Why should we sing folk music at all?

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Gene Burton
Date: 13 Jan 08 - 03:38 PM

100.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Don Firth
Date: 13 Jan 08 - 03:44 PM

Sorry, Gene. Beatcha by --->||<--- that much!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Gene Burton
Date: 13 Jan 08 - 03:45 PM

Does it count if you don't claim it immediately??

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Don Firth
Date: 13 Jan 08 - 03:48 PM

Not if it's 101. I wasn't trying for 100. It just happened that way.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Gene Burton
Date: 13 Jan 08 - 03:49 PM

Oh.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 13 Jan 08 - 03:51 PM

I do sympathise Don. It seems like its in some people nature to reject and dismiss creative effort, and you can always rationalise and invent a need. I'm sure you'd be welcome in any folk club I had a part in.

I'm surethere WERE people singing folksongs in America prior to te 'Cambridge years'. but seriously has the ball ever rolled that big before, or ever since.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Peace
Date: 13 Jan 08 - 03:55 PM

I understand the need to 'classify' songs according to type. I don't understand the need some people have to be arrogant about it. WLD's song about Wyatt Earp is as folk as anything else I've heard that is folk. That's my opinion and I'm stickin' to it.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 13 Jan 08 - 04:14 PM

That's very nice of you to say. I've got to admit I never thought of that as folk when I wrote it - although now you mention it, I nicked the music of the Days of '49. My big thrill came when they played it on Wyatt's birthday in his birthplace, Monmouth, Illinois.

I wrote it about my father, who was a policeman - I suppose that's pretty folky!

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 13 Jan 08 - 04:19 PM

Okay.

I sing it because I like it.

Now most of the stuff I write...I think it's folk music. That's my opinion. There are those, I'm sure, who would differ.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Don Firth
Date: 13 Jan 08 - 04:59 PM

You don't want to be deceived by a certain provincialism which occurs even in fairly large metropolitan areas like Boston/Cambridge, or New York (especially New York!). I forget which page it's on, but there's a "folk music map" somewhere in Baby, Let Me Follow You Down that purports to represent where folk music activity in the United States was happening. And it leaves the Pacific Northwest out entirely, despite the fact that we had a very active scene here. It's sort of like those "New Yorker's view of the United States" maps that show a lot of detail around the East Coast, but west of the Hudson river, they show two or three log cabins labeled "Chicago" and the rest is "Terra Incognita. Here be Dragons!"

I got involved in the very early 1950s, and by the mid-Fifties there was an active folklore society here (the one that we just resurrected), and there were folk festivals, concerts, and other performances. I think that none of this registered on the bunch back East for a couple of reasons. First, a lot of Easterners were (and maybe still are) under the impression that Seattle was nothing but a bunch of log cabins and igloos instead of a major West Coast port city. Seriously! When I was in Denver in 1955, I met a couple of New Yorkers who, when I assured them that we did indeed have a whole bunch of buildings over two storeys in height (at the time, the tallest was 42 storeys), they were sure I was pulling their legs! In fact, when they first arrived in Denver, they were surprised to find that it was a big city, not just a frontier fort and a few ranches (!). And second, there were several record companies here in the Seattle area, but they were into "do-wop" and soft-rock, and were positively hostile toward folk singers, so despite the fact that there were singers here as good as those anywhere else in the country, no recordings. Nobody anywhere else knew about them. Damned shame! Judy Flenniken, Nancy Quensé, Bob Nelson, Walt Robertson (the only one recorded), early on, Sandy Paton, and several other really fine singers I could name.

The Chicago scene was massive, with the Old Town School of Folk Music and several clubs. Berkeley/San Francisco. Los Angeles, Denver, and Portland, Oregon. These were all off and running pretty early on. By the mid-1950s.

Nobody much has written anything about the Pacific Northwest folk music activity. But I'm workin' on it.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Peace
Date: 13 Jan 08 - 05:02 PM

Yes, and there were places in Montreal and Toronto, Calgary and Edmonton, Winnipeg and Vancouver, Halifax and St John's--and it's as if Canada never existed in terms of folk music. Too bad.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 13 Jan 08 - 05:02 PM

Yes, but excellent though WLD's Wyatt Earp song may be, whose history is Wyatt Earp?


For once I am not simply saying that there s folk adn there is other music (although I belive that to be so, and it is interesting to see Don Firth's confirmation that ethnomusicologists maintain a distinction).

The point here is the thread. "Why should we sing FOLK music at all". The answer to that is different if you take the 1954 defintion, the horse defnition, or the WLD definition (which is, I think, "whatever type of music most people sing, excluding opera") or the Gene Burton definition which is top secret.

I gave my answer to the question asked in my first post to this thread, but if I was answering questions about horse music, WLD music, or Gene music (or Dylanist music or snigger snogwriter music) the answer would differ.

Horse music I might sing because it sounds fun. I have done the Reuben James for exactly that reason.

WLD music might be because the song tells a tale of the modern human condition. As close as I get would be "Love has no pride" (not one of his, but the sound is similar, and a damn good song it is, albeit not folk). I've also done "Yellow Submarine" 'cos people join in with gusto (not Bisto), and "Play with Fire" which always seems to get people going.

Gene music I don't know, because we have no litmus test.

Dylanism tells of the folly of the world. I have heard a practising Dylanist defined as a person who believes that it is possible to cause social and political change through song. For precisely those reasons, but without much hope any more, I do "We shall overcome" "With God on our side" "So Long" "Eve of Destruction", "the Cat came back" "Anthem of the Rainbow" and "Come away Melinda".

Snigger snogwriter - I do Richard Matthewman's "Bernadette" (very different from the Four Tops, I can assure you) - because it is a nice melancholy love song.

Some I sing because my late wife used to.

So, if "folk" means one of those things, that's why we should sing folk music.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 13 Jan 08 - 05:29 PM

I'm not sure I have a definition of folk music. When I was a teacher in the inner city, I saw a lot of kids excluded from what society had to offer - without even knowing it was happening to them.

I just think exclusivity and exclusion is the wrong way to go for all of us. Folk music should reach out. In a way its bigger than what we are, and our opinions and likes and dislikes - and you have to get over that.

I wonder how many of you have come across Steve Tilston's version of Streams of Lovely Nancy - totally different from any other version I've ever heard of that song - rather snappy bluesy accompaniment. I can imagine many people thinking it was sacrilege. But the point is that the song called out to him - and he put his interpretation forward....surely when you're holding the guitar or standing up singing in the pub - you make your mark - and its folk music.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Stringsinger
Date: 13 Jan 08 - 05:52 PM

the reason to sing folk songs is that they are honest, and reflect the lives of real people.
Also, they are accessible to all who want to sing them. They tell of history of countries and cultures. They are not censored or on some station's playlist. They are a great way to introduce those who have never thought about it much to making music for themselves and deriving much enjoyment from it.

Folk music is not about the bad stuff that Maine says it is. In context, it provides an insight into how people feel at various times.

The most important thing is that people can make music for themselves and not have to
depend on canned music for their entertainment. Besides, people can choose for themselves which songs they want to sing that reflect their values.

The question posed on this thread is a good one. I hope I have helped to answer it.

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 13 Jan 08 - 06:02 PM

"I just think exclusivity and exclusion is the wrong way to go for all of us."

Who's excluding anyone, WLD? We keep coming back to this 'beef' that you have about these 'wicked' traddies excluding you - but, digging deeper, your real beef seems to be that some people on this forum don't accept that what you do is folk music:

"People being told as I have been on this thread(albeit in a kindly way) what you have done with your life isn't folk music."

But, if you're, "...not sure I have a definition of folk music" how do you know whether or not they have a valid point?

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 13 Jan 08 - 06:26 PM

very true....very valid.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 13 Jan 08 - 06:32 PM

Be warned, Richard, that people who use the term "snigger-snogwriter" in my presence are in danger of getting something thrown at them!

You wouldn't HAVE any folksongs now if not for the past existence of generations of singer-songwriters.

And if I don't write new songs about what I personally am moved by, and nobody else does either, you can just kiss a permanent goodbye to the ongoing folk process.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Gene Burton
Date: 13 Jan 08 - 06:51 PM

Dead right, LH.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: GUEST,Peace
Date: 13 Jan 08 - 06:52 PM

The term snigger snogwriter as used is fine with me. My rough guess is that about 95% of all the songs ever written are tripe. That includes traditional songs, too. But for Jaysus sake, Richard: Eve of Destruction?

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: GUEST,Peace
Date: 13 Jan 08 - 06:53 PM

PS, I'm a snigger snogwriter.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Gene Burton
Date: 13 Jan 08 - 06:55 PM

Valid point that not every surviving traditional song is exactly a gem. I for one would be happy never to hear "The Whistling Gypsy Rover" again...

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 13 Jan 08 - 07:36 PM

Yes, a majority of what is written is quite amateurish, and you could call it tripe...

But we all have to learn to crawl before we learn to walk. It's precious few who start out like Mozart. I don't see why people should be denigrated for taking their first few inexperienced steps on a creative path. How will they ever get good at anything if they don't try?

If they are pretentious about stuff that is in fact mediocre...well...(smile)...put it down to their insecurity and inexperience, I guess. I'd rather focus on what's truly good, and there's always some wonderful new stuff being done. You just have to look for it, and you'll find it.

Folk never dies.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Peace
Date: 13 Jan 08 - 08:30 PM

I hear THAT gentlemen.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 13 Jan 08 - 08:40 PM

LH, write what you like. Nowhere have I even hinted you should't. It may be bad, it may be good, I might like it or not. But what's that got to do with the ongoing folk process? The folk process is the transmission, modification, and adoption of work. I am also baffled why you wnat what you do to be called "folk". Call it what you like, but don't mislead. You also don't give a reason or explanation why we should sing your music at all - which was the OP's question.

Peace, the one thing we have modern politicians to thank for is that they have made 60s protest songs apt and relevant again. Yep, Eve of destruction. It may be right, and I'm not the only person reviving it.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Peace
Date: 13 Jan 08 - 08:45 PM

Hell, I heard that Havens is doing/releasing one of mine from 40 years ago, too. That said, some of the songs being written by people like Moore, McKeever, Whittle, Burton, Moorhouse, Coventry (to name a few) will someday be considered folk songs. That's the way I see it.

My remarks about '95% of the songs ever written being tripe' still stands. I include many of my own in that--I just hope I have the 'sense' not to release them. Been there and done that.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Peace
Date: 13 Jan 08 - 11:09 PM

And Richard, keep doing those songs. Much like chicken soup: may not help but it won't hurt. G'by all.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 13 Jan 08 - 11:23 PM

Richard, I refer to my stuff as "folk" because it carries that vibe. And why is that? Because about 90% of my listening attention when I was a young person growing up was given to folksingers...as opposed to rock and rollers, jazz musicians, blues, pop, classical, country, etc...

I listened to folk and folk-influenced stuff almost exclusively from age 10 to 20, and that shaped my approach to composing simply by osmosis.

It was inevitable what happened. As a result, other people I've been around when I've played have always noticed right away that I am basically in a "folk" mode...I'm not a rock mode, not a blues mode, not a jazz mode, not rock n' roll, not country, not pop....folk. I like folk type instrumentation. I focus very much on lyrics. I instinctively move away from most other styles of music and toward folk. That does not mean that everything I listen to or play sounds like it came from prior to 1910 by the way...but it connects back to a folk origin in its sound and structure.

That's why I say it's "folk" because I really can't say it's anything else.

It might be "pop" to you...but it sure as hell isn't to anyone around here. I know pop music. It's on the radio. I mostly ignore it, although there are undoubtedly some very well crafted pop songs. There are some well crafted songs in any style of music.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: RTim
Date: 13 Jan 08 - 11:26 PM

It seems that people lik to talk about it too!
T.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 14 Jan 08 - 01:51 AM

I've been thinking about what you said Richard.

For myself, I'm not upset if people tell me what I do isn't folk music. One's influences are as much about what you reject as what you take on board, and if some people feel the influence of American music is so pernicious that they have to try and eliminate it to connect with a truly British muse - so be it.

You see, I've been able to work as a musician for a large part of my life doing all kinds of different acts, making various kinds of records when the chance presented itself. I've diversified. Being a professional musician wasn't a first choice career for me.

I'm upset though for the people who gave everything for the folk club movement in this country - and ended up being excluded from the action for stylistic reasons. Despite being brilliant, like Jack Hudson. I think its monstrous.

In spite of all that, I still think folk music is the last best hope for all of us. And wherever your niche is, you should keep doing it.

PS Many thanks Bruce, it was nice to be included in such august company.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Brendy
Date: 14 Jan 08 - 03:42 AM

I'm not hung up on definitions of Folk...., I can't really say, though where Irish Trad and 'World Music' (now there's something worth defining....) meet..., or if indeed they separate at all..... ;-)

I wouldn't book ACDC for a Folk Club, but I would, John Martyn, for instance.

I generally stay away from 'defining' Folk Music, but I know this debate intimately, and if we are going to start 'defining', then 'definitions', as Richard points out, have to be made, and the first analogy that springs to mind is that it can be as difficult as describing the colour 'Blue' to a blind person.
... on both sides of the argument.

The 'Folk Police', though ... a different body of people altogether have not been effective (in Ireland, anyway) since the Bothy Band split up.
Folk music in whichever pigeon hole one cares to put it in, will continue to evolve, and in 2054 we may have a totally new concept of the 'genre'

A lot of our World, however, will be Museum exhibits at that stage, and hopefully I'll have learned to play the Harp by that time... ;-)

I join Al, too in thanking Bruce for his inclusion of me in his '... to name but a few..' list.
I'm speechless.
... for once in my life....

Thanks a million Bruce
... now there's a pro...

B.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 14 Jan 08 - 04:20 AM

I wonder whether I think that American music is all so "pernicious". After all, I do sing a few American songs (including those already mentioned, and Tom Dooley, and Fall River Hoedown). For the avoidance of doubt, Al, the few bits of your stuff I have heard are excellently done, but to me sound very American, even "new-country". I think it's maybe a good job that our attempt to meet up near Nottingham failed, since I don't think I'd have wanted to put myself in a position where my performance could be measured against yours.

But I do try to do as much traditional English as possible - because I am English. I would not like to see the English culture die out, and I would not like to see a homogenised style of acoustic music across the world (presumably influenced largely by American styles, a fair dollop of of African thythms, a nod at the minor sounding scales of the Oud, maybe a hint of Celtic, some central European - good heavens, apart from the fact that they amplify it to a high degree, and it's not so American, I think I've just described Whapweasel)

LH, if your music is not folk (which I think it isn't, from your description) then I'd probably call it "contemporary acoustic", since my suggestions for a label of "neofolk" or "nu-folk" seem to have fallen on deaf ears.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 14 Jan 08 - 05:00 AM

I should still like very much to meet up Richard - you seem like a nice chap with interesting ideas.

I'm the least competitive person in the world - particularly where music's involved. I just do my thing. Ialways do my best -but like most people who've done it for a living - while its nice to go down well, sometimes the magic doesn't work and it won't ruin my day.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: synbyn
Date: 14 Jan 08 - 10:59 AM

Why should we sing folk music?

Because we must...

imho there's no other answer.

Anyone who does it for profit or for status is doing that for their own reasons, and you'd like to assume that they were interested in the first place to preserve and augment the traditions of their own people.

Imho we all have from within an urge to express and preserve our own heritage- those who don't are among the quacks and dictators who seek to cut us off from ties of family and friends, usually to insert themselves in some way to profit from the lack. Cults do it all the time. Making money out of the unsettled is one of the growth industries of our time.

Which imho is why those who use smoke and mirrors for gain are eager to excise the traditional warnings inherent in the old stories. Who can hear Long Lankin without thinking of the dangers in taking insufficient precautions against thieves in the night? And the world is full of false nurses who take some cash to let the predator in.

So we sing them because their is an urge to communicate the old stories. Because we must...

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 14 Jan 08 - 11:05 AM

Personally, I never hear Long Lankin without thinking of the honest stonemason who built the great hall, was swindled out of his fees and expenses, reduced to penury, whose wife was forced to become a wetnurse, and whose revenge got him burned at the stake. A great homily for a worker to learn, about trusting the rich.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 14 Jan 08 - 11:20 AM

Richard, my music comes more out of a North American tradition than out of a British or Irish tradition. Therefore, it might not sound like "folk" to you, as I gather that you are based in the British tradition.

I was, of course, affected by the British tradition to a considerable extent, because the North American folksingers sang a lot of the old English and Scottish (and Irish) ballads, so that influence was present as well in the music I was listening to as I grew up...but it was perhaps a bit secondary to the homegrown North American music which grew out of American, Canadian, and Mexican social experience...from the frontier, through the 1800s, the War Between the States, the War of 1812, the migration west, the cowboy era, the Mexican Revolutionary period, and so on.

North American folk music has a great deal to do with history and social struggle in the 3 great countries that make up North America. It did then, it does now.

Folk music was the only popular style of music around when I was a kid that was often overtly political. It was a movement in music that engaged in a great deal of social comment. That suited me to a "T". I use music to express philosophical and social and spiritual issues. Music is serious business to me, not just entertainment.

That's where folk music was different from the other styles, and that's why I was drawn to folk music.

Jazz - off in its own world. A head trip. A sort of technical appreciation of a certain kind of instrumental virtousity. Didn't interest me.

Classical - Beautiful stuff, but it didn't draw too much of my attention, because it wasn't contemporary enough for me. And it didn't have much to do with lyrical content.

Big Band - I detested that sound, and it the lyrical content of it seemed to me to be utterly frivolous.

Country - Emotional music. It's powerful in its own right, but I found most of it too maudlin, too simple-minded...I wanted something that would make me think, and folk music made me think. (I have lately developed more respect for some of the country music than I had as a youngster, however.)

Rock n Roll - Fun, I guess, but pretty frivolous. Great if you wanted to dance and party...I didn't. I wanted to think, comprehend, question, analyze, understand, revolutionize, change society!

Rock - Some good stuff, but mostly just an excuse for giant male egos with cucumbers stashed in their pants to gyrate around on stage and keep focused on SEXANDDRUGSANDROCKANDROLL!!!! Bloody stupid, in other words...

Pop - The endless, saccarine, homogenzized bla-bla that saturates the airwaves! The final enemy of all original thought. Mind you, there is the odd very good pop song...and it appears like a momentary gleam amongst a sea of utter dross. God save me from pop music!

Blues - Relentless stuff. The same damn riffs again, and again, and again, and again....yet it has a certain gritty honesty to it, no doubt, and there have been some wonderful blues players. The lyrics are usually pretty lamentable. I can stand about 20 minutes of well-played blues...then I get very, very bored and I go somewhere else. I have had all the blues I need for about a month after that.

Now, what music in North America offered something to really chew on, combined with lyrics that really meant something, for someone who cared deeply about politics, history, philosophy, revolutionary movements, literature, spirituality, and every deep question that has ever concerned mankind?????????

Folk music. The lyrics are the key. You can tell by the LYRICS if it's a folksong. That's my opinion. Folk music is the music of poets, ancient and modern.

The instrumentation? Well, you could sort of say that it's acoustic instrument music (usually, but doesn't absolutely have to be) and it tends not to have a drummer...because when you add a drummer you are moving more into a different kind of music...BUT...again, not necessarily. Folksongs can have drums too. It's just not so typical of them, I'd say. As time goes by, all these things change a bit.

The one thing that remains crucial is....the lyrics. Folksongs tend to be very substantial when it comes to lyrical content, and they attract people who LISTEN to the words. (and most people, I've noticed, don't really listen to the words when they listen to music).

View some videos of the Newport Folk Festival in the early 60's, observe the audience...they are listening to every word of the singer with rapt attention. They're not just there to "party", they are there to think about every kind of question that has ever lit a light in the human mind. That's folk music...for me, anyway.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: GUEST,Nigel Spencer (at work and cookieless)
Date: 14 Jan 08 - 11:37 AM

I'm not going to add anything constructive, just say that in the last 24 hours or so this has turned into a really interesting, informative and thought provoking thread, where people are throwing all sorts of different opinions into the pot without getting bad tempered about it... cheers, everyone!

Nigel

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: synbyn
Date: 14 Jan 08 - 11:44 AM

which only goes to show, Richard, that each song has a different resonance for each listener! There's nothing in the Penguin version, ie the most often encountered, which speaks of the stonemason, though, nor anything which connects the nurse in a revenge tragedy. Shows the importance of textual revision. Spin striketh!
This is one reason why I enjoy the width of folk music- it often starts with some actual occurence, but widens into a discussion of moral significance. It doesn't hammer us with answers. It provokes us to ask ourselves questions.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: GUEST,Russ
Date: 14 Jan 08 - 12:50 PM

weelittledrummer,
I sing 'real' folk music.
I love mudcat.

"most traditional folk music is very poor stuff"
is just wrong.

Maybe your "traditional folk music" sucks, but mine is great.

Russ (Permanent GUEST)

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 14 Jan 08 - 01:06 PM

obviously speak as you find....

The common ones tend to be very good, a lot of the rest I find unmemorable - as do many of the performers apparently, from the frequency with which they forget the words.

As I said some people can make them come alive - but many of the songs are as the Martin Carthy quote I put in a subsequent thread says - not really user friendly, shall we say. they come from a time when the rules of music and the idea of what constituted a song was very different.

Be honest, very few people go round singing Shakespeare's songs. they're different. Some of the songs we are talking about are that old and older. Who knows, perhaps you are one of those few who can hold a room in the palm of your hand with your pwerformance. But I have observed its a rare gift. Rarer, i fancy than most traditional singers realise.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Brendy
Date: 14 Jan 08 - 01:47 PM

"Valid point that not every surviving traditional song is exactly a gem. I for one would be happy never to hear "The Whistling Gypsy Rover" again..

Not valid at all, Gene, I'm afraid. You may not think that it is a gem, but to apply the generalisation to it, and by allusion, make that decision for other people, is being 'Folk Policey' in itself.

B.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Jan 08 - 01:50 PM

Why play folk? Chacun a son gout, I reckon. I play mostly Blues and some faux-celtic stuff. Would I call it folk? The blues, certainly-if by folk you are defining music written as a result of human experience.
Also, I have no idea what ethnomusicologists have to do with performing arts and, frankly, couldn't care less what their 'definition' of folk is.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: TheSnail
Date: 14 Jan 08 - 01:52 PM

...and it isn't traditional any way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Whistling_Gypsy

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Brendy
Date: 14 Jan 08 - 01:57 PM

The song has variants in most European countries. I imagine that Mr Maguire didn't write the first one in existence.

B.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Giant Folk Eyeball (inactive)
Date: 14 Jan 08 - 02:01 PM

I like Brendy's new definition of the 'folk police' and I'm going to start using it immediately: we are ALL the folk police...

How does the laughing policeman fit into all this?

Cheers

Nigel

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Banjiman
Date: 14 Jan 08 - 02:03 PM

He probably plays a banjo-ukele, it is after all a comedy instrument!

Stands back as offended banjo-uke players the world over defend their chosen weapon.......

In fun

Paul

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Brendy
Date: 14 Jan 08 - 02:04 PM

What's new about it?

B.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Brendy
Date: 14 Jan 08 - 02:07 PM

Cross-posted, there, Paul... I was asking Nigel...

B.

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Don Firth
Date: 14 Jan 08 - 02:33 PM

Why do I sing folk songs?

Can't remember words for s**t, but if the verses consist of one line followed by five lines of "Re-fol-re-fol, fol-de-diddle-digh-do," I can usually manage that. . . .      ;-)

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Jan 08 - 03:05 PM

Once again the 'what is folksong' argument raises its lovely head, which is only right and proper when discussing the subject of - well, folksong.
As usual, much of the argument is based on two false premises:
(a) that there is no existing definition of the term, and,
(b) that any perception of what that definition is revolves around personal likes and dislikes.
As Richard Bridge has lucidly pointed out, a perfectly workable, clearly worded, widely accepted definition has existed for over half a century and any discussion on the subject has to start with that – either by accepting it or dismantling it with argument. That what you are singing falls under the description of folksongs depends on whether you can put a tick in enough of the relevant boxes; if you can, it is, if you can't, it isn't – simple as that.
The accepted definition is to be found in various publications; in its concise form in A L Lloyd's 'Folk Song In England' and in an extremely detailed 16 page, double-column one in Funk and Wagnall's 'Standard Dictionary of Folklore. This is adequately backed up by hundreds of published song collections, and countless reference and research works, many bearing the term 'folk song' on the spine. Those who have any problems with part or all of the existing definition are perfectly welcome to question any or all of it, and even replace it with their own suggestions. I do not believe anybody is entitled to reject or ignore it out-of-hand.
The old usual – "I'm not great with definitions" is illogical, dishonest and not a little cowardly. We put labels on things so we know what tins to open, otherwise we hand the choice of what we eat, drink, read, wear, listen to, think – to others, many of whom have a vested interest in persuading us that what they are selling is exactly what we are looking for.
So far, nobody has put forward the asinine (no pun intended) 'talking horse' statement mentioned by Richard Bridge, but I'm sure it's lurking out there somewhere, as is the equally facile Humpty Dumptyish, "words mean what I want them to mean" argument.
Why is a definition important?
i. Many of us find arguments such as this one enjoyable, stimulating and educational, but in order to get the most out of them it is necessary to define our terms so we know we are speaking the same language. Throw away the definitions and you throw away communication, therefore forums such as Mudcat become meaningless and unworkable.   
ii. Everybody needs to know that what they are subscribing to conforms, more or less to what it says on the tin.
Our local newspaper recently carried an advert for a folk song club over the other side of the county. The fact that there are so few such events around here tempts me to jump in the car and drive the twenty-odd miles in the (at present) pissing rain and howling gales to attend. On the other hand, the chance that when I get there I will, more likely than not, find something which bears no relation whatever to what I understand as folksong, makes me more inclined to stay at home and watch Taggart.
Throughout the eighties and nineties we watched the gradual haemorrhaging of folk club audiences, when me and thousands like me voted with our feet and walked away from the folk scene exactly for this reason. We really were not prepared to sit through yet another evening at a folk club and not hear a folk song.
iii. More immediately; the thread on 'the PRS Gestapo' has brought into sharp focus the current activities of this august body, who are apparently claiming payment from folk clubs "on the off-chance that copyrighted songs 'might' be sung during the course of the evening". Folksongs proper are in the public domain, singer/songwriter compositions are not; therefore, those of who prefer what we listen to; to be the real thing will run the risk of losing our venues in the interests of those who are, quite reasonably, trying to earn a few sheckles out of their compositions.
These are only a few of the problems thrown up by the present situation; there are plenty more, proving, to my mind at least, that a great deal of damage has already been done to our appreciation and understanding enjoyment and passing on of folk music in the name of "let's not bother our tiny heads with understanding this music.
If anybody has an alternative working definition of what they mean by folksong for us to consider, I would be pleased to hear it. On the other hand, if it's just a case of using the term as a cultural comfort blanket, as has been suggested, perhaps it's time that those concerned face up to the fact that what they are doing is not, never has been and never will be folksong.
If they wish to keep the term in their CV as a job description, perhaps they might add "wannabe" in front of it.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Why should we sing folk music at all?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 14 Jan 08 - 03:32 PM

I know what I like when I hear it. Most of what I hear at local "folk" music gatherings, I like....although it's a pretty eclectic mix, that's for sure. Most of it you will never hear on your radio or TV. Not a chance. Whether that means that any of it's really "folk" music or whether it fits the Funk and Wagnall's official definition of what "folk" music is, I don't frankly give a toss...