 sj |
||
|
||
Scotland is not England
|
|
|
Subject: Scotland is not England From: John Nolan Date: 15 Aug 99 - 12:04 PM Max, or somebody: In the Links categories, under English Folk Music, is listed a site for Child Ballads. These were drawn from England and Scotland, and therefore it would be much more appropriate to call the category British Folk Music. I know it is hard to mention the preservation of national identity without sounding nitpicky, but I'm sure there must be at least one other Mudcat reader who feels as I do. |
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: Lesley N. Date: 15 Aug 99 - 12:32 PM I agree John (and I was the one to put it under English Folk) - I would much prefer a category named British Folk - particularly as there isn't a separate one for Scottish Folk. It would be easier to have a British category than to have separate ones for England, Scotlands, Wales and Northern Ireland.
|
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: Bill D Date: 15 Aug 99 - 12:52 PM If I am not mistaken, anyone can create a category in those listings...if you suddenly discover Bulgarian folk music, you can make a special place for links..it is not every day that we NEED a new category, but this might be one...*smile*...sadly, it is difficult for us 'colonials' to keep some of the distinctions clear in our minds all the time. No disrepect meant, just not living with it everyday. |
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: Lesley N. Date: 15 Aug 99 - 01:36 PM The problem with creating a new category as opposed to changing it is duplication. All English folk would also come under British Folk. How is a category name changed? Or are John and I the only ones who would like this done???
|
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: Allan C. Date: 15 Aug 99 - 01:48 PM Look just below the box where you enter a link. There is a small box in which you can create a new category. |
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: SingsIrish Songs Date: 15 Aug 99 - 05:15 PM Well, as I get more and more into folk music...especially from the British Isles, I find it of importance to me to know the country of origin of the songs...There are so many songs that are considered "Irish" but have their origins in England, or Scotland, etc. The "crossovers" are wonderful in that music will bring people together. SingsIrish Songs (but not only!) |
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: Lesley N. Date: 15 Aug 99 - 07:28 PM Truly said. I had someone write me quite angrily because they refused to believe I'll Take You Home Kathleen was written by an American in Illinois!
The trouble is do you not consider a song Irish/English/Scottish because it originated elsewhere? The origin of so many tunes is lost and many more became popular throughout most of GB.
The reason I don't sort my pages by country like everyone else does is because too many tunes have cross-pollinated. To put them in a single country list seemed like a straight jacket to me. So I made up my own categories and adapted a search engine that allows searches by country - but it gives everything that was popular in a country - not just what originated there. The information on the tune will have that (if I know it).
To sum up, I suppose my feeling is that yes, I want to know the origin (and history) of a folk tune - but "folk" by definition, I believe, means music that was popular in a culture - wherever it came from.
Which leads me back to the fact that I would still prefer one broad British Folk category than to have duplicate links in an English, Scottish, Irish, Welsh, etc. link category. Seems more efficient to me. Else instead of having one link for Taylor's Traditional Tunebook there were be separate links for the Scottish page, the Irish page, etc. More work to enter and more work to maintain. All that said I don't think it's a problem to do it either way. Far be it from me to organize someone else's thinking when I can't organize my own some of the time!
|
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: Bill D Date: 15 Aug 99 - 09:23 PM as you may have guessed, defining categories is one of the perennial problems...on the links page, I 'think' the post can be edited by the one who posted it...so it may be possible to delete one's own and move it to another place |
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: Paddy Date: 15 Aug 99 - 10:32 PM Cross-over and cross-pollination are grand and glorious things, but they only have meaning when the contributors are different. Within the Celtic Isles, there is a long tradition of intermingling, genetically and culturally, but that should never be an excuse to belittle or denigrate the distinct cultural groups within those isles. There are immense homogenization pressures at work throughout the world today, leaving much to be desired. Breaking down barriers is great, but destroying cultural identities in the name of homogenized unity or convenience is a very shortsighted view. Hmm, sorry. I didn't mean to go off there. I believe it is unwise to subsume Irish, Scottish, Welsh, Manx and Cornish into "British". They're all different and should be recognized for their own merits. |
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: John Nolan Date: 15 Aug 99 - 10:41 PM I'm no fan of subsuming, but I'd rather be subsumed under "British" than annihilated by "English". |
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: SingsIrish Songs Date: 16 Aug 99 - 02:35 AM ooooooooooooo, John Nolan! (LOL) I think you'll find there are some who will say that alot of tunes used for Irish, Scottish, and even American songs have their start/origin with an English tune... How many remember Guy Mitchell's hit "Roving Kind" (She had a dark and a rovin' eye, and her hair hung down in ring-a-lets...)? That song is based (words and music) on an English song from the 1800's called "The Pirate Ship" (also called "The Fireship" if I remember correctly from the songbook I came across). And hmmmm, "My Country Tis of Thee" is definitely not American in origin.... As with flowers, cross-pollinating can lead to many beautiful new specimens. I agree, too, that to destroy identity of any sort is totally wrong. And for those into history or anthropology or musicology or simply the love of music, knowing origins of wonderful songs and melodies is of great interest and importance. Perhaps that way people can gain new appreciations for cultures they never gave two hoots about.... Guess it is the early childhood educator in me coming through....multicultural education and integrating subjects (ie history and music). SingsIrish Songs
|
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: GeorgeH Date: 16 Aug 99 - 12:12 PM Paddy . . What the F*** are "The Celtic Isles"?? To my mind the greatest service we could do for Folk music is the utter abolition of the C word . . . It's become a marketing buzz word, IMO devoid of all musical and ethno-musical meaning. G.
|
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: dick greenhaus Date: 16 Aug 99 - 12:21 PM GeorgeH- Well yes, but so has the word "Folk". |
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: SingsIrish Songs Date: 16 Aug 99 - 02:05 PM Okay, to get a little more to the original topic ...instead of getting so nitpicky re British, Celtic, and other "collective" headings, how about doing continental headings of origin....ie European (that covers a bunch I know...) N. American (covers Canada, USA), etc. If an exact country of origin is known, couldn't it be mentioned like we do the author?
|
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: Jeff Dennison Date: 16 Aug 99 - 03:08 PM The key for me to the issue is that the British Isles has vast repertoire of traditions and long may it remain so. Just looking at England we have Northumbrian and a North Eastern traditons and this changes every few miles up and down an right across the country. My own infulences are orginaly based in London but have been influenced by friends all over the country who have different approaches to songs and music. I too resent the C word which has become meaningless especially when Jez Lowe a fine singer from Durham or Bob Fox who is a great performer from Tyneside are classed as a Celtic musicians. Many folk try to rewrite the histories to support their life view so let's stop it and get on making music. Regards Jeff |
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: Barry Finn Date: 16 Aug 99 - 06:43 PM John would it be anything like this. "The Falls Of Clyde" was Scottish built around the turn of the century, she'd been the whole world round & back, made her home in different ports from time to time & now has called Hawaii her home for the past many years but if you asked where's she from wouldn't you say she's Scottish born & built no matter what became of her after that. Even though she's a centurian she still has that certain style that old timers could pick out & say look at that flair & those lines, yup, she's Clyde built as sure as a song, no taking that from her. Barry |
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: John Nolan Date: 16 Aug 99 - 09:36 PM To go back to the first post - Child's collection is called The English And Scottish Popular Ballads. Both England and Scotland were quite separate countries when the vast majority of the songs were written...in fact quite a few ballads deal with the Border conflicts. Therefore, if in late 20th century America, this collection link has to be referenced under a single heading, "British" is the most appropriate word. "English" is slighting to the Scots, and obviously vice versa. By the way, Barry, enjoyed your singing , as ever. The party lasted until midnight with Mrs. O'Neill dancing up a storm and Rory Makem turning excrutiating funny. Great time. P.S. Don't they just revile the word "Celtic", too. |
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: Barry Finn Date: 16 Aug 99 - 09:50 PM John, "Celtic", I don't want to slip into the ship shit again. I saw that you posted a bit early the next morning. Barry |
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: Lesley N. Date: 16 Aug 99 - 09:51 PM John, it sounds as though most people believe the solution is to add a new category rather than change one. You can add either Scottish folk or British folk - and put the link there too (because although not exclusive of England or Scotland - it fits in both). When I put the link up I didn't mean to open a can of worms or insult anyone's nationality (two generations back my family is from Arbroath). I was just trying to point people to a resource and chose the only category at the time that seemed appropriate.
|
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: paddymac Date: 17 Aug 99 - 12:07 AM Dear George: if there's any word more widely used than the "C" word, especially in the Celtic Isles, it's the "F" word. I think it is what linguists have termed an "Anglo-Saxon grunt word". A proud contribution the the history of the world. Jeff: Kudos on your magnificent turn of a phrase with "vast repertoire of traditions". The core issue. |
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: GeorgeH Date: 17 Aug 99 - 07:26 AM Jeff D: Thanks for expressing my thoughts more coherently and with greater patience than I could muster. DickG: Well, in the UK at least "folk" is the antithesis of a marketing buzz word . . no marketing person would let it within 100miles of his music promotion. More generally, Ian Telfer (Oyster Band's token Scot - and he'd know better than to take that remark seriously) recently wrote an excellent article disassembling the celtic myth - originally for the OB fanzine but reprinted in the last Folk Roots. So, Paddy, I'll ask again; what, in your opinion, are the Celtic isles. And - as others have pointed out - Folk musicians from all parts of the islands in the west of Europe seem to share my objections to the "C" word! And in case I'm giving the wrong message; yes, I do see the problem over the original classification . . and don't see a ready solution. Possibly having headings for England and Scotland with it listed under both? Of course, with Child triggering this discussion about different strands in the traditions, it's worth remembering that a lot of the scholarship within the Child collections is that of describing just how widely distributed - well beyond the British Isles and Ireland - the legends carried by the Ballads can be found. G. |
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: Melodeon Date: 17 Aug 99 - 03:43 PM Are we in danger of becoming like the 'popular press' where every type of music, art, literature woman, man etc. has to have a LABEL. Just look at the immigration that England alone has had. Leaving aside those who came before 1500 ish we have had Flemish, Dutch, German, French, Irish, Scottish, Welsh, various Easten Europeans, not to mention in more recent times Asian and African. Each of those people have brought their culture with them and parts have been assimilated in to 'English Traditional' music. The English have in their turn populated (mainly via the Army) vast tracts of the world (including the "Celtic Isles") taking ther culture with them . Who knows where the bounderies lie, if in fact there are any at all. The whole of American popular music has its basis in English dance music form (the 8 bar AABB or AABA plus chorus) and African rhythms (a sweeping statement you may think). Let's forget the labels, we know what folk music is by its feel. Most of us have got a pretty good idea of its origin when we hear it. Fortunately we all want to sing, play and listen to it. Melodeon (at length). |
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: John Nolan Date: 17 Aug 99 - 05:19 PM One would think that the Celtic Islands might confusingly refer to those regions where the various forms of p and q Gaelic are spoken, if only occasionally, as part of an unbroken tradition. In Scotland's case, that would rule out east, central and southern Scotland, where Lallans, in its various dialects, has held sway among the country people for years. On the other hand, Celtic Islands may refer to small pockets of Parkhead supporters living precariously near Ibrox, or in Bridgton. As for labels, Melodeon, surely they should be all-embracing (British) or multiple (Scottish, English, Welsh, Irish). And vive la difference, I say! |
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: Eileen Date: 17 Aug 99 - 05:58 PM I hate to rush into a string that has such a potential to get hairy, but Lesley makes a good point up yonder about the issue of duplication. A good example I know of is The Cruel Sister, and its varients. I've encountered at least four versions, one English, one Irish, and two Scottish, the best in my opinion being of the latter type and recorded by Old Blind Dogs. Where to put them? I would say that it makes sense to me to have a category called British Isles Music and lump them all together, but I won't: I hate to start up a political melee in such surroundings. |
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: GeorgeH Date: 18 Aug 99 - 08:56 AM John Nolan: thanks for encapsulating my concerns about "Celtic Islands" . . Eileen: The problem with lumping everything under "British Isles" is that there are distinct regional cultures within Britain (and not simply divided as England/Scotland/Wales!) with distinct folk traditions - which, to confuse matters further, have always borrowed heavily and healithly to one another. And Melodeon - while labels aren't the be-all and end-all (especially if one's prime interest is finding good material to play/listen to) they DO help us to understand the social context and histories of the music. And, of course, the other nations within the UK quite understandably get upset at hearing their music described as "English" (and the Irish even more so), while others of us get very irritated at hearing everything from the UK categorised as "Celtic". G. |
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: Ewan McVicar Date: 19 Aug 99 - 04:31 AM I'm surprised no Canadian has yet weighed in about the habit throughout Britain of referring to the USA as America. Just as nasty and neocolonialist as calling Scotland England. Th English do that too, of course! But then, they would. |
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: GeorgeH Date: 19 Aug 99 - 09:00 AM Ewan . . I thought you'd have realised that everywhere which isn't England can simply be referred to as "foreign" . . . ;-) G. |
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: Lesley N. Date: 19 Aug 99 - 09:18 AM The issue here is not that the music of England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales is culturally distinct. Of course it is. The issue is SOLELY link organization. What is the most efficient way to organize the links so people will spend the least amount of time looking for what they want to find? Separate England, Scotland, Wales category means that people have to potentially look through ALL of those categories to find something. And there will be some irritation to see the same link in all the categories. With a single category people need only click on a link and return with the back button to look at the next site.
If we had a sufficient number of unique links for each category that would be another thing entirely, clearly separate categories would be valuable. Here I've submitted one more message than I planned to as the discussion went off, as Eileen says, on a hairy tangent that I probably should have anticipated, but didn't. This is a communal site and anyone can add link categories, so I will leave it to others in the community to do so at their will and when I find a good link will post it wherever it fits. That said, I agree - PLEASE don't add a Celtic category!!!
|
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: paddymac Date: 20 Aug 99 - 05:37 AM George H: Once shorn of its hairiness, your root question is a fair one deserving of a fair answer. I use the term "Celtic Isles" to denote an area where Celtic culture once prevailed and is yet either prevalent or prominent. I believe it is a more apt descriptor than the common geo-political one, particularly when seeking to understand the commonalities of folk traditions within the area. I understand the term to be independant of geo-political concerns, although I can understand how some might feel compelled to read more into it. Apologies to all for going a bit beyond the pale. |
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: AndyG Date: 20 Aug 99 - 06:17 AM paddymac.
I see a problem with a Celtic Isles classification as it seems that you then also need a Celtic Mainlands classification for "...an area where Celtic culture once prevailed and is yet either prevalent or prominent..." that emcompasses those regions of France and Spain.
AndyG |
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: Lady McMoo Date: 20 Aug 99 - 06:45 AM Taking up AndyG's point, Irish, Scottish, Shetland, Orkney, Breton, Welsh, Cornish, Galician, Cape Breton and probably several others are all quite distinct categories of music, each with a proud tradition and unique flavour. Although all are "Celtic" personally I don't think it is very useful to file them all under a "celtic" heading. mcmoo |
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: AndyG Date: 20 Aug 99 - 07:21 AM mcmoo, In my post I was attempting to say that paddymac's term didn't match his definition. My views on the mis-use and over-use of Celtic as a classification for music are strongly with those who would see it abolished. Re-reading my above post I can see that you might well think otherwise. I use the word when needed as an ethnic sub-descriptor e.g. Scots-celtic, as by no means all Scottish songs and music are celtic.
Getting back to the original post as far as I can see the only classification for the (cross-cultural) Child Ballads is, erm... Child Ballads.
AndyG |
|
Subject: RE: Scotland is not England From: GeorgeH Date: 20 Aug 99 - 10:16 AM PaddyMac: Thanks for the explanation. Its problem - apart from the general deficiency of the 'C' word, even when applied to Ireland - is that it most (by area, say) of what is now England does not qualify (by any stretch of any argument) as Celtic. And Scotland and Wales are not islands, nor (slighly arguable, some say) Brittany. BTW no intention on my part to be "hairy" and I do accept your "complaint" about everything being subsumed into "Britain" or "England" - I just see your "solution" as being as bad as the original problem. G. |
| Share Thread: |