The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #119547   Message #2610995
Posted By: TheSnail
14-Apr-09 - 11:10 AM
Thread Name: 1954 and All That - defining folk music
Subject: RE: 1954 and All That - defining folk music
Jim Carroll

C'mon Bryan, I'm sure you know what these parameters are: MacColl, Seeger, Matt McGinn, Cyril Tawney, Pete Smith, Eric Bogle, Con 'Fada' O'Drisceol, Adam McNaughton, Ed Pickford, Enoch Kent.....

That isn't a list of parameters, it's a list of names, names of people who represent your tastes. I could put up a similar list which would include some of those names but not at the top and many others involved in folk clubs could come up with their own (probably overlapping) lists. They don't amount to "recognisable parameters".

Who sets the parameters; the club committee using a bit of common nouse - that's who

Exactly, Jim, according to their own tastes and perceptions which may not entirely agree with yours.

(you know them - the ones who should also be setting the standards).

I'll leave that till you finally get round to responding to my earlier post.

Did anybody declare the folk revival dead?

Perhaps not in those words although I think you did say "moribund" at one point.

I am now being asked to give up my seat to a bunch of squatters who couldn't find their 'folk' arses with both hands, and who haven't either the energy or the imagination to find a name of their own - sorry, I'd rather fight my corner a little longer (like, for the rest of my life).

That's really sad. There are people out there who use "folk" to describe music that doesn't fit your taste. There is nothing you can do about it. Are you really going to dedicate the rest of your life to defending the meaning of one word? Better to spend the time promoting the music whatever it's called. After all, it had existed for a very long time before 1954.

The enthusiasm you have shown in the last few posts is a welcome change from your previous negativity.