One thing that may be confusing the issue a bit is that there are hootenannies, hootenannies, and "hootenannies." The first hootenanny I ever went to was a come-one, come-all free-for-all (for a description of this event, see my 30-Aug-01 - 01:32 PM post above). It was open to anyone who wanted to come. If you wanted to sing, fine. If you wanted to come and just listen, that was fine too. There was no list of singers, there was no schedule, and there was no program. Whatever was to happen just happened. And it was a great evening. This was the first hootenanny that had been held in this area for some time, and it brought a lot of folk music enthusiasts together who had never previously met. Many friendships developed out of this event, and it formed a core group around which subsequent hootenannies and other folk music events grew. There followed other hoots of the same kind, usually held in some public or semi-public place. This first one was held at The Chalet restaurant, but the University Friends Meeting House, if not otherwise booked, always welcomed this kind of thing (a few of the singers and several of the enthusiasts were Quakers), and there were several other places that welcomed us.

There were the spontaneous "hoots" that I also described in the above post. These were almost always held in private homes. These, too, were open to anyone who wanted to come. Occasionally a few rowdy types who were just looking for a party would show up. If they were disruptive they would be asked to leave; sometimes they just got bored and left on their own; and a few thought it was great, stayed, joined in, and started coming regularly.

Non-spontaneous (planned a week or more in advance) hoots in private homes started out being open to all, but we found that, unfortunately, it was necessary to put a few limitations on who got invited. We wanted the singing to be free-floating and spontaneous -- whatever came to mind. It never occurred to us to plan any kind of program or sequence of who was going to sing what. There were a couple of glitches, however. A woman who played the accordion and sang nothing but protest songs frequently tried the take over a hoot and turn it into some kind of political rally. After this happen several times, somehow we just neglected to invite her. Also, there was a bluegrass group that made themselves unwelcome. The bluegrass was fine; but the people in the group weren't. They viewed ballad singers with contempt, thought bluegrass was the only real folk music there was, and once they started playing, they would go from one number to another without pause, not letting anybody else get a song in edgewise. If people didn't know how to behave, they just didn't get invited. Bob the Deckman really knows how to host a hoot. He keeps an eye on who's going to be there, but other than that, he lets things run their course. He's had a lot of experience in hosting good ones.

Now, here, I think, is where the confusion comes in. In an effort to take advantage of the sudden popularity of folk music, the TV networks got into the act in March of 1963 with the advent of programs such as "ABC Hootenanny." The program came on Saturday nights, lasted for half an hour, and featured four "acts." The whole thing was carefully planned and choreographed. The only thing hootenanny-ish about it was the name of the show.

In summer of 1963, a Los Angeles promoter came to Seattle, recruited a bunch of local folksingers, and started "the Seattle Center Hootenanny" series modeled after "ABC Hootenanny." The whole idea was to promote the new Seattle Center (formerly the site of the Seattle World's Fair) and draw people in. There was not charge to the audience. They were held every Wednesday evening throughout the summer, ran for about two hours, drew huge audiences, and some of them were televised. I sang in many of these, as did most of Seattle's folksingers. The promoter paid us reasonably well, the audiences were wildly enthusiastic, and all in all, it was a very good gig. Nevertheless, to my mind, in this context "hootenanny" was just a buzzword. These were no more hootenannies than "Austin City Limits" is a hootenanny.

Granted, the first events that Pete Seeger, Woody Guthrie, et al referred to as "hootenannies" were events where the people who came to listen were asked to pay the handsome sum of 35 cents. These were something akin to "skiffle parties." The idea was to put on some sort of event and charge for it so you could pay the rent. The concept of the hootenanny pretty much evolved from there into "an informal gathering of folksingers."

Now, if you are going to have a big hoot with a lot of singers and a big crowd, and you need to rent a hall to hold everybody, then it makes sense to ask everybody to kick in and help pay the rent. Or if food is involved, make it a potluck. After all, that's what a hootenanny is: a musical potluck.

But the idea of some entrepreneur or concert promoter (who might be a folksinger as well) booking a hall, booking a group of folksingers, setting the hall up so that the performers sit here and the audience sits there, setting up the schedule, printing programs and posters and sending out other publicity, charging ten bucks at the door, then calling at a "hootenanny" -- No. I'm sorry. To my mind, that whole philosophy is all wrong. That's not a hootenanny. That's a multi-performer concert.

Don Firth