publication does a doubtful service to folksongs

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: GUEST,Brendan Phelan
Date: 12 Oct 09 - 11:48 AM

Hello, PMB. I came across your segment re: Dublin In My Tears, recently ( I don't spend much time surfing the Net, or the ocean, for that matter ). You are quite right to suggest that songwriters should be happy to have their work accepted into the tradition and refrain from quibbling about changes to certain lyrics that evolve with time. For my own part, I feel very humble and priveledged to have my song accepted into such illustrious company.
However, I feel you were in error in your criticism. I don't think it too much to expect singers to keep to the HISTORICAL facts mentioned in a song, ie. the sailing 'vessel', SS Princess Maud, mentioned in Dublin In My Tears, which transported many hundreds of thousands of migrant Irish workers to England in the 40s, 50s and 60s surely has a right to be properly noted by singers, or 'Songwriters labourers', as I affectionately call them.
One more ommission which gauls me is when singers refer to 'Sap' Kelly of the Coombe as "Sean", or "John". He was my grandfather and I wish him to be remembered by his correct name. After all, one would not refer to Robin Hood as Robert Hood, would they? Slan Leat.

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: GUEST, Sminky
Date: 02 Oct 09 - 10:26 AM

GSS - Snap!

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: GUEST, Sminky
Date: 02 Oct 09 - 10:20 AM

I take your point, Jim, there is certainly 'bad' accompaniment out there.

The instrumental 'break' halfway through a song (once [still?] compulsory in rock music) seems to be very prevalent these days. For me, it serves no purpose other than to interrupt the flow of the narrative.

When done well, however, accompaniment can enhance the emotional dimension of a song IMO.

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: The Sandman
Date: 02 Oct 09 - 10:11 AM

The most spectacular example of what I am talking about was Steeleye Span's recording of the ballad Lamkin. Half way through the action they appear to become bored with it and play an Irish reel - now what's that about?
excellent point, Jim.
and one of my minor criticisms of Martin Carthy,he on occasions puts an instrumental bang in the middle of a story ballad,why why why.
all it does is assist to lose the thread for the listener,if one forgets the words it is a very useful ploy,but i dont think that is the case with Martin.
of course his guitar playing is excellent,but it seems to me to be pointless.

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Oct 09 - 10:00 AM

Sminky,
I don't have any objection to accompaniment per se - I used to sing to a friend's accompaniment all the time (being instrumentally illiterate myself). When we ended our partnership through my moving away, I felt as if I had lost an arm and there were a number of songs I dropped from my repertoire for a long time. When I finally did come back to them I found I had to re-think the the phrasing completely as I had allowed the accompaniment to dictate the way I performed - the accompaniment hadn't accompanied, but rather, had dominated my singing.
It's the type of accompaniment that breaks up the narrative of a song I find intrusive and unnecessary - you know - line of song - line of music, type of thing. It happens all the time with singer/sonwriter stuff, and, to my taste, far too often with traditional material.
When we were recording the older singers, time after time they told us that they considered themselves storytellers whose stories had tunes - that seems largely to have disappeared.
The most spectacular example of what I am talking about was Steeleye Span's recording of the ballad Lamkin. Half way through the action they appear to become bored with it and play an Irish reel - now what's that about?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: GUEST, Sminky
Date: 02 Oct 09 - 09:23 AM

Sorry 'bout that

No problem Jim, each to their own.

I'm disappointed you find their accompaniments intrusive. In Fred Jordan's obituary, a certain Mr Karl Dallas says:

True, he sang unaccompanied, regarded as a sine qua non, mostly quite wrongly, by many students of the English traditions, which in their moribundity have for the most part lost touch with the sort of instrumental virtuosity which distinguishes the folk arts in most other parts of the world.

It would be interesting to know in how many other countries, with a folk song tradition, is singing performed solo and unaccompanied.

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Oct 09 - 08:03 AM

Sminky,
"if you dislike the work"
Sorry 'bout that - I find all their mannerisms and accompaniments intrusive and their performances samey.
If their work is a gauge of how well or badly the revival stands at present........ oh dear!
I think you'll find that Fred learned The Outlandish Knight traditionally (didn't he live over or next to a pub were singing went on). It was certainly recorded from him by the BBC in the '50s.
On the other hand, I believe around half the songs included on his EFDSS cassette 'In Course of Time....' were learned via the revival.
MtheGM
More later - the moss-ridden, rush covered acre which we lovingly refer to as a garden requires a bit of mouth-to-mouth before it starts pissing with rain again
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: GUEST, Sminky
Date: 02 Oct 09 - 06:39 AM

apart from Walter Pardon, none of the singers we questioned had come within a thousand miles of a folk club

Fred Jordan learned at least two songs at Folk Clubs (I think 'The Outlandish Knight' may have been one of them).

Jim, if you dislike the work of Martin Carthy, Nic Jones and Tony Rose then it's small wonder you find little to inspire you nowadays.

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: The Sandman
Date: 02 Oct 09 - 06:01 AM

to return to Manifold,I think he has a valid point.
for instance when I listen to recordings of older IRISH musicians ,such as Paddy in the Smoke,what i hear in the music is the joy of people playing.
they were working hard all the weeek and playing music at the weekend for enjoyment.
a professional musician has to play whenever someone asks him/her,he may not feel like playing,but it is his job,on occasions that can be reflected in the music.and occasionally he she will produce a lifeless mechanical performance
MANIFOLD says;In the alien atmosphere of the concert hall it takes a great artist to preserve the life and spirit even of his own folksongs let alone those of other people.

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Oct 09 - 09:28 PM

Indeed, Jim — but are you not begging the question as to whether the subjects of these yarns were original with Boccaccio, Chaucer, et al, or whether they in turn had not taken them from tradition? Chaucer, e.g., well in the tradition of literary persons' having always, from Homer onwards, been expected to rework tales already known to all their audience, never pretended to have invented the tale of Troilus&Criseyde, any more than Shax did later, or than Henrysoun did even sooner after. So that your McAlpine man's yarns might well have come to him, as it were, in parallel, rather than via Dan C?

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Oct 09 - 07:46 PM

"Jim,I find I change things anyway,regardless of whether I learned a song orally,or from a printed source."
However we learn our songs, I wonder how far we would have got without The Penguin Book of English Folk Song or The Singing Island or Marrowbones, or any of the basic collections that helped by giving us a push-start all those years ago.
The sad thing for me is, at a time when there has never been so much material available the folk repertoire seems to have shrunk to almost nothing. I'm afraid I find very little to inspire me nowadays - certainly not on Utube.
As regards the tradition proper, your question of publication is a fascinating and far more complicated than it appears on the surface. For instance, it seems a contradiction that a non-literate group like the Travellers should have had such a strong influence on the Irish singing tradition through the printed word - ballad selling. The rarest, also the longest ballads in the tradition survived far longer in the non-literate Scots and Irish Travelling communities than they did in the literate settled communities.
The cross-over between literary creations such as The Bramble Briar (Boccacio's Decameron) or Lord Gregory (Chaucer's Canterbury Tales) has never been fully explained - chicken or egg?
I am at present indexing and annotating part of our collection of London/Irish material for archiving and have come across stories (refered to as yarns) from a building worker, originally a fisherman and currach maker from West Clare. These include jokes sharing their plots with Chaucer's Merchant's Tale; (blind, cuckolded husband is persuaded to climb tree) and part of 'The Spanish Bawd (a play written in 1499 and translated into English 1631). How did they get into the repertoire of a poorly educated McAlpine's Man?
The same man had 'yarn' versions of Child ballad, The Bishop of Canterbury and The Merchant and The Fiddlers Wife, a song that appeared in 'Pills To Purge Melancholy in 1702 and has not turned up in the tradition since then.
I think it would be unwise to discard the influence of literature on our song traditions before we fully understand it - don't you?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 01 Oct 09 - 05:20 PM

Jim - you twist my words I fear! I inferred nothing of the sort. When I say canny, I mean exactly that & hopefully the traditional singers who have operated in a revival context as performers have been as happy with the situation as those audiences privileged to see them. In my experience this has invariably been the case. No offence meant, only respect.

S O'P

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Oct 09 - 04:53 PM

Doesn't alter the fact that you inferred that people like Walter were manipulative chancers who "were canny enough to operate quite happily in a revival context".
Here we are again - it would appear!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: The Sandman
Date: 01 Oct 09 - 04:29 PM

Jim,I find I change things anyway,regardless of whether I learned a song orally,or from a printed source.

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 01 Oct 09 - 04:12 PM

deeply offensive and patronising,

Not at all, just giving respect where respect is due that's all - I especially like the tale of Davie Stewart busking the queue for one of his Cecil Sharp House concerts.

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Oct 09 - 03:15 PM

Personally I would hold to my original preference and learn from print - in that way you have to interpret the song yourself rather than rely on somebody else's interpretation.
Surely that is the most enjoyable part of singing, making your own analysis and doing handstands when it works for you - and your audience?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: The Sandman
Date: 01 Oct 09 - 03:06 PM

now of course we can transmit the songs orally using youtube,which I would suggest is a better way of learning a song than going to mudcat,and learning a printed version.

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Oct 09 - 12:55 PM

Meant to say that, apart from Walter Pardon, none of the singers we questioned had come within a thousand miles of a folk club, or a collector (until they sang for us - that is).
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Oct 09 - 12:51 PM

Every single singer we questioned on the subject discriminated between what we folkies refer to as 'folk' and other types of songs in their repertoire.
They may not have used the same terminology as we did, but they recognised them as being 'different'.
'Come-all-yes' and 'traditional' or simply 'the old songs' were probably the most common terms used; some referred to them as 'traditional'.
Traveller, Mary Delaney called all her 200-odd traditional songs her 'daddies songs' - she learned around a dozen from her father. She went as far as to say that 'the new songs have the old ones ruined'. Her 'old' songs ranged from 18th century ballads to Traveller-made ones referring to incidents that had taken place within 5 years of our recording them.
Mikeen McCarthy said he didn't discriminate, but with all his traditional songs he saw pictures - "like being in a cinema". When questioned more closely he referred to his traditional repertoire as "fireside songs", as distinct from "street songs" (those used for selling ballad-sheets) or "pub songs" (those sung for pennies around the bars during fairs and markets). Mikeen's terminology wasn't restricted to the songs, but also to the different way they should be sung.
I can't speak for John England in 1903, but Walter Pardon was listing his family's songs into distinct catergories as early as 1948, a quarter of a century before he became a twinkle in the revival's eye.
He spoke at length, not just about the different types of song in his repertoire, but what those differences were (see Musical Traditions article).
Personally, I find the suggestion of "Canny singers" manipulating the revival for their own purposes, deeply offensive and patronising, but as it usually comes from people who can't tell the difference between Phil Tanner and Richard Tauber, I don't suppose it matters too much, and we can be content with the fact that the 'ignorant traditional singer' is about as real as the Victorian 'noble savage'.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 01 Oct 09 - 11:49 AM

Indeed, but it's worth pondering the extent to which the revival affected traditional singers & performers. Nothing exists in a vacuum after all, and many traditional singers were canny enough to operate quite happily in a revival context. So - fair enough Walter Pardon in 1982, but what about John England in 1903?

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Oct 09 - 10:31 AM

"Otherwise, our entire perception of the nature of Folk Song is determined by the early collectors. "
"Rambling Blade is the best old folk song ever written"
Walter Pardon March 1982
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 01 Oct 09 - 08:51 AM

publication does a doubtful service to folksongs

Not having the time to plough through the entire thread - but has anyone mentioned Boadsheets at all? Without which...

Otherwise, our entire perception of the nature of Folk Song is determined by the early collectors. The condition we call Folk wouldn't exist without them, or publication.

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Oct 09 - 08:32 AM

"JONES CARTHY AND ROSE, do not sound like each other."
Oh yes they do - IMO. The same hiccupy phrasing, the same over-indulgent, intrusive accomaniment........
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: The Sandman
Date: 01 Oct 09 - 07:55 AM

JONES CARTHY AND ROSE,do not sound like each other.
the ironoic thing here is that Manifold made the statement,but was happy to collect and alter songs and have them published.

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: LostHills
Date: 01 Oct 09 - 02:20 AM

People originally started collecting and publishing folk songs because they realized that they were disappearing from this earth forever. What a great service Child, Sharp, the Lomaxes and so many others have done for future generations by preserving the songs of our ancesters. The printing press is one of humanity's greatest gifts, and preserving these treasures has been one of it's most valuable uses. Putting volumes of old songs on public library shelves and teaching them in the public schools is a continuing source of inspiration for each new generation. They're folk songs and they belong to everybody. Everyone has a right to do them in their own style and in their own way, to add to them, change them around, rewrite them, reinterpret them and reinvent them. And we can be thankful that the source material, the written representation of the state they were in when the song collector first discovered them, will always be there for folks to learn from.

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Oct 09 - 01:15 AM

... and at risk of appearing unduly to squeeze my own concertina [I don't play the trumpet], let me quote from what I wrote about Mrs Hogg in my article on Folklore in The Continuum Encyclopedia Of British Literature [NY 2003]:

'"They were made for singin' and no for readin', but ye hae broken the charm now, and they'll never be sung mair." Her words have been called prophetic, but the resultant decline in living folklore was probably a factor of the same influences that led to the folkloric researches of Scott and others in the first place — awareness that urbanization and the spread of easily accessible forms of popular entertainment (pleasure gardens, music-hall; later, radio, cinema, television, recording) were undermining those popular roots on which the uninhibited spread of living folklore depends, and a consequent desire to preserve what could be saved before it vanished entirely. Although the folk forms have turned out tougher than this pessimistic view suggested, it is true that, from the invention of printing onward, every technological and popular artistic development had tended to fix the form. Mrs Hogg, alas, was too late.'

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 30 Sep 09 - 11:23 PM

Jim does well to remind us again of Hogg's mother & Scott.

Re what Art Thieme said just above, I quote again from inlay to a record I made 20 years ago, Butter&Cheese&All [Brewhouse 8904]: "These songs are all traditional, but I believe all will have been more or less consciously modified in the process of making them my own". Surely we all do that - esp if we don't want to sound like Carthy·or·whoever·soundalikes. To quote [sorry but its true & I think it relevant here] a review of a folk-evening I gave at Eye [Suffolk] Theatre a few years ago: the local paper man there wrote "He would address us in pure middle-class tones and then go right into the spirit of a song without putting on the folk voice"; which I value as one of the nicest things anyone has ever said about me.

Re living forms of folklore: as well as rugby songs, we must remember the Urban Legend [see works of Jan Brunvand and Rodney Dale]; and especially the JOKE; which can still blanket the world absolutely & instantaneously & unaccountably from east-west & from pole-pole by oral transmission — & ALWAYS DID even before radio & tv & WWW. Much speculation has gone on for a long time as to HOW this phenomenon occurs — an entertaining fantasy-sf explanation suggesting extra-terrestrial implantation is in the great Isaac Asimov's story 'Jokester', well worth a read to anyone interested in the Folk Process.

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Sep 09 - 06:43 PM

What is given out on the rugby and football terraces - at a streeeeeeeeeeeeeetch - might be described as ritualistic chants, but they are little more than that; certainly not songs. There are sporting songs; a number of serious collections of them (in print, I'm afraid Cap'n), but these are not what Bob Pegg was talking about.
As for publication doing a doubtful service to songs - Don Firth says it all really.
As a folk song enthusiast I spend a great deal of time listening to recordings; as a singer, (when I was one) as far as possible I would avoid learning songs from other singers like the plague. If I wanted mannerisms to be part of my singing, they might as well be my own - there are far too many 'Jonie clones' and Carthy copiers and 'Bellamy bleaters' without my adding to their ranks.
It always used to amuse me that the acusations made towards members of the Critics Group that "those who didn't sound like Ewan sounded like Peggy" invariably came from Carthy or Rose or Jones soundalikes, all of whom sounded like each other anyway - funny old world!
I'm afraid the idea of print being a bad thing went out with James Hogg's mother!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: The Sandman
Date: 30 Sep 09 - 06:07 PM

chants and songs, e .g. the wheelbarrow song.

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 30 Sep 09 - 05:13 PM

Dick,
Whilst I agree in principle with what you say here, I will try to defend what Bob was saying. First of all he was obviously alluding to Britain specifically. Secondly he uses the word 'possibly'.

If I can be allowed to add my interpretation to what he said...rugby songs are close to a pure living oral tradition within a particular and well-defined community. Of course he was wrong to suggest this is the last example, children's playground songs and lore are equally (but not totally) pure. Dick also added 'soccer songs' by which I presume he means 'terrace chants' and of course he is absolutely correct on that score.

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: The Sandman
Date: 30 Sep 09 - 05:06 PM

and Manifold himself was a collector,and also like LLOYD,he was a dab hand at reconstruction,I recommend people to listen to the radio programme about him ,it is fascinating.

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: Don Firth
Date: 30 Sep 09 - 04:59 PM

If it were not for the collectors who put the songs they collected into books, we'd have damned little to sing today.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: Art Thieme
Date: 30 Sep 09 - 04:46 PM

Folks, my records will need to stand for themselves. I found the songs all over the damn place, and then I sang 'em. They meant a lot to me, and even to some of those that heard them.

To intimate that a disservice was done, on any level at all, by Lomax etc. is pure B.S. ---- This discustsion belongs below the line.

(The "t" in the middle of the above word is intentional. ;-)

Art

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folkson
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 30 Sep 09 - 04:30 PM

This concept has been promoted at least as far back as Robbie Burns. IMO, it was a crock then and is a crock now. Folks learn songs form whatever and do what they will with them, for their own edification and amusement. That's folk music.

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: The Sandman
Date: 30 Sep 09 - 12:53 PM

Thirty years ago Bob Pegg suggested that rugby songs were possibly the last example of the folk process and got howled down. Are you suggesting he might have been right? and in the larger scheme of things does it matter? The music has survived, anyone here wishes it hadn'[quote]
Yes, he was right although I would also include soccer songs.

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 13 Dec 07 - 12:01 AM

Going back to the top: An interesting notion, Captain, and as Peace rightly says, some stirring does no harm, in ideas as much as in cookery. But I always like to test theories by turning them on their head.

So before bemoaning the fossilisation of folk songs in print, let's consider: What are the alternatives? What is the likelihood of their being accepted/taken up? And if they were, what would be the end effect on folk songs?

After all remember - this is an era where we all depend much more on the written word for our communication, even if much of it is electronic. It is a sad fact that we talk a lot less to each other IMHO(compared to writing), and certainly a lot less meanignfully, families don't gather round dinner tables, grandparents don't tell as many stories to their grandkids (they don't see them enough, often), time has become precious.

The folk process doesn't die, however. It just adapts, taking on whatever technology and social interaction has to offer as its tools.

So, like the old joke about folkies and electricity, it is senseless to bemoan the advent of the spread and ubiquitousness of the written word and its effect on the preservation or fossilisation of traditions. Just use it. And use it sensibly and to its full advantage.

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folkson
From: Rowan
Date: 12 Dec 07 - 04:37 PM

Frank's post is, to me, an interesting description of the dynamics in Britain and the US. Manifold had been in Britain while at Cambridge in the 30s but my reading of him doesn't suggest he had quite the same sort of class consciousness as Frank describes. More particularly, Manifold seemed to regard the music of the 'workers' (often collected from informants in bars) as subversive of the dominant way of thinking in its illumination of an 'alternative' history.

He was brought up in Western District Victoria and, I can tell you, that area of Oz in the 50s was as mind-numbingly conformist and conservative as you could find anywhere, so it probably even more so in the 30s and 40s; the influx of Americans in WWII didn't have much influence west of Ballarat. Brisbane was notoriously still in the 19th century until Expo in the late 1980s and the Queensland hinterland has never been enthusiastic about social change from 'the old order'. So Manifold had a case.

Back to the topic, to limit folk music to bars, pubs, homes, or any particular environment is to rob it of its universal appeal. To keep it out of print because of some peculiar notion that it would be contaminated doesn't make sense.

This makes perfect sense to us, here and now, but Manifold was writingagainst a different backdrop, temporally and locally. Each State govt Education Dept had a fair amount of control over what kids were exposed to culturally and one or two took it upon themselves to try and get Australian folksongs into the kids and the only way was via the classroom.

Manifold was worried that the only exposure to this "subversive" culture would be via middle class practitioners; that is at the root of his comments. I suppose an analogy that might fit is to think of the "Songs of the Auvergne", a collection of lovely songs sung by the likes of Elizabeth Scwarzkopf. I love both her singing and those songs but I know the folk of the Auvergne sang quite differently. If all we ever had of the Scottish Bothy ballads were renditions from lieder singers I think we'd be on Manifold's side of the argument.

Thankfully, these days, because of print, records and 'pain in the arse' folkies (and lieder), we've got close to the best of the Venn subsets.

Cheers, Rowan

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: Lowden Jameswright
Date: 12 Dec 07 - 01:01 PM

Frank - yours is the voice of reason and wisdom.

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: Stringsinger
Date: 12 Dec 07 - 12:47 PM

Henry Ford was out to destroy any semblance of ethnicity from immigrants to America.
He was an avid collector of fiddle music from the Northeast.

Lloyd and McColl were different in that they were concerned that a working-class music would be destroyed by a kind of musical imperialism, that which would overtake the less commercial and folk-based music not for profit.

I see them as different from Ford. Lloyd and McColl were far less Wagnerian in their wanting to recreate a legendary folklore based on racial and cultural supremacy as did Ford.

Many people, including myself, got interested in folk music through Left-wing people. At the time of the early Fifties, these were the only folks who gave a damn about folk music in general. By that time, Ford's views about preserving folk-based music was considered to be kooky curiosities.

The rise of the Folk Revival and folklore scholarship rests with the advent of the Left-wing movement and the Popular Front. There were those such as Lunsford who were interested in the folk music of the area in which he lived but he was not that influential in calling attention to folk music internationally as was Lloyd, MacColl, Seeger and folk scholars such as Archie Green, Kenneth Goldstein and others who came out of the Left.

Not all of these folks were active or ideological Marxists or even communists. Some drifted in and out of the CP as did many people during the Forties and early Fifties before it became a purge by power hungry politicians such as McCarthy. Many, including myself, had questions as to the consistency and integrity of the beliefs of many in the Party or outside and of some who professed to be Marxists.

In summary, not all can be painted with the same brush. Not all were rabid evangelists.
They were people of their time and the interest in folk music had to do with a rise of class-consciousness that was inherited from the Thirties.

Back to the topic, to limit folk music to bars, pubs, homes, or any particular environment is to rob it of its universal appeal. To keep it out of print because of some peculiar notion that it would be contaminated doesn't make sense.

It doesn't matter what we say about folk music. It will survive because it answers a basic cultural need. At times it's Lomax's "security blanket". It is accessible and that is its social beauty. You can sing it in groups, dance to it and it doesn't rely on manufactured media-driven musical drivel from the marketplace. You can also sing it privately without someone telling you that you are doing it wrong.

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folkson
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 12 Dec 07 - 12:16 PM

It may be of interest that way back in the early 1900s, Henry Ford was sponsoring studies and demonstrations of American Square Dance, to push his agenda that American culture was WASP based. Evangelicals are evangelicals, regardless of orientation.

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: The Sandman
Date: 12 Dec 07 - 10:20 AM

jc ,this iswhat I said
ThankyouRowan ,a fascinating programme.
One thing that struck me,the importance of these collectors, many of whom were communists according to ASIO,as were Lloyd and MacColl,and how much we are indebted to all these people who were driven by an evangelical belief.
I said an evangelical belief ,an evangelical belief,that this was the music of the people, that this was music that needed recording, saving and promoting.I did not say they were evangelical communists.Dick Miles

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folkson
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 12 Dec 07 - 12:18 AM

Ban Harker's biography of MacColl--"Class Act"--provides some interesting insights into MacColl's political views and actions.

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 11 Dec 07 - 05:16 PM

If you think about it we had folk songs performed at high volume to 20,000 paying guests at the O2 last night - roll on the live recordings!!

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 11 Dec 07 - 05:14 PM

"Folksongs belong in the home,in the pub,in the focsle,in the back of atruck or a friendly verandah;not in the list of set peices at an Eisteffod,not in the schoolroom unless as a rare
treat"

Back to the beginning - this is absolute rubbish.

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folkson
From: Rowan
Date: 11 Dec 07 - 04:55 PM

To me it appears the fulcrum of the discussion in the most recent posts from Dick and Jim is the notion of "evangelical"; both have made it quite clear they understand both McColl and Lloyd to have been communists. From my own observations of various people and their writings, we in the 21st century, are probably viewing even our own backgrounds and activities of 50 years ago through tinted filters and I suspect we view writings through filters as well; some people were openly flaunting beliefs and activities while others, no less committed, acted with more subtlety. From my hearing of the ABC program, Manifold may well have been an example of the offspring who converts to a stance/outlook/set of beliefs opposing their parents' position and quite unconcerned about the juxtaposition of his accent (denoting a privileged background) with his political outlook.

Dick, the numbered square brackets in your post lead me to believe you're quoting something with bibliographic references or footnotes. Have I missed a post where you indicated the source(s)?

Cheers, Rowan

Cheers, Rowan

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folkson
From: Andrez
Date: 11 Dec 07 - 04:18 PM

Many thanks for pointing out Rowans link to the ABC Manifold program McGrath from Harlow. I clearly missed it. Methinks l need to make an appointment with ye local eye doctor before the silly season really gets underway. I mean whats the point of being blind without being .......?

Cheers,

Andrez

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folkson
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Dec 07 - 02:18 PM

Cap'n,
I know they were; I wrote:
"Neither MacColl nor Lloyd could be described as 'evangelical communists' as far as I remember them."
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: The Sandman
Date: 11 Dec 07 - 10:37 AM

A L LLOYD
During this decade, he joined the Communist Party of Great Britain[5] and was strongly influenced by the writings of the Marxist historian, A. L. Morton, particularly his 1938 book A People's History Of England.[6] In 1937, Lloyd's article "The People's own Poetry" was published in the Daily Worker (now known as the The Morning Star) newspaper.[7]

In 1938 the BBC hired him to write a radio documentary about seafaring life, and from then on he worked as a journalist and singer. A proponent of communism, Lloyd was staunchly opposed to Adolf Hitler, and, in 1939, he was commissioned by the BBC to produce a series of programmes on the rise of Nazism. Between 1945 and 1950 he was employed as a journalist by Picture Post magazine but he left the job in an act of solidarity with one of his colleagues.[8]

By the 1950s he had established himself as a professional folklorist—as Colin Harper puts it "in a field of one".[9] Harper goes on to note that, at a time when the English folk revival was dominated by young people who wore jeans and pullovers, Lloyd was rarely seen in anything other than a suit (and a wide grin). Ewan MacColl is quoted as describing Lloyd (with affection) as "a walking toby jug".[10]

In the early 1960s, Lloyd became associated with an enterprise known as "Centre 42" which arose from Resolution 42 of the 1960 Trades Union Congress, concerning the importance of arts in the community. Centre 42 was a touring festival aimed at devolving art and culture from London to the other main working class towns of Britain. It was led by Arnold Wesker, with MacColl and Lloyd providing the musical content. Centre 42 was important in bringing a range of folk performers to the public attention: Anne Briggs, the Ian Campbell Folk Group, The Spinners and The Watersons.[11]

Lloyd recorded many albums of English folk music, most notably several albums of the Child Ballads with Ewan MacColl. He also published many books on folk music and related topics, including The Singing Englishman, Come All Ye Bold Miners, and Folk Song in England. He was a founder-member of Topic Records and remained as their artistic director until his death. He died at his home in Grenwich in1982.
As a child I lived in Blackheath,I regularly went to the lloyds house, for their childrens birthday parties,My parents were members of the Communist party,and I distinctly remember lloyds recordings being discussed,as was the fact he had been a member of the Communist party.Dick Miles

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folkson
From: Newport Boy
Date: 11 Dec 07 - 07:43 AM

In the 50s and early 60s there was definitely a strong connection between the early folk clubs and left wing politics. The first club I attended (MacColl, Seeger, Rosselson et al) was held above the offices of ACTT (Association of Cinematograph and Television Technicians) at 2 Soho Square. The general atmosphere was such that my true-blue college friend always felt a bit daring when he came.

When I came to Bristol in 1963, Bristol Ballads & Blues was held in the offices of the Communist Party in Lawford Street.

Phil

Subject: RE: publication does a doubtful service to folksongs
From: The Sandman
Date: 11 Dec 07 - 07:16 AM

Bertlloyd and EwanMaccoll,were both members of the communist party.
J S Manifold was a communist,and according to the programme [if I heard correctly],so was Meredith,Ian Turner,and others involved in the 1950s collecting of australian folk /bush /traditional songs,and early Australian folk revival.
however, both LLoyd and Manifold tampered with the tradition[in my opinion with varying success]yet neither were working class.
The input[to the folk revival,and also The recording and collecting both in England and Australia] by many people who were in the communist party or left wing is undeniable and should be recognised,we owe them a debt.Dick Miles