Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 04:46 AM

That should have been Dalrymple of course,
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Diva
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 05:00 AM

Looking forward to Anne and Gordeanna's ballad workshop at Celtic Connections! I'm still a bit feart to make changes to ballads, I once did a wee bit of editing to Mill o Tifties Annie and was roundly telt aff......so I've never done it since. But as Gordeanna says "how did they evolve?"

Learning all the time...as it should be

Kathy

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long bal
From: Matt Seattle
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 06:13 AM

I have only recently become obsessed by the Muckle Sangs, and have found this thread to be fascinating and helpful, with some very valuable insights from the long experience of others, and much to agree, disagree and ponder on.

On 'editing' - I have a strong hunch that the longer versions are closer to the way the songs started their journey. It's likely that nothing is scientifically provable about ballad origins, but if you've ever tried to make a verse or two yourself (rather than a parody which I suspect is easier) you'll find how hard it is to get to the conciseness and clarity of language at the service of narrative that the ballad makers achieved. Why destroy what was so hard won? If it's too long pick a shorter one.

A case in point. The longest version of Dowie Dens of Yarrow, first printed by John Veitch from a reciter in Peebles, Child's 214L, is also the most finely crafted, with many rhymes and near-rhymes in the odd as well as even lines. It also encapsulates the comparatively slim tale of Willie's Drowned in Yarrow. Veitch is convinced it is the original, or close to it, and he also makes a case for the identity of the heroine.

With its fine touches of imagery and detail it makes the other versions look (more or less) degenerate. The master art of the singer has been acknowledged here. Why do we have such a problem with the notion of a master makar who knew what they were doing? He/she could be a ploughman-poet like Burns, but don't ignore the poet component. Even socialism needs specialists.

The idea that some people are 'folk' and the rest are something else is a strange one. We all breathe the same air. Ballad makers were very much part of the community they made the songs for - they may be anonymous now, but they were people with a craft and a function, and they knew their audience. In the case of some Border ballads, they were 'praise singers' for their lairds and usually very partisan in the way they described events, probably out of necessity. If what they wrote was any good then, it is still good now. Lang may their rhymes ring.

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 06:59 AM

Nice post, Matt - I've always argued that the Revival overlooks the creative role of individual singers & makers by postulating some semi-random, semi-occult Folk Process which moves through human community like some sort of virus. Whilst this tradition-as-phantom-traffic-jam approach is interesting, I feel it's more purposeful than passive - tradition-as-Mexican-Wave maybe. In this sense genre-creativity is absolutely crucial, which is to say all idioms are essentially creative, determined by a very essential set of rules which may not have been at all evident to the ballad-makers who nevertheless used them both intuitively & masterfully, much as we might use the complex rules of grammar without stopping to think too much about it.

I must admit I've never felt comfortable about messing with ballad texts. Tunes are a different matter; in the absence of something suitable, or agreeable, I'll look for something better - or when no traditional melody can be found (as in the case of say Child #38) when I hooked it up to the Breton tune I still sing it to. My melody for Twa Corbies came about when I free-styled (improvised) it in a singaround one whilst very drunk - by chance someone recorded it and the tune stuck. These days I'm very fond of The Max Hunter Folk Song Collection where one might find consummate reductions of traditional balladry - such as Mrs Pearl Brewer's performances of Child #20 (HERE & HERE) which we've used as the basis for our rendering which can be heard as track #5 HERE.

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 07:43 AM

"the Revival overlooks the creative role of individual singers"
The revival certainly does not overlook the role of the individual singers; we get our examples from the Sam Larners, John Strachans, John Reillys and Sheila Stewarts - but we have no idea how to differentiate between the influence that they have brought their songs and that of the many hudreds - thousands even, of unknown mouths that the songs have passed through, though we know for certain that this 'process' must certainly have had an influence.
Please don't spoil a potentially interesting point with loaded nonsense such as "semi-random, semi-occult Folk Process".
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long bal
From: Matt Seattle
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 08:05 AM

Jim, I think Sean's point was that Art is deliberate ('more purposeful than passive'). I am sure he would acknowledge the art of those singers you name and those unnamed who preceded them. My point is that the Art of the Makar is (at least) as deliberate as the art of the Singer, and I have long felt that there is something wrong with the very notion of a 'folk process'. Maybe I've misunderstood it, but it always sounded to me as something amorphous and aimless rather than the sum of the choices made by individuals whose names we don't happen to know.

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Phil Edwards
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 08:15 AM

I think it's precisely the sum of the choices made by individuals whose names we don't happen to know - at least, that's how I've always understood it. Nothing magical, mystical or [semi-]occult about it.

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long bal
From: GUEST,EKanne
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 08:40 AM

Seems to me that we're all agreed that these ballads survive (or sometimes, don't) as the result of innumerable choices made by their singers and listeners over centuries :-
* preserve absolutely as received - even if it no longer makes as much sense as it should in
   places
* add in some extra verses to clarify (taken from another, similar song)
* 'simplify' the tune to suit an aging voice
* lose the sense of the tune when trying to produce a seldom-sung ballad, so put it to a
   familiar melody
* hear a great version from another singer and take it on board - in whole or in part
* cut down the length, perhaps as a result of failing memory or perhaps to suit an audience

and so on ad infinitum...

But I'm curious to know why SoP is unwilling to change words when he seems quite at ease with the notion of changing or importing tunes. What's the difference?

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 09:08 AM

The Folk Process only becomes occult when people assume 1) the songs are anomalous products of a community rather than the deliberate work of individuals (i.e. not seeing the trees/i> for the wood) and 2) that it's unique to - er - folk music. Such a process is the common creative, communal & cultural factor of all musics from King Crimson to Joy Division to Peter Maxwell Davies to 50 Cent. The problem with folk music is it's been largely defined from the outside; it is a perceived music, one that comes into being through being collected & dissected by antiquarians and academics - unlike, say, Punk & Hip-Hop (etc.) which are defined on the street (i.e. their very natural habitat) as part of their very essence and aren't, therefore, too hung up on the back-catalogue.

I've known some great & truly Traditional Musicians - like Matt, and Tom Walsh and dozens of others - whose dedicated familiarity with the music becomes a springboard for another level of Traditional Musical Creativity. I've known a few songwriters like this too - Ron Baxter is such a one - whose craft is keenly defined by a very definite native understanding which manifests in Traditional Songs. Wasn't Jim saying back there that we needed such people least folk became the Sealed Knot? Genres & Idioms operate as language; living, breathing, evolving, but ultimately determined by the inner structural & creative mechanisms of the individual human brain which comes into focus by interfacing with the cultural context in which it finds itself.

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 09:21 AM

But I'm curious to know why SoP is unwilling to change words when he seems quite at ease with the notion of changing or importing tunes. What's the difference?

I suppose it's because I'm an essential creative / improvising / mediumistic / intuitive musician, and not a song writer. Also, many ballads I sing I come across in written sources, which makes me think about them differently than if I heard them sang. Thus, whilst I never alter words, I will quite frequently do the same ballad in various different ways, such as Child #79 - which I might sing like THIS (i.e. in a traditional style even though the melody is my own) or as I do in Tack #10 HERE (i.e. freely intoning the libretto as part of an entirely improvised performance).

To tie in with my previous post, such musical creativity I see as essentially mediumistic to an inner creative process, defined by the hard-wiring of my brain and the cultural software I've been uploading these past 48 years. My idiosyncrasy is, therefore, the consequence of my cultural / collective / communal human context.

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 09:36 AM

Actually... I do change one word in Usher's Well and that word is sheugh, which I sing as clough, in honour of Prestwich Clough featured in several early pictures by Kevin Cummins of my musical heroes The Fall, and named in their classic Jawbone and the Air Rifle. Never been to Prestwich Clough, but a visit is on the cards - looks like my kinda place...

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 10:35 AM

"the songs are anomalous products of a community rather than the deliberate work of individuals "
The problems arise when people take an either or approach rather than recognising that the songs are a product of both and more - all part of what we call a 'folk process.'
You only have to look at the Ulster ballad repertoire to realise that it is a product of their having travelled a distance (largely from Scotland) over a great length of time - unless you want to argue for a bard, pen at the ready, waiting at the quayside for the next batch to arrive. I don't know enough about it but I'm pretty convinced that the same is true of the Appalachian repertoire.
As far as I can see it has to be a mixture of deliberate re-creativity, accumulated change while in transition and even misunderstandings and mispronounciations due to unfamiliarity with dialects and accents (a sort of cultural 'Chinese whispers').
All of these factors could be seen to be in play among the Travelling communities right up to their losing their traditions thanks to portable television.
There really is nothing 'mystical' about it - it's what happens when information of any sort is orally transmitted.
"The problem with folk music is it's been largely defined from the outside"
Why should this be a problem? We are ALL outside observers of many things; it doesn't prevent us from assessing and reaching an opinion, and as long as we have done our homework, who knows, we might just have got it right!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 01:59 PM

EKanne and Jim, Couldn't agree more with what both of you are saying here. I was simply making the point that academics generally believe that one of the major forces over time and evolution of the ballads is the last point made by EKanne to which I would add the broadside hacks cutting versions down for economic and commercial reasons. His last point doesn't apply in every case, just the vast majority.

Alarm!!!!!Thread drift!

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 08:09 PM

Steve - in case I missed you - Happy New Year.
Wonder if anybody has any interest in or experience of the humourous ballads - quite a few of them - tend to get overlooked in favour of 'The Big Boys'.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: The Sandman
Date: 05 Jan 10 - 08:41 AM

john blunt here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVaI2GHZ80g

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 05 Jan 10 - 10:03 AM

"Never been to Prestwich Clough, but a visit is on the cards - looks like my kinda place..."

SO'P, Prestwich Clough is worth a visit. It is overshadowed by the magnificent gothic edifice of St. Mary's church - in whose graveyard are buried some of my heroes, the great working class Lancashire botanists Richard Buxton, John Horsefield and James Percival. Nearby is Mere Clough, which was once one of their favourite plant-hunting spots.

Sorry! Complete thread drift!! Perhaps some of the botanists knew some ballads ... ?

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Jan 10 - 10:16 AM

"Perhaps some of the botanists knew some ballads ... ?"
Gardener Child maybe!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: MikeL2
Date: 05 Jan 10 - 10:56 AM

Hi Jim

I am not really into ballads but are monologues ballads ????...at many of the clubs and folk meetings up here in NW England you hear a few.

I know there is one performer of such right here at mudcat....

The ones I hear most are some that I associate with Stanley Holloway.

http://monologues.co.uk/Albert_and_the_Lion.htm

This link will give interested people some information.....sorry don't know how to do the clicky thing.

Happy New Year

Regards

Mike

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Goose Gander
Date: 05 Jan 10 - 11:14 AM

Sometimes the humorous ballads ARE the big ballads . . . Devil and the Farmer's Wife; Get Up and Bar the Door; Child #277 (many versions, anyhow - though I know some people hate this one); Frog Went A-Courtin' (I consider this a big one); etc.

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: The Sandman
Date: 05 Jan 10 - 12:30 PM

Brian .Peters. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCG2csH2OMYhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCG2csH2OMY

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Sheena Wellington
Date: 05 Jan 10 - 02:11 PM

This thread has finally got me to register with this wonderful site into which I have been dipping for years. I am overawed by the erudition on display so offer my comments just as a lifelong lover of the ballads, not an academic.

I was lucky enough to have some ballads from the family including a fine version of The College Boy from my father's Auntie Meg. She could hold me spellbound though it was the considered opinion of the rest of the family that Meg had a rare voice for roaring 'Coal' i.e. she sounded like the most raucous street vendor.

Thinking of Auntie Meg and all the truly great ballad singers I have been fortunate enough to hear - Jeannie Robertson, Sheila Stewart, Lizzie Higgins, Jock Duncan, Maureen Jelks, Anne Neilson, Adam McNaughtan, Gordeanna McCullough and Brian Peters among them - what they have in common is a total belief in the story they are telling while they are telling it.

This does not mean they signed up to the supernatural or subscribed to the often dubious moral line taken in the ballad. It does mean that they were able, within the song, to be and see and feel as the characters in their narrative

There's been quite a lot of talk about what kind of audience can 'take' a ballad. In my own experience, virtually any kind! Ballads are stories and people of all ages love stories.

Working in a school recently I let a class of ten year olds hear tapes of schoolchildren from the area recorded almost sixty years ago. I was delighted to find that several of the songs were still in their repertoire but totally floored to find that two of them not only recognised but had a few verses of Lady Lido (Child 20). This led to a fascinating afternoon with me singing them a couple of other versions, the class starting to learn Lady Lido, and an interesting discussion on changing social mores which covered everything from the Nativity to Eastenders!

Let us have a bit more confidence in the ballad tradition. As I think someone said upthread, the ballads are not worth singing because they are old, they are old because they are worth singing!

And, btw, I tend to go with the Veronese theory on 'Lord Randal'.

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Jan 10 - 02:35 PM

Welcome Sheena
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 05 Jan 10 - 02:54 PM

It is overshadowed by the magnificent gothic edifice of St. Mary's church - in whose graveyard are buried some of my heroes

Serious thread drift this, but that sounds about right from the song, Shimrod - next time we're in the vicinity we'll be sure to explore....

A grim tale for sure, but what would Sir Francis have made of it?

The Fall: Jawbone & the Air Rifle

The rabbit killer left his home for the clough
And said goodbye to his infertile spouse
Carried air rifle and firm stock of wood
Carried night-site telescope light

A cemetery overlooked clough valley of mud
And the grave-keeper was out on his rounds
Yellow-white shirt buried in duffle coat hood
Keeping edges out with mosaic colour stones

Jawbone and the air rifle
Who would think they would bring harm?
Jawbone and the air rifle
One is cursed and one is borne

The air rifle lets out a mis-placed shot
It smashed a chip off a valued tomb
Grave-keeper tending wreath-roots said
"Explain, move into the light of the moon"

"I thought you were rabbit prey, or a loose sex criminal"
Rifleman he say "Y'see I get no kicks anymore
From wife or children four
There's been no war for forty years

And getting drunk fills me with guilt
So after eight, I prowl the hills
Eleven o'clock, I'm tired to fuck
Y'see I've been laid off work"

The grave-keeper said
"You're out of luck
And here is a jawbone caked in muck
Carries the germ of a curse
Of the Broken Brothers Pentacle Church
Formed on a Scotch island
To make you a bit of a man"

Jawbone and the air rifle
Who would think they would bring harm?
Jawbone and the air rifle
One is cursed and one is warm

The rabbit killer did not eat for a week
And no way he can look at meat
No bottle has he anymore
It could be his mangled teeth
He sees jawbones on the street
Advertisements become carnivores
And roadworkers turn into jawbones
And he has visions of islands, heavily covered in slime
The villagers dance round pre-fabs
And laugh through twisted mouths
Don't eat
It's disallowed
Suck on marrowbones and energy from the mainland

Jawbone and the air rifle
Who would think they would bring harm?
Jawbone and the air rifle
One is cursed and one is gone

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3skvkMYXNU0

They don't write 'em like that anymore!

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 05 Jan 10 - 03:19 PM

Jim,
And a Happy New Year to you.
Welcome, Sheena.

Funnily enough, I don't think the people who coined the term 'big ballads' were thinking of the comic ones. Personally I think Child only included some of these as samples of what was around, as they are no older and no more ballad-like than lots of others he could have included, Marrow Bones for instance. They are just as likely to have originated on broadsides as anywhere else and most of them have their earliest versions on broadsides. (Sorry, Jim. I know you probably will balk at this.)

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Cuilionn
Date: 05 Jan 10 - 03:34 PM

Sheena-- What an absolute delight to see you here! Welcome tae the Mudcat!!!

I've spent the day listening to some of your recordings as I've been asked to gie a sang at a local Burns Supper--after years awa fae ony serious singin-- an find masel in serious need o courage an inspiration.

Muckle thanks for jynin in!

--Cuilionn

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Jan 10 - 08:20 PM

"(Sorry, Jim. I know you probably will balk at this.)"
I probably will Steve -all I ask is something more than gut reaction to back up such statements.
The humourous ballads in the Child repertoire are full of folk humour, wonder how it ended up at the broadside hack's desk unless he lifted it from the folk.
'Long Johnny More.' Young Highlander goes to London, catches the eye of the King's daughter and gets sentenced to death for his pains.
He gets a message via a 'little wee boy' to his family at The Back of Bennachie; they run down from Aberdeenshire in two days and, when they are refused entrance at London Gate, kick in "three feet of London wall". Having ascertained that that he hasn't harmed any of the "wee Londoners" they free him and they, along with the king's daughter, return to The Back of Benachie. When the king threatens to hang the little wee boy they warn him "we'll come to the funeral and we will bury thee"
Come on Steve - it's the stuff of folk tales - it reads like an Alec Stewart Jack Tale
Jaik knocked on the castle door and the king answered it.
"Hello Jaik", fit dae ye want?
"Hello King, I've come for the job"
Then there's the seditious 'Queen Eleanor's Confession'
Henry II's queen, Eleanor of Aquitane is on her death bed and she calls for two friars to make her dying confession. Henry gets word of it and and he the Earl Marshall, one of her former lovers, disguise themselves as friars to take the confession. The Earl Marshall makes the king swear that no harm will come to him, no matter what they hear.
The queen confesses that not only was Earl Marshall her lover, but one of her sons, her favourite, was the product of their liason.
"Had I not sworn by the hilt of my sword,
And by the heavens so high,
That not one drop of your blood would be spilt,
Earl Marshall, you would hang high".
A dangerous song to put your name to, and folk to the core.
The Earl of Erroll, has to prove his ability to father children because his newly wed wife has claimed that "Errol's no' a man" so her family won't pa the dowry.
A 'worm's-eye view of the nobility.
All those comic songs where the poor, particularly the women, triumph over the rich and powerful; Knight and the Shepherd's Daughter, The Baffled Knight, Broomfield Hill, - all folk utterence.
The Crafty Farmer - a folk biter-bit.
Get Up And Bar The Door, Wife Wrapt in a Wether's Skin, The Devil and The Farmer's Wife - domestic comedies.
Keach in the Creel - a centuries old folk tale - attributed to Ancient India in one collection and still popular among the rural labourers of Ireland. We recorded a cante-fable version of it from an Irish Traveller.
The humour of these songs screams 'folk'.
Compare any of these to the ham-fistedly contrived products of the broadside presses.
Sorry Steve - my gut tells me something totally different, no matter which particular hack put his name to them.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Jan 10 - 08:30 PM

MikeL;
Sorry Mike, meant to reply. "I am not really into ballads but are monologues ballads ????."
No- I don't think they are, they don't take ballad form but stand on their own.
They were extremely popular over this side of the country - local man, Partrick Lynch specialises in them and has some wonderful ones about farm-life.
My particular favourite is called 'Fogarty's Threshing' which takes place at the old country custom of 'Methal', when farmers who had harvested their own crops would all row in and help with their neighbours work.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 06 Jan 10 - 01:17 AM

Jim - Glad to see you include my favourite Queen Eleanor's Confession in your above synopses, as many years ago the late Tony Foxworthy, a worthy but somewhat pompous fellow to my recollection, took me to task in the course of a London Festival at C#Hse for having sung QEC 'as if it was a funny song, which it isn't'; & I could only stare blankly at him wondering what on earth he could be on about.

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: jennyr
Date: 06 Jan 10 - 04:13 AM

Still loving this thread, so can I throw another question into the mix?

I think I can see a way forwards in terms of singing and interpreting solo unaccompanied ballads. My approach tends to include, among other things, leaving myself quite a lot of room to manouvre (sp?) so that I potentially sing a song quite differently each time in terms of pace, phrasing, etc.

I've recently started singing with a partner, though, and find that this doesn't work so well as we need to more or less settle more on one version to be able to sing well together. At the moment one of us tends to take the lead, develop a version and then teach the other, which works to some extent, but I'm wondering what approaches other people take to joint balladry? Thanks for any advice!

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Jan 10 - 05:05 AM

Mike,
I hope Tony Foxworthy enjoys his being described as 'late' - he was certainly alive and kicking, if a little infirm, up to 18 months ago and we haven't heard different since. He is the brother-in-law of my friend, the (unfortunately truely) late Tom Munnelly
I'd be interested in replies to Jenny's question - joint singing of ballads, or any narrative song, very seldom works for me.
Correction;
The 'ancient Indian tale collected by us from a Traveller as a cante-fable was 'Get Up and Bar The Door'. The Keach in the Creel was (I think) a 16 cent. French fableaux which also appeared as a tale of an Italian apprentice painter who distracted the attentions of his intended's parents while he seduced her by making tiny wax candles and placing them on the backs of beetles, then marching them into their chamber, making them think that an army of tiny fiery demons had come to take them down to hell.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 06 Jan 10 - 05:24 AM

Jim - Thanks for that info: & great apologies to Tony, whom I haven't actually met since that occasion in, IIRC, 1969. I thought I had a dim recollection of an obit, but was probably confusing with someone else - like maybe Mark Twain or Dave Swarbrick, who notoriously did get obits when still about... These things happen.

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long bal
From: GUEST,EKanne
Date: 06 Jan 10 - 06:11 AM

Jennyr - Like Jim, I find it hard to imagine singing any of the ballads in my repertoire as duets because the sense of commitment/involvement is such a personal thing that no two people will necessarily be moved in the same way - what Sheila Stewart calls the "conyeach".
I regularly do ballad workshops with Gordeanna McCulloch and we share the same background of our introduction to the music, as well as most of the same influences or models. We offer some less familiar ballads, so that participants come with no preconceptions, and we all move through the learning process together. But the real point I want to make is that when it comes to individual verses, or sections, of the ballad concerned we regularly have to agree to differ - what sounds convincing to me might grate with her, or vice versa. Really what we are trying to do is persuade those attending that they have to find their own way of dealing with or interpreting tricky bits.
So I'm just a bit wary that any ballad duet would perhaps involve too many compromises to be a satisfactory experience for the performers as individuals. If the vocal pairing is a new one, why not work on more obvious songs for harmony treatment etc. and use the occasional ballad/narrative song as a solo for more variety?

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Brian Peters
Date: 06 Jan 10 - 06:23 AM

Re duets: yet again, it all depends on what type of ballad you are talking about. I wouldn't think there'd be a big problem with stuff like 'The Golden Vanity', 'High Barbary' (or whatever it was that Child called it), 'The Mermaid' and some of the comic ones mentioned above. Many of their versions have tunes that suit quite a rhythmic approach, so the problem of synchronizing two voices is reduced. With the 'Big Boys', you generally need more vocal freedom to put them over, and to achieve vocal congruence between two singers would probably be to rehearse the life out of them. Also, the emotional involvement required for some big ballads is the kind of thing it's difficult to share. I wouldn't want to do 'False Foudrage' with someone else!

Sara Grey and Kieron Means do some ballads in close harmony - but they are, after all, mother and son, which gives them an advantage both in terms of phrasing and in their emotional bond.

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 06 Jan 10 - 07:21 AM

Rachel & I do some big ones in harmony - it's something that's evolved quite naturally between us over the years, such as Child #102: The Birth of Robin Hood (track #4 on our Myspace Page) which I set to the medieval melody of Adam de la Halle's Bergeronnette Douce Baisselete (from Le Le Jeu de Robin et Marion) 20 years ago, and to which Rachel added her harmony 10 years ago. It's a very different discipline to singing on ones own - in many ways with two voices the narrative serves to make the dynamics all the more intense as other considerations come into play. Somewhat more strident is our take on Child #6: The Witch Mother, aka Willie's Lady, which we call The Wax Baby (track #6 on the above link) which I set to a traditional Scandinavian lullaby, rather than the more usual Son Ar Chistre (the work of the wonderful Ray Fisher of course!). Rachel added her harmony to this in singarounds, so it evolved as a duo piece with a similar regard for spontaneous dynamics inherent in the narrative structures of the song.

Truth to tell, I actually prefer singing ballads with Rachel doing a harmony part - it provides a much needed tension that pulls the thing into a much sharper focus which is essential to my personal understanding of the structural dynamics of the narrative, and what might be discovered therein by way of image, joissance & the collective necessity that has brought these ballads into being. We can never own them, but our response must, I feel, be respectful of their status as being a whole lot more than the bain of revival singarounds. This tells us more about the nature of the revival than it does about the ballads which are both bonsai soap-opera and reductions to the very essence of ritual drama, and, in both cases, very potent indeed. In both these ballads the outcome is the birth of a child - a tranfigurative nascence with prefigures a glorious happy ever after; the language of both is utterly exquisite, even to the point where I must remove myself to a certain extent during performance least I burst into tears.

Also worth noting is that neither of these songs, as far as I'm aware, are associated with traditional melodies; thus there are no traditional precedents for their performance. I took both from written sources, and though I was aware of Willie's Lady from recordings made by Ray Fisher & Martin Carthy, I only recently heard another version of The Birth of Robin Hood. What emerges are, therefore, tentative reconstructions by way of a more creative musical archaeology but which aren't too hung up on Early Music Authenticity as such. I might use the term Ante Folk to describe this, even though, ultimately, the performances are very much of the moment.

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Smedley
Date: 06 Jan 10 - 07:53 AM

On an early page (page 2? 3?) somebody posted a link to a short but wondrous clip of Jeannie Robertson singing a version of 'Matty Groves'. It doesn't seem to be working now - can anyone assist ?

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Jan 10 - 08:45 AM

Can't help with link to Jeannie Robertson's Mattie Groves, but can I recommend those interested in the ballad should look out for North Carolina singer, Dillard Chandler's version - turns the knees to jelly just thinking of it.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: The Sandman
Date: 06 Jan 10 - 09:13 AM

SteveGardham,surely, the whole point is not who wrote the song, but the fact that they have been adapted and altered over a period of time,and in most cases improved.
an example of this is 3 score and ten , originally a broadside,written to raise money for the wives and children,by delph,but improved by the tradition[the people]

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Mary Humphreys
Date: 06 Jan 10 - 09:14 AM

Singing songs as duets - it was done to stunning effect by the Keane sisters Rita & Sarah who sang in unison.
Being sisters probably makes for a particularly close communication. The Threlfall sisters have a similar rapport and I think their singing is equally remarkable.

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Valmai Goodyear
Date: 06 Jan 10 - 01:07 PM

Craig Morgan Robson perform ballads in breathtaking unaccompanied vocal harmony. For less skillful singers, there is a danger of losing the forward motion of the narrative.

Valmai (Lewes)

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Don Firth
Date: 06 Jan 10 - 01:43 PM

Singing ballads as duets, and in harmony. . . .    I'd have to think about that some. Although I think ballads generally go well without accompaniment, I usually like to accompany them (guitar), making sure that the accompaniment supports the ballad and doesn't detract or distract in any way. It would seem to me that two voices singing in harmony might render a ballad more a musical piece than a narrative. As I say, I'd have to think about that.

There are a few ballads that do go well as man-woman duets—dialogs—and I have occasionally performed them that way with women singers and we were well received. Two I can think of right off are (the dreaded) Lord Randal and Edward.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 06 Jan 10 - 01:59 PM

Dick,
I don't know what prompted this outburst. I didn't mention anything about anyone writing them and if you look at my previous posts a bit further up I said exactly what you've just said. Couldn't agree more. My arguments with Jim concern the origins of the songs and are not really relevant here.

However 'Three score and ten' is not a good example for you to choose. The version collected in Filey was rewritten by Delft's grandson some time after WWI and dispersed among the fishermen's choirs from Lowestoft to Filey. You could argue his grandson was one of the folk and I wouldn't disagree! Check out our website.

Jim, I don't want to monopolise SOE's thread with our arguments but if you want to set up another thread I will answer all the ballads you mention.

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Jan 10 - 03:08 PM

Steve,
If you are able to provide proof that there was no traditional version before they went into print - am happy to do so.
The implication of what you are claiming is that there was a school of composers (cohesion of form content, style gives it the right to that title) gifted enough to use social background, folklore and vernacular before thre was any reference literature produced, skillfuly enough to be absorbed universally into the traditions of England, and yet still remain for all intents and purposes invisible to public notice.
Alongside this, the rural classes were incapable of producing nothing of their own.
Is this what you are claiming?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 06 Jan 10 - 03:29 PM

Jim,
We have had this out on other threads.
To cut to the quick, we both have our strong beliefs based on many years' research on how the majority of the ballads came into being. Neither of us can ultimately prove our cases.
Apart from Peter Buchan's parody of Johnny Scot the rest of the ballads you mention all have as their earliest manifestation a broadside.    Sigh! In my opinion they have all appeared in print in their earliest form no matter what happened to them after that. You prefer to think that they came from the peasantry in some form which you are perfectly entitled to do. I can live with this. Why can't you live with my version? I have nowhere postulated a 'school of composers'. Why should these song makers not be invisible to public notice? Ballads were off the literati radar until the 18thc. I have never said the rural classes were incapable of producing nothing of their own. They certainly did, but IMHO not many were ballads, in England at any rate!

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Jan 10 - 03:47 PM

"Sigh! In my opinion they have all appeared in print in their earliest form"
What do you base this opinion on?
"Why can't you live with my version?"
Because it isn't logical - it nowhere concides what happened elsewhere in these islands, nor beyond. Why should Irish, Scots, Albanian, French, Russian.... produce their own oral litrature and not the English - or are you also questioning their ability or inclination to do so.
"I have nowhere postulated a 'school of composers'.
Your argument implies such a school. The similarities of folk songs fully entitles them to a separate identity and if this is the case the composers must be accepted as a 'school' as distinctive as 'impressionists', 'cubists' or any other artistic group.
Sigh indeed - Steve, with respect, you come at the end of a long line of people who, for one reason or another, have set out to prove that the folk, through inability, disinclination, whatever, did not produce their own folk songs. I never bought what they were selling, nor do I buy your arguments, unless they come with more to back them up than you have produced so far.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Goose Gander
Date: 06 Jan 10 - 04:31 PM

More thread drift - Is there any reason to believe that the ballads were not the production of 'talented composers' who happened to be 'of the folk?' There was no master's degree in folk composition in the eighteenth century. A ballad writer would be, by definition, someone who composed stories set to familiar tunes. Like most writers, I have to imagine these people also worked a number of other jobs throughout their lives. Why couldn't 'part-time ballad writer/singer/hawker' be a working class occupation? Certainly, print was a crucial method of diffusion, but I don't think the medium of print is necessarily a mark of middle-class/bourgoisie origin.

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 06 Jan 10 - 04:58 PM

Jim,
I'm sorry. The 'opinion' bit was a slip. With the possible exception of 'Farmer's Curst Wife' I can prove that the earliest KNOWN/EXTANT form of all of these was in print. Of course I can't prove that this WAS their earliest form. Ironically your title 'Devil and Farmer's Wife' is the 16th century possible broadside precurser of 'The Farmer's Curst Wife'.

I am not and have never questioned the ability of the rural classes to produce folksong. I have simply said that in my opinion having spent a lifetime studying both folk song and the broadside ballad and 'popular' music, that the ballads by and large were the product of commercial enterprise in some form or other.

And I hope I am not the END of a long line of people who believe this.

Goose, I apologise humbly for the thread-drift. I see nothing to disagree with in what you say. In fact I have said similar in other threads.

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Goose Gander
Date: 06 Jan 10 - 05:07 PM

No apology necessary, I only meant that I was going to drift from the thread. I guess we can get back on track now, or maybe start a new thread on the tangential topic.

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Richard Mellish
Date: 06 Jan 10 - 05:18 PM

Mutter, grumble. Just spent a while on a posting, clicked Submit and saw it fail to appear. So try again, and this time copy, paste and save before I try to submit.

My point was to request un-drifting this thread.

I would be happy to join Steve, Jim and anyone else in a discussion of origins, folk process, conscious and unconscious changes, oral transmission versus print, how when and why completely different versions of the same stories arose, etc -- but not in this thread.

Here, let's focus on how to SING the ballads: the pros and cons of accompaniment, duetting, choosing new tunes, etc. The fact that singers have always made personal choices, to preserve or to modify, and we can make the same choices now, which our listeners may approve or disapprove of.

Let's go on hearing from experienced singers about what has worked or not worked for them, what came easily, what was a struggle, what went down well or badly with audiences. Let's go on discussing what we like or dislike about some notable innovative singers such as MacColl and Carthy.

Richard

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: The Sandman
Date: 06 Jan 10 - 05:22 PM

Steve Gardham, could you give details of your website.

Subject: RE: Taking on the Big Boys? - classic big long ballads
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 06 Jan 10 - 05:31 PM

Fine by me, Richard. We had a thread going on this before the festive season but it got lost.