The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #97052 Message #1905255
Posted By: Declan
10-Dec-06 - 08:17 AM
Thread Name: Folklore: What are the Motives of the Re-definers?
Subject: RE: Folklore: What are the Motives of the Re-definers?
I don't think I'm choosing 2 as my definition. I don't think tunes that are not in the spirit of a tradition will ever be regarded as part of that tradition however popular they become. But some recently composed pieces written in the traditional style (hence 3) will become part of that living tradition, and will be passed on to others. That is how we have the older ones we have today.
I must stress that I am not talking about this in the context of commercial attribution of the tunes. If someone records a tune (or song) with a known author (and there is an onus on them to research this as best they can) then they should properly attribute authorship and pay whatever rolyalies that are due.
But there is more to the folk traditional scene than the commercial side, and I do not agree with the declaration of closure of the body of traditional work.
By the way I am not in any way trying to apologise for those who want to assert that forms of rock and pop music are traditional, for commercial or other motives. I would stop short of capital punishment for this crime however, as this form of punishment should be reserved for rhythmically challenged percussionists.