Just for some information for those who want to know.

I have all the Sydney Carter song books that Stainer & Bell publish. In them, Sydney Carter often makes comments about the songs. Sometimes he has suggestions about how his songs might be performed, which are certainly interesting.



Here are a couple of quotes from Sydney Carter about the performance of his songs (taken from his books):

"Really, no song should be learned out of a book. What is written down is only an approximation. Songs should be learned the way you learn to make an omelette or drive a car. By demonstration, imitation and experiment.

Folk songs used to be passed on like this, which may account for their uncanny power when performed by a singer in the right tradition: a power which is often lost when they are sung by a singer merely trained in "music". A folk song is really a kind of spell: music is a part of it, and so are words, but there is more to it than that. From a living singer, you can learn the proper tone of voice and timing, what liberties you can or cannot take with the rhythm and the tempo. Even the way he stands or moves about may tell you something. And, of course, you can ask him questions, which you can't do to a book."

Sydney Carter
September, 1969

"These songs are not "folk"; but a singer in the folk or blues tradition might know what to do with them more easily than a singer trained ecclesiastically. Animal vitality, the pulsation of the human voice, the dramatic use of vocal texture - rough, smooth, "ugly" or "beautiful" - are the qualities you find in a blues singer. They are not always welcomed in a church. Partly, perhaps, it is a matter of acoustics. Churches are not built to cope with sounds like this.

The angelic, disembodied voice, floating on its own innumerable echoes, can produce a wonderful effect. But it is rarely (I won't say never) the effect envisaged for the kind of song I write. Most of them come off better in the cellar or the crypt. Or even in the open air.

Can you sing of holy things in a worldly voice? When you go into a place of worship, do you have to leave your body at the door? Mahalia Jackson doesn't. She sings with the power, the grace and the fhythm of an animal. Can you, or can you not, be a holy animal? If not, I'm sunk.

Holy or not, I like a singer who can dance; with the voice, if not the feet. Melody and clarity of diction are desirable; but rhythm, timing and vitality matter more than crystal clear enunciation or the perfect rounded note. My gallery of vocal pin-ups would include Amalia rodrighes and (in another corner) Marlene Dietrich. Whether what she does can really be called singing doesn't worry me. It is alive, it can weave a spell; and I do not think it is a wicked one. Like anything alive, it dances. Even the Dead March should go with a live, albeit solemn, rhythm. It is relevant to life. If it isn't, why are we doing it?

The songs in this book started from words, rhythm and a melody. Harmonies came later. They tend to vary with the instrument and player. Here, they are provided by John Farmer, for piano and guitar. Other harmonies and instruments are possible; some of them can be heard on the records that are listed."

Sydney Carter
September, 1969

For example, Keith and I do an arrangement in unaccompanied harmony of "Crow on the Cradle". The tune we use is the one in the book and the one that most people know.

I bought a CD of a performance by Sydney Carter and Donald Swan when they were working together (I'll have to find it to give details if anyone is interested - it is not a bootleg CD). This CD has a version of "Crow on the Cradle". The words are different (and we've incorporated some of the differences into the version we sing). The tune is very different, i.e. not the one that was put in the book.

Hope this helps.

Cheers

Sylvia