BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?

Subject: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Steve Parkes
Date: 16 Jun 00 - 03:34 AM

I see in this morning's Guardian newspaper that Bert Snajch - sorry, Bert Jansch - suggests we should stop calling our music folk and get rid of the Arran sweater image.

Any suggestions?

Steve

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: GUEST,Roger the skiffler
Date: 16 Jun 00 - 03:38 AM

No suggestions, don't own an Aran sweater (does a guernsey count?). BTW did you see in the article that there is to be a tv documentary on him on Channel 4 on 28th June? I'll miss it as I'll be en route for Greece.
RtS

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Bugsy
Date: 16 Jun 00 - 03:58 AM

If it's the Doco that was screened a few years ago it's great! Presented by Billy Connolly, with heaps of living and now deceased folk/blues icons including Brownie Mcgee, Wizz Jones, Ralph Mctell, Hamish Imlach, Davey GRaham, John Renbourne, Al Stewart, Archie Fisher, and many more.

By the way I see his point. The general public's perception of "Folk" does tend to be of Bearded Wierdo's in AAron Sweaters singing "Whack Fol My Diddle-Oh".

Cheers

Bugsy

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Clinton Hammond2
Date: 16 Jun 00 - 04:22 AM

Here's a better idea.. stop wearing the damn sweaters like they are some kind of gift from the gods.... and stop singing "Whack Fol My Diddle-oh" if yer concerned about it... Learn or write some of the fantastic contemporary folk music that's floating around these days and play that instead...

I myself think there's a time and a place for both sides of the spectrum, but I do tend away from "Whacking" my "Diddle-Oh" too often in a gig...

{~`

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Bugsy
Date: 16 Jun 00 - 04:28 AM

Clinton, I agree with you wholeheartedly. I wasn't saying that, that is what folk singer/songwriters are like, I'm saying that is the "General Public's Impression" of what we are like.

Cheers

Bugsy

Whoonlywhackshisdiddle-ohintheprivacyofhisownhouse.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: GUEST,Sam Pirt
Date: 16 Jun 00 - 04:29 AM

Lets get this back on track, a suggestion

ALTERNATIVE

Cheers, Sam

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Skipjack K8
Date: 16 Jun 00 - 04:39 AM

Clinton, with a name like that, I find it hard to believe! *BG*

I have come up against this problem for ages, especially trying to drum up support for pub gigs and sessions.

I decided to call it Irish music, in the post Riverdance world, and that really cured the problem. Irish is cool (possibly was, but that's another thread's worth) and folk ain't. Pull 'em in, most like it, some don't. But they wouldn't have come anyway if it had a folk label.

The Arran sweater thing stumps me. I've never seen one worn in anger. Perhaps it's just been handed down the last couple of generations, from the 60's and the Spinners.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Bugsy
Date: 16 Jun 00 - 04:41 AM

Already spoken for Sam, Usually includes, Thrash, Punk, Hardcore, etc..

I was going to suggest acoustic, but then again not all folk is acoustic either.

CHeers

Bugsy

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Clinton Hammond2
Date: 16 Jun 00 - 04:46 AM

My point was that we continue to call it FOLK, casue that's what it is... but we work hard to change the "Public Image".. I'd much rather see that happen anyway...

Gods know I'm not a huge fan of the diddly music... Give me a good singer-songwriter anyday...

And Skipjack K8?? I don't get the joke I think yer trying to make...

{~`

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Skipjack K8
Date: 16 Jun 00 - 05:12 AM

Sorry, Clinton, it was in very poor taste. I was alluding to the well publicised proclivities of Mr President.

Just off to see my therapist. This has put me back weeks!

Best regards, anyway.

Skipjack

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Lady McMoo
Date: 16 Jun 00 - 07:20 AM

1) There is nothing intrinsically wrong with Aran jumpers or cardies. I own one although I never wear it during gigs....much too sweaty!

2) I think I agree with Mr Jansch on this one. While there is nothing wrong with the word "folk" itself it does conjure up an anachronistic image in most of the public's mind, unfortunately immediately prejudicing them against some fantastic music without actually bothering to listen to it. I've tried "acoustic music" and "roots music" but am not entirely happy with either for some of the reasons previously stated. Perhaps it doesn't need categorizing at all other than obvious labels like "contemporary" or "traditional" or "Irish traditional", etc.?

Peace

mcmoo

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Gary T
Date: 16 Jun 00 - 08:08 AM

"Music too good to be commercially successful."

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Grab
Date: 16 Jun 00 - 09:22 AM

Should we stop calling blues blues, then, and get away from the hard-drinking black male stereotype too? Or stop calling country country, and get away from the "lonesome cowboy" stereotype?

Anyway, given the popularity of "Irish" music and events such as the Fleadh, is folk in need of help like this? Seems like it's on its way up anyway, so the stereotype doesn't matter.

Grab.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: MikeofNorthumbria
Date: 16 Jun 00 - 09:22 AM

"What's in a name? A tune by any other name would sound as sweet"

It matters not what we call the music/song/dance styles currently referred to as 'folk'. Those who know and like 'folk' will still recognise it, and be able to tell the good from the not-so-good. And those who don't like it won't be fooled by a new label - they'll keep on picking on the least attractive examples of the genre, claiming that they're typical, and mocking them.

Moreover,the Bastards in Suits who run the commercial music industry will continue to hate 'folk', whatever flag it sails under. Because 'folk' is home-made music, produced by the people, for the people. The industry needs us all to be docile consumers of their mass-produced wares. Any form of home-made music (especially when it's given away for free) is a threat to their profits. So they rarely miss a chance to sneer at it.

And the majority of music journalists and media-persons will continue to dislike 'folk' whatever name we dream up for it. Because, although the 'folk' genre has always had some space for growth and innovation, it's basically about continuity and tradition. And continuity and tradition are BORING! Especially if you earn your living writing a weekly column praising everything that's shiny-new, and trashing everything that's been around longer than a few weeks.

So, call it 'folk' , or 'roots', or 'traditional', or what you like - but just keep on DOING it!

Wassail!

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: MandolinPaul
Date: 16 Jun 00 - 09:44 AM

As Big Bill Broonzy once said:

It's all folk music.
I ain't never heard a cow sing.

Paul.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: A Wandering Minstrel
Date: 16 Jun 00 - 09:44 AM

God damn! I knew it, I am a living stereotype! Actually the Aran sweater is a bit of a red herring. Any heavy cable knit will suffice. I get mine from craft fairs.

All the male members of the club I go to have beards ( and some of the women too but thats another thread) We sing all these ancient and traditional songs about beer, sailing in tall ships, mining coal and being ripped off by capitalist bosses. The songs have tunes and the pitch of the singers voices alters periodically. bet you dont get that on MTV.

Im folk and Im proud.

If you want me to sing that, hang on while I fill up my tankard and stick my finger in my ear. Oh Whack foll the diddle doll the riddle dill the dido...

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: BanjoRay
Date: 16 Jun 00 - 10:48 AM

The only useful addition to the title 'folk' is a regional adjective like Irish, Appalachian, Chinese etc. This'll tell tell you most of what you need to know! The Aran sweaters were only ever worn by the Clancy brothers about 35 years ago, although there are still a lot of beards about (including mine, but I am a banjo player). People who like the music won't mind it being called folk, and people who don't don't matter (tee hee).
Cheers
Ray

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: GUEST,Mrr
Date: 16 Jun 00 - 10:49 AM

Folkies DO have facial hair, just check out the pix of the Great Adventure. Oh, OK, Alice doesn't, but everyone with a Y chromosome is giving their secondary sexual charactersitics free rein. Wonder if folky women are less likely to shave too, wherever it is that American women tend to shave... You don't have to answer this one!

No, but seriously folks, ha ha, I agree with Clinton who thinks that the term is fine, let's change the image. Actually not quite: The term is fine, and why worry about the image to outsiders? Anyone into folk has a pretty good image of folk even if that image does include beards. Anyone not into folk, who cares what they think?

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 16 Jun 00 - 11:21 AM

"acoustic" seems to work quite well - or "unplugged" if you are aiming more modern still.

By the way, did you hear about the folk singer who had an Aaron sweater? I actually saw a poster with "Arran" spelt that way once! I sort of assumed the person might be into biblical roots music.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Rana who SHOULD be working
Date: 16 Jun 00 - 11:24 AM

Retro? Ducking for cover quickly. :-)

Seriously, FOLK is fine as others have said, change the image - no-one has mentioned the hand behind the ear (or is it finger in the ear)

Rana

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: GUEST,Mrr
Date: 16 Jun 00 - 12:53 PM

I thought it was Aran, anyway, no double letters at all...

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Jun 00 - 08:05 PM

Never heard a cow sing? Well that's a change from the usual horse. It's not true anyway, in either case, as has been pointed out numerous times - though maybe cows are generally better singers than horses. They like music too. I remember hitching one time by a field full of cows, and there were no rides, so I started playing, and they all came over and looked interested. (I didn't say they had good msuical taste...)

So to distinguish our repertoire from that of cows and horses, maybe we should just call it human music. There's Real Human Music, which is what we try to do, and there's Phony Human Music which is what gets thrown at us all the time.

And you've said it there, Mike me marrer, so I'll put it in again in case people might have missed it

-"And the majority of music journalists and media-persons will continue to dislike 'folk' whatever name we dream up for it. Because, although the 'folk' genre has always had some space for growth and innovation, it's basically about continuity and tradition. And continuity and tradition are BORING! Especially if you earn your living writing a weekly column praising everything that's shiny-new, and trashing everything that's been around longer than a few weeks."

Exactly. It's not the image that is the problem, it's the reality of the music, and that's what we like about it. You don't get rid of prejudice by changing your image. You live with it, and you overcome it. (And how many Aran sweaters has anyone seen since the Clancys? If they said weskits now, at least they'd be in touch of the true image.)

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Art Thieme
Date: 16 Jun 00 - 08:18 PM

Sam Pirt, I'm listening to you and Bill Sables as I type this. It's a fine recording. You do a grand job with your squeezebox. Thanks for your role in my having the CD!

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Rick Fielding
Date: 16 Jun 00 - 08:39 PM

Not sure if I should be replying in the "plastic Paddy" thread or this one. While playing with the "Sons of Erin" I had to wear one of those Damn sweaters. Seriously hot! 'Course had a beard as well. Oh, and no other chords except 1,4,5. (with a 2 thrown in to be radical)

"Folk" is what young people play until they get a decent record deal (and can afford a band). After that it's called "roots-rock". Companies and festivals (on this side of the pond) don't want to scare off the public by calling it "folk".

Rick

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Jun 00 - 09:03 PM

About Aran sweaters (and it's one r, for the Aran Isles - two r's and it's Arran off Scotland) - and the gist of it is, the Aran pattern isn't a great traditional Gaelic thing at all - there was someone went over to America in the early years of the century, and bought a book with knitting patterns back home to the Aran Isles, and they caught on. And here is a website telling all about this

The other thing, which puts a more serious spin on that is that one reason for having different knitting patterns in different places, which was a real tradition in many places, was so that when sailors and fishermen were drowned they'd know where they came from, and could let the family know. John Kirkpatrick wrote a great song about that. A shattering song in fact. (I think it's called something like "A twist of thread" - but someone else could correct me.)

Anyway, though they might be grand things to wear on a boat, they're the last thing anyone would wear on a sweaty stage unless they'd had their arms twisted.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Rollo
Date: 17 Jun 00 - 12:18 AM

Is there really an image problem?

Hey, listen carefully to mainstream, folk influence is spreading... If there is really a problem, we should do it like the cajuns when rock'n roll threatened to kill their music, the took it over and turned it into swamp rock...

But let's just keep it as ist is, for there are just two possibilities. a) folk is getting really popular - that means a lot of crap produced by obsucre money-makers, all the kids telling you whats cool and what isn't, and soon you can't stand it any longer to hear all the good ole songs to be made into "hip stuff" and return to classic or (beware!) that dinosaur style they once called "Rock" because it remembers you of better times ling ago. b) Folk is not getting more popular, keeps "our" music, and we can hang around in dim lit drinking holes wearing something we believe to be old fashion hand made rural style, listen to some damn good musicians and make jokes about all this yesterday men hanging around in dim lit drinking holes, wearing leather vests and jeans listening to sum hot blues man...

I would really suggest to vote for b. Its more fun and we stay the cool ones.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: bob jr
Date: 17 Jun 00 - 12:48 AM

hey there was this joke i heard once in a movie by woody allen where he asks the aliens how he can make the world a better place and they say "your a comedian you want to make the world a better place? tell funnier jokes" same applies here i think you want the publics support play good music and stop worrying bout what it is called just what it makes you and others feel

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: zonahobo
Date: 17 Jun 00 - 01:25 AM

How about "Nowage" music .. also thought of flok music but that seems to fit Pop better ...

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Lanfranc
Date: 17 Jun 00 - 06:09 AM

Having been involved in singing in and running Folk Clubs for the thick end of 35 years, I have always resisted any change of name in pursuit of bigger audiences.

The thing I always try to bear in mind is that audiences go to any music venue to be entertained. When they encounter a group of introverted excluding self-important individuals running the show, they vote with their feet. It doesn't matter if the music on offer is Folk, Jazz, Blues, House or even Classical.

Put Tom Paxton, Vin Garbutt or the late Alex Campbell (as just three examples of many) in front of any audience and they will communicate with them and almost certainly fill the hall or whatever. Remember that Billy Connolly, Jasper Carrott and Mike Harding cut their teeth in the Folk Clubs, and Steeleye Span, Fairport Convention and Battlefield Band didn't or don't want for audiences either.

Give and you will receive, make the music and songs relevant and entertaining and people will listen. The label doesn't matter - JUST COMMUNICATE!

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Noreen
Date: 17 Jun 00 - 02:30 PM

Try this blue clickie Charming man for the original article in the Guardian.

--Noreen

http://www.guardianunlimited.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4029813,00.html

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: The Shambles
Date: 17 Jun 00 - 06:21 PM

I really don't think that it is the music that has the problem. It the idea that if you like the music you have to be a Folkie. The image of the Folkie has been pretty well described in this thread and is it any wonder that normal (whatever that is) people are a little wary of being thought of as a Folkie?

The children of Folkies do seem to adopt a different image, even if they continue to play and like the music? So maybe there is yet hope?

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Jun 00 - 06:45 PM

"The children of Folkies do seem to adopt a different image, even if they continue to play and like the music" -the children of most people seem to adopt a different image. That's what children do and always have done. Call it image,call it style, call it fashion - it's transient and superficial, and in our hearts we all knew it, even when we were young.

What's different about the children of folkies who stick with the music is that their music continues to be made within a tradition, and exists within a sub-culture that does not reject that which is old, and those who are old as disposable, or regard novelty as the only thing that counts.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Mbo
Date: 17 Jun 00 - 06:59 PM

My parents aren't folkies, in fact they don't care for music that much at all. 45 minutes of music and they don't want to hear it anymore for at least 2 days. I have a great love for many kinds of music, including folk, and I like to play it straight, and to mix it up with other kinds of music. This is no "transient, superficial" thing, it is how I work and how I create & play music. My dillema is that I like older music traditons that people my age obviously hate and put down(bringing folk music to class didn't go over to well)and I like a lot of modern music that older people hate and put down. Could someone please tell me where I fit in the picture?

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Jun 00 - 07:28 PM

You don't have to fit in any picture, Mbo. You're the one who paints the picture. And I reckon it's a good 'un.

I've sometimes thought, there are two sorts of young folkies (pace Shambles - whatever the style or image may be, for me, if they love the music, that's what they are) - there are those who are second generation (or third or fourth...) and those who are first generation. And I've wondered how that feels and works out. Is there a tension about that kind of thing?

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Crowhugger
Date: 17 Jun 00 - 08:07 PM

Meebs, it's your canvas to paint as you wish. Sounds to me like it's a music picture! Categories are good for convenient reference but heck, toss 'em if they become inconvenient.

McGrath, what tension? I'm at least 2nd generation, no, 3rd or more on my father's side. Last fall a brand-new banjoist and I were jamming. No tension, just a blast! Are you referring to a particular experience that you had?

CH.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Jun 00 - 08:54 PM

No, I'm just curious,is all. What I had in mind is, we all have a sort of rivalry with our parents at some time. You know, the old thing about how when you're growing you realise your parents are right eejits - and then after a few years, it can be amazing how much more sensible they have become...

Well, if you're a second generation folkie, that's going to apply as well. So I'd expect you to be a bit impatient and dismissive of some of the old stuff the parents do, or think it should all be played at twice the speed and that..

But if you're a first generation folkie, I'd imagine that the intergenerational scorn would be directed at your own parents - and you'd might even be more in tune with the older folkies. (A bit analogouse to the way folk song collectors would sometimes focus their attention on the old grandparents, and the younger generation would have their noses put out of joint at times in the process.)

And that's what I meant by wondering about different attitudes and tension. Creative tension I'd hope. I'm not suggesting fistfights or suchlike - more disagreements about who to emulate and how fast tunes should be played, and so forth.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: bob jr
Date: 17 Jun 00 - 10:46 PM

how about foke? you could have foke machines that you put money into and foke comes out! it could have some snappy slogan like foke adds life or something.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: sophocleese
Date: 17 Jun 00 - 10:59 PM

Personally I think we should call it "Fred" to avoid confusion...

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: alison
Date: 18 Jun 00 - 06:53 AM

there's nothing wrong with Aran jumpers.. I've knit a few in my time..... great warm cosy things they are too.. but I have to agree with the others who said that they are too warm to even think of wearing on stage... The Clancy's must have been sweltered!!

we've been going through this problem with our local folk club.. the name scares people off.... even though we are not "strictly" folk, in fact anything is welcome and usually joined in with... so I have recently advertised us as a "music club"....

so far I've had interest expressed from a heavy metal guitarist (who is happy to play acoustically) and an operatic singer...... our next meeting should be interesting!! Maybe I'll try "Acoustic" next......

slainte

alison

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Pixie
Date: 18 Jun 00 - 08:10 AM

how about "non-commercial, no radio-play, you won't hear me unless you listen to CBC/University radio" music...come on "folks".....would the point of changing the name be to get more air play????? Wider audience?????Think about it - there are responses to this thread from various sites around the world from people who have come into this site because of the label "folk". What is that saying? If it don't need fixing, don't fix it?????

Pixie

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Mooh
Date: 18 Jun 00 - 08:53 AM

My dissenting opinion.

I frankly do not agree with Bert Jansch's suggestion. As a tradition, folk in its various forms is much older than any of us or our family trees. Renaming things seems like too much a 90's revisionist thing (to me) and will not change anything but increase the confusion felt by newcomers to the tradition. BJ is an incredibly gifted musician, but that doesn't mean we should accept his every utterance as worthy. In the end it will remain folk because it is folk, and history tells us it is so.

To provoke discussion about this matter is not in itself a bad thing, but I'm not sure that's the point. I'm suspicious that BJ was implying more about his own discomfort with his tradition or situation than with a general or universal sense of discomfort with the tradition. As good as he is, he doesn't speak for the whole tradition.

As for the image, so what? Don't subscribe to it. The sweater image is not very prevalent where many folk live and practice. Every form has its image, even cliches, but all you have to do is pick up a folk periodical or attend a festival to see that the sweater image doesn't reign everywhere, it's just a part of the larger picture.

My suggestion? Bert Jansch was not on the money this time.

My $0.02 Cdn funds, Mooh.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Jun 00 - 05:59 PM

I suppose "feck music" might be an interesting alternative.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Art Thieme
Date: 18 Jun 00 - 11:58 PM

Good folks,

To me and most knowledgable ones, there's "folk music" and there's "fake music". And we know it when we hear it.

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: bob jr
Date: 19 Jun 00 - 12:36 AM

atr you sound like some kinda know-it-all that i wouldnt want to know at all. guthries guitar said this machine kills fascists not become one!

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Crowhugger
Date: 19 Jun 00 - 01:57 AM

warning: major, LONG thread drift!

McGrath,

Personally, those intergenerational tensions showed up in areas other than music. My Mom got her guitar from my father's uncle when he died some 40-ish years ago; she got the Pete Seeger record and book and was off to the races. I was 3 when my mother accompanied me on a recording of kiddy songs to give to the grandmothers for Xmas.

I teethed on Prokofiev and Pete, oh and Paul Robeson (he knew my grandfather), kindergartened with Kingston Trio, Harry Belafonte, Chopin, Bach, Marian Anderson...Primary school added Haydn, Handel, Herb Alpert, Sergio Mendes and Brazil '66...and on through life.

My father taught me to play ukelele before I was anywhere near big enough to hold a guitar, even my mother's small Martin--and I was a tall child with large hands. As soon as I was almost big enough, I was putting the uke chords on the guitar. My parents showed me what to do with the other two strings. And then I tried the banjo. All this to a backdrop of a women's barbershop chorus, which my mother conducted. My father played French horn when I was young; had both an F and an E-flat horn as I recall--tough going for 8-year-old lungs I can tell you, but I could press the valve levers just fine!

In other words, it was all music to me and still is, including genres at which my maternal grandmother turned up her huge nose (not inherited, thankfully!)

Other people can debate classification all they want. I figure that all music is fusion and you can go crazy trying to name its ancestry and/or its present forms. Like some kinds of 'blues' are maybe Afro-celtic? Puhleeze.

My job is certainly not to compartmentalize something so closely woven as music--I'll leave that to the marketers. I'd rather sing, accompany myself acceptably on guitar, harmonize, get my lazy behind back to the banjo, and speed up on cello.

I have an idea that there has been a thread about the sort of tension you mentioned, but maybe it just came up under another topic.

END OF THIS CHAPTER OF THREAD DRIFT!!

CH.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Terry Allan Hall
Date: 19 Jun 00 - 05:24 PM

I've gotten a lot of milage over the last 25 years out of "Contemporary Acoustic"...vague enough to cover most any type of music employing acoustic instruments.

Silly to even concern ourselves... ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Jun 00 - 08:55 PM

Just for curiosity I checked through the introduction by Donal Lummy to the Christy Moore Songbook. Four pages all about Christy and where he fits in and what's he's done, and what he sings - and the word "folk" doesn't come into it once. And unless I'm very much mistaken, in a book with 142 pages and over 100 songs, the word doesn't come up once either.

And I wouldn't think for a moment that that is intentional "let's not use that word" - it's just wouldn't have seemed a significant word in the contextof a living tradition.

The definition doesn't lie in the word, it stands or falls with the people making the music. You don't add to the clarity of the situation by saying that Christy Moore is a folk singer.. or Martin Carthy... or Norma Waterson...and so forth. You define the music by saying "it's the sort of songs that Christy Moore, or Martin Carthy...Norma Waterson.. and so forth...all sing". And that's how I'd read what Art said just now, and got savaged for. (And Art would be in that list as well.)

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: Mbo
Date: 19 Jun 00 - 09:49 PM

Yes, Kevin, but what does Art mean by "fake music"? Is he saying that anything that isn't "folk" is fake, artificial, worthless? Or is he saying that other musics that try to be "folk" come off as fake? In my own personal opinion, NO music is fake. Every shred of music you can find had merit, at least to me. Even rap, even Hardcore, even Insane Clown Posse--they all are legitimate music, though I may not like or agree with them all, I do believe that worth SOMEBODY's listening time. Who am I, or indeed any of us, to pass such judgement on other's brands of music? What makes us so high & mighty that we can insult music that isn't "folk", yet taking great offense when someone from another music world insult us? Note: I am not one of "us"--I am neither a folkie, or wish to be one. Put me down as a "lover of all music." Period.

--Mbo

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Jun 00 - 10:07 PM

I didn't hear Art passing any judgements on brands of music. Fake is when someone doesn't believe in what they are doing. Happens all the time, more's the pity. In all "worlds of music", including the innumerable different types of music that get called "folk" from time to time.

Subject: RE: BS: Not 'Folk' - what should we call it?
From:
Date: 19 Jun 00 - 11:07 PM

Please enlighten me: what's an Aran? What's a jumper with the adjective Aran preceding it? What's an Aran sweater?