Our ghastly folk tradition

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Gene Burton
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 04:45 PM

John: LOL!

Banjiman/Paul: No offence, but if you re-read my last post the LAST thing I'm saying is that I'm not getting what I want from my music. My original point when I first came to the thread was NOTHING TO DO WITH MY OWN CAREER. Please, accept my word on this. I'm a straight-talking guy (too much so for my own good at times), and nothing I say on here or elsewhere carries any hidden subtext.

Snail: Similarly, when I tell you club organisers have my total backing and admiration, I really mean it. If I had a gripe with your lot, I'd tell you so openly. It's not as if I'd have anything much to lose by doing so. If you found one of my earlier points personally combative, just accept the apology offered.

...(deep breath)...

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Harmonium Hero
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 04:30 PM

Folkiedave: I do play fiddle, and footle about on duet concertina, but I fear you may be thinking of another John Kelly, from Ireland? Actually, if you're who I think (Dave Eyre) we have met - at Sidmouth four or five years back. I was dancing with Rumworth, and Haydn Thomson introduced us. You wre supposed to be emailing back about some books....
Ruth Archer: I like your analogy with the lift! And, yes - it is your age group that is conspicuously missing from folk music and dance. It's the yuppie generation. Please don't take that personally - you're obviously not all yuppies. It must be a lonely existence! Interesting question: what should we now call yuppies, since they're no longer young - and possibly no longer upwardly mobile? As you say, the 'new' people are not alwys young; the folk dance club people are predominantly past retirement age, but that seems to be because it's the thing to do when you retire.
Gene Burton: Don't be writing me off just yet; I've already told a few people to get a nice flat gravestone put over them, as I fully intend to be clog dancing on their graves when I'm 100. That's the sort of person you're dealing with here...
John Kelly.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 04:29 PM

Well, I suspect that they are right, aren't they, that you are a folk-song-singer not a folk singer? You have consciously learned the songs from dots or recordings, for the most part, rather than through the folk process. There are not many folk singers now and I certainly am not one. Even Martin Carthy used to make the distinction back in the 60s and 70s and explain that he was a folk-song-singer, a revivalist rather than a source.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Herga Kitty
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 04:18 PM

Richard - how would I know, I'm not a folk singer, according to Living Tradition

Kitty

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Herga Kitty
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 04:12 PM

Folkiedave - I've already posted my complaint to the POTW website, and the BBC autoreply. Could you please provide a link for complaining to BBC complaints generally....?

Kitty

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 04:11 PM

Oh, surely, Kitty, a folk singer?

(fly on Diane's wall dodges)

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: GUEST,The Mole Catcher's unplugged Apprentice
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 04:10 PM

I think that the reply already receieved from the BBC is about all you're going to get on this issue, I can't see Auntie wanting to prolong the debate.
Charlotte (the view from Ma and Pa's piano stool)

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Banjiman
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 04:07 PM

Apologies for thread drift.....but:

"My advice to Gene Burton and other disillusioned performers - of whatever age - is not to let the buggers grind you down."

So why not invest some of that creative energy in running your own club/ acoustic night/ event......? Agree it would be difficult for a full time pro musician, but we will do 40-50 gigs/festivals (mainly the other half) this year and run a monthly club night which gives 3 other performers (usually) a chance to perform each month.

We are in Ruth's "difficult" years (35-45) have 2 young children and 1 full time job and a home based business between us. We don't watch much TV anymore........but you get out what you put in.

My point here is not how clever we are (we're not!) but just if you are not getting what you want out of your music....don't moan, just do something about it!! (and we're definitely not too proud to ask for gigs........with my club organisers hat on I expect people to ask me, how else would I know that they want a gig?)

We started doing gigs and running the club last year aged 40 and 42....I think the elevator analogy is correct.

Paul

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Herga Kitty
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 04:01 PM

As the Black Boy has now fallen off Listen Again, and Pick of the week isn't available anyway, is there any way of establishing whether the singer was Kevin Mitchell or (as suggested by Derek Schofield) Frank Harte?

Kitty

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: TheSnail
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 04:00 PM

Gene Burton

when I criticise the way things are run it isn't you guys I have in my sights.

Well, who is it then? Even folk festivals are largely reliant on volunteers for nothing more than a season ticket.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Gene Burton
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 03:51 PM

"Our prime motivation is love of the music and our responsibility to our audiences"

Snail, for my part I've never doubted this to be the case for unpaid club organisers. I count a number among my personal friends, and I can assure you when I criticise the way things are run it isn't you guys I have in my sights. Again, apologies for any offence or misunderstanding caused.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: TheSnail
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 03:27 PM

Harmonium Hero

My advice to Gene Burton and other disillusioned performers - of whatever age - is not to let the buggers grind you down. I made a mistake dropping out before; they are not going to get the better of me this time.

By "buggers" do you mean people like me and the rest of the committee who spend quite a lot of their time running a folk club for no financial reward? The majority of clubs are run by amateurs. Our prime motivation is love of the music and our responsibility to our audiences, not to give the professionals a means of earning a living. That's not to say we won't do our best to give you the best deal we can, after all, we want you to come back. Try and remember that we have limited resources; both in money and time. There are only 52 Saturday evenings a year; we have to make choices. You and Gene Burton have acknowledged that nobody owes you a living but a less combative attitude would help. We are your friends.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Gene Burton
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 02:39 PM

John,

Thanks for the words of support; and all the best to you in the quest to re-establish yourself. I don't think anybody has a divine right to make a big fat living out of music, either; but a nice guy deserves a few breaks, so good luck.

Let me assure you, I'm far from disillusioned- I still live and breathe for music, just that the folk scene isn't my main forum at present. There'll always be those who believe any criticism of how things are run, however reasoned and valid, are merely expressions of thwarted ambition; but I can honestly say I've really never TRIED to do it full-time. I've never been one for sending off demos, badgering club/festival organisers etc. (it's all too NEEDY, somehow- just my personal thing, not a criticism of anyone who does differently); and I emphatically don't DO schmoozing...which kind of limits my opportunities! Still, if clubs feel moved to contact me for bookings (which does happen sporadically, believe it or not!), I'll talk.

BTW, sorry if some of my earlier comments came across as knocking older performers; that certainly wasn't what I intended. But age IS an issue insofar as a lack of young audiences (and a lack of long-term financial viability for younger full-timers) will inevitably hasten the demise of our music; because I'm afraid most of your lot are gonna be dead-ed long before most of mine... (no offence...just saying, like...)

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: peregrina
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 02:04 PM

I wrote to the BBC too, but so far only an auto-reply. Then again, my suggestion of the 'community service' that might have been appropriate retributive justice might have seemed a bit flippant.

Can't help thinking of the Woody's cook-in sauce example...
has everyone who posted expressing disapproval of Parris's remarks also contacted the Beeb?

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 01:55 PM

Believe me, Melissa - Dave is VERY familiar with the BBC Complaints Proceures!

:)

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Melissa
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 01:50 PM

Maybe you can ask them to extend an invitation for you to attend the debate, Dave? They probably don't have a computer generated response ready for requests like that.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 01:48 PM

"I just wanted to point out that it isn't just Young Folkies having a hard time; some of us Old Buggers aren't having much of a laugh either. There IS an audience out there, if only we are allowed near them. And many of them are young, although I don't think we should be concerning ourselves too much about the age issue; I think this has only become an issue due to the fact that there is a generation gap, which there wasn't in the old days. Folk music isn't an age-related music."

I agree, John. I think there is a cult of youth in folk at the moment. It's important to have a range of ages represented in both audiences and artists, but many artists of all ages find it hard to get gigs.

Whe we were at the Folk Arts England conference this year, my boyfriend summed t up really well, I think: there seems to be an assumption that folk is like an escalator: either people get on at the bottom (in their teens or early 20s), or you've missed them forever. But folk is more like a lift: it stops at every floor, and some people will get on, and some will get off. Their reasons for opting out at certain times can be myriad, but like you, often are to do with family commitments. As a 40 year old, I find that the REAL gap is in my age group: all of my friends seem to be at least 10 years older or 10 years younger than me, but there are very few 35 - 45 year olds around. Apparently we're the "lost generation".

Similarly, there are reasons why people opt in as they get older. Our music tastes change, we get more adventurous...there are new people finding the music (and dance) all the time - of all ages.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Folkiedave
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 01:45 PM

Sorry I meant to ask harmonium hero, are you a fiddle and concertina man too?

Dave

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Folkiedave
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 01:44 PM

Folkiedave,
It's admirable that you made the effort to contact BBC with your comment..I'm glad you got a response.

Response? I haven't even started yet.

Here's a question I have just posed to the BBC.

If the idea of allowing Matthew Parris to express his opinion is to stimulate debate as you suggest, where is this debate being conducted?

Dave

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Harmonium Hero
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 01:32 PM

I think the objection here is not - or shouldn't be - to Matthew Parris stating a personal opinion; if he does this on 'Grumpy Old Men', for instance, then it's just taken as the opinion of a GOM, which is what you tune in to hear. However, when he does it while presenting a programme - where he is, as it were, the voice of the BBC - then he is abusing his position. This is not an isolated example of this kind of thing; I can't recall specific examples, but I have often been angered by similar abuses of position on radio and TV, and in the press. And English traditional culture is a regular target. Of course they don't have to like it, but so what? No-one has to share their tastes. They need to - as the saying is - get over themselves. I think Tom Bliss is right to send off a stiff letter, however.
Regarding the thread drift about the trials of Young Folkies; (must first make it clear that I'm not having a go at anybody!) I first sang in a folk club in 1968 - in my 22nd year. There was no such thing as a 'Young Folkie' then; we were all just 'Folkies'. There were no Folk Music Degree courses, no Young Folk Awards, and it wasn't so easy to make a record; the equipment didn't exist to make your own, and recording companies didn't want to know you unless you were famous. It was, however, far easier than it is now to get bookings in folk clubs. I dropped out of the folk scene in 1983, and it was 1990 before I ventured back in. My reasons for dropping out were partly family-related, but there was an underlying disillusionment with the way the clubs were going. I'm now in my 62nd year, and facing a long and painful process of trying to get established nationally. The folk clubs don't owe me a living, any more than they owe anybody a living, but there are a lot of things wrong with the clubs, about which much has already been written on other threads here. I have my own opinions on this score - based on long expereience - but I won't bore you with them here. I just wanted to point out that it isn't just Young Folkies having a hard time; some of us Old Buggers aren't having much of a laugh either. There IS an audience out there, if only we are allowed near them. And many of them are young, although I don't think we should be concerning ourselves too much about the age issue; I think this has only become an issue due to the fact that there is a generation gap, which there wasn't in the old days. Folk music isn't an age-related music. My advice to Gene Burton and other disillusioned performers - of whatever age - is not to let the buggers grind you down. I made a mistake dropping out before; they are not going to get the better of me this time.
John Kelly.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 01:32 PM

Goodbye then.
And take the terminally damaged F word with you.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 01:15 PM

Diane you are without doubt the most bitter, disillusioned, and dismissive poster on this site.
You are to Mudcat what Mathew Parris is to Pick of the Week, you are doing exactly what he has done, you are expressing your own personal opinion.
However I will give Matthew Parris one thing, which you fail to do, he did not in the process of dismissing English folk music, also dismiss the opinions of others who have as much right to their opinions as he does.

G


[Exits shaking head in disbelief]

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Melissa
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 01:14 PM

Folkiedave,
It's admirable that you made the effort to contact BBC with your comment..I'm glad you got a response.

Richard,
I wasn't moaning about the lack of folk stuff near me, just trying to mention that it's not available everywhere. I've got Music and I'm content with what I have. Mudcat is a good place for me to be reminded of songs I used to know and handy for picking up wads of stray tidbits.
When I wandered in, I was excited about the idea of finding new places to go and new people to meet. I'm over that now.

The worst thing about Offensive Ignorami is that they're contagious.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 01:04 PM

The person from Missouri surely has a big enough mouth to continue rabbitting even with foot firmly inserted therein.
I am assuming (could be wrong but don't bother to correct me because it is intended as a generality) that you are among those who have hijacked the word "f*lk" to mean any old crap you bloody well like.
The word is terminally damaged by such arrogant, crass behaviour which is far more insulting to those who actually care for the the tradarts than comments from such pundits as Mr Parris, Fee Glover et al who know sod all about them anyway but think it's funny to be a smartarse. And, let's face it, the bulk of their audience agree with them and are amused.

I heartily wish a number of things:

(1) that the "good-enough-for-f*lk" crowd would just pick up the word they have devalued and nicked and sod off somewhere else with it.

(2) that they take their distasteful homophobic comments with them.

Trad music is getting on perfectly well (and growing) especially among younger people despite the hindrance of the unsavoury "olde stylee f*lk club" image projected on the population in general by such unhelpful antics which do far more harm than the odd lapse from presenters and mainstream writers.

Over and out.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 12:56 PM

Melissa, there are offensive ignorami everywhere. I think the Mudcat probably has fewer than real life (now that a few have been banned). It does however specialise in just a few genuinely well informed people who nonetheless have one or two utterly stupid fetishes and ram them down and up everyone they meet here until they meet in the middle. Some too are self-important. You have seen a few in action on this very thread.

Stick around and see. Maybe you might start your own thread "Any Folk and Acoustic in Missouri?", and apart from the inevitable "What is folk" debate you will probably get some useful information.

Tom, you are very right that Parris deserves condemnation on two levels. First he demonstrates utter ignorance and rudeness. Second he assumes that it is permissible to condemn an entire genre of ethnic music (pity he misidentified it) as ethnically inferior - something that would rightly be condemned (even by his cryptofascist party) if he were speaking of any ethnic music other than a white English one. You and I may disagree about "what is folk" but on this thread I think we agree.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Folkiedave
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 12:48 PM

My reply from the BBC.

Dear Mr Eyre

Thank you for your e-mail regarding 'Pick of the Week' broadcast 30 March 2008 on BBC Radio 4.

I understand from your e-mail that you object to the comments Matthew Parris made in regards to traditions and traditional music.

These comments are solely Matthew's opinion and do not reflect the beliefs of the BBC.

By allowing our guests to give their personal opinions on matters we feel that this will open up the area to debate, as while one section of our audience may disagree, another section may be in complete agreement.

I appreciate that you feel 'Pick of the Week' may no have been the best place to make such comments and I would like to assure you that we have registered your comments on our audience log. As you may be aware, this is the internal report of audience feedback which we compile daily for all programme makers and commissioning executives within the BBC, and also their senior management.

Thanks once again for taking the time to contact the BBC.

Regards

Craig O'Connor
BBC Complaints
____________________

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Grab
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 12:47 PM

He probably would have better manners, Tom. But his better manners would involve putting a polite gloss on the fact that her voice sounds to him like mating cats.

Was MP being impolite in referring to trad folk as "ghastly"? Probably, yes. Was he being truthful? Also yes, according to his ears.

The "accent" I refer to is not Irish, but the nasal tone used by trad folk singers. As you know, there's a reason for its existence - it lets a voice cut through a crowded, noisy room without amplification. It's as much an accent as a trained operatic voice is an accent.

Yes, I can appreciate technical ability in pitch, and I can appreciate technical ability in choice of songs and quality of research. And if someone's singing like that when I'm doing sound, professionalism means I'll do my best to make them sound good (although given that I might try to tame the nasal-ness, I might not be your ideal choice as soundman). It doesn't mean I like that style of singing any better.

And I've just done sound on Friday and Sunday nights for singer-songwriter acts. Not exclusively trad folk, but there were a few traditional songs in there. Hardly a one of them over the age of 25 either. Folk's alive and well and taking its chances with rock, blues, jazz, country and all the other genres.

Graham.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Melissa
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 12:39 PM

In all honesty, Snail, I was sort of hoping that once her foot was in her mouth, she'd keep right on chewing...

Missouri is known as the "show me state" Sorry to have used a term that's unfamiliar to you..I really wasn't tasting your head too much.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: TheSnail
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 12:29 PM

Melissa

Feel free to go right ahead and Show Me where the folk scene is if you want. I find it hard to believe that you are likely to have more information of my surrounding area than me.

Please, don't bite my head off. I was genuinely trying to be helpful. This thread is generally about the folk scene in the UK and I made the mistake of assuming you were based here. Sorry.

A word of advice; life is too short to waste time arguing with Diane Easby.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Teribus
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 12:06 PM

Didn't believe I was apologising for anyone Eric, merely stating that everyone is entitled to voice their own opinion without fear or favour - If you have a problem with that - tough - learn to live with it.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 12:04 PM

And I said that if there is no "f*lk scene" in your area you should be bloody glad.
And out of line? It's you that has stepped that way by dissing dance. You don't have to do it if you don't want to. You could play for it or at least respect it for the important basis of the tradarts that it is.
I'm not "chipping in" any more, Tom. As I said, this thread is pants. Entirely pointless except to show the sideline knockers that they are right to rubbish ":f*lkies" for their ridiculous defensive attitudes towards the indefensible.
Funnily enough I was talking only last night to a musician who has moved away to a slightly unusual location without a "scene" where, to his relief, he is regarded purely as just that, a musician along with all others of all genres.
If music has a duty it is for its exponents to use and develop it in their communities, NOT to behave in such a way as to let it disappear up their own backsides.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Melissa
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 11:54 AM

Diane:
"However, near everyone are musicians and singers who keep alive and add to the traditions of their own communities and haven't the time nor inclination to write about it on message boards. They're far too busy learning new tunes. You just don't know them because they don't parade around in said sad gear and make public exhibitions of themselves in a "good-enough-for-f*lk" fashion."

AND, if this was intended toward me, I did not say there was no music near me--I said there is not a Folk Scene in my area.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: GUEST,Tom Bliss
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 11:51 AM

Oh Diane, I hoped you might chip in, but not like this.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Melissa
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 11:48 AM

"Finally, I am gobsmacked by the comment that dancing is not on someone's agenda. How in the name of every saint in the calendar can anyone claim an interest in tradarts but ignore the purpose for which the tunes were written?"

You have spoken WAY out of line, Diane. If you would prefer dancing to be on my agenda, maybe you should take it up with an orthopaedic surgeon who is capable of remedying the situation for me.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: GUEST,Tom Bliss
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 11:46 AM

"And like it or not, that vocal accent *is* the type irrevocably associated with trad folk."

Err, sorry?

It is not an accent, it's a respected vocal technique just like bel canto, or the rock roar, or ballad tenor, or any other style, that has to be learned and developed and should be respected even if not liked. This singer happens to have an Irish accent, but that's not the point.

The point is that he is an expert exponent of a specific, long established and well-defined style, one that involves tiny and very precise alterations in pitch which are very VERY difficult to do well. The whole point is NOT to slide between the notes - but to land lightly and precisely on each ledge of the decoration. Caterwauling might be used unkindly to describe a screechy, slidy style of singing (like some singers) but not this technique, and to apply it in this case was just nasty.

There are lots of styles of music that do nothing for me, and some I actually dislike, but I'd never be so downright rude as to go on the radio and call them ghastly.

You friend's opinion of Ms Bush is one thing. But would he go on the radio and describe her in those terms? I hope he'd have better manners.

To quote from a new poem by a folk singer of this parish: "Decorum Mattersey."

101 (sorry is this some kind of game?)

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 11:40 AM

Purely for the sake of getting 100 on this godawful thread written by people who, largely, appear not to have listened to the broadcast being commented on in POTW anyway, let me point out that the "f*lk scene" as envisaged by that same introverted, insular, smug, bearded, tie-die wearing, tankard-swigging clique who delight inexplicably in the description of them themselves as "f*lkies" is something I don't touch with the proverbial piece of boat manoeuvring equipment and would hardly recommend anyone to seek it out.

However, near everyone are musicians and singers who keep alive and add to the traditions of their own communities and haven't the time nor inclination to write about it on message boards. They're far too busy learning new tunes. You just don't know them because they don't parade around in said sad gear and make public exhibitions of themselves in a "good-enough-for-f*lk" fashion.

If a public commentator chooses to send them up, they're probably right, or at least reflecting what the vast majority of the "real world" thinks. If that presenter or column writer thinks a source singer is "ghastly", that's not of any great importance. What does matter though is their failure to assess their importance as a song or tune carrier in our tradition.

Finally, I am gobsmacked by the comment that dancing is not on someone's agenda. How in the name of every saint in the calendar can anyone claim an interest in tradarts but ignore the purpose for which the tunes were written?

OK, I've probably missed that ton score by now. Who cares? This thread is pants).

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: GUEST,Gene meant to be working!
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 11:19 AM

100

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Melissa
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 11:08 AM

(Snail, 31/3, 9:26 post)
Melissa

There's nothing in my home area for me to base an opinion on The Folk Scene. Mudcat is the only example of Folk Gathering available to me.

I find that hard to believe. Where are you? Somebody here might be able to guide you to the real thing in your area. Involvement in the folk scene really has to involve putting your shoes on and going somewhere. It's about music and dance and song, not internet chat.

****
Snail,
I'm in the US, north-central Missouri.
Feel free to go right ahead and Show Me where the folk scene is if you want. I find it hard to believe that you are likely to have more information of my surrounding area than me.
I said there isn't a 'scene' around here, and I spoke from an informed position. There may be something in KC, but with the taste of "friendly welcome" I've seen here, I am not interested in driving two+ hours and spend money to be on the outskirts in Real.
There's something with a name like "Muddy River" in the Booneville area and until recently, I was thinking about making the trip. With Bob Dyer not being there, I would not have anything familiar in the surroundings and most likely will not go. Booneville is over two hours from here.

I already have musical outlets for myself.
I came to mudcat as a source for broadening my knowledge and to be a part of conversations with a bunch of people that seem to Think like musicians.
Dancing is not on my agenda.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Grab
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 10:48 AM

Yes I did, Tom.

Like I said, my guitarist friend reckons Kate Bush sounds like mating cats. He's not cloth-eared, he just doesn't like how her voice sounds. Me, I'd leave the pub if I was faced with an evening of that bloke singing - it doesn't necessarily make me cloth-eared, just someone who doesn't like that type of voice. And like it or not, that vocal accent *is* the type irrevocably associated with trad folk.

In that same programme, there was a clip from Westminster of an MP asking why money wasn't spent on brass bands and jazz. When he asked why money wasn't spent on jazz, one MP could clearly be heard replying "Because it's appalling rubbish" (if I can remember the exact words). Did anyone feel the need to write to their MPs about that one?

Graham.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 10:29 AM

Ah welcome back Teribus, now apologising for another ex tory MP.

eric

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: GUEST
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 10:27 AM

What was the name of the song from which the excerpt that Kevin/ Frank sang on the programme came?

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: GUEST,PMB
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 10:10 AM

It's not even "his own" culture- he was brought up in apartheid South Africa. His parents, who were British, may have introduced him to some aspects of British culture, but it would inevitably have been a subset filtered through a colonial perspective. He seems to have avoided racism, however I suspect that as a Thatcherite he views anyone outside the microclass of super- rich super- trendies as abject losers.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: GUEST,Tom Bliss
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 09:51 AM

Did YOU hear the programme Grab?

It was not what he said, but the way he said it which I felt was unacceptable on the BBC.

If he genuinely thinks Kevin (or Frank Harte if it emerges it was him after all - Parris didn't supply a name) sounds like mating cats then he's at best cloth-eared, and should be at least discouraged from making a twit of himself on the wireless.

But what he said came over as a personal insult to the singer, not a critique.

Even so, if he'd left it at that, I'd have left it to Kevin or Frank's chums to speak up on whoever it was's behalf.

But he dismissed an entire culture (his own, as it happens) which many of us are struggling to promote as 'ghastly' - in what seemed almost like a political statement, rather than a cheap joke.

Some rebalancing IS required, I think.

Tom

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Ythanside
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 09:28 AM

Catterwauling? You don't suppose the blighter was taking a sideswipe at our own dear institution? Damn fellow ought to be thrashed within an inch of his life!
Harrumph.   
:-D)

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: TheSnail
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 09:26 AM

Melissa

There's nothing in my home area for me to base an opinion on The Folk Scene. Mudcat is the only example of Folk Gathering available to me.

I find that hard to believe. Where are you? Somebody here might be able to guide you to the real thing in your area. Involvement in the folk scene really has to involve putting your shoes on and going somewhere. It's about music and dance and song, not internet chat.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Grab
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 09:17 AM

Fair enough, Dave - you like him, I don't. From the same programme, Parris liked a programme about bebop, but to me bebop sounds like a 4-year-old hitting notes at random. I'm also a bit of an Iron Maiden fan, which I suspect most acoustic purists wouldn't enjoy at all. And my closest friend (fellow guitarist) hates Kate Bush with a passion, where I find her voice and songwriting spellbinding. Fair do's.

But the thread subject seems to be that we're only allowed to say what we *do* like, and not what we *don't*. "Pick of the Week" is a purely subjective review of the previous week's content from one person's view. You might as well write accusing emails to "Desert Island Discs" because the person on the last edition didn't choose any folk music.

As for the "thought experiment", that does indeed work both ways. If someone was to say "thank goodness Western musical traditions progressed African-American music from primitive field hollers to the blues and jazz we know today", would that be offensive? If you happen to like field hollers, maybe you'd think so. For the rest of us who happen to like what we know as blues and jazz today, probably not.

Graham.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: GUEST,Tom Bliss
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 09:01 AM

Did you hear the programme Teribus?

It was not what he said, but the way he said it which I felt was unacceptable on the BBC.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Teribus
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 08:51 AM

"it's about a gratuitously offensive reference on BBC's Pick of the Week Programme,to traditional song and music, from a BBC establishment pundit (gay ex-MP) who has no qualifications to rate traditional song and music." - Kitty

No it most certainly is not it is about someone voicing his opinion. The fact that throughout his earlier years he was very well travelled may, or may not, have broadened his out look on quite a range of matters could indicate a sound basis for his remarks.

Here is someone else voicing their opinion on the subject:

"Yes it was Kevin Mitchell singing in that clip. He is one of the very best exponents of traditional song going. I reckon that Matthew Paris' education was very deficient indeed if he does not appreciate such wonderful singing." - Mary.

I would like to point to both Kitty and Mary that neither of you has any business telling anybody else what they should and should not "appreciate" - in all things "beauty(value) is eye of the beholder"

"The example he cited as a reason for considering our traditional song to be ghastly was actually a shining example of how wonderful traditional song and music is!" - Kitty

Your opinion Kitty which has just the same worth as anybody else's - even Matthew Parris's.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: GUEST,Gene on lunch
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 08:01 AM

Hmmm, well I've been to at least two of the festivals on Joan's most recent list and I don't recall seeing an abundance of young folkies either in the sessions or even in the concert audiences (though admittedly I tend to be more interested in the former, so I don't see all the concerts). And admittedly my last festival was (I think) September 2006, so it is of course possible that they've changed beyond all recognition in the last 18 months. But somehow I doubt it. It's also possible of course that this army of bright young things has a sophisticated intelligence network enabling them to find out when I'm planning to come to a festival and then agree amongst themselves to give it a miss...but am I really THAT important??

This is all starting to sound a bit like, Crisis? What crisis?, but then I guess, in the fullness of time, we'll see, won't we...(I can only lead a horse to water...)

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: GUEST,outraged
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 07:59 AM

"Prick of The Week" would have been a more apt title for the programme!