so can this be considered Folk ?????????

Subject: so can this be considered Folk ?????????
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 03 Feb 05 - 10:31 AM

see what you think of this 18 year old's
interpretation of a classic melody and lyric

[the 1st of the 3 songs of this artist demo soundfile]

http://www.billyfury.com/featuredartist/laura.ram


is this the Folk process alive and well in the UK ?

Subject: RE: so can this be considered Folk ?????????
From: Bill D
Date: 03 Feb 05 - 10:55 AM

"classic"?.....seems 'modern' to me, and like many modern attempts to capture a topical theme, it goes for the jugular by 'saying' the emotions, rather than allowing the listener to 'find' the point. It doesn't feel like 'folk'...but that argument has already been done to death. It's hard to put on a label, when we just don't agree.

You don't say if the young lady is the author, or just singing it, but her voice, while ok, sounds like she is trying too hard to be moving and emotional....but she IS 18....


well, you asked...*smile* (I may not be the best test case, as I am firmly rooted in older styles)

Subject: RE: so can this be considered Folk ?????????
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Feb 05 - 01:01 PM

I followed the link to source and copied this extract:

"Laura is from Northampton and was 18 in January....
Having spent an enjoyable weekend in Liverpool ..,
she was deeply affected by the murder of a 16-year-old boy - a victim of a drugs turf war in the city."

Maybe, guessing she wrote the new lyrics, this is too emotional
and too 'girly an approach for some of you old male folk 'critics'.
I think the tune is vintage and well loved enough to be considered a 'classic,
and worthy of being assimilated into a living folk tradition.
Very nicely performed by a young woman, I presume to be learning the ropes and experimenting with direction as a talented young singer/writer.

is she good enough to make it big like Kate or Dido, etc;
who knows ?

Subject: RE: so can this be considered Folk ?????????
From: Bernard
Date: 03 Feb 05 - 05:46 PM

Does it need a label or a pigeonhole? Can it not just be appreciated as it is?

Subject: RE: so can this be considered Folk ?????????
From: Tannywheeler
Date: 03 Feb 05 - 06:07 PM

Is she good enough...
This thing is less than a month old. Only TIME

Subject: RE: so can this be considered Folk ?????????
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 03 Feb 05 - 06:39 PM

AHHHHHH! Why don't you all just Folk off!


Sorry! Got carried away.... perform your own style - if it sells great....

Subject: RE: so can this be considered Folk ?????????
From: thespionage
Date: 03 Feb 05 - 10:51 PM

The vocals sound a lot like modern pop, which is neither good nor bad. The arrangement is very modern and I would hesitate to call it folk music, at least as I have come to understand the meaning. As a 19-year-old folksinger who plays guitar, banjo and mandolin, I would say that the older traditions are alive in the younger generation as well. Since part of the folk process, as Pete Seeger explained it, is to write new words to old tunes, I am part of the process in that aspect as well. I write parodies that are often funny—remember that Woody Guthrie's often contained humor—usually satirical, and nearly always contain at least a little bit of social commentary, even if that commentary is no more than "theatre people shouldn't procrastinate." I still think the song is fairly nice.

Take it easy, but take it. —Woody Guthrie

Russ
Practitioner of Thespionage

Subject: RE: so can this be considered Folk ?????????
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 03 Feb 05 - 11:06 PM

Give it a hundred years. Then ask.

Subject: RE: so can this be considered Folk ?????????
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 04 Feb 05 - 03:46 AM

Is it a hundred years since Woody already?

Subject: RE: so can this be considered Folk ?????????
From: Lanfranc
Date: 04 Feb 05 - 07:02 AM

No, it just feels like it!

Alan

Subject: RE: so can this be considered Folk ?????????
From: Bill D
Date: 04 Feb 05 - 10:39 AM

Woody gets 5 out of 9 on the 'purist' index of arcane categories, so he is 'accepted', though not a full member. (HE don't get to be a FULL member till someone asks if he was a real person...and can't get a quick answer....*grin*)

Subject: RE: so can this be considered Folk ?????????
From: TheBigPinkLad
Date: 04 Feb 05 - 11:26 AM

Nowt wrong with that. She's a canny singer, even if imitative of the American diva-clone. She swiped an established tune and wrote about current affairs. It'll never make No. 1 and it's forgettable, so I'd say yes, very much in the folk tradition ;o)

Enjoy being 18, Laura. And good luck ... don't give up!

Subject: RE: so can this be considered Folk ?????????
From: GUEST,Jim
Date: 04 Feb 05 - 12:50 PM

Good voice, but to my ears too much influenced by "the American diva-clone" mentioned above. I'd like to hear her natural voice style when she reverts to it though.

The song does nowt f'me, but I'm just an ignorant Yorkie Folkie - good luck to the lass.

Subject: RE: so can this be considered Folk ?????????
From: GUEST,Jim
Date: 04 Feb 05 - 12:53 PM

Off to see Rosie Deighton at the Rockingham Arms next Friday - now there's a grand Yorkshire folk voice f'ya!

Subject: RE: so can this be considered Folk ?????????
From: Hamish
Date: 04 Feb 05 - 02:14 PM

I win! I got "Unable to establish a connection with the server."

;-)

Subject: RE: so can this be considered Folk ?????????
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Feb 05 - 09:51 PM

Good voice. I'd like to hear it with the "soul" turned down - it gets in the way of the story. Of course that's part of that style, but I don't think it helps express the real feeling. You find yourself listening to the vocal tricks rather than the words and following the story.

Subject: RE: so can this be considered Folk ?????????
From: GUEST,.gargoyle
Date: 04 Feb 05 - 10:43 PM

I believe your emotional attachment has distorted the perception.

Sincerely,
Gargoyle

Subject: RE: so can this be considered Folk ?????????
From: Bobert
Date: 04 Feb 05 - 11:09 PM

In the purist sense it is folk music...

Would I buy it? No...

Bobert