Traditional singer definition

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 06:11 AM

"The famous example is Ewan McColl's "Shoals of Herring"
Moot point Howard; Shoals of Herring appeared on the Irish scene some time after the Irish song tradition, certainly the English language one, had shuffled off this mortal coil.
The reported hearing of 'Shores of Erin' came from American scholar Horace Beck, reported in his 'Folklore and the Sea' and it was never established whether or not it is based on his hearing (or mishearing) of the song sung by a bunch of folkies who got it from a Dubliner's album. It certainly never underwent too many changes which, I believe qualify it as being traditional; not did it take root to any depth here in Ireland outside the ballad scene (Ireland's folk revival).
There is more of a case to be made for MacColl's 'Freeborn Man' which possibly would have entered the Travellers' tradition, had it survived beyond the mid seventies; but even that only appeared as mangled fragments, again, apparently from misheard Dubliner's renditions.
The groups themselves had a hand in making some, (often ludicrous) changes to the texts of songs - beatiful example with The Johnsons' 'version' of Tunnel Tigers
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: The Sandman
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 06:26 AM

collectors seem to think that the difference between Traditional singers and singers of traditional songs is of importance when it comes to making a valuation of what is worth collecting.
however for those people who are interested in music and performance,what is important is the abilty to bring traditional songs to life.the fact that someone learned a song a particular way is no guarantee that they can do the song justice, they may be tone deaf but because they learned the song orally their version must be collected, how ridiculous.
however,most of the traditional singers I have heard have performed their songs well.
the other problem I have with collectors using the yardstick[oral transmission only ] is that much dross such as carolina moon and 1930s popular music becomes acceptable, regardless of merit of song
personally I reckon Cecil Sharp had his guidelines about right, my only criticism of Sharp would be his lack of enthusiasm for industrial folk songs.

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 06:51 AM

Cap'n
Collectors collect for a whole host of reasons and for a whole spectrum of material.
Many do it for unfamiliar songs or versions, others to put recordings of field singers out on albums - which have been an inspiration to people like me for near half a century, as a singer and a researcher.
It has certainly never has been an aim - or not for a long time, to collect in order to find the best singing - most of our traditional singers when they were recorded (certainly in England) were past their prime, many of them hadn't sung for decades and were dragging their songs out of a long unused memory store.
We were recording mainly to gain as much information as we could of an all but disappered song tradition before it went altogether.
You will never in a million years get something like that from a revival singer, no matter how good he or she is.
Sitting in a folk club with a tape recorder isn't 'collecting' - it's sitting in a folk club with a tape recorder
"oral transmission only"
I don't know of a collector who uses this as a yardstick.
As Steve Gardham points out, many of our songs were passed to the singer via broadsides and owe their currency to this.
Here in Ireland the 'ballad' trade, the selling of songsheets at fairs and markets, which lasted to the mid fifties, was possibly the major single influence on the Irish song tradition.
We certainly never recorded a singer who didn't learn some of his or her songs from a 'ballad'.
The oral tradition was certainly a vital element in the transmission of songs, but it wasn't an exclusive factor.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: GUEST,Woodsie
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 07:18 AM

Thanks Jim.

I remember (mis)hearing "Shores Of Erin" performed on a TV show when I was young early sixties I think! I'm glad I wasn't the only one!

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: The Sandman
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 07:33 AM

Jim,
Peter Kennedy in a discussion with Mike Yates dismissed Bob Blake,the reason, he had suspicion that he had not learned his songs orally, but from books.
mike yates collected songs from Bob Blake, thinking he was a traditional singer[IMO that is one who learned his songs orally from his local community/or family]
would Yates have collected the songs[INTHE FIRST PLACE] if he had known Blake was not a traditional singer?I DOUBT IT.
" We certainly never recorded a singer who didn't learn some of his or her songs from a 'ballad"That is a red herring.
do you agree that collectors, yourself included do not collect songs from revivalists, but collect songs from those people who have learned their songs orally from their family or local community such as Walter Pardon, that is how they define a traditional singer, it is not relevant that some of those songs were originally learned from song sheets , yet those such as Bob Blake who learned songs from books orsongsheets in the twentieth century were dismissed by Kennedy, and I suspect would never have been collected in the first place if Yates had known Blake was not a traditional singer.

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: Howard Jones
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 07:55 AM

If someone is singing their songs in a "traditional" context ie within their own community rather than the folk scene, then they can probably be considered a "traditional" singer. If they learned most of their songs from print rather than oral transmission that may devalue them to a collector as a source of material but not necessarily as an example of traditional singing style, which may be equally valuable.

The early collectors are now criticised for selectively collecting only the songs which fitted their ideas of what a folk song should be and ignoring popular songs in the singers' repertoires. It is a bit unfair to criticise later collectors for being less subjective and selective. Whether the songs are "dross" is a moot point, but it does help to put the folk songs and the nature of the tradition into context to understand the place they took in the whole of a singer's repertoire. I've never heard anyone on the revival justify singing 1930s songs on the grounds that they were part of some traditional singer's repertoire, although they may sometimes be sung for their own sake, without being claimed as folk songs.

Jim, perhaps I am guilty of repeating an urban legend regarding Shoals of Herring. My point still stands - there is no reason why a copyrighted song should not enter the tradition, although it is more difficult these days for variations to arise because of the availability of recorded versions (on the other hand these may perpetuate errors - how many people now sing "Fire Marengo" as "screw the cart and screw him down" instead of "screw the cotton" as a result of Bellowhead's version?)

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: The Sandman
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 08:06 AM

Howard, examples of vauable traditional singing styles can also be heard when listening to some revival singers.
Jim, your collection "around the hills of clare"contained some singers collected by you who wrote their own songs or learned other contemporary songs[ i cant find the cd right now] but I doubt if you described them as traditional singers?
Jim you are an exception ,most collectors collect songs from traditional singers,they do not collect singers of contemporary[late20th or21st century written] or self penned songs.

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 08:55 AM

examples of vauable traditional singing styles can also be heard when listening to some revival singers.

Is that really true, Dick? There are any amount of revival Conceits and Affectations which may be sourced accordingly - which is to say I hear lots of great singers in The Revival but their traditional singing styles can only ever be a matter of C&A, and hardly valuable with respect of The Tradition, unless of course it engenders a prospective urge in the listener - as happened to me recently when in listening to The Young Tradition I was moved to listen to The Copper Family.

That said, I can, and will, listen to any singer in a folk club or festival context; I especially love sessions and singarounds where the songs are so much more important than the singers. In this I respect all Revival Singers who are Created Equal with Respect of the Tradition. We have been thus called, and I will listen even to the most humble of them feeling that in this we at least approach the humanity which gave rise to The Tradition in the first place. But ours is a lesser world operating at some considerable remove from that which hath inspired us, and the more we seek it, so the further away it gets.

So - Revival Conventions, whilst being traditional in and of themselves, are not The Tradition - rather part & parcel of the religiosity attending The Revival as a whole, which is why, no doubt, JC in his guise Defender of the Faith publicly denounces my own efforts in this respect as heresy. Me, I would never stoop so low as to assume there was ever a right way of doing anything other than the one that works for you in the hope that if there's one thing Revival Singers do have in common with our Traditional Idols, it is a willingness to be exactly what we are, warts and all.

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: The Sandman
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 09:18 AM

yes here are some examples, Ewan macColl, Isobel Sutherland, Ron Taylor,SheilaPark, Watersons, WilsonFamily[individually and collectively]and others

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 09:22 AM

Absolutley love The Wilsons but 5(?) man sining in roaring harmonies? Which tradition is that then?

L in C#

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: mikesamwild
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 09:28 AM

When I coordinated a wildlife survey of Sheffield in the 80s we found most 'rare' species had been recorded in 'nice' areas where nature lovers liked to go at weekends . So the dots went on the maps and skewed the distribution patterns, attitudes and expectations and conservation funding etc etc. That's why the urban wildlife movement was so important.

We found lots more in a systematic survey of the entire city and in the most unlikely area.


To get back on thread!

Even now, I find that, unless , someone is not an elderly, manual, travelling, 'unspoilt' person a lot of academics and collectors don't bother too much.

Those Port Isaac fishermen would not have learned shanties on a motorised boat or even heard them until the folk revival of the 50s.


I know some who have been hailed as trad who are lousy singers by any standards.( and I don't mean a voice alone - sometimes delivery, personality, relevance of material, and knowledge or experience can confer respect on someone )

However, I think listeners have alway valued a tuneful singer.


Would Mmny aspirant singers would have been weeded out in the days of a still living tradition, if they didn't pass muster.


X fator wasn't the only selection process that left us a legacy of traditional or 'folk' song.

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 10:28 AM

Ewan macColl, Isobel Sutherland, Ron Taylor,SheilaPark, Watersons, WilsonFamily[individually and collectively]and others

To which we could add a hundred more names of our favourite Revival Singers, of whom tell us more about the Conceits and Affections of The Revival than the aesthetics of The Tradition on which they (supposedly) model themselves. To early Revivalists this Folk Style wasn't a consideration - look at the jolly young Ladies & Gentlemen of the EFDSS back in the 1920s HERE - from 2.30 you'll hear them singing very much in their Upper Class Received Pronunciation, wheras later performers (many from the same class) affected more rustic tones by way of greater authenticity / conceit / contrivance. I dare say such singers as Jack Langstaff and John Jacob Niles had quite an impact on later revival singers in terms of repertoire if not approach; and whilst one might ponder the full extent of this impact, one must also bear in mind that The Revival is founded as much on Faith than Fact, which, again, tells us nothing about the true nature of The Tradition no matter how any given singer chooses to sing a song. Indeed, there is greater truth in any singer of whatever class singing in their own voice, than mimicking a rustic one, or, worse still, copying a traditional singer.

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 10:29 AM

Cap'n
You are confusing the issue.
As far as I can remember we never included songs written by the singers on the Clare albums.
We did include songs made during the singers lifetimes that had been absorbed into their communities - a particular interest of mine - of course these are traditional songs and the singers traditional singers.
The only self-penned material we have ever collected has been a few pieces from Travellers because of their social significance - not to say we wouldn't collect such stuff if we came across it, but we wouldn't bust a gut looking for it. To my recollection, the only self-penned stuff we ever issued were two songs made by Travellers on 'From Puck to Appleby - were they traditional? They would have been if they had been taken up by the community; don't think they were - but they were both extremely important to the work we were doing.
Howard
You are right that there's no reason copyrighted songs should not be absorbed into a living tradition - but it's not as simple as yes/no.
We noticed that published songs learned by traditional singers from print tended not to change, but remained in their original form - there seemed to be a mystique surrounding the printed word - this was not always the case - in the early days singers used to use the 'ballads' and garlands as rough guides for singing. Somewhere along the way the printed word influenced the attitude to learning songs, as did commercially issued recordings.
"The early collectors are now criticised for selectively collecting only the songs which fitted their ideas of what a folk song should be and ignoring popular songs in the singers' repertoires"
True, and unfairly in my opinion.
What is often forgotten is that collecting is, to all intents and purposes a volunary unpaid pastime indulged in by enthusiasts.
At the height of our collecting we were both putting in a days work, bolting a meal down and heading for the nearest Travellers site - four or five nights a week. On top of this we were reaching deep into our pockets for tape and expensive equipment.
We didn't consider ourselves ethnomusicologists or social or oral historians, we were folksong collectors and we had arrived at a concept of what we believed to be folk song and we made that our priority. What we collected was a delicate balance between what we wanted and what the singer wanted to give us - and I have to asy I am still staggered as to how close those two were. On numerous occasions we were refused songs because "That's not what you are looking for" etc.
To be honest, my attitude is, if you want to record 150 versions of 'Stand By Your Man', please feel free; I'll be interested to hear what social or cultural conclusions you draw from them.
Admittedly, some of the early collectors were not bound by financial and time considerations, but they did have to write down the songs and tunes by hand and they all believed they were mopping up a dying art-form
Full-time collector Tom Munnelly summed it up perfectly for me when he describes his work as "A race with the undertaker"
Sharp, in desperately poor health, dragged himself around the Appalachians and brought back a treasure trove - for which he will have my deepest gratitude forever.
It's easy to adopt the smug hindsight that the Dave Harkers of this world do when discssing the early collectors - as I learned in the building trade, it's far easier to pull down something somebody else has built that build something yourself.
Sorry to be so long winded about this - difficult subject
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 11:24 AM

"tell us more about the Conceits and Affections of The Revival than the aesthetics of The Tradition on which they (supposedly) model themselves"
Why do you make it a point of principle to talk through your arse?
MacColl summed up what so many revival singers were about in this - something I'm working on at present:
"As the Revival began to take hold and interest in folksong grew, he began to feel that, as heirs to a broken down culture, it was necessary for Revival singers to equip themselves to be able to sing the entire spectrum of traditional song and not limit themselves to the fairly small repertoires that most traditional singers had."
I have met very few singers who tried to model themselves on traditional singers - most of them adopted the sensible approach of drawing what they found useful from the tradition and used it in order to do their own thing - sometimes successfully, sometimes not.
Your singing, on the other hand, appears to owe very little, apart from words and tune, to the tradition.
Seems you can never resist the temptation to take a pop at the people who ploughed the furrow for us.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: The Sandman
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 11:27 AM

the point is that Traditional singers are singers who learned their songs orally from their community or Their family.
Walter Pardon and Fred Jordan fell into this category, Fred was also a revival singer.
however if a singer learns a somg orally via the computer does he then become a traditional singer, does the internet qualify as a community?or does community mean[strictly] the village he was brought up in.

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: Lighter
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 11:37 AM

Neat link, Suibhne. And the film and sound quality are surprisingly good.

Why some revival singers choose to imitate accents not their own is worth thinking about. It gets them closer to the "ethos," I suppose. But it can create a problem for the audience unless it's done quite unusually well - which is, well, quite unusual.

Without implying any moral or artistic judgment: my belief is that the accent-imitators in general, passable or otherwise, are more concerned about doing justice to the song (and distancing themselves from mainstream genres) than those who don't imitate.

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: The Sandman
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 12:01 PM

the 1929 sword and morris dancers danced very well, whats all this carp about upper class accents, their diction is good and they are singning in tune in their OWN accents, they would also be criticised if they sang in muummetshire accents wouldnt they

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 12:09 PM

My point being that there is a whole world of difference between the singing of a Harry Cox or a Davie Stewart and that of a Ewan MacColl or a Peter Bellamy - and that this is a difference that really ought to be acknowledged and respected. The best, therefore, any revival singer can do is to sing honestly, in their own voice, without paying too much notice of the assorted affectations of revival singers who have distorted the picture and left us with a somewhat wonky legacy as a result.

As the Revival began to take hold and interest in folksong grew, he began to feel that, as heirs to a broken down culture, it was necessary for Revival singers to equip themselves to be able to sing the entire spectrum of traditional song and not limit themselves to the fairly small repertoires that most traditional singers had.

You say you wrote that, old man? Well, its as fair an apology for revival conceits as any I've read and underlines the extent to which The Revival not only obscured the glories of The Tradition, but misrepresented them for its own vainglorious ends - specifically, Ewan MacColl becoming so mired in his own myth he effectively abandons traditional song altogether in favour of his self-penned patronising tripe about Aparthied, and all in the name of Folk. So keep the faith, old man - you are an admirable disciple defending your flatulent faith whilst diligently seeing off any dissidents and heretics by mocking and riculing anything that doesn't fit with your blinkered vision of what you think folk song ought to be, whilst, rather sadly, missing the point entirely as to what it actually is.

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 12:16 PM

whats all this carp about upper class accents, their diction is good and they are singning in tune in their OWN accents, they would also be criticised if they sang in muummetshire accents wouldnt they

My point entirely, Dick - likewise Langstaff, Niles et al.

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: GUEST,Seonaid
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 12:18 PM

Love this thread -- so many good thoughts! It can go on forever, being so subjective (arguing who is "traditional" is rather like arguing who has a "big nose"... everyone knows what it means to them, but how do we quantify it, hmm?)
Which composed songs have made it into trad? My nominee is "She Moved Through the Fair."
Now I think I'll just stick my finger in my ear (though some may accuse me of sticking other digits in other orifices) and go sing something trad, like a nice 12th century Australian chant, or maybe Casey Jones.

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 12:20 PM

"Well, its as fair an apology for revival conceits as any I've read"
I'm quoting, but that aside for the moment. Where does your own singing fit in with all this?
From what I've heard of it, it is as far from a redition by any traditional singer as I have ever heard (you right to choose, of course), so once again you are accusing somebody of doing something that you apparently have no hesitation of doing yourself - as with your edict of not being able to alter texts, on a previous thread.
MacColl, and others of the revival you have snided at in the past, at least followed the logic of the tradition by staying faithful to its narrative function; totally absent from your own approach.
One more a case of one rule for you, another for the rest of the world.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 12:58 PM

==Which composed songs have made it into trad? My nominee is "She Moved Through the Fair."==

I think not. I repeat here something I have put on other threads, but make no apology for the repetition as it fits here so well.

The 'traditional' claims of "She Moved Thru Fair" {possibly based on tradition but an original reworking in the version we have in mind here by Padraic Colum & Herbert Hughes [see informative Wiki article]} are based largely on the version sung in late 50s in London by Irish Traveller Margaret Barry, who had been discovered in Ireland by one of the English collectors of the time {I forget which] & brought over. We were all, under her influence, singing this song with heartbreaking expression wherever we went in all the clubs & venues.

Interviewed by Karl Dallas, and asked where she had got her fine version ~ from her own family tradition? from other Travellers? ~ she replied casually, "Oh no. I got it off of a gramophone record by Count John McCormack."!

~Michael~

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: Howard Jones
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 01:54 PM

"Howard, examples of valuable traditional singing styles can also be heard when listening to some revival singers."

Yes, but these tend to be conscious imitations of traditional singers, rather than a style which has developed naturally through being part of the tradition.

A distinct "folk revival" style of singing seemed to evolve which bore little resemblance to traditional styles, which featured singing through one's nose and mumbling in one's beard, with or without a finger in one's ear. Fortunately it seems less prevalent nowadays, especially amongst the younger singers.   

Of course there are many very fine revival singers, just as there were poor traditional singers - in some cases this is due to age and infirmity when they were recorded, but no doubt some of them were never very good. Nevertheless, I am convinced that the distinction between traditional and revival singers is an important one.

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: The Sandman
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 03:07 PM

In Fred Jordans case there is no distiction he was both, furthermore some of those traditional singers wrote their own material,[eg] bob roberts willie scott.
in a musical sense the distinction is not an important one, what is important is the musical interpretation and performance, the distiction is important for song collectors.
I think it is important to listen to traditional singers because it is the only way of getting access to the roots of the music, the musical performance//interpretation is not always better, although with those singers who seemed to be still singing regularly [harry cox] they are hard to better .

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 03:46 PM

Cap'n,
Sorry - Fred wasn't both a revival and traditional singer - some of his repertoire may have been from outside his tradition, as is the case with many/most singers(Mike's John McCormack example being a typical one). He was a traditional singer who sang songs he got from the revival.
He first came to our notice through his traditional repertoire - particularly the one about the "Outlandish Knight who came 'alluding' to me" lovely!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: GUEST,Seonaid
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 03:54 PM

Michael, you are right about the origins of "She Moved Through the Fair". I guess what I meant was (what we all mean, really) is that it had been recieved into the *perceived* realm of trad.
Hold on, this gets into physics (and metaphysics): nothing has a reality of its own, but only exists as observed, right?
So I'll bring in another example, which was a "stealth" composed song for decades: Abdul el Bulbul Amir (and all variants). Long considered a "college song," it has finally been blamed on Percy French.
Which brings up a collateral question: whcih tradition(s) is/are considered truly "traditional"? The student song tradition was a healthy one from the Middle Ages until recorded music came in. Lord knows whether the once-prolific "skiing song" tradition is still going. These were, in fact, vibrant traditions, where no one asked who wrote the things they sang. They just learned them from each other and sang them. Frequently with gusto, and even more frequently with beer.
But I don't know that I could get away with offering a "traditional" set that included "Bulldog on the Bank" and some odes to schussing.
Whattaya think?

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 03:56 PM

There is actually about 90% concensus of opinion here amongst all of today's contributors. We have an excellent summary about what traditonal singers are and some other important related stuff thrown in for good measure. It's just a pity there are one or two invectives being thrown in as well.

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 03:56 PM

Where does your own singing fit in with all this?

I accept a degree of idiosyncrasy - otherwise I'm strictly a trad roots man myself in line with my Irish-Northumbrian heritage with strong links north of the border. Most people accuse me of being too traditional in my approach.

From what I've heard of it, it is as far from a redition by any traditional singer as I have ever heard (you right to choose, of course)

Like any traditional singer you care to name, I sing in my own voice with mannerisms determined by physical factors & other influences, conscious or otherwise. Traditional singers I pay special attention to in this respect - Davie Stewart, Phil Tanner and Willie Scott, who didn't sound like anyone else either. My right to choose? Hell, I've been singing folk songs since I was fourteen - and like any other singer I can only do so as nature has seen fit to endow me. I rarely sing unaccompanied, but there again I root that back to drones & modality in a generally improvisatory approach in keeping with the tradition (rather than chords which aren't). Shame you keep kicking up a stink, old man - I'm sure if you took a more civil approach we could have some constructive discussion on such matters.   

so once again you are accusing somebody of doing something that you apparently have no hesitation of doing yourself - as with your edict of not being able to alter texts, on a previous thread.

Nonsense. That argument was about messing with texts in the name of The Tradition & The Folk Process, which is spurious bullshit. I treat traditional texts as sacrosanct - a matter of personal opinion & reverence of the source, however it has come down to us. I might drop the odd verse for various reasons (such as those obviously added by later hands) but I never add anything, or otherwise consciously change texts.   

MacColl, and others of the revival you have snided at in the past, at least followed the logic of the tradition by staying faithful to its narrative function; totally absent from your own approach.

I suggest you take your finger out of your ear, old man - I am a storyteller, and as such my entire craft is devoted to Traditional Narrative idioms - ballads and folk songs included. Dialect can be a problem, but I don't mess with that either; language, imagery, and narrative dynamic are the prime considerations of any peformance of traditional material, spoken or sung, and encourage others to do likewise even unto accusations of being too much of a stickler for such things.

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 04:05 PM

"I treat traditional texts as sacrosanct"
Even corrupt ones - antiqqarianism gone barmy?
"otherwise I'm strictly a trad roots man"
It really doesn't show in your singing - your privelige of course
"I am a storyteller,"
Neither dowes this.
How do you justify using instruments in an almost completely unnaccompanied tradition?
You cannot dictate to people how they treat texts if you are going to discard the traditional forms as you choose to do.
I do not criticise you for anything you do; I just object to your criticising others for doing similar things.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 04:12 PM

C'mon, guys (and you know who you are...)
This is mud*cat*, not mud*sling*.

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 05:10 PM

Apologies all round, but I would appreciate it if we could proceed without the sweeping unsubstantiated statements and personal attacks on people who are no longeraround to defend themselves.
Nuff said,
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: GUEST,Goose Gander
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 09:41 PM

One more point, something alluded to but not in depth: a traditional singer is defined not only by his repertoire and context, but his style. Someone from a traditional background - Leadbelly or Woody Guthrie, for example - will put his/her own stamp on everything he or she performs, even if drawn from non-traditional sources, or from traditional sources outside his or her tradition.

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Aug 10 - 03:43 AM

A bit of fine tuning.
One of the things we noticed when talking to singers about singing in their communities was the discrimination that was made between those who "had a few old songs" and those who were regarded as singers and had some degree of status as such.
A bit difficult with Walter Pardon because his was largely a family tradition with a few neighbours thrown in who would be associated with them through work on the local farm, but even in this situation Walter's uncle, Billy Gee, stood out as 'the' singer.
Down the Norfolk coast, in Sam Larner's village of Winterton, there were once a lot of singers, but the few remaining ones talked of Jimmy Sutton (around the beginning of the 20th century) as being 'the' singer of the village.
In Harry Cox's village several people referred to Harry's brother as being an important singer.
This area of the West of Ireland was rich in singers, but Tom Lenihan stood out as 'the' singer.
Among the Travellers, plenty of them had songs, but there were people pointed out to us specifically as singers, in particular, Bill Cassidy and Mary Delaney. Mary in particular was regarded as one of 'the' singers because of the fact that she was blind from birth, which restricted her acitivities and singing was regarded as one of her main roles in the family and the community.
With the Travellers, the recognition of certain people as singers spread into the settled community and was once an important link between the two groups.
This is a eye-witness description we recorded of a Travelling family stopping on the outskirts of a village some time in the thirties.
The speaker was Mikeen McCarthy, the son of a well-known singer-storyteller who was a tinsmith in County Kerry.
Jim Carroll

"We'd be all tucked into bed but we wouldn't be asleep, we'd be peeping out through keyholes and listening out through the side of the canvas, we'd be stuck everywhere, and he'd (his father, Michael snr.) know it.
And the fire'd go on. One of the lads 'd come up for the light of a cigarette or something, he'd be already after topping the cigarette, 'twas just an excuse, "Could I have a light out of the fire Mick" they'd say to my father.
Sure, my father'd know, he'd know what he'd be up to of course and he'd say, "'Tisn't for the light of a fire you came up at all now, 'tisn't for the light of a cigarette you came up for now" and he'd start to laugh.   
And bejay, another feller'd come and he'd say it again, "bejay, before I know where I am there'd be ten of you there".   
And bejay, the word wouldn't be out of his mouth and they would be coming up along, coming up along, and the next thing one feller'd shout to the other, "can't you go down and bring up a gual (armful) of turf", and before you'd know where you are there'd be a roaring fire, 'twould band a wheel for you. Oh, there could be twenty, maybe more, maybe thirty, it depends, maybe there could be more than that again. There'd be some round the fire in a ring, there might be another twenty standing on the road. There wouldn't be any traffic at that time on the by-roads in Ireland, d'you know. They'd be all standing out along the road then.
So 'tis there you'd hear the stories then and the songs, all night, maybe till one o'clock in the morning. And the kettle... the tea'd go on then, there'd be a round of tea and.... That's the way it'd go on.
We were off ceilidhing then, they'd invite him off to a house; he'd always bring one or two of us with him. Same thing'd go on at the house then, that's where he learned all those great stories and great songs from, I suppose, ceilidhing from house to house, different counties, different stories, different songs."

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie
Date: 24 Aug 10 - 03:47 AM

At the risk of being belittled by those (him?) claiming their (his?) point is the definitive one on the basis of they (he?) used to own a tape recorder.....

The good Mr Padgett started a thread about traditional SINGER and it has (here's my word of the week) transmogrified into traditional SONG.

In the Rolling Stones tradition, "It's the singer, not the song."

Nobody is making sweeping anything about the person Ewan MCColl, but the product Ewan McColl is fair game. An excellent example of folk being what he decided it was. Mind you, penning such beautiful songs, he had at least as much right as anybody else to try to define things. I recall when I interviewed him that he kept rattling on about people only singing what is indigenous to them. A bit rich really. A Salford lad called Jim affecting a Scottish name and singing in a Scottish accent that may have worked, but there again, so did Dick Van Dyke's English accent, if you happened to be American. it is called playing to the crowd.

Just two things to throw in;

Mistaken words.. I used to sometimes end the night with a bit of music hall, and in particular Pomona. Pomona is a song about The Pomona Palace, in Albert Square, near Pomona Docks, in Salford. (McColl could have sung an indigenous song there if he had thought on...)

I used to be bemused by people correcting me and calling it Lamona.

The other thing to note is that my definition is not all embracing, (see above if you must, not going to bore all & sundry by repeating it..) but I have yet to read a definition that I could be happy with from others either. Hence, I reckon this is a circular thread, in that you can't define subjective terms.

A local club to me has a tape recorder "collecting" songs. The owner must be happy, as he seems to collect Paul Simon songs on it most nights.

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 24 Aug 10 - 04:28 AM

"Pomona is a song about The Pomona Palace, in Albert Square, near Pomona Docks, in Salford. (McColl could have sung an indigenous song there if he had thought on...)"

I think that this needs a bit of clarification. The Pomona Palace pub is just off Chester Road and is probably in Hulme, in Manchester, not Salford (Salford is to the west, across the Bridgewater and Manchester Ship canals). I say 'probably' because, on the ordnance survey map, the district is called 'St. Georges' and is close to the border with Stretford. Over the last 40 or 50 years the whole area has been extensively 'carpet bombed' by 'progress' - so, to an adopted Mancunian like me, the exact geography is not terribly clear (so much for clarification!). I don't know if there was ever an Albert Square around the area in question - the only Albert Square that I know is a mile or two away in the centre of Manchester.

Oh yes, Ewan MacColl may have been born in Salford but both of his parents were Scots and he learned several songs from them.

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: stallion
Date: 24 Aug 10 - 04:49 AM

seems to me that there is some confusion with scholarship and singing, like some factual books get labelled acedemic cos they have footnotes and journalism if they don't, with a fair ammount of snobbery attached to it all. Whilst I admire the scholars I have spent far too long listening in a hushed room to people who sing like old men and proudly proclaim that this is how it should be done. Most of what I think and approach I take my singing has, in snippets from different contributers, already been said. Actually I think everyone should contribute in whichever way they feel most comfortable in even if it's singing like an old man, the same goes for the material, the real tradition is that it is happening at all, it is a social occasion and it is the social occasion that is most important. What our family lost were the gatherings where each family member would get up and do their party piece. I remember the kids standing on a chair to sing or recite poetry and more often than not the same piece, my Dad always sang "South of the Border" and "D-Day Dodgers", I suppose it was our generation that discontinued it, maybe a legacy of the Dansette and recorded music, a bit of a con really. So social gatherings of people to sing or do their party piece is good and long may it continue. Oh, if people want/need to make money out of it it needs a label so that people know what they are purchasing, that makes sense, but to row about it, nah!

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: stallion
Date: 24 Aug 10 - 05:03 AM

Just thinking about it, just about the whole extended family lived in three adjacent streets and my dad and aunts and uncles all bought houses in different suburbs, after that the gatherings got less, my cousins and I don't even live in the same towns, maybe it was this that did for it m'lud.

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 24 Aug 10 - 05:17 AM

Even corrupt ones - antiqqarianism gone barmy?

Like I say, I'll drop those verses that are obviously extraneous to the cause - a recent example would be the version of Child #1 as it appears in The Northumbrian Minstrelsy (Lay the Bent to the Bonny Broom) which concludes with some decidely dodgy verses. I wouldn't add any new ones of my own though. On the subject of Lay the Bent, I have taken issue with those singers who carry on singing Child #10 to this melody after the example set by Pentangle. A minor point of pedantry perhaps, but a crucial one to the paticular poignancy of both melody & refrain.

It really doesn't show in your singing - your privelige of course

The priviledge is all yours, old man - to discredit everything I do for reasons best known to yourself.

Neither dowes this.

Likewise, though seeing as how none of my storytelling work exists on line I fail to see how you can reach this conclusion.

How do you justify using instruments in an almost completely unnaccompanied tradition?

Well, my tradition is that of The Revival where instrumental accompaniment is the rule rather than the exception. That said my main inspiration in instrumental accompaniment is Davie Stewart, even though I don't play the accordion.

You cannot dictate to people how they treat texts if you are going to discard the traditional forms as you choose to do.

I have not dictated anything, just made a few points by way of Devil's Advocacy in the light of people claiming that becase Traditional Singers changed songs it was fine for us to do so too - that this is the essense of The Traditional, and The Folk Process, which of course it isn't. This was in the context of a generally impersonal discussion which you insist on making personal, accusing me of abandoning traditional forms. This couldn't be further from the truth - I embraced them long since & they form the basis of pretty much everything I do. Even as a Revival Singer I eshew many conventions (arrangements, guitars, chords) in favour of traditional forms of improvisation, drones & modality which I feel have been obscured by the more anomalous musical affections of the revival. That's just the way I do things though - I'm not expecting others to do likewise.

I do not criticise you for anything you do

WTF???

I just object to your criticising others for doing similar things.

I would never stoop so low as to criticise / debase the work of any forum member in a discussion, much less drag them in personally as you have done here. Any criticism I have ever made of Ewan MacColl is directed to the Myth he created by way of celebrity, not the mindless sniping which you seem to think it is. Maybe this is part of the Religiosity of the Revival too, replete with its Myths and Holy Cows that must somehow be addressed, or else redressed by those taking part.

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Aug 10 - 05:42 AM

SO'P - Steamin Willie
I've apologised for my part in this wrangle - suggest SO'P does same and leaves it at that, letting everybody else get on with the discussion
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie
Date: 24 Aug 10 - 08:19 AM

mmm... Even progress in town planning can make folklore eh?

The geography of Albert Square is something I got from listening to The Two Beggarmen. Tony may or may not have got historical facts 100%, who knows? However, when I was staying at a hotel a few years ago which was addressed as being on Salford Quays, there was a sign down a small lane to the canal outside the hotel that stated that was the site of Pomona Docks.

So... did Albert Square exist? Was the original Pomona docks in Hulme or anywhere else for that matter? The reason for saying this is that tradition can affect more than song it would seem. Although the artistic licence in the music hall song may not have been based on a map!

The point was that some people call the song Lamona. I'm cool about that, don't get an atlas out and if I were to sing it again, I am sure I would rattle on about the Pomona Palace, the original setting of the song, whether it existed or not.

Mind you, one bloke who calls it lamona is a lot older than me, smokes a pipe and has a huge beard, Can't remember his name but he is a friend of a friend and once got all het up and angry when he heard me sing "his song by right."

His appearance makes him the authority on such matters not me. However, his petty childishness makes the art of going out for a pint and a song less enjoyable than it should be. Methinks there are some cheerful buggers on this thread who are capable of sitting poker faced too eh?

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 24 Aug 10 - 04:30 PM

On our jaunts into Manchester we use the Ladywell Park & Ride, picking up the Eccles tram which takes into St. Peter's Square crossing the ship canal over the Pomona Dock and stopping at Pomona station. There is a Pomona Palace public house nearby I believe... I first (& last) heard the song sung in Fleetwood some years ago by the redoutable Geoff Higginbottom.

Otherwise...

Thanks for the untimely inquisition, Joe, and the threats of censure, neither of which were strictly necessary. For the record, the altercation (hardly that) wasn't about the definition of a traditional singer (Jim & I are in 100% agreement on that one), rather Jim taking me to task on my own approach to traditional material in the light of some things I said elsewhere. You're spot on about Jim & I being friendly though - and can I just restate my absolute respect for the man & all he has done in the field of folk song & traditional culture.

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: Howard Jones
Date: 25 Aug 10 - 06:28 AM

Willie, it seems likely that the Manchester/Pomona version was the original, but got adapted in Cornwall to local placenames, as tends to happen. We can speculate whether that apparent local connection kept the song popular in Cornwall after it had been forgotten elsewhere. Be that as it may, it is the Cornish version which became popularised in the folk clubs through recordings by Brenda Wootton, the Yetties and the Spinners and which many people now think of as the "correct" version.

See this Wikipedia article - not always reliable but this one seems to have some convincing documentation.

As for someone claiming a song "by right", no one has a right to songs, but it is usual courtesy in singarounds and sessions not to perform something from someone else's repertoire. However if you don't know that a person sings it, or you're singing a different version, that's probably excusable. This courtesy also seems to have existed between traditional singers - singers had their "own" songs which no one else would perform.

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 25 Aug 10 - 08:30 AM

no one has a right to songs, but it is usual courtesy in singarounds and sessions not to perform something from someone else's repertoire. However if you don't know that a person sings it, or you're singing a different version, that's probably excusable. This courtesy also seems to have existed between traditional singers - singers had their "own" songs which no one else would perform.

Moot points worthy of further discussion, or even a separate thread, though I suspect it's already been gone over a hundred times! Some singers are more jealous than others - I've been spat at on various occasions for unwittingly covering the same ground, whilst others are just happy to know the song has a life beyond their repertoir. Some will claim their version to more correct than others, as in an unfortunate episode at an old folk club where two otherwise dignified and erudite ladies almost came to blows because one insisted her version of The Trees They Do Grow High was the proper one. That's one Child Ballad you won't find in Child, but the variants are legion and worthy of celebration, as is the case with traditional songs in general. I recently had a session with a notable Mudcat Ballad Singer and found that the ballad she sang (Childe Roland) had imprinted itself indelibly on my memory. Naturally I made it part of my repertoire, but should ever our paths cross in a singaround I'd most certainly ask her if she minded me doing it. I've worked in various duos with singers over the years and feel that the songs we did together belong to both of us, even if I served mainly as accompanist. I've lost count of the songs I've acquired this way, though many I've had to re-source on account of changes made by the singer.

How often have I worked up a song only to have it sung by another singer in the same session? All the more galling if they've got the words on their knee. Ultimately, the more people there are singing this stuff the better, and the deeper we dig in our sourcing so the less it should be a problem, so there's a lesson to us all really.

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Aug 10 - 08:55 AM

"Some singers are more jealous than others"
An interesting example of this was when Walter Pardon was approached by a local singer and told that he shouldn't give his songs to other people because when you did this they were no longer your own.
His (typical) response was "They're not my songs, they're everybodys".
The practice of not singing another singer's songs was very much a two-way street. Singers would never sing another's songs in their presence, or, only when persuaded to do so, and if they did, and had altered them in any way, they would apologise for having done so.
On the other hand, there is a story of a well-known revival singer who was booked at a Manchester club where one of the residents deliberately opened the evening with five songs which were known as being part of the guest's usual repertoire.
The guest sang them all again.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 25 Aug 10 - 10:52 AM

This is fascinating stuff - and essential to our understanding of the oral tradition as a whole really, which depends upon songs being passed around and remade by other singers. One wonders to what extent these re-makings were regarded as the intellectual property of any given singer, and whether or not this contributed to further remakings of the song to distinguish it further, or even if this was expected. Whatever the case, something must have given rise to the innumerable variations of Barbara Allen. We still talk of making a song our own, and do so with considerable pride even if we don't stray too far from the collected form of the song, but even so in looking at collected forms we coe across intriguing variations. One such is Mrs Pearl Brewer of Arkensas whom Max Hunter twice recorded singing All Down By the Greenwood Side (a consummate reduction to the pure essence of Child #20 with a melody to chill you to the marrow) but on both occasions she sang it quite differently. One wonders how differently she sang it on other occasions. I've come across other examples of this fluidity in traditional singers, and would be interested in a broader exposition on how traditional singers varied their songs from one performance to another, especially in the light of making a song their own. On one occasion Jim mentioned a singer extemporising certain verses, which ties in with other traditions I've come across - be it Yorkshire fishermen, Welsh guisers, Serbian gusle players, Indian village musicians insulting guests at a wedding, or Davie Stewart's additional verses to McGinty's Meal an Ale. So - food for thought & further crack I should think...

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: GUEST,Hilary
Date: 25 Aug 10 - 11:03 AM

If you are trying to say that a traditional singer is one who sings only traditional songs, I don't think one exists.

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: GUEST,Steve T
Date: 25 Aug 10 - 11:28 AM

I have found the subject of this thread fascinating. It even got me into thinking of joining Mudcat (until it degenerated into personal attacks etc) but my thanks for the approximately 60% of comments which addressed the question directly.

If I try to filter out the discussion on traditional song rather than traditional singers (even the 19/08/10 posting stating that there was no such thing as a traditional singer and the word could only be used to describe the material) there seems to be a remarkable amount of agreement.

Most contributors seemed to suggest that a "traditional singer" refers to someone who learned the majority of their material/repertoire as part of an ongoing tradition (3 contributors), orally (3 contributors) and developed their style (2 contributors) from their daily community life (6 contributors).

Few seem to disagree that traditional singers who met that definition may also have learned songs from outside their community (but then performed the songs in their own style) (despite the 23/08/10 posting which claims Fred Jordan was both a traditional and a revivalist singer, suggesting that it requires both the context and the material to be "traditional" to qualify.)

The later posting which refers to the distinction made within some communities between those who "had a few songs" and those who were "singers" might also suggest that the term "traditional singer" also needed to be bestowed upon a person and generally accepted within their community rather than claimed by them. (Would this exclude some of the singers collected by the likes of Sharp?)

The term "traditionalist" seemed to disappear rapidly within the thread and the terms "revivalist" and "source singer" seemed to have been used with some consensus throughout. Perhaps these are of more use to those of more academic bent than "traditional singer" which has been absorbed into the "non-academic" mainstream/festival/folk club literature and thus become less useful and concise.

My thanks to those who provided me with these thoughts.

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Aug 10 - 01:14 PM

"If you are trying to say that a traditional singer is one who sings only traditional songs, I don't think one exists."
I don't think one exists either, but it has been our experience with singers we have recorded that they do differentiate between the different types of song in their reperoire, even to the extent of having their own labels, particularly for the traditional ones - come-all-ye's, the old songs, Clare songs (from this county) etc.
Some singers used the terms 'folk' (Walter Pardon, for example) and 'traditional' was common with the older Irish singers and musicians around here.
Blind Travelling woman, Mary Delaney, with a repertoire of around 200 traditional songs, called them 'my daddy's' songs, even though she had learned less than a dozen from him - her way of distinguishing them from the others she knew. Mary could have doubled the songs she gave us with Country and Western songs alone, but she refused on the grounds that "they were not the ones she was looking for". She said she only sang them because "that's what the lads ask for down at the pub" and "The new songs have the old ones ruined".
Walter Pardon was not only discriminating between his different types of songs (as early as 1948, when he began writing them down in an exercise book), but he could, and did talk about what those differences were, often at great length.
While it is untrue to suggest that traditional singers only sang traditional songs, it is equally untrue that they didn't know the difference between one type and the other.
"until it degenerated into personal attacks etc..."
If my behaviour has in any way persuaded you not to join this forum, I can only apologise and hope you change your mind
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: The Sandman
Date: 25 Aug 10 - 01:39 PM

Fred Jordan was both, those songs he learned from his family[was it 24 songs]make him a traditional singer, those songs he later learned from other revivalists make him also a revival singer.
Jim Carroll[imo] is wrong

Subject: RE: Traditional singer definition
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 25 Aug 10 - 02:20 PM

"the terms "revivalist" and "source singer" seemed to have been used with some consensus throughout. Perhaps these are of more use to those of more academic bent than "traditional singer" which has been absorbed into the "non-academic" mainstream/festival/folk club literature and thus become less useful and concise."

Well noted!
Even those of us of a less academic bent want to be clearly understood and to clearly understand others likewise. That's the only reason I don't bother with using the 'folk' word in these discussions and stick to using the term 'traditional song' instead - it still seems to actually mean roughly the same thing to most people who use it.