to have been to improve them artistically, although in a few cases he may have had as his agenda the validation of his 'Industrial Song' Big Idea. But not 'validating the folk process'.

For all the flak that's been directed at Cecil Sharp, not even his severest critics have accused him of making up songs to demonstrate the folk process. Omitting the ones he didn't approve of, maybe. But that's a different issue.

As I said above, the evidence is there if you care to look at it. Hundreds of ballads, hundreds of variants (some of them differing by the merest gnat's crotchet, others wildly), catalogued by dozens of collectors most of whom - I hope you'll concede - "falsified the evidence". The evidence also includes, in some cases, the testimony of the singers themselves. What I'm seeing on your part is an elevation of the notion that 'folk music is no different to any other kind of music', to the point where all evidence to the contrary must be denied or ignored.

That's what I call 'an agenda'.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Goose Gander
Date: 23 Jul 09 - 03:43 PM

Touche.

And now, let's try to get back on topic.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 23 Jul 09 - 03:37 PM

You just did.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Goose Gander
Date: 23 Jul 09 - 03:36 PM

"When I rouse demons I know the angels are at my side"

If I had any idea what you are talking about I would attempt a response.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 23 Jul 09 - 03:32 PM

Sing your heart out CS. It's music, there are no experts. Anyone who claims to be one or wants to put it in harness is an idiot.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 23 Jul 09 - 03:18 PM

That recollection of my Grandmother baking cakes, makes me almost certain that we've quite thoroughly lost the plot about all this folk singing stuff. I think I'd definitely better stick to singing songs in sweet ignorance in future!

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 23 Jul 09 - 03:16 PM

When I rouse demons I know the angels are at my side. The folk process is a myth, at least one that has 'the people' as an ingredient.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Phil Edwards
Date: 23 Jul 09 - 03:12 PM

What is under question is whether or not the Folk Process is the actual consequence of a series of random mutations

Not really. I wrote:

in the case of evolution, random mutations produce variations, and natural selection determines which variations survive to the next generation. In the case of the folk process, individual creativity (plus imperfect recall and happy accidents) produces a multitude of variations - every performance of every song is different in some respect.

Not "random mutations" but "individual creativity". Agreed?

I also wrote:

But the second stage is crucial, just as it is with evolution: it's the adoption of particular variants by listeners, who then go on to base their own versions on a variant they like, that determines which songs go down to the next generation.

and I think it's this part you disagree with, although I still can't quite make out why.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Goose Gander
Date: 23 Jul 09 - 03:04 PM

"What is under question is whether or not the Folk Process is the actual consequence of a series of random mutations or a somewhat wayward interpretation of the consequences of something a good deal more purposeful."

No one here has argued for "a series of random mutations" and I think everyone here is agreed on the role of creativity and personal genius as an integral part of the folk process.

"Personally, I think it's been misrepresented by the collectors, with the evidence falsified to fit their agendas . . ."

Which collectors? Certainly not Max Hunter, nor Vance Randolph, nor Mike Cohen, nor Art Rosenthal, nor Mark Wilson. Certainly an individualist such as yourself understands that such generalized statements are unfair and invalid.

My favorite version of 'Greenwood Side'/'Cruel Mother' is the one sang by Addie Graham.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Goose Gander
Date: 23 Jul 09 - 03:02 PM

Yes, the process requires time and multiple transmissions and recreations, that's why there are so many versions of Child 200 all over the English-speaking world, and so many of those 'Drowsy Sleeper' / 'Silver Dagger' type songs in North America. A couple of chance mis-hearings of a composed song do not imply 'folk processing' and I don't anyone here has suggested that.

"Yet songwriting skill and a well-crafted pithy lyric are not valourised in folk, or if they are it's at the expense of the hive mentality."

Bullpucky. Or, to be less polite, bullshit. Where do you come up with this stuff?

Your reference to "seamless evolution" was a Strawman. I thought my comment was fairly obvious.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 23 Jul 09 - 02:38 PM

Quite interesting SO'P, reminds me somewhat of my Grandmothers method of baking Cake (whilst she inevitably also sang). Well of course she knew what was supposed to go in, and how it was supposed to come out, but being a baker by trade, she didn't weigh or measure. Instead she would just adapt what she had to hand to make sure the cake baked alright. Sometimes adding a few cherries at the end if the fruit was short, or milk if the mix was too thick. Sometimes she'd leave it in the (slow) oven for an extra half an hour, if the middle hadn't quite set, etc...

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 23 Jul 09 - 02:17 PM

(Max Hunter is good for this sort of thing, being an 'unedited' collection)

Max Hunter is good for everything! Of especial interest in this respect are Mrs Pearl Brewer's two distinct versions of Child #20 The Cruel Mother (All Down By The Greenwood Side) both of which I find utterly compelling as analogues of the same thing which might be ghosted between them. Is this imperfect memory at work? Or something more improvisatory in Mrs Brewers style? Could either of these variations go off to a second generation and become different songs? What was the prototype? How do they compare to that? In such situations such things are like a perfect sauce - a consummate reduction to its very essence but a means to an end or an end in itself? Who can say. Fact is Mrs Brewer is one of many Source Singers I do listen to for the pure beauty of her singing...

For those who don't know:

Child #20 - As sung by Mrs. Pearl Brewer, Pochahantas, Arkansas on November 12, 1958

Child #20 - As sung by Mrs. Pearl Brewer, Pocahontas, Arkansas on May 27, 1959

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 23 Jul 09 - 01:47 PM

The word process implies something protracted, drawn out. My argument is a song could be word and note perfect and changed only by accident or mis-hearing. That does not lend itself to an interpretation of being blessed by the transforming hand of the mysterious 'people', but a work of individual genius whose authorship has been lost. Yet songwriting skill and a well-crafted pithy lyric are not valourised in folk, or if they are it's at the expense of the hive mentality.
Not knowing a writer does not mean one cannot recognise singular genius or fingerprint.

Neither didactic process nor weird alchemy ring true. They're antique songs and the only thing we can be sure of (unless forged) is their antiquity - and an aggregation of myth.
Straw men are not evidenced merely by summoning their name.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Goose Gander
Date: 23 Jul 09 - 01:24 PM

Likewise, I don't think learning a ballad upon first hearing implies 'perfect memory' and replication of lyrics and tune, any more than repeating a story you've heard implies an exact word for word recitation.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 23 Jul 09 - 01:22 PM

Look at regional styles in the US, whether it's balladry in North Carolina, banjo styles in Kentucky, 'lining-out' hymns among both white and black congregations, Holiness and Pentecostal songs, etc.

No one here is denying that musical traditions exist - I doubt there'd be any music without them; hell, even inveterate free-improvisers like myself are working within a musical tradition. What is under question is whether or not the Folk Process is the actual consequence of a series of random mutations or a somewhat wayward interpretation of the consequences of something a good deal more purposeful. Personally, I think it's been misrepresented by the collectors, with the evidence falsified to fit their agendas. I once had Folk Faith, becoming aware of the extent that A L Lloyd messed with the songs I'd long believed to be traditional not only shook me to the very core.

These days I treat the Revival as a Tradition in itself; all Folk Singers are, therefore, traditional; especially Traddies, boldly making sense out of the senseless and having a ball in the (folk) process.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Goose Gander
Date: 23 Jul 09 - 01:20 PM

The evidence for imperfect memory, mis-hearing, etc. is there in the collections (Max Hunter is good for this sort of thing, being an 'unedited' collection) . . . unless you believe that EVERY textual and melodic variation is intentional, and that EVERONE in your Grandfather's generation was possessed of perfect memory. Which would be a strange sort of Absolutism. Not that I want to put words in your mouth.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 23 Jul 09 - 01:17 PM

"Which is a very good point, although one school of thought has it that in such a culture human memory was far more acute at recording & recalling things than it is today. In Music Halls it's reported an audience could remember an entire song on a single hearing, likewise with lengthy lays in the Middle Ages. So how does this fit in with collective memory loss, or things changing by chance? Hmmmm..."

Because, SO'P, Buchan suggests that in a non-literate culture texts were not fixed and ballad singers had a sort of 'construction kit' in their heads from which they made a ballad anew each time that they sang it. The 'kit' contained such things as tunes, plot lines and standard phrases ('milk-white steed', 'lily-white hand' etc.). I recommend 'The Ballad and the Folk' - it's a bit of a revelation.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 23 Jul 09 - 01:05 PM

My own Grandfather likewise - he could recite endless Geordie Broon of Backworth and Kipling's Barrack Room Ballads with great aplomb. His Gunga Din was second to none and he even sang Keep Your Feet Still Geordie Hinney but remained oddly unimpressed when I played him Bellamy's setting of Gunga Din to Feet Still. He never lost a word.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Goose Gander
Date: 23 Jul 09 - 01:03 PM

"What I can't swallow is the folk song as seamless evolution. I believe it's the unique creation of a talented individual, sometimes 2 or 3 such people with a dash of synchronicity, certainly tweaked and patched up, but decidedly not an incrementally growing artefact of 'the people'."

Glueman, Strawman . . . no one here has made an argument for "seamless evolution" whatever that means(?) . . .

Individual creativity is one crucial component of the folk process, show me ANYONE here who has denied this. But it's not the only one, and changes to songs can and often are incremental, just as they can be intentional or accidental (anecdotes about 'perfect memory' notwithstanding) . . .

I agree, talk of 'the people' can be problematic (I would not want to live in the People's Republic of Folk Music, or the Union of Designated Soviet Folk Contexts) . . . but there is a (for lack of a better word) collective element to folk music. Look at regional styles in the US, whether it's balladry in North Carolina, banjo styles in Kentucky, 'lining-out' hymns among both white and black congregations, Holiness and Pentecostal songs, etc.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Goose Gander
Date: 23 Jul 09 - 12:55 PM

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 23 Jul 09 - 11:56 AM

What I can't swallow is the folk song as seamless evolution. I believe it's the unique creation of a talented individual, sometimes 2 or 3 such people with a dash of synchronicity, certainly tweaked and patched up, but decidedly not an incrementally growing artefact of 'the people'. Whoever the hell they might be.

"In Music Halls it's reported an audience could remember an entire song on a single hearing"

A very good point. My father's literacy levels were what you'd expect of a chap who left a small rural school at 14 but his recall of lengthy poems far exceeds my own - M.A. and all. Rote was the tool of choice for retaining all manner of information and un-literate people became expert at commiting to memory.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Brian Peters
Date: 23 Jul 09 - 11:14 AM

"Never believed in the evolution of the folk song in any meaningful sense..."

The evidence is there. Easily accessible. Take a look.

"I don't believe singing historical songs keeps them 'alive'... They have almost no leverage on contemporary sensibilities..."

If an audience is engaged, the song is alive. I wouldn't sing 'The Outlandish Knight' in my local pub, but I have sung it in non-folk contexts and had people break into cheering at the denouement. An audience that is prepared to listen will always be open to a good story. Whose 'contemporary sensibilities' are you judging it by?

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 23 Jul 09 - 10:46 AM

"Guardians of Folk Songs?"

I can buy the notion of almost anything as a form of 'portal' to an alternate state - especially song and dance, being as they are universal methods for getting out of ones normal space.

Don't know that I buy song gaurdians exactly (though I wouldn't deny it as a possibility), maybe you're err 'sensitive' to dead residents of folk club, who will be interested in the songs *they* loved to sing (ie "OWNED" as indeed living residents seem to sometimes...) - and just like most folk on Mudcat, won't approve of any rendering which isn't exactly like their own!

Of course when *I* sing 'When I Was in My Prime', I only get lovely warm-heart feelings.. So maybe the ghosties approve? Hehe!

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 23 Jul 09 - 10:32 AM

A debased (half-forgotten and faultily reconstructed) version of Two Sisters. And a great song in its own right.

In your own words: It's a version recorded - and probably rewritten - by the Appalachian autoharpist (John) Kilby Snow. so hardly debased, or even half-forgotten or faultily reconstructed. In that sense Mark E. Smith's half-forgotten & faultily reconstructed version of Moore & Blegvad's WAR becomes a folk song...

What are Seeds of Love, Let No Man Steal Your Thyme and When I Was In My Prime - astonishing coincidences?

Hardly astonishing, nor yet even coincidences. I could demonstrate dozens of folk tales that use such similar motifs; Green Men carvings likewise. Maybe there's an implication of poetic significance here, some might say a consistency of symbolism - persuasively erotic cetainly. Not sure about Glueman's wayward spirit, but if there is such a thing then it speaks through more than the one individual.

Seeds of Love is another song wherein strange things happen, When I Was in My Prime likewise. I fact I stopped singing the latter after a spooky experience in a Durham Folk Club in which I became aware of someone standing close to me, a shadow out of the corner of my eye, a womanly fragrance, and a very definite sense of disapproval somehow. Someone was not happy with my performance, and it wasn't just the other singers. Later that night back a friend's place he nervously told me about the woman standing close to me when I was singing, but the next time he looked, she was gone. Still freaks me out every time I hear it actually. Guardians of Folk Songs? Actually I experience this sort of thing all the time - spectral presences in traditional songs. Oo-er...

Anyhoo - Back there a while I made some comment about Beaver Dams - seems the mechanism is simply a matter of beavers hating the sound of running water, so what happens after that is the organic consequence of an instinctive irritation. Play the sound of running water to a beaver over a loudspeaker and it'll grab the nearest thing to stuff it up. So much for design. We might gaze (as I often do at the zoo) at a Peacock's feather with no uncertain bafflement, but whatever the mechanics are I'm sure they'll be quite basic; Crop Circles likewise, especially in terms of an Evolving Tradition with Associated Folklore and other Fortean Implications both Mundane and Fantastic bit no less Wondrous whatever way you look upon it, and they do involve design.

*

What we may actually be seeing here (in the ballads especially) may be a glimpse of the creative workings of a non-literate culture (a culture that literate people, like us, can barely imagine).

Which is a very good point, although one school of thought has it that in such a culture human memory was far more acute at recording & recalling things than it is today. In Music Halls it's reported an audience could remember an entire song on a single hearing, likewise with lengthy lays in the Middle Ages. So how does this fit in with collective memory loss, or things changing by chance? Hmmmm...

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 23 Jul 09 - 10:13 AM

Aye Sis, borrowing, nicking, purloining, 'homage'. There's your process laid bare.