You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It

Subject: you cant damage a song by singing it
From: The Sandman
Date: 29 Jan 07 - 08:26 AM

You cant damage a song by singing it, the only way you can damage the songis by not singing it[Martin Carthy].
the important point is not who is singing the song, but how the song is being sung[Dick Miles].
I would appreciate other views on these two statements

Subject: RE: YOUCANT DAMAGE A SONG BY SINGING IT
From: GUEST,Bardan
Date: 29 Jan 07 - 08:30 AM

I've heard raglan road being absolutely butchered. Also the memory of alternative lyrics have made it impossible for a lot of people to sing a song with a straight face. (E.g. as I roved out has been ruined for my uncle by the substitution once of pants for hat.)

Subject: RE: YOUCANT DAMAGE A SONG BY SINGING IT
From: bubblyrat
Date: 29 Jan 07 - 08:32 AM

The Pogues certainly gave it their best shot !!

Subject: RE: YOUCANT DAMAGE A SONG BY SINGING IT
From: Cluin
Date: 29 Jan 07 - 08:35 AM

Two superficial profundities with plenty of exceptions.

But I tend to agree with them both in principle.

Subject: RE: YOUCANT DAMAGE A SONG BY SINGING IT
From: Leadfingers
Date: 29 Jan 07 - 08:58 AM

When The Kipper Family recorded Dido Fido , a lot of people said it would 'kill' Dido Bendigo as a folk song ! When was the last time YOU heard Didi Fido ? I know I heard Bendigo about a month ago !

Subject: RE: YOUCANT DAMAGE A SONG BY SINGING IT
From: goodpony
Date: 29 Jan 07 - 09:01 AM

Yes you can. Try listening to "Me and Bobby Magee" at a Biker-bar that features Kareoke.

Subject: RE: YOU CAN'T DAMAGE A SONG BY SINGING IT
From: Scrump
Date: 29 Jan 07 - 09:31 AM

Considering the 1st point (attributed to Martin Carthy above): It depends what you mean by the expression "to damage a song". In one sense, it can't be "damaged", whatever is done to it.

An individual performance or arrangement of a song could be terrible, but it won't affect the song, which still exists in its own right, as before.

Not singing a song may cause it to become neglected, and (as must have happened to old songs in the past) eventually forgotten. If there is no record of the song (in sound or written) then it would disappear completely, so I guess you could say that is a form of "damage".

As for the second point, that's true.

Subject: RE: YOU CAN'T DAMAGE A SONG BY SINGING IT
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Jan 07 - 09:32 AM

You can't damage a song by singing it SPARINGLY. an occasional bad airing might still serve to bring a good song to a wider audience. But think what has happened to 'Fields of Athenry', 'Wild Rover' and 'The band played waltzing Matilda' to name but three when they were sung over and over (and over and over and over ....)

Subject: RE: YOU CAN'T DAMAGE A SONG BY SINGING IT
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Jan 07 - 09:34 AM

What's the difference between a superficial profundities and a profound superficiality?

Though I wouldn't apply either term to these remarks, which are very sensible and remind us of truths that are easily ignored. Especially Martin Carthy's, because you do get people who don't appear to appreciate that it is indeed true.

Sometimes our ability to recognise the meaning or the qualities of a song can be messed up by listening to particular performances, particularly when that becomes the way people tend to sing the song. And when a song gets sung too often people can lose the ability to appreciate it, sometimes as a kind of gamesmanship ploy. ("Oh No, not the Streets of London/the Mary Ellen Carter/Will you go Lassie Go/No Man's Land..." etc etc)

But behind all the mess and the overfamiliarity the song is still there, ready to spring back to life at the right time and place.

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: GUEST,ib48
Date: 29 Jan 07 - 02:41 PM

you can if your westlife

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: Alec
Date: 29 Jan 07 - 03:04 PM

I agree (to a degree) with Martin Carthy , though he might reconsider if he ever hears me sing.
I also think how a song is sung is more important than who is singing but believe a song unsung is just some marks on a piece of paper.

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: The Vulgar Boatman
Date: 29 Jan 07 - 04:17 PM

"the music doesn't mind" - Dave Swarbrick
KYBTTS

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 29 Jan 07 - 05:04 PM

What was that business where the audience used to flap their arms about and shout IRA during Fields of Athenry. Do they still do it?

I once heard a wonderful deconstruction of Spancil Hill in a pub in Nottingham.

Last night as I lay dreaming
(What were you dreaming of Paddy?)
of pleasant days gone by
My mind was bent on wandering
(Where did it fly off to Paddy?)
To Ireland it did fly

Perhaps it was just nights I was playing that the audience had to amuse themselves in this fashion, but actually it seemed very well rehearsed. Anyway I enjoyed it - not sure if Martin Carthy and/or Dick Miles would approve.

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 29 Jan 07 - 06:45 PM

I think you can if you have a following at least. And if you write a parody to a great song..a so so song won't suffer too much but I think parodies do musical damage but it is a free country or three so have at it....mg

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: Stephen L. Rich
Date: 29 Jan 07 - 07:37 PM

"You can't damage a song by singing it."

That depends on the song and how it is sung.

Stephen Lee

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: pdq
Date: 29 Jan 07 - 07:48 PM

They probably never heard Al Green do "Hey Jude".

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: Scoville
Date: 29 Jan 07 - 09:55 PM

Ultimately, I don't think it does any permanent damage. If I hear a song and like the way it's done, then I want to go learn it. If I hear a song and there's something about it that's good but the arrangement sucks, I want to go do my own, hopefully better, version. I hope other people think like that, too. It seems that really bad arrangements fall by the wayside after a few years, anyway.

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: GUEST,reggie miles
Date: 30 Jan 07 - 12:50 AM

I've done a terrible job of some of my very own songs but never found out until I went home and listened to the recording of the evening's performance. DOH!

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 30 Jan 07 - 03:46 AM

Could we paraphrase Woody Allen:

I have nothing against gardening, I just don't want to be around when it happens?

All singers bring joy to the folk club, some of us when we get up and some of us when we sit down.

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: Jim Lad
Date: 30 Jan 07 - 03:58 AM

I'm with bubblyrat on this one and I'll add Sidney Devine, Fran & Anna and finally, Billy Connolly for buggering up The Work o' the Weavers.
"Little Arrows in yer clothin'.... God, I just gave myself an earworm!

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: GUEST
Date: 30 Jan 07 - 04:40 AM

An influential singer can change a song- even a composed and well known one.
For years "Over the Rainbow" was always sung the way Judy Garland sang it in the film.
"Somewhere over the rainbow---way up high"
Then Eva Cassidy's record became popular.
Now everyone sings:-
"Some-where over---- THE rainbow, way up high"
I don't think Eva Cassidy damaged the song by re-phrasing it. Some of her imitators may damage their reputation by gross over-singing, but the song is still there, waiting for the next definitive version to arrive.
In the folk revival era, I remember hearing Annie Briggs saying that she wrote extra verses for fragmentary traditional songs- and who played that ubiquitous percussive guitar accompaniment before Mr Carthy? Was that damaging to the tradition?
"Traditional", or "Updated" are both words with a large value connotation- and that value is positive and negative for different people. For some, a new version is always progress. For others, any divergence from "the tradition" is next to heresy.
I do not believe that any worthwhile song can be permanently damaged by either re-interpretation, parody or over exposure.
Did Jive Bunny damage Glen Miller? (an example of all three)
There may be a temporary effect, usually within one age cohort,and songs do go out of fashion, but surely the Folk song attitude is to take a much longer view.
Cheers
Dave

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: Roger the Skiffler
Date: 30 Jan 07 - 09:41 AM

I think I've probably left a few needing surgery!

RtS

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: GUEST,Angry Raisins
Date: 30 Jan 07 - 10:51 AM

And plenty have been murdered: "Raglan Road" mentioned above, I've never heard sung by anyone who actually took the trouble to look at Kavanagh's original text, either that or they can't breathe well enough to give the correct phrasing. The red-haired Irish fella just blasts his way through it, wrong words here and there, wrong phrasing at one point, total lack of understanding, yet everyone tries to imitate him. Jeeez!

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: Scrump
Date: 30 Jan 07 - 11:15 AM

A poor performance of a song can't damage the song. The song remains as it was before that performance, and is unscathed and available for use by anyone else who cares to sing it.

This can happen any number of times, but the song will remain, no matter how mmany times it may be butchered.

A song will only die if nobody remembers it, and there is no record of it. But it will die quietly of old age, not violently.

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: Kevin Sheils
Date: 30 Jan 07 - 11:39 AM

Agree about Raglan Road. There are very few people who sing it with a proper understanding of the internal rhythms and rhymes, particularly in the "I gave her gifts of the mind" verse but the vast majority completely screw up that verse.

Definitely a song that has been damaged, but such a pleasant surprise when you hear the correct phrasing, if you ever do!

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: Jim Lad
Date: 30 Jan 07 - 12:09 PM

Angry Raisins: "The Red Haired Fella""...?.!! You're winding us up right? Had me going there. Good one. I thought you meant Luke Kelly for a minute.

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: Greg B
Date: 30 Jan 07 - 12:53 PM

This statement has been obsoleted by 'American Idol.'

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: An Buachaill Caol Dubh
Date: 30 Jan 07 - 02:29 PM

I don't think "angry raisin" (?"Grapes of Wrath"?!) is winding us up at all, and for my part I agree entirely both with him and with Kevin Sheils: Luke Kelly, however appropriate his characteristic approach might have been in some instances, really brutalizes "Raglan Road". Notice his inappropriate phrasing in such cases as the relatively minor one,
"In Grafton Street /\ in NoVEM-BER /\ we tripped..."
(rather than the subtle implication of internal rhyme in:)
"In Grafton Street, in NoVEMber WE (t) ripped lightly..."

as well as the distortion of

"I gave her gifts of the mind, I gave her the secret sign
Of-the-artists who have known the true Gods of sound and stone;
And word and tint, without stint, I gave her poems...&c"

rather than

"I gave her g of the m, I gave her the secret sign that's known
To the artists WHO have known the TRUE Gods of sound, and stone,
And word, and tint: I did not stint; I gave her poems to say..&c"

Admittedly, this verse is difficult to sing because of the long phrasing and the way the sense carries on over line-ends; but KS gets it exactly right in drawing attention to the revelation that follows a properly phrased rendition. LK is best in such heroic, or rollicking, songs as "Rocky Road to Dublin" and, appropriately enough, "Kelly, the Boy from Killane"; but his "Raglan Road" has been unduly and unfortunately influential. (Ducking for cover now)

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: Elettra
Date: 30 Jan 07 - 03:29 PM

I've been singing "Raglan Road" for years and now I'm terrified to ever utter another word of it. Ochone.
E.

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: Jim Lad
Date: 30 Jan 07 - 03:46 PM

An Buachaill Caol Dubh:
You're ducking for cover? You just threw a grenade in the door. I'm outa here!

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: Blindlemonsteve
Date: 30 Jan 07 - 03:51 PM

You cant damage a song by singing it...........ever heard of "Daniel O´Donnell"

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: Peace
Date: 30 Jan 07 - 03:59 PM

"Horse With No Name"--the very act of singing it is damage enough.

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: GUEST,Tunesmith
Date: 30 Jan 07 - 05:16 PM

Of course, the opposite is very true. i.e. you can enhance a song by singing it. e.g. a rather ordinary song can sound superior when performed by a great artist.

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: GUEST
Date: 30 Jan 07 - 06:04 PM

Over on the Kumbayah thread there's a lot of moaning , some of it complaining about the song and even more complaining about how often, where, and when it has been performed. The song is ruined for some of the posters, if they ever saw anything good in it to ruin. That's not the same as the ruining of the song universally, but people tend to view songs subjectively.

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: DebC
Date: 30 Jan 07 - 06:16 PM

I can think of a number of songs that I loved until I heard some very bad renditions. Again and again and again and....

One is Dougie MacLean's "Caledonia". I have always loved that song until I heard it repeatedly rendered quite awfully. Still have not heard a version that pleased me except by Dougie.

The other is "Sonny's Dream" by the same method. I first heard Mary Black's version which is wonderful.

Both of these songs are excellent songs with well-written lyrics and wonderful melodies, IMO. But my experience has been that I have heard so many bad renditions of these songs that I cringe when I am about to hear them again.

On the other hand, I have never been that fond of "Leaving of Liverpool" for the same reasons as above until I heard Lou Killen sing it at the Lancaster Maritime Festival a couple of years ago. It was like hearing that song for the first time.

Deb

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: Scrump
Date: 30 Jan 07 - 06:20 PM

ever heard of "Daniel O´Donnell"

Daniel O'Donnell is too Daniel O'Donnell for me.

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Jan 07 - 07:15 PM

"It was like hearing that song for the first time."

And that can always happen with a good song, whch is why the thread heading is correct.

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: DebC
Date: 30 Jan 07 - 09:35 PM

Good point, McGrath :-)

Deb

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: The Sandman
Date: 03 Jan 23 - 12:55 PM

The Carthy quote,
probably was intended to mean, a song that is well written and has a good melody will continue to be sung despite bad perfomances of it.

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: Captain Swing
Date: 03 Jan 23 - 03:09 PM

I think Carthy's quote was in relation to the Imagined Village project. Was he not defending, justifiably, those performers who take trad songs and amalgamate them with different styles and traditions of music and with different instruments?

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: The Sandman
Date: 04 Jan 23 - 04:04 AM

Thankyou for letting us know the context of the quote.

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Jan 23 - 07:26 AM

Overkill is the biggest threat to a good song. Once everybody and his dog start singing it, the damage is done, probably for at least a decade. eg. Wagon Wheel, The Band Played Waltzing Matilda, Streets Of London.
it’s a crying shame because it takes a damn good song to get so popular that everybody gets sick of hearing it. It’s ironic.

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: meself
Date: 04 Jan 23 - 11:43 AM

Maybe you can't damage a song by singing it - but if you are an influential enough performer, you can popularize a lacklustre version of a traditional song such that it becomes the only version that is tolerated in public, to the chagrin of those who have been happily singing more lustrous versions of said song for years.

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: meself
Date: 04 Jan 23 - 11:48 AM

"it takes a damn good song to get so popular that everybody gets sick of hearing it."

It was probably on this site that I read a quote from some account of cowboy life in the later 1800s, in which it was alleged that if someone were to sing Oh, Bury Me Not at the campfire, he would require a partner with a drawn gun to cover him.

Subject: RE: You Can't Damage A Song By Singing It
From: The Sandman
Date: 04 Jan 23 - 01:05 PM

the quote was in relation to the Imagined Village project. Was he not defending, justifiably, those performers who take trad songs and amalgamate them with different styles and traditions of music and with different instruments