radio 4 how folk songs should be sung

Subject: RE: radio 4 how folk songs should be sung
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Nov 14 - 11:44 AM

"On the subject of radio pioneers we should raise a glass to Douglas Geoffrey Bridson"
Second that - Bridson's description of the struggle to get the working voice accepted by The BBC is fascinating - Yorkshireman, Wilfred Pickles was once given the job as newsreader, but was removed after complaints that he couldn't be understood.
Bridson, Mitchell and Chilton were all part of that "long and winding road" which now seems to have
Bridson's book is sub-title 'The Rise and fall of the BBC' it's interesting to speculate what the old guard would make of the 'Estuary English' and the loss of word-endings, which now seems to be the standard form of communication (I swear I thought that "brawban" was a Scotsman's support for a boycott!"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: radio 4 how folk songs should be sung
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Nov 14 - 11:56 AM

Should read
"Bridson, Mitchell and Chilton were all part of that "long and winding road" which now seems to have taken a turn for the worse"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: radio 4 how folk songs should be sung
From: michaelr
Date: 29 Nov 14 - 12:56 PM

...the man but for whom this thread, indeed this very forum, would not exist...

Max

Subject: RE: radio 4 how folk songs should be sung
From: Vic Smith
Date: 29 Nov 14 - 02:07 PM

...the man but for whom this thread, indeed this very forum, would not exist...

Yes, true, Michael. This forum would not be here without Max but the other Michael - he of the MGM tag - is also right that the whole folk song movement would not have developed in the way it did without the enormous pioneering work of Cecil Sharp.

I am reminded of the extraordinary tribute paid to him by The Ukulele Orchestra of Great Britain at the 2007 Cambridge Folk Festival.

Subject: RE: radio 4 how folk songs should be sung
From: GUEST,Rahere
Date: 29 Nov 14 - 02:28 PM

What I'm reviving is the thought that as performers, we have a tale to tell, which needs more than just a dull "next" introduction stringing the songs together, the best performances have a thread running through them. Robin Williamson is a case in point, he engages with the audience in a way which takes them on board and only releases them at the end. It doesn't have to be something deep and meaningful, we can achieve a lot by demonstrating the folly of the world, or what you will. But a simple catalogue of songs does nobody any service, the music least of all.

It was Ewan above all who started us on that track, crossing the boundaries of the theatre. Steeleye's 1974 Tour, for example, introduced a multimedia film performance into the set. This might have headed in the direction of a more integrated performance, meeting up with the Concept Album, had it not been for the overthrow of performer autonomy which happened in 1976-7 with the imposition of punk and hip-hop.

It is slowly returning though: Marvellous Machines, written by Andy Mellon and Pete Flood and performed by most of Bellowhead, earlier this year, was above all else a concept piece. A weird one, but one none the less.

So, at the simplest - and simple is good - we don't just sing the song, we perform it, we colour it to tell a tale. What that tale is is partly in the song, and partly in what we decide to do with it.

Andd then there's the question of grabbing the audience...

Subject: RE: radio 4 how folk songs should be sung
From: Brian Peters
Date: 29 Nov 14 - 04:24 PM

Interesting post, Rahere. The pros and cons of song introductions have been debated here recently (and I'm with you on the 'pro' side), but I'm now wondering what MacColl had to say on the matter, and whether it came up as a topic in CG. Jim...?

Subject: RE: radio 4 how folk songs should be sung
From: The Sandman
Date: 29 Nov 14 - 04:29 PM

"So, at the simplest - and simple is good - we don't just sing the song, we perform it, we colour it to tell a tale. What that tale is is partly in the song, and partly in what we decide to do with it.

And then there's the question of grabbing the audience..."
and there are many was of gettong an audience apart from grabbing them, an example is Roy Harris.
"Yes, true, Michael. This forum would not be here without Max but the other Michael - he of the MGM tag - is also right that the whole folk song movement would not have developed in the way it did without the enormous pioneering work of Cecil Sharp"
my thoughts too, Vic.

Subject: RE: radio 4 how folk songs should be sung
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 03:57 AM

"The pros and cons of song introductions have been debated here recently"
The question of introductions to songs was a constant theme throughout the time I knew MacColl.
He thought they were essential to prevent evenings from being conveyor belt productions of songs - "next - next - next" - on the other hand, he argued that they should never be too long, nor should they be superfluous - an example was the tendency of some singers to tell the story of the song, then repeat the exercise by singing it.
He limited, (or claimed to limit) his introductions to no more than (I think - have to check) a minute and a half.
I've just been listening to an evenings of ballads at the Singers, where some of the introductions were of the best I've heard - for instance, he introduced The Keach in the Creel, with the fableaux of the renaissance painter's apprentice who fancies his master's daughter and creates a diversion to keep the parents away while he has his wicked way (said to be one of the fore-runners of the ballad) - masterful.
Occasionally he would use the introduction to place a ballad in its historical setting, like The Battle of Harlaw or The Laird of Warriston.
At other times both he and Peggy would link a song and a story, making the latter an introduction to the former.
Introductions in the sessions over here in Ireland are extremely rare, and personally, I miss them very much; I feel you can loose a lot of the song without them.
I found it rather refreshing recently when I attended an afternoon concert of ballads set up by The National Library as part of their 'Man, Womam and Child' project, to hear singers introducing their songs - it added so much to the proceedings.
I think the rule of thumb with introductions is that they should contain relevant information, be entertaining and should add something to the song rather the repeat something that's already there, though there is no harm in drawing attention to something that might be missed.
An example of this that always springs to mind from MacColl, is his savouring the beautiful description of pregnancy in the ballad, Gil Morrice when the wife confesses that Gil is her son, and not her lover, as the vengeful husband suspects "I ance was fu' o' Gil Morrice as the hip is of the stone" (stick your thumbnail into into the thin layer of flesh of a rose hip, and you'll see what I mean)
I've noticed that some of the most interested responses from audiences when we've beeing giving a talk, particularly from those who are not particularly familiar with the folk song genre, have arisen from introductions.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: radio 4 how folk songs should be sung
From: The Sandman
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 04:00 AM

In my opinion introducing songs well is important, one thing I do not like is somebody introducing a song whilst denigrating it, why sing a song if you do not like it? neither can I see the point of telling the story before it has been sung, background info in my opinion is good.
I have noticed that some of the best performers use humour to get the audience on their side.
Prformers like Roy Harris manage to create an intimate feel, rather like a storyteller round a fireside.

Subject: RE: radio 4 how folk songs should be sung
From: GUEST,Rahere
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 05:38 AM

A lot of it is in voice tone, and perhaps adds importance to the middle 1/3 of a performance, in that the first 1/3 is grabbing them (often using an accessible piece), the middle confirming their loyalty, and the end the classic blow-off, minor emotional peak - recovery - big hit - thank'ee folks.

Subject: RE: radio 4 how folk songs should be sung
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 07:23 AM

The intro question is vital. I remember once being one of the judges in the Cecil Sharp House London Folk Festival competition, & subsequently writing the experience up for Folk Review; mentioning in particular the difficulty of judging between a good but rather run-of-the-mill group, and a m-f duo whose singing was way above average but the resolute facetiousness of whose intros was a real pain-in-the-arse turn-off.

We judges were pretty-well divided, iirc; and the prize eventually went to neither, but to the agreed runner-up on all our lists.

≈M≈

Subject: RE: radio 4 how folk songs should be sung
From: Vic Smith
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 07:31 AM

.... and the end the classic blow-off, minor emotional peak.....

There is something about some performances of a song that I can come to call last verse syndrome. A song has been going well; no slips - no forgotten words - no stumbles. You can feel that sense of relief, particularly with inexperienced singers, towards the end of a song and there is a lapse in concentration, a switch off just too soon and that is when the words don't come out or there is a drift off tune or some other slip up.

Subject: RE: radio 4 how folk songs should be sung
From: Brian Peters
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 09:32 AM

I remember hearing a performance of 'Matty Groves' which had seemed to go on for ever on account of an uninspiring delivery of the 'standard' Fairport version. About sixteen verses in, the singer stopped to announce:
"I can't rememeber the rest, but anyway they all end up dead."

A classic blow-off, indeed.

Jim, that is just the kind of thing I was hoping to hear about song intros.

Subject: RE: radio 4 how folk songs should be sung
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 09:54 AM

"Jim, that is just the kind of thing I was hoping to hear about song intros"
Pleased to hear it Brian - will be happy to send you some examples if they are of use
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: radio 4 how folk songs should be sung
From: Brian Peters
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 11:48 AM

Always interested in that stuff, Jim.

"[intros] should add something to the song rather than repeat something that's already there, though there is no harm in drawing attention to something that might be missed."

Exactly. In a complicated ballad, some vital detail can certainly be missed if it flies past quickly, or if the wording is a bit opaque. Point it up in advance, and a listener meets it with glad recognition.

Subject: RE: radio 4 how folk songs should be sung
From: The Sandman
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 12:03 PM

Jim, thankyou for your earlier post of 3.57 am, that is useful info.
On the occasions I saw Ewan and Peggy perform I was impressed with their performance presentation, I would appreciate examples if you felt like sending them or any info about their approach to song intros.

Subject: RE: radio 4 how folk songs should be sung
From: GUEST,Rahere
Date: 01 Dec 14 - 07:49 AM

It's the emotion which needs judgement, though, and sensitivity to the audience. A caring song in a Rugby Club? Max Boyce: Oh, snaily snail! worthy of Shakespeare...that's where the heart of grabbing the audience lies.
And then there are those who say the important bit is the reminder the CDs are at the back...

Subject: RE: radio 4 how folk songs should be sung
From: Vic Smith
Date: 01 Dec 14 - 09:08 AM

I hope that soon I may be able to make a more informed contribution to the everlasting debates...... a review copy of Legacy of Ewan MacColl: The Last Interview has just dropped through the letter box.