Writing a folk standard

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 02 Nov 16 - 03:09 PM

As far as current event songs go..
I'd suggest the only recent UK news item with the potential to inspire the longest lasting song with a chance to be remembered
is the "Great Fire Of Exeter"...

..and I can't be arsed trying to write it...

..and if I could the only decent rhymes that come immediately to mind
are "Brexiter" and "Bed wetter"... 😜

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: Mr Red
Date: 02 Nov 16 - 03:18 PM

I did write a song with the intention of fooling the folk club. Not only did it, but it was written in the during a lull of another song, and at a table with three fighting kids and two adults trying to mollify them.

the Oak and the Willow about halfway down

What gives it away is that Longbows were made of Yew, smaller ones could be made out of Ash. Obviously I am proud of it, but to be in with any remote chance of a standard it had to reach a wide audience, and that would be down to me. Not going to happen.

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: The Sandman
Date: 02 Nov 16 - 03:34 PM

but what is that extra special 'something' that makes those songs so popular?
here is an example JOHN OF DREAMS, it appeals to everyone its message is clear[ unlike some of bob dylan], it uses a beautiful tune and is well written

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: Mr Red
Date: 02 Nov 16 - 03:45 PM

..and if I could the only decent rhymes that come immediately to mind
"next iteration" is a good enjambed rhyme.

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: Andy7
Date: 02 Nov 16 - 03:53 PM

JOHN O' DREAMS is a great example! Moving words that all can relate to, and a lovely, laid-back tune, with a very distinctive, yet easy to sing, musical phrase as its backbone.

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: Andy7
Date: 02 Nov 16 - 03:59 PM

But Mr Red (great song, btw!) has a very good point. If the writer of 'John o' Dreams' had just sung it every couple of months or so at his local club, people would probably just say what a nice song he'd written, and that would be that.

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: Tattie Bogle
Date: 02 Nov 16 - 08:12 PM

John O'Dreams uses the tune of Tchaikovsky's 6th Symphony, 1st movement, but possibly Tchaikovsky got it from a folk singer. Only the timing is changed slightly.
As for Carousel "You'll Never Walk Alone" and Gerry Marsden's version: changed from 4/4 to 6/8: makes it easier to sway and wave your lighters to!
Andy 7, I mentioned several comparatively modern songs that have become "standards" further up the thread: perhaps the writers didn't set out to write one, but they surely hoped they might become so.

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: Andy7
Date: 02 Nov 16 - 09:13 PM

Ah yes ...

"Follow the Heron (Karine Polwart)
Coming Home (Steven Clark)
Both Sides the Tweed (based on James Hogg poem but revised by Dick Gaughan)
Norland Wind/The Wild Geese (poem by Violet Jacob, set to music by Jim Reid)
( + Include anything else that was a poem by Violet Jacob/Marion Angus/Mary Brooksbank)"

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: GUEST,Some bloke
Date: 03 Nov 16 - 03:56 AM

You are right. Tchaikovsky did use traditional Russian tunes within his work, ditto Mussorgsky etc and ditto our own Vaughan Williams, Britten, Elgar etc. The former two noted collectors of song.

In fact, the "sampling" of older songs in pop music is in itself carrying on the tradition. When Boney M sang Rasputin many years ago, the drums lifted verbatim from Cozey Powell's Dance with the Devil, it was no different to Vaughan Williams using the tune to A Blacksmith Courted Me for both another trad set of lyrics he collected (Our Captain) and also for his work on Pilgrims Progress (He who would valiant be.)

One wonderful way of writing a folk standard would logically begin with borrowing the tune. Borrowing the lyrics from poems and concocting a chorus with a tune borrowed elsewhere wouldn't be a bad idea. Mike Waterson did that after hearing a poem set to music by Filey Fishermans Choir. I have yet to hear anyone call "Three score and ten" anything but a folk song despite the poem being written and published to raise money for the bereaved. (An interesting Mudcat thread on that, if you are interested.)

The first step in writing a folk standard would be to realise that if it catches on in folk clubs and even gets buggered about with slightly, it is a folk song. Others may or may not call it a classic.

After all, hearing The Watersons sing a chorus song many years ago and more recently people sing it still, the only difference between trad and copyrighted is actually knowing whether it is or not. (Bright Phoebus and Three Score and Ten v Dido Bendigo and I'm a Rover.)

Folk is, in the borrowed words of Harold Wilson, a broad church.

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: Mr Red
Date: 03 Nov 16 - 04:51 AM

"ex-sitar" before we loose the context. (As it burns in the conflagration.) I read somewhere they have retrieved some (alledged) anglo-saxon bones from the undercroft that were in a jar. Probably on display.

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Nov 16 - 05:18 AM

"The discussion "What is folk" "
Whenever the subject comes up there is a wave of hostility - traces of it here.
I would have thought it possible to discuss this subject on a forum that styles itself as Mudcat does in a friendly manner - once again, I appear to have been proved wrong.
For me, the term folk is important - the existence of song, music and stories that have been created and passed on down the centuries, have remained anonymous virtually throughout the time of their existence is, to me, an interesting enough phenomenon to deserve drawing attention to as group distinct from the popular songs, classical creations and those made by known poets that are traceable and identifiable back to source.
The anonymity, constant adaptation and the subject matter of these songs makes them uniquely distinctive.
The process that once made them is now gone - songs are made, sung at the clubs, put on albums, published.... they remain largely unchanged and they are fixed at birth as being owned by their composers - they are compositions by Ewan MacColl, Eric Bogle, Jack Warshaw, Sandra Kerr.... all great songmakers in their chosen genre...... but they are not folk songs and they probably never will be because the folk mechanism no longer exists to pass them on in the way that they could take on a life of their own - they are all stillborn by their very nature.
Recently, I have become interested - obsessed even, with songs that have not entered the general folk repertoire, but were made locally by 'ordinary' (whatever that means) people, to record local events, characters, aspects of life..., survived, often for only a short period, then have disappeared when the subject matter that inspired them passed from the memories of the community.
The Travellers made them up to the 1970s, we've discovered probably near 100 of them made in this West of Ireland one-street town, dating back to the middle of the 19th century.
The represent the artistic creations of working people and as such, they are unique.
I have no problem with making new songs and singing them at folk clubs - songwriting is one of the great achievements of the Folk Revival 0-- without it, our clubs would have been little more than museums or butterfly collectors conventions.
When I was singing regularly, I had a repertoire of around 300 songs - about a third of them were contemporary songs created in the folk styles.   
Since I began to research and collect songs from the older generations - from farmers and land labourers, fishermen, Travellers.... I began to realise their importance, not just as entertainment, but as a massive body of our social history - historically, they are the voice of the voiceless - the "Folk" - I believe they important enough to be treated separately for what they are - way back in the 1830s, somebody came up with the term "folk" and, whether we like it or not, that's what we are stuck with.
It doesn't stop us liking and performing other genres of song or music, but if we want to discuss and pass on the information, we need to be clear about what we are talking about - it's crazy to have a term that is published and documented in great detail to mean one thing, yet which means something totally different in the "folk clubs".
They is a later development of the folk revival - when I first signed up to all this, I knew more or less what I would find when I went to a folk club - they did what it said on the tin.
Now I can, and have, walked out of a 'folk' club without hearing a folk song - I stopped going to folk clubs when that became a regular feature, and so did a lot of other people.
In those days, folk club evenings were weekly events - now they are mainly monthly.
The audiences reduced radically and their average ages increased - we stopped drawing in new people - I believe this was because the term 'folk' came to be used as a dustbin to cover anything any individual wanted it to be - the 'singing horses' took over the scene.
A major part of our collecting was to interview, sometimes at great length, the singers we recorded about how they felt about their songs and where they fitted into their lives and the lives of their communities.
Most of them sang other types of songs, earlier popular, music hall, Victorian Parlour Ballads, Country and Western.... - but they all distinguished the folk from the non-folk in some way or other - the "old" songs, the "come-all-ye's", even the "folk" or "traditional" songs.
Walter Pardon filled tape after tape describing how his folk songs were different from the rest of his repertoire.
Blind Travelling woman, Mary Delaney, recalled nearly 100 folk songs a
and ballad which she called "my daddies songs" - when we recorded her father, he knew about six - Mary was talking about a type of song - that was her definition.
She could have doubled her repertoire with the CandW songs she knew, but she refused becaus she said,"that's not what you are looking for - I only learned them because that' what the lads ask for down the pub".
It is a myth to suggest that he older singers didn't distinguish between one type and another - if they can do it, surely we can - it seems both common sense and good manners.
They gave us their songs because they thought they were worth preserving for whatthey were - they took a pride in them - so shoud we.
Sorry to have gone on for so long - a hobby horse of mine.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: Jack Campin
Date: 03 Nov 16 - 06:15 AM

The original question was not "what does it take to create a folk song?" But "what does it take to create a standard?" - which is a more achievable goal.

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Nov 16 - 06:28 AM

"what does it take to create a standard?"
Sorry Jack, but it wasn't - it was "what does it take to create a folk standard?"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: GUEST,Sol
Date: 03 Nov 16 - 06:51 AM

Quote from Jim Carroll: "the 'singing horses' took over the scene."

That bloody Mr Ed again!

I note that some sessions are now being advertised as "acoustic" rather than "folk". This seems to be an ideal way of sidestepping the unsolvable argument on the definition of folk music.
Acoustic covers Trad, Americana, C&W, R'n'R - anything really, as long as you don't plug anything in.

Music is music is music... Vive La Difference.

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Nov 16 - 06:59 AM

"acoustic" rather than "folk".
Certainly a solution that would suit me.
"Music is music is music... Vive La Difference."
Quite - though-it doe seem somewhat of a contradiction in terms.
Thanks
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: Jack Campin
Date: 03 Nov 16 - 09:25 AM

The f-word was in the subject line and nowhere else in the basenote. Andy7 clarifies:

the challenge will have been won if the song is frequently sung at singarounds in folk clubs!

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: GUEST,Some bloke
Date: 03 Nov 16 - 01:51 PM

Well done Mr Carroll. At last you prefaced your comments with "for me" rather than trying to inflict your view on others. There's hope for you yet.

Your views are not ridiculous as such, just not shared by those of us with a passion for folk that isn't the same as your own. Your long but readable post duly laments the demise of certain types of folk club and I share it (although I feel walking out and not enjoying a good night out is self defeating) but in the folk tradition, clubs and content evolve.

There are many recently written folk "standards" but not standard as in universal. I love going to areas of the country where most places know and many perform songs that would be heard for the first time in other areas. Even with YouTube and most performers having a net presence, you still get songs well known somewhere but not elsewhere.   I recently sang a trad song in Doncaster that hardly anybody knew yet a few donkeys back, you could hear it most nights in clubs in towns less than twenty miles away.

The acoustic solution isn't really a solution. I too use it in a club I help run in order to widen the net somewhat. Some of us are appearing in a charity concert next week and one man who plays '50s pop songs is insisting on playing acoustic whilst I shall be plugged in playing jigs and reels. We could have as much fun with acoustic as we do with folk on these threads, except nobody feels the need to wear their trousers up to their tits.

😎

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: GUEST,Sol
Date: 03 Nov 16 - 02:39 PM

For a bit of enlightemnment, let's all put down our weapons for a moment and assume there is such a thing as a 'recently written folk standard'. Which song(s) do you think could fall into that category?

e.g. Follow The Heron? The King's Shilling?

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: Andy7
Date: 03 Nov 16 - 03:30 PM

When All Men Sing (Scowcroft/Gifford, 1989)

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Nov 16 - 03:55 PM

"Well done Mr Carroll. "
Thanks for your patronising post - pity it is totally devoid of substance.
My view of folk song is back up by decades of research and libraries full of books - I have yet to see an alternative definition nor a convincing argument - "folk song is what I care to call it" seems the order of the day - and yesterday..... and every day since these arguments began - the main loser being the music.
"demise of certain types of folk club "
You mean we have weekly clubs and large, young audiences for whatever you acre to call folk song?
Somehow, I doubt it.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: Jack Campin
Date: 03 Nov 16 - 05:00 PM

Following up Sol's question, and sticking to post-1950 songs:

I'm Looking for a Job
Seven Nights and a Sunday
The Rolling Hills of the Borders
The Foreman O'Rourke
The Freedom Come-All-Ye
The Jeely Piece Song
Star of the Bar
Norland Wind
Both Sides the Tweed
Come by the Hills
My Love Has Gone
Women of Dundee
Generations of Change
far too many interminable Eric Bogle and Brian McNeill things
The Moving On Song
Shoals of Herring
The Terror Time

the last three being the only MacColl songs I've heard sung more than once. Most of those have a clear political message.

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: GUEST,Some bloke
Date: 04 Nov 16 - 05:05 AM

Nice list Jack. Of course we could add a few but hopefully people get the picture. I would have said post 1954 instead of 1950 but most of us know why.

My "standard" for folk at this time of year is John Tamm's excellent Scarecrow (trying to avoid the obvious ones.)

By the way Mr Carroll, my interpretation of folk is backed up by being me and nothing else, a bit like yourself. My interpretation of standard however is perhaps a more interesting proposition for this thread.

"Oh God, why does everyone sing that bloody song with thousands and thousands to choose from?" Not good news for the person who wrote it and being early November. Eric Bogle aficionados will be hearing many a rendition of a certain song once too often.

Although poor Richard Thompson didn't really deserve this doing the rounds in our local folk clubs thirty odd years ago;

Meet me at the folk club don't be late
I need to sing some Richard and it just won't wait
Blow out the candles and turn on the lights
I don't want to hear "The Bright Lights" tonight.

As I keep saying. a) Folk is a broad church and b) at our local club last week, thriving and really bucking the trend, out of about fifty people in the room, I reckon half a dozen had been born in 1954. None were old enough to be on the mailing list for agenda notification. When I'm having a moan about the folk police, I tend to compare them to US sports having WORLD series when there is little interest outside of three or where they recently invaded. (I know, cricket and the commonwealth is no coincidence either but I understand cricket.)

Most folk club standards hadn't been written in 1954. Not even most MacColl and Seeger shock horror and many traditional songs were gathering dust, waiting to be rediscovered by belts rather than braces 😇

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Nov 16 - 08:15 AM

"By the way Mr Carroll, my interpretation of folk is backed up by being me and nothing else, a bit like yourself"
Er - no
My interpretation is fully backed by over a century of research, long established, definitions - (pre-dating '54 by over a century), a common usage that has never been challenged by a replacement definition and reams of international literature.
Yours appears to be a personal one, not necessarily agreed by people who do not accept the established one but who neither have the knowledge or interest to agree among themselves enough to come up with I new one.
"Folk is what I say it is" is not a definition.
You done even have the good grace to acknowledge the damage that has been done to an established people's culture.
What has happened on the British scene is 'acculturation' - the destruction of one cultural form by other forms.
Forty odd years ago, when we first started researching in Ireland, we were recording from a dying culture.
Traditional music was on the wane - totally ignored or despised by the establishment and the media (as "diddly-di music") and on the way out, pretty much as it is in Britain now.
A handful of enthusiasts, took the situation and turned it around completely.
Since then, many thousands of young people have flocked to Irish music, taken up the instruments and the tunes, learned from the handful of older musicians that were still around, or their recordings and have guaranteed at least a three-generation future to our Folk arts.
In this one street town on the West Coast I can go out from four to seven nights a week (depending on the time of year) and hear excellent music played by musicians ranging in ages from early teens to octogenarians.
I can switch the radio on any night of the week and listen to traditional music and song, the same to a lesser degree with the the television where filmed sessions of traditions performers are regularly featured alongside academic discussion and documentaries - last week a documentary on Sarah Makem, this week on Elizabeth Cronin - the interviewee was a beatifully talented singer, I would guess in her early twenties.
Song has some way to go to catching up with the music scene, but it's getting there.
None of this has been achieved by not knowing our folk arse from its elbow.
Perhaps you might come back when you have a workable definition to replace the existing one.
So far, you have only produced a hostile takeover.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Nov 16 - 09:39 AM

"the interviewee"
Should read - "the interviewer"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: GUEST,Some bloke
Date: 04 Nov 16 - 11:03 AM

Nope. Folk is far more than your narrow interpretation based on your own experience.

This is why whenever someone makes a genuine enquiry or point, you come running out of trap 7 trying to belittle them.

Of course a folk standard can be written. They all were, whether recently by people we can relate to or in the deep dim past and buggered about with by successive generations.

It's a genre. Nothing more and nothing less.

Tsk

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Nov 16 - 11:21 AM

" Folk is far more than your narrow interpretation based on your own experience. "
Nope - for a start, it isn't "my narrow" experience - it is a documented art form
Your own non-definition appears to vary from club to club (assuming that each club has a definition) - doesn't come any narrower than that.
"Of course a folk standard can be written."
No thy can't - where do we go from here?
Give us your definition and I'll consider it - you have mine - and its pedigree
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 04 Nov 16 - 11:53 AM

.. mind you.. they did have electricity in 1954.. so there's no excuse for any and all kinds of folkie's grim determination
to continue despising & excluding electric guitars and fuzz boxes...???


.. unless there is actually a thriving electric instruments only trad folk club somewhere...????

"sorry mate, you can't come in with that acoustic instrument.... we have tradition and standards to maintain".... 😜

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Nov 16 - 11:57 AM

The reason these discussions usually end up as unpleasantly a they invariably do is, in my opinion, the amount of dishonesty that they generate.
The definition I work with is the established one - not mine.
I have never attempted to "belittle" any other music or anybody who performs it - I probably sing more folk inspired songs than anybody here.
I attempt to respond people's points honestly rather than attempting to misrepresent them.
I've given you my arguments and I've shown how clarity and purpose has made a difference to the future of folk music in Ireland.
I would be extremely grateful if that level of response was reciprocated.
Thee is nothing more evasive and insulting than terms like 'Folk Police' - a term favoured by people with no genuine answers.
It reduces these discussions to "snigger-snogwriter" slanging matches.
I hope everybody here is above that
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Nov 16 - 11:59 AM

""sorry mate, you can't come in with that acoustic instrument..."
Haven't heard that for over forty years - yet another straw man that doesn't merit a reply
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 04 Nov 16 - 12:18 PM

Precisely .. that's my point Jim.. "Over 40 years ago"

.. and the acoustic only establishment are still continuing to indoctrinate young minds in their luddite prejudices..

I actually mostly agree with your position, my interests lie in 'trad folk'.
But my mind and ears want to hear those old songs expressed respectfully, intelligently, and creatively with the expansive unlimited timbres of 'new' electronic sounds....

Electric guitars in Folk Rock may have been a shocking novelty 4 or 5 decades ago..
but now even a smart phone is capable of playing software instruments that stimulate and excite the ears with far more sonic possibilities....

If a good song can be accompanied tastefully with a concertina or harmonium, or hurdy gurdy,
then there is no reason why the same cannot apply to even a vintage technology monophonic synthesiser played through a low wattage, low volume battery powered portable amplifier....
That in the real world could be so responsibly low in volume it could still be drowned out by a banjo or accordian..

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Nov 16 - 01:13 PM

"and the acoustic only establishment are still continuing to indoctrinate young minds in their luddite prejudices.."
Is it - none of the clubs I have ever been part of organising have ever adopted such a practice and it has nothing whatever to do with this argument.
I respect any club's policy - accompanied or unaccompanied - the English ones I were part of encouraged accompaniment - Peggy Seeger actually too classes and gave lectures on accompaniment
Some Irish clubs (it doesn't have a folk-club scene) adopt a no-instrument policy because that's the way the singing tradition here works best, especially Irish language singing - the decision was taken in order to open up the native Irish repertoire.
Far from putting "young minds" off, the most hopeful club in Ireland at present meets on the first Sunday of every month at the Cobblestone Pub in Smithfield Dublin and is run entirely bu youngsters - they are producing some of the finest young singers in the country and are regarded with envy by us crumblies.
It is 'folk policing' in the extreme to impose an accompanied/unaccompanied policy from the outside.
In the end, the proof of the pudding.....
I've always left the Cobblestone ('Night Before Larry Was Stretched Club') fully sated and wanting more.
It is the policy clubs here that are making the difference, just as it was the 'anything goes' clubs that have destroyed the British scene.
It was rather interesting that, a few years ago, when the Frank Harte Weekend in Dublin, a largely unaccompanied event booked Christie Moore as it's guest they offered him the choice of bringing his guitar - out of respect for the event and for the singer in whose memory it was held, Christie refused the offer.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: The Sandman
Date: 04 Nov 16 - 02:19 PM

Jim.
I understand that if clubs have policies and they are clearly stated, then people are free to make their own decision to attend or not.
I am not sure that you are right about this
"Some Irish clubs (it doesn't have a folk-club scene) adopt a no-instrument policy because that's the way the singing tradition here works best,"
my personal opinion is that this is incorrect,Ilike the occasional variety of an accompanied vocal when performed well, but I respect clubs policies and am happy to go along with it, in fact i find it a challenge to try and present a night of unaccompanied singing.
do you mind explaining why you think the IRISH singing tradition works best with a no instrument policy.

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: Andy7
Date: 04 Nov 16 - 02:20 PM

Widening the discussion from the true meaning of 'folk', one could then also question whether the term 'folk club' is a misnomer.

But in my part of southern England, we all know what to expect from a 'folk club'. There'll be a good number of the traditional songs. Also a number of modern 'standards'. Some popular songs from the 60s onwards. Maybe a comedy song or two. And perhaps some self-penned stuff, some poetry, and some instrumentals.

That kind of mix is good enough for me! I have a great respect for the oral folk tradition, but I'd not want to go along every week to hear just genuine, unaccompanied old songs (some of which are beautiful, but some of which, to be fair, are mediocre, whatever their social history value). I like the variety; and as this variety keeps me and many others going along week after week, the old songs are then shared with a much wider audience, rather than a small group of enthusiasts.

Returning to the initial idea of the thread ... in hindsight, I should have called it 'Writing a folk club standard'!

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Nov 16 - 03:44 PM

"whether the term 'folk club' is a misnomer."
MacColl never called any of his clubs "Folk" or "Traditional"
I agree with a degree of "mix" if they are identifiable with each other, but it seems your particular mix tries to please all the people all of the time and ends up pleasing nobody.
Can't imagine a Beatle fan settling down to 15 minutes of Tam Linn
"Do you mind explaining why you think the IRISH singing tradition works best with a no instrument policy""
It's a largely ornamented tradition in which the ornamentation is a sufficient enough accompaniment in itself.
Don't forget, Ireland went through its 'Ballad Boom' in the sixties, just as Britain went through its 'Folk Boom'.
The survivors here were the no-accompanists, and the survivors have widened their scope radically to embrace the Irish language repertoire which seldom lends itself to accompaniment.
The basic difference here was that Irish revivalists had a much greater number of the older generation of living traditional singers to learn from than Britain ever had, there were almost exclusively unaccompanied and their songs worked that way.
On of the great problems with accompaniment in Britain is that, even with the best of musicians, it doesn't accompany, it acts as a distraction - the more accomplished the musician, teh greater the distraction.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 04 Nov 16 - 03:55 PM

"the more accomplished the musician, teh greater the distraction"

... the old songs should be safe in my hands then..... 😜

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: Andy7
Date: 04 Nov 16 - 05:04 PM

I wholeheartedly agree with your point about about accompaniment, Jim. I'd far rather listen to a song well sung with minimal or no accompaniment, than a song half-mumbled while the performer concentrates on her/his (admittedly very clever) guitar fireworks.

But I'm not sure why you say that 'my' particular mix (it's not mine!) tries to please all of the people all of the time and ends up pleasing nobody. I've already said that it pleases me, and many others besides. And no one set out to create such a mix - it arose organically. If people didn't like it, they'd stop turning up and buying drinks and raffle tickets, and the club would fold.

To take it to the extreme - just as an intellectual exercise - think of the song that is your very favourite (or at least, your favourite of the moment). Then imagine a club where, week after week, every performer sings only that song - in a variety of styles, keys and tempos, accompanied or unaccompanied, solo or in a group, etc. etc.

I'm sure you'd soon tire of that favourite song, and find another club!

The same is true, for me, of a narrow range of musical style. I don't want a club where only genuine traditional folk songs are sung. I don't want a club where you can only hear comedy songs, or only Dylan and Simon & Garfunkel. I love the variety. And I believe that that helps us more to appreciate, and love, the old songs from the oral tradition that we still frequently hear.

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: GUEST,Sol
Date: 04 Nov 16 - 05:18 PM

To follow up what Andy 7 said about enjoying the variety of turns at his club. The club I go to is similar and I have been made aware of many songs that I like but would probably never came across because they were in a category I wouldn't normally listen to e.g. C & W. From that aspect a different mix of styles in the club broadens one's appreciation of other genres.

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: Mr Red
Date: 04 Nov 16 - 05:44 PM

so did we come up with any latter-day standard bearers?

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: The Sandman
Date: 04 Nov 16 - 09:49 PM

"Do you mind explaining why you think the IRISH singing tradition works best with a no instrument policy""
It's a largely ornamented tradition in which the ornamentation is a sufficient enough accompaniment in itself.
Your OPINION,and nothing else, the problem with this opinion, is that it does not allow for the evolvement of the tradition, so what happens is that it the tradition gets preserved like a museum piece, if a person does not allow harmony[ that rules out The Voice Squad] solely because previously Irish singing was a solo unaccompanied tradition,absolutely ridiculous
I appreciate unaccompanied traditional singing, I also appreciate songs accompanied sensitively,IRISH TRADITIONAL SONGS can and have been accompanied sensitively, and have been successfully sung in Harmony[voice squad]
The Voice Squad, have taken the unaccompanied irish solo tradition and sung successfully in harmony, that is not opinion it is a fact. I anticipate that you might possibly say its ok for them to sing in harmony because it is vocal and not instrumental.
In my opinion it is how the song is accompanied or sung in harmony,THAT IS IMPORTANT and that applies to any tradition.
I AGREE THAT WHEN A SONG IS ACCOMPANIED THE STYLE CHANGES,but for traditions to evolve they have to accept change, otherwise the tradition will eventually be come static, unable to develop

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 04:39 AM

"Your OPINION,and nothing else, "
Don't be silly Dick - I have nothing to do with the making of policy in any Irish Singing club, festival or Singing Circle - that's what they have decided, not me.
It is not our place as "BLOW INS" to tell Irish people how they should do things.
It is "Your OPINION,and nothing else," that accompaniment is an essential part in the development of Irish song and that it can't develop without it - go and convince them, not me.
Ireland went through the commercial-driven, accompanied 'Ballad Boom" way back, it ran its course when the music industry decided when there was more money to be had elsewhere and Irish singers returned to their source material to pick up the baton - that did not include instrumentation or electrification or harmony singing to any great extent.
What is slowly developing now is a rising interest in solo-voice, unaccompanied singing based on what the likes of Elizabeth Cronin, Tom Lenihan, Joe Heaney, Eddie Butcher...... and all those other wonderful old singers were doing.
It would be sheer destructive arrogance fo us to interfere with that by demanding something from a British revival that appears to have run its course (judging from the "not knowing their folk arse from their elbow and not caring very much" arguments here.
The Voice Squad had their day an ran their course - their style of singing never caught on to any great degree, unlike the wannabe Waterson, mini-choirs that infested Britain for so long.
I like accompanied singing, I used to sing with accompaniment back in Britain.
When I moved to Ireland and lost my accompanist I found that I could sing virtually all my songs unaccompanied and get the same satisfaction that I always did.
Accompaniment was never a feature of British or Irish traditional singing and it thrived and developed for centuries without it - it was the advance of technology, particularly radio and television, that killed of our oral traditions, not the lack of accompaniment.
I have no intention of continuing this with you - you usually manage to turn arguments between us into unpleasant slanging matches - I'm not alone in this - your reputation goes before you.
If you have any reasoned arguments, put them - dogmatic pronouncements on what the Irish singing scene needs will get us nowhere.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: The Sandman
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 04:47 AM

I accept that the repertoire is increasing, but some of that repertoire is well suited to accompaniment. For example Fiddlers green, Song for ireland From clare to here, Shoals of Herring[ on occasion sung as Shoals of Erin], Dirty old Town.Coves of Rossbrin. Thirty foot trailer, Free Born Man. The Town i knew so well.THE BOYS OF KILLYBEGS.
the irish tradtional repertoire is not exclusive to the few singers clubs it includes songs sung in pubs and houses, ALL the above mentioned songs have been mistaken for traditional and are regularly sung and treated as if they were of the tradtion

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 07:04 AM

" accept that the repertoire is increasing, but some of that repertoire is well suited to accompaniment. "
That is for others to decide as well as you Dick
If you decide to accompany them fine - if chubs won't book you because yo do so - try them without or accept that you won't get their custom.
I sing Shoals of Herring, Dirty old Town, Thirty Foot Trailer and Freeborn Man without accompaniment and I always have done - they work for me.
It's not a matter of a song being "suited" to accompaniment.
Peggy Seeger once said in a lecture, "the way to approach accompaniment is first to decide if a song needs it - if it doesn't, don't".
I can live with that - many venues can too - live with it.
What you do in the privacy of your own home is is your own business - you can sing Lord Gregory with a loofah stuck up your backside, if that's what turns you on.
What you try to impose on clubs is a different matter.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 09:26 AM

ok then... I'm not Irish.. I'm not particularly interested in Irish folk music.. I never go to clubs, or have any intention to start doing so...

I'm a 21st century musician who is more interested in arrangement of instrumental timbres than words;
and the international internet is my potential stage for expressing my 'art'...

This is the culture that I inhabit and will explore with my adaptions of our old songs....

So as much as I respect & thank the collectors and caretakers of trad heritage songs,
I must also acknowledge the significant differences of intent, opinion, and aesthetic diversity that arise,
and actively discover my own way in this post millenial creative technological era...

In other words... If I wanna make a bleedin uncouth racket, I'll turn me amp up, plug a direct feed into the internet and get on with it...

though obviously whilst wearing headphones, no need to annoy the neighbours.... 😎

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 09:35 AM

"ok then... I'm not Irish.. I'm not particularly interested in Irish folk music.. "
Fine PFR - I won't pontificate on your music if you don't pontificate on mine.
I'm all for peaceful coexistence
I have no problem with adapting folk songs - George Butterworth's 'Banks of Green Willow' is one of my favourite pices of English Orchestral music - but it ain't folk
The internet has done wonders for disseminating our FOLK SONG
Feel free to adapt - if you must"!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: The Sandman
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 12:34 PM

Jim, I do not try and impose anything upon singers clubs, most Singers clubs in Ireland impose rules, I HAVE ALREADY STATED THAT I AM PREPARED TO ACCEPT THOSE RULES, IF I WISH TO PLAY THERE.

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: The Sandman
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 05:27 PM

"On of the great problems with accompaniment in Britain is that, even with the best of musicians, it doesn't accompany, it acts as a distraction - the more accomplished the musician, teh greater the distraction."
another sweeping generalisation, and in my opinion complete poppycock, the more accomplished musician can use his technique to accompany sensitively, the more accomplished musician in my experience knows when to not overpower the song a classic example is peggy seeger listen here to the golden ball at 23 .00https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8ZFVD7qkRU

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: GUEST,henryp
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 02:46 AM

11.30am Tuesday 8 November BBC Radio 4
Steve Earle's Songwriting Bootcamp

For songwriting, it helps if you have lived a little. Earle has lived a lot: seven marriages, jail time, cocaine and methadone addiction.

Also teaching is Shawn Colvin. She tells Levinson that great songwriters approach a subject indirectly. "Try to come in the side door."

John Bungey, The Times

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: GUEST,Warwick Slade
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 04:23 AM

I wrote a song that has been recorded in Australia and, in the best folk tradition, the tune has changed and extra verses.
The rule is - there are no rules.

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: The Sandman
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 04:48 AM

Jim,
Margaret Barry and Pecker Dunn were tradtional irish singers who accompanied their songs,but never mind they would be not allowed to accompany themselves any more if they turned up at irish singers clubs.
when tradtional music becomes about what you are not allowed to do, it is a very sad day

Subject: RE: Writing a folk standard
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 05:30 AM

Dick
When traditional music becomes about professional musicians moaning about not being able to get a booking, rather than than its exponents choosing what is best for it, it has no future.
They decide what is good for it, not the professional outsiders.
Every cultural movement sets its own parameters and decides where it is and is not going.
This is becoming more of a sales pitch than a discussion on the tradition
Jim Carroll