Our ghastly folk tradition

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Melissa
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 06:21 PM

Why would someone persist past it, Sue?
The world is big and there are a lot of other ways to spend time and if a newcomer feels like a door has been slammed in their face, an impression is made.

The "In Crowd" here can ask each other the most basic music questions and get reasonable, useful responses. That's fair enough and it's really, really nice to be able to carry on 'living room' conversations with people who are scattered all over the world.
If a newcomer falls in to mudcat, the first posts they make are trials..testing the water. A Guest who opens a thread asking how the math for turning chords into sevenths is likely to be given a link and a pat on the head.

Sometimes new people might want to talk. Questions are how we introduce ourselves here. If what they wanted was a link..and if they found mudcat by playing around online, chances are they're smart enough to find the sterile information themselves.
Yes, giving a link is nice.
Giving TIME and consideration is a lot nicer.

There's a LOT of stuff here above the line that does not look very appealing when you look at it from the perspective of an outsider.
Great threads are more prevalent than lesser quality ones, but there's a lot of tackytalk up here that isn't good advertising IF the idea is to welcome and embrace young/new folks who are interested or to pull in and win-over the ones who poke in out of curiosity.

Another aspect of seeming to be 'offish' is that we lose out on the chance to learn by introducing a little new blood to the place.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Gene Burton
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 06:23 PM

"I do think that someone genuinely interested (young or old) would persist past this..."

As I have. It IS hard work at times though, frankly.

A fourth factor which I perhaps should have mentioned, is denial. Melissa mentions people bemoaning the lack of young folkies; but when I brought this up on another thread recently a number of contributors claimed (apparently in all seriousness) that folk clubs and festivals were packed to the brim with young audience members AND performers, that folk music was more popular with the young than at any time including the '60s revival, and that if I didn't know that I should "get out more". Well, all I can say is I've been to scores of folk clubs and a good few festivals in the last 5-6 years, and it just ain't so. And I'm afraid I can count the number of people my age (27) and younger who I know personally, who listen regularly to folk music, on the fingers of one hand. If it were possible to talk a problem like that out of existence simply by denying it, that'd be great...however, we have to deal with the position as it is, not as we'd like it to be.

Melissa, thank you for posting, BTW.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Suegorgeous
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 06:28 PM

Melissa

Well...cos I did! past some gratuitous, unnecessary rudeness...not a lot you can do about it (apart from raise it, like this).

Sue

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Melissa
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 06:34 PM

Maybe it would be more conducive to pleasant conversation if you would read my words and take them at face value before deciding to snip me, Sue.

You don't know me well enough to give me that type of response.
For future reference, whenever you notice my name attached to a post, you can be assured that I'm speaking honestly and as clearly as I can...and that I am trying to share my viewpoint from my perspective.
Nothing more, nothing less.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 06:39 PM

I certainly am not going to claim that there are lots of youngsters at folk clubs. But there are a hell of a lot of them at festivals, both performing and as punters.

The Young Coppers launched their new CD at Cecil Sharp House in London on Thursday. The concert bill was packed with younger folkies. In the audience (and the post-gig bar) were a member of the Beautiful South and Graham Coxson from Blur. Not kids, I grant you, but young by folk standards...and from the pop scene.

Cambridge and Towersey festivals usually get particularly large numbers of young attenders, but others such as Warwick, Shepley and Sidmouth attract robust younger audiences, especially evident at the late night events.

In terms of artists - well, the scene is chocka with younger people at the moment. I can't be arsed to make a list. Perhaps what you actually mean, Gene, is that they're not booking you.

Re Mudcat: this is one tiny and quite specialist niche of the folk scene. The majority of young people with a burgeoning interest in folk will never find their way here. There are many other avenues for them, though.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly...write to feedback!
From: peregrina
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 06:44 PM

Melissa--thanks for your post. Agreed. I for one think it would be nice to see a little more of 'welcome here kind stranger'...

I first joined Mudcat to try to enlist others to send some e-mails of protest after a local station axed its excellent folk slot. I'll write to the BBC, but can't such much point in adding to the chorus here (which I agree with).

(I'm the person who takes the petition up and down the street for the doomed post office even though it's doomed..)

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Herga Kitty
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 06:52 PM

Thanks, Peregrina - I started this thread because a presenter on a BBC radio 4 flagship programme had gratuitously rubbished a genre that he isn't really qualified to comment on.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Gene Burton
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 06:55 PM

"Perhaps what you actually mean, Gene, is that they're not booking you."

This is the kind of remark I'd anticipated when I requested that this should be discussed "without resort to snideness or personal remarks". I've made my current position with regard to the folk scene and bookings clear on other threads, and can't be arsed to do so again.

This stuff is a lot bigger than my career or anybody else's. Provided I can retain the joy of singing, I really couldn't give a toss if I never earned another penny (I've actually earned more in the last year than in any previous year, though admittedly it is all relative). But I do worry that our musical heritage is being allowed to dwindle and wither by those supposedly dedicated to its propagation.

I do hope others feel able to discuss the points I've raised more constructively. For now, though, I'm off to bed. SWEET dreams, people.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: peregrina
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 06:55 PM

Hi Kitty,
I heard it too and entirely agree that it merits a thread...meanwhile I've just written to feedback and suggested that they make good the acoustic littering (I mean rubbish) by doing some community service--viz, for example a show on the music of the lost industrial communities of the northeast featuring the real stuff new and old rather than specially commissioned pieces.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 07:04 PM

Just because your talking about your own people doesn't mean that you can't be racist about them.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 07:10 PM

"But I do worry that our musical heritage is being allowed to dwindle and wither by those supposedly dedicated to its propagation."

*sigh*

If the scene is dwindling and withering, how come these young artists are so consistently on my radar?

Mawkin:Causley
Lauren McCormick and Emily Portman
Jackie Oates
James Dumbleton
James Reynard
Matt Norman
Last Orders
Mike and Ali Vass
Laurel Swift
Oli Matthews
Tom Wright
Saul Rose
Benji Kirkpatrick
Paul Sartin
Bodega
Park Bench Social Club
Megson
The Gloworms
422
The Askew Sisters
Spiers and Boden
Laura Hockenhull
The Young Coppers
The Demon Barber Road Show
Uiscedwr
Bella Hardy
Lisa Knapp
Rachel Unthank and the Winterset
Shona Kipling and Damien O'Kane
Jim Moray
Crucible/Hekety

...and that's just off the top of my head. These are people getting booked regularly at festivals and venues - and even folk clubs.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Melissa
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 07:15 PM

Gene:
"But I do worry that our musical heritage is being allowed to dwindle and wither by those supposedly dedicated to its propagation."

Without care, a body can die from an infected, untreated hangnail.
Mudcat is a teeny little thing in the Big Picture. If our garden is full of poison, I suspect the surrounding area feels the effect.

Kitty, I apologize for stepping on your toes by standing in your living room encouraging the conversation to move past your chosen topic. I read the thread and had nothing to add until the conversation turned in a direction where my input seemed appropriate. Maybe it's a direction we're all more comfortable leaving unsaid?

Ruth, the 'scene' may be vivid and lively around you, but not everybody has access and/or knowledge of a slice of Scene near them. For those of us who fit that category, mudcat IS a representative view into what's going on within Folk.

Sue, if your "because I did" statement wasn't meant to be snippish, I am sorry I snapped off a reply in rebuttal.

I now return you to your regularly scheduled thread where we learn whether the outraged listeners will continue tuning in and listening to the objectionable fellow to insure that they don't miss his next ridiculous comment.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Suegorgeous
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 07:22 PM

Melissa

I certainly did read your words, and I answered the question you put to me at the start.

I think you've not read MY words, or you've misunderstood. No way was I sniping, and I'm completely puzzled and concerned that you could take it that way.

You wrote: Why would someone persist past it, Sue?
I answered by telling you of my own experience of persisting past someone's rudeness to me on here, and my own view that there's not much one can do about other people's rudeness. How is that sniping?

Sue

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 07:27 PM

"Ruth, the 'scene' may be vivid and lively around you, but not everybody has access and/or knowledge of a slice of Scene near them."

It's hardly a hotbed of activity where I live, believe me.

Mudcat is one view of what's going on; it's not the be all and end all. Many people here, for instance, tend to be interested in the more traditional end of folk. There are a number of websites out there covering a much broader range of folk music. I would suggest that many of the younger people with a more casual interest in folk may find their way more easily to those, and find themselves in rather more like-minded company. There are a number of Facebook groups, for example, dedicated to folk music and dance, and which boast a substantially younger membership than Mudcat.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Melissa
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 07:31 PM

Yes, Sue...and I followed by apologizing after thinking a bit and realizing that maybe instead of being snippy, you could possibly have been giving a non-discussion answer.
I was hoping for discussion. All of us here stayed because we did and the response sounded dismissive to me.
I AM sorry for my defensive reply, it happened to feed into my thoughts about slamming doors and "take this link and leave us alone" and it was inappropriate for me to let your comment strike me that way.

From this point on, I will refuse to read spite in any message of yours in response to mine (presuming I say anything you might want to chirp in on) unless you specifically mention that it should be read that way.

Sorry.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Melissa
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 07:34 PM

Ruth,
Can you please refer me to two other online communities with an open forum and something comparable to our DT?

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Suegorgeous
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 08:00 PM

Melissa

Thanks very much for your thoughtful answer, apology accepted! and appreciated, cos not many people here do step back from what they've said and apologise if they feel that's right.

I'm sorry if my reply came across as dismissive, that's not how I intended it at all. I sometimes say things online very concisely (I enjoy brevity and can be impatient with waffle) and perhaps it can come across as abrupt.

I don't think I'm ever spiteful. I sometimes tease, and I have to be careful with that, as that can be taken wrongly. I do occasionally have a merciless dig back at people who are rude to me without cause (but I wouldn't even call that spite).

Sue

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 08:12 PM

I wasn't trying to say there were carbon copies of Mudcat out there, Melissa. I was trying to say that there are sites which are probably more appropriate for the casual, "dip-in" sort of person that many newer and younger folk fans are likely to be. The majority of people who pick up a Kate Rusby or Eliza Carthy CD, or see them in concert, are realy quite happy to simply chat to other people about that CD or gig, and don't feel compelled to seek out something like the DT.

These people are still part of the folk community - if anything, they outnumber the more hardcore types like us. The point I was trying to make is that we may not see them around here, but we can't presume their non-existence. If the festival scene is anything to go by, there are plenty of them out there.

Many artists' own websites have open fora. There is also Facebook, as I've mentioned previously. Some will find the BBC folk messageboard, or the Froots one if their musical tastes are a bit wider. There are also newsgroups like the Morris and E-Ceilidh lists.

For sheer weight of useful information, MusTrad is hard to beat.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Art Thieme
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 08:20 PM

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Grab
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 08:23 PM

Hmm. I heard that, and thought "how long before there's a hundred-post thread on Mudcat about a 2-second off-hand comment?" Answer seems to be: not very long. :-/

Is Matthew Parris allowed to say he doesn't like trad folk music? If not, why not? And if he'd said the same about rap, would anyone here be complaining? Or opera?

FWIW, I also wasn't greatly keen on the singer in that clip, and the prospect of an entire evening of it would fill me with as much dread as it probably would Matthew Parris and Kim Howells. That's not a judgement on the song but the singer - it made my teeth itch like fingernails down a blackboard. Thankfully all folk singers don't sound like that.

And interestingly the same programme also mentioned the disproportional funding of opera against other traditional English music such as brass bands.

Graham.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Folk Form # 1
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 08:47 PM

I agree with Grab. Most of us in Mudcat may love traditional folk music, but not everyone has to share that love. Music is very subjective.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: gnomad
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 08:54 PM

Parris has made a study of bitchiness, see his book Scorn, With Extra Bile (A bucketful of discourtesy, disparagement, invective, ridicule, impudence, contumely, derision, hate, affront, disdain, bile, taunts, curses, and jibes) ISBN0-140-27780-3.

Given his interest in nastiness, and his having been a politician, can we really expect a pleasant or informed comment from him?

I didn't hear the Parris piece, but was not very impressed with the "Black Boy" programme itself, which seemed to be rather limited in its geographical scope, the possible explanations investigated, and indeed the depth of those investigations. Nice that they tried, but a shame it was such a feeble try.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 09:15 PM

Not wanting to drag the thread off topic too much, by and large this forum is pretty welcoming, and a useful source of information. In that it resembles the Volvo Owners' Club forum (alas having a current bout of angst and closure arising out of solicitors' letters, rather as the DT every so often gets things removed thanks to the copyright police). By way of contrast, if you go to the Turbobricks forum and display ignorance or even an unfashionable opinion, you'd better put your earplugs in! By way of analogy go to the Froots or BBC fora and express the view that we would be better off with more folk music and less world rock, and batten down the hatches!

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Ythanside
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 09:29 PM

Come on, guys, lighten up. If only Rambling Sid Rumpo were still on the go he'd write and record a suitable response to that ill-informed pillock's comments and make sure the BBC got a copy. :-D

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 01:05 AM

Matthew Parris is one of the most offensive people alive, when he was a Tory MP he was filmed trying to live for a week on unemployment benefit, he was treated with the utmost kindness by people who REALLY were living on the dole, they bought him drinks and food etc, afterwards he said it was impossible to exist on unemployment benefit............but he wouldn't recommend increasing it, what a twat eh.

eric

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Gene Burton
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 02:25 AM

Of the artists listed by Joan, I wonder 1) What the average age of their AUDIENCE is and 2)(following from this) how many will still be making a good living in, say, 15 years time? Not a comment on their quality, just on the state of the folk scene. OK, so this supposedly thriving young festival scene boils down to about 5 festivals previously mentioned (I can only assume this to be the case 'cos it's certainly not true of any of the ones I've been to). Even if every artist listed got booked at all of these every summer, I hardly think that alone would provide a decent year's income...so I'd guess most of the rest must be coming from folk club bookings. Even Joan accepts the folk clubs are by and large failing to attract new blood, so what, realistically, are the prospects for (say) a 25-year old pro now still hoping to be doing it at 40 and beyond?

Though I sincerely hope I'm wrong, I can only say of the people listed, that I hope for their sake they have other strings to their bow/alternative careers lined up if they don't want to be facing poverty some time down the road. And, I repeat, what are we doing about it?

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 03:35 AM

Gene, you questioned the idea that there were lots of young audiences AND performers (your emphasis) on the folk scene.

Good lord, do I have to name all of the festivals booking such artists as well? The ones mentioned were meant to be illustrative, rather than an exhaustive list. I have no idea which festivals you're attending, but I probably do abut 10 a year, and see many of the artists I named at all of them. I also attend a lot of folk gigs in various parts of the country. These artists are bringing out CDs and touring them to venues all the time.

In addition to the festivals I cited, others booking substantial numbers of younger artists include:

Oxford, Cheltenham, Loughborough, Broadstairs, Gosport, Holmfirth, Chippenham, Southwell, Middlewich, Big Session, Ely, Priddy, Trowbridge, Bideford, Shrewsbury, Bromyard...those are, again, off the top of my head.

Audieces: well, that depends on the festival. Some are more successful at attracting younger audiences than others, as I said previously. This can be to do with pricing policies, type of accommodation available, engagement with the local community, and a number of other factors.


So as was suggested on the previous thread, perhaps you do need to get out more.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 03:35 AM

Only 5 festivals? What gave you that idea?

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: John J
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 03:37 AM

I think Matthew Parris's comment on folk used the word 'catawaulin' (sp?). I wasn't impressed by his damning description, but I suppose we're all entitled to our own opinions.

I found the programme on the Black boy was very enjoyable.

John

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: GUEST,Tom Bliss
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 04:58 AM

This just sent to Pick of The Week and Feedback:

Sir

Those of us who make our livings in the 'folk music industry' and who commit our time and effort to promoting the indigenous musics of these islands have become used to having it rubbished by people who have plainly never tried to listen to it with an open mind.

However, Matthew Parris' tone of voice in condemning the highly skilled Irish singer Kevin Mitchell as a 'dreadful caterwauling' and the rest of our musical heritage as 'ghastly' on Pick of the Week yesterday seemed to plumb a new depth in narrow-mindedness.

Would he have been allowed to use those terms on the BBC to describe, say, a traditional singer or music from India or China, I wonder? I suspect not.

Parris is of course entitled to express his opinion (and to attempt cheap and clichéd jokes if he must), but to call Mitchell's delicate, precise and tuneful delivery 'caterwauling' was not only offensive to Mitchell, and to Irish and other traditional music in general, it was also lazy and ignorant in the extreme.

I hope Parris will be persuaded to issue an apology.

Yours faithfully

Tom Bliss

Slipjig Music

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 05:04 AM

Nice one, Tom.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: melodeonboy
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 05:58 AM

"I'm beginning to wonder whether Parris doesn't do this sort of thing deliberately, just to get a reaction. A chain yanker as it were. I might be wrong", said Charlottte.

Excuse me if I'm a bit slow, Charlotte, but that was rhyming slang, wasn't it?

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: tijuanatime
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 06:12 AM

The key point is that Parris chose to express his dislike of traditional music in specifically racial terms: as a thoght experiment, try reversing his sentiments and imagine what the reaction would be.

As for these being off-the-cuff remarks, POTW is certainly pre-recorded and almost certainly scripted.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 06:46 AM

""These people are still part of the folk community - if anything, they outnumber the more hardcore types like us. The point I was trying to make is that we may not see them around here, but we can't presume their non-existence. If the festival scene is anything to go by, there are plenty of them out there.""

I think Melissa's point is that if we were more welcoming, we WOULD see more of them around here, and I would tend to agree with that.

I have spent most of a lifetime organising Folk Clubs, sessions, and singarounds, and have made it my trademark to welcome personally everyone who does me the favour of attending.

Mudcat is a wonderful place to be if you are (as I am now) a recognised insider, but there is, and always has been, a tendency for some here to forget that they themselves once made that mistake, of opening a long defunct thread, or asking a very dumb question.

How much REAL effort is involved in taking the time to set a newcomer on the path to being a regular Mudcat contributor. We can't expect youngsters to respect our experience and knowledge, if we don't have the patience to communicate with them.

Back on topic.

Anyone is entitled to like, or dislike anything he/she chooses. What I consider to be absolutely unacceptible, is for that opinion to be aired to a massive audience without the opportunity for the contrary viewpoint to be presented.

The BBC is a public service organisation, funded by licence payers, and as long as we all pay the same fee, we should all receive the same balanced service.

MP should keep his prejudices to himself, unless he has the guts to field a member of the group he is rubbishing to answer his comment.

Don T.

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Dave Hunt
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 06:57 AM

GRAB wrote - above
'FWIW, I also wasn't greatly keen on the singer in that clip, and the prospect of an entire evening of it would fill me with as much dread as it probably would Matthew Parris and Kim Howells. That's not a judgement on the song but the singer - it made my teeth itch like fingernails down a blackboard. Thankfully all folk singers don't sound like that'.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mores the pity! Kevin is a superb singer - and I could listen to hours of his singing - (and indeed have done in the past) his choice of material,singing style, timing, etc. are magnigicent - IMNSHO !!
Dave

Subject: RE: Our ghastly folk tradition
From: Fred McCormick
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 07:08 AM

"Matthew Parris is one of the most offensive people alive, when he was a Tory MP he was filmed trying to live for a week on unemployment benefit, he was treated with the utmost kindness by people who REALLY were living on the dole, they bought him drinks and food etc, afterwards he said it was impossible to exist on unemployment benefit............but he wouldn't recommend increasing it, what a twat eh."

So that's the bastard. Wasn't it he who was outed in a tv programme called Maggie's Militant Tendency?

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!

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: 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,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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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
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: 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: 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: 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: GUEST,Gene meant to be working!
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 11:19 AM

100