Eliza, my point is that some may prefer one version over another because they condemn their so-called " emasculated" version of a song which is indicative of a false folk snobbery.

I think that to prefer one version of a song over another doesn't indicate the snobbery.
It's the attitude that one version is condemned for silly reasons that indicates a snobbery.
I have been in musical circles where certain versions of songs have been treated with contempt by snobby folkies because they are not like the original sources .

I see the power of a song as subject to change which enables its life. I can see that a misunderstanding about a song can be subject to criticism, such as doing "Waltzing Mathilda" in 3/4 time because the singer believes that this is implied by the song title.

"Kumbaya" has a powerful life of its own which is why it is being attacked by Reactionary Republicans and their news representatives.

it can be done by various styles of singing without compromising its power.

The problem for some is that they have bought into the Republican playbook in the condemnation of the song because they feel it is reflective of weakness. Rick Perry in his macho Rambolike cartoonish reaction to "Kumbaya" attempts to flex his flaccid political muscle by saying that the song represents a kind of capitulation.

The song is not about capitulating to anything. It's asking for compassion.




Subject: RE: BS: Folk music attacked! War on Kumbaya!
From: GUEST,Eliza - PM
Date: 14 Jan 12 - 12:03 PM

Stringsinger, it isn't snobbery to prefer one version of a song to another. My pupils adored singing "We are walking in the light of God", but when I compare their delivery to that of an African choir, I find the latter extremely moving and mysteriously evocative. Does that make me a snob?