Jim Carroll interview

Subject: Jim Carrol interview
From: GUEST,iains
Date: 25 Mar 26 - 02:00 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJHYr8zPHaA

An interesting narrative.

Subject: RE: Jim Carrol interview
From: The Sandman
Date: 25 Mar 26 - 02:47 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJHYr8zPHaA

Subject: RE: Jim Carrol interview
From: The Sandman
Date: 25 Mar 26 - 02:50 PM

Very Interesting

Subject: RE: Jim Carrol interview
From: The Sandman
Date: 26 Mar 26 - 03:59 AM

thankyou for putting this up.

Subject: RE: Jim Carrol interview
From: GUEST,Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Mar 26 - 09:12 PM

Well it's probably no secret (to anyone who took interest) that I was a staunch ally of Jim here (though in a few private exchanges with him I did tell him like it is) during the time that he was being harassed by several people here who were far inferior to him in most regards except for one: that Jim struggled to realise that the people taunting him here were people who were simply not worth his time and who he should have shrugged off. Quite simply, he was an amazingly insightful and supremely knowledgeable man who understood traditional music in a way that no-one else here could hope to match. This forum suffered one of its most severe losses when it failed to embrace his superb scholarship. Yeah, he was argumentative, opinionated and stubborn and didn't know when to hold back. But in the world of traditional music he is a mighty man - and we just let him go. Tragic.

.

Subject: RE: Jim Carrol interview
From: meself
Date: 27 Mar 26 - 11:40 AM

Well put, Steve (although I'm a little uneasy about your use of the past tense - I take it that's just in reference to his time here, and that I didn't miss something?).

Btw, some very interesting stuff in that interview, for anyone remotely interested in traditional song and singing.

Subject: RE: Jim Carrol interview
From: GUEST,Peter Laban
Date: 27 Mar 26 - 12:14 PM

A similar public interview was done some dark evening in Miltown Malbay. It was filmed/recorded but I fail to remember who holds the footage. It was mighty although it perhaps went on just a bit too long and Jim lost focus a bit. John Tunney chaired the night.

Subject: RE: Jim Carrol interview
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Mar 26 - 12:41 PM

Two questions, and a suggestion - was it Jim who farted in church?
Where's the oft mentioned song? Some misspelled subtitles be fun.

Subject: RE: Jim Carrol interview
From: GUEST,Keith Price
Date: 27 Mar 26 - 12:43 PM

Well said Steve Shaw.
I only occasionally look in on this site now. It seems to be mainly lyric requests and obituaries.
It really was a good informative group at one time, and not just Jim.
I wish Max and others well.

Subject: RE: Jim Carrol interview
From: GUEST,Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Mar 26 - 12:55 PM

On reflection, I suppose I should have referred to traditional song rather than traditional music. Whatever both those things are! ;-) I'm far more of a tunester than a songster (though I'll be out this evening singing one or two shanties with the lads in my band, a new diversion!), but I always appreciated Jim's learned input here.

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: The Sandman
Date: 27 Mar 26 - 05:34 PM

Steve I agree.

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 27 Mar 26 - 07:22 PM

Jim did add a lot of erudition here.

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: rich-joy
Date: 27 Mar 26 - 08:56 PM

I really enjoyed that JC interview - thanks, All :)

(and yes, I do miss Jim's erudition here on The Cat!)

Cheers!
R-J (Down Under)

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: Sol
Date: 28 Mar 26 - 12:27 PM

I've just finished watching the Jim Caroll video. It was a great. His depth of knowledge, sincerity and his informal presentation was a joy.

Thanks for putting up the link, Iain (and the Sandman for the blue clicky).

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: StephenH
Date: 29 Mar 26 - 02:06 PM

I'll add my thanks for the link - it really was a very informative and enjoyable interview.

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: GUEST,Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Mar 26 - 05:17 PM

Looking back at the last ten minutes or so of the interview, it would be tempting to take umbrage over his critique of modern folk bands (he singled out Steeleye for example, characterising them as akin to "pop music", a view which one could easily take as pejorative)... but he didn't say that such takes on the music are invalid, just that he doesn't want the songs of the "old singers" to be lost. I do agree with that sentiment but I didn't hear Jim saying that all music thrives on evolution, whether it be folk, jazz, pop or classical, and that we should cheerfully espouse that evolution. The "old singers" are now mostly dead, and we simply have to move on...

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: The Sandman
Date: 30 Mar 26 - 03:15 AM

but liking particular musical evolution is a matter of personal taste, not all musical evolvement is bad, nor necessarily is it good. to cheerfully evolve everything is nonsense, it is all down to personal taste.
we do not have to move on, we move on if we like how it evolves. steeleye span were attempting to popularise the music and it was a form of pop music,at the same time a version of folk music
personally, i do not find their musical evolvement particularly inspiring.
i find some of the jazz folk fusion more inspiring, but that is personal taste
"we simply have to move on£" quote
no no no, we move on dependent on its musical, personal appeal and competence

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: GUEST,Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Mar 26 - 10:26 AM

Well you appear to be being contrary for the sake of it there. I didn't say we should "cheerfully evolve," did I. Every genre of music I can think of has evolved in some way or another down the centuries and if music stands still it will wither away. New people, new approaches, new experimenting. It's there for the taking and if one doesn't like something new that's going on then democracy dictates that we can ignore it. Personally, I like a bit of everything (except for bubblegum and modern jazz) because I like to see folk pushing the boundaries in interesting ways. That's all.

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: GUEST,Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Mar 26 - 04:39 PM

Heheh! There's no "Guest Steeleye." Some damn great ad suddenly took over my screen just as I was typing and it completely bamboozled me. Something about mis-sold car finance...

Anyway, I was about to type as follows:

Steeleye, Fairport, Bothies, Planxty and a whole host of others...Don't call it folk if you don't want to (Jim wouldn't have) but if you can't tell it from "pop" well there's summat awry with your thinking. Calling it "pop" is no more than a lazy way of doing it down. For years I worked with a dance teacher who wanted me to edit "pop songs" for her. I did about three or four hundred in all, having to listen very closely and repeatedly in order to accurately do the cuts, splices, fades, blending... and the vast majority of that music was well performed, well put together and done with great production values. An eye-opener for me. One song I edited down to about four minutes was American Pie (don't tell Don...). Not exactly Freddie and the Dreamers, but both "pop?" Most of what I did was what we'd call "pop" of course. Not all great, but neither is a lot of what we call folk music. We should choose our pejoratives more wisely I feel...

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 30 Mar 26 - 09:05 PM

I enjoyed the interview. It was nice to hear from Jim again.From his stuff on mudcat I had gained theimpression that he was with MaColl in the 1950's when the Singers Club was having ructions with Alex Campbell amongst others. Whereas he only met MacColl in 1969.
I suppose I had come into contact with MacColl's name in the 1960's when he was giving interviews to NME saying that Donovan wasn't folk music, plus The First Time Ever I saw Your Face was printed in all the Oak publications books of folksongs tht I bought to educate myself - I was a dumb kid. As well as that I'd seen Ewan's name as a school kid in the 1950's in the Singing together booklets.
My great grandparents were travellers, who came over to build the railways and canals in the early 19th century , so it was interesting to me to hear about what they got up to music wise. My grandad knew a lot of songs but I think they were mainly music hall things - very definitely written to entertain, rather than to tell folk stories - so really by the 1880's, my family was out of the folk music loop.
Years ago I bought a Joe Sweeny cd off Pete Coe and I read a folk tale off the cd cover and had a go at telling the story in a song. I have no doubt Jim wouldn't like what I tried to do to an Irish folk song, but anyway yer tis:-


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5DIWBp9PEBc&list=RD5DIWBp9PEBc&start_radio=1

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: GUEST,Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Mar 26 - 06:25 AM

Well if Jim didn't/doesn't like what you did with it, he has options, the easiest of which is to not listen to it! The only harm you can do to a folk song is to not sing it. A good traditional song that's worth having can easily stand up to whatever treatment is meted out to it. It'll still be there in the end.

I'm reminded of Minnie Caldwell and Martha Longhurst in Coronation Street, who wouldn't dare say boo to a goose unless Ena Sharples had given her approval first. Jim might not quite be Ena, but Ewan definitely was!

And All Around My Hat by Maddy and Steeleye is one of my Desert Island eight...

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 31 Mar 26 - 07:48 AM

At last, Steve, you’ve found something that you and I completely, totally, and absolutely agree upon!

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: Nick Dow
Date: 31 Mar 26 - 10:27 AM

If Jim had behaved on Mudcat as he did in this interview, nobody would have had a problem with him. Quite the opposite.

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: Richard Mellish
Date: 31 Mar 26 - 11:49 AM

I have met Jim a couple of times. I like him on a personal level and have great respect for his knowledge and dedication, not so much for some of his opinions. It was a shame that he felt unable to agree to disagree on here.

In particular he seemed determined to argue that because ordinary people (however defined) in Ireland made songs, therefore ordinary people in England could have make songs, therefore ordinary people in England did make songs, therefore most of the songs that we like were made by ordinary people. Steve Gardham in particular has amassed substantial evidence to the contrary.

On the whole, anyway, I am more inclined to Steve Roud's position; that how a song started is of less interest than its subsequent history. James Reeves' description "the dross of centuries" has merit.

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: GUEST,Wrong as usual, Shaw
Date: 31 Mar 26 - 12:30 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84MUlINrcjw

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: GUEST,Keith Price
Date: 31 Mar 26 - 12:54 PM

Richard Mellish
"Steve Gardham in particular has amassed substantial evidence to the contrary." no he hasn't. Steve states his research does not prove origin, at best probability.
I believe the origin and the development of the songs are of equal importance.
I don't see why it has to be one or the other. If the origin is ignored it would suggest an ethnomusicology approach to me.

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: Jack Campin
Date: 31 Mar 26 - 03:08 PM

I won't be watching that. Jim did such a determined and effective job of representing traditional music as a fiefdom for embittered self-important old curmudgeons that I would be quite happy to see his entire memory erased. His impact has been overwhelmingly negative.

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 31 Mar 26 - 03:36 PM

well you can't help it if you're a bit of a miserable old sod.   I have very similar personality traitts.
there is very little you can do about it. The world calls me a twat and denies itself my great insights into the human condition.

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: GUEST,Keith Price
Date: 31 Mar 26 - 03:59 PM

Jack Campin
If only Jim was a reasonable man, like yourself
It must be a miserable existence to be so embittered for so long.

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: GUEST,Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Mar 26 - 04:18 PM

Well I'm not sure what I was supposed to be wrong about but I did enjoy that clip - cheers!

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 31 Mar 26 - 06:01 PM

I don't know so much. He doesn't seem very miserable to me. Its his opinion, and he doesn't agree with your opinion. in fact he knows he's right -(nearly fell into the trap of saying he thinks he's right).

The world is full of people who don't agree with you. Look at all the people who support Donald Trump.

I seem to remember Pete Seeger was drawn swords with a folksinger called Bascom Lunsford. Their disagreement didn't negate the value of either singers work. Yes it used to hurt me when Jim used to accuse folksingers of being money grabbing grabbing capitalists, people
whom I knew had lived pretty much hand to mouth having spent their lives supporting the folk club movement.

But Jim and his wife have obviously done good work docementing the travellers artforms. I'm sorry he's on the naughty stair. From the sound of it in Ireland they think he's the dog's bollocks. Perhaps if we lived over there they would hate our guts.

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: GUEST,Keith Price
Date: 31 Mar 26 - 06:30 PM

I'm sorry Al, I was being sarcastic (not a good thing)
"It must be a miserable existence to be so embittered for so long" was aimed at Jack's post. If he still has such contempt for Jim after all this time I find that sad.
I consider myself a friend of Jim.Forgive my cack handed post. :-)

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 01 Apr 26 - 12:55 AM

mutual apologies - an attempt at levity!

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: Nick Dow
Date: 01 Apr 26 - 03:21 PM

Blimey! I was trying to be positive about Jim reading my post back I can see it might not read well, No excuse! I actually agree with a lot of his opinions, however his mind is so aggressively closed in certain (not very many) areas that it begs the question as to what he missed when he was collecting because it did not fit his criteria.
Let me be plain. I have no evidence that he missed anything, but his attitude as to folk and non folk song definitions is worrying.
That said I can live with it. I have occasionally Emailed him and received a positive and charming response. I would welcome him back here, after all this time upon the evidence of this interview.

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: GUEST,Keith Price
Date: 01 Apr 26 - 05:03 PM

I find it quite refreshing in the airy fairy folk world of the horse definition, that seems to prevail in some quarters, to find someone like Jim Carroll.
I'm convinced that a large part of the reduction in folk clubs, is because they've lost their identity nobody knows what to expect when they go to a club. I remember sitting in a club, tut-tutting to myself when someone was singing 'Sitting on the Dock of the Bay' until the penny dropped that he was probably thinking the same thing, when I sang 'Searching for Lambs'
"You can't please all the people all the time"

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 01 Apr 26 - 05:38 PM

Well here we go again.
Jim Carrol knows what folk music is.
The fact is he and his mates have amost done to mudcat what they've already done to the English folk clubs.
The rest of us apparently are so stupid that if a horse isn't singing it, its folk music.
Be interesting to know whether Keith, Have you ever stood on the dock of the bay?   More or less times than you went searching for lambs?

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: GUEST,Keith Price
Date: 01 Apr 26 - 06:43 PM

I have eclectic tastes in music Al. I had to, I was a full time jobbing musician for 25 years. I just like to choose what I listen to.

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: GUEST,Keith Price
Date: 01 Apr 26 - 06:56 PM

BTW Al, I think you're right "The fact is he and his mates have amost done to mudcat what they've already done to the English folk clubs." I think mudcat is better off with lyric requests and obituaries. :-)

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Apr 26 - 04:11 AM

I fell out with Jim whan he told me that I was personally responsible for ruining folk music!

To cut a long story short, I had been helping to run a club (Swinton, Mancheater) for more than 30 years at great personal , and often financial, cost. I enjoyed doing it and didn't mind the hard work as it gave a lot of people pleasure. Then Jim found out that we 'allowed' what he classed as pop music and therefore we were part of the problem :-( Not only that but he got very nasty and personal about it so I was not surprised to find out that he had been the same with other people, including the moderators on Mudcat. Littkle wonder that his membershp was revoked.

Shame really because, as others have said, he is very knowledgeable and could have contributed lots. He still can as he can post above the line as a guest but has now takinen his ball home!

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: Joe Offer
Date: 02 Apr 26 - 12:57 PM

Dave the Gnome: for the record, Jim Carroll's Mudcat membership was never "revoked." I bent over backwards to keep Jim here because he is a valuable information resource, but he was constantly ranting at Mudcat for failure to protect him from people who questioned him - and he considered questioning to be a personal attack that we should control. I would suspend him for specified periods of time to force him to calm down. Finally, he didn't come back after I lifted his last suspension.

He is currently welcome to post in the music section, but his posts will be deleted if he goes on rants against Mudcat's editorial actions.

Subject: RE: Jim Carroll interview
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Apr 26 - 02:01 PM

Thanks Joe - I was aware that you had encotaged him to post without the rants but did not know that his membership was still "live".