The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #10238   Message #71644
Posted By: Mark Clark
17-Apr-99 - 07:50 PM
Thread Name: 'Real Folk' vs 'Stroke Folk'
Subject: RE: 'Real Folk' vs 'Stroke Folk'
Lot's of 'real folk' music has enjoyed commercial succes and quite a few commercial tunes have entered the domain of oral tradition. In the final analysis I think any song that is: a) accessible to average amateur musicians, b) sufficiently interesting to attract an audience, and c) attractive in some sense to performers, either *is* or will become a 'folk' piece.

The first time I heard what we might call folk music was as a boy in 1950 or 1951 traveling on vacation with my parents and brothers. I can't remember whether we had a car radio or whether we just listened to the juke boxes in the truck stops where we ate but the Weavers had commercial recordings of "Goodnight Irene" and "On Top Of Old Smokey" and our family sang those songs half way across the country and back. I din't know they were folk songs and I'll bet Lead Belly didn't think he was writing a folk song.

In the forties I used to lie awake in bed and listen to Gene Autry on the radio. I wasn't supposed to have it on but I loved the music and the conversation too. Many people would rank "That Silver Haired Daddy Of Mine" as a folk song but Gene probably thought of it as a commercial piece written and performed for a partcular market.

In the final analysis I suspect the term 'folk music' is just another meaningless category designed to separate people rather than unite them. (For example, I suspect the use of the term on this forum helps to discourage those with no interest in the content here.) The term was certainly important in a university where folk material could not be included in a fine arts curriculum but might be studied as liturature or social science. If you and your friends like a song enough to sing it often when you get together, it's probably on its way to becomming a folk song. IMHO.

- Mark