BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 21 Jan 07 - 10:01 AM

Nice one John!!

If you listen to the programme you will hear JL's justification for not publishing the list.Interestingly top try and stop him making that point I accepted it in the original piece I did. I suspect we were both edited.

Dave Eyre

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,John Amendall
Date: 21 Jan 07 - 08:20 AM

Stories reach me that Lakeman & Leonard are already reheasing an old Flannagan & Allen number for their special performance at this year's Folk Awards.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Run_Rabbit_Run

The part of the farmer has yet to be cast, but I think there may be volunteers amongst us.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Betsy
Date: 21 Jan 07 - 08:16 AM

Why can't we have access to the list of people who supposedly comprise the Voting Panel ? Simple enough isn't it ?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 21 Jan 07 - 08:08 AM

I presume it's the EMI release (electric, no Kathryn).

When I was at Folk Devils record shop in Whitby last weekend, they had the first version of the CD still available, clever things. So if anyone is interested...

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,Deep Throat
Date: 21 Jan 07 - 08:01 AM

I want to know which version of "The White Hare" is supposed to be the song that is nominated.

The version on the *first* edition of Freedom Fields has an extra verse to the version they put on the second edition and the single. That is in addition to the completly changed arrangement without banjos or Kathryn Roberts. Mike Harding always plays the first version (probably because it sounds a bit more "folky") even though you can't buy it any more. But it is quite important which version of a "trad" song really is being nominated, isn't it?

As Sir Walter Scott might have said, "Oh what a tangled web we weave, When first we practise to..."

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 21 Jan 07 - 06:58 AM

For those who missed the original broadcast on Friday, there is a repeat this evening (Sunday) at 8.00 pm.

Can I suggest you email "Feedback" with your opinion. Clearly they listen!!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 20 Jan 07 - 10:18 AM

"As to the whole tale about hearing the tune somewhere in the past, isn't it strange that either the original writer or interpreter has not come forward yet"

I've said this before, too: the first time I heard the song was in a session. Someone played it, and i said to my friend, "That's got to be a Seth Lakeman song."

I'm not musically sophisticated enough to describe how an artist develops signature musical styles, but I have listened both to Kitty Jay and Freedom Fields, and my initial feeling, without ever having heard the song before, was tha tthe tune had Seth written all over it.

I'm just saying.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST, JC
Date: 20 Jan 07 - 09:44 AM

IF we accept Leonard's assertion that there really is a proper voting process, and that the panel really does exist, and does indeed vote,

and IF we accept that he's is telling the truth when he says a majority of these people voted White Hare into the trad category,

then it only proves that he's invited the wrong people to vote on folk awards onto the panel, so none of the votes mean anything at all.

If we don't then it can only be a put-up job aimed at lining pockets.

Either way it's an abuse of OUR money

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,John Amendall
Date: 20 Jan 07 - 09:31 AM

>>One of the issues that has really wound me up in this whole debate about the White Hare is that it seems to undermine the very concept of traditional music. The BBC has ONE award in its whole arsenal that has been specifically created to acknowledge traditional song...and if it will defend the right of a song which is clearly not a traditional song to be nominated in that category, it makes a mockery of the category itself. And if you love traditional music and feel that it has a right to be acknowledged within the BBC Folk Awards, that makes you rather sad. <<

That is where I am too. It annoys me that a song that was essentially written 5 minutes ago (in folk terms) ever got classed as "traditional". I really don't like the idea that if a performer is getting a bit of stick in folk circles for not doing enough trad material that he then decides "Oh I'll write a trad one then". That the guy the BBC has delegated custodianship of the process then colludes in trying to cover-up the subterfuge INCENSES me.

As to the whole tale about hearing the tune somewhere in the past, isn't it strange that either the original writer or interpreter has not come forward yet and cried "foul. Where's my money?". The song has had plenty of air-play. Even if he/she doesn't listen to the radio, I'm sure he/she has friends that do and should have recognised it by now. So why has no one come forward and said "it's mine?"

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 20 Jan 07 - 08:56 AM

Right back atcha, Uncle Dave!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 20 Jan 07 - 06:38 AM

I like the sound of your voice too Ruth, especially when it speaks so much sense.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 20 Jan 07 - 05:45 AM

Tim, I've expressed this before, but I'll say it again, mostly because I'm rather fond of the sound of my own voice.

Folk as a genre is, I think, almost impossible these days to quantify or put parameters around. It's come to mean different things to different people, from contemorary singer-songwriter stuff to artificial media constructs like "nu folk" and "twisted folk", right though to traditional music. Now, traditional music is much easier to define: it's music or songs without an identifiable author, and it's usually got a history of being passed down orally, often through many generations.

Looking after traditional music is like looking after any other aspect of our heritage. It's a legacy that is a living one, as so many people still sing traditional songs. How you interpret them is open to debate, but personally I love the whole range of interpretation, from the most stripped-down,unaccompanied singing right through to Eliza and Salsa Celtica's version of the Grey Cock. It all keeps the tradition alive.

One of the issues that has really wound me up in this whole debate about the White Hare is that it seems to undermine the very concept of traditional music. The BBC has ONE award in its whole arsenal that has been specifically created to acknowledge traditional song...and if it will defend the right of a song which is clearly not a traditional song to be nominated in that category, it makes a mockery of the category itself. And if you love traditional music and feel that it has a right to be acknowledged within the BBC Folk Awards, that makes you rather sad. Well, it makes me sad, anyway.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Tim theTwangler
Date: 20 Jan 07 - 03:19 AM

Well since Sam left I suppose......
OK I think I am starting to get the hang of this now.
So the way of the performing is not important but just a matter of taste.
but.
The song has to be by anon and the tune too.
Both having been changed and altered as they pass throuhg the hands of many and varied performers?
And age is not important because if it is by Anon there is no record of when it came into being.
So what is the difference between a folk song and a traditional fold song?
Can the former be new?
Also does the style of performnce and arrangment make any difference in this case?
Dave I totally agree your on air protaganist did come over a bit dodgy like.
I often wonder at the arrogance of a lot of the producers and spokesment that turn up on that program.
If they were any more set in their way and devious sounding we would probably be allowed to veot for them at the next general election.
They are never ever wrong.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 07:06 PM

You'll be bloody lucky.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,Folkybob
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 06:57 PM

11.30 in the big brother house and Ruth is feeling defensive.....

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 06:49 PM

Oh, forgive me - I never realised folkybob was a member of the legal fraternity. I just thought he was an arse.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 06:40 PM

I agree. It's interesting that he suddenly says "of course we'll publish the voting figures" as if it's such an easy, simple request with which to comply - so how come he's ignored it for the last two months?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 06:40 PM

"obligated"? Surely the word is "obliged". Stick that up your fundament, bob

See Fowler's modern english usage , Ruth, before you get noughty

OBLIGATED - as a synomym for obliged(having received a favour etc) is now a mere solecism; but in the full sense of bound by law or duty to do something it is still used,especially in legal language.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,The DG
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 06:31 PM

Given Leonard's pedigree with the BBC you'd think he'd be better at responding to listeners' feedback (it IS covered in training).

If he'd given sensible, full answers to reasonable questions, it would all have blown over long ago.

He has only himself to blame if people are chasing hares now.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 06:15 PM

Bob - it's not the issue of attribution that matters. It's what this 'mistake' tells us about the awards system. We are seeking honesty, integrity, truth and fairness, not attribution.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 06:05 PM

"obligated"? Surely the word is "obliged". Stick that up your fundament, bob.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 06:01 PM

Dont hang about eavesdropping on websites it's nerdy

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 05:45 PM

Thanks for your considered comment. You must be John Leonard hiding behind guest!!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,folkyBob
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 05:17 PM

Is this STILL going on........you guys need to get out more!
Frankly, you're lucky that such drivel(i.e. disappearing up your own fundaments about whether a poxy little song is trad or not) gets such wide exposure and its only because the BBC is so PC and obligated to include all whingers, grumblers, renegades and saddoes, that anyone's given you time of day. MOVE ON!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 05:14 PM

Can we offer a line to JL?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 04:04 PM

It is.......

John was a professional musician on the folk circuit until he joined the BBC at Radio Sheffield in 1976. After 4 years as the station's music producer he joined Network Radio, Manchester as a producer of music programmes for Radios 1 and 2. In 1993 he became Editor of Radio 1 North and was responsible for bringing to the network Janice Long, Andy Kershaw, Simon Mayo and Mark Radcliffe. John has been nominated for six Sony awards, winning 3 of them. In 1995 John left the BBC to join Nick Barraclough at Smooth Operations. In 1998 John returned to his first love, working in folk music, when Smooth Operations won the commission to produce Radio 2's folk-roots show. John lives just outside Oldham with his wife and five children. He sports an EFDSS-approved folk-singer's beard and has many jumpers.

From the Smooth Ops site......

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: danensis
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 03:43 PM

Is this the same John Leonard who used to arrange folk gigs in South Yorkshire?

John

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 03:21 PM

Tim the Twangler,

Look at one of the other best trad track nominations: the Grey Gallito by Salsa Celtica, a traditional English song set to haunting Latin backing.

Of course it's still a traditional song - and an absolutely cracking one at that.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 02:30 PM

Tim the Twangler: you ask if you recorded a trad song and used a reggae beat, would it be trad? Well, of course that would be eligible. But if you write a new opera about Tristan and isolde, it is not trad, and not eligible. Even though it is based on a Cornish folktale. Do you seriously think Wagner should win the Folk Awards? there are plenty of other awards for pop, and opera. etc. This is an award for traditional folk music. Which must mean something, even if there are different opinions on exactly what that something is.
    These nominations are worth a lot of money. Wagner doesnt need them. Simple.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Surreysinger
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 02:30 PM

It's interesting to note (and I'm going to be oh so BORING here), that there's nothing new under the sun! When the Folk Song Society was formed in 1898, J Fuller Maitland, Lucy Broadwood's musical collaborator in producing "English County Songs" in 1893, wrote to her about the putative committee of the society that "...the "faking" party is stronger there than we thought," and urged her strongly to ensure that she was on the committee to ensure that this faction did not hold sway. At the time it was very much the vogue for poets to take a traditional tune and harness it to words of their own construction, and then call the end result a folk song... sound familiar??

I have to say that I cannot for the life of me see how the choice of THIS particular White Hare song as a traditional one can be justified. I doubt very much, for example, if Mick Ryan would claim traditional status for his self-written song "King Kayley", even though the story it is woven around is a British folk tale (of wonderfully blood curdling and mystical nature), and it's performed in true unaccompanied traditional style.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 02:22 PM

The other White Hare referred to was recorded from Joseph Taylor (of Brigg Fair fame) and a version was recorded by the Waterson's on "The Watersons", both of these can be found here It bears no relation to this song at all. There was another version of the same song recorded by Kidson.

I have no objection to self-penned songs, some of them are brilliant - Ewan MacColl, John Conolly and Mike Waterson come to mind. Nor is there any objection to this as a song (not especially good IMHO) but that is not the point. If dozens of people cover it like they have with "Fiddler's Green" and "The First Time Ever" then good look to Seth. I hope he makes a fortune from it.

The indignation Tim, is not from those things. The indignation is because people such as festival organisers take notice of these awards (and so they should because they ought to indicate a measure of public popularity rather than just in the folk world) to book people. Choosing this track above others forces the fifth placed artist out of the reckoning. This is not a traditional song. People may find it hard to define a traditional song and I would be one of them.

But whatever definition you come up with - something written in the past couple of years does not come into the reckoning and never has.

However the traditional the story.

Last year the winning traditional track was by John Tams and was called the "Bitter Withy". Remarkably it was the only track on that particular record not written by him.

See why people think it might be fixed?

And JL has promised to put the votes up. Are you a gambler Tim? Here is a wager. That list of votes will be the ones cast for the four finalists. You will never know which track came fifth in the traditional category.

I did make a number of those points in the recording but they were cut. I knew the format and tried anticipate his objections in advance. Some of those were edited out.

I knew he would get the last word. But for an experienced broadcaster which he is, he sounded a bit nervy.

I think it might just be more transparent next year.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 02:16 PM

In this discussion I would refer colleagues to the highset authority:

John Leonard, when asked to define "traditional" gives us

a. No known composer and
b. passed through many hands.

Sounds good to me. Do it Tim, as Martin Carthy has said the only bad thing you can do to trad songs is to stop singing them.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Tim theTwangler
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 01:42 PM

I thought Dave did a good job of putting over the arguement against.
The program format was biased in favour of the company spokesman.
And by using that format the Official line was given a deal more reasonble feeling than you would have gotten if there was an opportunity for dave to come back and challenge the information given by the spokeperson.
HHHmmmmmm.
The Format of the song extract sounded no more traditional to me than all around my hat by Steeleye.
The arrangement etc did not conjure up finger in the ear type performance at all.
Is that what the Trad/not trad arguement boiled down to?
If twas a trad story, and Mr lakeman wrote it in his own style and borrowed an old tune that he then arranged.
And spliced it all together. I am really sorry and mean no offence but that does sound a bit like what I am told others do.
frankly if I didnt know what a huge amount of indignation it has caused to some of you on here(sorry for making fun of your genuinely held beliefs)I would have said it was just a good song with a decent beat.
But not what I would want to hear at our local folk club on a singers night.
Back to Tim the troll then.
If I arranged and recorded a Traditional (as defined by the majority veiw on this thread)song and it had a heavy reggae beat and Bodrhan riffs driving it. would it count as traditional?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 01:28 PM

Intigue, intrigue! Or is that another thread?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST, whistleblower
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 01:00 PM

the while hare is only the tip of the iceberg

far worse has happened in the past and will happen again if they don't clean up their act

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 01:00 PM

I started this particular thread and I am not sure I have anything new to add. People above have made the most crucial points.

But I have listened to the programme twice on Listen again and would simply say:

1. Dave made his points well but the format of the programme Dave first, John second, no come back, enabled John to tell his own story with out recourse to the points made by Dave.

2. John Leonard, when asked to define "traditional" gives us

a. No known composer and
b. passed through many hands.
Who could argue? The White Hare is not trad.

3. When talking about the song JL quickly moves from "The Song" to "The Story" and argues the "The Story" to be trad. and hence the song! The tune was picked by Seth as a boy and modified. mmmmmmm.

4. JL then alludes to the traditional song "The White Hare" is if the two songs are closely related as different variants of many trad. songs are. Seth's song is not related in this way, if at all.

Points 3 & 4 seem to show JL being somewhere between devious and dishonest in defending his position and this is the second issue that brings so many of us to this conflict:

Why is JL the only person who will not say TWHINATS? Does he have something to hide? Lets make no bones about he is extremely experienced and talented and generally a force for good. Why has JL talked himself into this corner? That is why we seek clarity.

Thanks to Dave for a good job well done in the face of much nonsense!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 12:13 PM

Yes - he was basically lying when saying that it's been credited as traditional on all the CDs - what about the two different versions of the album?

I say he's lying because the issue of the different attributions on the various CDs has been discussed ad infinitum in this debate, both here and on the BBC messageboard - there's no way he could be ignorant at this point of the fact that what he said simply isn't true.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 12:00 PM

Well done Dave. John Leonard used some very standard bits of obfuscation. Like making the obvious definition of traditional(different versions, oral transmission) as if he was disagreeing with Dave, thus subtly suggesting that dave must be talking nonsense.
Then the very, very, very interesting suggesting that he'd checkeed last year's voting patterns, and pointing out that taking out the votes of the people with a businesss interest wouldn't have changed the result. Sounds very convincing. But why did he pick last year, particularly, when people are complaining about this year? Go figure, as they say.
    He also, very openly and frankly, offered to publish the votes for first, second, third and fourth place( in a few months time when controversy has died down). And pointed out that nobody would be interested in who came tenth or fifteenth. Anotherr classic piece of misdirection. Who has asked him who came tenth or fifteenth? Who could care less?The interesting question is, who came fifth? because they deserve the kudos of a nomination, and the money that goes with it. Of course, it might have been one of Seth's actually traditional tracks, which would be very funny.
   All in all, a total failure, because what we all want is for the awards to be open, and the winners to be admired. All Smooth Operations are doing is making the awards look dodgy, and Seth Lakeman to get laughed at. It's a shame, and the problem could so easily be dealt with.
A final point, to which I don't know the answer. John Leonrad meatphorically spread his hands wide in an honest fashion and said that SEth Lakeman has said it was traditioinal on both CD versions, and that he (JL) supports him. Isn't it in fact the case that SL has now withdrawn the claim. and the single(issued most recently) has trhe song credited to Lakeman? Leaving John Leonard as the only person in the world who thinks it's traditional.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 11:54 AM

Cheers, Uncle Dave!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 11:39 AM

Anyone wishing to listen to it again - an elderly - avuncular even - mudcatter talking about the Folk Awards, can listen here where there is also an opportunity to email the "Feedback" programme and let them know what you thought of John's performance.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,Guest, Save the White Hare
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 11:13 AM

>>John [ it's trad if I say so ] Leonard wouldn't tell the truth to save his life, and he wouldn't know a traditional song if kicked him in the bollocks. <<

Oh so true. With a really shifty witness like that giving evidence in my defence I'm doomed!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 10:49 AM

Norman, I am with the general drift of wht you say, but perhaps you are understating your case? I supose all that troble in the shower has made you careful

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,Norman Bates
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 10:42 AM

John [ it's trad if I say so ] Leonard wouldn't tell the truth to save his life, and he wouldn't know a traditional song if kicked him in the bollocks.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: guitar
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 10:33 AM

it doesn't trad to me either.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 10:16 AM

I had never heard the song before today when they played a clip on Radio 4, it sounded more soft rock/Neill Young than folk music to me anyway, it wouldn't have sounded out of place being sung by the Eagles.
Traditional was something it definitely didn't sound to me!
Giok

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 10:13 AM

"where the song has passed through many hands in an oral tradition, as seems to be the case with Seth's version of 'The White Hare'."

So John Leonard really believes that these are traditional lyrics?

I heard her in the valley,
I heard her in the dead of night.
The warning of a white hare
Her eyes burning bright.

Careful you don`t catch her
Give her right of way.
For she will look upon you,
And steal your soul away

For the white hare is calling,
She's dancing in the night.
She'll be out `til the morning light.

Out upon the heather
A shadow came onto me.
Her hair was hanging over,
Her face I could not see.

She ran behind the rocks,
I heard the hounds cry,
The image of a woman
With head she held up high.

For the white hare is calling,
She's dancing in the night.
She'll be out `til the morning
With her eyes burning bright.
The white hare is calling you.

If you go hunting,
Calling out your prey,
If you see a fair maid,
Her hair an ashen grey,

Careful you don`t catch her,
Give her right of way,
For she will look upon you,
And steal your soul away

For the white hare is calling,
She's dancing in the night.
She'll be out `til the morning,
With her eyes burning bright.
The white hare is calling you.


If so, he's the only person who does - including Seth.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 09:56 AM

Two-Fingers Leonard contradicted his own criteria for entry qualification to the Best Traditional Track category, which are:

The best performance of any traditional song or tune on CD released during the past 12 months. This is a category designed to recognise the work of people recording traditional material. It is to be a new recording of a traditional song, from any tradition.

This is not the same as what he said, which was:

My personal definition of a 'traditional' track is any piece of music where we cannot identify the original author and where the song has passed through many hands in an oral tradition, as seems to be the case with Seth's version of 'The White Hare'. Seth and his band obviously came to the same conclusions, because on both versions of 'Freedom Fields', the song is credited as traditional.

Whatever. Neither can be applied to The White Hare.

He also raised the entirely irrelevant issue of PRS which would make not the slightest difference because you get the same money for Trad/Arr as you do for a wholly self-written song.

The only new thing he actually said was that the number of votes cast for the top four in each category will be published after 5 February on the website.

Dave Eyre was clear and concise, John Leonard was his obfusticating self. Nothing new there.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Marje
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 09:32 AM

Seconded. Or thirded, or whatever. I don't believe for a moment that either Seth Lakeman or John Leonard could imagine that such a sycopated, guitar-reliant tune could be traditional, nor do I believe that he just "heard it in a pub as a boy" and remembered it. It's just not that sort of tune. And he must then have sat down and written the lyrics to fit the tune - the traditional story didn't just leap into metred verse all by itself. I suppose it was easier to call it all "trad" than to say: "Words by Seth Lakeman. Tune copied from someone but I can't remember who it was."

Well done, Dave, for drawing attention to it. Perhaps both the singer and the BBC will take a bit more care with their categories and their attributions in future.

Marje

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: John Routledge
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 08:58 AM

Well said Ruth. Leonard was not convincing in the slightest!!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 08:55 AM

Loving John Leonard claiming that, because the STORY is a traditional legend, that makes the SONG Seth has written based on the story traditional too...

What a disingenuous load of claptrap and a pathetic excuse for keeping the song in the running. There's nothing more infuriating than when someone won't simply admit that they're wrong, and back down. It's very Blairite.

Sad thing is, the typical R4 listener won't understand the issue because of the way JL has spun it, and that Dave didn't get a chance to reply and challenge him.