Belonging to the 'folk' family

Subject: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: nutty
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 02:22 PM

The recent response to the death of Mudcatter Col K, as well as other happenings, has me again questioning just why we develop such an attachment to people we rarely see and hardly know.

I have folkies that I consider to be friends that ..

I see probably six or seven times a year
(sometimes even less)

I will probably spend less that a couple of hours talking to them at each meeting.

yet

I know that I would rather spend time with them than with the majority of my relations.

I know other people feel the same way.
Is this a phenomena exclusive to the folk world??

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Emma B
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 02:47 PM

"You can choose your friends but you can't choose your family"

I think any "community" that shares a common "love" would feel the same Hazel. I have very few family members left and regard the folk world as my substitute family with its squabbles, "black sheep" and all! :)

One magic moment was, when visiting catter Beer at his home in Canada recently, a younger member of his family who were visiting for the Ormstown Festival turned to me and asked "How are we related?"

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: GUEST,Sue
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 05:54 PM

I know exactly what you mean and as you know I'm fairly new to the folk world, I came across similar 'folk' when involved with horses on the eventing circuit.
More recently friends of mine who act as servas hosts
introduced me to some of their guests - it was amazing, within an hour our kids were all playing together and we were chatting as if we had known each other for years.
So no I don't think it is common only to the folk world, but it's pretty cool when you find it!

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Sorcha
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 06:05 PM

The dog show world is pretty tight knit too, but IMO I think there is a bit more 2 faced-ness (is that a word?) there. There is camaraderie but real competition there too.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Kampervan
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 06:31 PM

By and large the folk world is pretty fantastic.

I had a very good friend (D.B.) that I never met, except on Mudcat.

I was involved in a very good natured verbal 'dual' with another Mudcatter and, unbidden, D.B. volunteered to act as my second.

The thread meandered on for ages and D. B. provided constant, unwavering support. My protangonist and I eventually resolved our differences - (he won the fair lady's hand!) and all was well.

Shortly afterwards my second was reported on Mudacat as being very ill and, after a valiant struggle, died.

The strength of the response to his illness and subsequent death was enormous and it was only then that I truly learned what a fantastic person he was.

D.B. was Dave Bryant and I hope that those who really knew him will forgive my presumption at writing about a person that I never met.

So yes, it is difficult to understand, but deep attachments can develop with people that we've never met. That's one of the great things about Mudcat.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 01:49 AM

I have friends I see at the same festivals, once a year, for the last 17-18 years. I have people I talk to in the Mudchat and in threads but have never met. When those people turn out to be the same person, it makes for the most remarkable friendship.

It's even more remarkable when the person I've had virtual fun with on the Internet, turns out to be just as funny (or excruciating), kind and sensitive when I finally meet them in person.

I don't think it's confined to the 'folk' family exclusively, but it does seem more prevalent in these circles.

LTS

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 02:48 AM

There is the love of the music of course, but at least in the UK it goes further than that because of the "alternative" label that our generation especially associated with "folk". And so there is a stereotypical folkie in the UK - with many notable exceptions of course. The chances are a folkie will be society-, history- and environment-aware; their politics may differ but often their reactions to circumstances and events do not, not that much. I offer the example of the good Mike (cllr), who behind his Conservative political guise hides a reconstructed anarchist (just pulling his leg, but really his reactions are not what Thatcher might have expected, very often; and his IS firm friends with Robb Johnson who in all fairness stands well left of Blair and Browne).

So, saying "I am a folkie" often means more than loce of the music. A certain openmindedness and basic kindness and decency is also part of the package. And so we make many instant yet lasting friends in the circuit.

And there is no competition. Even among songwriters, there is a camaraderie, a willingness to help others, to share "tricks" and lessons learned.

Lucky us, I say.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Janice in NJ
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 06:25 AM

The phenomenon is not unique to folk music lovers. Every interest-oriented group of people -- railroad fans, dog breeders, chess players, stamp collectors, science fiction enthusiasts, natural childbirth proponents, etc. -- develop their own "family," complete their own formal and informal institutions, their own norms and expectations of behavior, their own folklore and mythology, their own colorful characters, their own heroes, and their own villains.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Morticia
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 06:36 AM

Prosaic but true Janice;nonetheless I'm with George, aren't we lucky?

I only took up folk ( I nearly said 'Let folk into my heart' LOL) about 15 years ago and the Mudcat not so very long after that. Through both I have ( or believe I have) this huge circle of intelligent, funny and talented mates, all of whom I am glad to see either at a festival, in my home or on here. When I go someplace, there are lots of people who would be happy to meet me, share a coffee or even their spare room. When I'm in trouble, there are people lining up to help out if they can, when I die I can imagine that a significant number of people will actually care. We are very lucky.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Leadfingers
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 06:40 AM

There is NO doubt in MY mind that The Folk World is a fairly close community , and MudCat is a major player within that community

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: the button
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 06:41 AM

I reckon part of the reason why there is such a bond between folkies is that -- even though our musical tastes might be different -- we share a music that's capable of having a real, visceral, hairs-on-the-back-of-the-neck impact. It's that shared experience thing. I remember when I saw June Tabor in Oxford a few years ago, and she was absolutely on fire. I found myself talking to complete strangers (unusual for me) after the gig, along the lines of "Bloody hell, that was intense."

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Scooby Doo
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 06:47 AM

Don't you think the folk family is great i got involved in 1981.Had a blip a few years back.But not looking back now.


Scooby.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 06:55 AM

It's a common interest thing mainly, and as has been said it happens in other single interest spheres. As has also been said or alluded to, it also has it's squabbles, friendships, alliances, cadres, and what have you, so in that respect it's very like a family.
It's only when it gets nasty and personal, which it does sometimes, that the bond is deeply stressed.
I never went to bed with an ugly woman, but I've woken up with a few, and I never met a Mudcatter that I didn't like.
I've had some wonderful support, lot's of free accommodation, and more than a few hangovers thanks to Mudcatters I have met. Very enjoyable ;)

Here's tae us, wha's like us? Damn few, and they're a' deid!

Giok

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: MBSLynne
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 07:01 AM

Yes, I know what you mean too. My very best friends are all, I think, 'folkies' and some of them I only see once or twice a year but I KNOW that if I were in real need or real distress those who could would be there, even if they had to travel quite a long way to do it. Those who couldn't be there would continue to offer their support from a distance. I have friends since I joined Mudcat that I've never met.

Though I agree that those who have a common intere4st form 'families' because they tend to be similar sorts of people, but I think we are actually extra lucky in the folk world, and probably one or two other groups, because, in the main folk people tend to be a very thinking and caring crowd.

Whatever, I do know I wouldn't leave the folk world for any money and I wouldn't swap any of you for anyone else outside the crowd. My life would be so much poorer without the lot of you.
(((((((((((((((((((((((Mudcatters))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

Love Lynne

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 10:11 AM

I was at a festival a couple of years ago and one morning went down to breakfast as usual. I found a table and sat eating breakfast. A friend from Gloucestershire asked if she could join me and we chatted for a while. After a few minutes a couple from my home town turned up and then another friend from Manchester. I realised that though all these people knew me they didn't know each other, and I took great pleasure in making introductions. I suppose that that moment made me realise that, through my interest in folk music, I was a member of an interconnected network of people and friends and it gave me a great feeling of warmth and security.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Banjiman
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 01:42 PM

I think the folk "community" is different to other "communities". Try this as an example....my 7 year old daughter lost her purse containing £10 (all of her money in the world!) on the campsite at Saltburn Folk Festival. We phoned John Taylor (festival organiser) on the Monday morning after the festival and he confirmed that nothing had been handed in. The organisers had a look round the campsite and couldn't find it.

We assumed that was that and maybe our daughter would learn an important lesson about looking after her things etc..... John phoned this week and said as the festival had made a small profit this year he wanted to give Kirsty £10 out of this to make up for the money she had lost. He apologised that they hadn't been able to find a purse that exactly matched the description of the one she had lost but had got her a new one anyway.........perhaps Kirsty will learn an even more important lesson about human kindness and thoughtfulness.

We are quite blown away by the thoughtfulness of John's action. Completely above the call of duty!

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Cats
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 01:57 PM

It is a real comfort at times to know you are part of the folk family. Many people I have known, including me, have been overwhelmed when something has gone wrong. Many years ago when I was run over at a festival, it wasn't the organisers who bent over backwards to make sure I was OK, it was the people around me. I had offers of lifts, help to get around, one of the pubs even opened up their kitchen and cooked for Jon and I at 11pm when we got back from the hospital as they knew we hadn't had anything to eat since lunchtime! Someone even offered me their B&B if camping was a problem! This year when word got around that the doctors said I might never sing again I was inundated with messages of support and offers of help and just messages both electric and snail mail to tell me they were thinking of me and sending out positive thoughts. OK, I agree we may not see these people more than a couple of times a year or even less, but this is one family I choose everytime.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 03:42 PM

well I've always thought of it as a pretty dysfunctional family....bitchy, narrow minded, dull, exploitative, creepy and grovelling to the perceived senior members of the family, brainlessly competitive when theres damn all to compete for, rude to outsiders, and far too damn pleased with much too little in the way of achievements.

there are some nice individuals, but I think somehow they only stay nice by having a life outside folk music. the actual view of the sharkpool and all the chewed up heads gives no sense of wellbeing.

the only nice thing about the world of folkmusic is some of the music.

I was just reading the excellent biog of Bert Jansch - Dazzling Stranger. the actual milieu described is very disquieting when one considers how much most of us devote to this artform. the writer has an excellent grasp of the turns and twists of the various times the folk revival has gone through in England.

Theres one peach where Bert tells Norma Waterson, that he was never booked as a guest after they left their club in Hull. Just for a moment, one glimpses the real fangs of the factionalism monster.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Herga Kitty
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 04:37 PM

Sounds like wld only got to meet the in-laws....

Kitty

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Folkiedave
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 05:00 PM

Bert was at Hull University on a Friday night gig not long after the Watersons turned professional and handed over the running of the club to a committee.

He seemed pissed or drugged up or both.

He inarticulate, he mumbled and struggled to play the guitar and sing at the same time. That's why he wasn't booked.

He didn't play the sort of music those who ran the club liked anyway.
They didn't book Alex Campbell for much the same reasons. They didn't mind drunks, but they expected to them to be able to perform.

There was a club in the same venue that ran on a Thursday night with a booking policy that would have encompassed Bert and they didn't book him either. There was a club not far away that ran on a Friday night and they didn't book him either.

And there was a circuit of folk clubs around Hull and across the water in the Grimsby area and I doubt he played many of them either.

So your point was?

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Folkiedave
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 05:41 PM

There's a folk tale about a old man sat at a cross roads. A traveller passing by asks the man what the people are like at the next village.

"What were they like at the last village?" says the old man.

"Pretty dysfunctional" the traveller said "Bitchy, narrow minded, dull, exploitative, creepy and grovelling to the perceived senior members of the family, brainlessly competitive when there's damn all to compete for, rude to outsiders, and far too damn pleased with much too little in the way of achievement.

"They are just like that in the next village you will come to visit" said the old man sat at the cross roads.

A little later another passer by stops and asks the same question about the people in the next village and the old man once again asks the traveller asks what they were like in the last village the man passed through.

"Wonderfully functional" says the traveller, "Broad minded, cheerful, happy to help anyone, respectful and cheerful to older members of the family who reply in kind, inclusive to outsiders and happy with their achievements which are multiple".

"Ay" said the old man at the crossroads "they will be much the same at the next village you come to visit".

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Banjiman
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 05:49 PM

Folkiedave......hit the nail on the head for me (2nd posting, can't comment on Bert, I'm far too young!).

Cheers

Paul

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 06:33 PM

Oh for Chrissake does it matter........
Look here are the canon of inspirational guitarists...

It goes like this ....django, Jansch, segovia, Hendrix....we should be so proud our little piss pond of a folk club movement produced one of those.

This is a guy whom LA session guitarists, who know everything, throw up with nerves when they have to work with him...his reputation is so great! Everybody I know whose jammed with him says - after ten minutes the guy leaves you doing stuff you never imagined was possible. an Alex Higgins of the acoustic guitar....

basically some sonofabitch wouldn't book him because he didn't know the 13th verse of the dowie dens of the wild rover and didn't stick the correct finger in his ear.

we should be proud to have shared the planet with this human being.

granted, he's one weird fucker!

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Folkiedave
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 07:11 PM

We didn't book Bert Jansch. We didn't book Michael Chapman even though he lived in the area at the time.

Instead we booked Christy Moore, Na Fili, High Level Ranters, Joe Heaney, Eddie and Finbar Fury, Sonny Terry and Brownie McGhee, Cyril Tawney, Louis Killen, Yetties, the Watersons appeared on a regular basis, Young Tradition. Anne Briggs made rare appearances there. We had the Grehan Sisters, Ewan and Peggy, Maggie Barry, Stewarts of Blair, John Foreman, Redd Sullivan, Nigel Denver, Teeside Fettlers, Croppy Lads, and we had some of them more than once. Especially Christy Moore. Hedy West, Fred Jordan, Barry Dransfield, Robin and Barry Dransfield when they became a duo. We had Aly Bain and Mike Whellans, The Elliots of Birtley, the Elliots of Barnsley and Rambling Jack Elliott. We had Mike Harding, Tony Capstick and we had Matt McGinn. We had Roy Harris and we had John Kirkpatrick, Martin Carthy and Dave Swarbrick and Dick Gaughan.

And those are the ones I remember.

Clearly from that list of artists you can see we had a really narrow-minded booking policy.   

The club had a reputation world-wide and visiting singers always got a welcome and a spot - had we one to spare.

I am sure we would have apologised for not booking Bert Jansch at the time had we known he was going to be so awesome.

What a shame he couldn't put on a proper performance sufficiently long enough for us to have made a more considered judgement at the time. But that was his call not ours.

The difference between you and me in this debate WLD is that I was there.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Jon Bartlett
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 07:11 PM

I have three folk "communities" or "families" - Mudcat, Ballad-L and the Pacific Northwest, centred in Vancouver. There's some degree of overlap between the first two, less with the third. It's the third that I grew up in. I arrived in Vancouver in 1968, joined the Vancouver Folk Song Society, and never left. I met my wife and partner Rika Ruebsaat at "the Folk", and we raised our children there: a core crowd of about seventy people, I suppose, with older ones leaving or dying, new ones arriving or being born.

I can't imagine life lived any other way. We've moved each other (dozens of times!), ate drank, laughed and cried together. We've been alternate parents for each other and have lived, as it were, in a little village together. To look around a roomful of people, most of whom you've known for forty years or more, is a comfort - even (or perhaps especially)when you've not been best buddies.

Mudcat and Ballad-L provide the same sort of thing, at one remove. We've been grateful so often to both Mudcatters and Ballad-L people who have gone out of their way to help us. It's a real charge to meet them in person!

My 2c

Jon Bartlett

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Folkiedave
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 07:15 PM

Could not agree more Jon.

And I am glad we met too!!

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 07:32 PM

oh come on! 'fess up! after all these years, what does it matter? You hated contemporary folk. Look at all the really important artists you didn't book!

I wasn't in Hull, but there were characters like you turning folk music into a minority movement on every street corner - took some doing as well! after Dylan, Paxton, Donovan and Bert Jansch had excited the entire nation about the possibilities of picking up a guitar writing about their lives.

you and you mates, managed it though. You were on the winning side, what are you shy about?

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Kampervan
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 08:08 PM

Wow, WLD. O.K. so the whole folk world is not sweetness and light. No collection of individuals is going to be perfect.

But I think that the general feeling amongst the foot soldiers is that the folk world is a nice place to be.

Politics, petty squabbles and power struggles will always occupy a few people, but the essential camaraderie and friendliness of the majority is something that I think is worth valuing.

I think you'll find that the majority love the tradition but, at the same time admire the greatness of artists such as the one's that you mention.

It's a sad bad world when the 10% that's wrong pulls down the 90% that's good.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 08:11 PM

Early this morning I read the start of this thread and found it wholly unrealistic and faintly nauseous. The 'f*lk scene' is littered with self-serving arses and not so many knights in shining armour.

Back in from a day of marvellous music, I find a situation far closer to the reality of what families are: a bloody battleground over not a lot.

Bert Jansch is a marvel, the one artist who sprang up fully formed. He cannot be stereotyped and, whether you like it or not, his music embraces a wide-range of styles. For me, it's his unique guitar technique, for others his songwriting.

I've heard him maligned for unreliability and being a piss-artist, both of which he has in the past excelled at. But never for any lack of musicality. These days he's grown up a bit (a lot) and is enjoying a thriving career largely outside the incestuous, narrow and limiting f*lk scene as perceived and defined by those who seem to think it's some sort of pink-tinged drop-in centre. It's not. It's a business like any other.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: the button
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 08:27 PM

Diane wrote: It's a business like any other.

In the last analysis (to coin a venerable Marxist phrase) of course it is. But (to coin a phrase of Bordieu, another Marxist) that doesn't stop it being a "taste culture" of some description, with forms of solidarity and shared meanings created among its consumers. Of whom I am one.

In much the same way that Coronation Street has been screened on a commercial TV channel for donkey's years, relying on advertising revenue for its continued existence. However, this doesn't stop Corrie fans (again, of whom I am one) bonding & creating shared meanings on the basis of their shared experience of watching Coronation Street.

In terms of being a performer, I'm fuck all in the crazy world of the folk industry. A few floor spots in clubs, being in a ceilidh band -- that's it. However, and for what it's worth, one of the things I relish about "the industry" is the leaky borders between producers (or artist as they might also be called) and consumers.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: nutty
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 03:04 AM

How sad that weelittledrummer , Diane and others of that ilk see only the commercial side of folk and nothing of the community.
From their posting they have obviously missed out on the cameraderie felt by myself and others on the fringes of the folk world.

Perhaps to appreciate it fully you have to give (as Col did) a certain amount of yourself.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Dave Earl
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 03:23 AM

Yes

What they seem to be ignoring is the way fans of our genre (in all its various forms) relate to each other. We are not talking about the big stars here so much as the ordinary followers of folksong/music/dance.

I have attended three funerals of people i have known from the Folk world and the sense of loss at each of these was very much like the loss of a family member.

Dave

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 03:30 AM

Every family has its relatives that were (or should have been) walled up in the east wing... just as every family has a wicked Uncle Ernie or a favourite Aunt Sally. We live with them, we learn from them and we all grow together. Some grow straight, some grow round, some grow very slowly and other shoot up like weeds. We still grow.

LTS

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 03:43 AM

What 'ilk' would that be?

Music is an industry as any other in which workers sell their labour power. Makes no difference whether your business is to produce educated (in a fashion) new graduates to service the workplace or packets of rice krispies. It's called capitalism under which the arts are not extolled as anything special (unless, of course, they make money).

To talk about 'cameraderie (sic) on the fringes of the folk world' sounds like just another excuse for out-of-tune and -time thumping and thrashing from the 'good-enough-for-f*lk' brigade who pride themselves on never buying a festival ticket and thus do not support the industry in any way whatsoever.

That some of them are nice to each other sometimes differs in no way from the behaviour of any other sort of micro-community. To start listing the shits instead wouldn't be hard and possibly a lot more useful.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: nutty
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 03:55 AM

Diane - you clearly have no idea what this thread is about. Nor, it appears, have you experienced the folk world as a community.

It's very hard to stay on the outside looking in - it makes the world seem a much darker place.

Read what the majority of people in this thread are saying - then you will know just what you are missing.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Dave Earl
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 04:01 AM

May we disagree Diane?

You said "To start listing the shits instead wouldn't be hard and possibly a lot more useful."

The whole point is that good, bad or indifferent we are part of a "community" that that does not see why we should view others as "shits".
They may not always hold the same beliefs as us and we may from time to time have arguments with them but they remain part of our community/family.

Dave

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 04:13 AM

The thread's 'about' a load of sentimentalised claptrap.

The world is a dark place in which a musician, in common with any other exploited purveyor of labour, has to fight for survival by selling the excellence of their product, or go under.

I'm missing nothing. I see a few people worth knowing and a whole load of bollocks. Just like anywhere else.

Sitting outside a tent at 3 a.m. singing Kumbaya or whatever doesn't improve either human relations or the business economy.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Dave Earl
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 04:23 AM

"Sitting outside a tent at 3 a.m. singing Kumbaya or whatever doesn't improve either human relations"

Not in itself no!

But being with like-minded people at whatever time and being part of the same event does (whether its what cranks your (D.E.) handle or not)

Dave

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: redsnapper
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 04:32 AM

The recent response to the death of Mudcatter Col K, as well as other happenings, has me again questioning just why we develop such an attachment to people we rarely see and hardly know.

I have folkies that I consider to be friends that ..I see probably six or seven times a year (sometimes even less)

Looking back at Nutty's opening post it doesn't appear to me that this thread was supposed to be about "sentimentalised claptrap", "self-serving arses" or "commercial business" whatever the merits or otherwise of that quite different argument may be.

I'm not really a festival-goer and only occasionally go to folk clubs. I do play a lot though, in sessions and in other musical genres, as do a myriad of other 'Catters. Over the years I've had the pleasure of meeting many of them and, yes, there is a feeling of community and of shared interests and frequently friendship too. I think that was what Nutty was talking about and I agree with that.

RS

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: mattkeen
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 04:45 AM

Diane - I think you are right

I also think that George is right in that there are a number of other attitudes that go along with the folk revival of the 50s and 60s - mainly a leftist political attitude that mean that folk crowds may find themselves in the company of others with whom they have more in common with than just music.

The closed minded letter of the law attitude of quite a few folkies is revolting to me.
Somebody, on this board recently recommended a "museum" way of looking at folk performance was the desirable way to go. In other words kill the fxxker and stuff it never to be relevant again.

Terrifying

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Dave Earl
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 04:45 AM

Didn't someone say something about still being part of a family when squabbles arise ?

Dave

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Folkiedave
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 04:52 AM

Let me go back to where I started to join in.

There's one peach where Bert tells Norma Waterson, that he was never booked as a guest after they left their club in Hull. Just for a moment, one glimpses the real fangs of the factionalism monster

He was never booked as a guest before they left their club either as far as I remember. Once he left, Norma had no say in who was booked - she had left. I did - I hadn't. Suppose you were recommended an artist who was appearing locally and you had chance to see them and they turned out to have enjoyed unspecified excesses and gave an awful performance. Would you book them on the off-chance that they might be good when they turned up at your club?

Well we didn't. We did book people on reputation and we booked people on recommendation and we booked drunkards - look at the list - but we didn't book people who couldn't perform.

It wasn't that he couldn't sing the "13th verse of the Dowie Dens of Yarrow" it was that he couldn't sing the second verse of songs he did supposedly know.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Dave Earl
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 05:24 AM

Oh and have a look at the "BS.Psst- It's only a year and a bit away" thread.

What it says there does include you!!

Dave

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: nutty
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 05:43 AM

This thread was not intended as a discussion about folk music nor how badly certain performers were treated nor the rights and wrongs of the folk music world.

nor was it intended to become a slanging match between people with a particular axe to grind.

I KNOW THAT THERE IS A FOLK COMMUNITY

I KNOW IT EXISTS - if others don't then that is their problem.

I KNOW that folkies such as Col K who are not great performers or singers ... work very hard for the community and have an impact upon it.
Festivals and folk clubs wouldn't survive without them. They are the backbone of todays folk scene.

So please stop all this griping and address the subject of the thread.

Which was - Is this a phenomena exclusive to the folk world??

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: GUEST,old git
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 05:44 AM

Those of you who are used to the postings of Diane Easby (in whatever guise) should not be surprised by her vitriolic response to this thread.   The same applies to a lesser degree to WLD.
Nutty...my experiences have been much the same as yours...and if that makes me guilty of "sentimentalised claptrap" then so be it....not all of us see this world as such a dark place and our mutual love of music and song is a great help in maintaining this contentment with life.
geoff t

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Dave Earl
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 06:01 AM

"
Those of you who are used to the postings of Diane Easby (in whatever guise) "

Yes but am I wrong in holding the belief that "warts and all" all the people I know or have dealings with are part of the community/family that is the "Folk" (or F*lk) world?

Dave

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Betsy
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 06:05 AM

Nutty ( who started the thread ) is a very pleasant , gregarious person who loves meeting up with folk-folk. She likes people. She sees the best in people, an attribute for which I admire her. I dropped in to see her at a workshop at a recent festival, but she didn't have the time because she was "teaching" a bunch of engrossed people of mature years,about using the web in order to further their knowledge of how to find sheet music , songs and other folk related subjects ( probably Mudcat ) etc., and enjoying every minute of imparting her considerable knowledge.
It would have been rude for her to ignore her "pupils", but had she had the time she would have enjoyed a chat as much as I . She has given her honest thoughts to the matter - she loves being part of it all - bless her. Thread creep has taken place here , she was just asking does everyone get the same (undoubted) pleasure as she does , of being part of the folk network. Don't try to dampen her enthusiasm - you can't. She puts far more into Folk music than she gets in return, - a top person indeed.
Cheers

Betsy

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: GUEST,Disgusted
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 06:10 AM

Nutty I'm with you all the way. The whole point of going to festivals clubs is to enjoy your self in the company of other people. The Penultimate goal is to enjoy not gripe.

May I respectively suggest the some people need to get a life or else they are in the wrong "buisness"

Peace
D

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 06:35 AM

Looks like some people had an overdose of bitchy pills at the weekend.

Nutty - your workshop on finding music on the web - is it confined to folk/traditional or do you look for other stuff too? I'm after things a formal SSATB choir can do for free.

LTS

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: KeithofChester
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 06:39 AM

Of course the folk world is like a family. It is just that the relationships between some of the members resemble those between JR Ewing and Pamella or Krystle Carrington and Alexis...

Other families that spring to mind might be the Julio-Claudians, the Herods or the Angevins.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Folkiedave
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 07:14 AM

To Guest AHA

Had you read what I written carefully, you would have noticed I had used WLD's words, not my own. And the second traveller - the pleasant one was saying the opposite of those words. Otherwise it was as I said "a folk tale". I altered the words from the traditional one. (It's the folk process you know).

However you seem to have missed the point of the tale. Pity really.

I cannot think why on earth you think I am some sort of Godfather - but by all means feel free to explain. I can take it. But at least do me the honour of both reading and/or trying to understand what I have said.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Folkiedave
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 07:33 AM

Guest AHA - Sorry Lizzie, my alert system was lacking a bit.

I really ought to have recognised you there and I failed. You are now posting under such a variety of names it is hard to keep track. I ought to have recognised it as you when I said you were posting to something you clearly had failed to understand. Par for the course I suppose.

Not a problem - sorry WLD I would have loved to continue this debate - but it is impossible with Lizzie joining in under a variety of names and not reading people's posts properly. So I will respectfully cease from this now.

Well done Lizzie - you spoiled another interesting thread there.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 07:54 AM

The "folk world" as a single entity is an illusion. There are so many different definitions of folk, and so many interests and enthusiasms within it, that to suggest some big homogeneous love-in is what we're all striving for is ludicrous. People form connections, and networks, and find that there are some people they love to bits and some whom they don't like and don't get on with. That's life.

I sometimes think it's when we try too hard to make all of these disparate ideas which we lump under the category of "folk" work together that the problems occur. Your folk isn't my folk isn't their folk.

As to the original question about a sense of community: is this phenomenon exclusive to the folk world? no, I don't think it is. But I do think that the many and various communities I belong to, all of which fit somewhere on the "folk" spectrum, are filled with some of the most lovely and interesting people you'll find anywhere. That included Col K.

Diane, I don't agree entirely with your appraisal of music and the arts as a commodity. Of course it's true to some extent, but there's a fair bit of subsidy around too, which suggests that, even in this day and age, the arts are not completely commodified in Britain. The government acknowledges that, on some level, the arts play a more important role in society than that of a mere commodity - though they obviously still don't make enough money available.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 08:03 AM

Ruth
It's not exactly my own appraisal either.
I put it like that as a reality wake-up call to the entirely ludicrous notion that all we need is a 'homogenous love-in'.
Who's paying for it? OK, ACE chips in a bit but the 'good-enough-for-folk-can't-be-arsed-to-tune-I-never-buy-a -ticket-or-even-a-CD-if-I-can-rip-off-an-artist' brigade don't give a toss about economics or an artist's right to a living wage.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: nutty
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 08:13 AM

You really need to get out into the world a bit more, Diane.
Then you would realise that some of the people I am talking about - considered by you to be 'good-enough-for-folk-can't-be-arsed-to-tune-I-never-buy-a -ticket-or-even-a-CD-if-I-can-rip-off-an-artist'
are actually artists.

Thanks Pete for your support - sorry we didn't meet up later at Saltburn.

Liz - PM me re the material you are looking for and I'll see if I can Help.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: TheSnail
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 08:33 AM

Diane Easby

Who's paying for it

Well nobody's paying me or any of the rest of the our club's committee, all of whom pay for their ticket. All the door money goes to the guest performer. I imagine the same is true of the majority of folk clubs in the UK. Maybe some let themselves in free but I expect others subsidise the club from their own pockets.

The vast bulk of the folk world runs on the voluntary labour of thousands of enthusiasts who do it for the love of it whether it be folk club or festival.

The folk scene I live in is not a business or industry but a social activity based on music.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Dave Tyler
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 08:35 AM

Been watching this and other threads for a while now. Why are posts from Lizzie persistently removed? Always found the folk world to be a friendly place but their messageboards are something else. Poison seems to drip from the mouths of people on here and elsewhere, who may be decent enough when you meet them, but they sure do enjoy laying in to artists and particular posters. There are many worse posts on this thread that should be removed but one person is continually singled out. It is not complimentary to the folk world or to Mudcat and the idea of a folk family has taken a severe battering on this thread, not because of Lizzie, but because of those who seek to silence and exclude her. Our world should be inclusive with everyone coming under that umbrella 'warts and all' as another poster mentioned earlier on.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 08:36 AM

You're talking about artists?
Who go around ripping off other musicians and stabbing them in the back?
Do make a list so we can all avoid them . . .
(Though I think I probably do that already).

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 08:41 AM

Brian:

The folk scene I live in is not a business or industry

Yes it is, or should be.
You are employing musicians for whom this work is their livelihood.
They ought not to be subsisting below minimum wage levels.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 08:48 AM

Dave Tyler:

Lizzie's posts get removed because she is banned.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: TheSnail
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 09:09 AM

Diane Easby

You are employing musicians for whom this work is their livelihood.
They ought not to be subsisting below minimum wage levels.

That is their choice. Contractual arrangements are made well in advance. Many top names seem keen to come back on the same terms. The folk scene is kept alive by people who get paid nothing at all. Without them, the professionals would not have a market place to sell themselves in.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Colin Randall
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 09:20 AM

Don't we just have to accept that the folk world is like any other - stamp collecting, leek growing, badminton, bridge, rambling, work - where most people try to get along with one another most of the time but you always have to be prepared for outbursts of backbiting, personality clashes, petty jealousies and rivalries, irrational behaviour and the rest.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 09:40 AM

"The world is a dark place in which a musician, in common with any other exploited purveyor of labour, has to fight for survival by selling the excellence of their product, or go under."

Diane if this were true then all the cash that gets poured into other minority arts like opera, wouldn't happen.
There are probably a lot more people watch, listen to, take part in, folk music than in opera. Why then do we not attract those vast sums of money? Perhaps we're not elitist enough, nor yet with influential friends in high places. As a person who has run clubs, and put his hand in his pocket to subsidise them too when needed, I can tell you it's done for love and not for snobbist reasons.
Giok

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 10:11 AM

"Diane if this were true then all the cash that gets poured into other minority arts like opera, wouldn't happen.
There are probably a lot more people watch, listen to, take part in, folk music than in opera. Why then do we not attract those vast sums of money? Perhaps we're not elitist enough, nor yet with influential friends in high places. As a person who has run clubs, and put his hand in his pocket to subsidise them too when needed, I can tell you it's done for love and not for snobbist reasons."

This is why I responded to Diane with my earlier comment about the commodification of the arts, G. If you look at her response I think you'll aghree she was ever-so-slightly playing devil's advocate.

When I taught Arts Management, the subsidy recived by "high art" forms like opera, compared to that received by the majority of other artforms in the UK, was always the topic of heated debate. Yes, there is definitely an element of elitism, in my opinion. And folk has an altogether different case to argue than many other artforms in justifying higher subsidy: it is, after all, an integral part of the country's heritage, and one to which everyone should have access, because it belongs to them.

In Scotland, folk arts receive higher subsidies than in England. And in Ireland, of course, there is a relatively huge amount of money that goes to support the traditional arts. There are many social and economic reasons why these things are true. And I'd go so far as to say it's been partly the wonderful community around folk, which has worked tirelessly (and without pay), and valued its independence and autonomy, which has been one of the many factors responsible. There's been a culture of self-reliance which has meant that when other artforms were going after (and achieving) subsidy, many areas of the folk arts were looking after themselves.

We're playing catch-up now. It's not easy, but we're getting there.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: GUEST,slowerairs
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 10:19 AM

What started as a pleasant thread, has become a virtual battlefield.

Personally, I love the folk world, the nice folkies and tend to stay

clear of those who have an axe to grind, of which there appear to be

several on this thread. Most folkies, enjoy the participation in the

music and the feeling of well being which follows an excellent

session or festival. Friends made, in most cases, remain friends for

life. That I believe, was the whole point of this thread.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 10:36 AM

I believe Lizzie was removed on a "Pro bono" basis, and did in fact say she would never come back again. Seems like she can't stay away!
I do however agree that vitriolic things that have been said about her have been allowed to remain which might perhaps be better to have been removed too.
I was guilty of 'having a go' at Lizzie, so perhaps am the wrong person to comment, but I can see why she has become PNG.
That's what happens when you ignore 'Yellow cards'
Giok

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: nutty
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 10:37 AM

Dave - you really should learn more about Mudcat before putting your point so forcefully.

nobody is being unfair to Lizzie --- she is banned but continues to post.

The fact that her posts stayed up for a number of hours is because this is a USA based forum and runs at least 5 hours behind GMT. The post stayed up simply because the moderators were sleeping. A fact of which Lizzie is well aware.

IT WOULD ALSO HELP IF YOU AND OTHERS WOULD ACTUALLY READ WHAT THE THREAD IS ABOUT BEFORE WADING IN.

As this thread appears to have totally degenerated I hope that Joe will close it.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: KeithofChester
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 10:40 AM

What started as a pleasant thread, has become a virtual battlefield.

Indeed, and perhaps this is therefore the right song with which to close.


The Band Played Waltizing Matilda

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 10:50 AM

'The whole point of the thread' smacked, to me of insufferable smugness; what WLD described as 'far too damn pleased with much too little in the way of achievement'.

I'd add to that a far too prevalent attitude of reluctance to pay for what you get. A Sussex club organiser says no-one complains. Not quite true. Brian, you've got an audience who doesn't want to pay more so you pander to them. You say contracts are agreed well ahead and it's 'the artist's choice' whether to accept. No it's not. It's a choice between not very much or nothing.

The issue of tradarts funding is no blind alley where axe-grinding gets done but crucial to the existence and continuance of our cultural heritage. England, specifically, lags far behind any other I have looked at and this is explained partly by the low esteem in which its population (including, pointedly, those who choose to call themselves 'f*lkies') hold their inheritance. To be proud of doing it on the cheap and talking down to artists, telling them they should be glad of what they get is unacceptable and insulting.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 11:01 AM

"The issue of tradarts funding is no blind alley where axe-grinding gets done but crucial to the existence and continuance of our cultural heritage. England, specifically, lags far behind any other I have looked at and this is explained partly by the low esteem in which its population (including, pointedly, those who choose to call themselves 'f*lkies') hold their inheritance. To be proud of doing it on the cheap and talking down to artists, telling them they should be glad of what they get is unacceptable and insulting. "

I think I disagree with you somewhat on why this state of affairs has arisen, Diane. I know that one of your passions is fighting for musicians to be paid a living wage, and for punters and club owners to respect that need. But I don't think folk club managers are necessarily proud of "doing it on the cheap" - I think they've always had to consider the costs, because it is their own money they're risking, and as a result have got into a self-perpetuating culture.

I think it's true that the population at large undervalues its traditional heritage, and that's one of the mountains we have to climb.

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 11:05 AM

Dave 'Lisa' Tyler

The folk world is about equality

The multiple personalities of madlizziecornish know nothing of either concept.
It's all about her and her bizarre fantasies.

I'd already remarked somewhere about the refuse carts carrying the clones leaving the depot a bit late this morning. America overslept. Maybe they couldn't get the chewing gum removing machine to tackle the binge spraying of graffiti to start. It's The Price Of Oil . . .

Subject: RE: Belonging to the 'folk' family
From: redsnapper
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 11:06 AM

'The whole point of the thread' smacked, to me of insufferable smugness; what WLD described as 'far too damn pleased with much too little in the way of achievement'.

I'd add to that a far too prevalent attitude of reluctance to pay for what you get

The thread was nothing to do with that at the start but it got highjacked along those lines. Just as many perfectly reasonable threads get highjacked for the personal hobbyhorses of some members.

RS