Steamfolk

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: matt milton
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 08:01 AM

""Folk is a myth predicated on a Bourgeouis Fantasy of working class culture"

There's another point to be raised with regard to this assertion: a lot of folk songs voice working-class fantasies about bourgeois culture. Especially in their details: all those down-soft pillows, milk-white skins, pure-breed horses, fine silk clothes etc etc.

A.L. Lloyd's writing is great on this in 'Folk Song in England'. In fact, really, Suibhne - if you haven't read this book then you should - as it's a very class-conscious analysis.

It strikes me that there's a risk here of losing sight of the actual CONTENT of folk songs: the words and the tunes. The way folk was presented and disseminated and collected (and the people that did that collecting) is by no means the same thing as the songs themselves.

So much of the content of so many folk songs rings very true to me precisely because it actually seems very contemporary, not of the past. That's why I mentioned Alasdair Roberts. The aforementioned working-class fantasies about luxury goods and romantic lives of the super-rich have a direct counterpart in today's Hello-magazine style culture of gawping. That is but one aspect of folk-song content which doesn't seem remotely compromised by any prissy mediation by any middle-class folksong collectors.

The Bothy ballads would be another excellent example: the sarcasm, wit and boss-hatred in them exists in an entirely different atmosphere to the William Morris-JRR Tolkien-waistcoat'n'ale breed of psych-folker. I hear 'The Day We Went to Rothesay' and Arab Strap's "First Big Weekend' as near-identical twins.

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 08:33 AM

Nice one, Matt. I agree, broadly, with what you're saying here although remain wary of the class-consciousness of of Lloyd, MacColl et al, as much as I would of (say) Henry Cow claiming to be a Peoples' Band. But hey, that's just me... I do have the book you speak of, but as with Fakesong and a dozen others, it awaits my attentions - largely on account of a recent obsession with Graves's Claudius books, though once I'm done with Claudius the God I'll be going back to The Broons for a while to clear my head.

I wonder, would any folklorist or Ballad Fan see the parallels between the old songs and the celebrity worship of today, or even see that as being in any way folkloric, much less significant or directly analagous on more than the one level? It also exists at the trashier end of fiction, as do the Ballads themselves in a way, though their evident appeal was evidently widespread and fluid with respect of things which later became extraneous thus reducing them to their consummate essence.

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: Brian Peters
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 08:42 AM

Knock on any door, any where, and you'll be able to talk to someone - anyone - who'll be able to give the same sort of impassioned & moving testimony about the music of their life and times.

I could turn on Desert Island Discs every week and get that, too. What I don't think you or I could do is to knock on any door and find anything resembling the ubiquitous culture of participatory music-making that Mrs. Grover describes.

to use it as some sort of Exhibit A (as you have done here) turns it into a fantasy. Both mawkish and voyeuristic, it becomes a myth.

If you're suggesting that quoting those words in the present context somehow devalues their content, then you've lost me, I'm afraid. Bringing words like "mawkish and voyeuristic" into a discussion of one woman's account of real life in a relatively impoverished society smacks of the very patronization that you accuse Sharp et al of, even though I suspect you aimed them my way. They're her words - she wanted others to read them and to understand the role of songs in the "hard-working lives" of the people around her. And it was her own parents, not some prissy middle-class collector, who lamented the passing of their songs from that culture.

After all, how can these grubby so-and-sos possibly understand the significance of their own songs, much less their modal structures, analogues, origins, processes or even the purity (or otherwise) of their traditions?

That was a quote from which cultural colonialist exactly...? Even Sharp doesn't come over like that when you read his diaries (opinionated though they often are).

Liked what you said about England, though. And what matt milton said about the actual content of the songs.

PS - This is still a Fun Thread BTW...

Not sure if that means that you find the present argument fun, or that this was supposed to be a Fun Thread until the 'Bourgeois Fantasy' argument spoilt it. I'll leave you to the fun bit for now. Though I can't help wondering what that other arch contrarian Mr Bellamy might have added to the discussion...

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 08:42 AM

...unlike trash fiction, though one may always skim.

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 09:22 AM

What I don't think you or I could do is to knock on any door and find anything resembling the ubiquitous culture of participatory music-making that Mrs. Grover describes.

Then it's hardly ubiquitous is it? But I would argue that it is, just that Folk has selected not to acknowledge the commonality - indeed the very ubiquity - of that experience. Instead, it selects the exceptions and creates a conditional agenda whereby it can only be the experience of a select few whose life experience is somehow more authentic than others.

It still remains a fantasy, though more widespread now of course. We're working hard on our new Kipling Bellamy show for the Fylde this year - it's a repertoir which I love dearly, but which is quinessential Steamfolk on all counts. As I said in my wee note for last night's rendering of A Tree Song on Soundcloud, I've often heard the song sung as a Traditional Song by very earnest pagans. If that isn't fantasy, then what is? But that isn't to devalue its meaning, subjective or otherwise, just appreciate that, like everything from The Wicker Man to Freeborn Man of the Travelling People (which may be questioned on any amount of counts) it still carries and signifies very real potency. God, I recall when we saw Robin Williamson singing Free Born Man at Glastonbury after the Battle of the Beanfield and people were sobbing; I know I was...

One time in one of Joe & Maureen's Fylde singarounds someone sang an impassioned rendering of Shoals of Herring that actually made me feel sea-sick; and recently in Newcastle I listened as a passerby of a certain age asked a young guitarist to accompany him on All Right Now and then proceeded to sing what might well have been the definitive version. The weight of meaning and human experience hung heavy in every word irrespective of the song; it was common lore, and the crowd that gathered to watch went mental when he'd finished. Such expieriences aren't uncommon, nor yet are they Folk Music, but they are unbiquitous. If they weren't, I doubt I'd bother to be honest.

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: theleveller
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 09:44 AM

For one brief but beautiful period there, I was having a great time in Steamfolk Fantasy Land. Now I've been brought back down to earth by the inevitable realities of hard-nosed debate. I'm off somewhere else for some alternative musical flagellation.....(puts on headphones and cues up Venus In Furs).

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 11:24 AM

Don't be put off, theleveller - it's all in good humoured passion for much the same thing on various levels of Devil's Advocacy which was ever the Platonic way (or something) - or was it Zen? Either way, whatever differences any of us have here, they are outweighed by the similarities - or am I being overly optimistic?

As for Venus in Furs, did you know John Cale flattened the bridge of his viola so it would sound like he imagined the old crwths would have sounded? These days we have the modern Crwth Revival to show us that he was more or less right of course, but even so I've had Crwth Purists telling me my Welsh Pattern crwth isn't a crwth at all, even though it was made for me by Tim Hobrough in 1987 thus predating the Modern Crwth revival by several years - and my Medieval Round Crwth was made for me (again by Tim) in 1983! Ho hum. Revivalist Fantasy? Makes you think, eh? But what dies as one thing, is reborn as something else entirely. In fact, it might be said, it might not be reborn at all because the main thing that defined it in the first place is irretrievably lost to us, so all that remains is the ghosts. That's okay by me, BTW, nothing like a good old seance, is there?

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: Brian Peters
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 11:47 AM

Damn, caught out again... I thought I liked John Cale because he was a drug-crazed lunatic who made great rock music whilst banging the piano lid on his head, or rubbing the vocal mike across the grill of the fencing mask he wore over the welder's goggles and black stocking that constituted the remainder of his headgear. And now you're telling me he was a folkie all along. Woe!

I'm reassured to hear that there are Crwth Purists around, though. Thank God!

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: GUEST,Jon Dudley
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 11:54 AM

Brian Peters wrote:

"There is a grain of truth in what you say about 'reaction to the horrors of modern life': I remember finding Bob Copper's memoir of life in rural Sussex on A Song for Every Season heartwarming precisely for its contrast with the turmoil of my own late teenage years. It's just too bad Bob isn't here now so that you could tell him that his reminscences were nothing more than some kind of mythic comfort blanket."

How true! I remember an earnest young fellow, whom, after hearing Bob speak somewhere describing the (only occasionally) idyllic life in Rottingdean and saying that his father and contemporaries were 'happy', said that "they only only thought they were happy, and were in fact victims of, etc.etc" - to which Bob replied, "you know what? I'll settle for thinking I'm happy, it seemed to work for them".

Oh yes, I don't know if there's such a thing as SteamFolk, but SteamPunk looks like a right good old laugh, what with all those computer keyboards made of redundant typewriter keys, funny old stovepipe hats and swirly Victorian graphics. If you want a pure unadulterated SteamPunk novel and possibly the first of the genre (although not bearing that appellation) I recommend Keith Roberts' 'Pavane'

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: theleveller
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 12:19 PM

LOL!

Didn't know that about Cale's viola, though I have remarked before somewhere that it does sound very "folkie". I'm still planning to build a crwth myself when I get round to it (probably when we've finished making the gothic garden) and pop into Beverley Minster from time to time to have a look at the carving.

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: SteveMansfield
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 12:46 PM

Oh yes, I don't know if there's such a thing as SteamFolk, but SteamPunk looks like a right good old laugh, what with all those computer keyboards made of redundant typewriter keys, funny old stovepipe hats and swirly Victorian graphics. If you want a pure unadulterated SteamPunk novel and possibly the first of the genre (although not bearing that appellation) I recommend Keith Roberts' 'Pavane'.

I think Steamfolk is whatever the heck you want it to be, as AFAICGIS it doesn't exist outside of this thread and there's only about 3 people arguing about it here.

Swerving the thread towards 'Which was the first steampunk novel' would, from what I've seen elsewhere, take it into hitherto unimagined realms of bitterness and entrenched positions!

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 01:06 PM

Here's a corker of a crwth I stumbled on whilst scrambling through the misericords of Worcester Cathedral a couple of weeks back:

Worcester Crwth

Look at that whilst listening to Venus in Furs...

Yeah, I like the Crwth Purists too. I've had them question my authenticity because both of my crwths have ever-so-slightly curved bridges to faciliate a more subtle style of playing (!?) than the all-strings-at-once approach that sounds like a bad hurdy-gurdy to my ears, but there you go (not that I've any objection to bad hurdy-gurdies in the wild). My interest is in playing music rather than historical musical pedantry, though I think some of the new Talharp & Jouhikko stuff (Pekko Kappi especially) is pretty amazing. Those horse-hair strings, man! I made a Jouhikko myself once back in 82 which doesn't sound too bad actually, considering, horse-hair strings and all, but Pekko's something else... One of the crwth highlights of my life was an impromtu duet with Susan George back in 1999 at the Aust Festival - just a wee sesh in the graveyard but it felt real enough.

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: ripov
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 05:33 PM

Lovely carving, but it must be very hard to play with his hand that way round; or else with the crwth held that way, sitting on the lap. Maybe artistic licence?
Do you play it like a viola da braccia, or like a key-less nyckelharpa? (pics at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyckelharpa)

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: theleveller
Date: 07 Jul 11 - 03:26 AM

D'ya' know I've got a sudden urge to pop up the road to the Early Music Shop at Salt's Mill for a bit of a plunk around if I get the time at lunchtime - has to be a temple of Steamfolk (and it's a nice walk along the canal side)..

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 07 Jul 11 - 04:30 AM

Oh wow. Just discovered the thread and can't properly read on galaxy tab and at work. As an infant steampunker and toddling folker I love the idea of blending my 2 most keen intersts.

Google Thomas Truax for look at some weird steam musical instrument inventions. Listen to Professor Elemental, Abney Park, Ghost in the Static and others for some other ideas of the different ideas that steampunk music takes.

I am in the market for a working gramophone with horn.

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 07 Jul 11 - 04:45 AM

Haven't been to the EMS in years - not since one very snowy day in early 2005 when I needed some odds ands for my newly acquired citera. It was still in Bradford back then. Still, my darling mother-in-law is forever pushing for a family jaunt to Saltaire so maybe soon, eh? Thing is, I've reached a stage in life (get this) where I'm actually happy with my instruments and am actually looking to simplifying things on account of having too many! What's happened, in fact, is that since getting into playing Normal Violin (in a Normal Tuning, though occasisionall I'll use a cross-A) (very cross) I seldom bother with anything else right now other than the Kemence (Black Sea Fiddle) and my sqare crwth. Indeed, on one of my recent recordings someone pointed out that my violin playing is more crwth-like than my crwth, and vice versa! I still hanker for an electric 5-string, just so I can record Weird Stuff without hacking off the neighbours, but I doubt the EMS can help me there. Still - no harm in looking is there?

As for the Worcester Crwth, I reckon that position looks okay; all depends on the ergomonics of the beast itself really, and it's not a million miles away both from modern revival styles of playing and the ways you see these things depicted in medieval iconography. Another piece of Steamfolk Trivia (but not as good as the John Cale one) is that the CRWTH or CROWD (in which one might so easily lose oneself) is the first instrument we see in Medieval Iconography being played with a BOW. In fact, one theory is that the bow developed from increasingly long Lyre Plectra which (as with the Korean Kayagum which is occaisionaly played with a resined stick akin to con sordino* techniques of the modern violin) could be used to rub the strings, or bow them. Just a theory, but when you look at the length of plectra anciently depicted on the Semitic Lyre from the tomb of Khnumhotep III (which is very square & crwth-like!) it doesn't seem too far fetched.

One question remains though - a Nykelharpa without a keyboard is what exactly?

* Con Sordino these days seems to mean simply to play with the mute; maybe I've got the wrong term, but I recall chatting with a very dazzling posh young girl from Central High on the train once when I was 15 (and she was 14) who old me Con Sordino meant to play the strings with the wood of the bow which gives a weird muted sound but quite different to a mute. A google search proves fruitless. Anyone know? As for the girl, I met her again five years or so later when she was fairly embarked on her Physics degree having kicked the fiddle altogether. I remember having lots of fun with her beside a huge convex mirror in the physics building of Newcastle University and roaming around the old Museum of Antiquities but we never saw each other again. In fact, when I told her I was married she slapped my face and that was that, even though there wasn't a hint of romance in any of it. Sad really, but whever I play with the back of my bow I think of dear Melissa - or was it Clarissa?

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: SteveMansfield
Date: 07 Jul 11 - 04:53 AM

a Nykelharpa without a keyboard is what exactly?

A psaltery?
A longship?

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 07 Jul 11 - 04:53 AM

I am in the market for a working gramophone with horn.

I'm sure I'm not the first to do it, but I recently wrote a passage in which one Bright Young Thing is using Two Gramophones to keep the music going continuously and scratching between the two with free-styled vocal accompaniment to accompany the debauched drug-fuelled antics of his upper-crust young chums in a remote Northumbrian Country House circa 1929... That's almost steampunk I guess!

It was CS that first mentioned it (who else?) and it chimed in my fondness for creaky Victorian technology (Santos Dumont was a childhood hero), HG Wells and Studio Ghibli cartoons (Howl's Moving Castle being a case in point).

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: theleveller
Date: 07 Jul 11 - 05:24 AM

"Still - no harm in looking is there?"

That's all I ever do at Salt's Mill - Hockneys, hand-made suits and celtic harps (no matter how desirable) are out of my price range. Anyway, I'm saving up for a frock coat.

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: GUEST,Howard Jones
Date: 07 Jul 11 - 08:24 AM

"Knock on any door, any where, and you'll be able to talk to someone - anyone - who'll be able to give the same sort of impassioned & moving testimony about the music of their life and times."

Really? I'm not denying the importance of music in people's lives now, but for the majority of people I know outside folk circles it's music they listen to rather than perform themselves. These days people are permanently plugged into their mp3 players, but I don't know many who could sing a song all the way through.

I'm sure there are still families or other groups for whom a good old sing-song is still an important part of their lives, but I believe they're now a minority.

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 07 Jul 11 - 08:48 AM

Really? I'm not denying the importance of music in people's lives now, but for the majority of people I know outside folk circles it's music they listen to rather than perform themselves.

People only sang back then because they didn't have better ways of hearing music; these days they do. No matter how one experiences music - any music - it still has supreme personal meaning to the life and culture of the listener. Even a performing Folky (like me) experiences more recorded music than any other, and the music that means most to me personally, culturally, exists on records, including CDs & MP3s. Right now it's Caravan's live version of For Richard recorded at The Fairfield Hall in 1974. Previously available on the long vanished (from my archives anyway) Canturbury Tales album, I found a copy of the live CD in Fopp in MCR the other day for £3. I could write pages of what this recording means to me, my life, my culture, my people, my spirtuality and general sense of joy (certainly a good deal more than any Folk Song ever will) but this is neither the time nor the place.

What I will say is that your post is the worst of the Fundamentalist Folk Myth writ in tones so condescending I would sooner there was no Folk that to hear such talk. For shame. Think on this, when they play someone's favourite music at their funeral, what your hearing is the story of their lives, be it Barry Manilow, Frank Sinatra, Lieutenant Pigeon, Blondie, Enya, Bowie, Free, whatever. But still, no doubt the Folkies know better, eh?

*

And regarding my earlier post - the mirror was concave.

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 07 Jul 11 - 09:36 AM

It was me who introduced CrowSister to steampunk. Wish I could brwse 2 sites at same time so to copy links to some steam stuff here. I am currently looking at music hall and burlesque music to folkify and folk music to steam up.

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 07 Jul 11 - 09:45 AM

Nice on VT, though if you go from the OP my idea here is that Folk is already on the same sort of cultural level as Steampunk - i.e. Eccentric Minority Life Fantasy, and a lot of fun to boot.

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: Brian Peters
Date: 07 Jul 11 - 10:20 AM

People only sang back then because they didn't have better ways of hearing music; these days they do.

So listening is 'better' than singing, eh? What about the beneficial physical effects on the singer, that we're learning more about all the time? Or the fact that sharing songs in a social context is a completely different kind of transaction from hearing them on a phonograph or mp3 player?

the worst of the Fundamentalist Folk Myth writ in tones so condescending...

Be of good cheer, Howard, those who defy the Holy Writ of Suibhne are invariably cast as 'condescending' and 'fundamentalist'. If the 'condescending' bit was the "jolly old sing-song", that's no more than the kind of phrase Bob Copper would have used. If it was the claim that not many people these days can sing a song all the way through, I wouldn't have thought that was a matter of doubt. After all, there are 'better' ways of hearing music these days.

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 07 Jul 11 - 10:34 AM

The Gospel according to Saint Suibhne eh ?

I don't think so.

Dave H

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 07 Jul 11 - 10:51 AM

So listening is 'better' than singing, eh?

Of course it is; most people would rather hear music than try and do it themselves. Most people do listen more than they play anyway. If I played more than I listen I'd be a physical & nervous wreck. Right now I'm back on the Purcell Sonatas in Four Parts. No way I could play them myself. Same goes for pretty much anything else really, be it old recordings of Harry Cox & Sam Larner (better still, The Video) or old recordings of Bird & Birks, or the new Kanye West album...

social context

Oh come on - even sitting here typing this is a social context; I get MP3 downloads and all sorts of stuff like this - sharing music with people of similar passions which might never happen otherwise. Then you have church, choirs, discos, night clubs, raves, parties, fun fairs, shopping centres, like the Trafford Centre where even I might shead a tear for Karen Carpenter in the food hall for all sorts of reasons, social, personal, cultural, which is what music is.

Holy Writ of Suibhne

I'm thinking of real lives here - not fantasy folk lives authenticated by Cecil Sharp as genuine. Musical experience lives and breathes in each and every single human heart that's ever lived as Sacred. To me that's about as Holy as it gets really.

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: Tootler
Date: 07 Jul 11 - 02:10 PM

So listening is 'better' than singing, eh?

Of course it is; most people would rather hear music than try and do it themselves.

What rubbish!

It's far better to take part than to be a passive spectator. Listening, at least to recorded music, is fundamentally a passive activity whereas playing, even for yourself, makes active use of the brain and keeps it alive. I find playing therapeutic and I play more than I listen these days.

The second part of your statement is a non-sequitur. The fact that most people listen rather than play does not automatically make it better.

We have become a nation of spectators rather than participants and that is to the detriment of the social fabric of the country.

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: SteveMansfield
Date: 07 Jul 11 - 02:22 PM

What Tootler said, with a side order of Brian's viewpoint as well thanks.

As the editor a certain monthly magazine is occasionally fond of saying, IAFWAFIAWMWQ ...

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: GUEST,Howard Jones
Date: 07 Jul 11 - 02:29 PM

"So listening is 'better' than singing, eh?"

Maybe, maybe not. What cannot be denied (although I'm sure Suibhne will find some way) is that they are different ways of relating to music. I happen to think that directly participating in something is always going to be more rewarding than passively experiencing it.

I don't why I am accused of being condescending. I fully recognise the importance of music in people's lives today, and I'm not suggesting that their response to it is in any way inferior. It is however different from the way the people Brian was talking about related to their music, and part of that difference is the direct influence those people had on shaping and changing the music they performed.

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 07 Jul 11 - 04:55 PM

The fact that most people listen rather than play does not automatically make it better.

Of course it does; you can hear far more different musics that you can ever play. It's part and parcel of our whole musical culture.

We have become a nation of spectators rather than participants and that is to the detriment of the social fabric of the country.

In your own words mind, Tootler - what rubbish!

*

What cannot be denied (although I'm sure Suibhne will find some way) is that they are different ways of relating to music.

Well, everyone has their own unique experience of music, as they do of life, so there's billions of ways potentially.

I happen to think that directly participating in something is always going to be more rewarding than passively experiencing it.

Can experiencing music ever be passive? I don't think so - as long as you're experiencing it then you're far from passive. And it's not always more rewarding - I've been involved in live shows and was bored shitless for hours on end (despite the enthusiasm of the audience); these days I'm happiest with my record collection which always rewards me. I love my Folk Club too, where some nights I just sit back and bask in the beauty of it all (unless it gets too diddlededee then I'll hit back with a ballad or two).

and part of that difference is the direct influence those people had on shaping and changing the music they performed.

You see this is where the Collective Process does come into play otherwise musical styles wouldn't change and evolve, which they do, and at some condiderable pace. Indeed, Traditional to some is synonymous with Old Fashioned (as in Traditional Fish & Chips) and Unchanging, which runs contrary to the cultural dymanics that gave rise to the idioms of Traditional Song. Get up close enough though, and it's human individuals doing this stuff; trending with glorious chaos & creative unpredictability.

The great thing is though NO MUSIC EVER COMES OUT OF NOTHING.

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 07 Jul 11 - 04:57 PM

IAFWAFIAWMWQ

Not long before the insults start here is it?

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: Spleen Cringe
Date: 07 Jul 11 - 05:09 PM

I'm not a musician and can't really sing. Yet I am passionately engaged with music and have been since my early teens. There's absolutely nowt wrong with music as a spectator sport. As long as there have been performers there have been spectators - even in the 'good old days' of rural poverty and making your own entertainment, I would wager that there were as many, if not more, people listening as playing and singing: not everyone has it in them, just as not everyone can be a blacksmith or a carpenter. And of course, for most rural people up until the invention and mass production of radios and the introduction of improved public transport links (if you had the money or inclination to go to town to see a show, that is) their main experience of music would have been church, pub or family home - I can't imagine people had much choice but to make their own music or listen to music made by those around them. That's one of the reasons why I kind of agree with SO'P's comments that the 'tradition' is a retrospectively invented concept to describe an everyday activity of agrarian life that was born out of necessity (at least I think that was the gist). I think we have a tendency to hold this state of affairs up as some grand ideal and try to replicate it with our sessions and singarounds - which can never be anything but a fleeting re-enactment of the real thing, minus, of course, the grinding poverty, high infant mortality rates, rickets, limited diet, lack of education and healthcare and so on.

One of the downsides of the folk scene's insistence on participation as a core element of what the music is about, is that it can sometimes lead to some excruciating listening experiences - whatever the therapeutic value may be to the perpetrator! I don't think any other music scene overvalues participation to the same extent - though I tend to avoid open-mic nights and karaoke bars if I can... That's not to say I don't enjoy a good singaround - I was at one last night - but if that was my only choice, my musical life would be deeply diminished.

And finally, I'm not convinced that my appreciation of music is compromised because I'm not musically talented. To imply such a thing would be condescending, but sadly it is something I've heard many times over the years. In fact, it was the sort of crap my school music teacher used to come out with years back - as he busily attempted to turn the children in his class off music for life. But that's another story...

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: GUEST,Howard Jones
Date: 07 Jul 11 - 07:12 PM

I am absolutley not saying that anyone's appreciation of music is compromised because they are not themselves musicians or singers, nor am I saying it's inferior. All I am saying is that it is a different way of engaging with music. Moreover, it is one which allows the individual to play a part in shaping and forming the music itself, which a listener, no matter how passionate, is unable to do.

I must confess that I went through a brief period of believing I was continuing the tradition, but I soon realised that was nonsense. I very much doubt that "traditional" singers and musicians thought of "the tradition" in those terms (although there is evidence that some at least distinguished between these songs and those from other sources), and that the idea of "the tradition" is a retrospectively invented term. However the thing it attempts to describe was real enough. We may argue over definitions, boundaries and processes, but somehow out of this has come a body of music with characteristics which are recognisably different from other genres, sufficiently different in my opinion to be worth continuing.

Continuing to perform old music because you recognise and enjoy its qualities is not the same as continuing "the tradition". I also cringe at the notion that our singarounds and folk clubs are somehow perpetuating and replicating some golden age, although I don't think this view is as widely held as is sometimes suggested. And whilst I recognise the value of participation, I also agree that it is often over-valued, as if participation alone is enough and quality is not also important. However sometimes sitting through a ropy performance is the price you pay for music being something a community is actively involved with, rather than it simply being entertainment. Being part of a group of people making music together is undoubtedly a different experience from sitting in an audience, which is not to say that both cannot be electrifying.

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 08 Jul 11 - 05:46 AM

Damn right too.

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: SteveMansfield
Date: 08 Jul 11 - 07:48 AM

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray - PM
Date: 07 Jul 11 - 04:57 PM

IAFWAFIAWMWQ

Not long before the insults start here is it?


Oh, indeed not - looking back through the thread I make it post #6 :

Steamfolk is a way of accepting & celebrating the fact that Folk has been a fantasy construct from the off and continues to be so in perpetuation of its own carefully founded Myths, Orthodoxies, Assumptions, Attitudes and Aesthetics with respect of both The Tradition (that it first invents then claims to represent) or else the New Folk Idioms arising therefrom.

Straight after that there's

I reckon most Folkies think it already is. In their fondness for the Authentic Folk Instrument vintage Contertinas fetch sums way in excess of their actual value or musical usefulness. Why? Because Vintage Lachenals and Wheatstones are articles of a very particular sort of faith that insists on the genuine artefact, provenance and all. I think this is cool - I'm the same with the random ethnography that clutters up this place; exotic cargo cultism.

and so on

Folk is a myth predicated on a Bourgeouis Fantasy of working class culture;

and so on

a projected collective fantasy reaction to the horrors of modern life

and so on

Both mawkish and voyeuristic, it becomes a myth.

and so on

It's a pure Paternalistic Colonialism visited upon the grubbier members of one's own society who have failed to appreciate their own culture by letting it go to wreck and ruin.

and so on

this class-ridden shit-hole of a country of ours

and so on. I was just joining in the spirit of this
fun thread and good humoured passion.

But now, I'm going to take my own advice and quit this particular argument. One more thing though - really like the Oak Ash and Thorn song you posted the link to BTW, good luck with the project.

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: Spleen Cringe
Date: 08 Jul 11 - 08:44 AM

I don't think the notion of folk as a fantasy construct is insulting. It makes me like it even more, personally. Authenticity was always overrated...

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 08 Jul 11 - 09:10 AM

Steve - nothing I have written here (much less the bits you have seen fit to use as examples) has been a personal insult against anyone, rather, purely and simply, a discussion (however so polemical at times) of the facts of the case and my feelings arising from them. To call me a Fool for saying so (much less imply that you are somehow wise in making this observation) IS a personal insult and runs contrary to the spirit of both this discussion, and of Mudcat itself. It also runs contrary to the spirit of Free Speech, which does not extend so far as insulting, or indeed censuring, others.

I am prepared to accept your (cringing) apology with the same good grace in which I feel you are now obliged to offer it.

S O'P (feeling thoroughly & joyfully invigorated after rehearsing Frankie's Trade all morning, though I bet the neighbours might not be so happy...)

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 08 Jul 11 - 09:17 AM

I don't think the notion of folk as a fantasy construct is insulting. It makes me like it even more, personally

Me too. Steamfolk is the epiphany that enables me to love this stuff even more than I do already. Just I'd bought those John Renborn / Nick Drake / Bert Jansch / Pentagle CDs at Fopp the other day... Still, we did come away with a tidy hawl of Caravan, Miles Davis, Gillian Welsh and Kanye West. Maybe next time, should they still be there...

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: AlexB
Date: 08 Jul 11 - 09:52 AM

I get MP3 downloads and all sorts of stuff like this - sharing music with people of similar passions which might never happen otherwise

I'm pretty sure that singing together involves more actual interaction.

I spend half my time on the computer. I have a lot of good friends I rarely or never see offline. I interact with them through text based media. I have a sibling who talks to a community of friends over Skype. Occasionally, music gets shared, but it is no big thing. When music sharing is a big thing, it doesn't have much of a community aspect. YMMV, but from what I see of music sharing on the internet, I fail to see any social context.

If I go to a pub and we have a sing and share songs, that is instant social. Even the people who don't sing are involved. Listening to cds and mp3s is not the same, even if you are listening in a group. On my own I might just listen to a cd and focus on nothing else, in a group setting is is usually background.

Do I think one way is better than the other? Of course not. And perhaps in Brian's example people sang because they actually liked to sing, and when working it helped them focus better? I don't know, and unless you were there or knew someone who was, you don't either. I certainly find I get through work faster and more happily if I sing than if I have music in the background. The latter distracts me. I know that isn't the same for everyone, but it does invalidate the idea that singing is a substitute for better forms of musical delivery. And to impose your own modern view on people from a different generation is no different to what you are accusing others of doing when you claim they are fantasising about a fictional past.

As for the music itself... I like it. My reason for liking it has nothing to do with some idealised notion of the past, although I do find it interesting how songs were collected and have changed over time. I just like it for reasons that cannot be pinned down. Although strangely, the sound of it does play a large part.

Suibhne, I'm sorry, but this thread reads like you are trying to start a new religion, but claiming your new religion is the old religion, and that it follows your arbitrary notions. There are several people here who have said it isn't so cut and dried, and you tried to shoehorn their views to fit what you are saying. This may not be your intention, but you are pretty much telling people you understand their interests better than they do. Never a wise move.

Actually... I just refreshed before sending. I think that is exactly your goal. You insult people's interests, and then tell them that they should be cringingly apologetic just because you feel you are right. No facts are mentioned, only conjecture based on your own understanding of other people, an understanding which originates from your own biases on the subject. Your concertina comments were bogus and you claim yourself it was because you don't 'get' the instrument. Likewise you don't 'get' the rest of the things you are talking about. It does make those comments insulting. You are not debating. You are trolling.

View folk as you wish, especially if it allows you to get more enjoyment out of it, but don't start treating your view as gospel and those who disagree as the unenlightened masses.

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 08 Jul 11 - 10:01 AM

more actual interaction

Sorry, but seeing stuff like that just makes me stop reading. I've been collaborating now for 10 years with musicians from all over the world and have come to regard them as dear friends & crucial colleagues even though I've NEVER MET THEM FACE TO FACE. The MUSICA FIUTO album (Hic Sunt Leones 2008) I did with Italian film-maker Francesco Paladino is a case in point. This is the reality of modern life & music-making - it is no more or less ACTUAL than any other sort.

Now, I'll start reading the rest of your post.

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 08 Jul 11 - 10:16 AM

You insult people's interests, and then tell them that they should be cringingly apologetic just because you feel you are right.

If you think that then you've misundertood it completely - what I'm asking for is for Steve to apologise for insulting me personally. As for the insulting of interests - you're coming across dangerously fundamentalist there yourself. Indeed, by turning this into some sort of personal analysis of my motives you're making it into something it really ought not to be. And you missed the concertina stuff by miles. Still, that's fair enough - just don't do in the same sanctimonius tones you assume I'm using - because I'm not, and, unlike you, I'm not addressing anything I say here to any one person (unless answering the points they themselves have raised). So, stick to the objective facts and enter into to the spirit of the debate without resorting to personal attacks, then we might talk, eh?

You are not debating. You are trolling.

Now I really have stopped reading.

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 08 Jul 11 - 10:52 AM

Furthermore - if you think that by arguing that Folk Song is the consequence of the living creativity of the individual working-class men and women who made the songs in the first place (rather than the well-heeled enthusiasts who collected and fantatised over it) is being INSULTING then - well - what is there to say?

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: Charley Noble
Date: 08 Jul 11 - 08:53 PM

SA-

I'm actually finding this thread educational, a window into how another generation is thinking through the stuff we play. Thanks!

May this thread live long and prosper, until the next generation tears it down.

Cheerily,
Charley Noble

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 09 Jul 11 - 04:05 AM

My generation was the one that folk music skipped, Charlie. In folk I'm either feeling (at least) ten years youthful or twenty-years decrepid depending on which generation I happen to mix with. In any case I very much doubt I'm speaking for anyone but myself here, which was the point all along.

Still, folk remains both a reconstruction of a thing and a thing in itself; in moves in the hearts of those of us for whom knocking old hand-forged nails out of a rotting wooden hulk of an old fishing smack is to touch the very lives of those who went before...

Holy relics indeed!

S O'P

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: Charley Noble
Date: 09 Jul 11 - 10:12 AM

S O'P-

"old hand-forged nails" and rusty at that!

They're keeping some treenails company from the abandoned 5-masted schooner Mary F. Barrett here in my studio.

Cheerily,
Charley Noble

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: Tootler
Date: 09 Jul 11 - 05:37 PM

Here I am with other steamfolk in the Harz Mountains in Northern Germany a couple of weeks ago.

We did sell out and went diesel but we saw the light and quickly returned to fold as pure unadulterated steamfolk.

I thought this video might appeal to other steamfolkies :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOnHd84yVZ4

This was strictly participant with spectators.

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 10 Jul 11 - 06:04 AM

What a waste of time. I'd call it ALL a waste of time but Brian Peters says many sensible things.

I won't be back on this thread, it was as bad as I expected, maybe more so.

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: Edthefolkie
Date: 10 Jul 11 - 02:17 PM

I don't see how a few people slapping an arbitrary label (or, er, "construct") on something makes that label valid. I've seen exactly the same thing happening with science fiction (oops, another label)- starting with H G Wells, moving along through Keith Roberts and arriving at China Miéville. And of COURSE there is the supreme arbitrary label, "World Music".

I must admit that NOBODY is better at labels than yer average folkie. Look at the way Cecil Sharp is becoming nearly as persona non grata as Ewan MacColl. I've just been watching the new "Barley Mow" DVD which includes pre WW1 clips of Sharp, Maud and Helen Karpeles, and George Butterworth performing morris dances. How disgraceful. Rich people corrupting the innocent diversions of the working class and creating a construct bearing no relation to the original pristine article. I just found it charming, sad (George was killed in WW1 before he write much music) and a nice picture of female emancipation (Maud and Helen are wearing rather short outfits and bell pads at the KNEE).   

Look, the damn thing's supposed to be FUN. That's why we sing, dance, listen, and argue innit? Oh dear, another label - "Fun". B*gger.

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 10 Jul 11 - 04:19 PM

Folk's as much a label as anything; but Tootler's train's a beauty.

Subject: RE: Steamfolk
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 10 Jul 11 - 04:20 PM

PS - 100!