Mythological Proportions of the Present (songwriti

Subject: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Thomas the Rhymer
Date: 23 Aug 00 - 12:34 PM

Call it what you will, it is of the utmost importance to me to compose songs. I have to stand apart from "tradition" to do this and I'm quite angry about it. It seems as though a person might study traditional music, AND be able to express (in terms respectful to the forms of antiquity) the mythological patterns of the present.

How is it going to look one hundred years from now when songwriters who are being chastized today, mannage to have written enduring music considered 'classic folk' by elders seven generations from now?

We must keep an ear to the past, AND an eye to the future.

I must now say, against this stout and coarse hardwood grain, that the encouragement needed to create these 'Legacies of or own generations', are sadly lacking here in the Mudcat. We must do better. The essence of folk is not dead, it is alive, and brisling with effectiveness!!!

Thomas

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Mbo
Date: 23 Aug 00 - 12:41 PM

Tell 'em Thomas!

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: MMario
Date: 23 Aug 00 - 12:45 PM

amen.

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: GUEST,T in Oklahoma (Okiemockbird)
Date: 23 Aug 00 - 12:56 PM

Thomas, you seem to be saying that it is possible to write songs in imitation of other, older songs which comment on current events. If that is what you're saying, I agree, but -- who are you responding to ? Is this your way of attacking the "criterion of ignorance" (which holds that "folk" music can only be created by people who have no conception of "folk" music as a separate category) or the "criterion of illiteracy" (which holds, in its most extreme form, that no "folk" music can have any written sources in its chain of transmission) ? Or are you dealing with some other sorts of claims or assertions ?

A few examples of commentary in somewhat mythological style are collected here, e.g. "The Mudcat Came Back", and "The Ballad of Dennis Karjala".

T.

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Bert
Date: 23 Aug 00 - 01:13 PM

Im sorry Thomas but I must disagree with you about the 'encouragement' part. Mudcat very supportive of songwriters. Take a look here and join in.

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Barbara Shaw
Date: 23 Aug 00 - 01:13 PM

I don't view traditional music as having one specific point in time in the past. Rather, I think of it as a type, a character that represents its own time, which is ongoing. Music written today can and is traditional if it reflects the "information, beliefs and customs" of today. Whether or not it gets "handed down" depends on its appeal.

Encouragement is not always the driving force for creativity. Despite great discouragement, in fact, many of the greatest songs and musical works have been created. It is the ability to persevere despite lack of encouragement that may separate the greatest musicians from the average.

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Jeri
Date: 23 Aug 00 - 01:46 PM

Thomas, I don't understand why you're angry - I must have missed a thread somewhere.

People have different likes and dislikes when it comes to music, and some may love a song others don't care for. People who don't like a song have nothing to do with whether or not it survives - it's the people who DO like it that count. I can imagube people sitting around years ago saying "I hate that blanking 'Barbry Allen' song. Every blanking time we get together, Zebediah has to blanking sing it. It's a stupid blanking song anyway!"

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Thomas the Rhymer
Date: 23 Aug 00 - 01:51 PM

T, I am not referring to immitating ANYTHING! When I say "respectful to traditions" I am NOT saying "imitate the traditions shamelessly". We have new lifestytles and though we may revert to war, patriarchal sexual orientation, and non orgasmic women/prostitutes, the simple fact is that traditional songs don't respond to many of the issues facing people today. One casual glance down the list of Brittish food stuffs is enough to make one choke! The issues facing us today DO have a lot in common with the near and distant past, and I am committed to this as fact! However, the ostrich-like assertions of tradophiles; that there can be no new folk, is like bible thumping to adherents of evolved faiths like unitarians... THERE MUST BE 'NEW FOLK' BECAUSE THERE ARE NEW ISSUES BROUGHT FORTH EVERY DAY, lIKE; WOMEN'S RIGHTS, PEACETIME ECONOMY, ENVIRONMENTAL COEXISTENCE, AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST,... "May we take care of one another?"

To honor the forms of tradition, with a voice of today is no "folk sin". Unless, perhaps, a "specialist" is flirting with the insecurities inherent to a 'live' process...

Thomas

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Jim the Bart
Date: 23 Aug 00 - 01:59 PM

I think that it's important to understand a tradition to skillfully build on it. Without understanding, progress along traditional lines is accidental at best. Even an extremely intuitive person needs to feel the context in which she or he is working. . .

In the short time since I discovered the existence of the Mudcat there have been many threads which have explored the dimensions of this thing called "folk music". I enjoy these discussions when they lead to greater understanding of this context; I get annoyed when I perceive an attempt to establish folk dogma. To relegate the folk tradition to history, rather than keeping it in current events, it may still be interesting but it is reduced in both power and vitality. In this sense, I agree whole-heartedly with Thomas. Like him, I revere the past, but not at the price of diminishing the present or denying the future.

As a writer of songs as an expression of my own point of view (rather than as commercial product), I find this forum tremendously helpful to me as I try to improve my technique and "hone my tools". I appreciate all of your opinions, even the ones with which I might not agree (even some of the flaming), as long as their intent is to continue the dialogue, support the music, and advance the culture.

My secret hope is tha,t on some future day, a great debate will rise in this forum over whether that Bartholomew song was folk or pop, stolen or original, the continuing of the tradition or a load o'crap. I would hate like hell to think that the only truly "Mudcat" response would be "who cares? Now, what about the Black Velvet Band. . .

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Thomas the Rhymer
Date: 23 Aug 00 - 03:47 PM

This being said I will conceed
To those within historic creed
That wise men past... gie us the seed
To history we must take heed

But burning crops is not my game
Nor defamation of dead men lame
As acts of vengence bring us shame
Songs of old we must reclaim

But smiling I, do breathe sweet aires
And meeting life's not empty stares
Encounter page's blank with dares
Called forth I write, renounce "who cares"!

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Gervase
Date: 23 Aug 00 - 03:51 PM

Who's chastising? Not me. Songwriters are appreciated, even if their contribution to the great stream that is 'folk' goes unacklowledged.
Stephen Foster, Ewan McColl, Keith Kendrick, Cyril Tawney etc, etc...we all have their work in our repertoires and songbooks, and we owe them a huge debt.
Which is why, when I hear a new song, the first thing I ask is, "who wrote it?". Let's not be shy about singing the praise of a good wordsmith.
Go for it, Thomas the Rhymer; every age needs its bard/chronicler/coroner. Where can I see/hear some of your work?!

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Morticia
Date: 23 Aug 00 - 04:24 PM

I'm not sure why you're getting your knickers in a knot here Thomas, seems to me you are knocking on an open door at this site.....we have some very well respected song writers who appear, IMHO, to embrace traditional styles and relevant social commentary beautifully.....perhaps you haven't had time to check out Aine's song book yet? I should if I were you, it's in the Mudcat resources section at the top of the page...then you can save being cross for something more worthwhile.

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Thomas the Rhymer
Date: 23 Aug 00 - 04:24 PM

Soon!

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Aug 00 - 06:19 PM

Where would the folk and traditional songs we sing and play today come from if people hadn't written them during their own time?

Carol

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: rabbitrunning
Date: 23 Aug 00 - 08:05 PM

I don't think you can _write_ a "folk" song. I do think you can write a song, and if you're very lucky and it's a very good (or very naughty!) song it will become a folk song. Something like, oh, "You Are My Sunshine" which started out as Tin Pan Alley and which has become a song that children sing as toddlers, and that parents teach without ever having to look in a book or find a recording. I do think that you can write a ballad, or a rondelay, or whatever. On any topic you please. I think you can take familiar chord changes or song structures and bend them to new tunes, as well. I even believe that you can take an old tune and bring new words to it. Why not?

From all I've seen, the Mudcat is actually a good place to "sound out" an audience for new works, especially those that use "traditional" forms as a basis. So go for it! I'd like to see what you can make of the modern world.

CD

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: celticblues5
Date: 23 Aug 00 - 08:33 PM

Thomas -

I have to agree - I haven't read ALL threads since coming to the cafe (not having 150 hours in each day, alas), but haven't noted anything discouraging songwriting. I HAVE seen many requests for/praises of works by such modern "folk-style" composers as Malvina Reynolds, Christy Moore, etc. They (and others) have done wonderful work on both sides of the cause - commenting on social ills & encouraging caring for each other. And I would bet that a good percentage of catters have also written songs - even if they've never shown anyone ;-)
That was, after all, one attribute of a good minstrel - the ability to make up something on the spot that commented on current goings-on at the court.

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Aug 00 - 09:21 PM

rabbitrunning,

I understand your point, and I respect it. I think I have a different definition of folk music than you. To me, if a mother makes up a song on the spot and sings it to her child, even if the song is never heard again, it's still a folk song. But that's just my opinion.

Warmest regards,

Carol

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: rabbitrunning
Date: 23 Aug 00 - 10:40 PM

Well, it's a song of the "folk" anyway. I'll include ephemeral creations perfectly cheerfully if you'll agree that it's the songs and variants that persist which end up being debated by all us "folks" with too much free time. Shall we call the subcategory "traditonal" songs, then?

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Aug 00 - 11:26 PM

rabbitrunning,

I don't know, but I will tell you this - I've been making up new words and teaching them to my son (who is now 17), in the hopes of one day seeing them in the dictionary. Who knows?

(Flabious: the texture of cooked mushrooms and other edible fungi, esp. the semi-transparent variety frequently found in Moo Shu.)

Carol

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Whistle Stop
Date: 24 Aug 00 - 08:23 AM

I think "who cares?" is a perfectly appropriate response to the "is it folk?" question. Like Bartholemew, I enjoy these discussions (somewhat), but reject the dogmatic approach espoused by those who think that there is only one acceptable definition of "folk" -- their own.

Thomas, I feel that you should write because you want to or are driven to. In my opinion, writing for "posterity" or to "continue the tradition" is a mistake; you're not likely to hit the mark, and having this as your objective will only stifle your creativity. Once the song is written, it will live or die on its own merits, categories be damned. The folk process works best when we're not too self-conscious about it.

As for encouragement, when I write it's always the song that encourages me. I try not to look to others for rewards that should come from within.

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Thomas the Rhymer
Date: 29 Aug 00 - 01:31 PM

I'm back. The beach was absolutely gorgeous! Sorry 'bout the intense attitude, but I needed to vent some of my own shortcommings...
I am starting to write again, and what I was getting at is this; IMHO, we must sing in our own voice if we are to convey meaning...
If we do 'other people's songs', and traditional songs would be in this category for the time being, we might forget to sing from our own souls.
When I do one of my songs, I'm singing out my soul in a matter of speaking, and when I follow it with a Trad song, I just seem to come from the same/simmilar place... at least for a while.
To "get in", one must develop one's OWN voice, somehow...

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: celticblues5
Date: 29 Aug 00 - 09:39 PM

Thomas -

Don't you think most of us internalize the songs we do, so that, if they do not come directly from our own souls, they have, at minimum, an overlay of our own souls and - when it's at the best - a symbiosis?

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Art Thieme
Date: 29 Aug 00 - 10:15 PM

Folksongs---real ones---made up about three-quarters of the songs I sang. A quarter of 'em weren't folksongs by any definition I'll ever accept. When I introduced my songs, I usually said, "This is a folksong." Or I'd say, "No way this is a folksong but it's written in that style and it's clear the writer knew what a folksong should look and sound like." Or I'd say, "This isn't a folksong but I like it anyway."

It's a sad aspect of democracy that, in the name of personal freedom, so many are willing to accept a falsity because, like religious dogma, they choose to believe it.

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: CarolC
Date: 30 Aug 00 - 12:55 AM

I've been thinking about this one for a while. I'm certainly no expert on any kind of music, but this is what I think.

I think that when you dissect a frog, you have to kill it. I think that when you make music into an academic exercise, you take all of the life out of it.

For what it's worth.

Respectfully,

Carol

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 30 Aug 00 - 10:46 AM

I really like that idea about "the mythological proportions of the present". Whether you want to call them "folk songs" or not, many of Stan Rogers' songs seem to me to find "the mythological proportions" of the present, of ordinary people's lives, and that's what makes them so gripping. For example, The Mary Ellen Carter, The Field Behind the Polow, Lies, and on and on.

Songs so written have a chance to live beyond their youth, and thus a chance to BECOME folksongs.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Sean Belt
Date: 30 Aug 00 - 11:07 AM

Thomas,
You write,"IMHO, we must sing in our own voice if we are to convey meaning... "If we do 'other people's songs', and traditional songs would be in this category for the time being, we might forget to sing from our own souls."

What you're saying bothers me. I'm not much of a songwriter. I've written a very few over the years, but mostly they're forgettable efforts. However, when I sing a song that I've picked up from the Public Domain such as "Omie Wise" or from a songwriter of recent past or now, such as Pete Seeger's "Well May the World Go" or Richard Shindell's "Speaking with the Angel", I only sing them because they resonate strongly with me. In fact, much more strongly than those that I've written myself.

Maybe I'm missing something in what you're saying, but what I'm getting is that you chastise those of us without your gift for writing even though we are able to speak honestly from our souls using others words. You've got a great gift, I'm sure in your writing. Isn't it possible, though that I (and others) have a gift as well for using traditional (and non-traditional) songs to convey something of worth?

- Sean

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Thomas the Rhymer
Date: 30 Aug 00 - 09:42 PM

Sean, YES!

My appologies for the rude assertion... I am speaking of the powerful and intimidating (to the performer, in this case, me...) performance of one's own song... I am in agreement with you that we learn to sing as a form of role playing, and indeed it helps (me) to have some distance from the meanings of the song,...ie, not feel them too personally when performing. But what I was speaking of in my previous post, was the merging of performance and reality. It is that moment when you reach someone with your words, and the feelings are authentic, not feigned. I would guess that the bard's art was to do something along these lines, by singing of the events of the day... but if you have ever tried to sing a love song, or a break up song, to the person it was written of,.... WOW! It's a whole new ball game!

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Brendy
Date: 30 Aug 00 - 10:12 PM

How can you "not feel them too personally when performing", and hope to "...reach someone with your words, and the feelings are authentic, not feigned."?

B.

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Amos
Date: 30 Aug 00 - 10:22 PM

A fine song, made one's own because of empathy and insight, never sounds anything less than new in the moment. Because, laws, symbols, labels and letters aside, it is alive in the momnent, which is as new as anything ever gets anyway!

A

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Thomas the Rhymer
Date: 30 Aug 00 - 10:33 PM

Hi Brendy!

That is the point! I am much enammoured of the folk sing, don't get me wrong... I was referring to the difficulties I personally face when I do a song that reaches into my own reality, and stimulates in me a vulnerability akin to nakedness...

It is easier for me to sing with detatchment of situations and feelings distant; like an actor. But when the feelings conveyed are my own, and are taken as such, it begins to feel like I'm wading through all of the audience's feelings, and this is more difficult for me. And,... the merging of song, feelings, and reality are bound together in the moment... ANEW!

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: DougR
Date: 30 Aug 00 - 11:19 PM

Thomas: I have followed this thread since you posted it, and I must confess that I still am not sure what you are proposing. Is it that too much emphasis is given to "traditional" as opposed to contemporary music? Traditional music (composed prior to the 20th Century for example)is more worthy of performance than music composed after the 20th Century?

No one will quarrel, I believe, with the need of the composer to write music. Not all of the music written is good, however, regardless of how much passion and fervor is exhibited by the peformer when he/she sings or plays it.

If it is not good, it will not become a mainstay in the repertoire. If it is good, the composer is assured of a place in music history.

I believe that a good performer (interpreter) of a composer's music can often do a more credible job of performing that persons work than the composer. Example: Anyone (almost) performing Kris Kristofferson's works.

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 31 Aug 00 - 12:07 PM

Poets often don't do too well reading their own poems. Now whether this is merely because they don't have the skills for reading aloud, or whether their poems are too close to them, I don't know.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Thomas the Rhymer
Date: 31 Aug 00 - 12:11 PM

O.K Doug, I will try a little clarity

Folk singing is dear to me. Song writing is important too. I am standing in "no man's land". Tradophiles seem to hold a slight disdain and a passive/agressive attitude towards "written songs" in general. Song writers often find the traditions to be "depressing, mean, and dull".

I do not share these Judgements. I am not always able though to find the reconcilliation between the two 'camps' and it is pulling me apart. I have been stopped in my tracks, afraid of 'pissing off' anyone. This has got to stop.

Folk is inclusive. The exclusionary behavior of mincing definitions is not for me. When people write songs about what they see, feel, know, wonder about, hate, love,... it is folk music. Commercial orientation? Get it out of here!

Quality is a reason I look to traditional music. Integrity of a genuine artifact, a time tested traveler, a lesson in life, a moral imperitive.

I want to bring people into the same camp. We are already here on this fabulous earth... And besides,... do we really want to think of music as something people used to write, way back when...?

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 31 Aug 00 - 12:25 PM

I'm fond of the way Burl Ives approached this. He said something like:

"I'm not a folksinger. I sing songs that I like. It just so happens that most of them are folksongs."

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Whistle Stop
Date: 31 Aug 00 - 03:31 PM

Thomas, it sounds to me like this eternal debate over the definition of folk music is getting to you. My opinion is that it's all valid, and I really don't care much about the labels. If a song has meaning to you, sing it, whether it's something you wrote or something handed down to you. Rest assured that most of us will recognize the validity of what you are doing, even if an argumentative few (I count myself in that category) are inclined to quibble endlessly over the definitions. When the definitions become too upsetting or stifling, forget about them -- they simply are not as important as the music itself.

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Jim the Bart
Date: 31 Aug 00 - 07:14 PM

Thomas (and everyone else, too) -
In my experience, the worst songs that I write are the ones I "make up". It is the real, little details taken from life that make a song come to life. I think the best traditional music has those details in a universal enough form that the song can speak for many people, over long periods of time and over vast tracts of space.

I went through a bad stretch of years where nothing I wrote was worth a damn, and I couldn't figure out what I was doing wrong. I read books on songwriting technique, examined other people's work, did all the stuff "the experts" suggest to break through the block and it just didn't help. Looking back on it now that it's over, I realize that for all those years I was trying to write songs without revealing myself. I was changing the focus, fuzzing the details, in short, doing everything I could to hide any of the truth about me that might creep into the song and that I didn't want to share. And the result was always tainted. They say you have to write about what you know; I believe that you have to put a whole lot of yourself in a song before anyone else will care about it.

This may seem a little odd to you (it sure does to me):
Twice in my life I have partially written very good, very specific songs about experiences that I hadn't had. The songs both sat unfinished for years until (on different occasions) I suddenly realized that I was in the scene that the song fragment described. I then finished the songs, which are now two of my favorites. It's hard to explain the feeling of deja vu that I had when the realization came to me. And I can't pretend to explain how this happened.

Keep writing - keep rhyming - keep sharing - a lot of people really appreciate what you do

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: hesperis
Date: 31 Aug 00 - 08:22 PM

Bartholomew - Thanks.

Sometimes even I need to be reminded that music "comes to life" from life itself.

I have been trying to write a love song for over three years now. The Chorus is perfect. I salvaged it from another song when I realized that. Scrapped the rest of the song because it didn't go with these four beautiful lines. The verses are still being written, although I finally got some of the chord structure. The Chorus is so catchy it's hard to think of anything else to go with it...

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: catspaw49
Date: 31 Aug 00 - 09:06 PM

That was a wonderful posting Bart. Really well put and I am once again happy to have you here at the 'Cat.

THOMAS.....I'm also glad Doug asked and that you clarified what your point was, since I too was sadly lost. Folk is inclusive and if you say you write "Folk-Style" songs, than I agree and I see the point you were driving at. No one writes a folksong. People write the songs you describe and if they survive they become folksongs.

It hasn't come up in this thread, but I think the antagonism toward songwriters is not in anyone writing new songs that are very folk-like or folk styled......witness the writings of so many like Tom Paxton and the esteem he is held in by the hardest "folkies." The objection is to those who write "navel contemplation" songs and bill themselves as folk artists. How can anyone take one of those deeply introspective, let me tell you about my problems songs and do it justice besides the author? Its unlikely it will survive the process. Worse, many of those people have no knowledge or feel for roots music to begin with and do no tradfolk at all. There are excellent singer/songwriter/folksingers and there are some who are not. I don't mind listening to a lot of their music, some of it I like. But there's nothing worse than expecting folk and getting navel gazing.

I used to laugh a lot at this subject, but semantics does have its place. I'm not tryng to pigeonhole things but its good to get what you think you're paying for. So in that respect, I've come to use "Folk"...Folk Style"(or like).....and songwriter in entirely different and distinctive ways. No big deal though...but it helps to understand why you might see antagonism at times.

Spaw

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Bill D
Date: 31 Aug 00 - 09:19 PM

Thomas...the new songs WILL be written,,,and many of them by people who really care and are trying to express the new issues and feelings that swirl about society.....and some of them will be GOOD songs.(and some already are!) I am one of those who is mostly involved with the 'older' music...and one of the reasons is that so much music today...(as opposed to 75+ years ago) is so closely connected to a music 'industry' where quality is an occasional, but not necessary, by-product. And what pains me is the refusal...or inability...of many singer/sonwriters to see that there is a tangible difference to the subject matter, arrangements, style...etc, of much of the music being done today, and the subsuming of what they are doing under labels invented for something different.

I do NOT make any absolute judgements about it being 'better' or worse...just that I am NOT enthralled by a lot of what is being done and IF young girls want to sing their diaries, and people want to buy it...so be it!...Just allow me and some others the courtesy of NOT claiming that what they do is 'just like what the songwriters used to do'...and allow us to have an occasional 'open mic' without demanding equal time...

By all means...we should encourage the muse... and applaud the ATTEMPT to observe and celebrate our world in song...but we do a dis-service if we blindly applaud every RESULT as wonderful....

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: CarolC
Date: 31 Aug 00 - 09:59 PM

Ok, now I am confused.

Spaw, on the thread about the Jewish influence on folk music, you listed Bob Dylan as an example. By the definition you used on this thread, wouldn't he be a singer/songwriter?

This argument about folk versus singer/song writer is a new one to me.

Thomas, I'm with you. I say Go For It. It's a big world out there.

Best wishes,

Carol

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Mbo
Date: 31 Aug 00 - 10:09 PM

Love songs are all I can (or want to) write these days!

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: catspaw49
Date: 31 Aug 00 - 10:27 PM

sure Carol....Dylan's a singer/songwriter. He has taken many of the tunes and some words from trad songs (and sometimes not credited anyone but himself BTW). But he also sang songs in the folk genre as he started and certainly many of his are folk-style. At this point, it can be argued too that an awful lot of the songs are either now in or about to enter "folk." Certainly, like it or not, "Blowin' in the Wind" is one. Although he writes some songs about personal experiences, they are generally ones we all share to some degree (read the thread currently running on "Don't Think Twice"), he doesn't often engage in the navel gazing thing like, say, Lisa Loeb...who I like, but though she is often lumped in folk, is not.

As Bill just said, this isn't about likes or dislikes, just what was for many years a term that had meaning.....and of course now, its lost.....probably stolen is a better word.

Spaw

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Thomas the Rhymer
Date: 31 Aug 00 - 11:34 PM

SPAW!

You hit the nail on the head, and drove it clearly in,
You've organized the things I've read, and so now I can begin
When writer's rights are bought and sold, and labels pick their creeds
The folk tradition pans for gold, glitters glut the greed!

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: CarolC
Date: 31 Aug 00 - 11:44 PM

To me, people like Peter, Paul, and Mary, are folk. Simon and Garfunkle are folk. Joan Baez is folk. According to what I've been reading in these threads, these artists would not fit into the category of folk. This is a concept that I don't think I will ever be able to get my (admittedly small), brain around. Sorry.

Anyway, I just listen to what I like, and I don't ever worry about what it is called. I discovered recently that Yo Yo Ma (my favorite classical cellist), is now making music with bluegrass artists. I've heard the music that they make. Nobody knows what to call it, but it is hauntingly beautiful in a whole new way. It seems to me that that is what ought to count.

Best wishes,

Carol

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: catspaw49
Date: 31 Aug 00 - 11:51 PM

It doesn't matter a whit Carol.....Its an old and worn and generally boring discussion around here and I'm glad you like all those folks. Sometime if you're in need of sleep and have a lot of time on your hands, put on a favorite album and go find all the threads on the meaning of folk we've run around here.

But also when you get a chance, listen to some roots artists and some others as I'm sure you probably have. I like PPM, but listen to some of the older versions of many of their songs too.

Spaw

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: CarolC
Date: 01 Sep 00 - 12:27 AM

The old stuff is good, Spaw. We do a lot of that stuff at the jam sessions around here. But we hold songs we like that are written by the people we play with in equally high esteem.

You're right, though. It is a tiresome argument. I'd much rather be playing my accordion. ; )

Carol

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Thomas the Rhymer
Date: 01 Sep 00 - 12:55 AM

On the other hand, it DOES matter to the songwriter who insists (boneheadedly) that he must please most of the people all the time...

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: DougR
Date: 01 Sep 00 - 01:05 AM

I'm not a song writer. No talent along that line at all. I do write screenplays, though, and I suspect that the motivation for writing those is not dissimilar from writing songs. The first five screenplays I wrote were written because I thought the "market" was looking for stories like the screenplays I wrote. I only tried to market two of them, and was not successful at selling either of them.

I wrote my last screenplay because I WANTED to tell that story. I don't give a damn whether is sells or not (well ...) but the point is, it is my story and I think it is told well. I didn't write it because I thought it would be a commercial success, I wrote it because I thought it was a good story and I wanted to tell it.

I suspect songwriters are faced with the same challenges.

DougR

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: CarolC
Date: 01 Sep 00 - 01:09 AM

You have to please yourself, Thomas. That's all you've really got. The rest is just icing on the cake.

All the best,

Carol

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Whistle Stop
Date: 01 Sep 00 - 08:28 AM

As a confirmed songwriter and navel-gazer, I continue to believe that introspective songwriting is valid, AND that it fits comfortably into the "folk" genre. There is plenty of folk music that was written about feelings rather than events, or written about fabricated events in order to explore feelings. In this, as in anything else, there is good music and bad, music with broad appeal and with limited appeal, music we will embrace and music we will reject. But introspective music as a whole should not be rejected, nor excluded from the definition of "folk". I personally feel that some of the themes explored in this type of music are more universal, and eaiser to relate to, than much of the "event-based" music which everyone recognizes as "folk".

Spaw mentions "Blowin' In The Wind" as a singer/songwriter composition that is now, or will soon be, "folk" music. I agree, and would suggest that "Mr. Tambourine Man" (a "navel-gazer" if there ever was one)enjoys the same status.

Carol, I have to agree with you on the collaborations between Yo Yo Ma, Mark O'Connor, and Edgar Meyer. Great stuff, whether you can put a label on it or not.

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Thomas the Rhymer
Date: 01 Sep 00 - 12:02 PM

Personal exploration of feelings devoid of mutual understanding, shared with no one, played for money,...sounds like the blues (or R&B) to me...

If we go to the essence of 'young girls singing their diaries to acoustic music' we may find something interesting. Aside from the obvious sexual conotation, there is usually a guy in the background (or three) telling her how great she is,... and hoping to make money; to CASH IN! as it were. I have been personally told by one of these airhead men, that I wouldn't have a chance in the U.K. because I wasn't a sexy woman (I wasn't a woman at all!), and the implication was that the 'boys club' would much rather watch a sexy show, than allow of another 'competitor' on the scene...

The 'chick with a guitar' phenomenon is curious. Why is Joan Baez so fantastic? Because she studies, sings fantastic, plays great, chooses a wide variety of FOLK songs, exudes kindness, thinks deeply, and is obviously motivated by love. She is, almost incidently, gorgeous.

In my folk world, I want to see/be many of these qualities, and the average diary singin', soapbox standin', golddiggin' cutie just don't go dair. Not as a folk musician! It isn't the girls though,... its the guys that lead them on, and that pimpesque posturing... for the money! (or is it sex?)

Maybe love IS the great folk motivator!... and people just cant stop confusing sex with love.

And I love you all! THOMAS

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: The Shambles
Date: 01 Sep 00 - 01:31 PM

This was a very interesting thread. I didn't look in to it for a long time because I mis-read the title.

I thought is said 'Mythological Proportions of the President'!!!

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Whistle Stop
Date: 01 Sep 00 - 02:23 PM

Thomas, your gender and age biases are showing. I'm sure there are cute girls, and cute boys, who sing with passionate intensity (real or feigned) about topics that are only of interest to them, and will have an appropriately short shelf life. But that does not mean that all "navel-gazers" should be lumped together with them. Some of the deepest, most meaningful music out there is primarily focused on emotional and/or spiritual topics, rather than "stories". A lot of this is really good stuff, and has relatively universal appeal. Think of all the religious music out there -- Amazing Grace, for example. This is music of the soul more than it is music of the world, but it certainly qualifies as folk music. Hell, even Joanie sings it!

As for the "chick with the guitar phenomenon" (your words, not mine), I always felt that Joan Baez was the quintessence of that. Different strokes for different folks, I suppose, but I never found her as impressive as a lot of people seem to. As far as I can tell she was a 1960s Jewel who couldn't write her own songs, so she had to borrow them from other people (and her versions were almost always inferior to the originals).

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Thomas the Rhymer
Date: 01 Sep 00 - 03:20 PM

I Stand corrected. I think I was referring to Buffy St. Marie, and strangely confused the two. Hmmm. I do think very highly of Joan though, because she has done so many true Folk songs. I do think there are miles of difference between Joan and Jewel. I do think it takes guts for a performer to play Folk music without needing to 'tag' the songs by changing them just beyond recognition, and then renaming them for personal agrandizement... And Joan did service to the American public by continuing to sing interesting Folk songs when she could have chosen anything of comercial value. If you look down her song list of recordings, I think you will agree.

I love hymns. Are you making some obilque comparison between songwriter's navels, and Our Lord On High?

O.K....I'm done being defensive...

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Bill D
Date: 01 Sep 00 - 03:42 PM

Joan Baez was something more than a 'chic with a guitar'...she was sort of a 'folk interpreter'...not 'trad', but close to the roots...not my favorite style, but still interesting...the modern wave was personified by Kate Wolf, who wrote deeply personal stuff, and did it well! Now, in doing so, she moved farther from 'folk/trad', and a host of (mostly)less talented and copy-cat singers followed her...branching out as they went. Now there is no law against any of this...and these songwriters may sing or write anything they choose...but as to this-----

"But introspective music as a whole should not be rejected, nor excluded from the definition of "folk". I personally feel that some of the themes explored in this type of music are more universal, and eaiser to relate to, than much of the "event-based" music which everyone recognizes as "folk". "

.....there is a BIG difference between being rejected, and simply needing a bit different classification! I do not 'reject' introspective music...I just find the introspective themes of today harder to relate to than event based music...if you feel differently, why fine!...But please....go to the database and look for songs that show the same type of introspection that the modern SSWs are doing! There aren't very many...."The Foggy, Foggy Dew" just has a different 'feel' than "Trumpet Vine"....most of the folk songs of many years past were not written in 1st person, and they did not usually spend much time directly commenting on the 'peopleness of people'...they told stories, sometimes with morals, and let YOU extract the meaning, rather than pouring it over you like Maple syrup.

Now...one more time...it is not better, it is not worse...but it IS different! A broiled steak, a tofu salad, Peking Duck, fried Spam, and chocolate covered sauerkraut are all 'food'...and SOMEONE can be found who will think each is GOOD food....but they ain't all traditional, and they don't all belong on the same menu!

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: DougR
Date: 01 Sep 00 - 03:57 PM

Chocolate covered sauerkraut? Please say you didn't really mean it, Bill D! DougR

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: catspaw49
Date: 01 Sep 00 - 04:06 PM

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Thomas the Rhymer
Date: 01 Sep 00 - 04:29 PM

Whistle Stop
What you wrote got right under my skin,
So I'm not really quite sure where to begin
Is singing Folk music the songwriter's sin?
Or shall we take those three chords and arrange them again?

Tacky your name to the winningest stake
Give up some critical insights to take
Wrap it all up into frosting and fake
But be sure you get laid with the wealthiest make!

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Little Hawk
Date: 01 Sep 00 - 04:33 PM

Great thread. I finally took a look at it. In defence of Joan Baez, I think she was and is absolutely wonderful as a performer (always gives her audience 100%), and she eventually, after a long struggle, became a fine songwriter as well. Her renditions of other people's songs were sometimes not as good, sometimes better, depends on the song. She remains (mysteriously, considering her style) one of the most effective interpreters of Bob Dylan songs ever. She has a lot of insight into Bob, and that shows.

It's an interesting notion that "if a song survives, then it's a folksong". I can see the reasoning behind that. There are a lot of folk-style songs, then, that will never become a folksong, though they are still folk style. Dylan has written a shipload of those, and so have innumerable other people, including many of us Mudcatters. Yeah, I said "shipload".

So...what I would call a folk-style song is a song that is written simply for the sake of the song itself, not for a specific commercial market. That, to me, is folk music. It stands on its own merits, and it's honest and real. What is folk music to me can occur in any style of music.

I have a hard time seeing Peter, Paul & Mary as true folksingers...but I'll give them some benefit of the doubt on it. They sounded a little too radio-ga-ga to me, much of the time. They helped Bob, though, so what the heck.

Whistle Stop - I encourage you to read Joan Baez's autobiography "And A Voice To Sing With". Without commenting on Jewel one way or another, I can assert that Joan Baez is one of the most courageous, remarkable, extraordinary individuals I ever heard of...in music or in any field. She has never wavered from her ideals. And she has sacrificed much commercial success to do that. Read it.

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Bearheart
Date: 02 Sep 00 - 05:52 PM

I don't consider myself a songwriter, but a few good ones have come through me when I was looking the other way, and I find that they all seem to fit stylistically into a genre-- Celtic, blues or old-timey gospel-- and I think it's because those kinds of music are in my soul. The words are often different from what might be expected though because they also come from my soul and my experience-- so that the "gospel" tunes celebrate Earth Mother, not God, for instance. I think it's alot about getting out of the way of the music, rather than trying to make it happen. Happens best for me when being quiet in the woods, or after having spent time with someone near and dear, or late at night in the car, or in the shower. Then I really am listening to the "deep" me, which has something meaningful to say.

And in my opinion, folk music is made by folk-- all those anonymous songs were wriiten by somebody...

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 02 Sep 00 - 08:32 PM

Seems to me a lot of what we consider "traditional" folk music has as a primary difference from today's singer/songwriter compositions the element of Point of View. Often,traditional music tells a story from the third person, a story meant to impart a lesson in heroism,love,tragedy,etc by citing a specific example: Lord Randall,Brave Wolfe,John Riley are typical of this story-telling genre of folk. In contrast,most singer/songwriter material is first person perceptions of the slings and arrows of everyday life. Therefore, Alanis Morissette's observation that "I'm brave but I'm chicken-shit" is less likely to stand the folk endurance test than the word picture painted by some anonymous poet of the battle on the Fields of Abraham,and Wolfe's death. From this standpoint,although Morrisette may be writing about her personal worldview and talking about things she knows,and the anonymous writer may have never come near the famous battle,the relative quality of the resulting work is evident,and this brings me to my final point: A good songwriter sticks to his own personal experience and perceptions, a great one possesses the empathetic talent to bring to life the point of view of others outside himself and his world.

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Mbo
Date: 02 Sep 00 - 08:40 PM

Right EJ, like the song says "How can you be a man, until you seen beyond the life you live?"

--M (see the 451 thread)

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: CarolC
Date: 02 Sep 00 - 09:38 PM

Lonesome EJ,

I've never heard anything by Alanis Morrisette, but the people I know who write songs write them as much from the third person, as from the first person point of view. And when they do write in the first person, they do it as a storytelling device, rather that just spewing their guts in the song.

Usually, they want to impart something that they consider to be profound about life. A good example is the song "Till it Overflows" by Mary Daily on her album "Beginnings", which is about situations like the shootings at Columbine High School.

Respectfully,

Carol

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: rabbitrunning
Date: 02 Sep 00 - 10:31 PM

A "shipload" of songs, eh, Little Hawk? Must be the Titanic...

I'm fairly new to the Mudcat, and a lot of what brought me here is songs I learned as a kid, or from kids, and it continually astonishes me how many of the songs that I thought were "traditional" songs are actually quite clear in their authorship. "Some Folks Do" by Stephen Foster, for example, is a song that I learned very young, with no idea that it wasn't a folksong.

Peter Paul and Mary, Joan Baez, and even folks like Tom Lehrer popularized songs, traditional or not, that our counselors liked and taught us at camp as folksongs. Authorship just wasn't the question if the song was good enough to sing. And the best songs to sing became songs we taught our friends on the playgrounds and so on. I was talking about folk tales and folk songs to a fifth grade class last spring, and when I asked if they knew any folk songs the first one they named was "Puff the Magic Dragon." And the teacher thought it was a folksong too! I disabused them of the notion, gently, and asked for another song, and three little girls in the back, much shyer now, finally volunteered to sing one for us. They sang "Disco Duck"...

Folklore will survive, but we can't see from here what will be chosen. We can only see what we have to chose from now.

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Sep 00 - 10:34 PM

3rd person, 1st person, whatever...

The song can be about anything at all. Mary Chapin Carpenter wrote an incredible song called "John Doe # 24" about a "dead and sightless half-wit boy" found wandering the streets of Jacksonville in 1945. He was institutionalized, and died in the late 80's, his origin remaining a complete mystery. She got the idea to write it after reading an article about his life and death in the Jacksonville paper.

She wrote the song in the 1st person, as this man, and she wrote a masterpiece. So it was written in the 1st person, but actually is 3rd person (so to speak) and it's partly true historical fact and partly conjecture. It's one of the most perfectly written and moving songs I have ever heard in my life. It's impeccable.

Is it a folksong? I don't know, I just know it's a masterpiece. It's on the album "Stones In The Road".

Mainstream radio, as far as I know, has never played it, but CBC probably has. They aren't funded by commercial advertising.

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Mbo
Date: 02 Sep 00 - 10:41 PM

No, country radio never played it because it wasn't released. Country radio is NOT album-oriented, only singles oriental. The play all the released songs from Stones In The Road. So that's why you'll never hear it.

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: CarolC
Date: 03 Sep 00 - 05:37 AM

Little Hawk,

I think your last post belongs on the "Explaining the Unexplained" thread. "A dead and sightless half-wit boy found wandering the streets"....

; ) Carol

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: DougR
Date: 03 Sep 00 - 04:55 PM

Carol, you're a keen eye. I didn't catch that in Little Hawk's post at all. You're right though. That's the place for it.

DougR

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Little Hawk
Date: 03 Sep 00 - 10:34 PM

Well, yeah, I guess you could say that.

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Callie
Date: 03 Sep 00 - 11:33 PM

Sean: it was Ron Sexsmith who wrote "Speaking With the Angel"

Callie

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Thomas the Rhymer
Date: 04 Sep 00 - 05:22 PM

...So when people write, and their muse takes flight,
Do you Immediately compare, their 'this' with 'over there'
Or is the beauty here inlayed, With 'Made it' in the shade
As their stardust sprinkled wares, rescind our worried cares?

Hollywood entwines, but we read between the vines
As celebrities will cope, by selling 'better soap'
To those of us unbathed, not yet born and yet quite scathed;
Yet we live in spite of hope, and but for the stars; anthromope...

Th lust for stardom... divided by the lack of freedom, Is ten times the daily wage of the average single mom divided by the number of aspirants to 'fame' on a percentage basis. Times after Times.

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Whistle Stop
Date: 05 Sep 00 - 08:35 AM

Thomas, I will confess that I'm not following you. If anyone cares (not sure I do), my last posting was responding to Thomas's disparaging remark about "chicks with guitars" as the epitome of self-absorbed, navel-gazing modern songwriters. I am a self-absorbed, navel-gazing modern songwriter (a guy with a guitar), who has a healthy respect and love for traditional music, but chooses not to be limited by it. I don't really care to categorize musics to any great extent, but I think that the "folk/traditional" category is broader than a lot of people recognize. It includes first person, second person, and third person narratives, about events, emotions, or (usually) both, and in some cases it is impressionistic enough to rival Dylan's most obscure work. I don't see a bold defining line between traditional music and modern "folk style" music -- the line is faint and fuzzy at best, and often disappears from view altogether. Others may feel differently, of course, but I do think it's ironic that some seem to have a very exclusive and proprietary view of "folk" music (which, by definition, would seem to be the most inclusive of categories).

Little Hawk, thank you for suggesting that I read Joan's autobiography. I don't mean to speak disparagingly of someone who is obviously regarded highly by many on this forum, but I can really only take her in small doses -- both her music and her politics. I don't think that it takes a great deal of courage for a famous singer to champion liberal causes -- I see lots of examples of real courage every day, and this just doesn't rise to the same level in my book. I have seen Joan in concert twice, and while I enjoyed both shows, I consider her a minor talent. But perhaps I will get to her autobiography at some point (like a lot of people, my list of "must reads" is a mile long), and maybe it will change my views. Thanks again.

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Sean Belt
Date: 05 Sep 00 - 08:42 AM

Callie, Thanks for the catch on my mistake! I should have checked the credit on the CD, rahter than rely on my codger-like memory. Consider me red-faced and all apologetic to Ron Sexsmith, should he stumble across this discussion.

Still, a good thread.
- Sean

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 05 Sep 00 - 12:34 PM

Re my previous statement about point-of-view in traditional vs contemporary "folk" music,CarolC is right to say that the FirstPerson pov is not exclusive of telling a fascinating story,or imparting a moving experience. It is however much more conducive to the excesses of emotional catharsis which mark much of the singer/songwriter genre,and which,once you take the individual voice and celebrity away,loses its lustre quickly.I am skeptical that this type of music will ever be passed down as musical legacy.

I do,however,think that the First Person view is much more peculiar to our time and place,where individuality and the artist's life are seen as the be-all and end-all of experience. There is a timelessness and universality about much traditional music,which owes much to the obscurity of its sources'and the sense that it has a life beyond that of its creator(s).

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Thomas the Rhymer
Date: 05 Sep 00 - 01:23 PM

Hi Whistle Stop!

I appreciate most directly your more recent post. The demeanor suited me, and although you present disagreement as a smoke screen to leave your heros own unknown, I like the challenge you offer... Thanks!

It has never occurred to me to think of Ms. Baez as a "minor talent". Your opinion mystifies me.

What would you consider to be "real courage"? (why do I think of Jane Fonda while I write this?). I am laughingly engaged by a stab at her politics, as if someone's politics affects their talent?

I think you have an excellent conception of the grey areas around 'folk' and I too tend to think of it all as one big (happy?) family.

What I meant by courage... When people need to reinvent the wheel and claim territory that is already more or less public domain, I would say that they are falling prey to the basicly insecure belief that they need to distance themselves from others, and be noticed as 'different'. This is something I do at times. As an exclusionary behavior though, it seems designed to isolate, (and perhaps even the 'stick up their b(!)' folkies do this) by showing off one's DEPTH, SENSITIVITY, or (for folkies its) their "Holier than thou" and rigid adherence to the specific genera at hand...

The courage comes from the tacit faith that everyone likes to be unled, and believed in. It is my belief that the folk tradition lets the 'people' decide by presenting songs, feelings, situations, scenarios, if you will,...that stimulate thought... free thinking. The average songwriter, and there are many, does not leave room for this because they are selling themselves, and/or preaching. Ms. Baez chose to relate to people in the 'folk' way, durring a time when people were getting rich off self disclosed dissent. She took a higher road IMHO.

There is a vague breeze blowing these days, that whispers too softly the folk wisdom of ages. Ms.Baez called forth some of that inspiration by not going to self aggrandization... and I appreciate the courage that took!

Best Regards...

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Whistle Stop
Date: 05 Sep 00 - 02:10 PM

Thomas, I followed about half of that one, which is an improvement, and shows that I am still capable of learning languages other than my own.

Regarding Ms. Baez, there are two issues -- music and politics (separated for the sake of this discussion; I'm sure someone will tell me they are inseparable). Musically, I find her interpretive abilities to be uninspired, and her voice is positively annoying. Politically, I think she preaches too much, and is too confident in her feeling that she knows best on all topics.

As regards courage, she lives in a free country (I'm sure some might quibble about this as well, but in my estimation we citizens of the USA are more free than those in most other countries), where it does not take a great deal of courage to speak one's mind. Especially when it helps support one's career, as it has in her case; to be frank, she has gotten a lot of publicity out of her support for various causes. I don't question her sincerity, but there are a lot of sincere people who are not particularly courageous (myself included). When you see real courage, it's easier to put this in perspective. Again, I'm not criticizing her for her beliefs, or for speaking her mind -- I just don't think it's all that unusual, or particularly praiseworthy.

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Thomas the Rhymer
Date: 05 Sep 00 - 02:33 PM

I did not EVER say that I thought Ms. Baez was courageous with her politics.

It is in the realm of carrying forth the folk tradition, back to the homes of America,... THAT took courage.

You have provoked me enough, Whistle Stop, and I might add that I find you to be a difficut person to relate to. The distinct impression I get is that you are an unequivocable underdog taking on the world, with the winner's circle lolling about your dream-world destiny, with nought but a road paved with insults ahead for you.... Have a nice trip, I'm going some other way,....and I hope you'll join us when you can stop with the insults....O.K.?

Respectfully Yours, ttr

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Whistle Stop
Date: 05 Sep 00 - 03:57 PM

Respectfully?

Thomas, I don't feel that I should have to defend my conduct. But apparently there has been some misunderstanding here. I did not intend any disrespect, nor did I offer any insults. My opening comment about you and I speaking different languages was intended as a joke, although it's clear to me at this point that we really do have different ways of expressing ourselves. As for our differing views on Joan Baez? We're allowed to have our own opinions on musical matters; it does not necessarily mean that either of us is right or wrong, or that we dislike each other. So I don't really know what I said that gave offense, and unfortunately your message has failed to enlighten me.

As for the "unequivocable underdog taking on the world, with the winner's circle lolling about [my] dream world destiny, etc." -- I can't pretend to know what you mean exactly, but these sure sound like insults to me. Let's go our separate ways, and I would only ask that you refrain from these kinds of remarks in the future; this kind of thing is really unnecessary.

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Thomas the Rhymer
Date: 05 Sep 00 - 04:10 PM

AMEN BROTHER!

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Thomas the Rhymer
Date: 06 Sep 00 - 12:51 AM

O.K.,

Is there a lesson in all this? I sure would like to know what it is that the people who like s/s writers really want. I feel like I compose for two reasons. The first, is that people seem to bbe delighted if I answer, "Yep, I wrote that". The second, is that I love to invent things, and music is REALLY FUN to make up! POETRY TOO!

My objective here is to find some middle ground, without compromising either ideal. Wyndham-Read did it really nicely with his approach; namely, he found poetry that was metered, poetry that moved him, and then he set it to music. I t had to fit his specific criterion, and he had to compose a rather genera-specific tune.

But what is it that the typical writer is missing today?

Is it content? Is it the handed down element that's lacking, because the songs only appeal to one part of society (or one generation)?

I have been of the opinion that people compose mostly out of the pallete of their influences, and thier influences are predominantly what we listen to the most.

If we choose our influences, we can shape what we write. If we don't choose our influences, but gravitate to them purely subconciously, then it is concievable that we may be writing music that we can not verify or understand.

If there is some Mystical-Healing power to 'the old songs' and I do believe there is, then how is the average songsmith going to figure into it if he/she is predominated with "new and improved songs" like so much software.

Are we accepting the absurd notion that songs are written with 'planned obsellesence' like cars off of the assembly line?

Yeh, I know, I'm arguing both sides... but I'm on both sides, and I want it all!

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: GUEST,unplanned obsellesence
Date: 06 Sep 00 - 02:37 AM

I think the lesson is that we all get to see you writing love letters to yourself

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: Thomas the Rhymer
Date: 06 Sep 00 - 03:19 AM

Nice try, guest, as there is an unintended innocence to my postings, it is true. However, I know the relevence of my questions, and my intention, is true. The questions I ask are heartfelt, and I don't put people down unless they insist on negative posturing.

Take you for instance. The response you are looking for; is it punitive? Are you able to discuss your concerns without annonymity? Or are you the vengeful sort?

This forum can help us answer questions. Or it can be a dumping ground for all sorts of human heartache. Care to proceed with the former?

If I have offended anyone, I'm sure they can send me their concerns in the PM. Please do.

In the meantime, Singer/songwriters and folk tradition may be incouraged to intermingle artfully!

Subject: RE: Mythological Proportions of the Present
From: DougR
Date: 07 Sep 00 - 02:46 AM

Whistle Stop: I hope you don't feel you are alone. I have had some difficulty following TTR's reasoning too. He has a definite point of view, but for some reason I have a problem following some of it. Probably due to my onset senility! :>) DougR