Is this a folk song?

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 04:53 AM

Dear 'Steve-Cooperator',

Where, exactly, did I say that "... a song has to be traditional to be folk"? I think that there's a fair chance that you "don't see where I'm going any more" with my argument because you haven't read what I've written (?) Perhaps it's because I've written things which do not confirm your preconceptions?

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. It is reasonably certain that most so-called 'traditional' songs have undergone this process and, hence, qualify as folk songs. If you look for exceptions to all this you will almost certainly find them, but this doesn't 'prove' anything.

Also bear in mind that the marketing category 'Folk' bears very little resemblance to the academic category 'Folk'.

Is the process that turns songs into folk songs still operating? Jim Carroll says "no" and I respect his opinion. I think that there is a possibility that similar or analogous processes may be operating now - but I think it's too early to tell.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: GUEST,Steve-Cooperator
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 02:51 PM

Shimrod,

I really don't see where you are going any more with your argument.

You don't need a degree to be able to discern between different genres of song and music. There has been substancial research into traditional music for over a century which is available. Going by your suggestion that a song has to be traditional to be folk, I am interested to know what genre you class well crafted songs by writers such as John Conolly, Jez Lowe, Hughie Jones, even the Captain himself.... classical, pop, punk?

Toy Palmer, whio I am sure is impeccable in his research methodologies talks of the tradition in its making.....

Referring back to my original argument, new songs do find there m=way into the folk canon (I am no saying traditional, though many songs do wrongly get cited as such) those that do have a style that clearly identify them with the genre, conversely there are many songs that do not fit in with the style, and fall by the wayside.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: Rasener
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 10:03 AM

Shimrod
I consider them all part of the folk scene and most of them do traditonal songs (or at least songs that deal with hsitoical issues).
I am not ducking the issue. I am genuinly confused about who of those are classed as folk and those classed as Traditional.
Until I started my folk club about 5 years ago I hadn't been in the folk scene as such for nigh on 30 odd years.
All I do see is a lot of people not able to explain what is what.
Incidentally, it didn't require your you to reply with attitude.

I can only improve my knowledge by listening to what other people tell me.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: The Sandman
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 08:58 AM

I shall treat Jim Carrolls latest post with the light hearted frivolity it deserves,but will refer back to one or two points that he made in his previous epistle.
I have never not treated singers such as Phil Tanner,Harry Cox with anything but the utmost respect.I do not think their singing is crap[and am not saying that you inferred that i had],just making my position clear.
Finally would you like to give us a precise time that you think the tradition died.
oh and I dont much like this song[Probably more to do with style]although I dont disagree with some of the sentiments,Ipreferred Mr President by PINK,,but does it really matter, whether their folk songs or Punk songs,a good song is a good song whatever its category

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 05:43 AM

GUEST(Jim),
to paraphrase you: I might suggest that with your last statement you are goading the good Captain, or trying to - but I don't want to be accused of criticising - anyway, I am sure you yourself have criticised others at one time or another :-)

The Captain did respond to at least some of your points, for example the one about unconscious or self-conscious changes to traditional songs. And I agree with him that at least some times unconscious changes can and do occur - without there being any cause for disparaging them in the way that seems intended by your PS statement.

In fairness, I don't believe that you are poles apart in your appreciation of the tradition, at least as expressed in this thread.
Perhaps some antagonism borne of the past is colouring the posts, and it can confuse the discussion, but OK, you believe that tradition is dead (your words), while the Captain believes that it is on-going. I confess to leaning on his side personally, even as I acknowledge your right to a different opinion. Perhaps you are both correct, even, in that the "existing" tradition is dead, but "new" traditions could be in the making as we speak, without us being able to identify them today, because we are too close - they will be judged in generations to come.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 04:58 AM

Hi 'The Villan',

"Would somebody tell me which of these performers are Folk or Traditional and why?"

Have you ever thought of reading what's been written on this subject and having a go yourself? A lot of people who ask these sorts of questions seem to think that it's OK to give someone else the responsibility for research and analysis - but then seem to think they can pick-and-choose among the answers and casually discard those bits and pieces that don't fit with their particular prejudices and preconceptions.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: GUEST
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 03:13 AM

Cap'n
Well done,
Once again you have managed to respond to all the points I didn't make and ignore the ones I did.
You really will have to make up your mind; one minute you are a traditional singer, the next, you are a singer of traditional songs - and if you decide you are part of the tradition, give us your definition and explain how you fit into it.
I might suggest that you go read a book - but I don't want to be accused of telling people what to do - anyway, I'm sure you've read one at one time or another.
Jim Carroll
PS The only thing unconcious changes are an indication of - is unconciousness.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: Grimmy
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 07:44 AM

Furthermore edthefolkie, football chanting in the UK meets all the conditions of the 1954 definition. It is truly a living tradition.

Cecil Sharp would have problems with some of the 'indelicate' words though. He would probably turn 'You're not fit to wipe my *rse' into some jovial hunting song!

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: GUEST,edthefolkie
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 07:04 AM

Richard Rodgers and Oscar Hammerstein wrote a song for a musical. Many years later a chap called Gerry Marsden recorded it with his beat group. Football fans in Gerry's home town subsequently (or according to M Carthy, previously!) started singing some of the song on the terraces. Supporters of other football teams started singing it, sometimes with altered words. Eventually an enormous crowd sang the same song to the Queen in front of Buckingham Palace.

I refer of course to "You'll never Walk Alone". We know it came from a musical called "Carousel" - we can buy the sheet music - and yet it would appear to qualify as a folk song, because most of the singers probably have no idea of its source.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: dozy rozy
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 04:31 AM

Well said.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: The Sandman
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 04:24 AM

dear jim ,as a matter of fact I sing in the bath as well.
individuals own arrangements of tradional songs,not quite the same trhing as owning the song,in the case of Scarborough Fair,Martin Carthy owned a particular guitar arrangement , Paul Simon was forced to acknowledge this,quite right too, the arrangement was Carthys work,even if ths song was traditional.
JIM,I make unconscious changes to songs over the years,some of them quite radical, eg the singing of The Greenwood laddie,in a different time signature[Ididnt realise I had done this until someone pointed it out]it just seemed thats the way it should be.
the tradition is far from dead, in fact in my opinion its very much alive,and will be all the time singers and musicians like myself,perform /or sing, whether its while im in the bath ,or milking my goats, or performing in a folk club.
my advice to you is to do some vocal exercises,and start singing again ,its great fun.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 04:03 AM

Cap'n
You are judged because you are - and have chosen to be- a performer, just as somebody who chooses to paint, write books, poetry or plays, act - whatever, has chosen to do what they do. All of these are judged, hopefully by people who know what they are talking about. If you are not happy about having your performance assessed, stay at home and sing in the bath!
In the time we have been collecting from field singers, I can recall very, very few of them who have regarded themselves as performers, but rather, as people who have remembered songs from an earlier period of their lives and are happy to pass them on to us. In virtually all cases, they have not sung, certainly not in public, for many, many years, and it would be totally unfair (apart from the potential damage it would have done to the task of persuading them to pass on their songs) to apply the same criteria as you would to a younger, healthier, and much more practiced and confident singer. Any judgment of their singing can only come from their peers and from within their own communities. I've seen up close (and not so long ago) the damage that can be inflicted on our access to the tradition by the arrogant and insensitive behaviour of some career folkies (and folkie-'academics') who have ridden rough-shod over the feelings of our traditional singers.
It is worth remembering Cap'n, now that you seem to have come round to the idea that you are not a traditional singer (no criticism - just an assessment of where you stand) that you, like the rest of us, have what we have, because of the generosity of the Walter Pardons, Sam Larners, Phil Tanners et al. As far as I'm concerned, that privilege carries with it a responsibility towards what we have been given, so that in the future others can get the same pleasure from the songs and music as we have. The 'thanks for the songs; by the way, your singing was crap' technique, far from being helpful, is, and always has been destructive. To say the least, it is extremely ungracious!
Despite the insistence of some people that we still have a living tradition and that some of the contributors to this, and other threads, are part of it, nobody has come up with a half-decent definition to substantiate these claims. A week ago, on the 'what is folk music?' thread, Richard Bridge gave an excellent summary of what goes into the making of 'folk' or 'traditional' songs, one I am happy to file and use whenever the need arises.
For me, the tradition, far from being on-going; is dead; what we are left with are the echoes of that tradition. I watched the extremely rapid demise of the singing tradition among Irish Travellers in the mid-seventies, when they acquired portable televisions.
Modern technology, canned entertainment and the fact that, rather than being active participants, most people are now passive recipients of our entertainment and culture; all these and other factors have put paid to a living tradition representing people and communities in general. Copyright laws have ascertained that individuals rather than communities 'own' newly written songs - and even songs like 'Scarborough Fair' and 'The Maid and The Palmer' which have been doing the rounds for centuries. If Comhaltas and the Irish Musical Rights Society over here have their wicked way, we'll soon be paying royalties for the privilege of singing and playing Irish traditional songs and music.
Some time ago somebody asked the question 'How do we honour the tradition?' As far as I'm concerned, we do so by recognising where we stand in relation to tradition, by acknowledging the debt we owe to those who have given us the songs, stories and tunes and by realising the responsibility that comes with that gift. This does not mean that we put what we have been given in a specimen jar and lock it away in a safe place. There are no 'rules' on how the songs and music should be performed (as much as people who use terms like 'finger-in-ear, 'folk police' and 'antiquarian' would wish to impose their particular take on the subject on us). Personally, I have got a great deal of pleasure from listening to the 'cowshit music' of Vaughan-Williams, Delius, Butterworth, Grainger, Bartok, and many others who have taken traditional music and turned it into something else.
If we make radical changes to traditional music, at least let us acknowledge that it is a self-conscious act on the part of us as individuals, and not the process of an on-going tradition.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: Rasener
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 03:08 AM

To me folk music is about day to day life and things that we can all associate with, whether it be a couple of centuries ago or now.

What I find totally confusing is that if I go to any folk club/concert/festival, there are lots of different performers on and they are all classified as folk.

Would somebody tell me which of these performers are Folk or Traditional and why?

Martyn Whyndham-Read
Graham Moore
George Papavgeris
Vin Garbutt
Pete Coe
Anthony John Clarke
Jez Lowe
Duncan McFarlane
John Conolly
Bram Taylor
Bill Whaley & Dave Fletcher
Tim van Eyken
Napper & Bliss

There are many more people I could list. However I like all the ones mentioned above and consider them folk singers.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: GUEST,Bardan
Date: 28 Mar 07 - 02:25 PM

I was thinking more of the field recordings/ stuff from archives etc... sorry for the misunderstanding.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: PoppaGator
Date: 28 Mar 07 - 01:03 PM

The folk process is definitely ongoing, just as history never stops progressing. At any given time, of course, people living in the moment cannot possibly foresee how history will record the present time.

What makes it especially difficult to predict the future of "folk music,' or of any ongoing artisitic tradition, is the fact that audio and video recording technologies, among other similar developments, are so very new in historical terms. Not only is it impossible to forsee how this new complication will affect current and future development of our shared cultural memory ~ we are not even able to appreciate all the unconsious assumptions behind our own various ideas of "tradition" and "process," and how these assumptions are inescapably based upon information we have received through decidedly non-traditional channels: records and tapes, certainly, but also widely-available paperback books, contemporary universities and schools, computer-aided research, and even internet forums like this one.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: The Sandman
Date: 28 Mar 07 - 08:43 AM

ok.now Im a singer of traditional songs[ApparantlyIm not a traditional singer],.
I sing in tune,I have a vast repertoire of traditional and contemporary songs,Iam professional in my approach,and yet because Im a singer of Traditional songs rather than a traditional singer, I am supposed to be judged[dont ask me why] differently from a traditional singer,.
Whether this song is a folk song is not important to me whether I like it is,and I dont,noW hear is some traditional music that is not sung in an off key mannerHTTP://www.dickmiles.com

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: GUEST,Bardan
Date: 28 Mar 07 - 07:17 AM

I'm not saying they all are. I'm simply saying that a lot of the recordings we have are of genuinely old people who's voices have more or less gone, and in some cases who can't even really hold a tune. They're important as repositories (nearly wrote supositories there for a moment-wouldn't that have opened a can of worms) but as music they're not great. That doesn't mean there aren't some great recordings as well or some great singers right now singing traditional songs well.

I'm certainly not saying old is bad either. I quite like a song with some archaic language, makes it more interesting. And I love a nice modal tune as well. Just think the tradition needs to continue and evolve or it'll stagnate and probably die.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: The Sandman
Date: 28 Mar 07 - 05:29 AM

Bardan,Not all traditional singers sing in a croaky off key manner,try the following, Phil Tanner,Harry Cox,Fred Jordan,Bob Roberts,BobLewis,Geoff Wesley,Holm valley tradition,Bob and RonCopper,to name but a few.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 28 Mar 07 - 04:49 AM

Hi Bardan,

I DO know what you mean ... and yet ... and yet. If I'm honest I used to think the same as you when I first got interested in folk song - give me a decent singing voice - not these croaky old geezers. Then, for my 21st birthday, I got a load of record tokens and bought Topic's 'Folk Songs of Britain' series (on vinyl LPs, of course - I'm showing my age here!). Soon I found I was coming back to them again and again because I found that once I got past the superficial roughness (and surprisingly few singers were singing "off key" by the way) I realised that there was something rather weird and wonderful going on. I just loved the contrast between the ordinariness of the voices and the strangeness (and occasional great beauty) of the material.

There's a theme that runs through this thread which suggests that folk song should be directly relevant to the lives of people living NOW and that old is BAAAADDD and new is GOOOODDD. I have to say that I find this way of thinking a bit alien. I suspect that many people rather like to escape from the humdrum nature of their day-to-day lives, now and then (I know I do!), and I suspect that the 'old people' who sang the 'old songs' often felt the same. I'm also not very impressed by new things unless they work (like digital technology - which works about 85% of the time!). Much contemporary music doesn't work for me - which is why I tend to like the old stuff.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: GUEST,Bardan
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 09:13 PM

Yes! Someone agrees with me! That was my point earlier on. The emphasis is too often simply on how old a song is. Some people even seem to feel superior because they know an older version or even the 'original' (straight off a broadsheet, for all we know never sung). Then they have the temerity to talk about the folk process.

Shimrod, I haven't heard that particular recording, but I've listened to other recordings of other songs by old fishermen/labourers etc... They tend to be great historical documents if you like. The preservation of the songs is a great thing as far as I'm concerned and any nuances or bits of folklore or whatever. I'd much rather listen to someone with a decent singing voice sing the songs though and a decent arrangement, maybe the odd bit of harmony is nice too. Obviously you're of a rather different opinion and fair enough but I don't think I'll ever be a fan of croaky off key singing. If I know the guy and he's having fun and thereby raising the mood that's different but I would only really listen to those sorts of recordings to learn asong.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: Snuffy
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 07:58 PM

"Old" and "traditional" are not interchangeable.

Many of the Child Ballads are not necessarily traditional folk songs - they are old texts. Many have never been found sung in the tradition, and many have no known tune. They had effectively died out - rejected by the "folk".

As songs they are a product of the revival of the 1950s and 60s, and have no more right to be judged traditional than anything written by Dylan, the Beatles or Leonard Cohen

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 06:59 PM

Perhaps if the folk process is still happening (and I'm certainly willing to admit the possibility)certain recent or contemporary songs will eventually become folk songs. But it could be, of course, that if I could move forward in time a couple of hundred years I might find that the songs that have been (are going to be ... oh, bugger - this is confusing!) 'elevated' by the community to folk song status are not to my taste. This does not mean that my taste is any better than anyone elses, of course (perish the thought!!), but I might find, personally, that the folk song genre is no longer of any interest.

What if, in the future (in, say, 2207) such songs as 'The Birdy Song', 'Imagine' and 'American Pie' have replaced the Child Ballads. I think I'd rush back to 2007 and take up knitting ...

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: GUEST,wordy
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 06:19 PM

Yes chrispin, it might not necessarily be those songs but it will be their equivilant. The people will have spoken.
The clock cannot be turned back, the people will sift what is given to them by the media and they will find the nuggets.
It's the folk process, but adjusted to modern times.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: Stringsinger
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 06:03 PM

Weelittledrummer,

I think that We Shall Overcome does qualify as a folk song. It's gone through changes, lyrics added, interpretations to fit different occasions, extended from other antecedents such as the Tinsley song "I'll Overcome Some Day" to other variations. It's a good example of a folk song that is contemporary and will be sung years from now maybe in new forms. Already, there is a Spanish version and it's becoming internationally known.

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: chrispin
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 05:57 PM

So are we saying that "It's a long way to Tipperary.." and the like are on their way to becoming folk songs because people have enjoyed and do enjoy singing them? Is "usage" the ONLY criteria

If so, then I fear in the next century, we (I use the term hopefully) will be singing folk-songs that sound remarkably like "I just called to say I love you" and "American Pie"...

Heaven forbid!

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: GUEST,spb-creative
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 04:03 PM

Shimrod,

As someone who hasn't learned much in 25 years:

My opinion (again)

(1) Music genres like folk, jazz, rock, classical can be defined in terms of style, idioms, etc. It isn't rocket science to work out which is which in many cases, and as such it doesn't need a rule book.

(2) There will always be grey areas and cross-over between styles, e.g. Go and Enlist For a Sailor, On Board the Kangaroo, but music hall songs written by Harry Clifton, mid 1840s, the formaer collected by Hammond or Gardner in Basingstoke at the time Clifton was performing in provincial venues.

(3) Having too rigid definitions, what happens to songs like Fiddlers green, do we define it as "Sounds like folk music but it isn't really because it was written".

In my childhood I used to watch the Spinners Christmas Concerts, and for me personally, it was what defined folk music for me, even though not every song was traditional.

On the other hand, I have been to folk clubs and heard offerings by singer-songwriters which would take a phenominal stretch of the imagination for ME to define it as folk. I have also heard lots of what I would call Jazz, but a jazz expert probably wouldn't.

So I am not saying that somethiong is folk because someone wants to call it that. Those who know me also know that in some areas I am a purist, particularly maritime song, and that I define a shanty as a song that can be used to carry out the job for which it was made, and the words are relevant to the perspective of the shantyman, i.e. the correct or sailorised use of technical language, otherwise it would be a sea song (not necesarily folk, but there are some dodgy parlour songs!!!).

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: Herga Kitty
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 03:48 PM

I've been running singarounds at Sidmouth and Chippenham festivals, and going to singarounds at other festivals. I've noticed that we sometimes have more than one song in one session that was written by Keith Marsden, Dave Webber, Roger Bryant, Mick Ryan, Stan Rogers - because they are good songs that people enjoy singing and joining in with.

One year at Chippenham, a lady sang a Martin Graebe song without knowing that the author was sitting unassumingly in the singaround waiting for his turn to sing.

I think folk music is about people making their own entertainment, not the academic preserving of historical tradition, which is academic and historical, not folk, which is organic. Great stuff and worth preserving - and also a source of inspiration for new generations to give a different treatment to.

The Child ballads, after all, come from the days when peoople entertained themselves by singing and telling stories.

Kitty

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 03:33 PM

Yes, I did, Shimrod - thanks!

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 02:57 PM

Sorry, George - I was probably being a bit dense there!

"And by the way, I also believe that the folk process is not dead, but it continues working (see related thread of a couple of months ago) and in time it will produce more "folk" songs."

You could well be right but, with my sceptical scientist's hat on, I think it needs more study and observation to be sure.

By the way, did you write that song called 'Johny Don't Go Walking in the Sea' (hope I've got the right person)? Now that is a cracking song - not a folk song yet, of course, because it hasn't been through 'the process' - but brilliant, all the same!

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 02:46 PM

Hi Bardan,

Thanks for your apology! I must say that I wasn't really expecting one - because this forum can be a bit rough at times - but it is sincerely appreciated, all the same. I also hope that I didn't upset you too much either.

Just to provide a bit of perspective, you've probably gathered that I'm a bit passionate about traditional song and it's been an important part of my life for more years than I care to remember. Through my interest in this musical form I have met many fine people, over the years, and I can assure you that none of them remotely resemble policemen! None of us really wants to stop anyone from listening to anything and couldn't do so even if we wanted to.

I wonder if I could recommend something to you? See if you can find a recording of a singer called Enos White singing a song called 'George Collins' (it's on a CD called 'O'er His Grave the the Grass Grew Green - Tragic Ballads' Topic TSCD 653 - it's Volume 3 in Topic's 'Voice of the People' series). Enos was a 75 year old Hampshire farm labourer when this track was recorded in 1955. He was just an ordinary bloke (and sounds it) - but the song is extraordinary! It's about a man who meets what is possibly (and it's the ambiguity that I love) a water sprite or fairy - and she uses enchantment (possibly) to kill him. Not only is the text weird but the tune is as well - and all this issuing from the mouth of an otherwise very ordinary, elderly country man. Also note that the ballad is unlikely to have anything to do with with Enos's actual life - but it may say a lot about his inner life and his imagination.

Now I don't expect you to like this track - and I will think none the less of you if you hate it - but it might give you an inkling of where I'm coming from. You see once I got hooked on this sort of thing it changed my perspective on music completely (for good or for ill!). It also made we realise that we, in this country, have an amazing musical legacy which is at best too often derided and at worst too often ignored.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: The Sandman
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 01:02 PM

On the subject of the rounding of the horn,this song contains a wonderful peice of poetry,take this verse
While beating off magellan straits,it blew exceeding hard
Two jolly tars we did lose, blown from the topsail yards.
by angry seas the ropes we threw,from their poor grasp was torn
we had to leave them to the sharks that prowl around cape horn.
Powerful stuff,you dont have to sail around cape horn,to appreciate the message ,of being unable to rescue friends from death.thats why somgs like this[Rounding the horn]are still relevant.
That is why the song is relevant to midland office workers,or anyone else, it expresses feelings that most of us are likely to come across at some period of our lives.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: GUEST,Bardan
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 07:50 PM

Shimrod, I'm sorry for my abrasive comments earlier in this post. You've actually answered fairly civilly and logically while I posted with less self control than I normally would expect of myself. Still don't necessarily agree with you mind (I need a sticking out tongue smiley- anyone know how to make em?) If you are part of the 'folk police' at least I haven't fallen down any stairs yet.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 06:30 PM

I was being sarcastic in that message, Shimrod - I agree with you that it's the process that is important. Yet there are many who will insist on defining "traditional" based on known authorship (or not). Me, I'm more relaxed about this. And by the way, I also believe that the folk process is not dead, but it continues working (see related thread of a couple of months ago) and in time it will produce more "folk" songs.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 05:22 PM

"Quite why Famous Flower of Serving Men, should be thought more of a folksong than We Shall Overcome eludes me."

Hmmmm - you almost got me there, WLD! But isn't 'We Shall Overcome' more like an anthem than a folk song? Has it been altered by the communities that sing it? Or isn't it reproduced, each time it is sung, more or less word for word? If 'WSO' is a folk song so are the hymns in 'Ancient & Modern', so is The National Anthem and so is 'Happy Birthday' (haven't we been here before?).

"You want it to be Famous Flower of Serving Men to be a more valid folksong, because of your emotional needs - not for any logical reason."

Well, I admit to being human and to having emotional needs - but I'm not sure how relevant they are to this debate. Nevertheless, there seem to be several contributors to this thread who appear to be absolutely desperate to having their favourite music admitted to the category 'folk song' - but do you know, I have absolutely no idea why! Now that's what I call illogical ...

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: PoppaGator
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 04:58 PM

My favorite quote from this whole mess:

I do think it [the song mentioned in the first post] has more authenticity or relevance (whatever that is) than an East Midlands office worker singing about sailing round Cape Horn.

Thanks to whoever wrote that. Sorry, I didn't make a note of your name ~ but I suppose that's just one more example of the folk process at work, innit? ;^)

A few more isolated reations to various points that have come up:

In the 1960s, in the US, the song in question wold definititely have been a folk song, or more specifically a folk protest song. Perhaps not so today, expecially not in England (where there seems to be much more worry about this issue than elsewhere).

On the question of self-consciously "literary" phareology: I don't think the argument holds water that, to qualify as "folk song," a lyric must be simple to the point that it's less-than-impressive from a literary or poetic standpoint. As someone else pointed out, many old songs that we'd all agree upon as qualified folksongs include unique and impressive lyrical passages. Why?

~ Whoever wrote them (and, of course, every song was written by somebody, albeit in many cases several somebodies) was talented and, in fact, deserves credit for having created something memorable.

~ In many cases, English usage that was common in some long-gone time and place may now carry an exotic flavor and thus seem more impressive than it did in its own time. I'd venture a guess that more than a few lyrical formulations that we currently find greatly quaint and charming were not only less impressive in their own time, they may even have sounded awkward and forced to contemporaries.

~ This degree of exotic quality or unfamiliarity can develop over long periods of time, but songs of fairly recent vintage can have this quality if their origins are sufficiently alien to the listener. I'm thinking mostly of rural Southern blues from the 1920s/30s, which come from a society comepletely unknown to us today, not only to middle-class white folks born after WWII on either side of the ocean, but even to African-Americans, young and even old, living in today's cities. I think that many blues lyrics resound in an especially poetic manner not only because their language of origin is a variant of English largely unknown to most of us today. but also because the form enforces an extreme economy of style, with much more left unspoken than explicitly expressed.

And, my "final" (for now, anyway) word on "tradition" and "authenticity":

Singing that holds my interest is honest and expressive of the singer's own -personality and experience. I'm willing to allow that a singer can give a valid, honest, and deeply expressive performance of material that may not literally coincide with his/her real life, that requires an act of the imagination much akin to what a skilled actor does to craft a "true" stage or film performance.

Most of what I've learned to love as "folk music" meets this standard, but not every performance that claims "folk" status earns my approbation. Certainly, while I may feel a real connection to one or another early field recording of some traditional gem, I am not necessarily going to enjoy a pale imitation of that song put forward by someone who wasn't born when the recording was made ~ whether said singer is the mythical Midlands office worker mentioned above, or a profesisonal "folk" entertainer working the festival circuit (also mentioned earlier in this thread). That does not rule out the possibility that someone else ~ myself. maybe,or perhaps even you ~ might not be able to sing a version of that same old song that adequately captures its true feelings and intended message.

To extend the analogy from trad folk to trad jazz: there are highly skilled but wholly soulless ensembles all over the world who play perfect note-for-note recreations of classic recordings; many of them make annual pilgrimages to New Orleans and put on performances, and I very rarely find anything very moving or compelling about what they have to offer. This is not to say, however, that contemporary players cannot possibly recreate a true and authentic experience of this music. Every night, living breathing humans do a very nice job of it at Preservation Hall. (Many are native-born locals, of course, but there are plenty of honest and empathetic players who come from around the world to play old-style New Orleans jazz exactly the way it should be played.)

I'm not saying that a person who happens to believe that "folk" must be defined in a tightly restricted manner is necessarily going to be a mediocre, unfeeling musical performer. I'm sure that some can translate the same passion they bring to their academic arguments into some positive, passsionate feeling that comes across to the listener. But I'm equally sure that for many others, the restrictiveness of their outlook is clearly reflected in a lack of expression and, yes, even of musicality, in what little they have to offer as performers.

I believe that ~ all else being equal~ the best chance for a listener to experience authentic feeling and musical inspiration is by listening to a performer more interested in fun, love, and self-expression than in laying down rules and definitions.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 02:27 PM

well this the whole point - the unknowns and variables are almost infinite.

Quite why Famous Flower of Serving Men, should be thought more of a folksong than We Shall Overcome eludes me.

One song we have seen whole communities rally round and take to their hearts, the other is Martin Carthy's greatest hit - but its relevance to anything or anybody outside of a few dodgy characters in fishermans smocks and of course the academics would mystify many.

You want it to be Famous Flower of Serving Men to be a more valid folksong, because of your emotional needs - not for any logical reason.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 01:57 PM

"According to the academics, with a known author, the song has no chance of being "folk", let alone "traditional"."

Oh, George!! I would have thought you would know better than that. It's perfectly possible for a song to have a known author AND to be folk/traditional. The classic example (as I have stated many, many, many, many, many times on this board) is 'The Famous Flower of Serving Men' known to have been published by Laurence Price in 1656 ('A Book of British Ballads' by Roy Palmer, Llanerch Reprint, 1998). The source of the song is IRRELEVANT (how many more times!!!!) - it's the PROCESS that the song has been through that is important. That's why some punk dirge cannot be accepted to be a folk song until it's been selected by 'the community' and changed by them. A key question (to which I do not have an answer) is do the relevant communities still exist? I'm interested in the answer to this question, by the way - but don't expect me to be too impressed by guesses.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 12:34 PM

No worries, Grimmy - I didn't take that way.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: Grimmy
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 11:40 AM

Sorry, George, now that I've read my own post, it looks like my challenge was aimed at you personally. Definitely NOT my intention! Thanks for responding

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: guitar
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 11:35 AM

i think the orginal song is a folk song

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 11:34 AM

call it what you want - of course its not us who decide what makes a folksong, and thankfully its not the academics.

the original song we were asked to look at, at least has the virtue of unselfconsciousness.

Dylan, MacColl, MacGowan, Leonard Cohen - they all write to some extent, in what Raymond Chandler characterised as 'art' writing. they write using language that draws attention to itself, rather than simply telling of the situation. Of course poeticisms and lyricism are part of many well known undisputed folksongs

and thats not to say these people didn't write folk music, or that their approach won't go down as folksongs - there really is no way we can predict that.

what is surely important -is rather like George says - that we as a nation reconnect to our folk singing roots. folksinging is ultimately not what academics say, its what the people sing.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 11:28 AM

Vive la difference!

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: guitar
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 11:22 AM

"All music is folk music. I ain't never heard a horse sing a song", and it was said by Louis Armstrong.this is the real quote. as I said we ca ngo on arguing about this until the world ends, we all have diffeernt ideas what folk music is

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 11:17 AM

You'll have no trouble persuading me.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: Grimmy
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 10:03 AM

George, I know the song was written soon after Waterloo (Joseph Lees and his mate Joshua ?Wood flogged copies to the soldiers). Joshua it was who claimed the credit for a time, but later confessed that it was Joseph's work. He also admitted that they penned many of the so-called variants "to reflect the social and political changes" (but mainly to make more money).

Anyway, enough of the history - it was later 'collected' by Frank Kidson, amongst others, and is sung at folk gatherings to this day.

I put it to you that it is a folk song.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 09:41 AM

Actually it was 1815, Grimmy, that the first Jone O'Grinfilt song was written. According to the academics, with a known author, the song has no chance of being "folk", let alone "traditional". It's "that other thing" instead. But call it what you will, the people took the song and made it their own anyway.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 09:32 AM

..and it has given rise to at least 17 known variants, with the same tune and different lyrics to reflect the social and political changes of the 19th century. And the original author was not only forgotten, but someone else usurped the rights and the glory, the guy who made it famous by singing it around as a travelling entertainer.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: Grimmy
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 09:18 AM

In 1819 (or thereabouts) Joseph Lees of Glodwick, Oldham, wrote a song.

Hi did it to raise some beer money.

He went straight round to the local ballad printer with it and persuaded him to print it.

The local people liked it. Joseph and his cronies, realising they were onto a good thing, came up with over a dozen variants, all of which were printed.

It is still sung today.

So, despite the fact that it breaks just about every rule in the folk rule book (even to the extent of its being written for profit) - IS THIS A FOLK SONG?

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 09:14 AM

OK, all you "THEY'RE-so-horrible-to-us-THEY-won't-let-us-call-it-folk"
whingers. Go ahead and have a go at creating "the folk songs of tomorrow" - I challenge you! And if you're successful, I'll be the first to applaud you (although, of course, I may not be around to see the fruits of your efforts).

Arguably, the most successful attempt at doing something like this was by Ewan MacColl (Boo! Hiss! - right, that's got that over with!). But MacColl was steeped in the Tradition, used traditional tunes, or tunes based on traditional tunes, and even based his texts on the speech patterns of the people he celebrated. Now, it may not even be strictly necessary to go to those lengths (?) in order to complete the project that I've set you, but at least it shows that MacColl had a deep knowledge and understanding of what folk songs were all about, before he set out on a such a massive undertaking.

Subject: RE: Is this a folk song?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 07:58 AM

Have just read through this thread. the traddies have a point - our culture must be respected, but I wish they would take aboard some of the concerns many of us feel about what we hope is an ongoing artform - to which many of us (mad fools!) have donated the major part our lives out of no great self interest.

Bout a couple of years ago I was in the green room at at a festival in one of my usual untermenschen roles. And there were two of big hitter folk families on the bill.

The conversation was frankly incredible - it was like Noel Coward meeting the Lunts at a Broadway soiree.

-Oh yes they wanted us for sidmouth this year but I was determined to fit in Ontario and Brisbane folk festivals in this year, and its a couple of years since we did the san Francisco thing....etc!

And of course when they get up on stage, its all this 'I'm a poor little collier's lass load of cobblers....

The guy who wrote the song that startted this thread will probably have a year or two of success - he will almost certainly get ripped off by the gangsters of the English music scene, and when his youth and energy have been spent - he will wind up on benefits. He will hear his song occasionally down the local folk club - Mike read will take the piss out of him for wearing a on tank top totp2.

Try not not to be too disparaging of the people who spend their passion on trying to write about their lives as lived, in folksong form.