|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) Date: 29 Jun 09 - 01:28 PM Villian: "what the issue here is, is an assumption that these morris men are rascist becuase they black up" Who has 'assumed' that these Morris men are racist because they black-up? I haven't seen *any* such aspersions cast of that ilk, by anyone - including the school. I'd like to see references that make this clear. Because IMO, you're getting the wrong end of the stick here Villain. And clarity in these matters is essential to prevent *exactly* the kinds of damaging and incorrect assertions, which will almost inevitably be made by white racists observing this news item, that R. Bridge refers to in his letter above. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Richard Bridge Date: 29 Jun 09 - 01:29 PM It seems to me that the evidence above shows specific links to traditions of guising up in different colours by regional origin. Accordingly if one accepts (as I do) that blacking up is not a racial reference then the colour is specifically part of the tradition, and any offence is taken as a matter of ignorance. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Royston Date: 29 Jun 09 - 01:29 PM The Villain; However, what the issue here is, is an assumption that these morris men are rascist becuase they black up, without finding out why and possibly making a lesson plan to explain why they do what they do. A case of being proven guilty before innocent, by claptrap PC do gooders. Makes me want to puke. You go too far, in spite of plenty of guidance to the correct path. NOBODY SAID (THE SCHOOL INCLUDED) THAT MORRIS MEN WERE RACIST FOR BLACKING UP. THE SCHOOL WERE WORRIED THAT GUESTS AND VISITORS WOULD SIMPLY BE OFFENDED BY BLACKFACE. Geesh, what do you have to do... |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Banjiman Date: 29 Jun 09 - 01:33 PM "NOBODY SAID (THE SCHOOL INCLUDED) THAT MORRIS MEN WERE RACIST FOR BLACKING UP. THE SCHOOL WERE WORRIED THAT GUESTS AND VISITORS WOULD SIMPLY BE OFFENDED BY BLACKFACE." I was about to write exacrly the same thing. Put yourself in the shoes of someone black and then consider if you might be offended by the "blacking up". |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: The Borchester Echo Date: 29 Jun 09 - 01:34 PM Baz, the esteemed Ed has moved the fRoots reference out of the media thread (where I put it this morning) into one of its own: http://froots.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=17952#17952 |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Spleen Cringe Date: 29 Jun 09 - 01:36 PM Cheers, Royston, thanks for the response... I think Ged favours the 'Morris Smurf' look. Villan, I don't think the school is assuming the Morris Side is racist. I think they're assuming that parents and others will associate blacking up with racism. Certainly there's a discussion to be had, but in the meantime better they're in school, greenfaced or redfaced and dancing than sticking to their guns over a relatively minor detail and excluded. Both sides of the dispute could be looking to meet each other halfway... |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Spleen Cringe Date: 29 Jun 09 - 01:37 PM Sorry crossposted with Royston and Paul. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Rasener Date: 29 Jun 09 - 01:38 PM >>Accordingly if one accepts (as I do) that blacking up is not a racial reference then the colour is specifically part of the tradition, and any offence is taken as a matter of ignorance. << Agreed >>NOBODY SAID (THE SCHOOL INCLUDED) THAT MORRIS MEN WERE RACIST FOR BLACKING UP. THE SCHOOL WERE WORRIED THAT GUESTS AND VISITORS WOULD SIMPLY BE OFFENDED BY BLACKFACE.<< Firstly, no need to shout. Secondly, read what you have said. Why would they be offended? They are just disguising their faces. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Banjiman Date: 29 Jun 09 - 01:50 PM "Why would they be offended? They are just disguising their faces." So "blacking up" has absolutely no negative connotations for anyone then Villan? Can you really not see why some people could be offended? |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Royston Date: 29 Jun 09 - 01:53 PM The Villain, We know, because we're folkies, what the *good* tradition of blackface symbolises. That is not true of everyone. Gravesham is one of the most ethnically diverse boroughs in the UK, including London Boroughs. In their own minds, the school are worried that offence would be caused. I think they are wrong, I think that if the side gave a humorous and informative introduction to the blackface issue then the community would be find it fascinating and enjoyable. I grew up in the borough and went to school in Gravesend and speak with some personal experience of the local community. However, I can understand the school's perspective. If you read [our own literature] about the origins of blackface and look at the contemporary language used by some of our sides [who talk about "Niggering"] then I can understand why a public, community organisation would decide not to take the risk. Against that complete backdrop, why do we not celebrate our tradition just as effectively and authentically with a different, less contentious colour? |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Ruth Archer Date: 29 Jun 09 - 02:16 PM "2. Certainly has some unpleasant and racist connotations even though modern-day morris folk do not intend it to be so." In a nutshell, that's the thing. The claims that Border Morris never had any connections with minstrelsy are simply not true. In fact, the connection through both the music and the instruments traditionally used is very strong, not to mention the blacking up. This doesn't mean that morris dancers who black up in 2009 are deliberately celebrating a racist tradition (though, as Crow Sister pointed out, I have suspicions about certain members of my local border side as they are BNP activists). But if anyone asked today's border morris dancers about the origins of the tradition, they'd not be telling the whole truth if they did not mention mistrelsy. And you have to think about how good you'd feel explaining that legacy to a person of colour. The people on this thread who have accused the school of ignorance for not researching the custom might want to do a bit of reading themselves. This discussion has been carried out time and again on Mudcat, and I still don't understand why some people feel so threatened by the suggestion that it might be a good idea, in this day and age, to maybe think about using a different colour than black to stand in for the traditional "disguise". If the school has, as it says, a "fragile" and diverse community, I can absolutely understand their reluctance to potentially damage what trust they may have built up locally by having a black-faced border side perform at their event. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Rasener Date: 29 Jun 09 - 02:19 PM Ok I will leave you to it. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: VirginiaTam Date: 29 Jun 09 - 02:20 PM I don't believe any side should be forced to change colour or add design in order to meet PC agenda. I agree that banning a tradition because it may offend teaches nothing. But it does reinforce unwarranted shame on English traditions and bolsters the BNP argument which is dumb and dangerous. I don't find the black face in context of Morris dance offensive because I see no connection of the Morris dance style to any people of colour. Blacking up for minstrel show is racist because the practice was parodying the music and dance of people of colour. It is all about context. Is there anything wrong with border morris dancers putting on the disguise in front of the audience, using traditional materials (if applicable) and providing an explanation of how and why it is done? It is time to educate not placate. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Ruth Archer Date: 29 Jun 09 - 02:26 PM "I see no connection of the Morris dance style to any people of colour. Blacking up for minstrel show is racist because the practice was parodying the music and dance of people of colour. It is all about context" But Tam, blacking up for Border was certainly connected at one time to minstrelsy. So how can one have racist connotations and the other not? |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Dead Horse Date: 29 Jun 09 - 02:56 PM O.K. So we can safely assume that any morris/mumming/whatever side that continues to black up in spite of the absolutely obvious racial slur, intended or not (strike that - it must be intended if they still defy this public outcry) should immediately be brought to book for inciting racial hatred etc. I saw a child the other day who had her face painted YELLOW !!! What were her parents thinking? I do hope no chinese/japanese folk saw this blatant insult to Asian culture and race. Do please try to remove heads from arseholes in the ignorant, wherever you find them. Not bow down to them, even if they are in supposed "knowlegeable positions" |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Les in Chorlton Date: 29 Jun 09 - 02:57 PM Well done Ruth, as before, I think you have said it all. The 19C Minstrel tradition influenced Border Morris. Why don't they say so? L in C |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: VirginiaTam Date: 29 Jun 09 - 03:02 PM Hi Ruth I was composing as you posted so we kind of crossed. Unfortunately wikipedia provides neither proof nor documented history but does report several theories. Sadly because the entertainment activities of the poor have not figured worthy enough of recording until recently, we likely never will know the truth. More recently, some people have postulated that the black face tradition was linked to the much later introduction of the American minstrel shows into Victorian England in the late 1830s. However, there is no direct evidence of this nor any explanation for why rural border morris dancers would choose to adapt their traditional folk dances to partially dress like the minstrel performers, but not adopt the whole costume or any other element of the show. I just don't see anything in border morris dance or music that compares to the minstrel show music and dance. In my estimation they do not sound or look the same in anyway. However I do find the following might be more plausible as a reason NOT to black up than the very very loose parallels to American Minstrel shows. Another theory is that the black face tradition derives from earlier forms of the dance involving a Moroccan king and his followers (which links into the theory that the word "morris" is derived from moorish or moresco). There is recorded evidence from 1688 of payments in Shrewsbury of 10 shillings to Ye Bedlam Morris and 2 shillings for Ye King of Morroco [1]. There are even earlier recordings of a black-face morris tradition in Europe. Carved figures from 1480 in Munich, Germany show "moriscan dancers" with black faces and bells and evidence from France includes the quote from Arbeau circa 1580 which stated "In fashionable society when I was young, a small boy, his face daubed with black and his forehead swathed in a white or yellow handkerchief, would make an appearance after supper. He wore leggings covered with little bells and performed a morris". However, there is too little recorded evidence to prove or disprove any linkage to the dances on the English Welsh borders. So unless some written documentation of an actual border morris dancer from the time the blacking tradition started surfaces, we each have to make our own decision about it. I believe everyone (even those of colour) should be afforded the same opportunity. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: The Barden of England Date: 29 Jun 09 - 03:17 PM I'm no racist - far from it, but if we carry this to its logical conclusion, then what about the Voodoo tradition where you'll see people 'whitened' up. Am I not able to complain that this may well offend me, and many others? John Barden |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Banjiman Date: 29 Jun 09 - 03:23 PM "I'm no racist - far from it, but if we carry this to its logical conclusion, then what about the Voodoo tradition where you'll see people 'whitened' up. Am I not able to complain that this may well offend me, and many others?" But does it offend you? If so perhaps you could ask for voodoo (with whitened faces) not to be performed at your local school? Assuming they had some planned that is. I repeat, can you really not see why someone might be offended by "blacking up" .... whatever the motives and the particlar history of the Border Morris tradition? I can. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Royston Date: 29 Jun 09 - 03:25 PM Dead Horse, Calm down and try to consider the evidence that is being discussed before reacting on instinct alone. What is emerging (in spite of what you would like to hear) is that blackface morris has some very dodgy racist roots. Unlike other colours of disguise - we are all agreed that *facial disguise is the essence of this great english tradition, *not* the colour. Now you have to understand that Minstrelsy (blackface to impersonate a person of African heritage) is simple and vile racism. The origin of Minstrelsy lies in the fact that some white folk who couldn't bear even to look on a black person, let alone touch them or pay money to see them entertain, found the black person to be terribly amusing and funny, like a circus elephant or chimp. So other white folk pretended to black and caroused and grinned and looned around the place to amuse the other racists in a way that didn't involve actually being near a real savage. So, you see, anything derived from or celebrating Minstrelsy *can never* be "good" or "clean" or "justified". It is beyond the pail. I feel sorry for you if you don't understand that. Some say that Minstrels and Gollywogs are from a "more innocent" time, but that is wrong. They are from a more ignorant and stupid time - of slavery and segregation. These cultural icons must be remembered with utter shame, not celebrated. This is why blackface (which has an ambiguous heritage) may not be worth hanging onto, particularly as the colour is not important to the *good* folk heritage. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Royston Date: 29 Jun 09 - 03:29 PM John, I'm no racist - far from it, but if we carry this to its logical conclusion, then what about the Voodoo tradition where you'll see people 'whitened' up. Am I not able to complain that this may well offend me, and many others? Banjiman has made the good point. I'd add that Voodoo witches whited-up for disguise long before they had ever seen a white-skinned person. They weren't doing it to deride and take the p**s out of white folk. As I said above this, we are learning that blackface morris has a heritage that is more dodgy than I had previously thought. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Les in Chorlton Date: 29 Jun 09 - 03:35 PM http://www.welshbordermorris.co.uk/ Please go to this website and click on Clee Hill Then click Clee Hill Best wishes Les |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) Date: 29 Jun 09 - 03:42 PM I think it's a question of gently balancing different needs. Within a multi-racial school in particular, it might be a bit too 'full on' to do the blacking-up without some minor allowances for possible misunderstanding, and the real resultant dangers of alienation, especially if having to explain intricate historical details for origins of tradition - which the folk community themselves seem unable to agree upon. Imagine a young black child going home and telling their African or Asian mum and dad that they saw funny bearded white men dancing around with black painted faces at school. Yes, education needs to be firmly in place, but we don't even have it in place within those English village schools, *without* a real black face to be seen. Most English white kids wouldn't understand it, so how can we expect immigrant families to do so? Hypothesising for a moment that the blacking practice is indeed *merely* a form of guising, then adapting to *context* is thoroughly appropriate to the maintenace of the tradition. For if, as Borchester Echo says, it was about use of those materials which were readily available - then the particular *colour* was purely *incidental* to available materials, and not an essential fixture of any region. I'd argue that flexibilty be allowed for. Certainly in this instance, the Morris Men could have suggested to the school that they could mildly adapt their masking/guising for this particularly racially sensitive context. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Royston Date: 29 Jun 09 - 03:47 PM L in C They have taken down their site in shame and replaced it with a blank index page. However, they are not as cleve as they think, so you can see the page HERE |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Richard Bridge Date: 29 Jun 09 - 04:31 PM If, as appears likely, both border and molly were using blackface or other obscuration of features before minstrelsy, then the use of blackface is not derived from minstrelsy and the origin of blackface is not tainted by it. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Ruth Archer Date: 29 Jun 09 - 04:36 PM Tam: I have posted this previously on Mudcat, but it was som tome before you joined. You might be interested: 'I'm quoting from an article written by Derek Schofield in English Dance and Song magazine, summer 2005: "Forty years ago, the only English traditional, or revival, dance group who blacked up were the Britania Coco-nut Dancers from Bacup." "There are references to people blacking up as a form of disguise in popular custom, although in Heaney and Forrest's book 'Annals of Early Morris', there is only one reference to black-faced morris dancers in the period they studied (up to 1750), and that is from the mid-sixteenth century." The article goes on to discuss how black-faced minstrelsy took hold in America from the early 19th century, and eventually made its way to Britain and enjoyed huge popularity here by the turn of the 20th century: "no village concert was complete without a few minstrel songs." The piece goes on to discuss the incorporation of blacking up into "traditional" events: "There would seem to be little doubt that the black faces of the traditional morris dance groups of the Welsh Border counties were at least influenced by minstrelsy. The occasional use of banjoes, bones and tambourines in these morris dances cannot be mere coincidence." I apologise for the brief and piecemeal nature of these quotes, and for the lack of context (especially to Derek) - sadly the whole article is not available on-line. But I can tell you that it makes a pretty convincing case for the influence of minstrelsy on blacking up. So then the question is, if blacking up and minstrelsy were once intrinsically linked, does it matter today?' Derek went on to add in the same thread: 'Having looked into blacking up for the EDS feature that Ruth Archer has kindly quoted from, there is undoubtedly an influence on English folk culture from minstrelsy. Bacup may be one, Padstow mummers may be another, the 20th century traditional Border morris which has been copied by revival sides might be another. The question is ...has the blacking up transcended its origin and now have a life of its own? Does this practice offend sectors of our society? (And I don't mean just the black members of our society ... white people might also be offended). And if so, are we prepared to do anything about it?' Another quote from the same thread, from Dave Hunt: 'A version of the 'A' part of the tune is also used for the tune known as 'Clee Hill' as collected from Dennis Crowther who is from that area, which is not far from Ludlow in South Shropshire. The tune was used by the morris/molly dancers from Clee Hill area and in 'pre-PC' days was known as 'The niggerin' tune' as the dancers went out with blacked-up faces and called it 'Goin' out a-niggerin' The use of the term molly instead of morris,was common in Shropshire and I have met people who remembers 'Going out molly-dancing' in East Shropshire in the 1930s-40s ' And something else that I said later on in the same thread: 'Finally, a few people have said that it would be interesting to hear from a black person what they feel about all of this. Well, the article from EDS that I quoted earlier interviewed several people about the practice, including a dance caller named Nigel Hogg. This is what he had to say: "I have watched many different dance groups around the country, and on certain occasions I have seen groups black up to perform. As a mixed race man I do find this tradition offensive because I see it as a parody mocking people of colour. I would imagine that the people who perform these dances are not racists, and on some levels the people involved have not even though about the implications these dances might have to people of colour." ' |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Royston Date: 29 Jun 09 - 04:49 PM You make a persuasive case, Ruth. I still have doubts about whether the whole blackface morris thing is intrinsically racist but I am definitely coming off the fence in thinking that it is just too dodgy and, if we all agree *black* is not important, then we really should *disguise* in other ways. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: VirginiaTam Date: 29 Jun 09 - 04:57 PM Fair enough Ruth, But something about the whole idea of white people protecting black people from potentially offensive performances does not sit well with me either. I think it borders on patronising and insulting their intelligence and denying them the opportunity to see and make a judgement for themselves. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Smokey. Date: 29 Jun 09 - 05:06 PM It seems to be rather an insult to black people to assume they would see a face painting tradition as anything other than just that. True, some people (of any colour) will find offence in virtually anything, but I don't think making a show of pandering to them does a great deal towards eliminating the real problems in society; it just seems to breed more intolerance. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: GUEST,HelenJ Date: 29 Jun 09 - 05:07 PM Against the advice I have sent an e-mail to the school expressing my shock at their lack of historical knowledge. I also questioned their ability to teach anything factual. I also signed it "Blacked up Musician for Blacked up Morris!" |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Ruth Archer Date: 29 Jun 09 - 05:07 PM From that point of view, Tam, each person has to make their own (hopefully informed) choice about whether they want to dance with a side that blacks up or not. But if someone makes the choice to do so, I think they ought to be willing to be honest with anyone who might ask (and with themselves) about the origins of the custom. I am not saying that border morris dancers are intrinsically racist, but in all likelihood their custom evolved from racist practices. The school in question did not "ban" the side. The side will continue to dance at events throughout the summer I'm sure, and good luck to them. But because of the sensitivities of this particular community, the school thought it unwise to honour their booking. Surely it is as much the right of the school to choose not to book the side as it is the side's right to dance however it chooses? |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Richard Bridge Date: 29 Jun 09 - 05:14 PM It seems to me, Ruth, that a great deal in your logical development turns on whether Anglian "Molly" dancing is a form of morris and was so named. I am not an expert on either. Many molly sides seem to have pretty well no moves that look like border moves, but some do have some moves that look like some border moves (but none that look like cotswold or longsword, and not much like any male or female northern clog that I have seen). Sharp of course refused to accept molly as a form of morris or folk dance and he spoke of it as degenerate. If then molly is separate in derivation from morris, the existence of the blackface molly tradition undermines the assumption that backface morris is tainted by minstrelsy, as would proof of a morris blackface tradition predating minstrelsy. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: The Barden of England Date: 29 Jun 09 - 05:19 PM Banjiman - People 'whitening' up doesn't offend me in the slightest, and to be fair I am unaware of the Border Morris connection. I always believed that at Rochester Sweeps it was in some way a celebration (a silly way of putting it I know) of the Dickensian method of putting children up the chimney to clean it, and coming out with sooty faces. I will go to the site you suggested and mull it all over. John Barden |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Ruth Archer Date: 29 Jun 09 - 05:30 PM Richard, there was only one brief quote in my post that referred to molly dancing - and if you look again, you'll see that it isn't Anglian but from Shropshire: border morris country. I'm not sure when border began to be referred to as "border", but it would seem that black-faced dancing in Shropshire was known locally as "molly". |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Richard Bridge Date: 29 Jun 09 - 05:36 PM Yes, Ruth, that may be the fulcrum. If the modern Anglian blackface molly derives its name and blackface habit from Shropshire border, then if Shropshire border is tainted, so is Anglian molly. If it doesn't OR if blackface predates minstrelsy then the blackface habit is clearly NOT based on minstrelsy, so the suspicion of racist reference is not well founded. THat was my point. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Gedi Date: 29 Jun 09 - 05:40 PM Royston said "Beware the troll...Gedi I say that anyone claiming to have been called a racist for liking english music is in fact a liar. If I am wrong then the person accusing racism must be a lone idiot, so why would anyone bother to mention it..." Firstly I must thank Spleen Cringe for coming to my defence whilst I've been doing other things. Secondly, I can assure you Royston that I am neither Troll nor Liar. Nor do I appreciate being called such. The incident mentioned did happen and there were witnesses. I think your third sentence struck the nail on the head - the guy was a pratt of the first order. However I mentioned it just to show that such people do exist and that we should be aware of that fact. I was certainly taken by surprise that he could even think I was being racist, and he would not let me explain myself at all ( I think it was mostly the beer talking tbh). For your information, anyone who knows me will tell you that I am definately not a racist, living in a vibrant multicultural area of Manchester with friends from many different backgrounds. I don't intend to carry on with this but I felt I had to respond to your over-hasty character assasination. By the way, I personally would not wear black makeup. As Spleen says I prefer more the Smurf look, which is why I was 'Blued Up' on the night in question. Ged |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: The Borchester Echo Date: 29 Jun 09 - 05:41 PM I think John Kirkpatrick invented it in reply to people asking him what he did in the day time. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Ruth Archer Date: 29 Jun 09 - 05:42 PM I can't be arsed to find the article at this juncture, Richard, but the sources were very sound. I think there's been a fair bit of relevant research into this area. And Dave Hunt's experience, as someone who is well respected and known in the folk music community, is quite persuasive. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Richard Bridge Date: 29 Jun 09 - 05:52 PM I'm not clear why you need to be arsey Ruth. There is a logical sequence to my question, and I would have hoped you might appreciate it. Borchester, your knowledge is often second to none but I do not see the point you are making. Yes I ahve followed teh link. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Vic Smith Date: 29 Jun 09 - 05:56 PM Baz Parkes wrote "There's an excellent posting by Vic Smith on this subject on the Froots forum other sites and media watch thread. Someone more clever than I will have to do a link...." Ahem! Well, the link to the fRoots Forum is http://froots.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=4563 where Ian Anderson (if it is safe to mention that name on Mudcat) posts with a similar experience to mine. However, in posting it on fRoots I was merely quoting what I had written on the Folk Against Fascism thread at http://mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=121472 You can't have missed it; it is the 270th posting of (currently) 713 postings on that thread! |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Ruth Archer Date: 29 Jun 09 - 06:08 PM I wasn't being arsey, Richard - honest! Mwah! Mwah! I was being knackered - it's been a really long day and I literally cannot be arsed to clear off the blanket box and search out my back-issues of EDS. But if you're interested, I'm happy to do it tomorrow. I remember there were a lot of sources for suggested further reading. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Kev The Clogs Date: 29 Jun 09 - 06:10 PM I have just sent the following email to the Headteacher of Chantry School (I used to work upstairs in the specialist teaching unit on the top floor". Dear Hazel King, I just had to write to you and say how appaled I am at your discision to ban Motley Morris from performing at your school. I don't know how you got to hear about them - word of mouth/saw them at an event/saw their web site - whichever way, it is VERY obvious that they paint there faces in black. Motley have danced in many parts of this country and have given great pleasure to many people of many different faiths/colours/cultures. As a teacher, I find your actions extreme and unwarrented. Surely education is about all cultures, walks of life, origins etc. You are denying your students to right to discussion and enquiry which would certainly have followed a visit by Motley. As a Morris Dancer, I find your actions DEEPLY offensive towards ALL Morris Dancers. Morris Dancing is OUR heritage and National Dance - I'm sure that you would promote Dancers and Dancing from other cultures - so WHY NOT OURS!!!?? Yours Kevin Tudor Steward for Bishop Gundulf's Morris |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: The Borchester Echo Date: 29 Jun 09 - 07:47 PM Richard Bridge You are surely aware (or perhaps not) that John Kirkpatrick, hacked off at those who assumed his working time consisted of 2 x 45 minute sets per night, wrote a song called What Do You Do In The Day? One of those things he did, on moving to Shropshire, was to reinvent Border Morris. ****** And hey, Pete Coe is a headliner. He's been at Sidmouth every time I've been there (and more times besides) AND he's written a stadium rock song. Me, I'd listen to Banditaliana and Genticorum all day long for the entire week, even if it has to be in a horrible tent with giant birds stomping all over the roof. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: The Borchester Echo Date: 29 Jun 09 - 07:48 PM Oops, wrong thread - I had two open, Can a clone please delete? |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: GUEST,Derek Schofield Date: 29 Jun 09 - 07:49 PM A few thoughts on the discussion, especially since Ruth Archer has been quoting me. The evidence points clearly, in my mind, to the fact that Border Morris was influenced by minstrelsy. Songs, tunes, dress (and not just the backface), instruments used (banjo, tambourine, bones). In addition, minstrel songs entered what we could call the 'popular/traditional/folk song' repertoire of country singers as well. I am sure that the people who danced and sang in the minstrel troupes or danced and sang the minstrel-influenced dances and songs did not set out to be "offensive" to black people (they'd probably never met any black people). I'm old enough to remember the Black and White Minstrels on the telly, and it never occurred to me that they were setting out to be "offensive". And now, the plethora of Border Morris sides that black up ... I am sure that they do not set out to be "offensive". But "being offensive" is not in the eye of the perpetrator, it is surely in the eye of the beholder. Vic Smith and Ian Anderson on the fRoots messageboard have both given evidence of how black people have not been offended by blacked-up dancers because they can draw analogies with whiting up in their own cultures. They have a context (once explained!) in which to see the dancers. (And both the examples quoted were of black people who had grown up in African countries). Of course the explanations they are given make no reference to minstrelsy – only to the matter of "disguise". Forty years ago there was no revival (or traditional) Border Morris. It is a relatively modern phenomenon in the morris world. The sides that started up, that led the way, relied on the few notations that were available. The biggest influence on the Border revival is probably John Kirkpatrick's Shropshire Bedlams, in terms of style, dress, dance formation etc, John openly admits that he "invented" the style of dancing and most of the dances, using the traditional dances as inspiration. Sides that have followed have copied Bedlams' dances or continued the process of inventing dances. Here's an observation: there are several different ingredients in any morris tradition – music, costume, dances, style etc.... Most Border Morris sides use recently- composed tunes, played on instruments that were never used traditionally for Border morris, wearing costumes that often bear slight relation to the costumes used traditionally, dancing dances that are recently made up in a style that has been recently invented. And yet ... when it comes to challenging the blacking up aspect of their appearance, it is "tradition" that is used in justification for continuing to do it. If all the other "traditional" aspects of the dance "tradition" can be jettisoned, then why not the black face? Discuss! I'm interested to hear from any side that has discussed the matter of blackface rationally, considered the evidence, wondered if they might be causing offence and then made a decision to retain the blackface or change to a different colour or drop the blackface altogether. Derek Schofield |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: melodeonboy Date: 29 Jun 09 - 07:52 PM "it is easy to see the school's decision as justified" C'mon Royston. It's not easy at all. It sounds to me like a decision made by silly little people who've been to school, followed by teachers' training college, followed by going back to school as a teacher, whose world view consists of politically correct government directives (I know, I work in a school) and misguided columnists on certain newspapers. It's ignorance, stupidity, fear and lack of backbone and, above all, a lack of common sense and cultural understanding. As many of those who've posted above (Richard Bridge, Kev The Clogs, Dead Horse, Neovo et al) have stated, or at least implied, the whole thing is so ridiculous that it's not even worthy of intelligent debate. Let's not even try to intellectualise it (or go down the path of talking about using blue or sky blue pink or whatever other colours people have in mind). Just write to the head, as some of you have already done, and let the school know that a real world exists outside those school gates! |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: The Borchester Echo Date: 29 Jun 09 - 07:55 PM No. don't delete my 7.47 post. It is meant for here (at least the first half addressed to R Bridge is). I'm knackered too. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Joybell Date: 29 Jun 09 - 08:06 PM Sorry if someone has mentioned them already but -- chimney sweeps fit in here with morris dancing. They are part of this tradition from before the blackface minstrels. Ref. Egan's "Life in London" Their colour is sooty black. Part of their occupation and not anything to do with the colour of people. Multi-coloured chimney sweeps? Silly. Cheers, Joy |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Soldier boy Date: 29 Jun 09 - 10:07 PM Goodness me what a cafuffle. Has the world gone mad? All this debate and argument over something so completely 'innocent'. No morris side that blacks up does it intentionally to offend black people. Good grief! They do it mainly so that they have a veneer of disguise which certainly has a clear and well documented tradition with both morris and mumming sides so they could dance out or collect 'offerings'and hopefully not be recognised,especially in small,close knit communities and villages. The anonymity and mystery being part of the allure and a cloak to hide behind for nervous or bashful participants and it was a purely innocent colour readily available in coal dust or by burning corks etc so that is why the colour black was used. It was readily available and for the working man it was cheap. They're innocent. If any morris side really intended to provoke or incite racial hatred don't you think they would have chosen something far more obvious like the garb of the klu klux klan or something. Blacking up has absolutely nothing to do with pretending to be or emulating a dark skinned race.I don't think for one minute that any side has been influenced by the Black and White Minstrels which is a comical parody beneath most self respecting individuals. It's innocent. The famous Bacup Coconut Dancers are blacked up and wear strange red and white hooped skirts because I believe they are copying an ancient Morrocan/Moorish tradition (which many people believe is the origin and birth place of all morris dancing anyway) Innocent. Now in all innocence please consider this and throw it into the melting pot. A few years ago, I'm not sure when, at the Rochester Sweeps Festival the BBC in all their correct PC wisdom decided that they could not film kids blacked up as sweeps because it might offend ethnic minorities in our cherished,cosmopolitan and nanny state country. These young children were distraught and gutted by this decision because they would'nt appear on telly. They,nor their parents that innocently blacked up their sweet little faces, thought for one single second that this might cause offence and had done the same ritual for many years at the festival. After all if you are representing an innocent depiction of children sent up chimneys, guess what they will get black from the soot! We all know now that this was a despicable trade in child labour but it was all done in fun at this festival - in the vein of a Dickensian characterture or a light hearted image from Mary Poppins. Innocent. Guess what,in conclusion, the clear message is that it is all 'innocent'. Sometimes when blindly following a 'tradition' some people might follow it or ressurect it without knowing the real intent or symbolism behind the tradition but today in this century I do not believe that there is any real or sustained intention to upset our coloured brethren. Or if it does occur it is all done in complete innocence. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Gervase Date: 30 Jun 09 - 02:27 AM 100. Of course no morris side blacks up to cause offence intentionally.* No-one has suggested that. The fact is that it can cause offence, and like the black and white minstrels, child labour, badger baiting and other such things, is maybe best put aside or adapted to suit the changing times. Is it really too much to ask for these moderen, reinvented sides to tweak their pastiche that little bit more and substitute patterns for plain black or use another dark colour. For goodness sake, the average morris dancer's rig has naff-all in common with what was worn 130 years ago anyway., what with all the badges, the zxip-up trousers, the poly-cotton shirts and the like. To cling to this one aspect of the reinvention smacks of desperation, mulishness or worse. *But, as Ruth says, there are some odd folk in morris sides. I received some extremely dubious right-wing emails via two in my local side a while back, so perhaps there is an undercurrent we should acknowledge in the open. |
| Share Thread: |
