The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #117258   Message #2524937
Posted By: WFDU - Ron Olesko
26-Dec-08 - 11:25 AM
Thread Name: Pink-too modern to be classified as a folker?
Subject: RE: Pink-too modern to be classified as a folker?
I'd just like to add something - part apology and part attempt at clairification.

I would not consider Pink a "folk singer" in the traditional sense. I apologize to Les if I sounded "patronizing" (not my intent) or too harsh (out of frustration). Les is following a traditional definition of folk music and I do understand the point that many people make.

This is where I deviate. I would hate to have my life and interests ruled by definitions.   While I understand a need to classification in some cases, I also see those classifications as limiting.

I have a passion for folk music.   I love the history behind traditional songs and feel that they are gems that have been handed down from other generations - generations that took time to create such jewels.

At the same time I look at modern society and realize that the same interests that drove Cecil Sharp and other collectors to discover music still exist in terms of passion and desire, but modern advances have altered the path. Someone once came up with the term "oral tradition" as a way of describing how songs were passed on. The method of preserving these songs, orally, was based more on limitations and practices of the time - there were no recording devices and an intersest in saving these songs did not exist - so putting a song to paper was not a priority.   Nowadays we have a recognition of why it is important to preserve our heritage, and we have alternate methods of preserving and teaching others the music.

I would not invite Pink to a folk festival based on the music she has so far recorded, nor would I invite the Rolling Stones or any other group that created music for commercial reasons. At the same time, there is legitimate reason to look at the songs of these individuals and realize that there is a separation from "pop" and "folk" that DOES exist in contemporary music.

I realize that many people have an anal retentive desire to cling to 1954 definitions and the work that they have studied and come to know.   I understand that their steadfast desire to preserve older definitions is based on a passion - a passion that created a body of work that has been preserved for future generations, and a 51 year old radio host to enjoy and learn from.   

I can only wish that people do go beyond their self-imposed boundaries to listen and perhaps examine how such songs and singers might fit into a more realistic definition of what folk music should be.   A Steve Earle or a Pink deserve to be heard.