traditional music is for entertaining

Subject: traditional music is for entertaining
From: The Sandman
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 04:46 AM

"Traditional music is for entertaining it is not for a further education class" Bob Davenport.
please discuss amicably [That means not calling people talentless morons]

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 04:49 AM

Good lad Bob Davenport, he knows what he's talking about.

Dave H

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,davemc
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 04:53 AM

Absolutely.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 04:56 AM

Over-simplification. The two are not mutually exclusive, and both have their place. I tend to the analytic/scholarly/want·to·know·you·know category myself; but if you prefer just to listen & wallow & enjoy, feel free.

I know [or knew] Bob Davenport of old. He loved stirring things up [tho not quite as much as Robin Hall!].

≈M≈

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Ernest
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 05:19 AM

Ever heard the term "infotainment"?

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Brian Peters
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 05:22 AM

Agree totally with Michael. I'm actually giving a series of further education classes on English folk song right now, and I like to imagine they're entertaining. Different audiences - folk club, concert, pub, workshop - demand different kinds of 'entertainment' , and a good professional can gauge that. For instance, if I went to see say Jeff Warner at a local folk club, would I want to hear his great stories about the songs his mother and father collected and the people who sang them, or a stream of chorus songs interspersed with one-liners? Know what I'd prefer.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Vic Smith
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 05:28 AM

For instance, if I went to see say Jeff Warner at a local folk club, would I want to hear his great stories about the songs his mother and father collected and the people who sang them, or a stream of chorus songs interspersed with one-liners? Know what I'd prefer.


But apart from that.....
I reserve my opinion about the intentions of this thread but will refer back to this post if my suspicions are justified.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,raymond greenoaken
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 05:29 AM

Folk music is like pop music with brains. And some pop music is like pop music with brains. Anything wrong with brains? We all came equipped with one.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: The Sandman
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 05:36 AM

"For instance, if I went to see say Jeff Warner at a local folk club, would I want to hear his great stories about the songs his mother and father collected and the people who sang them, or a stream of chorus songs interspersed with one-liners? Know what I'd prefer."
   it depends, I might possibly like to hear both it is entirely dependent on the quality of the stories or the quality of the one liners.
Brian, it is no good prejudging one liners or stories before they have been told.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Musket
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 05:54 AM

Superflous word in the title Dick..

Music is for entertaining. Any messages, subliminal or otherwise are decoration. Regardless of the genre, music is an abstract concept.

Although my love for classical music is rather strong, I am surprised. I can't listen to Mozart's 40th. Why? Probably due to school when we had to run our finger along the score whilst listening and the teacher coming round rapping knuckles of anybody who lost their place. Not the best way to introduce people to music!

Some traditional music suffered that way too. When you were forced to sing something at school, you aren't necessarily going to have much time for it later.

By the way, music is music with brains. Define folk or pop before letting the brain clutch out, it can stall if you aren't careful.

On second thought, don't define folk, you'll wake the monster under the bed.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: The Sandman
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 06:04 AM

"Some traditional music suffered that way too. When you were forced to sing something at school, you aren't necessarily going to have much time for it late."
my experience was different from yours, I loved having folk dancing and folk singing at primary school, the only problem I had with folk dancing at school was I sometimes ended up dancing with girls who were fat and smelly.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 06:05 AM

The monster under the bed has never slept!

≈≈Grr·ROARrr·Rrr!≈≈
                   ~M~

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: The Sandman
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 06:09 AM

do not wake i am sleepinghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNVI2RBMPP8&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Musket
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 06:18 AM

Aye, the older you get, the less sleep you need.

Dick, I recall enjoying dancing round the maypole and singing songs as a very young lad, but when music lessons as a teenager started dissecting and analysing....

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,Fred McCormick
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 06:23 AM

Bob Davenport is a man with an enormous chip on his shoulder, but about what I do not know. He is also extremely arrogant in attempting to dictate to people what they should and should not use traditional music for.

Yes, I love listening to traditional music and traditional songs, and on a world wide basis. It's bloody good stuff.

However, as someone who left school with no qualifications whatsoever, and just a garbled establishment version of history, the music and songs of these isles in particular were a revelation to me. They taught me who I was, and who my forebears were. In fact they taught me that the lower orders had a place in hsitory which was no less significant than all the careers of mad politicians and even madder generals that the world ever produced.

It is a rich seam of intellectual enquiry which I have relentlessly pursued ever since and it is one which has brought me immense satisfaction.

So I will willingly stick two fingers up to Bob Davenport, and all the anti-intellectuals of this world. I'll continue to derive enormous pleasure from listening to Michael Coleman and Joe Heaney and George Maynard and countless other traditional musicians and singers. And I'll continue to seek out every nugget of information about the sounds which they were good enough to share with us.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: The Sandman
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 06:24 AM

i accept what you say to a certain degree, but i will act devils advocate here, without some degree of analysis and musical self analysis it is difficult to improve.
i suppose the analysis must be self imposed rather than be imposed by an outside force, particularly if you are a teenager, when it is the natural thing to be inclined to question and rebel against adult teachers.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 06:27 AM

Putting any restriction og any type of music, song - you name the art form, is restrictive and arrogant - if they have any sense, people will take anything on offer from any of these - they all go beyond simple 'entertainment'
I am not surprised Bob Davenport made such a statement; my last memory of seeing him was at The Musical traditions Club, in London, where the guests were two of my favourite singes, Roisín White, and Aran Islander, Teresé Mullane.
Teresé sang in Irish and was thoughtful enough to explain each of her songs with short introductions.
We were unfortunate enough to be seated a row in front of Davenport, who spoke loudly and very pointedly throughout all of her introductions, until I became a bit pissed off and asked him to pack it in.
He replied, "I thought we got rid of all this talking shit years ago; I came here to listen to songs".
Pretty well in character for someone who once described Jeannie Robertson as "a terrible singer" (we have a recording of him doing so)
Boorish loutishness rules O.K.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: The Sandman
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 06:38 AM

could we please discuss the statement, not indulge in personal attacks on Bob Davenport, PLEASE STICK TO WHAT HE SAID AND DISCUSS THAT IF NOT GO SOMEWHERE ELSE,THANKS.no trolling or flaming please

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 06:41 AM

Please don't tell me how to make my contribution - you cited Davenport - I described his attitude to the singing of other performers in relation to his statement - perfectly in line with the topic.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: The Sandman
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 06:51 AM

Jim, did I adress you personally?, I did not, my comment was aimed at Fred, it is unecessary to call him arrogant or to refer to him having a chip on his shoulder.
funnily enough since you appear to want to discuss davenports statement about singing songs and too much talk, I was once castigated for introducing and talking abouta song, by a traditional singer Fred Jordan, who said to me Dick have you kissed the blarney stone since you have been to ireland just sing the song.
come on Jim ,whats the feckin difference between what Bob said and what Fred said, it appears to me that you are prejudiced against Bob Davenport,
would your response be the same to Fred ?,for interrupting a performer on stage, if it is, fair enough.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 06:53 AM

Agreed, Jim. Would add that drift or expansion of topics are a familiar & constant feature of this forum; and that being OP of a thread confers no authority whatever to dictate to other posters the form or direction of their contributions.

So just suck up what comes, Dick -- & live with it.

Regards
≈M≈

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 07:25 AM

There's only one thing that traditional music isn't for, and that's dictating to others what music "should" be for.

Some uses of music:

Entertainment.
Education.
Child care.
Crowd control.
Group bonding.
Ritual.
Physical exercise.
Mental exercise.
Torture.
Satire.
Group coordination.
Expression of identity.
Annoying other people.
Recording of history or myth.
Increasing emotional tension.
Reducing emotional tension.
Fashion statement.

People have used traditional music for all these purposes, and many more, often unintentionally. In fact, I'm writing a song at this very moment- nay, a cycle of synphonic and choral oeuvres (that's French for eggs, sophisticated or what?) of which the sole purpose is to get up Mr. Miles' nose.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,Fred McCormick
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 07:26 AM

GSS. If you were addressing my comments about Bob Davenport, it would have been sensible to say so.

I can only repeat that I have always found Davenport an extremely ill mannered individual, who is far too fond of rudely laying the law down and telling other people what they should and should not listen to.

I can think of quite a few examples to back that statement up. Here's just one of them. A few years ago Bob Davenport sang an Irish song called Patsy McCann. When he finished, and apropos of absolutely nothing, he launched into a tirade against Ewan MacColl. (NB., I don't want to re-open the MacColl/Davenport debate, but attacking MacColl is a favorite pastime of Davenport's, as many Mudcatters will know.)

The conversation went roughly like this.

BD. "In 1957 Ewan MacColl told Joe Heaney that a man with his reputation shouldn't go singing music hall songs like that."

Me. "In 1964, Ewan MacColl and Peggy Seeger recorded Heaney singing that very song."

BD. "Eh? What? How do you know?"

Me. "They recorded Joe Heaney singing Patsy McCann as part of that big long interview they did with him in 1964."

BD. "What interview?"

Me. (patiently). "In 1964 Ewan MacColl and Peggy Seeger conducted an interview of about five hours duration with Joe Heaney, during which he sang Patsy McCann."

BD. (aggressively). "I don't know who you are or where you're from!"

At this point several people intervened and restored some sort of equilibrium, before the matter got out of hand completely.

Personally I find it impossible to distinguish between Davenport's opinions and the way he expresses them.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,JIm Bainbridge
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 07:32 AM

Regarding traditional music as entertainment, I recall when I was making a living singing & playing my 'gadget' in pubs (not folk clubs)in West Cork about 20 years ago, I was taken to task in Casey's Cabin bar in Baltimore by a well-known local uilleann piper. He told me that my version of St Patrick's Day was wrong. I pointed out that I certainly played it differently to most people, but I had picked it up from an LP of reissued 78s by Leo Rowsome, and while it was not the standard version, it certainly was not 'wrong'.

He wouldn't accept this, and then said- 'Ah but you're an entertainer, not a traditional musician'. I could hardly believe this, I've never claimed to be a 'traditional musician' whatever that is, but have treasured his words ever since- I have always considered it a wonderful compliment...

Whatever music you play, surely it's essential to communicate with your listeners- 'entertainment' doesn't have to be all funny songs, jokes and manic reels- you judge your audience & try to enhance their evening in whatever way suits all present. If you don't you b..... well should! Have had many evenings ruined by sequences of 'dreich' songs by knowledgeable people with no concept of balance over an evening, and outside of 'singing circles' even less idea of what non-folkie listeners might be 'entertained' by.

Bob Davenport would ALWAYS communicate (he'd hate that word too!) with his audience even if they didn't realise it and he always does 'requests' if he can. After all, if you're asked to sing the 'Wild Rover' and oblige that person, I've found you can do anything you like after that- I have received much good advice from Bob over the years, and still try to live up to his standards.

Bob will not be opening a college of tact and diplomacy, and he is quite capable of defending himself against people who do not share his
view of 'traditional' music, so I certainly won't be doing that.

I would just point out that Mr Carroll's experience would not have happened but for Bob Davenport. I think if you ask the organisers of the club he mentioned, they will tell you that their original interest in the music owes a hell of a lot to the inspiration of the man, and it is quite conceivable if they'd never met Bob Davenport, the excellent Musical Traditions club probably would not exist.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 08:04 AM

"I would just point out that Mr Carroll's experience would not have happened but for Bob Davenport."
Yes it would - I came into the revival about the same time as Bob and was influenced by people he was influenced by.
I find Bob's contribution to folk song somewhat chequered, to say the least and have always been at odds with his attitude of "art with a small "A" and culture "not being for the working classes".
Whatever enjoyment I may or may not have got from him as a performer, his input into my understanding of the music is virtually non-existent, if for no other reason than his disturbing habit of shouting down those he doesn't agree with.
I'm actually working on digitising a couple of hundred tapes of the Critics Group meetings at the moment - the group came into being when Bob, and several other prominent figures on the folk scene approached MacColl and asked him to give them singing lessons - the clubs were well up and running at the time.   
"it appears to me that you are prejudiced against Bob Davenport,"
I reported exactly the incident at the M.T. club -nothing prejudiced in that, and perfectly in line with what you quoted him as saying.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,Fred McCormick
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 08:10 AM

Jim. Very well said, and point taken. Peta and Ken are very close friends of mine, and I greatly value the work they've done with the Musical Traditions Club, and the Keith Summers weekend, and their involvement with Whitby, Sutton Bonington, The Downs festival and many other areas of musical activity.

And that is before one considers the enormous support they've given to a great many singers and musicians - me included; and before I take account of the many occasions I've flogged down at their place whenever I've been in London. (My only regret there is that I used to take a bottle of whisky down for Peta and somehow or other ended up drinking a large portion of it myself. Unfortunately, since my doctor ordered me off the drink, that pleasure has had to go by the board.)

However, the open and generous natures of the pair of them in no way excuses the boorishness of Bob Davenport, or the enormous King Edward spud on his shoulder, or his aggressive attitude.

Oh, and I nearly forgot. It's entirely due to their said generous natures that I am now the custodian of Keith Summers' enormous record collection. That is just one more thing for which I am eternally grateful.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,Fred McCormick
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 08:14 AM

Just to avoid any confusion, I'd better point out that my last contribution was of course a reply to Jim Bainbridge, rather than Jim Carroll.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Brian Peters
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 09:33 AM

"Brian, it is no good prejudging one liners or stories before they have been told."

I'm not prejudging Jeff Warner's stories, Dick - I've heard and been entertained by them many times. Jeff is of course also funny, and a great judge of the right song for the moment. The point I was trying to make (as Jim Bainbridge has just done) is that 'entertainment' doesn't have to mean 'lowest common denominator', or to exclude anecdote or history. Jim B is equally right about the deadening effect of a succession of doleful ballads or endless introductory lectures, but it's the prescriptiveness of Davenport's original remark that I dislike.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: The Sandman
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 11:33 AM

yes,Brian,
my point was of a hypothetical nature,because you did not specify which chorus songs or one liners you were referring too, did you?
the point i am making is this that one liners and chorus songs can be equally good as stories dependent on the quality of each.
MGM you are being a silly billy AND a booby, as the op of the thread i have every right to ask people from not indulging in personal attacks but stick to discussing what Bob said.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,Mike Yates
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 11:45 AM

I have just read through the above. Whatever happened to the comment in the first posting - "That means not calling people talentless morons" -?

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,jim bainbridge
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 11:52 AM

As an infrequent mudcat contributor, it appears to me that a lot of unnecessary animosity arises out of very little, and largely due to people with trenchant views (ironic, that!!) I have always tried to see both sides, but in order to conduct sensible discussion, accurate quotes are essential, and I do not appreciate words being put in my mouth.
AT NO POINT did I accuse Mr Carroll of being prejudiced against Bob, nor do I dispute his version of what happened at MT! All I did was to point out one aspect of the man's contribution (controversial or not) to traditional music...as I said, Bob is quite capable of defending himself.   
From a personal standpoint, since attending ONE meeting nin the sixties, I have never had time for the 'Critics' Group' although I don't doubt the value of researching this early aspect of the revival- good for you, but I'd rather hear Bob sing 'Memphis Tennessee' than hear the whole bloody lot of them, including MacColl- don't get me started! I admire the songs he wrote/plagiarised/invented, but that's as far as it goes.

On another point by Fred M, I am sure what the point is about Joe Heaney singing Patsy McCann, but I do know that it was one of the only two songs in the repertoire of John Doonan, the Tyneside piccolo player, if that's of interest?

OK- back to the entertainment business...

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,jim bainbridge
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 11:55 AM

where did the original quote come from?

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 11:58 AM

if POP music is bubblegum and sugary fizzy colas..
and ROCK music is blood red steaks and lager & Jack Daniel's,

then TRAD FOLK is stale scones & buns and syrup of figs....

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 12:00 PM

"i have every right to ask people from not indulging in personal attacks but stick to discussing what Bob said."
That is exactly what has happened - everything said here has been in relation to his attitude to fellow artists and enthusiasts - it is in response to what he has said, not what he is.
What you have quoted is exactly the stance he has always taken on Folk song
There are no "personal attacks" here, apart from those made by you directed at those who disagree with you.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: ripov
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 12:01 PM

No it's for taking part in. Singing. Playing. Learning about. Otherwise it's just show business. Of course it's always good to hear a capable performer, but that's an entirely different aspect.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,#
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 12:03 PM

There in paragraph 3, Jim.

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/feb/26/singing-floor-folk-review-jp-bean

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Leadfingers
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 12:13 PM

A LONG time ago , I was I a Folk Club when the organiser stood up and shouted " You're NOT here to enjoy yourselves - Remember this IS a Folk Club"! -And he was DEADLY serious !
No one will EVER convince that when Grndpa Copper was singing his 'family' songs in Rottindean he was establishing a Semi Religious art form - He was being an ENTERTAINER

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: The Sandman
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 12:16 PM

Jim Carroll.Fred said
"Bob Davenport is a man with an enormous chip on his shoulder, but about what I do not know." that is a personal attack and has no bearing on what he has said.
I have not indulged in personal attacks.You dont SERIOUSLY consider r me calling MGM a silly billy and a booby[awkward fellow] a personal attack, if you are, you are being very sillybillyish
Bob has in my opinion contributed a lot to the uk folk revival, so when he says something it ought to be discussed without personal attacks and remarks about chips on shoulders..

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: The Sandman
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 12:29 PM

I also fail to see the relevance of this remark from jim carroll
"Pretty well in character for someone who once described Jeannie Robertson as "a terrible singer" (we have a recording of him doing so) what has his opinion of jeannie robertson" got to do with the original statement
"Traditional music is for entertaining it is not for a further education class"
you have also not answered my question in relation to Fred Jordan.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Vic Smith
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 12:35 PM

it appears to me that a lot of unnecessary animosity arises out of very little...... OK- back to the entertainment business...

Would that it could be so, Jim, but just look at the opening post. It contains a reference to a insult perpetrated in and carried over from a previous thread and sadly, Mike Yates did not know this and questioned why it was here.
I wrote at 09 Nov 14 - 05:28 AM -
I reserve my opinion about the intentions of this thread but will refer back to this post if my suspicions are justified.

My suspicions were that one of the main purposes of the thread would be to call for another round of insults to break out and this has been the case - see the post at 09 Nov 14 - 11:33 AM. The pattern of this type of thread is that once the insults start they accelerate quite quickly and then the people who are here to discuss and give and take points drop out. This would be a great pity because already some interesting points have been made.
One thing I do find strange however, is that these threads often hinge on statements that were made or positions taken up decades ago and focus on people who are either dead or no longer active. Meanwhile there are very many interesting positions being taken up by younger performers who have developed a love of traditional music and seem to me, when I talk to them, to have developed a different take on the music. They don't ever seem to share their thoughts on Mudcat. (Causley, Moray, Askews etc, etc,) Here we seem to get bogged down in historic situations, particularly the 50 year old Davenport/MacColl differences.
Perhaps we are reflecting the age of contributors here.
Strange, isn't it?

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,punfolkrocker
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 12:38 PM

Eddie Upton of Folk South West is a positive example of a performer good at combining both entertainment & education..

I've not seen him for about 15 years, but I'd guess he still is...

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: The Sandman
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 12:43 PM

BOB entertaining
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yde-74PWNvc
can you do this Jim? Fred? lets hear you?

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 12:46 PM

Fred can answer for himself - as far as I'm concerned he responded to your original point - you cannot choreograph these discussion, people will answer them in any way they choose.
"so when he says something it ought to be discussed "
Whhich is exactly what is happening here - or would be if you allowed it to take place without your censure
One more time!
""Traditional music is for entertaining it is not for a further education class""
Both are possible and, in my opinion. highly desirable - only a tyrannical folk-bobby would suggest otherwise.
As far as Frwd Jordan's opinion is concerned, I covered it in my first posting
"if they have any sense, people will take anything on offer from any of these - they all go beyond simple 'entertainment'"
We've recorded many hours of field singers talking about their songs - what's your point?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,Punkfolkrocker
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 12:49 PM

"One thing I do find strange however, is that these threads often hinge on statements that were made or positions taken up decades ago and focus on people who are either dead or no longer active....

...Here we seem to get bogged down in historic situations, particularly the 50 year old Davenport/MacColl differences.
Perhaps we are reflecting the age of contributors here.
Strange, isn't it?"

I thought it might be a bit impertinent if I asked "Bob Davenport ? who the f@ck is Bob Davenport !!!???"

Sooo I just googled some youtubes..

In a previous Music Technology Forum I was one of the older 'sages' when I was in my early to mid 40s.

Now, my next big birthday celebration in only a few years will be my 60th..

Yet here at mudcat I almost feel as if I am a young delinquent tearaway...???

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: The Sandman
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 12:50 PM

Vic Smith, I dont think MGM, would be seriously offended by my calling him a silly billy or a booby, they are terms he has used himself in the past.
you however have an agenda, if you have a problem with anything i have said to you which is perfectly true[ i have it all in print], take me to court if not get off my back and shut up.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Vic Smith
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 12:55 PM

The pattern of this type of thread is that once the insults start they accelerate quite quickly and then the people who are here to discuss and give and take points drop out. This would be a great pity because already some interesting points have been made.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 01:01 PM

Everybody on this thread is expressing an opinion. Bob was giving his opinion. We don't have to agree with him. I respect Bob as a performer and a friend. I wouldn't ask him any academic questions though!

IMO the guest of 7.25 am had the right idea. We've all given our opinions. What else is there to do apart from all this mindless name-calling?

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 01:08 PM

"I dont think MGM, would be seriously offended by my calling him a silly billy or a booby"

.,,.,.

Oh, I 'spect he'll survive

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: johncharles
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 01:22 PM

"BOB entertaining
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yde-74PWNvc
can you do this Jim? Fred? lets hear you?"
an old guy singing a modern song of which there are hundreds of covers, some better than his some worse. there are thousands of singers entertaining people every day of the week. People who have something meaningful tosay about traditional music are in much shorter supply and are worth listening to.
john

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 01:30 PM

Alternative answer ---


☹☹☹boohoohoo☹☹☹

Take yer pick, Dick

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: The Sandman
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 01:55 PM

People who have something meaningful tosay about traditional music are in much shorter supply and are worth listening to." corect and there are many who have something meaningless to say about traditional music, and there are some who can sing it and make it entertaining, and many people who also try to lay down rules and argue about definitions who are talking hot air, no names no pack drill.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Nov 14 - 05:09 PM

"can you do this Jim? Fred? lets hear you?"
Bob is not being criticized for his ability to entertain - just on his behaviour towards fellow artists and performers - let's hear you on that one, or doe celebrity bring immunity from criticism in your book?
What's your point?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,Howard Jones
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 03:42 AM

Surely if people are to learn something from traditional music they must first be entertained by it, otherwise they won't listen any further.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: The Sandman
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 03:42 AM

my point is.....I wanted your opinion on Fred criticising me for introducing a song with back ground information,I am pointing out that Bob is not the only person to have made remarks like that, dependent on your response will influence my opinion on whether i think you are prejudiced against Bob Davenport, that is my point ,can you understand that, is it loud and clear.
I think Bobs point is that presentation AND TRADTIONAL MUSIC is important and has to be entertaining,that audiences should not be talked down to, I interpret his comments to mean that he has no objection to further education classes about folk music per se, but he objects to a certain kind of presentation which involves lecturing audiences in the manner that he thinks is a further education class manner.
These are not necessarily my opinions., but my interpretation of Bobs statement.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Dave Sutherland
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 04:15 AM

Having stated that the original quote in this thread was made by Bob Davenport I cannot see how the discussion can ensue without any further reference to him? I will readily admit that Bob was my main influence on my entry into the world of British traditional music and song back in the sixties but in the intervening years he has made many provocative statements (or had many provocative statements attributed to him) such as "The worst thing about folk clubs is that there are too many folk songs sung in them" or looking forward to the day when we can dance around a bonfire made of Northumbrian pipes. I have heard him make or illustrate the original statement on various occasions during live performances however I must echo Fred on the way that traditional song has enriched my life over the last fifty years in the same fashion.
BTW I never yet heard Fred Jordan introduce a song as his opinion was that in the time taken up talking about songs you could have fitted in another three items. Fred could get away with that but not every singer could.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 04:34 AM

Re the original topic, a skilled performer should know when 'telling a story, eg anecdotes' without lecturing enhances the enjoyment of the performance, but as much as performing the song/tune, this has to be done well to be entertaining.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: r.padgett
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 04:37 AM

Traditional music and folk song in general is to be listened to as by and large it tells a story encompassing many different areas of life and facets

Songs can and do have a place in the historical progression of life and interested ppl can and do go on to find a lifetime interest in history and social happening spurred on by folk songs, traditional and otherwise such as Industrial songs of the last 150 years

Pop songs by and large (with inevitable exceptions) tend to be more relient on accompaniments and pa's with repetitive passages and catchy tunes relegating story telling to a minimum ~ in my view

Ray

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 05:05 AM

"Surely if people are to learn something from traditional music they must first be entertained by it,"
This is, of course, true - it is the case with any art form -
If it catches your fancy as a song, there is no reason whatever that you should not follow it up if it has more to offer, and there is equally no reason why you should not want to pass that information on, if you feel it might be relevant or 'entertaining' even, though how much of this you can manage during a performance is a matter of judgement.
Introductions can be too long - they can also be unnecessary - I've never understood why some singers feel it necessary to recount the plot of their songs before they sing them.
You can overload the audience with information, but a little background can help with the appreciation of the song - there are bad introductions, just as there is bad singing.
I've spent the last six months annotating the songs we collected in West Clare, and have been staggered at the amount of information we've turned up about some of them (I've included one at the bottom of this posting - fine for a website, a definite no-no for a club performance - far too long)   
I chose to comment on Bob Davenport' attitude because his was the name raised - plenty of other examples to choose from of people who resent any form of introduction to a song or a piece of music.
In the 1980s we were asked by Librarian Malcolm Taylor to bring some of the people we were recording to sing, play and talk for a few hours at Cecil Sharp House - it turned out to be one of the best evenings I have ever been part of
We assembled three friends, Tom MacCathy, piper, whistle and concertina player from West Clare, Fergus MacTeggart, a magnificent fiddle player from Fermanagh and Mikeen MacCarthy, a Traveller singer and storyteller from Kerry.
They had never really met each other before, but they sat in front of a room-full of people and played, sang, told stories and reminisced about life and culture in rural Ireland, from three totally different aspects, with questions being thrown up from the audience.
Pat and I sat up there with them like a couple of spare pricks at a wedding (in case the proceedings flagged) - totally unnecessary.
Malcolm had to drive everybody out of the room at the end of the evening, and the chat and swapping of yarns and information went on in the street for some time after.
During the interval, somebody came over and asked why we didn't stop all the talk and let them just sing and play - it was the only negative feedback we got from that evening   
As I say, one of the best evenings I can ever remember - certainly the three lads were talking about it for years after - Tom MacCarthy and Mikeen becam friends; Tom, who was a Council carpenter in Hackney, used to drop into Mikeen's caravan during his lunchtime - his family still talk about it.
Jim Carroll

The Sons of Granuaile
Michael 'Straighty' Flanagan
Inagh

You loyal-hearted Irishmen that do intend to roam,
To reap the English harvest so far away from home
I'm sure you will provide with us both comrades loyal and true
Or you have to fight both day and night with John Bull and his crew.

When we left our homes from Ireland the weather was calm and clear,
And when we got on board the ship we gave a hearty cheer.
We gave three loud cheers for Paddy's land, the place we do adore,
May the heavens smile on every child that loves the shamrock shore.

We sailed away all from the quay and ne'er received a shock
Till we landed safe in Liverpool one side of Clare and stock
Where hundreds of our Irishmen they met us in the town
Then 'Hurrah for Paddy's lovely land', it was the word went round.

With one consent away we went to drink strong ale and wine,
Each man he drank a favourite toast to the friends he left behind.
We sang and drank till the ale house rang dispraising Erin's foes,
Or any man that hates the land where St Patrick's shamrock grows.

For three long days we marched away, high wages for to find.
Till on the following morning we came to a railway line.
Those navies they came up to us, and loudly they did rail,
They cursed and damned for Paddy's lands and the sons of Granuaile.

Up stands one of our Irish boys and says, 'What do you mean?
While us, we'll work as well as you, and hate a coward's name.
So leave our way without delay or some of you will fall,
Here stands the sons of Irishmen that never feared a ball.'

Those navies then, they cursed and swore they'd kill us every man.
Make us remember ninety-eight, Ballinamuck and Slievenamon.
Blessed Father Murphy they cursed his blessed revenge,
And our Irish heroes said they'd have revenge then for the same.

Up stands Barney Reilly and he knocked the ganger down.
'Twas then the sticks and stones they came, like showers to the ground.
We fought from half past four until the sun was going to set,
When O'Reilly said, 'My Irish boys, I think we will be bet.'

But come with me my comrade boys, we'll renew the fight once more.
We'll set our foes on every side more desperate than before.
We will let them know before we go we'd rather fight than fly,
For at the worst of times you'll know what can we do, but die.

Here's a health then to the McCormicks too, O'Donnell and O'Neill
And also the O'Donoghues that never were afraid
Also every Irish man who fought and gained the day
And may those cowardly English men in crowds they ran away.

Irish immigrants fleeing the Famine and the mass evictions were met with prejudice and violence in many of the places they chose as their new homes.
This account, from Terry Coleman's 'Railway Navvies', gives a vivid description of the reception many of them received when they landed in Britain.
It describes the plight of the men who took work as railway navvies in the English/Scots border country.

"Throughout the previous year the railways had been extending through the English border country and into Scotland. A third of the navvies were Irish, a third Scots, and a third English: that was the beginning of the trouble - easy-going Roman Catholic Irish, Presbyterian Scots, and impartially belligerent English. The Irish did not look for a fight. As the Scottish Herald reported, they camped, with their women and children, in some of the most secluded glades, and although most of the huts showed an amazing disregard of comfort, the hereditary glee of their occupants seemed not a whit impaired'. This glee enraged the Scots, who then added to their one genuine grievance (the fact that the Irishmen would work for less pay and so tended to bring down wages) their sanctified outrage that the Irish should regard the Sabbath as a holiday, a day of recreation on which they sang and lazed about. As for the Scots, all they did on a Sunday was drink often and pray occasionally, and it needed only an odd quart of whisky and a small prayer to make them half daft with Presbyterian fervour. They then beat up the godless Irish. The Irish defended themselves and this further annoyed the Scots, so that by the middle of 1845 there was near civil war among the railway labourers. The English, mainly from Yorkshire and Lancashire, would fight anyone, but they preferred to attack the Irish. The contractors tried to keep the men, particularly the Irish and Scots, apart, employing them on different parts of the line, but the Scots were not so easily turned from their religious purposes. At Kinghorn, near Dunfermline, these posters were put up around the town:
'NOTICE IS GIVEN
that all the Irish men on the line of railway in Fife Share must be off the grownd and owt of the countey on Monday th nth of this month or els we must by the strenth of our armes and a good pick shaft put them off
Your humbel servants, Schots men.'
Letters were also sent to the contractors and sub-con¬tractors. One read:
'Sir, - You must warn all your Irish men to be of the grownd on Monday the 11th of this month at 12 o'cloack or els we must put them by forse
FOR WE ARE DETERMINED TO DOW IT.'
The sheriff turned up and warned the Scots against doing anything of the sort. Two hundred navvies met on the beach, but in the face of a warning from the sheriff they proved not so determined to do it, and the Irish were left in peace for a while.
But in other places the riots were savage. Seven thousand men were working on the Caledonian line, and 1,100 of these were paid monthly at a village called Locherby, in Dumfriesshire. Their conduct was a great scandal to the inhabitants of a quiet Scottish village. John Baird, Deputy Clerk of the Peace for the county, lamented that the local little boys got completely into the habits of the men - 'drinking, swearing, fighting, and smoking tobacco and all those sorts of things'. Mr Baird thought that on a pay day, with constant drunkenness and disturbance, the village was quite uninhabitable.
A minority of the navvies were Irish, and they were attacked now and again, as was the custom. After one pay day a mob of 300 or 400, armed with pitchforks and scythes, marched on the Irish, who were saved only because the magistrates intervened and kept both sides talking until a force of militia came up from Carlisle, twenty-three miles away."
The writer goes in to explain that the worst of the riots were to follow.
This song describes the situation in Britain, specifically in Liverpool; we have never come across it before and can find no trace of it.
A similar song 'Seven of our Irishmen' (Roud 3104), sung by Straighty and by Pat MacNamara, deals with those who landed in America and were targeted as possible recruits for the U.S. army.
Ref:
The Railway Navvies;   Terry Coleman 1965

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Musket
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 05:27 AM

The more you analyse entertainment the less entertaining it becomes.

For that matter, the more you try to compare genres as better or worse as music, trying to inflict personal taste as being definitive, the more your arse is on view.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 05:43 AM

Yeah.. Mudcat reeks of ignorance and intolerance in the prevailing hostile attitude towards any genres of popular music...

Maybe mudcat is a magnet for educated articulate over opinionated people
who are perhaps lacking a vital spark of humility and genuine innate intelligence...???

[but that's public school education for you....😜]




"RE: traditional music is for entertaining"

.. depends..

what's the reasonable dividing line between over long song intros and a lecture illustrated with musical examples/specimens...

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Vic Smith
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 06:31 AM

It is paradoxical that Bob Davenport was an advocate of performing songs without introductions and yet one of his great singing heroes (like mine) was Gordon Hall and we often talked about Gordon when we met. Yet no traditional singer that I met was more analytical about his songs, nor was there one who sought more information about their background in very long phone calls - as I and others, Reg Hall, Keith Chandler, Bob Copper, Terry Masterson and Bob himself amongst others could attest to. If he felt the need or was in the mood, Gordon would sometimes share this information when introducing a song. I conducted a radio interview with Gordon once to ask him about his songs and their place in his family. I had no idea of how long the interview was to last when I started but in fact it turned out to be the longest in my 25 years of conducting studio interviews with singers and musicians for my weekly programme - it lasted nearly two hours and even then I felt that Gordon had only just get going. You can read a full transcription of the spoken part of the interview minus the songs that I asked him to interject into the piece by clicking here


And now an aside..... I can't say that I knew Bob very well, but I did book him on many occasions for clubs, concerts and festivals and I spoke to him whenever we met at other events. Our longest converstion, funnily enough was when we were both booked to sing at the Gordon Hall memorial concert in Horsham. I always found Bob to be an utterly charming polite communicative bloke. I have heard so many stories from so many people about the other side of Bob and how difficult and challenging he could be that I know that they must be true; but I find the different impressions puzzling.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,Fred McCormick
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 06:40 AM

Jim Banbridge. My point about Patsy McCann was first of all that Davenport used it as an excuse to defame MacColl, yet again. For crying out loud! The man's been dead 25 years. Do I seriously have to listen to yet another diatribe, every time Bob Davenport opens his mouth?

Secondly, I was offended at the aggressive way in which he turned on me when I pointed out a simple fact of history. If Bob Davenport cannot rationally discuss something as incontrovertible as that, without behaving as though he's about to start a fight, then I really have no time for him.

GSS. "can you do this Jim? Fred? lets hear you". What the fuck has that got to do with it? Tell you what Dick. I am not very well known as a singer, and I haven't had your illustrious career, but I suggest you wait until you've listened to me singing before you start casting remarks like that around!!!

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,ST
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 06:43 AM

On the original question – whether you give (want) any background etc depends upon the environment you're in. In some places where the audience is not gathered to listen to "traditional", or even "folk" music it may not be appropriate; so at an open mic, karaoke-style set up or a in heaving, noisy pub bar it's probably best just to sing anything entertaining, whether traditional or not. In other contexts (and, possibly contentiously, I'd put folk clubs in this category) it adds to the enjoyment to know something about what you're listening to – particularly since the very nature of traditional song is that it does have an historical story in addition to the story contained within the lyrics.

If you don't actually know anything about the background, the concept of the song being "traditional" is superfluous anyway – without background it's just a song. How would you know you were singing a traditional song if you didn't know its history and provenance? Isn't the provenance part of what sets traditional song aside? By claiming an interest in "traditional" songs we are showing that we have looked into the background of the song – so we've already moved into the "education" sphere.

Obviously the original comment ("not for a further education class") was phrased to imply the worst sort of presentation of the background to a song. No-one wants to listen to something badly presented whether it be a song or a lesson/lecture but to suggest that you should never talk about, or have the opportunity to learn about, where the song came from and the journey that it has taken seems to me to miss some of the essence of what distinguishes traditional song from any other song.

In addition, did Mr. Davenport, never find enjoyment in learning something new? At some of the evenings I go to I gain a lot of pleasure from learning about the songs. When I stop wanting to learn it'll be time to give up completely.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 06:55 AM

"The more you analyse entertainment the less entertaining it becomes."
I'm with Wimberly (Folklore in the Englih and Scottish Ballads)
"An American Indian sun-dance or an Australian corroboree is an exciting spectacle for the uninitiated, but for one who understands something of the culture whence it springs it is a hundred fold more heart-moving."
Understanding and passing on some of what you know about a song is a million miles from "analysing entertainment", and most people know that.
"educated articulate over opinionated people"
Don't know any public school educated people, most folkies I rub shoulders with received the same bog-standard state education I did.
Of course, we all realise working people with a poor education are incapable of understanding the complexities and subtleties of any art form - even the one they created and proliferated themselves!!
Arguments about "narrowness in musical tastes" usually stem from the fact that (speaking for myself) find most modern pop music shallow, ephemeral and unsatisfying - you want to see my collection of jazz, blues, classics, opera, swing, bluegrass.... come up and see me sometime - wonder how many Lady Gaga fans can make the same offer.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 07:38 AM

Jim - my sarcy comments weren't aimed at you...

or anyone else like us from more humble upbringings..

Though, that's not to say there aren't 'working class' folkies
who are culturally intolerant,
or who aspire to emulate the posturing and pretentions of public school bellends...😏

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 08:13 AM

"Though, that's not to say there aren't 'working class' folkies
who are culturally intolerant, or who aspire to emulate the posturing and pretentions of public school bellends.."
Certainly not confined to folk music - ever tried drinking with a wine buff, or a train spotter, or a jazz fan, or a car enthusiast... - I've got twin sisters, one who supports Liverpool, the other Everton - you don't want to be there on Saturday, when they're talking about "real football"!!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Vic Smith
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 08:40 AM

I am not very well known as a singer.....

Perhaps not, but you are a fine- voiced, entertaining one whose name is well-respected in traditional music circles throughout these islands and at such events you are always called on to sing. Though you are probably best known for your interpretation of traditional songs. your CD The Song I'm Composing - which I am listening to again as I compose this - is something of a neglected masterpiece, concentrating as it does, on the great and varied selection of songs that you have written. Funnily enough, despite your careful, thoughtful songs, it is your compositions that are strictly in the Irish humorous tradition, such as The Goat Replies and The Bacon Butty, that I hear sung around folk clubs.

Your name was one that met with unanimous enthusiasm when the suggestion of booking you came up at our folk club committee meeting.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Musket
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 09:09 AM

Public school Bellends?

Presumably chav bellends appreciate songs about whaling or reed cutting whilst public school bellends can't understand what the song is about?

Ask Bridge, he might have some insight into this subject

😇

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,Fred McCormick
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 09:13 AM

Hi Vic. Love it, love it, love it. Can I put that on my CV?

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Airymouse
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 09:59 AM

I tend to get sidetracked, so like the passenger trains in the US it takes me a long time to get anywhere. I think education, except musical education, which I don't have, has nothing to do with   with the music we all share. I am never going to believe that the person who knows the chemical table backwards and forwards has a better appreciation of traditional music than the person who can't read. After all, the music we like is not literal; it's oral, or for instrumental music ,aural. Likewise, I am never going to believe the "Song Catcher" schlock that the people who sing or play traditional songs are all dirt poor, illiterate, country folk who have never seen an automobile or a TV set.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,Phil
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 11:16 AM

What usually makes these little conversational hand-grenades so... um... productive is that they can be understood in three or four different ways. What generally happens is that the person who wants to start the... er... discussion makes a point using an extreme version of the statement, then rapidly relocates to a milder version when it comes under attack, before returning to the more provocative version for a counter-attack, and so on. Hours of fun.

In this case, the statement that "traditional music is for entertaining" could mean:

1 - Traditional songs should be sung well, so as to entertain the people listening
or
2 - Traditional songs should be sung and performed in an entertaining way, so as to draw in people who think they don't like it
or
3 - Traditional songs should be sung without any extraneous material, unless the material's also entertaining (so a historical introduction to The Dolphin is out, but Tony Capstick's introduction* would be fine)
or
4 - Traditional songs should be sung by entertainers, along with whatever else they entertain people with

I'd agree with 1, both agree & disagree with 2 (not everything can be made entertaining), but strongly disagree with 3 and 4.

*The name of this song is The Dolphin ... which is also the name of a pub in Rotherham where they used to have right rough strippers on. Weren't those strippers rough though? (continues)

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 11:26 AM

" I am never going to believe the "Song Catcher" schlock that the people who sing or play traditional songs are all dirt poor"
Some of the finest ballad singing in the United States come (or came) from 'songcatcher' country - the Appalachians - read Sharp, or Richie, or Scarborough.
The last outpost of ballad singing in Britain and Ireland was the impoverished and illiterate Travellers
That may have changed now we no longer have a creative oral tradition, but these were the makers and passers-on
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 11:39 AM

lot of thread drift here. i mean the usual suspects argy bargying away.

i suppose really it depends what you consider to be your tradition. what you feel is your perceived tradition that you are handing on.

there is no guarantee that the music in your tradition will entertain me. for example a lot of the world music that Froots identifies with doesn't really do it for me. but its someone's tradition, that they value and want to preserve.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,jim bainbridge
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 01:12 PM

You're dead right Vic- this is a discussion for opinionated old codgers, so by definition I should never have got involved. (what was that you said?)
I've played with & enjoyed Bob's company for many years (45 or so) and have never has a cross word so am equally puzzled about how so many people provoke all this alleged 'aggro' from Bob.
Wasn't aware of the source of the quote which started all this, nor its context. Somebody told me the other day about the book in question, but think I'll carry on reading my John McGahern, thanks very much.
Here's to the music, it speaks for itself, one way or the other without all this analysis & bad temper.... adios amigos

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Musket
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 01:58 PM

The last outpost of ballad singing? Ballads are still being written, adapted from traditional roots and performed.

Just because you don't understand the somewhat exciting journey folk and traditional roots is on at present, don't come out with sweeping statements that were questionable forty years ago, never mind now with folk and acoustic roots dominating the albums, tours and festivals.

Juat don't expect today's artistes to sit in a pub in a circle, that's what old men do...

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 02:17 PM

"Just because you don't understand the somewhat exciting journey folk and traditional roots is on at present,"
Perhaps it's the way you tell 'em - whoops, soory - by your reckoning, 'Strangers in the Night' is a ballad.
"so am equally puzzled about how so many people provoke all this alleged 'aggro' from Bob. "
I've described our experience at the Musical Traditions; others have described theirs elsewhere - are we to ssume that celebrité allows people like Good Ol' Bob to behave in such a fashion, or is it that us "opinionated old codgers" just don't have a sense of humour to allow us to appreciate the finer qualities of his character?
Being a good (or popular) performer, does not excuse his boorish loutisheness
Adios Jim
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Musket
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 03:44 PM

Whats the storyline?

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,Proper Traditional Musician
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 03:47 PM

For entertaining? Absolutely. What we call "Folk" is routed in working class social music. Ordinary, working class people generally did not meet up in the pub on Saturday night to have high-brow technical discussions. They wanted to be.....entertained. To tap their feet, have a drink and generally forget the stresses and starins of their lives. This whole argument just sums up how middle class, boorish and anally retentive "Folk" is following the "revival". Of course it's always a problem when so many school teachers are involved with anything.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 08:37 PM

all very well - but what if its not entertaining but people want to preserve, because they think its worthwhile.

i'm not saying the two are mutually exclusive. but there's no rule saying just because its traditional. it will be entertaining.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Janie
Date: 10 Nov 14 - 09:55 PM

Hmmm....

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,guest
Date: 11 Nov 14 - 07:39 AM

that's an important point-it's not to be taken seriously is it? beside child abuse by our leaders, the devastation of climate change and a myriad other things, who the f....cares about 'opinionated old codgers' and their views, whatever they are- there are plenty of those in positions of real power- get a life, the lot of you

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Brian Peters
Date: 11 Nov 14 - 08:26 AM

"get a life, the lot of you"

... says someone who's clicked on to Mudcat, read the thread, and taken the trouble to post to it.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Brian Peters
Date: 11 Nov 14 - 08:37 AM

"...meet up in the pub on Saturday night to have high-brow technical discussions"

I started going to folk clubs to have a sing, a drink, and a good time - I don't remember any 'highbrow technical discussions'. I'm also having a laugh at someone, sheltering behind their anonymity, telling complete strangers they're 'anally retentive' and accusing them of boorishness in the same breath.

It's bleedin' obvious that traditional music is for entertaining. Arguments arise when people try to insist on their own narrow definition of what constitutes 'entertaining'.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Vic Smith
Date: 11 Nov 14 - 08:54 AM

"get a life, the lot of you"

... says someone who's clicked on to Mudcat, read the thread, and taken the trouble to post to it.
Brian Peters for the second time - 

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Brian Peters
Date: 11 Nov 14 - 09:14 AM

Cheers, Vic!

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,John P
Date: 12 Nov 14 - 09:48 AM

"It's bleedin' obvious that traditional music is for entertaining. Arguments arise when people try to insist on their own narrow definition of what constitutes 'entertaining'."

I second the second and give a second thumbs up.

More broadly, arguments arise when people try to tell other people how they ought to play, listen to, enjoy, or introduce music.

It is bleedin' obvious that anyone who gets up in front of others and performs music is engaging in an act of entertainment. Some people are better at entertaining than others; for my tastes, the people who are on the extremes of both sides of this thread are the worst. I really don't want to hear more talking than music, and I really do want to have the songs introduced in at least a minimal fashion. "Here's a tune from Wales" is a thousand times better than no introduction at all.

And I want the entertainer to be sensitive to what sort of audience he or she is playing for and to speak appropriately. I wish that both the pedants and the silent types would spend a bit of time honing their entertainment chops while they are honing their musical chops. Some might be better in classrooms while others might find their natural audiences in comedy clubs. But in any event, they are inflicting themselves on others -- I would be thankful if they tried to acquire some skill and sensitivity before they do.

I've spent most of my life playing traditional music and there are pros and cons for different performing situations and for different levels of knowledge on the part of the audience. If I'm playing in a folk club, I'll share a lot of information about the origins and development of the music and tell about my sources and a few stray thoughts on the nature of traditional music. But the delivery of this information is as important as the information itself; if it's not entertaining then it's not, well, very entertaining. A pro for playing for a knowledgeable audience is that they already have a good idea of what I'm up to -- I don't have to explain everything to put it in context. The con is that the many members of the audience will have very specific ideas about how I ought to play music and are not shy about sharing their feelings in negative terms.

A more general audience will get a shorter introduction that tries to relate the song to the experience of people who haven't experienced traditional music before, while still being entertaining. The con, of course, is that more basic explanations are often required and some people just go away shaking their heads about the weird musicians they saw today. The pro is that they don't have pre-conceived notions about whether or not I'm playing the music correctly and they don't care if I don't tell them who I learned the song from. A big pro is that there is usually someone in the audience who has never heard anything like that before and who gets completely turned on by traditional music. That's the best part.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,MikeL2
Date: 12 Nov 14 - 09:53 AM

High Guest JP

I am with you on this. You talk a lot of sense.

Regards

MikeL2

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 12 Nov 14 - 04:08 PM

Can't fault it. My own experience backs this up completely.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 12 Nov 14 - 04:19 PM

.. perhaps there should be more nudity in folk music...???

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Vic Smith
Date: 12 Nov 14 - 04:44 PM

.. perhaps there should be more nudity in folk music...???

Anything to oblige. I

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Vic Smith
Date: 12 Nov 14 - 04:58 PM

(Ahem.... I'll try that post again)

.. perhaps there should be more nudity in folk music...???

Anything to oblige.... especially if it gives me the opportunity to link to the 1953 Lomax/Kennedy recording at The Blaxhall Ship of an relatively unknown singer who, in my opinion, is one of the finest of the old English traditional pub singers. Here with the compelling image that -

He found a woman stark naked
With her hair pinned to the the ground

- is Bob Scarce singing 'Three Jolly Sportsmen' and if one person who hasn't heard Bob sing before can listen to it and appreciate the majesty of his singing then this thread will have served its purpose.


Lots of other magnificent singing and playing on that website, by the way....

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Airymouse
Date: 12 Nov 14 - 06:11 PM

In his "A Browser's Dictionary," John Ciardi maintains that "stark naked' means butt-ass naked rather than totally naked. Perhaps this makes the image more compelling.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Phil Edwards
Date: 12 Nov 14 - 06:58 PM

Before baths were widespread, most people (male and female) would wear a shift or smock under their outer clothes, and keep it on basically all the time - you'd live in it, sleep in it, wash yourself in it ("as far as possible") and when the time came die & be buried in it. You would basically never be "naked as the day you were born" - and when somebody was described as being naked, this would often mean "stripped right down to their smock".

That's how I envisage the 'naked woman' in Three Jolly Butchers/Sportsmen - in an apparently humiliating & vulnerable position, but not actually starkers by our standards.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Airymouse
Date: 12 Nov 14 - 08:03 PM

Aw shucks.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: ripov
Date: 12 Nov 14 - 09:34 PM

Disregarding the entertaining and sometimes amusing and informative side-threads, I still think you all have it backwards. Music is primarily a mode of self expression. The concept of performing (or entertaining others) comes afterwards. And music becomes traditional because it is, OF ITSELF, enjoyable, entertaining; so that people want to play it, or listen to it; and so it is passed on from one person to another by whatever means they choose to employ.
This is not to say thay anyone performing it should not do so to the best of their ability, to give the most pleasure to those hearing it, but this is common to any activity, not just traditional music.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Nov 14 - 06:09 AM

"Juat don't expect today's artistes to sit in a pub in a circle, that's what old men do.."

Having spent many years listening to and visiting singers and instrumentalists who perform what I perceive as Folk Music I cannot recall one of them that described themselves as an artiste. They were mostly people who had a life to live and and a job to do and enjoyed music and song when time allowed.

I am wary of people who think of themselves as artistes, and sitting in a circle seems quite logical if you are singing/playing with others, it's easier to communicate and interact but I guess that I am thinking of people getting together for the pleasure of it rather than "artistes".

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,Hootenanny
Date: 13 Nov 14 - 06:11 AM

My apologies, that last post was mine.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Musket
Date: 13 Nov 14 - 07:35 AM

And well put.

You miss the point though. My observation was the parochial assumption of many that their Thursday night activity denotes folk. These threads are full of people whose goldfish bowls have greasy glass

Folk and acoustic roots is one of the most thriving musical entertainment genres out there right now. And still we see people getting precious and thinking a hobby that is dying out at the same rate as those doing it is the be all and end all.

I listened to someone singing a Seth Lakeman song a few months ago. Chatting later, they thought a) it was traditional and b) they had never heard of Seth, but had got the words and tune from someone who sings it.

My point? Earlier in the night they had been moaning about open mic nights and how folk music was dying at pub level and dead at professional level.

I use traditional influences in my own work, as do many others. Including the originators of many traditional songs. It's all entertainment. Nothing more, nothing less. It belongs to nobody and everybody.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 13 Nov 14 - 07:36 AM

'traditional music is for entertaining'

but will it work in Mayfair.   I suppose it might catch on.....

When the after eight mints have gone round - they all get their ringbinders out and....

down the road at the Embassy reception, the butler enters with Ferrerro Rocher, and .....oh you're spoiling us - three slip jigs and a hornpipe!

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Musket
Date: 13 Nov 14 - 10:31 AM

The other night, I noticed, four Martins, two Lowdens, myriad Taylors, a Collings and to be fair, my Rainsong is in the £2.5K bracket but made me look a pauper boo hoo.

Music of the masses eh? Pass the Ferrari Rocket.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Nov 14 - 11:54 AM

musket, what ar all these names & who is Seth lakman?

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Sep 19 - 05:37 AM

yes who- and his dad

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: leeneia
Date: 24 Sep 19 - 11:08 AM

Purposes I can think of for trad music:

entertaining others
comforting oneself when lonely or sad
teaching, esp. children e.g., "Ten Little Indians" teaches counting
religion
making love
selling products
strengthening friendship
passing the time when bored
recording history
preserving ethnicity
keeping ethnic divisions alive
shock value, grossing others out - is this a form of bullying?

I have a niece named Amy. We were never close until one day I memorized and sang "Once in Love with Amy" to her and her fiance. She was 30 years old and had never heard of that song!

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: The Sandman
Date: 24 Sep 19 - 02:06 PM

Tomorrow i will be doing a gig locally in a community centre, i will be singing trad songs , i will get others to sing as well, the songs are stories and people seem to find them entertaining. it will not be necessary to pull rabbits out of hats or do tommy cooper impersonations, but if it is anything like the last time i did it,the people enjoy it and ask me back, trad music is appreciated in ireland

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Sep 19 - 07:12 PM

Music helps you feel better, and that's not precisely the same as being entertained,, though that's one aspect of it.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,mrgrtt123
Date: 24 Sep 19 - 10:05 PM

You mean "entertainment?"
We will all have different opinions or feelings whenever we listen to music.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Sep 19 - 06:25 AM

Traditional music is certainly 'entertaining'
If you think that' all that is, you miss a hell of a lot more
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Sep 19 - 06:30 AM

Incidentally, the feller who is quoted as saying it is just for entertaining once insisted that Art for educated people should come with a capital "A" while for the rest of us it should have a small "a"
Doesn't say much for the people who created and kept alive the traditional Arts (or should that be "arts"), does it ?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Sep 19 - 11:20 AM

I think that people are ignoring the WHOLE quote in the opening post. The context in which Davenport made the statement isn'g given but I certainly read it as a criticism of singers who waffle on stage about a song's background. Fred Jordan used to make similar criticisms and it was a great lesson to see Walter Pardon who would stand up, sing the song and sit down without saying anything.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Sep 19 - 11:39 AM

Whatever he meant he is utterly wrong - he referred to it not being suitable for education
We experienced Bob's take on introducing songs when tow extremely fine Irish women singers, Roisin White from Armagh and Theresa Mullan from the Aran Island, Inishmore were booked at Peta Webb's club, The King and Queen
Theresa thoughtfully gave a short explanation of her Irish language songs, over which a 'very Bob' Bob, pointedly talked loudly
We were two rows in front of him, so Pat turned as asked him would he mind not talking
Charmingly, he replied, "I came here to listen to singing not talk - I thought we'd got rid of that shit in the sixties"

Bob's been around long enough to know that some singers feel the need to introduce their songs
I've always considered Bob somewhat ill-mannered and arrogant - and over-rated
Sorry 'bout that
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Stringsinger
Date: 25 Sep 19 - 12:15 PM

Art is entertainment. Different people have differing entertainment needs. The word entertainment has been associated with commercialization but I am entertained by a great symphony, looking at a Picasso, hearing an erudite lecture or a rural trad folk performer. I'm entertained by jazz, reading, seeing a good Broadway musical, and creating music and words for myself.

What passes mostly for entertainment on a commercialized level is not entertaining to me with some exceptions. I'm entertained by integrity and honesty in a performance regardless of genres.

The point made about traditional folk music is that it was not constructed to be on the stage or sell lots of recordings but fulfills a need for security and solidarity in a community. But that's still a form of entertainment more satisfying than anything on TV,
or marketed music.

The "Folk Scare" brought this into focus. Some songs were bowdlerized and spruced up for the mass market. The idea of a folk singer was sold as a young woman with long hair and a guitar. Or college frat boys.Think Mighty Wind.

An art form with thought and depth, conveying emotion that's available to anyone who cares to make the effort to appreciate it is an ultimate form of entertainment that lasts.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Sep 19 - 01:52 PM

""Art is entertainment."
Not really as simple as that in my opinion SS
If I look at Picasso's Guernica or read Brecht;s Marie Farrer I am not being entertained in any way
Take as many examples such as this as you wish
The problem isn't describing traditional music as 'entertainment' but is confining it to that description
Jim

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Sep 19 - 06:13 PM

Before I became too bloody deaf I played in pub sessions for twenty years or more. I was playing tunes for myself and for my fellow sessioneers. In no way was I "performing" for an audience. I'm told that the pub crowd enjoyed us and that we actually attracted extra customers of a Friday night. It was a bonus if they enjoyed what we did, but we were playing for ourselves, not them. Every grand Irish session I've listened to or joined in with has been the same. A gig is different, but a session is for the sessioneers only. Anything else is a bonus for the pub and its customers.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Sep 19 - 06:20 PM

I agree with your post, Jim. I'd also add that passive "entertainment" of the ilk of telly soaps is anathema to me. In any performance, whether it's a telly drama, a pop concert, John Kirkpatrick with his boxes or a Beethoven string quartet, I want emotional interaction. "Soaking it up" simply won't do for me. Maybe I'm just weird...

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: leeneia
Date: 25 Sep 19 - 08:10 PM

Let me ask y'all something about the OP.

Is 'further education' what we Americans call 'adult education'? It involves classes for enrichment only, not work towards a degree. Students usually have degree already.

If Davenport is saying that traditional music should never be covered in a college class, I think he has rocks in his head.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: The Sandman
Date: 26 Sep 19 - 05:13 AM

Bob Davenport on that occasion missed A COUPLE OF IMPORTANT points, short explanatory introductions are informative, and part of communication with an audience, which is part of entertaining,.
for example i sing a song that has several words in the doric, so that people can understand subtle aspects of the song it is necessary to explain.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,jim bainbridge
Date: 26 Sep 19 - 06:10 AM

Here we go again & I want no part of any slanging match- enough of that in the House of Commons.
I know Bob has strong views and I'd go along with many of them- this thread has several oft-quoted incidents/comments from many years ago which are now in the category of 'mud sticks' & hearsay.

Sandman is right & am sure Bob would agree that introductions to songs should be brief & relevant- NOT long a long rambling precis of the song to follow, even if translation is necessary. If that degree of explanation the case, maybe a folk club is the wrong place for it?

As for the presence of traditional music in a college class, at the risk of offending old pals & academics in Newcastle, I'd say that 'traditional' music managed fine without the academic class, and i'd subscribe to Ed Pickford's tongue in cheek song 'Folk Degree'(see youtube clip) where he laments he can't get gigs any more as he doesn't have a folk degree.

There is a need for research into the tradition OF COURSE and I have no idea what goes on in folk education (I shudder to think, really) but would suggest leenia does a little more research before attacking one of the earliest and most influential of the UK revival singers.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Sep 19 - 06:27 AM

Bob's behaviour is too well known to need a slanging match jim - as is his views on taking folk song seriously
We all have strong vies on some things - it's Bob's behaviour to his fellow enthusiasts that cause the problems
You have the description of his behaviour at The King and Queen defend it, condemn i or deny it - but don't accuse anyone of provoking a slanging match please
It is your opinion that he is "one of the earliest..." or even an influence for the better
Longevity is no recommendation for anything other than being around a long time
Folk song, when taken seriously (as some of us choose to do) is not only worthy of being part of education - it is an education in itself, when you allow it to be
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,Derrick
Date: 26 Sep 19 - 07:06 AM

Folk song was the one of the entertainments of the working people,many songs made by those people,some borrowed from other sources.
The subjects of the songs varied from pure comedy to social and political comment,the singers picked their songs depending on the occasion.A song with a moral lesson might be chosen in one case a comedic song in another.
When it comes to a folk club a little information to "set the scene" is acceptable a ten minute lecture is not.
The place for that is a workshop.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Sep 19 - 07:22 AM

" a ten minute lecture is not."
Couldn't agree more Derrick - though some of the best lectures on folk song and music I attended took place at folk club venues
Jim

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,jim bainbridge
Date: 26 Sep 19 - 09:05 AM

I think my point about rambling introductions was clarified well by Derrick, but I cannot follow how someone with your obvious intelligence, Jim C, can be so vitriolic about anyone at all?
it can't be good for you!

Such condemnation is illogical & almost rabid & must be more deep- rooted than some incident from years ago- I assume due to Bob's views on MacColl et al, but it surely is time you became a bit more objective about it all- I'm glad that YOU are not compiling the HISTORY OF FOLK MUSIC- it could be a little biased & potentially send college folk students in a doubtful direction if your views were set in stone!!
I recall that Vic Smith once compiled a collection of anecdotes about MacColl, and I would have a few, but I can accept to see that the man achieved a lot in his life.
Bob's contribution has been in a quite different sector of our music, and I accept the fact that Bob will not be running a course on tact & diplomacy.
I don't intend to rake over events of years ago, but to suggest that Bob Davenport is not one of the most influential figures of the early revival is not only dishonest, but ridiculous.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 27 Sep 19 - 05:10 AM

I have a niece named Amy. We were never close until one day I memorized and sang "Once in Love with Amy" to her and her fiance. She was 30 years old and had never heard of that song!

One person's song from a 1948 Broadway musical is another person's traditional music.

DC

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Sep 19 - 05:37 AM

"Jim C, can be so vitriolic about anyone at all?"
I have describd my experiences of Bob - unless you believe I am lying what objection do you have to my doig so on a thread where his name comes up
What I wrote is perfectly in line with is attitude to folk song
I obviously don't have to remind you of the constant vitriol poured on the over thirty-years dead MacColl - why anybody should wish to compile a collection of that is beyond me ?
All that does is to make it more impossible to discuss his work, yet Bob is among the most vitriolic
I have a recording from the mid-sixties of his deliberately wrecking a meeting attempting the direction the folk song revival was taking, set up by Ewan and Bert and including Bob, Bert and Alex Campbell as speakers
Bob shouted down every speaker from the floor saying more or less what he is quoted as saying here and sent the meeting crashing in chaos
I don't call that a great contribution to folk song by any stretch of the imagination
Bob was then an arrogant bully and a wrecker, that is why I don't like him
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Sep 19 - 06:06 AM

"Jim C, can be so vitriolic about anyone at all?"Sorry - that was misleading
The meeting was set up TO DISCUSS the direction the revival was taking
Apparently it was Bert who was concerned and instigated it
Jim

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: The Sandman
Date: 28 Sep 19 - 03:19 AM

I have heard a recording of that meeting, i think one of the mistakes was for a break half way through for pints of beer[Ewans suggestion]
Bob should and almost certainly will be judged on his performances rather than on one or two incidents from 40 plus years ago.
in my opinion, both of them were strong characters with strong opinions. I think the important thing for older performers is to try and help and encourage and improve standards, something Ewan gave up time trying to do, he may not have always got it right[who does?].
in my opinion we are all indebted to Ewan and Bert and all the dedicated folk club organisers, who ran folk clubs every week.
At the moment the uk folk revival needs people like Nic Dow who is helping the setting up of a new folk festival in Charnmouth this weekend.
My advice to younger performers is get out and organise an event , the easiest place to start is a one day folk festival, unless performers start organising events there will not be sufficient venues for the uk folk revival to maintain a profile.
Does the Newcastle degree course emphasis the need for performers to learn organisational skills or does it give the impression thatgigs will be there for everyone leaving thecourse
the answer in my opinion is not art centres, flooded by folk agents who hype up the latest flavour of the month and seem concerned primarily with making folk music as commercially viable for themselves and their acts.
Folk agents primary concern is getting work for their acts this eventually leads to to pressure to commercialise the music and take it further from its roots.
In my opinion the uk folk revival is meandering back and forth in a rudderless direction, younger people[50 downwards] need to start organising folk events,their concern should not be only commercial on the other hand they need to breask even,any profit has to be ploughed back.
Commercialism is necessary to a small extent only,commercialism should not be a mantra it should not be the be all and end all. professionalism and respect for the music and the maintenance of quality is more important

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Sep 19 - 04:47 AM

"I have heard a recording of that meeting, i think one of the mistakes was for a break half way through for pints of beer[Ewans suggestion]"
Never remember a meeting over a pub that didn't break for a beer - I remember sharing a crowded bar with Tariq Ali and Daniel Cohn-Bendit during the interval of a forum in Manchester in 'Red '68'
Alchohol wsn't the problm at 'The John Snow' - though it didn't help that one speaker was steamed when he came in (not Bob)
You made a number of interesting points which I'd like to take up after brekkers
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: The Sandman
Date: 28 Sep 19 - 05:20 AM

i was one of the people that started Ballydehob JazzFestival , I witnessed committee meetings that were wrecked by people having too much to drink, serious debate and alcohol do not work well together imO,    Especially when you have Bolshie characters like Bob involved.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Sep 19 - 06:18 AM

"Especially when you have Bolshie characters like Bob involved."
I mentioned Bob because of what he said Dick, and how I believe this incident illustrates his attitude
I really didn't mean it as an attack on him as a performer
All Festivals, in my opinion, take folk Song out of their natural environment - no harm if it's done carefully and thoughtfully, and not become the be-all and end-all
More later
Jim

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: The Sandman
Date: 29 Sep 19 - 04:08 AM

how does one define entertainment?, one persons entertainment is another persons ennui

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: GUEST,jim bainbridge
Date: 29 Sep 19 - 01:10 PM

We've heard your tired stories about Bob Davenport over and over, Jim C.

For heavens' sake, it's from another age- give it a rest!! it has to be time you joined us in the 21st century?
I have respect for MacColl's work & have often said this, and can see how his work might appeal to pseudo- academics like yourself.

I have plenty of tales about MacColl which I won't bore readers with you, you seem to lack similar consideration?

I did meet MacColl & went to some of his singing workshops in the sixties, but found his attitude condescending, precious and intolerant.

Suffice to say that whatever his achievements, he was a pain in the arse and I personally learned a million times more from Bob Davenport's approach to the music.
No more from me on this pointless discussion unless it gets back to the subject.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Sep 19 - 03:02 PM

"We've heard your tired stories about Bob Davenport over and over, Jim C."
No you haven't Jim - you've heard only the two and you are the only one to have in any way objected to them, so please don'st imagine you are speaking for anybody other than yourself
You with your "pseudo academic" are now reverting to personal insults rather than argument - somewhat reminiscent of the individual you are defending
I knew Ewan for twenty years - he was someone who devoted a day a week and the use of his home and library to inexperienced singers like me while the Bobs of this world got on with their careers'
If Ewan had behaved a fractionally as bad as Bob and all the others who collect and spread their "stories" publicly, as I have witnessed many doxens of times, and as you are doing now now, he would deserve all the small-minded spite you and yours chuck out - he never did - not in my hearing - not once
You tell me not to attack Bob yet you feel free to wade into somebody who has been dead for over thirty years - yeah - that sounds fair !!!
Peggy put it in a nutshell once in a letter to The Living Tradition - "Ewan's been dead a long time and can no longer speak for himself, so if you don't like what he did, please let him rest in peace"

You don't want me to say things that happen to be true about your mate yet you feel free to insult me whenever it suits you
You say I am out of date - MacColl's been dead for over thirty years - so what set of rules applies to that contradictory behaviour !!

I don't care what you or anybody thinks of Ewan - what he left behind speaks for itself
I certainly don't care what you think of my work - that speaks for itself too and will be around in the form of many hundreds of songs we have collected and made available, long after all of us are dead and forgotten
No pl;ease take your nasty small mindedness elsewhere - I think I can safely say it's not welcome here - or shouldn't be
I hope to discuss the comments on education more fully later - feel free to stay around and join in
If you continue to abuse and insult I shall ask that you are removed
Jim carroll

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Sep 19 - 03:03 PM

Sorry Dick
I'd like to take up what you said later
JiM

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Vic Smith
Date: 30 Sep 19 - 07:07 AM

Jim Bainbridge wrote:-
We've heard your tired stories about Bob Davenport over and over, Jim C.

 .... especially that one about Bob D's outburst at the K&Q. Clearly it offended some at the time, but it was a fit of the moment reaction and it happened several decades ago and can no longer be said to have lasting importance. Certainly it does not define Davenport's huge contribution or his vast importance in developing an approach to folk song which is still prevalent today.
Jim Carroll is another person who has made a great contribution and I have gained a great deal from his generosity and his thoughts on the tradition but he makes a few statements that reappear with repetitive and monotonous regularity and they have a stultifying effect on the progress of a discussion.

In my opinion, it was a mistake to return to this 2014 rancourous thread. Mudcat would seem, generally speaking, to have become a more pleasant, productive iscussion forum that it was five years ago.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Sep 19 - 08:19 AM

Vic
You are one who, accordibng to Jim, were happy to gather Ewan stories
You cant sweep Bob under the carpet and do that with another fellow folk enthusiast - that's applying double standards
You may find the storoy "monotonous" - I have been trying to get past yours and others Ewan stories in order to share some of the things I have gained during my association with Ewan - so far without success
If you standars apply to one, they apply to all
Ewan remains a no-go area thirty years after his demise
I mentioned Bob because I felt his behaviour relevant to the statement he is reported to have made here - I will attempt to discuss what I feel about Dick's statement if we are allowed to move past the barrier which is now being created by an unacceptable defense of bad behaviour towards fellow performers
It is very noticeable that not one of you have actually denied that what I described took place, just that we must forget it - sorry -no can do when it's relevant
Jim

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Vic Smith
Date: 30 Sep 19 - 09:36 AM

Vic
You are one who, accordibng to Jim, were happy to gather Ewan stories
If Jim can produce evidence that I gathered any stories about MacColl then I will apologise - but I think he will struggle to do so.
I have been trying to get past yours and others Ewan stories in order
Again, I would like you to produce evidence that I have posted - never mind repeated as you do - that I posted such stories against any performer.
Do you believe seriously that this is the way I operate?

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Sep 19 - 10:16 AM

Jim said what he said, my last reference was to the existence and circulation of the stories, not who posted them
They have proved years of a barrier to discussing the work and ideas we evolved in the Critics Group
Such discussions seldom get belong 'name changes' and 'war records'
Your dismissal of my story and suggestion that it inappropriate echoes Jim's last abusive message in which he describes Ewan as "condescending, precious and intolerant." - must have been a different feller than the one I knew
As with comments you have made in the past about disagreements I have had with others, your objection would have carried far more weight had it been accompanied by criticism of Jim's abusive attitude towards me and a scurrilously inaccurate attack on someone who hasn't been been around for three decades to answer for himself
Somewhat tunnel-visioned and one sided - again

I really have finished with this Vic - you have drawn far more attention to Bob's behaviour here than I ever wanted to
Let's leave there and deal with the more fruitful possibilities of this discussion - waddya say ?
Jim

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Vic Smith
Date: 30 Sep 19 - 10:45 AM

Don't dismiss your accusation of my supposed misconduct towards MacColl it so easily.
We can leave it when you make it clear that I have not posted against him as you suggest by writing yours and others Ewan stories is incorrect.

Jim Bainbridge wrote I recall that Vic Smith once compiled a collection of anecdotes about MacColl and I am also unhappy about this and I think that he may be confusing me with someone else, though to be fair to Jim B, he does not imply that these stories were perjorative or against MacColl in any way.
I do remember years ago posting one story about a dinner party I was at with Ewan & Peggy which put him in a rather bad light but this in no way defines that influential figure any more than the K&Q incident defines another influential figure.

I come late last night from a relaxing holiday to face this. Thanks a bundle.

Subject: RE: traditional music is for entertaining
From: Joe Offer
Date: 30 Sep 19 - 10:57 AM

I think this thread has gone on long enough.