BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: The Shambles
Date: 22 Jun 00 - 03:11 AM

Well we could always try World Music? But………….What is it with the World?.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: The Shambles
Date: 22 Jun 00 - 02:11 AM

Just number 23.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: catspaw49
Date: 22 Jun 00 - 02:02 AM

Do they serve "Toad in the Hole" and call it "Frog in the Lotus Pond?"

I'll just have some grits.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 21 Jun 00 - 07:23 PM

"stew some meat in a sauce made of chilies, garlic, cumin and coriander" -that sounds very tasty. But I think it'd be better if you added in some oatmeal.

Or maybe porridge oats would be better. (I mean, if it's oatmeal, is it really oats?)

There used to be Chinese Restaurants and Fish and Chip Shops. Nowadays round where I live most of the Fish and Chip Shops are run by Chinese owners and sell Chinese Food as well. Sometimes we call them Chinese Takaways, and sometimes Chippies. The tradition marches on. I think Chinese Chippies are folk; and Macdonalds is fake.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: The Shambles
Date: 21 Jun 00 - 05:27 PM

Not 'Folk' - What shall we call it' was followed by------

'Gardening can be dangerous'.

So we won't be calling it gardening then?

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: catspaw49
Date: 21 Jun 00 - 12:03 PM

Damn Dick!!!! I don't think you have used that before in these multitudinous "Define Folk" things and its GREAT!!!

There is a reason for definitions, even if its for simply saving time at the record store. We have a lot of new players on this thread, but the arguments are pretty much the same.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 21 Jun 00 - 11:54 AM

What you call something should, ideally, have something
to do with what it is. If you want to stew some meat
in a sauce made of chilies, garlic, cumin and coriander,
that's fine; just don't call it oatmeal.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Kim C
Date: 21 Jun 00 - 10:13 AM

Klofsinger! I love it!

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Bugsy
Date: 21 Jun 00 - 02:45 AM

See, I used to have this restaurant where I employed "Folk" musicians and gave the punters a 2 course meal and floorshow for the one low price. Also paid the muso's over the going rate for the work. I originally called it "THE ATTIC FOLK CLUB" and only got a few folkies and no other patrons. I changed the name to THE ATTIC MUSIC CLUB" and got a lot more patrons all of whom said they liked the entertainment. One guy came up to me and said, "That was great entertainment, What would you call that music?" When I told him "Folk", he said, "But I don't like folk music". He never would have come to the ATTIC FOLK CLUB, but had a great time at THE ATTIC MUSIC CLUB. He now goes to other folk clubs and enjoys the music.

I don't know if you consider him to be a little stupid or bigoted, but he's like so many out there who would love folk music if they got past the "folk" bit.

Cheers

Bugsy

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: bob jr
Date: 21 Jun 00 - 02:21 AM

the problem here doesnt seem to be with the term folk but more how some people are defining it. people limit themselves by defining a thing too tightly. someone playing a guitar by himself aint neccesarily folk music and some one you think is a fake aint neccesarily so.calling music whatever you like is ok as long as you like what you play....i dont know if something is commercial or sponsered its fake man thats alot of good people to be tarring with that brush...maybe folk to you aint folk to me and vice versa but i dont like all the negativity i read here like some of you wearing folk like it is some kinda holy vestament or something its another expresion like country or the blues or jazz or rock or classical i try and find something to like in most music and if i cant i see that as a personal thing not a condemnation of a whole genre ....guess thats not clear at all but i just play i dont write too good

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: catspaw49
Date: 20 Jun 00 - 10:34 PM

I knew I could count on you Bill! Thanks for showing up.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Bill D
Date: 20 Jun 00 - 10:25 PM

once upon a time 'folk' meant something...but it was too convenient a word and FAR too easily streched to include anything vaguely acoustic and faintly resembling the 'older' music. Then a bunch of us tried calling it 'traditional'...and the thundering herd soon co-opted THAT by calling whatever they listened to in their formative years 'traditional'...even if it was no older than Dylan or Kate Wolf.

The point is, we had a couple of good words, but those who changed the music refused to find new words for what they do, and they now outnumber 'us', so *shrug*...I am reduced to saying something like...

"some of the music I like is older, acapella or acoustic, written by non-professionals about mundane, everyday things other than sex & drugs & the singers latest maudlin thoughts about 'life'...sung to simpler tunes with generally fewer chords, with often heroic themes ...and....and...." pooh

what I do is, I still call it folk/trad or 'in the tradition' to denote stuff that is newer, but with the 'feel' of older stuff...and like Art says, we know it when we hear it. There is a NEED to be able to describe music with a certain feel, whether or not we get to keep the words pure

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: sophocleese
Date: 20 Jun 00 - 07:37 PM

GUEST,Mrbisok@aol as nobody yet has answered your question. "Jumper" is another quaint English term for "sweater". An Aran swetaer or jumper is a sweater knitted in the style of those made on the Aran isles off of Ireland. Usually a cream coloured, or other natural shade of wool is used and patterns are created through texture with cables and twisted stitches. Its a useful design as the density of the pattern added to the insulation while the crossed over stitches kept it flexible for ease of movement. They are warm sweaters, not at all comfortable to wear under hot stage lights.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Jun 00 - 07:34 PM

Back slang would make it klof music - inviting accusations that it only appeals to people with cloth ears; but regardless, I quite like the idea of being a klofsinger.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: GUEST,Mary
Date: 20 Jun 00 - 07:22 PM

I think part of the problem today is that (as Rick said) as up-and-coming band claims the title "folk" until they can be embraced by the pop world.

Sadly, real folk music gets watered down until people just thing it's boring, light strumming.

I like the new genre of antifolk. The name sounds confusing even though everyone I know playing it sounds more like Woody Guthrie than any of the current crop of "pop-folkies".

Mary

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Bert
Date: 20 Jun 00 - 02:55 PM

'cleese, Calling it Fred wouldn't avoid any confusion 'cos I've got a guitar named Fred.

Mbo, The way I interpret Art's remark is that Folk music is natural music and fake music is 'contrived' music. If someone sings or plays music naturally just for the sheer enjoyment of it then it's folk music. If someone is playing something for some artificial reason then that is fake music. Some of the artificial reasons for playing music are... commercial, political, sponsored, prestigious and religious. You can probably think of some more. And you don't have to like any of it just because it's music. Of course that doesn't stop people from singing 'fake music' just for the enjoyment of it; then it becomes folk music.

But as Art says 'we know it when we hear it'.

Bert.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Jim Dixon
Date: 20 Jun 00 - 02:53 PM

I don't think anyone's attitude was ever changed by changing the name of something.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Steve Latimer
Date: 20 Jun 00 - 02:17 PM

'Spaw,

Thanks for clearing that up.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Kim C
Date: 20 Jun 00 - 01:53 PM

"Folk" is a pretty broad term - it encompasses so much. I consider "traditional" music to be folk music, but also songs that tell a story. Maybe I'm the only one, but I think Tom T. Hall could be considered a folkie, even though he had a whole slew of hits on commercial radio. ("The Homecoming" is one of my favorite songs of his.) He is a master of telling a story in a song, which of course is a folk tradition that probably goes back to the very origins of singing.

"Folk" is also a term that most people understand pretty well.... if you say "folk", they know you're NOT talking about Top 40 anything. They may not understand the intricacies of what "folk" is, but they pretty much know what it AIN'T.

Besides, "folk" lends itself to some good wordplays, i.e., we're just folking around, we're all folked up, folk you, etc. :)

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Whistle Stop
Date: 20 Jun 00 - 08:36 AM

I agree with a lot of the people who have posted to this thread -- Crowhugger, Mbo, and others -- that the name really doesn't matter. But I'm curious: how long have we been using the term "folk music" anyway? My guess is that the term has been around for a while, but only came into common usage relatively recently, and never had a definition that was very clear.

At this point the world at large has a vague idea of what "folk music" means -- acoustic guitars; young people who vaguely resemble the young Dylan and Baez and take themselves way too seriously; older people with who resemble Woody and Pete and are forever trying to convince us of the importance of labor union songs from the early part of this century; facial hair (men and women alike); self-absorption, political correctness, and boredom. Not a terribly flattering image, if images concern you. We have a different view of it, but we're aware of the stereotype, and recognize that, like most stereotypes, it has some truth to it.

My guess is that the common perception of "folk" music (however accurate or inaccurate it is), and the common usage of the term, is based in the 1950s. That's pretty recent, and suggests that there's nothing particularly sacred about the term. Any thoughts on that?

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Peter Kasin
Date: 20 Jun 00 - 04:02 AM

How about calling it "light metal"?

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Jun 00 - 01:30 AM

bob jr, if you want to hear what folk music and songs sound like, get some of Art's phono records or his recent CD.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Mbo
Date: 19 Jun 00 - 11:39 PM

Words of Aran

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: catspaw49
Date: 19 Jun 00 - 11:36 PM

An Aran is a citizen of Aranrefrain, a small country which specializes in shagging sheep. Its located just to the southeast of Dumthred and its first born are all sent to Mexico to apprentice as umbrella skinners. The climate in Mexico is far warmer than their native land, hence the term Aran sweaters. Those left behind shagging sheep in the abject poverty of the homeland are tired and, oppressed by the Dumthred armies, often leap from buildings and are Aran jumpers. Fortunately the highest building in Aranrefrain is only 6 foot high.

Hope this helps.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From:
Date: 19 Jun 00 - 11:07 PM

Please enlighten me: what's an Aran? What's a jumper with the adjective Aran preceding it? What's an Aran sweater?

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Jun 00 - 10:07 PM

I didn't hear Art passing any judgements on brands of music. Fake is when someone doesn't believe in what they are doing. Happens all the time, more's the pity. In all "worlds of music", including the innumerable different types of music that get called "folk" from time to time.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Mbo
Date: 19 Jun 00 - 09:49 PM

Yes, Kevin, but what does Art mean by "fake music"? Is he saying that anything that isn't "folk" is fake, artificial, worthless? Or is he saying that other musics that try to be "folk" come off as fake? In my own personal opinion, NO music is fake. Every shred of music you can find had merit, at least to me. Even rap, even Hardcore, even Insane Clown Posse--they all are legitimate music, though I may not like or agree with them all, I do believe that worth SOMEBODY's listening time. Who am I, or indeed any of us, to pass such judgement on other's brands of music? What makes us so high & mighty that we can insult music that isn't "folk", yet taking great offense when someone from another music world insult us? Note: I am not one of "us"--I am neither a folkie, or wish to be one. Put me down as a "lover of all music." Period.

--Mbo

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Jun 00 - 08:55 PM

Just for curiosity I checked through the introduction by Donal Lummy to the Christy Moore Songbook. Four pages all about Christy and where he fits in and what's he's done, and what he sings - and the word "folk" doesn't come into it once. And unless I'm very much mistaken, in a book with 142 pages and over 100 songs, the word doesn't come up once either.

And I wouldn't think for a moment that that is intentional "let's not use that word" - it's just wouldn't have seemed a significant word in the contextof a living tradition.

The definition doesn't lie in the word, it stands or falls with the people making the music. You don't add to the clarity of the situation by saying that Christy Moore is a folk singer.. or Martin Carthy... or Norma Waterson...and so forth. You define the music by saying "it's the sort of songs that Christy Moore, or Martin Carthy...Norma Waterson.. and so forth...all sing". And that's how I'd read what Art said just now, and got savaged for. (And Art would be in that list as well.)

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Terry Allan Hall
Date: 19 Jun 00 - 05:24 PM

I've gotten a lot of milage over the last 25 years out of "Contemporary Acoustic"...vague enough to cover most any type of music employing acoustic instruments.

Silly to even concern ourselves... ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Crowhugger
Date: 19 Jun 00 - 01:57 AM

warning: major, LONG thread drift!

McGrath,

Personally, those intergenerational tensions showed up in areas other than music. My Mom got her guitar from my father's uncle when he died some 40-ish years ago; she got the Pete Seeger record and book and was off to the races. I was 3 when my mother accompanied me on a recording of kiddy songs to give to the grandmothers for Xmas.

I teethed on Prokofiev and Pete, oh and Paul Robeson (he knew my grandfather), kindergartened with Kingston Trio, Harry Belafonte, Chopin, Bach, Marian Anderson...Primary school added Haydn, Handel, Herb Alpert, Sergio Mendes and Brazil '66...and on through life.

My father taught me to play ukelele before I was anywhere near big enough to hold a guitar, even my mother's small Martin--and I was a tall child with large hands. As soon as I was almost big enough, I was putting the uke chords on the guitar. My parents showed me what to do with the other two strings. And then I tried the banjo. All this to a backdrop of a women's barbershop chorus, which my mother conducted. My father played French horn when I was young; had both an F and an E-flat horn as I recall--tough going for 8-year-old lungs I can tell you, but I could press the valve levers just fine!

In other words, it was all music to me and still is, including genres at which my maternal grandmother turned up her huge nose (not inherited, thankfully!)

Other people can debate classification all they want. I figure that all music is fusion and you can go crazy trying to name its ancestry and/or its present forms. Like some kinds of 'blues' are maybe Afro-celtic? Puhleeze.

My job is certainly not to compartmentalize something so closely woven as music--I'll leave that to the marketers. I'd rather sing, accompany myself acceptably on guitar, harmonize, get my lazy behind back to the banjo, and speed up on cello.

I have an idea that there has been a thread about the sort of tension you mentioned, but maybe it just came up under another topic.

END OF THIS CHAPTER OF THREAD DRIFT!!

CH.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: bob jr
Date: 19 Jun 00 - 12:36 AM

atr you sound like some kinda know-it-all that i wouldnt want to know at all. guthries guitar said this machine kills fascists not become one!

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Art Thieme
Date: 18 Jun 00 - 11:58 PM

Good folks,

To me and most knowledgable ones, there's "folk music" and there's "fake music". And we know it when we hear it.

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Jun 00 - 05:59 PM

I suppose "feck music" might be an interesting alternative.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Mooh
Date: 18 Jun 00 - 08:53 AM

My dissenting opinion.

I frankly do not agree with Bert Jansch's suggestion. As a tradition, folk in its various forms is much older than any of us or our family trees. Renaming things seems like too much a 90's revisionist thing (to me) and will not change anything but increase the confusion felt by newcomers to the tradition. BJ is an incredibly gifted musician, but that doesn't mean we should accept his every utterance as worthy. In the end it will remain folk because it is folk, and history tells us it is so.

To provoke discussion about this matter is not in itself a bad thing, but I'm not sure that's the point. I'm suspicious that BJ was implying more about his own discomfort with his tradition or situation than with a general or universal sense of discomfort with the tradition. As good as he is, he doesn't speak for the whole tradition.

As for the image, so what? Don't subscribe to it. The sweater image is not very prevalent where many folk live and practice. Every form has its image, even cliches, but all you have to do is pick up a folk periodical or attend a festival to see that the sweater image doesn't reign everywhere, it's just a part of the larger picture.

My suggestion? Bert Jansch was not on the money this time.

My $0.02 Cdn funds, Mooh.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Pixie
Date: 18 Jun 00 - 08:10 AM

how about "non-commercial, no radio-play, you won't hear me unless you listen to CBC/University radio" music...come on "folks".....would the point of changing the name be to get more air play????? Wider audience?????Think about it - there are responses to this thread from various sites around the world from people who have come into this site because of the label "folk". What is that saying? If it don't need fixing, don't fix it?????

Pixie

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: alison
Date: 18 Jun 00 - 06:53 AM

there's nothing wrong with Aran jumpers.. I've knit a few in my time..... great warm cosy things they are too.. but I have to agree with the others who said that they are too warm to even think of wearing on stage... The Clancy's must have been sweltered!!

we've been going through this problem with our local folk club.. the name scares people off.... even though we are not "strictly" folk, in fact anything is welcome and usually joined in with... so I have recently advertised us as a "music club"....

so far I've had interest expressed from a heavy metal guitarist (who is happy to play acoustically) and an operatic singer...... our next meeting should be interesting!! Maybe I'll try "Acoustic" next......

slainte

alison

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: sophocleese
Date: 17 Jun 00 - 10:59 PM

Personally I think we should call it "Fred" to avoid confusion...

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: bob jr
Date: 17 Jun 00 - 10:46 PM

how about foke? you could have foke machines that you put money into and foke comes out! it could have some snappy slogan like foke adds life or something.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Jun 00 - 08:54 PM

No, I'm just curious,is all. What I had in mind is, we all have a sort of rivalry with our parents at some time. You know, the old thing about how when you're growing you realise your parents are right eejits - and then after a few years, it can be amazing how much more sensible they have become...

Well, if you're a second generation folkie, that's going to apply as well. So I'd expect you to be a bit impatient and dismissive of some of the old stuff the parents do, or think it should all be played at twice the speed and that..

But if you're a first generation folkie, I'd imagine that the intergenerational scorn would be directed at your own parents - and you'd might even be more in tune with the older folkies. (A bit analogouse to the way folk song collectors would sometimes focus their attention on the old grandparents, and the younger generation would have their noses put out of joint at times in the process.)

And that's what I meant by wondering about different attitudes and tension. Creative tension I'd hope. I'm not suggesting fistfights or suchlike - more disagreements about who to emulate and how fast tunes should be played, and so forth.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Crowhugger
Date: 17 Jun 00 - 08:07 PM

Meebs, it's your canvas to paint as you wish. Sounds to me like it's a music picture! Categories are good for convenient reference but heck, toss 'em if they become inconvenient.

McGrath, what tension? I'm at least 2nd generation, no, 3rd or more on my father's side. Last fall a brand-new banjoist and I were jamming. No tension, just a blast! Are you referring to a particular experience that you had?

CH.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Jun 00 - 07:28 PM

You don't have to fit in any picture, Mbo. You're the one who paints the picture. And I reckon it's a good 'un.

I've sometimes thought, there are two sorts of young folkies (pace Shambles - whatever the style or image may be, for me, if they love the music, that's what they are) - there are those who are second generation (or third or fourth...) and those who are first generation. And I've wondered how that feels and works out. Is there a tension about that kind of thing?

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Mbo
Date: 17 Jun 00 - 06:59 PM

My parents aren't folkies, in fact they don't care for music that much at all. 45 minutes of music and they don't want to hear it anymore for at least 2 days. I have a great love for many kinds of music, including folk, and I like to play it straight, and to mix it up with other kinds of music. This is no "transient, superficial" thing, it is how I work and how I create & play music. My dillema is that I like older music traditons that people my age obviously hate and put down(bringing folk music to class didn't go over to well)and I like a lot of modern music that older people hate and put down. Could someone please tell me where I fit in the picture?

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Jun 00 - 06:45 PM

"The children of Folkies do seem to adopt a different image, even if they continue to play and like the music" -the children of most people seem to adopt a different image. That's what children do and always have done. Call it image,call it style, call it fashion - it's transient and superficial, and in our hearts we all knew it, even when we were young.

What's different about the children of folkies who stick with the music is that their music continues to be made within a tradition, and exists within a sub-culture that does not reject that which is old, and those who are old as disposable, or regard novelty as the only thing that counts.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: The Shambles
Date: 17 Jun 00 - 06:21 PM

I really don't think that it is the music that has the problem. It the idea that if you like the music you have to be a Folkie. The image of the Folkie has been pretty well described in this thread and is it any wonder that normal (whatever that is) people are a little wary of being thought of as a Folkie?

The children of Folkies do seem to adopt a different image, even if they continue to play and like the music? So maybe there is yet hope?

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Noreen
Date: 17 Jun 00 - 02:30 PM

Try this blue clickie Charming man for the original article in the Guardian.

--Noreen

http://www.guardianunlimited.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4029813,00.html

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Lanfranc
Date: 17 Jun 00 - 06:09 AM

Having been involved in singing in and running Folk Clubs for the thick end of 35 years, I have always resisted any change of name in pursuit of bigger audiences.

The thing I always try to bear in mind is that audiences go to any music venue to be entertained. When they encounter a group of introverted excluding self-important individuals running the show, they vote with their feet. It doesn't matter if the music on offer is Folk, Jazz, Blues, House or even Classical.

Put Tom Paxton, Vin Garbutt or the late Alex Campbell (as just three examples of many) in front of any audience and they will communicate with them and almost certainly fill the hall or whatever. Remember that Billy Connolly, Jasper Carrott and Mike Harding cut their teeth in the Folk Clubs, and Steeleye Span, Fairport Convention and Battlefield Band didn't or don't want for audiences either.

Give and you will receive, make the music and songs relevant and entertaining and people will listen. The label doesn't matter - JUST COMMUNICATE!

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: zonahobo
Date: 17 Jun 00 - 01:25 AM

How about "Nowage" music .. also thought of flok music but that seems to fit Pop better ...

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: bob jr
Date: 17 Jun 00 - 12:48 AM

hey there was this joke i heard once in a movie by woody allen where he asks the aliens how he can make the world a better place and they say "your a comedian you want to make the world a better place? tell funnier jokes" same applies here i think you want the publics support play good music and stop worrying bout what it is called just what it makes you and others feel

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Rollo
Date: 17 Jun 00 - 12:18 AM

Is there really an image problem?

Hey, listen carefully to mainstream, folk influence is spreading... If there is really a problem, we should do it like the cajuns when rock'n roll threatened to kill their music, the took it over and turned it into swamp rock...

But let's just keep it as ist is, for there are just two possibilities. a) folk is getting really popular - that means a lot of crap produced by obsucre money-makers, all the kids telling you whats cool and what isn't, and soon you can't stand it any longer to hear all the good ole songs to be made into "hip stuff" and return to classic or (beware!) that dinosaur style they once called "Rock" because it remembers you of better times ling ago. b) Folk is not getting more popular, keeps "our" music, and we can hang around in dim lit drinking holes wearing something we believe to be old fashion hand made rural style, listen to some damn good musicians and make jokes about all this yesterday men hanging around in dim lit drinking holes, wearing leather vests and jeans listening to sum hot blues man...

I would really suggest to vote for b. Its more fun and we stay the cool ones.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Jun 00 - 09:03 PM

About Aran sweaters (and it's one r, for the Aran Isles - two r's and it's Arran off Scotland) - and the gist of it is, the Aran pattern isn't a great traditional Gaelic thing at all - there was someone went over to America in the early years of the century, and bought a book with knitting patterns back home to the Aran Isles, and they caught on. And here is a website telling all about this

The other thing, which puts a more serious spin on that is that one reason for having different knitting patterns in different places, which was a real tradition in many places, was so that when sailors and fishermen were drowned they'd know where they came from, and could let the family know. John Kirkpatrick wrote a great song about that. A shattering song in fact. (I think it's called something like "A twist of thread" - but someone else could correct me.)

Anyway, though they might be grand things to wear on a boat, they're the last thing anyone would wear on a sweaty stage unless they'd had their arms twisted.