Sorry folks,
That some people choose to attempt to make a living out of folk song is of very little interest to me - their choice, their responsibility to provide themselves with the raw material, not mine (particularly when I read, as I did recently in The Living Tradition magazine of "The Imagined Village" which "recasts classic folk songs, adding a dose of sitar, dub soundscapes, beats, bhangra and dhol drums" – can somebody please pass the sick-bag and direct me to the nearest exit?) What is particularly galling about the above is the fact that the ad carries an Arts Council logo, so presumably it has the benefit of that august body's blessing as well as taxpayers' money.
My concern is that the songs and music get passed on to those who will respect them and facilitate their survival, and as far as I'm concerned any hope for this lies mainly with the clubs, not with the 'professionals', (though they certainly have a part to play and bear a large part of the responsibility for same).
When professionals tell me of how much it costs to put together an album I can only say that it measures somewhat small against the financing of thirty odd years of collecting – but then again, who's complaining – that's what we have chosen to do?
The music will not survive if it is left in the hands of people who adopt the attitude (to mis-quote President Trueman) "The tradition stops here".
If a singer chooses to sing say, a Christy Moore composition, or a Ralph McTell piece, or something by any recognised songwriter, they will expect to pay royalties; my suggestion of a levy on traditional material was made as a way of maybe evening the playing field and perhaps reciprocating the generosity of our tradition bearers, thereby taking some steps to ascertain that future generations might get the same pleasure that we have from the songs and music. I believe it is feasible, but only with the good will of the people concerned.
Cap'n, - whoops, your disrespect of traditional singers (and your elitism) is showing again. If Walter's statement (I wonder where 1974 came from - he said it some time in the mid-eighties) that the songs belong to all of us is irrelevant, who do they belong to – Paul Simon, Phil Coulter, Bob Dylan, you??? In practical terms every version of a song is an 'arrangement', so presumably somebody down the line has put in some work on it (without claiming it as their property). If "the rent" has to be paid, perhaps some of that is owed to Walter, Harry Cox, Sam Larner, et al, but I can't see them calling in the bailiffs, can you?
Incidentally, MacColl's generosity with his time, knowledge and material pre-dates the commercial success of First Time Ever by at least a couple of decades. That song (which was written fifteen years before its being taken up by Presley and Flack), and several other MacColl and Seeger compositions were recorded by numerous other singers without royalties being paid or requested. They believed that the songs were made to be passed on – I'll drink to that.
I intended to cover some of the other points that were raised, but Saturday night's/Sunday morning's hangover is getting the better of me - g'night all.
Jim Carroll