 sj |
||
|
||
The Concept of FREED Folkmusic
|
|
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Will Fly Date: 25 Sep 10 - 04:24 AM The new paradigm being proposed is just too radical for comprehension No it's not - it's just pointless. And, once again, you resort to insults for anyone who seems tainted with professionalism. And, once again, you provide no factual evidence whatsoever to support your "paradigm". Or should we say, dogma? Sal (the lemonade lady): back garden festivals do happen. I'm a regular contributor to an an annual festival/party in the large back garden of a friend in Sussex. Each year, several of us erect awnings, PA system, blankets, chairs, bar area, food area, etc., in the garden. The back porch becomes the stage and we set out amps and mics and a guitar, a keyboard and a drum set. On the day, we put up a tall blackboard and provide a box of chalks. Those who want to perform - anything they want - get 3 songs/tunes or 15 minutes, whichever is the shorter and put their names on the board. The music starts at 2pm and finishes at 9pm, when we strike down the PA and gear and join everyone around a large fire. Kids play on swings and hammocks and table tennis in the front garden - where we also had an acoustic folk session this year - and everyone who comes, whether they perform or not, brings a food and drink contribution. The organisers themselves provide a huge amount of food and drink, and bring out a huge paella at 6pm for everyone to share. The party is by broad invitation only - simply because the space is limited to around that number. We get children singing with their parents or with their friends. We get hoary old folkies singing hoary old folk stuff - we get blues, jazz, classical music, comedy songs. We get complete beginners and consummate professionals - all playing for fun and completing the day. And we have a dedicated rota of people who do the washing-up, staff the bar - and run the PA and compere the afternoon (my job). The next day, a few of us are back again - striking down all the awnings, tables. chairs, blankets, groundsheets... This is not the only example I could quote. But - note this: we're not trying to shoehorn people into a "culture"; there's absolutely no elitism (which would be scorned); no money changes hands; it takes a huge amount of unselfish organisation - and it's immensely satisfying. And we don't need the Conrads of the world to make it happen. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) Date: 25 Sep 10 - 04:39 AM "The new paradigm being proposed is just too radical for comprehension by those defendant upon the status quo" As I've said uplist, as a hippy bird who enjoys roughing it, I'm cool with fields and bonfires and home-brew. But your model is too badly thought out even for someone with my minimal expectations, and you keep repeating yourself rather than offering more serious suggestions. Importantly, there must be *some* sanitary provision. I've done backpacking and yes, you can bury your poo if you're the only person around. But even trails get dodgy if they are well trodden. Several hundred people all shitting in the same field, even if everyone dug a hole, doesn't work. Particularly if they are pissed because they just don't bury it. Here's one alternative model that does work. At hippy fests like this: Small World in Kent there is a strong community ethic. Volunteers build shit pits with surrounding wooden structures. The jobs that you can do at such events work for the people who go there, including the sick and the unemployed. Pete who is physically fit but bi-polar is able to build the stages, erect marquees or dig out the shit pits. It's good for him. Sylvia who is partly physically disabled make fairy wings with the kids in the creche or paint up the signs. It's good for her. Everyone works together and contributes what they can and this generates a great deal of warmth and camaraderie between volunteers. No-one is being abused. Result: people are happy and go back every year! Although this model works. It only works for the type of people who are OK with that. And these types of groups are marginal in our society. They are people who already embrace an anti-capitalist, anti-consumerist/ecological, communal/semi-Marxist ethic and lifestyle (to what degree they are able). Most people in the Western world are not on this wavelength and will never be. So even following such an example, the groups of people wanting to join in that kind of experience will be very limited. Frankly your "radical" model as it stands, will attract even less interest from the wider community. And would never succeed in fulfilling your agenda. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: MikeL2 Date: 25 Sep 10 - 05:26 AM Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Will Fly - PM Date: 25 Sep 10 - 04:24 AM <"The new paradigm being proposed is just too radical for comprehension"> <"No it's not - it's just pointless. And, once again, you resort to insults for anyone who seems tainted with professionalism. And, once again, you provide no factual evidence whatsoever to support your "paradigm". Or should we say, dogma?">. Well said Will. But I think we are wasting our time here. There's no use knocking if therer's no-one in....!!! Cheers MikeL2 |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: *#1 PEASANT* Date: 25 Sep 10 - 07:54 AM Thank you lemonade lady. It is terrible to see pros tell us that the old pre industrial role of folk music is dead. They state that people have "evolved" - consult darwin they did not evolve they were just sold and bought a bill of goods from the pros. Ordinary people are not good enough to make music. They need to hire someone who is. Simple. We can go back to the pre industrial role of folk music at any time. Right in your back garden. Thats how I do it. It is pointless from the position of a professional who would be taken down a few pegs in relation to the wider folk world. Factual evidence simple- with more access at all points there will be more people with access and more who can come to join in. Wil you know that occasionally there are free events but you also know that this is not the overall norm for the industry or community it is a very small part. It needs to be a very large part. Will- that it worked so well for you is a test- it will work all over the place so why not everywhere, all the time? Many on this thread have stated that the problem is that it will not work. We have also heard where it does work very very well and solves a big accessibility problem- self help festivals the way to go. Give the grant money back to the very poor, homeless and ill. We need to demand that professional musicians be ok with that which will develop the folk world provide access save in active form the greatist number of songs etc. Yes. We need to tell them- stop the arbitrary limitations and arbitrary barriers. Stick to the side events-weddings, private events. Once the audience grows more will demand these in the long run but now pro musicians by and large are simply not doing what is best for the music. It is a radical change but if the models work just fine cut the crap and join in the reforms. Conrad |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 25 Sep 10 - 08:16 AM "The new paradigm being proposed is just too radical for comprehension" Nope, it been done before many times, and only works if people with the right attitudes cooperate. It's not radical, if anything it's idealistic. But I have read people say this countless times already in this thread.... |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: GUEST,Hmmmm... Date: 25 Sep 10 - 08:19 AM "Thank you lemonade lady." Who's going to break it to Conrad that the Lemonade Lady sells her lemonade at £2 (almost $4) a glass at several professional festivals, and is probably one of those he'd consider a rip-off merchant who is exploiting folk music? :) |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Will Fly Date: 25 Sep 10 - 08:22 AM Conrad - I think you're missing the essential points of my description of the little music festival/party we organise. There's a huge amount of sensible organisation involved. The festival, though there are no gate charges, still costs people money - because everyone is asked to provide something, and the something they provide has cost them money. And a large proportion of the music is provided freely by people who are consummate professionals. Your constantly reiterated comment that pro musicians by and large are simply not doing what is best for the music is simply not true in the folk world in this country. If you keep on reiterating it, it proves beyond doubt that you either simply haven't a clue or are perversely ignoring what everyone here is telling you. All the musicians I know and play with - of whom some make a modest living, some make a little money and some make no money whatsoever - are skilled, generous performers who contribute a huge amount to the music in my area. To hear you harp on about your mythical view of how the music is supposed to be socially organised and constructed fills me with incredulity. But can I ask yet again for some examples - just 2 or 3 will do - of the music that you feel falls into the category of folk music. Music that has to be learned and not entertained with. Music that has to be part of a "folk culture" - whatever that is. Music that falls into what you call your "paradigm". Why can't you respond to this simple request? I can only assume that you actually don't know. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: *#1 PEASANT* Date: 25 Sep 10 - 09:41 AM Any music would apply. Learning songs installs them in the minds of people. Entertaining with them just leaves people happy for a moment. Give a man a fish....he will be fed teach him to fish and he will be able to provide for himself forever..... Yes things- but things that you have you can contribute whats wrong with that. Remember there is no profit in that. Things provided by vendors have profit added. Conrad |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Will Fly Date: 25 Sep 10 - 10:01 AM Any music would apply But you've been persistently talking about "folk culture" in this thread - "folk culture" that's special and needs to be nurtured - learned, not just for entertainment. So... Learning songs installs them in the minds of people. Instills, eh? Why, I wonder - if a song is, say, "Sympathy For The Devil" by the Stones. Is this folk music? Entertaining with them just leaves people happy for a moment. Really? Seeing Reverend Gary Davis in 1964 made me happy for a lifetime! |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Howard Jones Date: 25 Sep 10 - 10:41 AM It is not that "ordinary people are not good enough to make music". Most of them don't want to. Most of them are happy for other people to make music for them to consume, just as they are happy for other people to bake their bread, make their clothes, and provide the other goods and services they use. The reason they're happy to do this is that they know that the professionals can do it better and cheaper than they can. Of course, some people like to make their own music, just as some like to bake their own bread or make their own clothes, but they're in the minority. The role of folk music in the pre-industrial world (and industrial world, come to that) was entertainment. People then didn't have access to professional entertainment, so they had to make their own. When the invention of the gramophone and wireless gave them access to professional entertainment, they had no further need for folk music, and all but a few willingly abandoned it. We may find that regrettable, but it was their choice. The simple fact is, modern society doesn't need folk music. It no longer has a role, except for a few hobbyists. Even those of us who are deeply involved with folk music engage with it very differently from the way traditional singers used to. To imagine that the majority of people just need to be exposed to folk songs in order to return to some imagined pre-industrial idyll where they spend their days singing to each other is simply fantasy. The way you go on, anyone would think that large festivals with a preponderance of professional performers are the only outlet for folk music, when they are just one of many. People can choose to go to these, or to folk clubs, house concerts, pub sessions, even communal self-help events where they can shit in a field if they like - most choose to go to a variety of these. You claim to want to spread folk music, but spend your whole time arguing for a one-size-fits-all approach which would reduce the diversity of ways in which it can be spread. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: The Sandman Date: 25 Sep 10 - 01:28 PM I object to being exploited.one of the most satisfying experiences for me has been busking, yes ,i busk for money.I make alot of money busking ordinary people [non folkies put money in my hat. it is the most honest way of performing, no hype what you see is what you get, frequently people tell me youare really good you should be singing in clubs. Ismile , and think to myself been there done that, but with busking, there is no one to stop you getting a gig, because you are a stroppy so and so, people judge purely on my music ,and they show their appreciation by chucking me fivers[ as did ronnie drew of the dubliners]long may it continue, i never turn money away. however i am happy to put videos up on you tube so people can learn songs, and i do that for nothing. but i couldnt afford to do that if people didnt book me at festivals and clubs and if they didnt put cross my palm with silver when i am busking |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Don Firth Date: 25 Sep 10 - 02:15 PM "The new paradigm being proposed is just too radical for comprehension by those defendant upon the status quo- especially professional musicians. In the short term they might loose but in the long term they would do much better. They suffer from poor long term vision." The "new paradigm" is not new at all, nor is it radical. For over fifty years I have heard various self-style "innovators" and "visionaries (!)" with their half-assed ideas about ways to promote folk music, and at base, all these "new paradigms" invariably involve trying to bring the whole field down to their level of incompetence. And it's that level of incompetence that inspires their goof-ball ideas. They're jealous of not just those who are getting paid to perform, but those whom the vast majority of people prefer to hear sing rather than them, even when those singers are not getting paid, nor do they particular care whether or not they are paid. People like Conrad want a prominence that they are unwilling to take the effort to earn. Simple as that. ". . . folk pros strutting around, dominating festivals and excluding imperfect performers and making sure their audiences are being ripped off. . . ." 'Scuse me, folks. I've got to go now, and find myself a folk festival I can go around and dominate, exclude imperfect performers, and make sure my audiences are being properly ripped off. Conrad simply doesn't realize how important it is to we wealthy, BMW-driving, professional singers of folk songs who travel from festival to festival in our Lear jets and stay in luxury hotels (with swimming pools to loll around by) keep folk music severely limited in order to exclude the poor, downtrodden working class (and those who choose not to work, living off their wives' incomes instead), and limit our festivals and other performances to only those wealthy enough to buy tickets and who can afford to buy themselves many gallons of expensive beer to drink (so they can "awaken their muse") while listening to us perform. This is a call to the barricades!! Don (sitting on top of the huge bag of money that I earned by singing in coffeehouses) Firth |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Don Firth Date: 25 Sep 10 - 02:38 PM During the early 1960s, most coffeehouses in my area paid something like $15.00 a night, and the one I sang in a lot had me singing three evenings a week (Thurs., Fri., and Sat.). Many coffeehouses had singers only on Friday and Saturday. That's $2,340 a year, Conrad. Out of which I had to pay for gasoline to get to and from the place. And income tax. Yes, I had to file a Schedule C with my 1040, because I was earning money working as an independent contractor (to the coffeehouse). Singing at "The Place Next Door" three nights a week, and ignoring such things as expenses, it would have taken me something like 427 years to earn a million dollars. Yeah, Conrad, we're all rolling in wealth! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) Date: 25 Sep 10 - 02:41 PM "Right in your back garden. Thats how I do it." Do you have a garden that will accommodate several stages and many hundreds of people? |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Don Firth Date: 25 Sep 10 - 02:42 PM By the way. How's this for a basic premise? The matter of the quality of the singers: "You don't have to be able to sing well. It's folk music!" This is what Conrad is really saying. And you know, it's not the first time I've heard someone say that! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Smokey. Date: 25 Sep 10 - 02:52 PM I've heard it, at least implied, many times. It's the kind of attitude that keeps people away from folk music in droves. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) Date: 25 Sep 10 - 02:52 PM "During the early 1960s, most coffeehouses in my area" I'd love to see some footage Don. I don't have any picture I can compare this with from my experiences of pub sessions in the UK. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: catspaw49 Date: 25 Sep 10 - 03:00 PM Hi Corny.....As your foemost bullying fuckwit, let me be assured you read what Howard wrote, can understand it, and KNOW it to be true.......It is. Read the following paragraphs again and again until you see the truth: HOWARD WROTE---The role of folk music in the pre-industrial world (and industrial world, come to that) was entertainment. People then didn't have access to professional entertainment, so they had to make their own. When the invention of the gramophone and wireless gave them access to professional entertainment, they had no further need for folk music, and all but a few willingly abandoned it. We may find that regrettable, but it was their choice. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) Date: 25 Sep 10 - 04:57 PM "It is a radical change but if the models work just fine cut the crap and join in the reforms." The point I was trying to make, is that these current models which of course do indeed work (as is evident by their continuance) are not however *your* model. Because you regard aspects of all of these examples to be somehow representative of the current "status quo" that you are railing against: be they festivals that accept volunteers in return for a ticket (abusive), or smaller word-of-mouth folk camps (elitist), or amateur events held in public houses where the landlord might want people to buy his beer (exorbitant costs). It seems that however much people open the door and offer their hospitality for near to free as you're going to get without digging for roots with your bare hands, nothing currently successfully functioning as 'folk for free (or near as dammit)', is pure enough to meet the rigid demands of your personal ideology. Otherwise, Howard has it nailed. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: *#1 PEASANT* Date: 25 Sep 10 - 06:02 PM The best way to care for the legacy of folk music is by active knowledge and use of the songs by as many individuals as possible not as few as possible. Yes you have to cast a wide net to find the segment that will do this but professional performers benefit via scarcity so therefore they keep the nets tiny. Singing quality is indeed not important. If the song lyrics are presented and the tune is basically there then it is more of a service than any number of professionals making all the money available. Maybe you are not getting wealthy but I read of a good number of musicians that do tours involving lots of air travel and big cities. I could not afford to that as an ordinary person and doing that contributes to overall bottom line cost certainly does not make the music cheaper. Again dont mind pros making money I just mind their share of the best venues and available money. Its too high. Yeah I worked for a festival director who wore scruffy clothes and drove a beat up truck and made money from volunteer exploytation. "if it wasn't for you volunteers the festival couldnt happen" yeah sure. If the volunteers did not turn up he could not own his home in a very high rent district and drive his other car a bmw and take two or three trips to europe each year. Why would anyone volunteer for such a person. It is simple abuse. He brought in vendors who made significant money. No way not necessary the music can happen without it. Sorry. We have seen the models- they work....we just need to put them in place. Conrad |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Don Firth Date: 25 Sep 10 - 06:11 PM ". . . professional performers benefit via scarcity. . . ." Right, Conrad! The fewer people we have in our audiences, the better we like it. My burning ambition is to hire the 2,500 seat Seattle Opera House, walk out on stage, and find no one there. That's what every professional folk singer wants. #### Hey!! What the hell! Conrad, YOU could probably do that right now! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Don Firth Date: 25 Sep 10 - 06:14 PM But seriously, folks. . . . Crow Sister, in answer to your question about coffeehouses, I'm sorry I don't have any footage of coffeehouses like The Place Next Door. Videotaping technology and such hardly existed at the time, much less being able to snap photos with a cell phone (which didn't even exist back then). But there are photos and such of coffeehouses that currently exist where the same kinds of things go on. To give a fairly comprehensive history of coffee and coffeehouses, and how coffeehouses became gathering spots for singers of folk songs in this country, a few years ago, in answer to a similar question, I posted a fairly lengthy dissertation. If you wish, this should be able to take you to it. Probably more than you really want to know on the subject: Coffee and Coffeehouses Coffeehouses are still going strong here, at least in this area (Pacific Northwest) and as I understand it, in other areas of the country as well. And many still feature singers of folk songs. Here are a few photos from the Pacific Northwest Folklore Society's web site of events taking place in coffeehouses around Seattle: Audience eye-view of the singers. Singer's eye-view of the audience, more or less. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: *#1 PEASANT* Date: 25 Sep 10 - 07:25 PM If everyone had their music then folk musicians would have to share the venues......that is the conventional venues. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Howard Jones Date: 25 Sep 10 - 08:12 PM Conrad, no one is denying that your models work - as you've been told repeatedly, they're nothing new, and people have been doing for years what you're now demanding. However, they're not the only models - there are lots of others which also work, and which many people prefer to yours. For someone who claims to want to spread folk music as wide as possible you have a strange way of going about it. You want to do away with the diversity we have at present and replace it with a model which suits you. You don't seem to understand that people want different things - some want to sit and listen to a professional, while others may be happy to sit in a field with no facilities and listen to a drunkard squeaking out unrecognisable tunes on a penny whistle. If you think volunteers are being exploited then don't volunteer. No one is forced to offer their services, and it's seldom one-sided - people do it because they get free tickets in return. That's fair exchange. Why is it any of your business if people choose to do this? You remind me of Oscar Wilde's definition of a cynic: a man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing. You are obsessed with making it free, but most people recognise the value of what good folk musicians, professional or otherwise, can provide them with and are happy to pay for it. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: *#1 PEASANT* Date: 25 Sep 10 - 10:17 PM Not disputing that some will pay the problem is that costs limit access and should be minimized and eliminated as much as possible. This is done but rarely. Yes the models work but it is more than a model it is a central paradigm. Yes there is a place for pros but it is not at the top of the food chain but further down than it is now. The issue with volunteers is volunteer abuse. Basic rule- if you ask for volunteers everyone should volunteer. If you make a profit return it to the volunteers. Sounds easy to me. And yes one gets tickets but my experience is most likely not to the performance at the festival you wanted to see. Nothing wrong with diversity. One must embed it in a paradigm or philosophy that removes bariers at all levels from the spread of folk music. Eliminate volunteeism when it is used to make a profit, remove economic segregation and discrimination make access as easy as possible for everyone. Conrad |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: catspaw49 Date: 25 Sep 10 - 10:30 PM Honest and straightforward question here.........Do you really believe your assorted plans will bring people to folk/trad? If so.....Why? Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Don Firth Date: 26 Sep 10 - 01:10 AM ". . . the problem is that costs limit access. . . ." Not to events like the Northwest Folklife Festival—and other such festivals all over the country. They're free to the public and volunteer run, which is to say, run by people who don't have to be there unless they want to be there. And here, Conrad, is what you will probably regard as the best part: the performers also volunteer, whether they are customarily paid or are true amateurs (people who do it purely for the love of it—which is not to say that professionals don't also do it because they love it and would continue to do it even if they weren't ever paid). And there are lots and lots of workshops and discussion groups. No difficulty meeting and talking with the performers. So—what's your problem, Conrad? You're several decades behind on your "visionary new paradigm." Well—some days are like that. . . . Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) Date: 26 Sep 10 - 01:41 AM "while others may be happy to sit in a field with no facilities and listen to a drunkard squeaking out unrecognisable tunes on a penny whistle." The free folk festival scene Conrads been arguing for already happens. You get it in every park in every town in the country. If you want to attend such an event - without the elitist restrictions of loo's, warmth, real ale on tap, tents or musicians - you can easily find one by the smell of urine and empty special brew cans. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: *#1 PEASANT* Date: 26 Sep 10 - 07:04 AM Don you know what I have been saying- There are some free music or almost free events (I mean free from municipal and state grant funding as well) they are not the rule. Go back a few centuries and you will find lots of interesting smells that we somehow object to today. I think that the smell of money is one of the worst. Conrad |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Howard Jones Date: 26 Sep 10 - 07:19 AM Yes there is a place for pros but it is not at the top of the food chain but further down than it is now. This is pure drivel. What on earth do you mean by the "food chain"? People rise to the top because through good musicianship they gain the respect of audiences, who want to see them perform (and are willing to pay to do so) and want to buy their records. The best musicians are likely to be professional (either on a full or part-time basis), but they're not good musicians because they're professional , they're professional because they're good musicians. No one is going to pay to listen to someone who doesn't achieve a certain standard of musicianship, and for them to pay enough to earn a living you need to be pretty damn good. Professionals are at the top of the food chain because only those at the top can earn enough to be professional. You're very concerned about spreading folk songs wider, but you don't seem to realise that it is the professionals who actually do this. Virtually all the songs and tunes I know I've learned from a professional, either directly from their recordings and books, or indirectly from someone else who themselves learned it from a professional. It is mostly the professionals, who are under commercial pressure to add to their repertoires, who spend time in libraries going through original collections to find new material, who work it into shape, and popularise it through their performances. Without the professionals to spread them around, most folk songs would be known only to a handful of people. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: catspaw49 Date: 26 Sep 10 - 07:28 AM Not to put too fine a point on it but in the grand scheme of things most folk songs are only known by a handful of people anyway. I'm curious as to what Conrad expects if his wishes are met. Conrad, do you really believe there will be a mass shift to folk music from pop or poprock? Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: *#1 PEASANT* Date: 26 Sep 10 - 08:27 AM Professionals rise to the top because via their agents and recording backers they dominate all the major stages and most of the radio play. Doing right by the traditions and music that we are charged with preserving and developing has nothing to do with popularity contests. While earning a living from folk music is nice it is not necessary. Like an automobile folk music needs maintenance and repair. It does not matter that a mechanic is employed if he cant fix the car or the fixes to the car create damage later. What is the impact of what professionals generally do upon the tradition. Is it as positive as it could be. Anyone can go to a library. You dont need to be a pro. Thats the point you dont need specialists. The reason folk songs are only sung by a handful is that over the last 100 years integration of folk music into the lifeway has declined. Yes that is what this is all about. Less entertainment and elitist perfectionism and more lifeway folk music. Sung and written every day by ordinary folk in increassing numbers. Conrad |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Will Fly Date: 26 Sep 10 - 09:13 AM I'm still waiting for Conrad to give me two or three examples of the folk music that he thinks we are "charged" (who by?) with preserving. America had a huge influx of immigrants in the 19th century, from all over the world - the British Isles, Europe, the Far East, etc. Are we talking of Yiddish folk and theatre songs, for example? Just tell us what you consider to be the music. Anyone can go to a library. Of course they can - but they don't necessarily choose to. The music is there for all to see, accessible to all, but if people don't want to be coerced or prodded into enjoying it, you can't make them. It's nothing to do with money or professionalism or elitism. It's the people's choice and, no matter how important someone may think folk music is, it's not a given in society that we have to sing it, play it, or like it. The reason folk songs are only sung by a handful is that over the last 100 years integration of folk music into the lifeway has declined. If folk singing has declined, it's not because people are lulled away from singing it by professional performers - it's because, as Howard has quite rightly said above, other forms of music are more appealing. It's as simple as that, but you don't seem to get it. And - just to contradict that statement - what about the wealth of fiddle tunes in folk music (for example)? I sit here with the "Fiddler's Fakebook" in front of me - 500 tunes from all over the North America and parts of Europe - set out for me to enjoy. And anyone else to enjoy. And the key word here is "enjoy" - because you haven't once mentioned in any of your posts the fundamental point of all music, which is to play it and enjoy it, And, if we choose to entertain others or be entertained by others with the music - just for fun - there's nothing any so-called radical paradigm will do to change that. You can't shoehorn music and the joy of music into a crackpot social theory for it's own sake. When you realise that, you might get some sense into your head. You might believe that folk music is a fundamental element of a "lifeway", whatever the hell that is, but many do not and will not, preferring classical music, or jazz, or rap, or hip-hop, or reggae or church music. And some people have no interest in, or ear for, music whatsoever. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: GUEST,Ruth Archer Date: 26 Sep 10 - 09:38 AM "Anyone can go to a library." Yes - so how come so few people do? Libraries are free at the point of use (though we do pay for them through our taxes - is this another area where you'd abolish subsidy?), so there are no barriers to access. They are a good test of your theory that if things are free, more people do them. The majority of people don't regularly use libraries. They buy books. They read on the internet. Some don't read at all. It's all about perceived value. And here's a thing: in a capitalist society (which, as a political conservative, you presumably advocate), many things which have no price are perceived as worthless. If you give away free tickets to an event, especially if it is for a kind of entertainment with which the target audience is unfamiliar, many just won't bother. The event has no perceived value for them, and with limited leisure time to "spend", people are very careful about the choices they make. If you charge for the tickets, the potential attender has made an investment which is more likely to secure their attendance, and they see the event as having an intrinsic value. You don't believe me? I have seen professional venues try to develop audiences for less popular artforms, such as contemporary dance, by giving tickets away. Audiences still stayed away in droves. My point is that, for people who don't know anything about folk music, making it free won't inspire them to come. If you do, by some minor miracle, manage to get a few of them into your field, asking them to listen to poor performers and to shit in a hedge is hardly going to compare with the leisure experiences they are used to, and you're not very likely to see them a second time. A bad experience of folk will put off many new attenders for life, as it reinforces negative stereotypes. Far from opening the gates, Conrad, your little masterplan would kill folk stone dead. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Howard Jones Date: 26 Sep 10 - 11:37 AM Anyone can go to a library. As will said, "of course they can - but they don't necessarily choose to." Most of us have to earn a living in other ways, and can't spare the time to travel hundreds of miles to spend long hours in a library researching songs, piecing together a performable piece from various sources, reworking and rehearsing it until it is finally ready to perform. Professionals make time, because to remain successful they have to continue to refresh their act with new material. Then performers lower down the foodchain, as you put it, copy it and perform it themselves. I'm not claiming that professionals are the only ones to do this. Some amateur performers are also able to do it. But it is mostly professionals, because they have to, and their influence is greater because their performances reach more people. Agents are just facilitators - professionals rise to the top because promoters want to book them because audiences want to see them. If you're not good enough to attract an audience, no agent in the world will get you bookings. They get radio play for the same reason. And don't imagine these professionals and their agents somehow have it all tied up - promoters are always looking for new talent. The key word there is "talent". |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Don Firth Date: 26 Sep 10 - 03:06 PM "Professionals rise to the top because via their agents and recording backers they dominate all the major stages and most of the radio play." What a load of crap!! Conrad, I don't have an agent, nor do I have a recording backer. Nor do any singers I know—and know of—who customarily perform at folk festivals and other venues, free or otherwise. I did have an agent once, in the early Sixties, for about three months. People, who had heard me at one place or another, had been coming to me, offering me money to sing various places, and this guy wanted a 10% cut of what I was being paid. But he wound up LOSING me more work than he found me, so I fired him! Sure, singers like Pete Seeger, Joan Baez, Richard Dyer-Bennet, Theodore Bikel—people who went around nationally and gave concerts in large concert halls had (have) agents—but they represent a miniscule percentage of the number of PROFESSIONAL singers of folk songs. Most of us are NOT nationally known, and we really don't make a great deal of money at it. Generally, just enough to cover our EXPENSES, which allows us to KEEP singing for audiences—and at FREE events, such as festivals. And school classes and in school assemblies. Incidentally, how BETTER to spread interest in folk music that to sing for young people? Especially if you make it interesting, informative, and entertaining? Conrad, you live in some kind of boozy dream world. ANY public location, such as the Seattle Center here, or any of the thousands of public parks scattered in cities around the country—and free and open for the public to use (that's what they're there for!) are maintained by public funds. And these public funds are provided usually by bond issues that the public—those who use the park—vote on and pass, year after year, just like bond issues to support public schools. And the same holds true for "free" public facilities like public libraries. Who do you think pays the library staff? The city. Usually from bond issues that people vote on. Because they consider these things worthwhile. THERE IS NO WAY THAT THESE FACILITIES CAN BE PROVIDED, MAINTAINED, AND STAFFED UNLESS SOMEONE PAYS FOR IT!! After all, SOMEone has to clean up the turds you leave behind and pick up your trail of empty beer cans and put them in the recycling bin. Don Firth P. S. My apologies to all the normal people here for my liberal use of CAPITALS, but I'm trying to find some way of getting through Conrad's obviously blurred vision in the vain hope that some of it may eventually make it's way to the few remaining functional synapses he may have left. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: catspaw49 Date: 26 Sep 10 - 03:18 PM No one minds at all Don.......We're all still wondering what the hell it is Conrad expects out of his "Grand Plan." Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Don Firth Date: 26 Sep 10 - 03:30 PM Well, the one fairly clear beacon shining through the fog of Conrad's convoluted "Grand Plan" seems to be his writhing lust for unlimited access to free beer. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Tootler Date: 26 Sep 10 - 04:15 PM Ordinary people are not good enough to make music. They need to hire someone who is. Conrad seems to believe that professionals are denying opportunities to amateurs. Well I'm an amateur musician and I don't find there is any lack of opportunity nor do I find professionals telling me I am not good enough. Quite the opposite; the professional musicians I know are very encouraging. There are plenty of folk clubs and sessions where I can go and sing and play and, were I so minded, there is opportunity to look for paid gigs. One local venue has periodic "hiring fairs" where you can showcase yourself. However, I am quite happy to continue as an amateur. I also play recorder in a group that gives a couple of concerts a year and have recently joined a wind band and a choir who also do concerts, so there is plenty of musical activity that I can take part in with opportunity to perform. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Don Firth Date: 26 Sep 10 - 06:51 PM There is often not that much qualitative difference between an amateur and a professional. I know a number of really fine singers who don't want to be professional singers. They sing strictly for enjoyment (their own and others') and prefer not to be dependent upon their singing for income, wanting to sing when they want to sing, not because they depend on it to pay the rent. But—I don't know that many people, including those who chose to stay amateur, who will refuse payment if someone offers it to them. When it comes down to it, I'm probably more of a semi-professional. What drew me into professionalism was being asked in 1959 to do the "Ballads and Books" television series. For which, incidentally, I did NOT receive any pay. A program planner for KCTS-TV had heard me a few times at "hoots" (private parties where friends get together to sing for each other) and actually had to talk me into doing the series. KCTS was an educational station based at the University of Washington, operating on a low budget and using hand-me-down equipment from KING-TV, a local commercial station. Now, it's our local PBS affiliate and with its own studios off campus. But at the time they did not have the money to pay "talent." People then assumed that, since I had done a television series, I was obviously a "professional," so they expected to pay me when I sang somewhere. Such as the coffeehouse "The Place Next Door," which had just opened and was looking for a folk singer to hire. Simply a case of being at the right place at the right time, and being ready when the job was offered. So—Conrad, there is a damned thin line between amateurs and professions, particularly in the realm of folk music. Your picture of professionals as being greedy elitists trying to limit the field bears no resemblance to anything going on in the real world. As a greedy, elitist professional singer out merely to exploit folk music for my own selfish enrichment, with the exception in the early Sixties when I was singing regularly in coffeehouses, doing concerts, singing at the Seattle World's Fair and at arts festivals and such, if I had not also been teaching guitar in a music store and giving folk guitar classes in the evenings when I wasn't singing someplace (and how better, Conrad, to spread interest in folk music than to teach others how to do it?), I would not have made a very good living. I managed to squeak by. But—I was able to keep doing what I wanted to do: sing for and with other people. With the British Invasion (The Beatles, the Rolling Stones, et al.) and the demise of the popular interest in folk music—and the closing of many coffeehouses, I and many of my greedy, elitist professional compatriots had to take "day jobs." But we continued to get together for "hoots." But gradually, over the past few decades, folk music seems to be growing. Slowly, perhaps, but growing nevertheless. Folk festivals (free!) all over the country, many new coffeehouses opening (there are more coffeehouses offering folk music as entertainment in Seattle right now than there were in the Sixties!), open mikes, song circles. . . . Believe it or not, but there is more interest in folk music right now (as opposed to popular folk singing trios, quartets, and other ensembles of the "Mighty Wind" stripe) than there was in the Sixties. And this time, it's growing, not because it's suddenly a popular music fad, but because genuine interest in the songs themselves, and a desire on the part of many to not only preserve them, but sing them. It will never be more than one corner of the wide world of music available, any more than opera or early music is, but as it is now, it's actually much more stable and healthier than it was during the heyday of groups like The Kingston Trio, The Limeliters, and The New Christy Minstrels. If it ain't broke—and it ain't!—don't fix it! Or as a famous man once said: "You cannot help a child grow by pulling on its head!" Don Firth P. S. ". . . nor do I find professionals telling me I am not good enough. Quite the opposite; the professional musicians I know are very encouraging." Exactly so, Tootler! I'll never forget sitting on Carol Lee Waite's living room floor at 3:00 o'clock in the morning in 1954, passing a guitar back and forth with Pete Seeger as he showed me guitar licks. Or the time I spent backstage having a long chat with Richard Dyer-Bennet, who as very encouraging. Or both Guy Carwan and Barbara Dane suggesting songs they thought I could do particularly well. What Conrad keeps saying about professional singers of folk songs reveals how totally ignorant he is about that of which he speaks. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: *#1 PEASANT* Date: 26 Sep 10 - 06:59 PM Active preservation and composition are most important enjoyment is way down the list. Though valid. Advertizing can do most anything why not use it to encourage people to go to libraries, play and learn music easy..... \ There is a finite resource to support the music and pros are sucking down most of it. They are getting enough to arrange for national tours involving jet plane money. Way too much. All at the same time when ordinary folk cant get a venue because according to Don they arent refined enough. Music does not require money. I can prove it by going to any public place and play music. Easy- the money connection is bogus. Get used to it. Music can be free. Certain people just dont want it to be. Ah yes but if it is too expensive you simply can't come. Thats just economic segregation and intolerance. No riff raff need apply. It is the next frontier on the civil rights adgenda that needs to be worked on. We have already heard on this thread "if you dont like the cost get a job" Enough said. Rampant elitism and discrimination. Only perfect singers need to apply..... Conrad |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Bettynh Date: 26 Sep 10 - 07:09 PM OK, Conrad, time to name names. What folksingers are you talking about that "arrange for national tours involving jet plane money?" |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Smokey. Date: 26 Sep 10 - 07:14 PM Conrad, stop wasting your time here - get yourself out of the house, go to your nearest cheap pub and sing your heart out. Be sure to tell them why. Do this in as many places as you can, then come back and tell us what happened. |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: catspaw49 Date: 26 Sep 10 - 07:21 PM Exactly Betty......well stated and let me go one step more. CONRAD--READ AND ANSWER: You've made the following statement repeatedly yet NEVER have you named names or given any specific. I contend you are completely full of shit. Let's see your proof source or close the thread as there is no "discussion" but simply a boring lecture from you with absolutely no validity. "There is a finite resource to support the music and pros are sucking down most of it." Go ahead Conrad......let's have some names and details......some proof source. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Don Firth Date: 26 Sep 10 - 09:11 PM ". . . civil rights. . . ." Jesus, Mary, and Joseph!!!! Name names? He CAN'T. Because there aren't any. He'll just keep repeating the same ridiculous thing over and over again. He's HOPELESS! Bloody deranged!! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Don Firth Date: 26 Sep 10 - 09:24 PM ". . . civil rights. . . . I'm still working on that one. I'm in total awe! #### "It is the next frontier on the civil rights adgenda that needs to be worked on." You mean, Conrad, that if someone pays me to sing somewhere, it violates your civil rights? Explain to me, please, how that works? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Don Firth Date: 26 Sep 10 - 09:37 PM ". . . civil rights. . . ." I haven't heard anything this outrageously hilarious since Tina Fey aired one of the funniest comedy routines of all time by simply quoting verbatim what Sarah Palin said during a press conference!! Conrad, you're missing your calling. You have a great career ahead of you as a comedian. (Or in politics – Republican Party, of course.) Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: Don Firth Date: 26 Sep 10 - 09:43 PM Jeez! Nobody could say anything like that unless he's sitting there at his computer completely ripped! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: catspaw49 Date: 26 Sep 10 - 09:51 PM I belong to the ACLU and I have seen nothing about fighting for the rights of the aggressively stupid. BTW Corny............We're waiting for the names and proof sources........Let's not forget. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: The Concept of FREED Folkmusic From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 26 Sep 10 - 10:22 PM "Jeez! Nobody could say anything like that unless he's sitting there at his computer completely ripped!" At least John in Hull was Funny! (trying to be funny too!) and knew his limitations .... |
| Share Thread: |
