Does Folk Exist?

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: TheSnail
Date: 24 Jul 09 - 08:17 AM

Will Fly

You might laugh at my ignorance, but I only found out, from the Senior Member at a recent Surrey session, that Michael Turner was a local man. (His violin apparently hung in a local museum). Now, I've played "Michael Turner's Waltz" many, many times without knowing that. "What does it matter?" I hear you say. Well, knowing that, I won't attempt to play it with grace notes, phrasing and other techniques which are taken from an Irish or a Scottish, or even a Northumbrian tradition.

But did you know that it is actually written by Mozart? Michael Turner's version differs a bit from the original and it's changed in subtle ways over the years as it's been played in sessions so why not play it in an Irish, Scottish or Northumbrian style if you want to? I've heard that it's a popular busking tune in France where it's known as Dave's Waltz and it's used for a traditional American Hymn.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Will Fly
Date: 24 Jul 09 - 08:47 AM

Yes - I confess I did know it was by Mozart, actually - and of course I can choose to play anything in any style I want to (and frequently do), regardless of any knowledge I may or may not have about a tune. I was just making the point that knowing something about the origins of a tune need not necessarily detract from either playing it or listening to it. As you can see from reading my previous paragraph, we were quite happily jazzing our way through the Bach gavotte...

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Jul 09 - 09:45 AM

"I choose not to let it anywhere near the music I love because I understand what it can reveal and what it can't."
Then why make crass statements about its existence, origins... etc?
All ill-informed bollocks really
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 24 Jul 09 - 09:55 AM

Disagree oh thunderer. Not at all crass, just aimed at winkling out shibboleths and acts of faith from the realities. Folk means different things to different people, the so-called process is one of those things that sets the dogs nodding.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Jul 09 - 11:31 AM

"one of those things that sets the dogs nodding."
What evidence do you have that 'the folk process' does not exist?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 25 Jul 09 - 11:50 AM

"I believe the serious face of folk music stops people getting access to the tradition as much as the inclusion of pop in clubs. Youngsters simply won't run the gauntlet of BS to be told what is and isn't 'authentic'."

When I was a 'youngster' (a long, long time ago) I became interested in folk song because it 'rang my bell' more than the pop music of the time and it was "the serious face of folk music" which kept me interested. I didn't have to run any "gauntlet of BS" but I did get to meet some of the great names of the time and to listen to both their music and their wise words on the subject (I don't remember any 'BS').

I must admit that I do get a bit fed-up with you droning on about "acts of faith" 'glueman'. The theoretical background to folk music is based on thousands of hours of observation and research undertaken by some very talented and insightful people - whereas your vague musings seem to have been dreamed up in odd moments between scratching your arse and picking your nose. To dismiss all of that hard work in favour of a few arbitrary notions and prejudices seems to me to be the height of arrogance.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: GUEST,Michael Morris sans cookie
Date: 25 Jul 09 - 01:46 PM

"I'd be extremely interested in a post modern theory of folk music if there's one available. I'm not a post modernist but it sounds like a cat among stool pigeons. Or the role of the songwriter in folk, re-appraising the craft of Bert Lloyd, something on gender and if you have a psychoanalytic reading the folk revivalist I'm all ears."

"I know what research is at the higher academic levels. I choose not to let it anywhere near the music I love because I understand what it can reveal and what it can't."

Make up your mind, Glueman.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 25 Jul 09 - 03:00 PM

To be clear, some doctoral or post-doctoral research evidencing precisely how effective 'the process' is as a way of defining what's commonly described as folk music would be most welcome. I have no problem with change as a vehicle of transmission, I hesitate to bracket all folk songs as substantially changed because the index of transformation is not defined in a meaningful way. Taken as a whole my instinct is some traditional music is clearly common whereas others appear to be taken as common music on trust.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Jul 09 - 03:44 PM

"To be clear, some doctoral or post-doctoral research evidencing precisely how effective 'the process' is as a way of defining what's commonly described as folk music would be most welcome."
whatever happened to:
"I choose not to let it anywhere near the music I love because I understand what it can reveal and what it can't."
How about some evidence straight from the horses mouth.
The Irish and Scots Travellers held on to their singing and storytelling traditions far longer than any other communities in these islands TOTALLY WITHOUT ACCESS TO LITRACY.
It was still possible to record full texts of song from them right into the mid-seventies including many of the Child ballads which had disappeared from the repertoires of field singers - 24 verse version of Lamkin, a similar length version of Young Hunting, The Outlandish Knight, The Grey Cock, Edward, Lord Randall - living examples of an oral tradition.
Of course,, this might not suit your own particular agenda- but you can't win 'em all.
I asked for evidence - all I got was waffle - no surprise there.
Business as usual
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 25 Jul 09 - 04:06 PM

I never claimed there is no such thing as an sung tradition of historic music, just that notions of 'the people' and 'process' are rather over-egged by those with a particular agenda.
Whatever their levels of "LITRACY".

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 25 Jul 09 - 04:22 PM

This is becoming very murky. I'm saying I can tell what folk music is by listening to it. Someone telling me it was Child 75 'Lord Lovel' or that he based his work on Gruntvig's model or it yields to a Proppian morphology is unnecessary to know it's a folk song.
If however traditionalists insist that academic readings are necessary for proof, or that such proofs play any part in appreciating music, then their research models and terminology are going to have to be impeccable. I'd rather keep professorial research away from the self-evident truth of my ears but terms like the people and the process serve to muddy the waters, not clear them.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: GUEST,michael Morris sans cookie
Date: 25 Jul 09 - 04:34 PM

"I'd rather keep professorial research away from the self-evident truth of my ears but terms like the people and the process serve to muddy the waters, not clear them."

"To be clear, some doctoral or post-doctoral research evidencing precisely how effective 'the process' is as a way of defining what's commonly described as folk music would be most welcome."

"I'd be extremely interested in a post modern theory of folk music if there's one available . . . . Or the role of the songwriter in folk, re-appraising the craft of Bert Lloyd, something on gender and if you have a psychoanalytic reading the folk revivalist I'm all ears."

Murky, yes. Particularly when you can't seem to decide whether you want quantitive proof of the 'folk process', a 'critical theory' of folk music, a psychoanalytic reading of the folk revivalist," a postmodern theory of folk music, or just the "self-evident truth of my ears".

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Jul 09 - 04:40 PM

How about this for a self-evident truth - Lord Lovel, along with The Suffolk Miracle, Captain Wedderburn's Courtship, The Keach in The Creel, The Cruel Mother, Lord Bateman and The Silk Merchants Daughter - Scots and English ballads all, proliferated in this remote(ish) area of the west of Ireland up to thirty odd years ago - all to be found in ther repertoires of 'the people' ie the rural working classes. You really don't need an M.A. to work out how they got here.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 25 Jul 09 - 05:40 PM

A wilful misquote Guest MM. We'll keep research out of the picture completely and trust out ears. Agreed?

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Jul 09 - 11:01 AM

"A wilful misquote"
More than a little rich from someone whose stock-in-trade is misquotes and distortions (want a list?). Personally I can't see anything misquoted.
".....some doctoral or post-doctoral research evidencing precisely how effective 'the process' is as a way of defining what's commonly described as folk music would be most welcome." -
"We'll keep research out of the picture completely and trust out ears."
Now how do we square that circle? To me it reads "let's ignore the facts (other than the ones I make up myself!!!)".
The academic research work has been done: Abrahams and Foss, Bronson, Wilgus, Lloyd, Goldstein, Sharp, David Buchan, Glassie and Ives, Lomax (and his Cantometrics team), Charles Seeger, David Buchan, David Atkinson..... the list is endless.
The studies of the singers and their communities have been carried out to the satisfaction of all who take the trouble to examine them: MacColl and Seeger (English and Scots Travellers), Artelia Court and Alen McWeeney (Irish Travellers) Porter and Gower (Jeannie Robertson and other Scots Travellers), Hamish Henderson (both Scots Traveller and settled singers) Robin Morton (Fermanagh singer John Maguire), Hugh Shields (Donegal singers), Tom Munnelly (Clare singer Tom Lenihan), Henry Ives (Maine woodsmen), Alan and John Lomax (convicts, blues singers and many, many others), Henry Glassie (2 magnificent volumes (plus) of the songs and music of a Fremanagh village), Pádraigín Ní Uallacháin (Irish language singing in Uster), Lillis Ó Laoire (song and singers in Tory Island....... again, the list is endless.
Even some of the singers have put in their own opinion on record; Sheila Stewart, Willie McFee, Almeda Riddle, Betsy Whyte, Jean Richie, Duncan Williamson.......
Yet we ignore all this and "trust to our ears" - whose ears, yours? Someone who is apparently doing a Hamlet "To research or not to research ……..", and constantly misrepresents (deliberately, to judge by the response when challenged) the opinions of others and even his own - "I know what research is at the higher academic levels. I choose not to let it anywhere near the music I love" - gi'e us a break jimmy.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 26 Jul 09 - 11:39 AM

"If however traditionalists insist that academic readings are necessary for proof, or that such proofs play any part in appreciating music, then their research models and terminology are going to have to be impeccable. I'd rather keep professorial research away from the self-evident truth of my ears but terms like the people and the process serve to muddy the waters, not clear them."

No-one is "insisting" on anything except you, 'glueman'! And who, exactly, has suggested that "proofs play any part in appreciating music"?

And, in the absence of any coherent arguments (or, indeed, evidence) on your part), I can only conclude that you think that "terms like the people and the process serve to muddy the waters" because they don't support your preconceptions.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 28 Jul 09 - 10:25 AM

Well I've had a few days away, read the thread and I'm convinced. Only stuff that fits the 1954 definition is valid and any other music in clubs or festivals should be heckled off the stage.
If I do notice any young people with a keenness for acoustic music they describe as folk they'll get a piece of my mind. Or I'll argue the toss with a tidal wave of words until they go away, or mad, whichever's sooner.

Thank you for enlightening me gentlemen, I have become one of you.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Jul 09 - 10:54 AM

"Well I've had a few days away, read the thread and I'm convinced. Only stuff that fits the 1954 definition is valid and any other music in clubs or festivals should be heckled off the stage."
Won't bother to ask you to justify this - will chalk it up as another example of hit-and-run argument which you appear to favour.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 28 Jul 09 - 11:26 AM

I'm enlightened. It was the volume of words that did it.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: TheSnail
Date: 28 Jul 09 - 12:15 PM

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman - PM
Date: 18 Jul 09 - 04:45 AM

.

I shall attend a couple of folk clubs soon and report back.

How did it go?

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 28 Jul 09 - 12:23 PM

Have mostly been on holiday but if I find any singer-songwriter folk-lite I'll be sure to do as everyone advised and tell them they're wrong, and to check here why.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 02:31 AM

"..........singer-songwriter folk-lite I'll be sure to do as everyone advised and tell them they're wrong,"
Don't supposed you're prepared to tell us who has said that snigger snogwriters are "wrong"? No? - thought not.
Keep it up Glueman - if you haven't got any facts to back up your argument - make 'em up!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 03:20 AM

BTW what is the correct response when you find non-54 tradition in a folk club?

a ) point out their error up to and including fisticuffs

b ) heckle

c ) moan interminably on Mudcat

d ) patronise the group with 'very nice if you like that sort of thing' comments

e ) roll eyes at fellow Ascended Masters but keep turning up because nowhere else will have you

f ) see the band's musical judgements as a matter of personal opinion

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 04:42 AM

And cover up your distortions in order to avoid answering awkward questions
Keep it up - only makinging my point for me.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 04:46 AM

So which one is it Jimbo?
On the 'snigger-snogwriters' point (nice respectful term there from a folkie) it was Bridge. You do the search.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: GUEST, Sminky
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 04:55 AM

snigger snogwriters

I for one am getting pretty angry at the use of that term. Many of the songs we hold so dear were written by such people.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 04:59 AM

Thing to understand here is that the 1954 Folkies such as Richard, Pip and Jim have never expressed any disapproval of other types of music - see Pip's Dylan Night thread for example; and Richard seems very eclectic in his remit & performance; Jim likewise. What they say is that other types of music can't be Folk; they're not saying other types of music are in any way inferior.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 05:09 AM

That's a very literalist view of their conclusions if I may say so SOP. If their opinion on the exact definition of folk was an academic one without any repercussion in performing contexts, I'd agree it would be simply a point of view. As it is there's ample evidence they valourise the 54 definition at the expense of other musical practices. Neither do I believe they all share a similar outlook on the validity of non-traditional music when performed in folk clubs.

The volume and ferocity of engagement does not derive from an emphasis in wording.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 05:18 AM

Many of the songs we hold so dear were written by such people.

Is that the Royal We there, Sminky? Because personally, I can't think of a single one. But then I'm a 1954 Traddie by default - and when it comes to Folk, I only do trad. and any exception to that (such as the songs of Ron Baxter, Rudyard Kipling, Peter Bellamy etc.) are idiomatically trad. if not by process, then certainly by design.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 05:21 AM

"Thank you for enlightening me gentlemen, I have become one of you."

Oh, nice new tactic, 'glueman'! What do you call that? Rueful irony, perhaps?

Instead of wasting your time coming up with these endless distractions, why don't you tell us what, exactly, you believe in and what should, in your opinion, happen in folk clubs?

Right, I'm off to discourage some young people and then I might strangle a few cute, furry kittens! Aaaahhhh, ha, ha, ha!!!

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Spleen Cringe
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 05:25 AM

Yeh, what I don't get is the assumption that if I like traditional music I also must de facto like a load of lame-assed introspective singer-songwriter guff of the sort that is beloved of folk clubs, with their "well-crafted", "tasteful", "workmanlike" bloody pointless, pedestrian, dreary bollocks. Fuck that! Give me the Stooges, Gong, John Coltrane, Henry Flynt, the Wooden Shjips, Six Organs of Admittance, the Skygreen Leopards, Bonnie "Prince" Billy and a thousand others over the self important ranks of singer-songwriters ("troubabours"? Bleeeuuurch!) anytime. And if I want to hear a good "singer-songwriter", chances are I won't be looking in a folk club to find them!

I do know, by the way, that some good original songs are still being written in a "folk style" by people who are part of the "folk scene" (Rapunzel's "Riverdance" or Wendy Arrowsmith's "The Visitor" spring to mind immediately) but I also know that you have to wade through oceans of dull shite to get to the good stuff.

Tee hee!

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 05:27 AM

Gong

They're on - in Blackpool - Winter Gardens tomorrow night - after midnight - which means - I can't go! Shame it wasn't the Marine Hall in Fleetwood...

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 05:40 AM

"I for one am getting pretty angry.........."
Having endured well over half a lifetime of such facile bollocks as 'finger in ear', 'purist', 'folk police' and all the other 'highly intellectual' summings up of my opinions, I feel myself totally justified to lose my patience occasionally and retaliating in kind, so please - please feel free to get as angry as you wish. If my using the term 'snigger snogwriter' gets up the right noses GOOD - perhaps it might go some way to putting an end to this infantile crap so we can all debate and share our ideas and opinions like adults.
Thank you SO'P (can't speak for the rest of the trio, but I'm not sure I answer to the 1954 folkies description, though I appreciate your kind words).
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 05:46 AM

Shimrod, I prefer the music of the tradition but recognise it purely as the preference of a jaded musical palate searching for a hit, not an absolute conclusion backed by proofs.
It's also worth recognising that music hall songs, swing, boogie-woogie, ragtime, rock and roll and the rest were adopted by people who lived under a more direct influence of Tradition than we do, and found historical music limiting in its scope and its ability to relate to ordinary people.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: GUEST, Sminky
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 05:50 AM

Why do so many people assume that singer-songwriters are a 20/21st century phenomenon?

I'll give you a name S O'P - Joseph Lees, 18/19th century singer-songwriter. Creator of John O'Greenfield. By chance we know his name, but his unknown predecessors stretch back through the ages.

And BTW Spleen, some of them wrote bollocks too, but the songs didn't susrvive. Nothing new under the sun.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Spleen Cringe
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 05:58 AM

Fair point Sminky. I hope some of the songs I've had to sit through suffer the same fate...

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: GUEST, Sminky
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 06:03 AM

So do I Spleen, and I'm sure they will ;-)

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 06:10 AM

And so we return to the undeniable fact that all traditional songs were written by someone, and even if altered contained the signature of the originator, not the Bleedin' People.
If I could account for a single reason to stay out of folk clubs, even more than risking the opinions of Shimrod and his Newtonian Folk Proofs, it's a fear of hearing Streets of London played on a guitar.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 06:17 AM

But "music hall songs, swing, boogie-woogie, ragtime and [to a certain extent] rock and roll" are now regarded as "historical" musics and have been displaced.

I also don't buy this argument that the music that I like must also be relevant to 'ordinary people'. How relevant were swing, boogie-woogie and ragtime relevant to 'ordinary' British people in the past and how relevant is rap music relevant to 'ordinary' British people today? I would suggest that they were or are relevant because they were or are fashionable. Personally, I've never 'got' fashion (but surely the Emperor is naked?!) and it doesn't influence my tastes.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 06:48 AM

Swing was probably a revelation for some landgirl whose only exposure to music was Grandfer's fiddle tunes. Sexy, brash, great dances.
Lindy Hop

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: GUEST, Sminky
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 06:51 AM

Personal tastes aside (always). The fact that 'Streets' is so commonly played should tell you something about the song.

I recently took delivery of a new guitar at my place of work. I got the usual 'play us something' demands from my colleagues (of vastly differing ages and musical tastes). I played 'Streets' - without singing.

To a man (and woman) they spontaneously launched into the chorus. That should tell you something about it too.

Let it simmer for 200 years - with enough 'polishing' it might become a 'good' song.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Spleen Cringe
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 06:58 AM

I suspect any type of music is only "relevant" to those people it's relevant to. I've never consciously let popularity or lack thereof have any bearing on my tastes, though I have to sometimes stop myself from willingfully pursuing the obscure for its own sake.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 07:00 AM

SoL has become a litmus for *what do we mean by folk*. It sounds like it belongs in a designated folk context but points in the wrong direction.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 07:04 AM

Let it simmer for 200 years - with enough 'polishing' it might become a 'good' song.

Well, it's been simmering away now for 40 years and it's still no better - or indeed no different - than it was. What makes you think another 160 years will make a difference?

I hate The Hiring Fair even more, especially that look of utter perverse earnestness that invariably comes on the singers face when she puts his hand (pause) on her tit.

*

Actually my wife (the aforementioned Rapunzel) is a snigger-snogwriter, amongst other things; check her stuff out here: http://www.myspace.com/rachelmccarron. Her Sarah Says was a favourite of mine even before we got to know one another because it touched a literary nerve and inspired a mythos in its own right which leads somehow to me remixing it as Sarah More or Less a couple of years back. Folk? Process? I like to think so... Check it out! Raw folk-trip-hop fusion!

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 07:16 AM

"It's also worth recognising that music hall songs, swing, boogie-woogie, ragtime, rock and roll and the rest were adopted by people"
They were not 'adopted' by the people - they may have been listened to and sung by them, quite often by the same people who sang folk songs, but they remained recognised as products of the music hall and the popular music composers and they tended to remain unchanged and unadapted. On the other hand, folk songs, whatever their origins, were taken over by the communities where they thrived and adapted out of all recognition. It would appear that their origins were considered unimportant enough to have been forgotten almost immediately on their being acquired (can provide enough evidence for this if required).
".....and even if altered contained the signature of the originator"
No they didn't, otherwise we might have some idea who wrote them - or maybe you have some idea who wrote Barbara Allen, or The Unfortunate Rake, or even what part of these islands he or she hailed from.
There is plenty of evidence that some folk songs were the original comositions of a number of people - all unknown.
The definition of a 'folk song' has nothing to do with who composed it or even in what form it was originally written - it is the process it underwent that provides its identity.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: GUEST, Sminky
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 07:25 AM

What makes you think another 160 years will make a difference?

Maybe it won't - so what? (40 years is nowt - though variations have already sprung up in the US). The fact that it is still being sung in 2209 (if indeed it is) should tell you something about it.

The opinions of you, me or next door's cat about the merits of the song amount to Jack Shit. Personal tastes aside - remember?

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: glueman
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 07:38 AM

I'd include 'completely leaving behind historic music and choosing the radio and the dancehall' as part of the process of adoption. Boy hears Rolling Stones, seeks out John Lee Hooker, plays domestically intoned white blues, forms progressive blues rock band, music ignored for 30 years before being adopted by revivalists with new spin. Process in action.

Never bought into *the* process, only a process. Processes evolve like music, it's perverse to imagine otherwise.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 09:12 AM

I haven't looked at Rachel's page for some time - and I'm glad I just have again. As well as Sarah Says/Sarah More or Less, I remember listening to her rendition of Bonny Boy some time back, and thinking it was jolly good.

Very recently, after I came upon versions of the song by both June Tabor and Shirley Collins, I decided to learn it for myself. But after following the link you posted, must say I like your wife's version far more than either Shirley or June's - for whatever it's worth.

What's the drone thing? I noticed that it's sounds pitched to the lowest note in the song. Anyway it works well with such elegant and clean ornament.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 09:44 AM

What's the drone thing? I noticed that it's sounds pitched to the lowest note in the song.

That's me improvising the accompaniment on our Indian harmonium in (gulp!) real time; I have a perverse approach to drones & modality, and the modulations thereof, but when it works, as this did, it can be quite effective.

*

Sorry to all good folks for using the word tit back there by the way, it should really have been nork or, in honour of H. E. Bates (whose influence Ralphie was obviously labouring under when he wrote the song) nelly.

Subject: RE: Does Folk Exist?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 09:56 AM

"The opinions of you, me or next door's cat about the merits of the song amount to Jack Shit."
Merit has nothing to do with definition, except to those who substitute personal preference for definition.
Jim Carroll