 sj |
||
|
||
Is this a folk song?
|
|
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: Scoville Date: 09 Apr 07 - 12:25 PM Question: Are y'all talking about British folk clubs, and, if so, what the heck are they all booking if everyone is complaining that there is no folk being performed? The two venues I visit here that I think would roughly equate to "folk clubs" have been known to book the following: Paul Geremia, Battlefield Band, Old Crow Medicine Show, Slaid Cleaves, Nancy Griffith, Tom Paxton, Clandestine, Eliza Gilkyson, Sara Guthrie, Beppe Gambetta, Ian Tyson, etc. How do those stack up? (I'm asking as a point of reference. I don't necessarily consider all of these to be folk myself.) I've noticed that here in the States, Blues seems to be thought of as separate from American folk music which seems odd to me since it has such a strong African-American history. The reason for this is because they are both such huge genres that it would be an organizational and definitional nightmare. Blues is folk, and folk is sometimes blues, and both are roots of rock, country, zydeco, and a lot of other things. However, two groups that have as many subgenres as "white" folk and blues don't need to be combined into the Mother of All Music Genres. You'll note, though, that there is not a hard line dividing them and that they often travel parallel tracks. |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: GUEST Date: 09 Apr 07 - 03:37 AM Whoops - that was meant to be whoops. If I'm not careful I'll get another visit from the 'typo-fairy' who stalks this thread, Jim |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: GUEST Date: 09 Apr 07 - 03:34 AM Whops - sorry Barbara. Jim |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: BB Date: 08 Apr 07 - 04:05 PM Read what I said again, Jim. *George* said, "We encourage everyone to sing whatever they like". I was agreeing with what you said. Personally, we run our club in order to encourage people to perform - what they perform really is up to them. But that's our club (which isn't a folk club although quite a lot of 'folk' material, including traditional, is performed there), and it was something that was called for in our village - it's not necessarily what we would be running if we were elsewhere. You can call that 'a social amenity' if you wish - it's also a darn good night out! I think you're right, Jim, in saying that audiences generally are down for folk clubs, although not necessarily for folk music, and there are many reasons which may contribute to that - but I think that's drifting even further from the thread subject, so I'll not go there. Barbara |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: GUEST Date: 07 Apr 07 - 04:39 AM Hi Barbara, I don't think I said "We encourage everyone to sing whatever they like", If I did, that is not what I meant. I believe singers should choose for themselves what they sing; where they sing it and what they/we call it is a different question. It's been my experience that club audiences for all types of 'folk club' have plummeted, not just for traditional song. If club organisers don't run clubs to promote their own music - why do they run them - as a social amenity - maybe. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: BB Date: 06 Apr 07 - 03:58 PM Jim said, "I know of no club organisers who encourage singers to perform material that is not in line with club policy", which you seemed to refute, George, in talking about Herga. But Herga's policy is not necessarily the same as its residents' preferences. In fact, you say, "We encourage everyone to sing whatever they like", and that, surely, is stating the club's policy, so you are simply proving Jim's point. By and large, we do the same wherever we are, but one has to accept that people like Jim and Shimrod may well be put off from attending such clubs. The scene is ending up with very few clubs catering for those who really only enjoy 'traditional' folk music, thus has to accept that it is losing some very valuable people completely, although hopefully it gains others who may discover the value of traditional music. Barbara |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: GUEST Date: 06 Apr 07 - 01:50 PM I think it was Shimrod wrote that he was fed up turning up to 'Folk Clubs' and not hearing a 'folk Song' all night. I totally agree with that; it's why I (and thousands like me) stopped going to clubs - and thereby hangs the problem that 'anything goes clubs have yet to solve. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: George Papavgeris Date: 06 Apr 07 - 04:59 AM Jim, I agree about the debt owed to Ewan, Bert, Alan etc by you, me, and countless others. Also, for clarity, neither was I inferring with my statement about Herga anything with respect to the Singers Club. You were lucky to have been part of that, and part of an earlier Herga too. I just wanted to point out Herga's openness to all styles of music today, despite its undoubted traditional origins. |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: GUEST Date: 06 Apr 07 - 02:55 AM George, I have attended Herga on several occasions (Royal Oak?) in the distant past and it was invariably to hear traditional (or traditional-type) performers - Kevin Mitchell springs to mind (and we brought Walter Pardon there to perform). This fact was, I am sure, due to our tastes in music; I do not doubt what you are saying (though your 'best face' comment does indicate a policy preference. Personally, I believe the idea of setting up a club in the first place is to promote the music you like, and believe important enough to make an effort for - otherwise, why bother? Over the years I have been in clubs where musical instruments were forbidden, that would not allow newly written songs to be performed or where, say, bawdy material was openly disapproved of (and on occasion, talked down). I have been in clubs with Ewan and Peggy where they have been asked not to sing political songs. None of this was ever part of The Singers Club Policy - ever. As far as I am concerned Ewan was a key figure in introducing me, and many like me to folk music- a fact that has dominated my life for over 40 years and will (I hope) continue to do so until I run out of puff. I doubt if there would be many of us speaking to each other on forums like this if it hadn't been for Ewan, Bert, Lomax, and I believe the least we owe them is to recognise their contribution and, at least, get the facts straight and not continue to peddle the myths as reality! Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: George Papavgeris Date: 05 Apr 07 - 05:39 PM Jim, you say "I know of no club organisers who encourage singers to perform material that is not in line with club policy." Herga is such a club. Its reputation and the vast majority of its residents lean towards traditional, but we encourage everyone to sing whatever they like, and we enjoy some excellent jazz guitar and contemporary songs from Chris Flegg, the occasional contemporary duet from Moses and the Ref, other contemporary singer/songwriter stuff... And yet, when we want to put on our "best face", the club is unmistakably traditional, with the likes of Johnny Collins, George Clarke, Kitty Vernon, Mike Sparks, Graeme Knights, etc. I am a permanent aberration, in that respect, yet one the club encouraged and fostered and helped. Which is precisely the reason why "Friends like these" was written for those very folks I just mentioned: traddies, but welcoming everything. |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: GUEST Date: 05 Apr 07 - 03:07 PM I wonder when people will come to terms with the fact that Ewan and Peggy never prevented any form of song being performed at the Singers Club. Speaking as an ex- Singers Club organiser, as with any club in existence, the songs that were performed by the residents there where those in line with the policy of the club (arrived at by an audience comittee) - i.e. traditional songs and contemporary songs created on traditional lines. That was a policy FOR THE RESIDENTS. Singers from the floor sang what they chose to sing and if their performance impressed whoever was residenting that night, they were booked as guests there. I know of no club organisers who encourage singers to perform material that is not in line with club policy. If people feel that it is wrong for a club to have a policy, that is a different argument. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: Stringsinger Date: 04 Apr 07 - 07:50 PM It seems like this argument becomes intensified in England or Ireland because of the nature of the culture being more in touch with its roots than America, which has so many roots and diversity stemming from its citizen's immigration. In England, Ewan and Peggy seemed to highlight this in their "folk club" where certain songs were not permitted. Here in the States, the only similar exclusionary musical attitude is in the area of bluegrass. In a way, you might say that the bluegrass contingent is in touch with a certain folk style that emanated from unaccompanied ballad singing to old time string band music. This exclusionary attitude prevails in jazz circles as well. I've noticed that here in the States, Blues seems to be thought of as separate from American folk music which seems odd to me since it has such a strong African-American history. The point of this is that without a historical and cultural context, folk music wouldn't exist. That's the point of it. The stories it has to tell of the people who created it at one time in history and their feelings expressed for posterity. This is something that is hard to emulate by current singer/songwriter standards. Although there are some great writers today who are conversant with a folk-style in their writing and composing, they can't have the history because they are not that old. However, that said, I think, for example, that Jean Ritchie brings to her songs the historical and cultural perspective that reflects more of what a folk song is because of her association with her family and the traditional musical aspects that she inherited. John Jacob Niles, the same. Does this mean that they write "folk songs"? I'm not sure that they do, but I do believe that their material reflects a genuine understanding of what this cultural process is and their songs are closer to those traditions than the contemporary singer/songwriter who "has something to say". Why make this distinction? Because there is something of value in a folk song that can't be measured by any other form of musical expression. It has to be appreciated in its own right for what it is and other good music shouldn't be banned or denegrated in any way. Contemporary folklorists understand the difference between folklore and that which falls out of that category because it doesn't meet the criteria. If we go down the road that anything is folklore, than maybe Hollywood is folklore. I don't think most of the Mudcatters would accept that. The same with folk music. Frank Hamilton |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: GUEST,Shimrod Date: 04 Apr 07 - 06:30 PM I can't find a lot to argue with there, Grimmy. If I'm honest I prefer old songs because I find them more exciting and and stimulating to my imagination. On the other hand I find much of today's popular culture banal and stupid in the extreme (ie. 'dumbed down') and many new songs that I hear are not much better. Nevertheless, there are some good song writers around and I would be the first to applaud their achievements. |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: Grimmy Date: 04 Apr 07 - 01:18 PM I suspect though that, in your world, there no place for old things at all Nothing could be further from the truth, Shimrod (BTW I dig up old bottles, collect fossils and was a genealogist before my current job. On my desk right now, having arrived today, is a copy of 'Broadsides of the Industrial North' by Martha Vicinus). I love old things, new things, and things yet to be. I care passionately about the old ballads and traditional songs and I will do all within my power to preserve them (though ultimately, as I have said, the people will decide), but I care equally passionately about new songs which, in turn, will become old. And so it goes on - as it always has. Unfortunately, it strikes me that some people only start to care about songs when they (the songs) have become old - and that is sometimes too late. I care now - that's the difference. |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: GUEST,Shimrod Date: 04 Apr 07 - 12:58 PM Grimmy, Perhaps we don't need to be reminded of new things because, in this particular moment, they are all around us. Eventually, of course, the new things become old things and then we need to be reminded that they once existed. I suspect though that, in your world, there no place for old things at all. But there wouldn't be much point in a museum full of new things, would there? So, in your world, there wouldn't be a place for museums ... and we would have to go on and on and on re-inventing the wheel! |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: Grimmy Date: 04 Apr 07 - 10:20 AM Greg - if that's the only fault you can find in my post then I am more than content. However, remember that museums are not just places to keep old things in, they are also places to keep new things out. |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: greg stephens Date: 04 Apr 07 - 09:57 AM Grimmy: I think you are thinking of museuems where they keep dinosaurs and Egyptian stuff where they have "do't touch the exhibits" signs. In the museums containinmg folk songs of the past, anyone can touch the exhibits any time they like. That's what they are for.When did anybody last try to stop you singing a folk song? It's never happened to me(OK, it has, many times, when the landlord's throwing out, but you know what I mean). |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: Grimmy Date: 04 Apr 07 - 07:38 AM Are we discussing folk music here, or some esoteric branch of forensic science? Frankly, I don't give a flying bab about definitions and I get rather suspicious about the motives of those who do. Imagine, joy of joys, that we came up with a definition with which everyone agreed - WHAT THEN? In 100 years' time:
It won't be the 'experts' or the 'thinkers' or the 'scientists' who decide the future of this music we love - it will be the people (just as it's always been). That seems to worry some folks here. It doesn't worry me - I have every confidence in their good taste and judgement, both now and in 100 years' time. Even if their taste doesn't coincide with mine. If some folks wish to become museum curators, with their 'Do not touch the exhibits' signs everywhere, then good luck to them - but I won't be stopping by. Unfortunately I won't be around 100 years from now, so I'll say this now: I told you so!. |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: Morris-ey Date: 04 Apr 07 - 06:44 AM Well, there's 20 minutes of my life I won't get back.... |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: s&r Date: 04 Apr 07 - 06:00 AM It all depends what sort of definition you use to define folk. "A definition may either give the meaning that a term bears in general use (a descriptive definition), or that which the speaker intends to impose upon it for the purpose of his or her discourse (a stipulative definition). Stipulative definitions differ from descriptive definitions in that they prescribe a new meaning either to a term already in use or to a new term. A descriptive definition can be shown to be right or wrong by comparison to usage, while a stipulative definition cannot. A stipulative definition, however, may be more or less useful. A persuasive definition, named by C.L. Stevenson, is a form of stipulative definition which purports to describe the 'true' or 'commonly accepted' meaning of a term, while in reality stipulating an altered use, perhaps as an argument for some view, for example that some system of government is democratic. Stevenson also notes that some definitions are 'legal' or 'coercive', whose object is to create or alter rights, duties or crimes.[1]" Quote from Wikipedia Says it all Stu |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: GUEST,Shimrod Date: 04 Apr 07 - 05:33 AM I suspect that we keep having these fruitless arguments because of the existence of a peculiar mindset which is now lodged deep in the heart of our culture. In this way of 'thinking' nothing much of any interest or relevance existed before the lifetime of the 'thinker' - hence it's necessary to keep on (and on and on and on) re-inventing the proverbial wheel. This also leads to the view that any transient notion that pops into the head of our 'thinking' protagonist MUST be of great relevance and must be acted upon. But, because these airy notions have no strong intellectual or theoretical basis, someone else must be persuaded to validate them. Unfortunately, the putative validators are 'experts' - who often HAVE studied what went before and ARE armed with definitions and theories - and are not easily persuaded. Hence these intransigent 'experts' have insults heaped upon their heads by the frustrated 'thinkers'. And, let's face it, in contemporary popular culture education, study and analysis are despised; 'experts' are 'nerds' who should know their place and take responsibilty for the airy notions of the wilfully ignorant. |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: GUEST Date: 04 Apr 07 - 04:00 AM Once again a 'what is folk' thread rides off into the sunset without anything significant (or even new) being advanced and leaving behind a trail of recrimination and bad-feeling. It always seems to me that the subject is always approached on the somewhat strange premise that no definition of 'folk' and 'tradition' exist and that we always have to start from scratch in creating one. This is, of course, not the case; perfectly sound definitions have been in place for a long time; oceans of ink and rainforests of paper have been expended in dealing with the subject. It is hard not to notice that once again, those uncomfortable with the old definitions have singularly failed to come up with alternatives. As far as I am concerned, the definitions accepted by Cecil Sharp, Francis Child, Bertrand Bronson, Bert Lloyd, David Buchan, Vaughan Williams, Frank Kidson, Gavin Greig, George Gardiner, Lucy Broadwood, Anne Gilchrist, Ewan MacColl, Alan Lomax, Gordon Gerould.......... and all those who have had a part in forming my ideas, and those of many others, and brought us into the music in the first place by putting pen to paper on the subject over the last century, still work for me. They may be, (are) in need of fine-tuning, but it is nonsense to ignore them. Perhaps these epics could be approached by those who have problems with those definitions explaining what those problems are, and perhaps it should be borne in mind that nobody is 'telling' anybody what and what not to sing. In my experience terms like 'folk police', 'finger-in-ear', 'folk fascist' and 'purist' are usually to be found on the lips of those who appear to have no workable definitions of 'folk' and 'traditional' and are invariably directed at those of us who have. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: Tootler Date: 03 Apr 07 - 07:45 AM I was browsing the Contemplator website when I came across this; Before the printing press broadsides were written by hand. Before folk songs were written by hand there was a centuries-old tradition of minstrels and folk singers. As these declined and the printing press became more common, folk music transmission was channeled into broadsides. Broadsides contributed to the further decline of minstrelsy. Broadsides were, in turn, replaced by newspapers and printed sheet music. Of course, this is a simplification but it kind of looks familiar. I think we are in a similar period of transition with the relatively recent invention of electronic media which has had a profound effect on the way music is transmitted. I have for quite some time now held the view that the invention of printing had a profound effect on the society of its day in a similar way that the invention of the computer is having on ours, though maybe it is not just the computer but the whole business of electronic recording and transmission of information in all its forms that is having the effect. One of the negative effects is taking music making away from ordinary people and making it the province of "experts" |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: greg stephens Date: 01 Apr 07 - 04:58 PM Jeri: yes it can be irritating, this age old topic(I think I am probably older than you, so I've had this and allied discussions longer than you have!). But let's face it, this a forum for discussing folk and blues, isn't it? So if there is considerable difference in what different members mean by these terms, it has to be thrashed out every year or so, so people can say where they stand. Folk music is not unique in this respect: classical means different things to different people. And think of the concept of R'n'B now, and R'n'B in the 50's. It wouldn't half take the heat out of these arguments if people would realise that saying "Richard Thompson's latest song is not a folksong" is by no means the same as saying "Richard's Thompson's latest song is rubbish" or "Richard Thompson's latest song should be banned". There is no value judgement whatsoever in saying which song you think is folk and which isn't. In making a statement like that, people are merely applying definitions, surely a morally neutral position in this case. I would finish by echoing Ian Anderson, fRoots mazine editor, who pointed out recently that the "purists" he knows are the people with the most eclectic record collections. |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: Jeri Date: 01 Apr 07 - 04:41 PM OK, I finally re-read what I wrote, and I understand how people took my comment literally. I meant 'want to ban' as 'want the new songs to go away' as opposed to enforcing some sort of rule. It's poor communication on my part, and I'm truly sorry about that. I have to remember I'm speaking to people who don't know me and who like to argue. I think I was reacting to the level of anger and defensiveness I perceived in the thread, and I veered off-topic. My last words in this thread. I have to question my own intelligence for getting involved in the umpteenth incarnation of the pointless 'what is folk' debate. |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: greg stephens Date: 01 Apr 07 - 04:39 PM Jeri: well I've read your reply so naturally I've gone back and reread your post closely, the last thing I want to do is to accuse you of something you haven't done. But I am afraid I can't interpret your letter in any other way but as an accusation that Shimrod is trying to ban certain songs. There are at least three perfectly clear comments to that effect. Go back and have a look. Shimrod seems to express his opinion a bit over vehemently, but, as they say, "cet animal est mechant. Quand on l'attaque, il se defend". All he seems to me to be doing is sticking by his definition, which suits him well, and arguing against Villan's(and other's, perhaps yours?) which he finds confusing. And he's right, redrawing old definitions(however flawed) can be very confusing. You spend years teaching kids that zebras are the ones that look like horses, only covered with black and white stripes; but elephants are the big grey ones with a trunk at the front. Fine, that's great, that works. But if someone else arrives and starts telling the kids they are both actually zebras, than you get a complicated situation. Shimrod's defining, that's what he's doing. He's saying zebras are this, but elephants are that. He's not trying to ban elephants, and it's just confrontational to accuse him of it, when he patently isn't. |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: GUEST,Shimrod Date: 01 Apr 07 - 04:28 PM Jeri, "Of course, it doesn't sound like you want to ban ALL new songs. Shimrod,..." (your post 01 Apr 07 07:59 AM). This suggests that you believe that I would like to ban some new songs ... doesn't it, Jeri? Again I challenge you to find anything in my posts, in this thread, which suggests that I would like to ban anything. But hang on! Oh, I see - it was an April fool's joke! Ah hah hah hah hah!! Good one! You really fooled me there, Jeri! Let's leave it at that, shall we? |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: Jeri Date: 01 Apr 07 - 01:41 PM "And Jeri, you really are being extraordinarily unfair to Shimrod by accusing him of trying to ban George Papavgeris and all that sort of thing. When has the poor lad said any such thing? It's really bad manners to accuse people of things you know perfectly well they are innocent of." If I'd said that, I'd be unfair. Whatever. Wait, it's the 1st April, and you're accusing me of saying something I didn't say accusing someone else of saying something he didn't say? Haha -- very funny. A person would have to be a complete moron to take the thought of any one person 'banning' music seriously. I am not that moron. I'm sorry if anyone thought that's what I really meant. |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: GUEST,Shimrod Date: 01 Apr 07 - 12:20 PM Thanks to Greg for understanding my, somewhat stroppy, point of view! and thanks to Villan for the apology. |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: Rasener Date: 01 Apr 07 - 12:08 PM >>you howl with rage at Shimrod << Sorry Shimrod. I will stay out of this thread from now on as I obviously seem to know FA about Folk Music. However I do know what sounds good and what sounds awful (which stops people coming to listen). Just as well I am stopping running Faldingworth Live at the end of the year.Once less place to play at(If nobody comes forward and takes over). Don't suppose anybody will as it is too much hard work, and the crap you have to take from some prima donna's is unbeleivable. Maybe some of you would liek to buy a yellowbellies 2 CD. Go to this link and follow your nose. http://www.faldingworthlive.co.uk/yellowbellis_2_cd.htm PM me if you would like one. Enjoy yourselves guys and gals. :-) |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: greg stephens Date: 01 Apr 07 - 09:55 AM OK Villan, we're getting somewhere. You include John Connolly and George Papavgeris in the canon of "folksong", but not Queen and Elton John. So, two questions. What is about Fiddlers Green that is more "about real life" than Elton John's or Queen's songs(as that is apparently your crierion for choice)? And the most relevant question , you howl with rage at Shimrod for excluding songwriters from the category of folk,calling him a purist and folk-police or whatever and all that stuff, but you do exactly the same thing? And Jeri, you really are being extraordinarily unfair to Shimrod by accusing him of trying to ban George Papavgeris and all that sort of thing. When has the poor lad said any such thing? It's really bad manners to accuse people of things you know perfectly well they are innocent of. Shimrod, like Villan, and George P, and all of us, has his own defintion of "folk". These definitions may differ. That does not mean that Shimrod is trying to ban George, or that Villan is trying to ban Queen. |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: GUEST,Shimrod Date: 01 Apr 07 - 09:22 AM Jeri, I am NOT telling anyone what they should sing or what they should think. And I have never advocated banning anything! What I am doing, and what I have a 'right' to do (although I tend to think that it is cowardly and stupid for people to attempt to stand by their 'rights' in a situation like this), is expressing my opinion and disagreeing with people. My 'crime' is to express a minority view which deplores the fact that the folk music that I grew up with is being replaced by an anodyne, inferior 'nu-Folk', comprising mainly dire, self-penned ditties which claim to be 'relevant to folks' lives today' (bollocks!), and, perhaps, 'Folk-lite' which is the pretty, bland, traditional-based commercial effusions produced by the 'Newcastle Prodigies' and their ilk. But as I say, many people can't bear it if someone disagrees with their precious opinions - that someone is guilty of a 'thought-crime' and accused of all sorts of other crimes. I challenge you to go back over my posts and give me one instance of where I have advocated banning anything. You might also like to think of ways in which I could possibly enforce such a ban! You might also like to reflect on the fact that there is a big difference between defining something and stating a preference. For example, I like George Papavgeris's songs very much but I don't think that they are 'folk' - I do not believe that this devalues George's achievement in any way. Furthermore, I would not dream of suggesting that George should be banned or excluded from folk clubs. |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: Jeri Date: 01 Apr 07 - 07:59 AM There are folk songs and then there's folk singing. No matter how much some of us would like to make rules about what 'folks' are allowed to sing, they're going to ignore us in the millions and go about happily humming 'Feels Like Teen Spirit' and 'Hey Jude'. They're going to (and by the way, I love this) continue to write their essay answers to standardized test questions in the form of a rap. They're going to whip out the dead date songs such as 'Teen Angel' at the end of a singing session when the easily offended have gone off to bed. The 'folk' sing for joy, and they really don't care about what other people don't like or what offends them. I love the traditional stuff, but the minute someone gets all shirty about it and wants to ban all new songs, it sure doesn't make me want to sing the songs they like. Of course, it doesn't sound like you want to ban ALL new songs. Shimrod, the more you write here, the more I think you're talking about music you like vs. music you don't like. I don't think what George sings is 'folk', as in 'traditional', but I like it too. Other people sing the same generation of songs, and I may not like them. It's not about what is or isn't 'folk', it's about the way you believe everyone else should think. When you try to tell other people what to think, you wind up with and argument. If one uses a definition as a standard to judge what should be instead of describe what is, the word interferes rather than aids communication. We sometimes refer to traditional music as 'roots' music If the tradition is a living thing, it has to have more than just roots. |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: GUEST,Shimrod Date: 01 Apr 07 - 06:28 AM "Why are you being the way you are Shimrod?" I'm being the way I am, Villan, for two main reasons: (i) Because I'm sick of going to, so-called, 'Folk Clubs' and sitting through an entire evening and not hearing any folk songs. I wouldn't mind if the 'nu-Folk' I'm forced to listen to was any good or bore any resemblance to 'real' folk song - but usually it doesn't (at this point I'm specifically excluding George Papavegeris from this - if everything was as good as his stuff, I wouldn't be as pissed-off!). If I hear one more song about how awful it is to be a fisherman/unemployed fisherman or a miner/unemployed miner and all to some mawkish - 'just-made this-up-in-the-bath-by humming-old-Neil-Young-hits' tune I shall f....ing well Scream!! (ii) This thread poses a closed question ie. "Is this a folk song" and refers to some 'socially relevant' punk epic. There are only two possible answers to a closed question: 'yes' and 'no'. My answer is a resounding 'no'! But that is not the answer that the poser of the question wants to hear (you can probably guess which answer he actually wants to hear). There is also a subtext here that anyone who disagrees with the implied answer to the question is a 'purist' and 'fundamentalist' and must be attacked - and, sure enough, the 'anything goes in a folk club' brigade have come pouring out of the woodwork in support. I find this whole approach to be basically dishonest and irresponsible. A more honest approach would be for the poster to state that the above epic is a folk song and to give the reasons why. I would still disagree, of course, but would have a bit more respect for the poster and his supporters. |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: George Papavgeris Date: 01 Apr 07 - 04:31 AM Smileyman, as you can see from the thread, different people will give different answers to these questions. But specifically with tegards to yout first question (is it the song or the singer), my personal view, following from my "folk ethos" argument in my previous post is: The song can be folk because it is written with a "folk ethos", and if performed in a manner outside that ethos, this doesn't stop the generic song from being folk - but the performance is not folk. A folk song sung in a non-folk (pop, rap, whatever) manner, that's all. |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: smileyman Date: 01 Apr 07 - 02:50 AM I just stumbled into this forum, but I found myself sucked in. In regards to the folk vs not folk debate currently raging, I have a couple of points that I'd like to throw out just for fun. A. Is it the song or the performer that makes it folk? For e.g., I think most would consider Woody Guthrie a folk singer, but if a hardcore punk group like The Dropkick Murphys takes his song "Gonna Be A Blackout" and perform it, does it no longer become folk? B. If a song must be attributed to "anon" before it becomes folk, where does that leave songs such as "The Black and Tans", or "Waltzing Matilda"? C. If a requirement of a folk song is that it is taken by the people and changed, does that make "We Shall Overcome" folk (as has already been pointed out), or Bob Marley's "Get Up, Stand Up", or Bob Dylan's "Chimes of Freedom". (Personally I think that the only one of these that can currently be claimed to be folk is "We Shall Overcome", but give it another 50 years and I think the other two will make a case for themselves.) |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: George Papavgeris Date: 31 Mar 07 - 02:36 PM Shimrod, Les simply subscribes to a different interpretation of the meaning of the world "folk", and lord knows there are enough of those around. Don't be exasperated at this, to the point of calling him responsible for the possibility of the term "folk" being devalued. His opinion simply differs with yours, and no deeper meaning than that exists or should be read into it. It's like me and my wife calling the hue "aqua", "green and "blue" respectively. I still love her, reasoning that she can't help being wrong :-) But back to the definitions of folk, and the likelihood of the term "folk" being devalued - and let's leave "traditional" out of this for now. Witticisms and horse-talk apart, I can discern from this thread alone the following definitions, each with its subscribers and advocates: a) A "folk song" must first undergo the folk process, and can only become "folk" through this. This gives rise to two options: a1) The folk process is dead, and so no more folk songs can be ever created; this virtually equates "folk" with "traditional" (not 100%, I know) a2) The folk process is on-going, and so songs written today can only become "folk songs" with the passage of time, with hindsight so to speak b) A "folk song" must have "anon" composer (again, this almost equates "folk" with "traditional") c) A song is "folk" because a recognised "folk singer" sings it d) A song is "folk" because it is written in a certain musical "style" commonly accepted as giving rise to "folk music". Shimrod, I believe you subscribe to either a1) or a2) above, and you worry that the But can you see the incongruity of using that very term "anti-intellectuals" as being the danger to "folk", whose original definition (as in, centuries ago) is "of the people"? Me, I like to go back to the origins of things - and the definitions above, from a) to d), are hardly more than 50 years old. Based on the original meaning of the world "folk" (outside the world of music) I would like to offer an alternative view, one that might sound a little like d), but isn't: e) Consider that there is such a thing as a "folk ethos". This is like saying "style", but I am going well beyond the external cosmetics of type of tune or instrumentation, modal or bipedal scales, dialect or antiquity of language employed, plugged or unplugged, acoustic or whatever. It does however point towards a number of things: - A thematic relevance to the world and society at the time when it is written (i.e. for a new song, relevance to today), except when specifically setting out to describe historical events - An equivalent linguistic relevance to the same period - An emphasis on story telling or image-painting - Most important: A viewpoint belonging to the "masses" (as opposed to aristocracy, oligarchy etc) Note that I said nothing about the music; that is partly to further emphasise the importance of lyrics (which puts the majority of pop and rock outside the scope); and partly to enable the freedom to embrace different musical styles, both chronologically and geographically, as indeed the people have done throughout the ages. (I know that some will immediately pipe up "how does this folk ethos apply to tunes, then?", and I have to own up that I don't know; I am more familiar with song than with pure music, but perhaps those with a tunes-only bend can offer some equivalent). This would then lead us to term some contemporary songs as "folk" in the sense of "written with a folk ethos"; and suddenly, Jez Lowe becomes acceptable as "folk music", as indeed do all the examples that Les quoted above. Just as I we say that certain songs are written "in the tradition", without confusing them with "traditional" - and if we do, what the heck, it just shows how well they were written "in the tradition". I would personally prefer the academics to use a "folk ethos"-based definition of "folk" rather than the current chronologically-, authorship- and technology-based ones, which I find to be too dry. But that is my view. You may not like it, and that is fine - but call no exorcists, this not the devil speaking. |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: Rasener Date: 31 Mar 07 - 01:15 PM Why should I make it up Shimrod. Greg asked me a question and I tried to answer. I see so many people come through my club, who I book and they are all good and the majority are singer songwriters but all come under the classification of Folk. All the people mentioned above apart from Elton John and Queen have played at my club and they have been really good. Oh sorry the only other one that hasn't played at the club is Vin Garbutt but that was when he was ill. I get so much thrown at me about what is folk or trad, I wouldn't know anymore. My attitude is if people enjoy what they hear then I must be doing something right. I get on average 40 people each evening which is not bad in this day and age for a very rural area. Look at my diary for the club, you will see the type of people who are on Faldingworth Live Diary Why are you being the way you are Shimrod? |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: GUEST,Steve-Cooperator Date: 31 Mar 07 - 12:40 PM It is not down to one person to decide on what and what is not folk music beyond their own ability to discern. performers and presenters have some respibility to ensure that various aspects are availble to have an informed opinion. There is a wealth of published information, bulliting board, newsgroups, etc, from which one can draw futher information. however, I don't see it appropriate to be dismissive about the revival which popularised folk. talking of 'process' that raises the question of who decides that s song has gone through sufficient process. Also folk 'process' goes another way where the nuances of collected material have been lost through lack of care and attention towards the songs, and the ease of disseminating material in recorded form sometimes hastens this dilution. |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: GUEST,Shimrod Date: 31 Mar 07 - 12:16 PM Villan, You're making this up as you go along, aren't you? I'm certainly not going to abandon a perfectly good definition of folk song on the basis of your guesses, feelings and vague hunches. But if you want to do so, go ahead! If you decide to do this please remember that if the word 'folk' becomes devalued and folk song becomes just another wooly-headed type of pop music (and blows away like a puff of pink smoke) please remember that you are responsible (along with all the other 'anti-intellectual-ain't-heard-no-horse-stamp-foot-everything-I-like-is-folk-throw-tantrum' brigade). |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: Rasener Date: 31 Mar 07 - 11:53 AM LOL As I have already said I don't know , you tell me. >>You've named some recently written songs that you think are folksongs<< They are songs that seem to be accepted in the folk scenes. >>So, name some recently written songs that you think aren't folksongs, and let's see what sort of pattern develops<< Well teher starts the problem. If for example we take Elton John who is not classed as a folk singer. Candle in the wind which in some ways would be classed as pop. However when he used that song in relation to Princess Diana to some extent it became a song of the people and if you went to a concert of his, everybody would be singing it. Likewise, I have seen Queen live 2 times who are definately not folk, but to be there live listening to everybody singing "We are the champions" is something to be seen. We are the champions in my opinion would not be classed as a folk song. |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: greg stephens Date: 31 Mar 07 - 11:01 AM All songs are about life, Villan(well that's a sweeping statement but it's probably near enough true). You'll have to do better than that.You've named some recently written songs that you think are folksongs. So, name some recently written songs that you think aren't folksongs, and let's see what sort of pattern develops. |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: Rasener Date: 31 Mar 07 - 10:48 AM >>you must have some rationale that decides which are sheep and which are goats. << I don't have any rationale. I tend to listen to a pop song and think "That would be nice done in a folkie style". Generally IMHO it would only be younger folk singers that would take modern pop songs and do them in a folkie style. However on reflection, I suppose a true folk song would have lyrics that give a messge out about life in one way or another. An example would be songs written about the demise of the fishing industry (very prevelant to the area of Grimsby (local to me) But then, If I take John Conolly's Fiddlers Green thats about a fisherman who's time is almost up, and yet it is almost classified as traditional. I don't know. You tell me. |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: Rasener Date: 31 Mar 07 - 09:51 AM >>a Peacock butterfly has just flown in and sat by the computer<< Thats me, I have just come to spy on you LOL. Greg i could go on endlessly giving you songs written by people who have played at my club who are contemporary singer songwriters and you wouldn't have heard of the songs, more than likely. Howveer they have all been written about life. Have a look at the lyrics of this one, which has only been written a short while ago about a Village not very far from where I live. http://www.faldingworthlive.co.uk/new_page_1.htm One of the songs I enjoyed and heard at my club that comes from a well known band called Guns and Roses and it was sung by a Ceilidh/Folk band called Byards Leap - the song was called Sweet Child Of Mine |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: Rasener Date: 31 Mar 07 - 09:39 AM We could then go on to Graham Moore and Tom Paine's Bones George Papavgeris with Empty Handed Vin Garbutt with Storm Around Tumbledown Jez lowe with Last Of The Widows Duncan McFarlane with Bed Of Straw Just a few - there are many Who said I was talking about pop groups However I do like the ones you mentioned "Sugarbabes, Arctic Monkeys" and many more. |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: greg stephens Date: 31 Mar 07 - 09:30 AM Well, that's one for the folk category. But what intrigues me is, which contemporary songs don't you allow into the folk list? And why? Bcause you must have some rationale that decides which are sheep and which are goats. And, not that this has anything to with the subject in hand, a Peacock butterfly has just flown in and sat by the computer. |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: Rasener Date: 31 Mar 07 - 09:18 AM Shall we start with John Conolly and Fiddlers Green |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: greg stephens Date: 31 Mar 07 - 09:12 AM Villan: since you are firmly of the opinion that contemporary songs can be folk songs, are you going to tell us which contemporary songs come into the folk category? Are you all-inclusive(Sugarbabes, Arctic Monkeys and all), or a little bit more folk-policey. Or do you just mean"songs accompanied on the guitar sung in a folk-club". Because that is not really a defintion, it's a bit too circular. So come on, tell us. Which contemporary songs are folksongs,and which aren't, in your opinion? |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: GUEST,Shimrod Date: 31 Mar 07 - 08:27 AM FOR CHRIST's SAKE - It's NOT a value judgement and has got nothing to do with being 'blinkered' or 'open-minded'! By standing by accepted definitions of folk song no-one is stopping you from singing anything you like or commenting on the quality of what you or others choose to sing. Just reflect on the following quote from the great folk song collector, Mike Yates: "...many people today want a world of certainties, a world where our every thought and desire can be seen in terms of black and white. But, of course, life is not like that, and kicking against this we so often find ourselves suffering from the unsatisfactory nature of things." This is why you seem to be upset about the fact that, "Almost all people who are currently singing folk songs aren't." And that last statement may not be completely true - I know plenty of people who choose to sing 'real folk songs'. |
|
Subject: RE: Is this a folk song? From: Rasener Date: 31 Mar 07 - 05:01 AM >>I know that this is a futile exercise but one last time: A folk song is not a 'good' song or a 'bad' song, or a song that I like, or a song that you like. In addition it is not a song written in a particular style and whether or not it is 'well-crafted' is irrelevant - and it does not even have to be anonymous. It cannot be a recently written song because a particular song has to have undergone a PROCESS (involving selection, transmission and change) before it qualifies as a folk song<< Well that answers it. Almost all people who are currently singing folk songs aren't. No wonder the folk scene has got no chance. How blinkered is folk. The under current from contemporary folk singers at the moment is massive. I have seen that at my club. The number of great songs being written is massive. Keep it going, don't let the blinkered guide your course. |
| Share Thread: |