Do We Think We're Better Than Them?

Subject: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 03:17 PM

Lot's of squabbles on Mudcat between the umm Traddies and the Folkies. Not exactly the Bloods and the Crips I know but where online fisticuffs occur they can rage for a long time. Old wounds fail to heal. Old rivalries (naming no names) persist for years!

What we repeatedly see is someone say's something - perhaps not positive - about 'standards' or 'song sheets' or 'singer/songwriters' or a current popular folk artist (etc. etc.) and it triggers angry reactions, sometimes including comments like Folk Police! Folk Nazi! Folk Snob!

Is it because Traddies (myself included*) are a bit snobbish and arrogant? Do they think they're 'better' than they're non-Traddie compatriots? Or are such reactions unfounded?

Umm, discuss.. I think ;-)






* This appears to be the current buzz-term on MC atm.

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 03:20 PM

Heh! Reminded myself that I'm not a *proper* Traddy after all - check out the terrible apostrophies!

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Bill D
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 03:28 PM

Not 'better'...just different. And it is a difference that should be observed. I am just opposed to pretending that "it's all the same".

Words need to mean something....

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 03:40 PM

Yes. My own feeling is than non-traddies can often appear rather antagonised by traddies aserting that there actually is any difference. My assumption is that such antagonism is born from the (perhaps false) presumption that being 'diiferent', means being 'better'.

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: mg
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 03:43 PM

I keep trying to avoid that dichotomy...the key is to find others who share your enthusiasm for long ballads, or rugby songs, or spiritual chanting or singing yellow submarine and not try to impose your tastes and preferences on groups that meet to do a different sort of music. mg

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 03:50 PM

"Not 'better'...just different."

Different? I'm reminded of a scene from a film a fellow Traddy poster flagged up for me when I'd eventually passed my Traddy initiatory rite and been accepted into the ranks of the 'different': One of us

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: olddude
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 04:00 PM

I applaud it, who the heck wants to listen to the same exact music (either side) and nothing else. Music is for everyone to enjoy and the taste in music is a different as snowflakes ... I don't like Rap ... but many people do ... I listen to what I like to listen to ... others have the same right and should be encouraged to do so and perform what they want to perform ... that which is pleasing to them and others who like the same genre whatever that genre is

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Amos
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 05:01 PM

I second Dan's view; there is awide beautiful spectrum of sung music from tribal chants to lieder songs and opera, and everything between. No-one is required to like anything they don't naturally like; but at the same time, recognizing that all adjudications of beauty are only opinions, tolerating those of others is really a good thing to do.


A

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Joe_F
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 05:19 PM

My apologies if I have already copied this into some other thread, but here is something I wrote to a friend on the subject in 2004:

1. Trad vs singer-songwriter

I gather that this is an important divide & that I am on the extreme
trad side of it. However, I don't see the point of it, and in
particular the names don't make sense to me. Evidently, writing songs
& singing them does not suffice to make one a singer-songwriter;
otherwise, my singing songs by Pete Seeger, Lou & Peter Berryman, Ewan
MacColl, Bob Blue, Tom Lehrer, Malvina Reynolds, Cyril Tawney, Leslie
Fish, Stan Rogers, Flanders & Swann, etc. would put me squarely in the
enemy camp.

Perhaps the real animus is like that in a conversation I was once told
about:

"Put the teapot on the stove & heat it hot as hell. Then put the
tea in. That way, the water will continue to boil violently when
it hits the tea."

"Doesn't that sometimes break the teapot?"

"There are those who like teapots, and those who like tea."

Likewise, there are those who like singers & those who like songs,
regardless of origin. For the other side, human beings are at the
center of the stage, everything else is a prop, and songs in
particular are vehicles for singers, songwriters, and
singer-songwriters to express their yearnings for love or money. For
me, the songs are at the center; they are, among other things, a way
of seeing people in perspective; and when it comes to gossiping
sentimentally about the people connected with the songs (something I
am all in favor of -- look me up on the Mudcat Forum), I am most
interested in the ones mentioned in the songs, secondarily in the ones
who made them up, and only cursorily in the ones who perform them, who
are only one way to get the songs propagated -- containers &
dispensers.

In itself, that need not be a cause of conflict -- it might merely add
to the variety of songs & talk. But in the present cultural context
it is something of a party question, mixed up in the wars between
nerds & jocks, among word people, people people, & thing people,
between amateurs & professionals, etc. That may be why you folks are
treading so carefully.

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Acorn4
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 05:19 PM

Anything except modern jazz!

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 05:31 PM

Different not better or worse.
Main differences - a traddie can define his music - a non-traddie can't - prove me wrong
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: The Vulgar Boatman
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 05:35 PM

Dan and Amos - thank you.

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 05:36 PM

A non-traddie's music has *exactly* the same roots as those of the first ever singer songwriter, who hummed his tune whilst out in the fields, then started putting words to it...

And he wrote and he wrote and he sang and he hummed...and the time it did pass, until one day he woke not just to hear the lark in the morning, but to get up to his computer and see the lark on Mudcat as his fellow travellers in time discussed whether 'they' were better than he.....

And he smiled, his knowing smile......

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 05:38 PM

..and then, he packed up his acoustic guitar, and his electric one too..and went out to have a lark with his mates.....playing jazz, soul, blues, folk and hip hop..

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 05:43 PM

"Do We Think We're Better Than Them?"

Absolutely. I think songwriters are the jewel in the tiara, the bean in the coffee, the cheeze in the whiz. I also thing that those who keep the music alive are the pud in the ding, the shoe lace in the shoe, the punch in the bowl. I also also think that the luthiers who produce the instruments people play are the corn on the cob, the feathers in the pillow, the gas in the car. I also also also think that the bitchin' and complainin' belongs in the garbage, because were it not for the aforementioned people and the singers/performers/recording artists of whatever musical persuasion then music itself would die a horrible death, and with it a great spirit in this world. There are some types of music I don't like as much as others, but there is no music I hate.

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 05:43 PM

I'm reminded of something Burl Ives said:

"People call me a folk singer. I'm not. I sing songs I like. It just happens that most of the songs I like are folk songs."

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 05:46 PM

Yeah! What 999 said! :0)

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 06:06 PM

Er not quite Lizzie:
You forgot the bit about the traddie not putting his name on his song, so it took on a life of its own, became remade again and again and again, and travelled all over the town, the district, the country, the wide world, until nobody knew who owned it, so everybody did, Then thousands of people began to sing it, until it split into two - four -eight - sometimes a hundred pieces. And long after the original maker died, the song continued to be sung, for years, decades, centuries and still continued to give pleasure to those who found it
Meanwhile the non-traddie carved his name on his song, buried it deep in his garden under a tree, and announced to the world that it was HIS SONG, so it never changed. Then he went back to his castle and counted all the sovereigns he had ammassed from all HIS OTHER SONGS which he had buried under all the other trees in his garden, which also never changed and never became anybody elses until they saved all their sovereigns and bought them. And then they went and buried them under trees in their garden................
And they all lived happily ever after.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Will Fly
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 06:17 PM

Main differences - a traddie can define his music - a non-traddie can't - prove me wrong

Mmm... I think that if I were to say that I love and play the music of Jimmie Rogers, the Carter Family, the Delmore Brothers et al, a definition of this music would be "Early American Country Music" - a mixture of some traditional music and many composed songs. I can't see a problem with that. I know where I am and exactly what I'm doing. I could advertise a club that supported this music and the prospective attendees would know - as you put it - exactly what was on the tin.

Plenty of other definitions to go at - just depends on how you narrowly or how broadly you outline the definition...

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Emma B
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 06:20 PM

Just to make a contemporary analogy - in the UK at the moment there is a discussion about changing the 'first past the post' voting system
Now, if I had to vote for just one form of music it may be 'traditional' folk but I'd much rather vote for many of the genres I enjoy in order of preference

The thing about traditional music and song is that it has time for all the 'turkeys' to be forgotten whereas some of the modern singer/songwriter compositions have still to face the test of time - a cruel test indeed and some will be found wanting.

The one thing I think can be said without contradiction is that music will never die - it may be transmuted, it may evolve into forms that are a long way from what pleased my generation or those of my forebears, it may be commercialised until it squeaks in protest and then return to the 'hearth' again but it will survive!

There are many songwriters out there; some are more 'unsung' than others some write so much from the heart that that is where it remains like the 'blossom on the desert air'

If you love a song - really feel a resonance - just get out there and sing it whatever meaningless category you put it in.
I was brought up in a singing tradition where folks just sang and didn't make these argumentative distinctions

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: The Sandman
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 06:21 PM

I think I am better than every body else at a few things.
I dont think I am better than lous armstrong at blowing the trumpet,but possibly my own trumpet.
http://www.dickmiles.com

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 06:22 PM

Well, Jim, I hope you never put your name on a trad CD.

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: melodeonboy
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 06:27 PM

I know this territory has been crossed on Mudcat a thousand times before. It's not necessarily a matter of "better", but just being aware of what you want to sing/play/hear. And the semantics of this are really quite important. I've been to folk clubs where I've heard primarily music that I consider folk. I've been to other folk clubs where I've had pretty much a whole evening of 60s and 70s pop songs performed by "man with acoustic guitar". I enjoy the former and don't particularly enjoy the latter. Nor have I particularly enjoyed most of the singer-songwriters (again, usually "man with guitar") I've seen (with the exception of gems like Tony Carling).

It's the ambiguity of what a "folk club" is these days that is the issue. It's easy to say that we should have a completely laissez-faire attitude and let people play what they want (which actually works in the folk clubs that I attend regularly, but is not necessarily a model), but people do go to events with expectations. I'm sure that almost anyone going to a folk club who was provided with an evening of electronica, e.g., would feel disappointed. It's not about value judgements; it's about expectations, and ultimately, people just listening to what they want to listen to.

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 06:29 PM

"Well, Jim, I hope you never put your name on a trad CD."
Not as an author I wouldn't
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 06:35 PM

Of course not, Jim. But since it's trad music, why put your name there at all? It's just part of the trad process.

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Bert
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 06:36 PM

- a traddie can define his music -

Yup, it is a vignette of songs sung by old folks when the Cecil Sharp was on the rampage.

If the collectors had been around several decades later then traditional music would consist of early and mid twentieth century songs.

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Will Fly
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 06:38 PM

But since it's trad music, why put your name there at all? It's just part of the trad process.

Quite simple - Jim could be the producer or the compiler/selector of the songs on the CD. These things don't produce themselves.

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Bert
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 06:42 PM

Just think, if the collectors had come along later thenthis would be folk music

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Emma B
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 06:48 PM

Bert, I have a friend, a wonderful and popular singer of folk music, that, in the best tradition of 'folk singing', is just as likely to sing 'She wears Red Feathers and a Hula Hula Skirt' in a singaround as anything 'collected' by the likes of C# :)

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 07:08 PM

Those of us who know what "folk music" means think we are better philologists than those who do not.

"Folk" is a matter of derivation. It is not a matter of quality or style.

Once upon a time, it was a matter of proving that one had respect for the paying of dues to sing a folk song in a folk club before going on to sing non-folk-songs. In that respect, folk-song-singers have roots that the performers of contemporary acoustic music have not.

Incidentally the remark attributed to Burl Ives above would have made him not a folk-singer but a folk-song-singer.

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 07:08 PM

Modern jazz is so old that it's almost traditional now. :-)

And I love it.

Maybe it should be called Jazz formerly known as Modern?

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Tootler
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 07:13 PM

I sing traditional songs mainly but not exclusively because that's what I like to sing.

What I think is really important, though is taking part. Making music not "consuming it"

As someone said on another thread:

There's also a strong force that tells people not to make their own music. "Shut up and buy recordings from the APPROVED performers!" - that's the modern way of life.

That's the attitude we need to fight against.

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Emma B
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 07:16 PM

"If you love a song - really feel a resonance - just get out there and sing it whatever meaningless category you put it in."

Amen! Tootler

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 07:20 PM

Categories are made to divide. That is their function.

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: michaelr
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 07:30 PM

I play and sing Irish, English and Scots traditional songs and tunes with my band. I arrange them in non-traditional ways which reflect the musics I grew up with, and those I've been exposed to since. I do this to please first myself, second the audience.

I think it can be said that both I and the audience are infinitely more entertained by our contemporary arrangements than we would be if I stood there in an Aran sweater with a finger in my ear.

There are those (quite a few around this forum) who will claim that they're better than me, or that I'm doing it wrong, or that I commit sacrilege. I do not care.

It's too arbitrary. Should Irish trad tunes be played the way they were in Michael Coleman's day? In 1850? In 1790? The whole concept is ridiculous, and contrary to folk music as a continually evolving form.

I wish I knew whose quote this is:
"Folk music is not a pickle. It doesn't need to be preserved."

Cheers,
Michael

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: michaelr
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 07:33 PM

Forgot to say that I also sing contemporary songwriter material, from Richard Thompson to John Hiatt to Garcia/Hunter to Bobby Charles to Robbie Robertson to my own etc etc etc...

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Paul Reade
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 07:42 PM

A couple of years ago I went to see BBC Philharmonic Orchestra performing Haydn's "Creation", and during the interval, I overheard a woman in the audience talking to her friend: "You know, I'm just an old square, but I much prefer this to the more modern stuff". To her, the difference between Haydn and Hindemith was purely a matter of personal preference – if the conversation had been between folkies, it could more likely have been on the lines of "Haydn represents the true face of classical music and twentieth century composers are upstarts who have no place in a concert hall" etc, etc.

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: mousethief
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 07:51 PM

Anything except modern jazz!

Especially when they try to play it too darn fast.

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 08:38 PM

"Put the teapot on the stove & heat it hot as hell. Then put the
tea in. That way, the water will continue to boil violently when
it hits the tea."

What a terrible way to make tea...

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: evansakes
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 08:48 PM

Re Modern jazz

"Especially when they try to play it too darn fast"

What? and change the beauty of the melody until it sounds just like a symphony?

Myself...I'd say there's good and bad in everything (except Stockhausen)

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: mousethief
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 08:54 PM

I have yet to discover anything worth listening to in Phil Glass. Or John Cage.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: artbrooks
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 09:06 PM

Personally, I've never yet heard a definition of "traditional" from the British perspective that made a lot of sense to me. One person says that it is music presented in a certain manner, normally without instrumental accompaniment, which has unknown authorship and has been passed down through the oral tradition. Another person says that all, or almost all, songs regarded as traditional have an identifiable author. Yet another expert avers that songs written before {date} may be considered traditional, even if their author is known, as long as they fit the other required characteristics. Somebody else says that instrumental accompaniment is acceptable, under certain specified circumstances.

I'm just glad that I know what "folk" means, after all this time!

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Leadfingers
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 09:33 PM

Of COURSE we are better than THEM ! Who ever WE are , and whoever THEY are !

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Janie
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 09:42 PM

Actually Jim, I think there is a lot of evidence that songs the origins and author of which are known also, over time, undergo change and variations - it is not unusual to observe that on song threads here on Mudcat. (The recently revived Belfast/Aragon Mill thread is one example.)

Music scholars and researchers, such as yourself, musicians who perform and who are scrupulous to credit where they got a song, and those who use sheet music to learn a song, or need to research whether or not a song is copyrighted to know if royalties have to be paid - are all people who will know or discover whether a song is "traditional" in the sense that no one knows, anymore, who wrote it.   Most people who sing or play or otherwise enjoy music and song are none of the above.

Mayhap the reason traditional songs do not have a name attached is because the singer/songwriter lived in a place and time where stuff didn't get written down, or if it did, it didn't get archived, much less copyrighted. It may well be that many of them cared that their names were attached, but the technologies of the time did not make that possible, at least not beyond their small community, and perhaps 1 1/2 generations. The basis of the oral tradition, at the loss of specific origin that goes with it, was simply that was the best way, given the readily available technologies of the time, to try to preserve and pass on any knowledge. It seems to me that our human tendency has always been to capture and preserve as much knowledge and information as the technologies available to us permit.

Having written all of that, it occurs to me that I might not understand what you intend by "traddie." Maybe there is a modern tradition in the UK of people who write songs and ballads in the style of traditional songs originating in the UK and/or Ireland, with the intent that they be disseminated orally and without attribution so as to enter "the tradition." In other words, they hope to avoid the song being identified as originating from them.

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Janie
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 09:45 PM

Those last two sentences should have been phrased as questions.

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Janie
Date: 13 Feb 10 - 12:02 AM

Realizing that was also a good bit of thread drift. Sorry.

Sister Crow, I really don't have "a dog in this fight," (not saying it has turned into a fight-yet.) I do have some observations to share about snobbery and perceived snobbery.

Warning: One of Janie's inordinately long posts follows. Skip it if I tend to make your eyes glaze over.

FWIW, I think that when people are not only passionate, but also purist and pretty expert and accomplished in their interests, (be it music or something else) they may well tend toward a little snobbery.   Notice I said "may." Disdain is inherent in snobbery. But all snobbery is not created equal. Snobbery derived from passion and expertise and aesthetic sense may be applied only to the choices made by oneself, or may be generalized to all others, such that those who do not share the same expertise, passion and/or aesthetic are disdained for their differences and choices. Most of us are hypersensitive to the experience of being disdained. This means many people pick up on disdain that is present, even when it is only implied, and when the disdainer themselves may not be consciously aware of the disdain they feel, and therefore communicate toward those less expert or pure in their interests. Sometimes a person will read disdain into the actions or remarks of another that is not really present. Sometimes a person who does not feel disdain toward those who differ or who do not share the expertise or passion of that person will not recognize how harsh, judgemental, and disdainful they sound.

I think the us vs them issue around "traditional" vs "folk" music is much more of an issue for folks on the other side of the pond than here in North America. There also may be differences in the culture of communication and around confrontation. From this North American's perspective, we on this side of the pond tend to not have rancorous discussions about these differences in taste. We tend to see them more as simply differences in taste and not argue about who is "right", or to discourse as rancorously as do you on the other side of the pond. (I am generalizing.) What we North American's experience as acrimony between those of you in the British Isles, you may view as just a rousing discussion. Perhaps you are more comfortable with strong confrontation and you do not experience your arguments as being as personally attacking to one another as it seems to those of us here looking on.

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Feb 10 - 03:27 AM

"since it's trad music, why put your name there at all? It's just part of the trad process."
Sorry - am not understanding this; who exactly is 'putting their name on' anything, certainly not me or mine?
Those I know involved in traditional music acknowledge it to be largely anonymous and usually indicate that fact. It is the singer-songwriter who claim (quite rightly) authorship; but then go on to attach the description 'folk' to their songs.
"Yup, it is a vignette of songs sung by old folks when the Cecil Sharp was on the rampage."
Nope - it's been around and fully accepted since the early 19th century when it was used to describe the lore and tales of specific communities. It was well-established and widely in use by the time Sharp 'was on the rampage', and is inseparable from the lore, tales, customs, belief etc of the communities that created them. And no Bert, what you put up wouldn't have become folk - they had known authors (owners), the folk had no part in either their making nor transmission.
"Folk" is a matter of derivation. It is not a matter of quality or style."
Spot on Richard - I would only add that nor is a matter of personal preference (not any more anyway).
Earlier on Will proffered as a definition "I think that if I were to say that I love and play the music of Jimmie Rogers, the Carter Family, the Delmore Brothers....".
Presumably if a neigbouring folkie substituted Elvis, The Osmond Family and The Everly Brothers, that would then be his/her definition of 'folk'?
Here we leave the real world and go through the looking glass where "Words mean what I want them to mean".
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Mavis Enderby
Date: 13 Feb 10 - 03:32 AM

"Perhaps you are more comfortable with strong confrontation and you do not experience your arguments as being as personally attacking to one another as it seems to those of us here looking on"

I think this is a point well made. In the heat of the debate/argument/mudsling the people involved forget there are many others looking on, shaking their head in despair, and moving away.

Pete (who neither a "Traddie" or a "Folkie" be!)

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 13 Feb 10 - 04:07 AM

...the lore and tales of specific communities. It was well-established and widely in use by the time Sharp 'was on the rampage', and is inseparable from the lore, tales, customs, belief etc of the communities that created them.

And in this way, boys and girls, is ALL music Folk Music, and ALL music is Traditional Music because ALL music is defined by the Traditions of Specific Communities and remains inseparable from their lore, tales, customs, beliefs etc. Traddies (& Folkies) miss the point by focussing on songs rather than idioms; the point being that all music - any place, any time, any genre - is subject to the same processes that Traddies (& Folkies) call The Folk Process. All music is the collective consequence of human creativity & community; it's what people do, what people have always done. Plus ca change! Otherwise, I'm with Lizzy n this one.

Subject: RE: Do We Think We're Better Than Them?
From: Will Fly
Date: 13 Feb 10 - 04:17 AM

Earlier on Will proffered as a definition "I think that if I were to say that I love and play the music of Jimmie Rogers, the Carter Family, the Delmore Brothers....".

Sorry, Jim - but you're misquoting me by not completing my sentence. What I actually said was:

"I think that if I were to say that I love and play the music of Jimmie Rogers, the Carter Family, the Delmore Brothers et al, a definition of this music would be "Early American Country Music" - a mixture of some traditional music and many composed songs."

I never said it would be folk. I was merely pointing out that your statement about only traddies being able to define their music was not completely correct. You can define a genre of music as narrowly or as broadly as you like - that's the problem with drawing chalk lines around music.

If you recall, in another thread, I invited you to give me your take on the boundaries of the "folk idiom" as you had very clearly described it - and you admitted that it was not a simple question to answer. I'm not interested in trying to define folk music, but I was making the point that it's the boundaries of songs composed in the "folk idiom" - that grey area - which is the nub of Mudcat argument. And I'm genuinely interested in your opinion as to where you would make the chalk mark. Some would perhaps draw it more narrowly than you - other more widely. I'm not interested in making an official chalk mark - just curious about your take on it because I respect your opinion and experience.

I've made the contrast between tunes in the folk idiom and songs in the folk idiom on more than one occasion. There's far less controversy over modern composed tunes in the style. I've been playing a whole slew of tunes on my fiddle which include "The Rakes of Kildare" (trad), "The Spoot O' Skerry" (modern Shetland reel), "Da Ferry Reel" (modern Shetland reel) "The Sweetness Of Mary" (modern Cape Breton strathspey), "Donald Cameron's Polka" (Old-time but probably Scottish), etc. No problems at a session with this mixture and others like it.