Short film from Doc Rowe's collections

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: MoBF
Date: 10 Jan 11 - 02:38 PM

Dear Astray, I just re-visited the site after several months and spotted this last post. Yes, the Museum of British Folklore project is very much still going and thankfully from strength to strength. Do please visit the website news section for updates and subscribe to the newsletter too should you wish.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 16 Jul 10 - 06:26 AM

Forgot about this one; classic stuff! Does anyone know if the Museum of British Folklore still going?

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 30 May 09 - 05:28 AM

A wider view would be welcome anyway, Gillian - stuff like This for example - and This. Interestingly, in a thread I started just this morning, the second poster linked to This which gave me pause to ponder with respect of both the current thread and the old Folklore: The Abbots Bromley Horn Dance thread.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: Gillian B
Date: 30 May 09 - 04:58 AM

In the spirit of moving things on and seeing as there seems to be some interest in the subject I propose a new thread.....(for those who would like to see the project happen)
What would you hope to gain from visitng a Museum of British Folklore?

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 29 May 09 - 03:39 PM

Although you say he (Simon Costin), has every right to work with CPTC, your inference is that he does not.

I (personally) say that whilst he (Simon Costin) has every right to work with our CPTC*, from what I've seen so far, I (personally) don't feel that it's a worthwhile project in & of itself for reasons already expressed. Please note though, Gillian - I am but one person expressing a personal opinion about a project which concerns things I care deeply about. Please also note that my bookshelves are bending down with volumes on other things I care deeply about - Folklore, Folk Song, Folk Tale, Storytelling, Green Men, Folk Custom, Frank Zappa, The Fall, Duke Ellington, Scott Walker, Misericords, The Marx Brothers etc. etc. - many of which I think are absolute bollocks. Needless to say, I cherish each & every one of them as much as do the criticisms of my own work accumulated over the years - which is one of the reasons I never delete the comments on my YouTube films no matter how negative or downright rude they might be.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be suggesting The Museum of British Folklore is beyond criticism; I only hope those involved with it don't feel this way too.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: BB
Date: 29 May 09 - 02:41 PM

I think tradition has perhaps more to do with being 'culturally embedded' than how long an event has been going, i.e. how much does it involve the local community, and who is it done for? If it doesn't involve the local community, or it's done purely for tourism purposes, then I have my doubts as to whether it can be called a tradition.

But someone will doubtless quote an instance where I'm wrong :-)

Barbara

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 29 May 09 - 01:52 PM

Gillian B: "From the tone of this post it appears that Folk Culture now belongs to an elite group, it is 'ours' not 'their's'. Although you say he (Simon Costin), has every right to work with CPTC, your inference is that he does not. Surely this goes against everything you are saying. Should it not be everyone's to explore, cherish, research and celebrate?"

I'm curious though, as a prior student of archeology, if you went to a 'Museum' and found say err the bones of a dinosaur located next to resin 'bones' of a Unicorn (or a similar popular novelty item), my guess is that you might possibly react unfavourably to that? I recognise my analogy isn't all that strong, but it's exactly the kind of thing which would provoke a displeased reaction from some.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: GUEST,Keith Leech
Date: 29 May 09 - 01:15 PM

I think Simon is reading this anyway but if not I hope to see him over the next couple of weeks and then we can have a chat. I think the more ideas and help he has the happier he will be, after all hpefully we all wan this project to work.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: johnadams
Date: 29 May 09 - 11:01 AM

Ruth Archer wrote:

But because there is a heritage dimension here, it's helpful if they know what it is they're looking at.

In which case polite and constructive feedback to Simon, made in the spirit of support and development, is an essential part of the process.

This is now shaping up nicely as a proper discussion.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 29 May 09 - 10:14 AM

"I would like to see them all, old and new, provided they can be placed in context by the explanations."

Which is exactly my point, too. I think it's simply that lack of context and explanation which has caused the ructions.

People can choose to attend/research/investigate/explore (or not) whichever events/customs they like. But because there is a heritage dimension here, it's helpful if they know what it is they're looking at.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: GUEST,Keith Leech
Date: 29 May 09 - 09:44 AM

Its the old debate isn't it? What is traditional? 25 years in which case the Hastings Jack in the Green is. 200 years in which case Lewes Bonfire as it is currently seen isn't. 300 years in which case mummers plays probably are not. Then we have revivals like the Earl of Rone, a great event but as it has only been revived for 30 years is it traditional? Some of the things we consider traditional are less than 100 years old. Now don't test me on that one because I cannot remember specifics.

I suppose this is something Simon will have to grapple with but personally I would like to see them all, old and new, provided they can be placed in context by the explanations. Certainly Doc has considered Hastings good enough to put into his May book published by English heritage.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 29 May 09 - 08:56 AM

Hi Keith,

Thanks for your elucidation. I think that the reason why people have had a strong response to the film as it stands is that it was taken out of the very specific context for which it was made. If shown simply on its own merits and without that context or any explanation, I can understand why people who care about these things worry when revival events featuring characters such as the Green Man are shown cheek-by-jowl with traditional customs. The casual viewer cannot make the distinctions for themselves.

Does it matter? Well, I think it does. Unfortunately there is a lot of fakelore that has become attached to Britain's traditional customs and history. Certain people have engaged in the arduous process of teasing the different threads apart, which can be frustrating on lots of levels - many visitors to and practitioners of the customs themselves would prefer to believe in their version of history, because it's much more interesting than saying, "We don't know where this comes from or why it happens. It just does. Isn't it great?" I can understand why the people who do the research, and work patiently to de-bunk the nonsense, get cross if they perceive that someone is stepping in and jumbling it all up again (though I do appreciate, having spoken with Simon myself, that this is not his intention at all). I'm just talking about perceptions, and a certain protectiveness, that develops over time.

At the end of the day, I guess the danger in looking at that film out of context is that people latch onto the Jack in the Green stuff because it is an attractive and colourful event. That's great - but it would also be good if they realised what its relationship is to those longer-established living customs which form our folk heritage, and understand that it isn't one of them.

I know people, for instance, who prefer the Thaxted version of the Horn Dance to the real Abbots Bromley. That's fine, as long as they are judging them on their own terms and understand the difference between people doing something interesting with an idea, and a real, living tradition. Without context, that's hard to do.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: Gillian B
Date: 29 May 09 - 08:42 AM

'an individual artist appears to be co-opting our common popular traditional culture (CPTC) for his own personal arts project'

From the tone of this post it appears that Folk Culture now belongs to an elite group, it is 'ours' not 'their's'. Although you say he (Simon Costin), has every right to work with CPTC, your inference is that he does not. Surely this goes against everything you are saying. Should it not be everyone's to explore, cherish, research and celebrate?   Organising a research facility, setting up an educational out-reach programme, preserving objects and items that might otherwise perish, running a diverse arts and music programme, all seem to me to be worthy objectives. Or when somebody chooses to do this, is it now deemed to be 'appropriation' for selfish ends? (and why wasn't I consulted first!)

I can't help feeling that had the MoBF approached Sedayne/Sinister Supporter/Insane Beard/Suibhne O'Piobaireachd/Lord O'May to ask his advice early on, this sea of negativity would have been avoided. I have to agree with the post by Bill Prince, whether he admits to it or not, the recent posts by Mr Breadin are laden with 'unpleasantness and insults'. Mr Prince, you have no need to apologise, this forum is a good and useful resource, it's just that, sadly, certain members of it would prefer to use it as a means to brow beat others.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: GUEST,Keith Leech
Date: 29 May 09 - 08:25 AM

I have only just been directed to this site so sorry if I am way behind. Firstly the film needs to be seen in the context of what it is meant to be. It is a short representation of British customs which is being used to promote the museum of British folklore. It needs to be able to hook in potetial contributors and supporters. It therefore needs to be short and punchy. If you want the full academic thing then go elsewhere. Simon is really working hard on pulling this all together and I think we should be supporting him.

Secondly onto the Green Man thing. Yes it is the Hastings Jack in the Green. Before you criticise you should go to see it and then speak to the reviver (ie me). In my book on the subject I state very clearly that it is a revivial not a recontruction and as such living and open to change. I also say that the green men were taken directly from European customs and are entirely contemporary and that there never was a suggestion that they existed in the original just as morris dancers didn't. Any questions? Fire away.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: GUEST,Silas
Date: 29 May 09 - 07:52 AM

Well, Norm, nice to see you back.

If you find a way of deleting posts please let me know. I would love to be able to delete the posts where I have made a complete tit of myself!!

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: Norman FitzNicely
Date: 29 May 09 - 07:44 AM

I apologise. And I will explain.
I was recently persuaded by another member to join this Forum. I have not done so in the past for the reasons I stated above.

I am a depressive. After a particularly bad day yesterday I decided to look at a subject which I thought would interest me. I found the tone of some of the "discussion" a little more than robust; that has been my previous experience here too. That, on top of my day, tipped the balance for me.
Those of you who know me will know that I am not the miserable git that I appeared to be in my previous post.

I have no wish to detract from the discussion about Doc's sterling work. Therefore if it is possible, after a few days I will delete these posts as if I had never been here, and I will confine my future visits, if there are any, to reading but not participating in the Forum. For now.

I'm sure I heard someone say "Good!" just then ;-)

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: GUEST,Silas
Date: 29 May 09 - 05:34 AM

Well, Norm, if you are reading this (and we all know you are), you just need to develop a slightly thicker skin.

This is a great place and has wonderful and varied and extremley knowledgeable membership. We don't all agree all the time, thank god, and some posters styles are a little robust, but its all good clean fun. So shed the 'holier than thou' attitude and jump in.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 29 May 09 - 04:31 AM

Don't bother replying to this - I won't be reading it.

I'm sure you won't, Bill - but that's a fairly rude & unhelpful piece of posting in itself, especially as it's wholly inaccurate with respect of what has taken place here. The multiple identity issue was due to technical reasons: my main post ID is currently Suibhne O'Piobaireachd and whilst this name occasionally changes, the membership ID does not - in other words, if I change the name, so the name changes on all the other 2,461 posts (this will be post #2,462) I have made under this name since becoming a member on the 13th Jan 2007. My GUEST ID is generally Sedayne (Astray); this I use if I'm logging in from other computers on the hoof, or, in this case, when we were having problems with our main computer at home. For the purposes of this thread, I chose the anonymous (and festive) Lord O'May (think of it as a kind of guising) but quickly changed it to include the familiar soubriquet when the discussion showed signs of heating up.

Nothing I have said here was intended to be gratuitously unpleasant or yet to insult any individual. Any critique has been directed against the work of the perpetrators and most assuredly not against the perpetrators themselves, who, if the impressive CVs on the webpage linked to in the OP of this thread are anything to go by, are serious design professionals to whom such criticism is, as they have said above, water off a duck's back.

Which reminds me of something I haven't heard for a year or two: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8yx4k4tzqE

S O'P

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: Norman FitzNicely
Date: 28 May 09 - 08:21 PM

The above exchanges are among the reasons I resisted joining this forum. Rudeness hidden behind a ludicrous number of noms-de-plume is not the kind of thing that I came here for.
So I'm off again. Probably the shortest membership of what could be a good and useful resource, but on almost every occasion that I've been here I have come across unpleasantness and insults cloaked as "constructive criticism".
And before you pick on my nom-de-plume, my name is Bill Prince. Don't bother replying to this - I won't be reading it.
Hi John.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 28 May 09 - 12:32 PM

On musing about why I've been so kindly received by people here, I feel in no small part, it was my desire to ask questions and seek guidance from multiple others who were already fully immersed in the history of the tradition before I began forging ahead (I only sing by the way - nothing more ambitious than that).

I understand that while it may be alien to me (and it surely is at times), what many of these individuals hold and cultivate, is precious and rare to them (and to us all likewise). Through the naive eyes of a newcomer like myself, I tend to only see bickering over interesting pretty things (though I don't at the same time - for I'm now forging my own living personal relationship with some of these artifacts).

It has however, appeared to me - at more times than I can number, to be contrary and perverse (with consequent dangers of scaring away possible further enthusiasts). And yet the personal passion which inspires such strongly expressed views, is ironically a quite non-selfcentered devotion to the those rare cultural materials they engage with every day - as performer, researcher, recording artist or simply session organiser.

As such, I can readily appreciate both the Museum as a personal creative project with an ambitious and important social purpose intended to attract the interest of people like me. And also, the reasoning behind why it has also caused some degree of inflamed reaction.

I understand the vibrancy and enthusiasm of Simon's piece, and thus it's likely success in attracting interest from regular people. But I also understand the reaction against some of it. Such a project will inevitably be fraught with great challenges to meet demands of both an unknowing public, professionals, passionate dilettantes, and academics alike.

Whatever it's flaws, or personal aesthetic biases (which I see some problems with) however, from the position of a relative newcomer to the world of folk, I heartily wish the Museum well both in infancy and full fruition.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 28 May 09 - 10:48 AM

Thanks for that, Gillian - but despite your rather picturesque analysis, no one's bullying anyone, simply reacting to a situation in which an individual artist appears to be co-opting our common popular traditional culture (CPTC) for his own personal arts project. He has every right to do this of course, just as I have every right to say what I have. I do this all the time in my professional life when I feel our CPTC is suffering in the name of self-interest - see HERE for one such incident involving storytelling and, yes, The Green fecking Man. Note here that rather than perpetuating the issue into protracted discussion, as has happened here, I've allowed the perpetrator to have the last word in the matter, though his unrepentant stories are ours to mess with attitude sticks in my craw.

In the present instance I (personally) would disagree that there is a need for such a museum, given that the internet provides that role anyway, without the agenda, the objectives, the proscription and the aestheticism which I (personally) feel are counter-productive to a wider appreciation of the subject as a whole - i.e. that of our CPTC which exists, and will continue to exist, regardless of projects such as this one. As I say, input any of the above customs into Google and you will find webpages, YouTube film, and photographs by the shedload. Neither do I feel the customs need promoting; God knows they attract enough attention as it is - last time I went to the Allendale Tar Barrels I was almost crushed to unconsciousness by the crowds. That said, I wish the venture well and might suggest a few events at which it would be very welcome indeed.

Always nice to see Doc Rowe's footage though; here's an idea - why not upload some of it onto YouTube and see what the reaction is? If my shitty little film of the Chester Cheese Rolling can get over 55,000 hits and inspire some choice inter-county debate on the comments board, I bet it would cause quite a stir AND create a broader awareness of the existence of the archive with people who have a real interest in such things.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: GUEST
Date: 28 May 09 - 10:43 AM

Who is this Sean Breadin of whom you speak?:

Sedayne/Sinister Supporter/Insane Beard/Suibhne O'Piobaireachd/Lord O'May et al.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: curmudgeon
Date: 28 May 09 - 10:41 AM

Have I missed something? Who is this Sean Breadin of whom you speak?

Thanks - Tom

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 28 May 09 - 10:33 AM

"I suspect he has behaved in this manner for so long that you are all inured to it."

As I've said elsewhere on this forum Gillian, fortunately for me, I've genuinely had nothing but support and encouragement from Sedayne and some others of his ilk here myself. And despite some of the peculiar customs, I would indeed encourage anyone - including the unfortunate slightly chargrilled Simon - to risk posting questions and queries to the highly informed and experienced members here. As said irrespective of this thread, the members are not Dragons, but it's alway's wise to wear asbestos underwear when venturing forth.

I was also an 'outsider' to the trad folk scene, until a few months ago. It's somewhat perplexing to witness such impassioned and unpleasant reactions over what appear to be minor matters. And it would be disheartening to be on the receiving end too - as I said earlier. Fortunately, never having been on the receiving end of it myself, I tend to stand back incomprehendingly (and with no small dismay) and observe it as a peculiarity of grumpy gout-riddled old men (and women - wouldn't want to leave certain famed members out) who tend for the most part, to gain perverse sado-masochistic virtual entertainment from dishing it out consensually between themselves...

Enough from me on this, I trust that Simon hasn't been alienated from potential fruitful future communications with some of the informed membership.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: GUEST,Silas
Date: 28 May 09 - 10:10 AM

Well, simon, I say again, I thought the film was wonderful. Really really good - i've watched it several times now.

As for the museum - fantasic concept, can't wait to see it 'live' so to speak.

Good luck to you.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: Gillian B
Date: 28 May 09 - 09:36 AM

As a relative newcomer to this forum it has been curious to observe how others deal with the likes of Mr Breadin. He seems to employ all the tactics and language of the bully. Many years ago when I was studying Archaeology at University, we had a very learned tutor who was both revered and feared. While being incredibly knowledgeable on a vast range of subjects there were some that he deemed to be his and his alone and woe betide any pupil who dared to explore them. Anyone who did was instantly shot down in flames and derided in much the same way that your Mr Breadin has done to Simon Costin. He has shown he would rather bully, undermine and shame another individual, than to help and nurture. I'm sure you all know and respect him but from an outsiders perspective his behaviour lacks any kind of respect or grace. I suspect he has behaved in this manner for so long that you are all inured to it. I applaud John Adams for pointing this out but I fear it will have little effect and that well meaning people will be frightened off from ever daring to ask for help or an opinion least they be humiliated in the way that we have all had to witness. Well done to Mr Costin for having the nerve to defend himself but shame on Mr Breadin for having spoiled what might have been an informative and friendly exchange.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 28 May 09 - 07:59 AM

MoBF: "I am seeking the advice of academics and professionals and impassioned individuals such as Sean, as the project evolves, which will help to broaden and develop things as well as add depth to the content displayed. Once the museum becomes more established I'm sure the website will grow and expand and contain a lot more material."

Very encouraging post. Glad to see some postings haven't alienated you, or discouraged you from undertaking a more serious endevour. In Sean/Sedayne's and others defense, the self-styled bogey men round here, are actually much more charming, helpful and encouraging than they might sometimes sound, as I'm sure you will find if you speak to any in person.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 28 May 09 - 07:59 AM

Cheers, Museum of Folklore. MRAU - but do check my earlier apology & recent post which I hope you find more considered. That I wish you well in the venture goes without say & I hope our paths do cross one day. Maybe we need another thread - What is Folklore?. In which case, all lore is Folklore - I ain't ever seen no horse go guising; at least not a living one...

Here's something I read earlier on the Heart of Albion Press website that might have a relevance here:

Explore Folklore shows there is much more to folklore than morris dancing and fifty-something folksingers! The rituals of 'what we do on our holidays', funerals, stag nights and 'lingerie parties' are all full of 'unselfconsious' folk customs. Indeed, folklore is something that is integral to all our lives – it is so intrinsic we do not think of it as being 'folklore'.

The implicit ideas underlying folk lore and customs are also explored. There might appear to be little in common between people who touch wood for luck (a 'tradition' invented in the last 200 years) and legends about people who believe they have been abducted and subjected to intimate body examinations by aliens. Yet, in their varying ways, these and other 'folk beliefs' reflect the wide spectrum of belief and disbelief in what is easily dismissed as 'superstition'.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: GUEST,The Museum of British Folklore
Date: 28 May 09 - 07:42 AM

I didn't have time to check all the posts yesterday and am just catching up.Let me start by saying that, as Gillian B has pointed out, this project is in it's infancy. It is not my intention for it to be 'Institutionalised centralised state-funded folklore' as Mr Breadin says. In fact I intend to try and get it privately funded so as to avoid the Institutional approach and keep it as free and vibrant as the subject matter. I must say it has been depressing to read the posts by Sean Breadin. I have several of his writings printed off in my files and have always respected his ideas. While I didn't think his posts were spiteful, they were certainly harsh. My reply wasn't a 'defensive apology' as he implies, merely my telling the background to the film and the context within which it was shown. I would have hoped someone in his position would have offered help and suggestions as to the pitfalls to avoid in starting a new project such as this. Using terms such as 'Bullshit, half-assed pastiche, nasty folksy Green Man imagery', etc etc, to undermine and belittle someones efforts is all very well and thankfully water off a ducks back. There will always be dissenting voices with a new venture, which is healthy and should work to make the project exciting, but how much more constructive they could be if they were to offer alternative advice instead of damming condemnation. To imagine the website would contain the breadth of material Sean mentioned, when after all, it serves as an introduction to the project and a journal is a little unrealistic. I am seeking the advice of academics and professionals and impassioned individuals such as Sean, as the project evolves, which will help to broaden and develop things as well as add depth to the content displayed. Once the museum becomes more established I'm sure the website will grow and expand and contain a lot more material. Thankfully, the general response to the project so far has been very favorable, with many people coming forward with offers of help and useful and constructive views as to how the whole enterprise should and could evolve. I will gladly take them on board and aim to work towards establishing a vibrant and unusual centre to celebrate and research our annual customs and traditions. My thanks go to all those here who have shown encouragement and all I would say to Sean is that it would be of more interest to people like myself and others I'm sure, to hear sage guidence rather than have to read arrogant and patronising posts.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 28 May 09 - 07:38 AM

I was wondering if it might be more appropriate if the 'Museum' had been pitched as what it actually is, ie: a collection of folkloric and fantasy artifacts? Or even an art piece inspired by British Folklore old and new.

The term 'Museum' does seem to be rather misapplied, as it implies a serious degree of academic clout and rigor, which the caravan - entertaining and engaging as it is (or so I feel) - seemingly lacks.

People surrender their critical faculties before the weight of terms like Museum or Archive. And I suspect this could indeed be confusing to the average punter.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 28 May 09 - 05:41 AM

before you decided to be so spiteful and rude.

I am naturally wary of attempts to create an umbrella of folklorism under which The Burry Man is the natural cousin of the Hastings Jack-in-the-Green, and the Cheese Rollers of Cooper's Hill drink from the same cup as the Britannia Mills Coconut Dancers - and all to an Eliza Carthy soundtrack. I've no problem with any of these things as disparate entities - even Eliza Carthy to whom much respect - but to bring them together in such a way implies a common continuity of purpose that just isn't there. To juxtapose the more fanciful creations of post-modern fantasy-fakelore (and evident revivals) with the very real McCoy of the Allendale Tar Barrels is, in my opinion, not only entirely misleading, but disrespectful to the very ordinary people who keep these going and to whom they ultimately belong as living, breathing entities. In so saying I'm not being spiteful, rude, crabby or narrow-minded, I just feel that any study of folklore and folk custom requires the aforementioned dignified objectivism that seems, to me, to be entirely absent from this project.

Whilst in my Sinister Supporter guise at this year's Morpeth Gathering, a rather charming young Goth couple congratulated me for my evident pagan presence. Happily they didn't seem at all disappointed when I pointed out that far from being pagan the Green Man is one of the earliest indicators of the Nature / Nurture dialectic deriving from strong Gnostic undercurrents in the theology of the medieval church and that its presence in the Folk Consciousness is entirely due to the Post-modern Zeitgeist as engendered by the likes of John Michel (feature in a recent Fortean Times) and the ongoing influence of The Wicker Man etc. Culturally, these things are crucial; as is The Museum of Folklore; as is the work of people like Wyrdstone whose choice of folkloric images is a key signifier of the nature of his music. However, we're in the realm of very deliberate revival here, existing at a secondary or tertiary remove from the source; as such it threatens us with the notion of a bland consensus which has always, alas, been the unfortunate flipside of Folk. In this sense the Wicker Man phallic-symbol Maypole is just as twee and sanitised as - er - This (that's Staines Morris in case you don't recognise it at first!). Remember, the customs are not Folk in and of themselves; they are defined as such by outsiders.

Anyway, but here's another very choice piece of YouTubery from Ottery St Mary:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEsRfcA5dts

Folk? Hmmmmmmm....

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 28 May 09 - 03:46 AM

Gillian B: "He is obviously not an academic but just has a heartfelt love of something that we all share"

There is also IMO a danger implied in the tone (rather than content) of criticism leveled at the project. Some people have the energy and personal determination to do things like this, some people are well informed enough to judge them as wanting. The kind of damning critique so common to Mudcat - as opposed to educated feedback or constructive criticism - is most dispiriting. Clearly there needs to be collaboration between people with the ability to create, and more serious academics, to get a 'real' archive and museum sorted (if such a thing is wanted at all). But I saw this as a homespun creative project - if anything very idiosyncratically human, crude and imperfect - and in no way a serious academic exercise (I'd be rather surprised if anyone mistook it for such.) It's a miscellanious menagerie of interesting objects and images, a chest of curio's designed to attract the eye and interest of casual passers by. And on that basis, I think it works well.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: Gillian B
Date: 27 May 09 - 06:35 PM

How very strange. I've just spent a very enjoyable few hours looking through both the Museum of British Folklore site and several of Sean Breadin's blogs etc. How anyone who is as obviously intelligent and well read as Sean could heap such scorn on a project that is so much in it's infancy is beyond me. The MoBF site comes across as a heartfelt, sincere project which the director is at pains to point out, is a personal one. It seems that he has been trying to make the right contacts within the folk community (Doc Rowe etc), and is striving hard to establish something, that I for one, would love to be able to visit one day. He is obviously not an academic but just has a heartfelt love of something that we all share I suspect. As John Adams has said, give the boy a chance! Even with your apology I doubt if we will hear from him again if he thinks this is the welcome a first effort receives. You mention the 'dignified objectivism' of The Future of Things Past, it's a pity that, with your obvious intelligence, you could not have applied some before you decided to be so spiteful and rude.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 27 May 09 - 06:30 PM

I look forward to seeing the MoBF on a festival field somewhere.


Me too.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: johnadams
Date: 27 May 09 - 06:19 PM

I've got no problem with a robust exchange of opinion on this or any other forum. I thought your criticism 'off mark' and said so. You gave me back your opinion. Some of the language you used was less diplomatic than I find comfortable but hey, not everyone's a diplomat.

While I can understand your passionate objection to the "nasty folksy Green Man imagery which owes more to The Wicker Man than the wondrous reality of British Folk Custom (not that I have an opinion on it myself), to pick on a single element of the offered video and use it to dismiss the whole vision that is the Museum of British Folklore seems a little excessive.

As a person who has spent more than a decade actively supporting Doc's work, sometimes to the detriment of my own, to have some more support feels really good. I've never met or spoken with Simon Costin and hadn't even heard of the MoBF until Doc mentioned it in a phone call a few weeks ago. As far as I'm concerned it's a gift from the Gods and if it has a few imbalances in the early stages, so what.

I say "Let's have more selfless people like Simon Costin - people with a vision and a dream of making things better, with no thought of self aggrandisment!"

I look forward to seeing the MoBF on a festival field somewhere.

Johnny Adams

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 27 May 09 - 05:28 PM

Furthermore...

I came into this with a Guest Post at 23 May 09 - 07:01 PM with a simple list of the things I recognised in the compilation film in response to someone asking. I then pointed out in another Guest Post at 23 May 09 - 08:39 PM that some of the footage was familiar from The Future of Thing's Past (which I regard very highly owing to its general air of impartiality & dignified objectivism) next to which the compilation film looked a tad slipshod. An opinion is expressed - and away we go! It's the Mudcat way...

So, before this goes any further, my apologies to all involved and my sincere regrets if any of my unmerited mouthing off has caused anyone any upset. At times, I am a belligerent gobshite; and sometimes it's easy to forget we're talking to human beings.

Best of luck with the venture; and you know if our paths cross I'd be in there like a pig in shit anyway.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 27 May 09 - 04:38 PM

Any amount, Gillian - most of them on Myspace, alas, owing to convenience. Go to Jesus at the Zoo (a free on-line album project) & scroll down for the links to the others on the right hand side of the screen.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: GUEST,Gillian B
Date: 27 May 09 - 04:23 PM

Dare we ask if you yourself has a website of any sort?

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 27 May 09 - 04:12 PM

The most laughable thing is to have posted a 'film' of his own as if it is an example of something worthy, which then turns out to be badly filmed, boring and cut with images of stone carvings and green man faces.

Bile venting? Bloody hell, Gillian - I'm not in same league as this choice personal onslaught. I might criticise people's work (only because I care about the subject) but to dare call another human being unhinged? You're on another there. And who said anything about my Cheese Rolling film being worthy? It doesn't have to be worthy - it's YouTube! I did it as a joke - cutting casually filmed footage of this absurd little event with the equally absurd Victorian foliate-faces from the surrounding architecture. It was only meant to be up there a week, but I left it up owing to the amount of hits it got and the general hilarity of the Cheshire vs Gloucester comments, which, as I said, is the most interesting thing about it.

And never once have I questioned the sterling work of Doc Rowe - I just feel it's worth a good deal more than this. A lot more.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: GUEST,Gillian B
Date: 27 May 09 - 03:48 PM

I'm beginning to think that Suibhne O'Piobaireachd / Sedayne / Lord O'May or whatever his name is, might be a little unhinged. It is one thing to air an opinion in a measured and interesting way but totally another to stoop to being rude and ignorant to boot. To dismiss someone's hard work using terms like 'bullshit' etc says more about him than it does about the people or person he is venting his bile on. I was hoping to have read a response from the MoBF but am hardly surprised they haven't posted anything. What would be the point?
The most laughable thing is to have posted a 'film' of his own as if it is an example of something worthy, which then turns out to be badly filmed, boring and cut with images of stone carvings and green man faces. If that's what Doc and the MoBF have to live up to, heaven help us!

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: Valmai Goodyear
Date: 27 May 09 - 02:28 PM

Excellent footage of the Ottery boys and an even better choice of Cliffe Bonfire Society as the climax. Filming by firelight, firework light and flare light is not easy.

Valmai

P.S. What shall we do with him?

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: johnadams
Date: 27 May 09 - 11:13 AM

Of course I've looked at them - as soon as this thread started.

The caravan looks great and is surely as relevant in the scheme of things as David Owen's 'Seeds of Love ' exhibition or Matt Cowan's Flash Company exhibition - using art to attract people in with a view to leading some of them to dig further.

You talk about them leaving out all this other stuff - it's a quick launch video not a fully peer reviewed balanced academic artefact. I'm prepared to have a little patience and tolerance and see what follows. It seem to be an ambitious plan and if the vision were to succeed it would benefit us all.

It's not really a case of seeing eye to eye. Given that you accept that the fantasy folkists have a right to get it wrong and given that you accept that Doc, MoBF, etc have a right to observe it, I can't actually see what you are objecting to except that somebody's effort didn't meet your exacting standards with regard to your pet issue.

I'm not out of line with your viewpoint on some of these things. I'm just showing a lot more tolerance towards somebody's efforts to make a difference.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: katlaughing
Date: 27 May 09 - 10:58 AM

Meanwhile a clip of the chasing the roll of cheese down the hill was featured on Keith Olbermann's COUNTDOWN on MSNBC last night, so now we know what that round bouncy white thing was in Doc's docu!:-)

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 27 May 09 - 10:33 AM

Have a look through the images on the website, from the logo to the images that accompany it, and to the caravan itself. I don't think I could face looking through it again! Of course people can do what they like, but this sort of fantasy folklore is just as noxious as the sanitisation of earlier collectors. It is subjective, unreal and of little interest to both a serious study or a casual awareness of the subject. And where are the grave decorations? The wayside shrines? The illuminated houses at Christmas? The hen-parties at Blackpool? The resolutely un-folksy folklore that still represents the hopes & fears of the folk to this day. If I've overlooked it, then I do apologise.   

People are free to document whatever they like, but I feel distinctions must be made between what is genuine and what is contrived to be so, just as distinctions must be made between a record by Steeleye Span and one containing documentary recordings of Walter Pardon.

There's another thread hereabouts - 1979 Pics - Devon & Newcastle Dancers - which is worth a look in this respect, especially Tug the Cox's comment of 20 May 09 - 03:00 PM. Either there is something real here, or else the term Fantasy Folklore is entirely tautologous.

Enough anyway - I doubt we're going see eye to eye on this one, nor that anything I have to say will have the slightest baring on the matter one way or the other.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: johnadams
Date: 27 May 09 - 09:51 AM

....... where exactly do the BMoF actually promote this " nasty folksy Green Man imagery which owes more to The Wicker Man than the wondrous reality of British Folk Custom."?

True they include images of of these celebrations (or one at least) in their extensive range of observation (as displayed here but I can see nothing other than an observation that it exists, which is does, and is thus observable. They don't appear to be expressing a judgement one way or the other. Are you objecting to Doc or them even acknowledging its existence?

I don't actually disagree with you when you express a dislike for 'fantasy folklorism'   but I would reserve the right to observe it and make it available for other people to observe and comment on. It's up to them to make their minds up about it and not up to you or me or Doc or BMoF to filter and sanitise their experience before they consume it. We had enough of that from the early collectors.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 27 May 09 - 08:57 AM

There seems to be a mismatch in your opinions.

In which case, allow me to clarify. First of all there are the empirical events - the songs, the customs, the stuff as it exists, or has existed in times gone by. Second, there is the documentation of the stuff - the collected matter which is not the stuff itself of course, but a secondary archive in the form of manuscripts, sound recordings, films, photographs etc. These occupy completely different realms - the first is a thing; the other is a study of a thing, and, as such, must be as objectively dispassionate as it needs to be clear on its objectives & agendas. So far so good; I've got no problem with that.

There is, alas, a third level which seeks to interpret such events in terms of a fantasy folklorism wherein such things are seen in terms of highly selective aestheticism which is loaded with assumption, agenda, speculation and spin which has absolutely nothing to do with the events themselves. This is the realm of Revival and Reinvention - the realm, I fear, to which The Museum of British Folklore belongs, with its nasty folksy Green Man imagery which owes more to The Wicker Man than the wondrous reality of British Folk Custom. This is bucolic post-modernism at its very worst; an indulgent weirdness which exists in direct opposition to sheer and often shocking ordinariness of the customs themselves - and the people who participate in them.

So, whilst I applaud any attempts to maintain the integrity of the archives, I can't help but feel the Museum of Folklore trivialises the whole issue and is somewhat counter-productive to a cause that would be better served by taking the wider view you spoke of earlier.

Just one opinion though, to which I am no doubt welcome.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: johnadams
Date: 27 May 09 - 07:41 AM

I haven't spotted any clog dancing. There's some step dancing but I can't recognise the dancer or the stye. I'll ask Doc to identify it.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: manitas_at_work
Date: 27 May 09 - 07:38 AM

Whoops! That should have said 'people are NOT questioned on their belief systems' !

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: manitas_at_work
Date: 27 May 09 - 07:37 AM

I'm pretty sure the step-dancing was being acompanied by Bob Cann.

Subject: RE: Short film from Doc Rowe's collections
From: manitas_at_work
Date: 27 May 09 - 07:34 AM

I'm not sure if the 'new age posturing' referred to Hastings but Hastings doesn't have a Green Man Festival or Jamboree. There are green men, women and even dogs there but is' a Jack in the Green and is a concious revival of the 19th century sweeps' festivities. Of course many of the participants are new age romantics and I'm sure some of the organisers look askance at this but people are questioned on their belief systems when they join in and the organisers seem very keen to keep the festival open to the whole community even to the point of neo-pagans being allowed to store their processional ginat in the church overnight. There is even a link to the traditional Bank Holiday motorcycle rally with a greened up motorcycle being ridden in the procession.