Folk Singer v Entertainer

Subject: RE: Folk Singer v Entertainer
From: GUEST,Phil d'Conch
Date: 23 Sep 17 - 05:46 PM

That whole first page of comments... oy.

"Meyer has pointed out that condition, that contradiction, which afflicts everyone who thinks at all: the more you strive to be sensible and serious and meaningful, the less chance you have of becoming so. The primary objective is to laugh." - Freefall in Crimson, John D. MacDonald

To Don Firth's 17 Dec 2012 post I would add:

entertain late Middle English: from French entretenir, based on Latin inter 'among' + tenere 'to hold.' The word originally meant 'maintain, continue,' later 'maintain in a certain condition, treat in a certain way,' also 'show hospitality' (late 15th century). - Webster's New World

entertainment is a form of activity that holds the attention and interest of an audience, or gives pleasure and delight. - wiki

"An Old Testament Cantor, the chanteyman and Harry Belafonte all seek the same goal… enchantment. They want to harness the energies of the audience to get something done – Praise the Lord; haul the bowline; pay the rent." - Phil d'Conch to Gibb Sahib

I was being flip about Belafonte but one cannot seriously deny the man's ability to enchant and entertain a live audience. He still does.

The standard definition of "recreation" is based on "leisure" however this ignores the well documented history of the shanty, cadence &c as a form of recreation part & parcel to a work environment. They "recreate" and "renew" our "spirits" as we work. (see Capt Forrest's remarks on the celeusma & fatigued crew.)

It's as basic as sleep, water & food. Go too long without recreation and your brain will shut down. The "second wind" a shanty or cadence provides is something science still struggles to explain

Don't forget to breath... & laugh.

Subject: RE: Folk Singer v Entertainer
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 23 Sep 17 - 07:30 PM

'does that make me an entertainer, or what?'

what....?

Subject: RE: Folk Singer v Entertainer
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Sep 17 - 09:28 PM

I've seen a lot of folk singers who were not very entertaining , also seen a lot of very good entertainers who were not folky at all! Why does it matter ? And why is it asked in the terms of one vs the other ? Nonsense really, more holier than thou folkie bollocks !

Subject: RE: Folk Singer v Entertainer
From: r.padgett
Date: 24 Sep 17 - 04:00 AM

Folk song should be educational tell a story and in such a way be capable of getting to the feelings of the song ~ a Folk singer should be singing to empathetic (or those capable of empathy) or at least be able to understand what and why the singer is singing it (might simply be a nice tune of course) ~ not sure why anyone would learn a tune or song that didn't say or impart something that is NOT worth hearing

Entertaining well! ~ folk singers could fall into at least two sorts those singing funny songs and those singing serious songs ~ the likes of Tony Capstick whose introductions and jokes were the funny ones and the songs by and large serious often traditional

Well I subscribe to the traditional side of course! Entertainers not singing traditional/or contemporary could find an audience anywhere maybe ~ traddies of course need a specialist following who understand their roots ~ now professional singers (singing for money) is a whole new ball game

Ray

Subject: RE: Folk Singer v Entertainer
From: GUEST,jim bainbridge
Date: 24 Sep 17 - 06:31 AM

Agree with most of that, Ray- I don't do many folk clubs these days, but I knew many of the 'source' singers and musicians and absorbed a lot from them. Over the years, I've developed a fairly eclectic repertoire, increasingly outside folk clubs, which are still mostly attended by people who have the background to be 'entertained' by predominantly 'serious' material with often a long history.
Humour is a great thing, but it is quite possible to be entertained and absorbed by a quality singer where humour is not the main aim of the evening.

   I make no claim to be 'traditional' 'folksinger' 'entertainer' or any of those terms, although others have applied all three terms *and others! to my music.

I once read with interest a review of a CD I did some years ago. One of the reviewers' comments was...
'Jim just sings the songs he likes'- now I think that was meant to reflect my approach to the music, but if you take it literally, you have to wonder- what is the alternative to that?

Subject: RE: Folk Singer v Entertainer
From: JHW
Date: 24 Sep 17 - 07:05 AM

One night at Robin Hood's Bay FC (North Yorkshire) Johnny Silvo was the guest. He weighed up an audience of folkies and holidaymakers and gave us a wonderful evening of mostly folk songs. I've never seen at any other occasion quite the whole roomful queuing up to buy a CD or perhaps just to speak to the man. A folk singer and an entertainer. RIP.
Independent