BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?

Subject: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 11:24 AM

Just what I needed is to subject my brain to a special program done a few years ago on Pete Seeger.

I had seen it when it came out but this time it was a fundraiser for PBS with lots of breaks for thought. Here are some observations. What do you think?

Bear in mind that I believe that Pete Seeger said and did many wonderful things and that he has the same freedom of expression to be accorded to anyone.

1. Seeger and Smothers et al. seem to appreciate how to use music in politics—a powerful force. They used it for their issues and positions. (Nothing wrong with that.) However, they seem to be simply the left flip side of others who did the same thing in the first half of the 20th century. Same process but different side of the issue. (I happen to agree with them but that does not make it any different a process)

2. Under the guise of "concerts" the Seeger-Smothers party spokesmen staged political rallies where they limited the slant of the songs and discussions to their own side of the issue. (That's censorship.) These were not concerts but primarily political rallies with music. Granted not all the songs may have been political and a study should be done however it is apparent that there was generally a left slant. Yes Seeger may have done some concerts where his point of view did not dominate. Yes he had the right to do so as it was his freedom.

3. Rather than being considered a folksinger/writer as the program did he should also be considered a political organizer and the rallies should not be called concerts.

4. Yes Seeger can be considered a patriot. All politicos claim to represent their country. Nothing wrong with being a member of the communist party either or associating with them. I am glad that the documentary pointed out that his mind had changed.

So here we find the American aspect of the folk revival manipulated by political activism. Fifty or more years later we seem to find ourselves with the progress wound down. Every other college kid does not carry a guitar and folk music is absent from ordinary television where it had a significant presence earlier.

Folk music is probably bigger than it was fifty or more years ago however everything is now bigger.

I think part of the problem was the over identification indeed the possession of folk music by one set of political ideologies and then also its attachment to the spinning wheel of age set commercial marketing. (Yes Seeger was as I am anti commercialization of folk music a good point.)

So WWW what went wrong? More than politics though.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 12:48 PM

Your barely readable dried up stream of unconsciousness style makes me wonder if your mother had any children that lived.............

I'm not sure which of the points you are failing to make is the one that this thread might or might not be about but I will defend unto death your right to spout gibberish.

Thanks for posting.........................


Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 12:55 PM

What is this f*ckin' unhealthy obsession you have with Conrad, Spaw? Can you live without leaping up like Pavlov's dog to shower him with personal abuse every time he posts here or would that simply be too much to ask?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 01:01 PM

That wan't abuse.....It was a question.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 01:04 PM

Oh, I see.

Well, I have a question for you too. Do you like sex and travel?

;-D

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: pdq
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 01:15 PM

Mexican Cornbread

    Ingredients
                  1 cup butter, melted
                  1 cup white sugar
                  4 eggs
                  1 (15 ounce) can cream-style corn
                  1/2 (4 ounce) can chopped green chile peppers, drained
                  1/2 cup shredded Monterey Jack cheese
                  1/2 cup shredded Cheddar cheese
                  1 cup all-purpose flour
                  1 cup yellow cornmeal
                  4 teaspoons baking powder
                  1/4 teaspoon salt

    Directions
        1) Preheat oven to 300 degrees F (150 degrees C). Lightly grease a 9x13 inch baking dish.
        2) In a large bowl, beat together butter and sugar. Beat in eggs one at a time. Blend in cream corn, chiles, Monterey Jack and Cheddar cheese.
        3) In a separate bowl, stir together flour, cornmeal, baking powder and salt. Add flour mixture to corn mixture; stir until smooth. Pour batter into prepared pan.
        4) Bake in preheated oven for 1 hour, until a toothpick inserted into center of the pan comes out clean.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 01:16 PM

Yeah, I've always been happy to go fuck myself! And you?   No....wait.....I mean are YOU happy to go fuck yourself.........Now as to Conrad...........Okay, let's put it this way..........

Dear Conrad,

Are you wanting to discuss Seeger and his leftist politics?
Your magnanimous acceptance of everyone's politics?
Something about when folk music was all for the right or something at one point?
Seeger should not have staged concerts that were really rallies?
You disagree with the rally concept unless it is publicized as such?
Music is a powerul force but it should be only used equally by all sides?
Folk music is smaller than it was?
Folk music is bigger than it was?
Folk music grew because of the leftist slant?
Folk music got smaller because of the leftist slant?
All of the above?
None of the above?
Some of the above as well as the role of aphids in the lives of gardeners?


Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 01:19 PM

WOW!!!!

pdq, we may disagree on a lot of stuff but I love Mexican style cornbread......well any cornbread actually........and that looks like a great recipe.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: pdq
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 01:22 PM

With San Miguel Dark or Sierra Nevada Pale Ale...

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Bill D
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 01:30 PM

"Sierra Nevada Pale Ale... "

Oh, my...a landmark! I have to AGREE with pdq on something.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 01:59 PM

Damn Bill.....WE both agree with pdq.....Are we going over to the dark side?

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: michaelr
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 02:21 PM

No -- the dark side is personified by Ann Coulter, whose spectral visage greeted me at the top of this thread. Shudder...

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: pdq
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 02:31 PM

The Mexican cornbread recipe is a bit heavy on the eggs, depending on how large they are.

Two "jumbo" eggs are just about right.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 02:46 PM

Take a tortilla, spoon a generous quantity of guacamole acrose the diameter, then fold the "wings" over, sort of like a wrap. Absolutely delicious snack. I love guacamole! And it's good for you!

The big challenge is to keep the guacamole from squirting out the back of the rolled up tortilla onto your shirt-front.

A bit of mariachi music in the background. Or, perhaps, not to get political, but maybe some Spanish Civil War songs. . . .

*#2 PHEASANT*
(The proud bird with its head up its tail)

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Greg F.
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 02:55 PM

Great- Return of the Piss Ant.

Probably visited on me for my sins...

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 04:23 PM

The best thing about corn bread is, you can eat it.

I mention this merely because I once heard about a pig who tried building his house out of the stuff. It didn't work out too well.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: artbrooks
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 04:29 PM

I do believe that the OP does deserve an honest answer to his questions - not his conjectures and musings, perhaps, but certainly to his questions. So, here goes: yes, no, nothing.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 04:33 PM

Conrad, Joan Baez has always been quite forthright about describing herself as primarily a politician who just happens to also be a singer. Her concerts are definitely crafted to present her political point of view which is based primarily on nonviolence and working for peace. (that would be considered "leftist" in some quarters, but it would probably be considered "rightist" in China)

She is not censoring other points of view in presenting only her own views in a concert, she's simply presenting her own views, that's all. She'd be censoring other points of view if she got elected and helped pass a law prohibiting views other than her own.

Expression of one's own ideas is not censorship of other people's ideas.

If Anne Coulter were a singer, she could give musical concerts presenting her political point of view. Alas! She is not. ;-D Therefore she is limited to talking on TV or radio and writing books and articles to present her point of view.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 04:42 PM

That doesn't matter at all.....The question is which would eat the cornbread.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: akenaton
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 04:43 PM

Don't feed the trolls!

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 04:45 PM

Oh I dunno'........If they like cornbread then what the hell?

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Jim Dixon
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 04:51 PM

Conrad: Are you trying to say that Seeger et al. were TOO political and that's why folk music is less popular today than it might have been? That too many people who otherwise would have been folk music fans were turned off by his politics? And that's a bad thing?

Also, you refer to "others who did the same thing in the first half of the 20th century" who were on the opposite side from Seeger and presumably conservative—but I have no idea who those people are/were. Can you give some examples?

Burl Ives comes to mind, but he was far less political than Seeger, wasn't he?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: akenaton
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 04:53 PM

They just LOVE cornbread n' molasses.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Bettynh
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 05:01 PM

Pete Seeger and the Smothers Brothers hardly constitute a political party. Do you have any idea what was happening in this nation and in the world in 1968? I don't remember any music at all from the KKK or John Birch Society. Just who were the musical opposition? Should we support Tea Party hootenannys?

The cornbread sounds great, though.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 05:04 PM

Burl Ives may have had political views....but I find little or no evidence of them in his musical performances.

If you want views from the right wing in song, you pretty much have to go to a few individuals in country music for that...plus Barry Sadler (ballad of the Green Berets).

It's a shame Ronald Reagan never played folk music, eh? ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: artbrooks
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 05:20 PM

Sadler's songs were pretty much apolitical (not to mention kinda dumb), and I never heard that he himself ever belonged to any movement at all. The fact that someone was in the military and served in Vietnam indicates nothing.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 05:20 PM

I'm with Spaw on this - I really cannot see the point Conrad is trying to make, other than he doesn't care for Pete Seeger. So???

Because Seeger sings songs from the left, you do not want to consider his performances "concerts"?   ALL songs have a point of view. If you do not agree with that point, it is your choice.

I continue to love Pete Seeger concerts.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: akenaton
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 05:52 PM

Always found ole Pete a tad patronising meself!

The sixties were not just populated by Love Y'all hippies.

Some of us were out on the streets, fighting, not name calling like the pussies of today.

Our enemies were Capitalism and Imperialism, we had an American Nuclear Submarine base just a few miles away......we kept ourselves busy!

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 06:02 PM

So how did the battle against capitalism and imperialism work out for you?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 06:13 PM

How has it worked out for Iraqis, Latin Americans, and Afghans?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: artbrooks
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 09:23 PM

The richest man in the world is a Latin American.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 10:24 PM

So it looks like the battle continues. All the reason why we need more Pete Seegers and Smothers Brothers.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: ichMael
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 10:35 PM

Yes, that original post is quite...original. What's your point? Politics and music don't mix? Or they do mix? Sorry, genuinely confused.

But you say, Folk music is probably bigger than it was fifty or more years ago however everything is now bigger.

That's true. Take Bruce Springsteen, for example. He's kind of a folkie. Done a bunch of acoustic stuff. And he was traipsing around a while back doing concerts for a Kenyan politician. Springsteen was singing "Born in the U.S.A." to every pair of ears that would listen, and he was singing on behalf of a man named Barry Sotero. The guy got elected and breaks the law regularly now by putting his signature on important documents. So music and politics can be a bad thing, if that's what you're wondering about.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 12:16 AM

Well thank any powers that be for cornbread! On this thread we have folks from the left, the right, and many points in between. We have come together here in agreement on this one issue........Conrad is a dingbat! As often happens with his posts, he gets carried away trying to make a point and then loses it in a massive outpouring of babbling nonsense.

So Conrad, sit back and relax, score yourself some cornbread, and be joyous in the fact that you have brought all these diverse people together to some degree. If that was indeed your entire point, well done........and don't say anything to screw it up! I implore you to let well enough alone and control yourself.


Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: akenaton
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 05:03 AM

Ron.....The Nuclear Base is now a marina......a Capitalist marina granted :0), but its better than missiles?

I think we may have had a part in making the US Navy a little less comfortable than they are used to.

BTW....We were not a lynch mob, although we had some right nutters in our ranks, we were opposed by pro capitalist factions on both sides. Plenty of Scots made lots of money out of the US Base and we would have been instantly dismissed from our jobs if our membership of the CP had been known.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: EBarnacle
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 11:42 AM

Don't knock politics as a kneejerk activity. Any time you express an opinion and defend it, you participate in political activity You are attempting to get others to agree with you or support you. It een happens at social events.

In the case of many folkies, there is the additional factor of entertainment as well as political validation. Most of the people there are probably there for the entertainment first.

One of the beauties of our system is that you are allowed to express yourself, no matter how much of an idiot you come off as. If you get enough people to agree with you, you can classify as a movement, a union or a party.

In theory, that is what elections are for, is to judge candidates' opinions.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: EBarnacle
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 11:45 AM

If people did not want to hear what performers had to say, do you believe they would show up just for the music? Maybe, but I doubt it.

At the end of the day, most audience members do not go to be challenged, they go to the concert to be entertained.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 11:59 AM

Awright!!! Now this thread is in the BS section where it naturally belongs.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 02:09 PM

I think one can distinguish between political rallies (one party one viewpoint) and folk concerts.

This is not to say that music should not have political content of course it can and musicians are free to express themselves -naturally. Not arguing that.

Point is that at times performers make more of the politics than the music, spouting political manifestos, pep talks, call and response slogans and when just a little music is included then they are doing more of a political rally than a concert.

I like seegers line in the documentary "I read the communist newspapers and I read the wall street journal....I would just like them to get into the same room and talk to each other"

That seems a good point of view for folk musicians. What is wrong with sharing the stage? One wonders if those who chose to sing songs from the right or conservative perspective or perhaps pro war would have been welcome if they turned up and asked to play and swap songs with seeger or for that matter the smothers brothers. I don't know- did this occur? Anyone have any documentation.

For those who werent there it is important to remember that smothers brothers made a big point of the fact that seeger was not permitted by the network to be on their program singing the big muddy a political song about viet nam (he later won the battle)

I don't know but did the smothers bros. ever have a right wing conservative singing a pro war song?

Yes you can organize your concerts the way you wish however when you exclude opposing views, and when you project more politics than information about songs, then things look more like political rallys.

Was a generation ripe for the adoption of folk music and its revival captured and lead away by folk performers who pushed left wing agendas? (seeger referred to himself as a lefty) Was the revival stolen and made into a political tool?

If so the "lefty's" used the interest in folk style music in the same way that german nationalists did in the first half of the 20th century and it is just as wrong in each case.

Remember at the top....I noted that seeger did much that was not narrow and political. He was anti commercial which I agree firmly with.

Some great achievements and great songwriting and singing. And he is a patriot and like all politicos he loves his country. He is entitled to his point of view.

But.....what would have happened to all those people who loved the sound of folk music and feel of it if the orientation of the music and the messages of its performers had not become so polarized?

When the country turned away from "hippie- lefties" - did not folk music suffer a bit having been branded?

As a cartist driving my artcars- (I only drive artcars) I am constantly being associated by my adoring public with the hippie movement, or drug culture or leftie politics.(couldnt be further from the truth) When this happens people stop seeing me as art and inflict ideology which keeps us apart. Same thing once when playing a tin whistle- I was playing a song from the protestant tradition a listener taking the music for irish republican spouted an anti british line as if I would agree.

Political branding of a musical genre is harmful and should be avoided. We need to get to the point where all points of view expressed in song can take the same stage at musical events. Don't narrow the options of the audience. If you are confident you are right then they should agree with you but give them choice.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 02:13 PM

You should get Pete Seeger and Joan Baez to sit down with you, then, Conrad, have a heart to heart talk, and straighten them out. Maybe Bruce Springsteen and Billy Bragg too. I wonder how this could be arranged?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 02:48 PM

Any time.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Seamus Kennedy
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 03:20 PM

Actually, not to seem naive or anything, but Conrad has an interesting idea..
If we (somebody else, not me) could organize a concert with well-known folkies of each persuasion, right and left, to illustrate their beliefs with songs to a mixed audience of righties and lefties, with respectful attention being paid to both sides - no haranguing or barracking - then we might achieve something that all the shouting heads on TV and spit-flecked demagogues on radio cannot do.

Joan Baez and Jed Marum to kick the show off.

Any others?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 04:07 PM

"Point is that at times performers make more of the politics than the music, spouting political manifestos, pep talks, call and response slogans and when just a little music is included then they are doing more of a political rally than a concert."

Doesn't sound like any Pete Seeger or Smother's Brothers concert I've ever attended. Sure they get their point across, but it is still a concert. Besides, why limit the definition and expecations of the word "concert"?

Protest songs are folk music.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 04:52 PM

Exactly Seamus!

Whenever one side dominates you tend to loose the other bringing both sides together even though one might be smaller still increases potential market.

Additionally when there is inclusion or balance we chip away at the branding that makes people see the folk world as being on one side or the other....

Yes Ron- one can have workshops, concerts with themes, politics in music and lyrics fantastic. However, when I know that going to a concert will most likely produce an artist droning on about the war, the economy, the hudson river whatever more than they talk about the songs, history of songs, history of lyrics, origins of songs then I am not feeling so much as if I am at a concert.

I already noted both somthers and seeger did some good things and played wrote and included a wide range over time however, they did succeed in branding an entire generation of people who simply started out liking the sound of ordinary everyday folk music and its qualities as music and verse.

As the Seeger documentary pointed out Pete knew the power of folk music and he put it to work- for one side --at the expense of the intellectual contributions to music of the other side - don't know- would be interesting to find out.

And I will repeat- the seeger smothers party turned out to be on the winning side. I agree with much that they pursued. I am thankful that Seeger saw the light (as I recall when he learned about the deeds of Stalin).

I was struck by the crowd at a workshop at Glen Echo Washington Folk Festival last summer. Seeger and contemporaries music featured. Almost all the same generation- ageing folkies about 50-60.

My theory -
1. population changes in attitude. When a genre of music is branded as one place on the political spectrum and the center of the population changes (in our case to the right as hippies became busismen, lawyers....and Reagan built up conservative patriotism...)
growth of followers will slow.

2.As music moves from live performance to recordings to market it is purchased by the generation with funds at the time. In America at least generational sharing is minimal and with time the age set market is broken off from future generations therefore the next generation does not follow.

The trick is to get folk music to thread through the gears not get wrapped around them. If you want folkmusic growth to continue through time you have to get it like film through the rollers of a projector.
When wrapped up in one issue or point of view it gets derailed.

Additionally when we transform music we sing into music that is marketed and that we purchase we likewise get stuck. It just rolls around and around in its little side niche eventually hitting the bargain basement with hope of only some wondrous reclamation or revival.

If we keep singing the songs, telling the tales as a lifeway while at the same time recording and marketing them there seems to me to be more of an opportunity to grow. The more timeless music - that of daily life, and good word play and rhyme and catchy tunes seem to be the glue that should be exploited to hold things together and not so much the political issues that get dated, become less relevant and need more time to explain to be understood.

Again seeger with his interest in collecting and documenting did much fine work in this area too.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 04:54 PM

To my Loyal Fan Club in the Peanut gallery (or for you corn gallery).
So glad that you are here to add splashes of color to these threads-simply wondrous. The continuity of ages. Thanks for keeping up with me.
Maybe I should have a fan club!

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Bill D
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 05:15 PM

Fan club? good idea!

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 05:54 PM

Conrad:    ". . . at times performers make more of the politics than the music, spouting political manifestos, pep talks, call and response slogans and when just a little music is included then they are doing more of a political rally than a concert."

I've been to one helluva lot of folk concerts since the early 1950s, and I have never attended one where what Conrad describes pertained.

Back in the late 1950s, there was a woman who perpetually wore a red dress and played an accordion who sang only hard-charging extreme left-wing songs and had a tendency to take over hoots and song fests. We just stopped letting her know when and where they were happening and that solved the problem.

There's a street singer in Seattle who's specialty is angry topical songs. The option there, if you aren't interested in what he is bitching about this time, is to keep walking.

I toss in the occasional peace oriented song (Johnny, I Hardly Knew Ye, The Green Fields of France, Two Brothers) into my programs, but I've never had any complaints. I figure that if these songs offend anyone, then they need to be offended.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: PoppaGator
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 06:21 PM

To be fair, Pete Seeger has almost always included singalong and/or call-and-response numbers promoting some kind of human-rights or "political" viewpoint. He has always been pretty safe in assuming that his audience would be happy to participate.

For a performer to express his own opinion is NOT "censorship." Censorship is exactly the opposite: the attempt to prevent people from expressing themselves.

If you don't like it, don't attend.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: frogprince
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 07:05 PM

With the context of Conrad's other postings,I think we can read something between his lines here:
We were comfortable going out to hear people like Pete Seeger, who had an obvious agenda of promoting peace, liberty, and celebration of human diversity. So why should we be uncomfortable with singers who spout a little venemous hatred about the majority of the people on earth?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 07:08 PM

Nothing wrong with wonderful sing along and call and responses but it does not have to be political to be just as fun. People enjoy the process and would still be there without the political content. Thats just it....at the time due to generational and market changes there were a lot of people who agreed that of all the available genres that folk music was the key that turned their locks. This has a lot to do with perception of the music of one or two generations back and search for identity but also has to do with many other dimensions of life including politics, economic conditions etc....world view.

So there was this desire to experience the type of music that folk is but then it was branded as politically left, end the war, civil rights (all good topics and causes) but once branded the entire relationship of the audience to the music and those who wish to come in changes.

Its not that seeger always staged political rallys but that he did it quite a bit along with lots of wonderful things.

Again performers can always be free to express themselves. Did Seeger and smothers censor which is to say deny others access to their stages? Don't know and am waiting to hear. They were known to keep to their own points of view strongly though.

In the broad concept of marketplace it is helpful to avoid appearing to be exclusive even though you might not actually be excluding. A successful green grocer sells lots of stuff - not just apples. Suppliers of a grocer that sold only apples would not bother to market other products to him and even though the quality of apples was very good those who did not like apples or had grown tired of them would also not stop in. Is that censorship....maybe not but it is sure not being helpful if you are the only green grocer in town or dominate the market, television networks, stages....

I tend to think that the story of Dylan and Newport has relevance here-his change of genres- but the brain cells need to have a meeting with mr yoengling.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: olddude
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 07:24 PM

i like corn bread, i don't like cream corn in a can however

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 07:33 PM

I see now........If Pete can do it then why can't you do it Conrad? Sure......you have the same rights regarding censorship so you can appeal to your target audience in ways they can sing along with! I get it!!! So let's do Pete's "Sailing Up, Sailing Down" with one of your audiences! Go ahead Man.....Go for it!!!

Blowing Up (blowing up)
Burning Down (burning down)
Blown up, Burnt down
All across the country
We're killin' Commies, Jews, and Niggers
All along the way
You can think we're white trash now
But we're proud to be the K-K-K


Lemmee know how it goes for you Conrad.


Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: akenaton
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 08:40 PM

Most of us hate somebody or some thing.

Is there anyone who doesn't hate the cowards who put their jobs before the lives of a million men women and children?

Sorry that was the "liberal democratic" government of Great Britain!

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: frogprince
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 08:42 PM

Here's a little something by Pete:

You know this language tha we speak
Is part german , latin and part greek
Celtic and arabic all in a heap,
Well amended by the people in the street
The choctaw gave us the word "okay";
"vamose" is a word from mexico way.
And all of this is a hint i suspect of what comes next.

Chorus:
I think that this whole world
Soon mama my whole wide world
Soon mama my whole world
Soon gonna be get mixed up.
Soon mama my whole world
Soon mama my whole wide world
Soon mama my whole world
Soon gonna be get mixed up.

I like polish sausage, i like spanish rice,
And pizza pie is also nice
Corn and beans from the indians here
Washed down by german beer
Marco polo traveled by camel and pony,
He brought to italy, the first macaroni
And you and i as well we're able,
We put it all on the table

(chorus)

There were no red-headed irishmen
Before the vikings landed in ireland
How many romans had dark curly hair
Before they brought slaves from africa?
No race of man is completely pure,
Nor is anyone's mind, that's for sure
The winds mix the dust of every land,
And so will woman and man.

(chorus)

This doesn't mean we will all be the same,
We'll have different faces and different names
Long live many different kinds of races
It's a difference of opinion that makes horse races
Just remember the rule about rules, brother
What could be right for one could be wrong for the other
And take a tip from la belle france: "viva la difference!"

(chorus)

Now, we wouldn't want to censor you; would you like to put in something from a different political perspective?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: akenaton
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 08:47 PM

Get a grip guys.....look what Bush accomplished, without jackboots or even a moustache!
We have and will again massacre millions, if it is in our interests to do so.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 08:50 PM

Waitaminute, waitaminute!!!!

As I recall, the network tried to censor Seeger. The song was "Knee Deep in the Big Muddy." The Smothers Brothers put their foot down and insisted that Seeger be allowed to sing it.

So who's trying to censor who, here, eh?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 09:18 PM

Actually Don, Pete was WAIST deep in the Big Muddy when the damn fool said to move on.

Spaw (;<))

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 09:40 PM

the question is did pete or smothers ever refuse to have a person from pro war persepctive or for that matter anti communist perspective on the same stage/programme?

Then again die either of the three ever sing a pro war song anywhere to provide a sense of balance?

I was not pro war but have a feeling that one side stole the show and the audience.

I think the story was that he was kept off the show initially but a good time later got in.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 10:21 PM

Right, Spaw! Back to the anatomy chart!

Back during WW II, I remember as a kid hearing songs like "Praise the Lord and Pass the Ammunition" (!), and a re-up of "Over There" (song from WW I) which may have seemed to be pro-war. But really they were saying, "Let's get this damned thing over with!"

But hardly "pro-war" in general. Certainly not in the same way that "The Green Fields of France" is anti-war. Many of the songs I recall hearing during WW II were like those sung by English songstress Vera Lynn:   "When the Lights Come on Again All Over the World," "The White Cliffs of Dover," and "We'll Meet Again." During the Korean "Police Action," I'm told that Teresa Brewer's "'Til I Waltz Again with You" was a great favorite of American troops in Korea.

All of these songs display a longing for the war to be over.   Most anti-war songs have more to do with the evils of war in general. Something to be avoided. Somehow, I can't really imagine a song that favors war in general. It would have to be pretty bizarre, not to mention a bit—sick.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 10:33 PM

Here's a pro-war song, Don:

"Stand Navy out to sea
Fight our battlecry
We'll never change our course, so
Vicious foe steer shy-y-y-y!
Stand Navy out to sea
Anchors away!
Sail on to victory
And sink their bones to Davy Jones! Hooray!"

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Rapparee
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 11:05 PM

Her's a list Vietnam-related songs from the DT. You guys fight over 'em.

0.8909 - THE FIELDS OF VIETNAM
0.8510 - BALLAD OF THE UNKNOWN SOLDIER
0.8351 - GHOST ADVISORS
0.8347 - TALKING VIETNAM POT-LUCK BLUES
0.8169 - LAMENT
0.8169 - FEEL LIKE I'M FIXIN' TO DIE RAG
0.8169 - 9420 WOGAN TERRACE
0.7967 - PUFF THE MAGIC DRAG-ON
0.7967 - I WAS ONLY 19 (A WALK IN THE LIGHT GREEN)
0.7967 - STRAFE THE TOWN AND KILL THE PEOPLE
0.7967 - SPECIAL FORCES SONG
0.7967 - JINGLE BELLS (Vietnam)
0.7967 - FOURTEEN DAYS LEAVE
0.7967 - DON'T TAKE MY COUNTERPART AWAY
0.7967 - DASHING THROUGH THE SKY
0.7742 - THERE'S A WALL IN WASHINGTON
0.7742 - TOUCH A NAME ON THE WALL
0.7742 - ROSE OF VIETNAM
0.7742 - THE BALLAD OF JAKE AND 10-TON MOLLY
0.7742 - MAKIN' WEAPONS
0.7742 - HELLO, CAM RANH TOWER
0.7742 - CADENCE COUNT (3)
0.7742 - AFTER THE WAR
0.7742 - YOUR DAUGHTERS AND YOUR SONS
0.7742 - YELLOW ROSE OF SAIGON
0.7742 - THIS COWBOY'S HAT
0.7742 - THEY CALL ME A MACV ADVISOR
0.7742 - THE OLD MAN'S TALE
0.7742 - THE BUG-OUT BALLAD (MOVING ON)
0.7742 - THE BALLAD OF THE CO VAN MY
0.7742 - TCHEPONE
0.7742 - SORRY ABOUT THAT
0.7742 - SIX CLICKS
0.7742 - SEAN SULLIVAN
0.7742 - RED RIVER VALLEY (2)
0.7742 - NAPALM STICKS TO KIDS
0.7742 - MONTAGNARD SERGEANT
0.7742 - MACV MARCHING SONG
0.7742 - LUANG PRABANG
0.7742 - IT'S HARD TO BE HUMBLE (2)
0.7742 - GHOST ADVISORS II
0.7742 - FRIENDLY FAC AND GREEN BERET
0.7742 - FORT DIX STOCKADE
0.7742 - YOUR FLAG DECAL WON'T GET YOU INTO HEAVEN ANYMORE
0.7742 - COME AND JOIN THE AIR FORCE (2)
0.7742 - COLONEL NIGHN
0.7742 - BORN ON THE FOURTH OF JULY
0.7742 - BIG MUDDY
0.7742 - BATTLE HYMN OF LT. CALLEY
0.7742 - BALLAD OF THE GREEN BERETS
0.7742 - BALLAD OF CORDS
0.7742 - 50,000 NAMES

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 01:03 AM

Geeziz Conrad.....Are you really this friggin' stupid? Tell me its all an act huh? Damn............

"the question is did pete or smothers ever refuse to have a person from pro war persepctive or for that matter anti communist perspective on the same stage/programme?"

Why? Its their party ain't it? Do you think you'd be well received at a Concours D'Elegance with one of your piece of shit artcars? Just in case you think you would be, let me assure you that you would NOT!

"Then again die either of the three ever sing a pro war song anywhere to provide a sense of balance?"

Are you insane? Again numbnuts, WHY????? There is no law that makes them put on the other side.........geeziz........

"I was not pro war but have a feeling that one side stole the show and the audience."

Well duh...........do you think? Might there be some good reason for that?

Try the cornbread Conrad and shut up.


Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 01:17 AM

Cliché from the Sixties:

"What if they gave a war and nobody came?"

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: katlaughing
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 02:03 AM

Conrad seems think the Smothers Bros. and Seeger were supposed to give equal "airtime" to the "opposition" ala political debates before an election. If they are the only ones he can think of to deride for presenting their views and, obviously, finding plenty of audiences for them, I cannot imagine what premise he would use to defend some of today's media, let alone some of the neo-nazi thugs who do have their own hate-filled songs and concerts. Does he really think they should be on stage to provide a "balance" to the likes of the iconic Seeger?

Perhaps equal time should have been given to bands which sing such "folk" music as the Grinded Nig (Texas) song "Splatterday, Nigger Day":    "Drive around in my van/We want to kill a nigger/They are in the city/Follow one into the alley/We all attack the nigger/He has seen his last day."

Take a look at Neo-Nazi Hate Music - A Guide. If you can stand it, pay particular attention to the last few paragraphs re' the politicization of their music. Do you think they would, or should, give equal time at their concerts to Seeger and others?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 07:03 AM

I would never say that any artist had to be open to the songs of other points of view only that being balanced was healthy for folk music in general over the long haul.

Why aren't there so many anti war songs?
Could it be that those writing them were not welcomed>?

Interesting, the attitude that just because my view is right and some people agree with me I can limit consideration of music to songs singing my point of view.

Folks- Music is art, songs are artworks first and political statements marginally. Why focus on only one dimension of an artwork.

Its like a painting of Christ- you may oppose the concept of Christ, you may not be a christian, you may oppose religion. Does that mean that that a picture of christ done by an old master is not beautiful.

Interesting that some on this thread would be joining those in Afghanistan out there blowing up centuries old brilliantly created statues of the Buddha.

Its easy to argue that the received view should have freedom like seeger to the smothers brothers producers. It is more difficult to extend as is required, freedom of inclusion and welcome to opposing viewpoints howerver, when we welcome everyone to the tent we are on the best path.

No you don't have to invite people you dissagree with but it would be the courageous right thing to do.

For all I know smothers, and seeger valued the music more than politics and invited and included the opposition. Anyone have statistics on this>?

Takes all voices to sing in the choir and keep music above petty political swamps.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: artbrooks
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 07:32 AM

Why aren't there so many anti war songs? What hole have you been hiding in?

Songs are artworks first and political statements marginally. You're kidding, right?

Interesting that some on this thread would be joining those in Afghanistan out there blowing up centuries old brilliantly created statues of the Buddha. Can you name one?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Bettynh
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 08:50 AM

I remember seeing Pete on the Smothers Brothers show - he came on, started, got knee deep in the Big Muddy, and there were "technical network difficulties" as he headed to waist deep. The difficulties were "fixed" with the end of the song. The documentary did seem a bit muddled about what exactly happened.

I do not want to listen to pro-war music every time I hear anti-war music, or anti-God music every time I hear pro-God, or anti-global warming every time I hear pro-environment, or Creationist every time I hear Darwin. The need for "fair and balanced" has been run over by insanity and I'm done with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 09:49 AM

Please note Conrad old dick......I am not alone in wondering what your problem is, Can you not see?

Wait......Maybe I have it figured out. You are trying to show us what a grand and magnanimous spirit you are and that we are poor and cowardly fools for not embracing the entire spectrum of possibilities!!! Is that it? Did I get it right?????

Nah........I think the real problem is that you're a friggin' nutjob so out of touch that you will do anything to have your view embraced by all and have your dimbulb, warmongering, racist, and hate-filled songs heard by them.


Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 10:11 AM

"I would never say that any artist had to be open to the songs of other points of view only that being balanced was healthy for folk music in general over the long haul."

So you must think that people like Francis Child was being fair and balanced with his collection? Do you honestly believe that collectors of folk songs weren't filtering their work through their own moral beliefs?

Conrad brings up a point about seeing beauty in a painting of Christ by the old masters, yet at the same time he is not allowing himself to see the same beauty in a protest song.   You let the politics cloud your artistic sensibilities.

Conrad also asks the question of whether or not the Smothers Brothers denied airtime to pro-war songs. That completely misses the point. The idea of presenting opposing views is not the responsibility of the person standing on the soapbox, it is the responsibility of those who provide the soapbox to stand on.

To be honest, CBC had every right to decide what to allow on their network - the issue wasn't free speech but rather censorship.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: katlaughing
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 10:52 AM

Ron, I think you meant "CBS," at least that's the network I watched the Smothers Bros. on.:-) (Maybe it's a plot by the Canucks to take over...inculcating us all with CBC references all over the board!)

Hey, all! I shall have a tent party...ya'll come and meet those Uber Alles fellahs...I'll bet they'll just love hearing our fav. songs...maybe we can even get them to dance to Hava Nagila! That's right, everyone is welcome in this tent!

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 11:04 AM

No not that extreme in the area of balance approaching balance or giving the impression of overal balance would be good enough.

Yes once again smothers and seeger are in the right when they design their programming according to their interests.

Is the narrow view resulting in audience and genre branding good for folk music No.

Presenters imho - those entrusted with media power should be responsible in that they should try to open what are essentially variety programs to the widest possible range of political outlook.

Was the power of music used to exclude political points of view? Maybe dont know. Someone should study this. Seems to me hard to complain that your song can't be played but at the same time make sure that others with opposing views can not put their material on the air space you control.

Yes one can do a themed show- trouble is that in the case of smothers and often with seeger shows were presented as variety shows or open shows but none the less they projected only one point of view. Did smothers ever include pro war material or anti civil rights material? Did seeger ever share the stage with pro war or anti civil rights folks?

The public airwaves and public stages are powerful positions in society. If you are having a themed series- fine say so- "the smothers brothers free culture, anti war, show"

As for collectors yes - I am very familiar with collection self censorship. That is what this thread is in part about. Self censoring of music that is available on limited public airways and stages.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 11:27 AM

There seems to be some sort of tacit assumption by most of the membership who post here that Conrad is...

a Neo-Nazi
someone who hates all minorities and wants to see them destroyed
a rabid right winger, possibly a KKK member
a vicious sociopath
a hatemonger of the first water
a person undeserving of courtesy, patience or mercy
someone who ought to be made a complete outcast
a handy target for ridicule
perhaps a secret werewolf or child abuser? ;-)


I'm puzzled by this, since I don't know Conrad very well, and I have no idea why most of the oldtimers on this forum endlessly engage in what I would term "a swarming" whenever he lifts his head out of the foxhole, as it were, and dares to post here. (?)

What the hell is it all about?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 11:34 AM

It has become a folk tradition!

This infact is the general reaction of those who find their comfortable status quo interrupted by thought.

A good indication that discussion is on the right track.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 12:01 PM

"Presenters imho - those entrusted with media power should be responsible in that they should try to open what are essentially variety programs to the widest possible range of political outlook."

That is correct, sort of.   The FCC, at the time, did have regulations called the Fairness Doctrine that were supposed to mandate that broadcasters present programs on controversial subjects and provide fair and balanced coverage.   The Smothers Brothers brothers WERE an alternate political outlook at the time. There is also evidence that CBS was pressured by the White House to censor the program.   There was programming that aimed toward the right, and no one was protesting that. I recall groups like Up With People and songs from Barry Sadler getting significant airplay and television exposure.


"Is the narrow view resulting in audience and genre branding good for folk music No."

Wrong. Folk music comes out of a community. The community creates it and adopts it. It is what it is. Whaling songs, mining songs, cowboy songs, AND protest songs are a reflection of the community from which it was spawned. The FACT that the left embraced folk music and the output was adopted by the community IS a sample of the times and the community. IF we were walking around singing pro-war songs, that would be a reflection of the times and community - but it was not.

Protest songs are what they are. If you do not care for the style, you are not required to listen. Sea chanties do not interest everyone either.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: frogprince
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 12:08 PM

L.H., for the love of God, this turkey is advocating that to have a nice, big, healthy folk music scene, we should welcome in a "fair" share of neo-natzi skinheads with their hate music. He's going on that the historic tendency of folk music to reflect humane values constitutes a one-sided political "agenda" that would better be balanced out from the "other side". There really is such a thing as being so "open minded" that you let your brains fall out.

"Interesting that some on this thread would be joining those in Afghanistan out there blowing up centuries old brilliantly created statues of the Buddha" Why ofcourse we would, Conrad; why shouldn't we? After all, historically, Buddhism has been largely a faith embraced by non-white people.
Conrad, you really need to get a better grade of tinfoil for your hat>

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: EBarnacle
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 12:19 PM

Geeziz Conrad.....Are you really this friggin' stupid? Tell me its all an act huh? Damn............

"the question is did pete or smothers ever refuse to have a person from pro war persepctive or for that matter anti communist perspective on the same stage/programme?"

Spaw, Conrad, funny that you should mention this.

I am involved in a situation with an organization with Pete and at present there is a heated discussion over whether or not to hire the Barraoille Whalers for our festival. Basically it is a discussion over whether to hire people who have peformed politically incorrect acts, from which they have retired, or to exclude them from performing at the festival.

The PC's do not want them because they are controversial. It is being couched as a matter of avoiding protest and keeping ticket sales up. Those of us who support hiring them consider that many primay sources are politically incorrect but that their value as primary sources outweighs their controversiality.

The Festival Director decided to hire them.

Back to the point: Would a right wing group, such as the Tea Baggers or fundamentalist Republicans [Yes, I know that is more than a little redundant.] hire someone who does not follow their political line to perform at one of their fund raising events?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 12:47 PM

Yes, Frogprince, I agree that his overall point regarding folk music performances seems pretty damn silly. ;-) Granted! But so what? How big a deal can that be?

But how does this equate to Conrad himself being, as I listed before:

a Neo-Nazi
someone who hates all minorities and wants to see them destroyed
a rabid right winger, possibly a KKK member
a vicious sociopath
a hatemonger of the first water
a person undeserving of courtesy, patience or mercy
someone who ought to be made a complete outcast
a handy target for ridicule
perhaps a secret werewolf or child abuser? ;-)
In any case, clearly a veritable monster who should be attacked upon sight!

I ask simply because I am genuinely puzzled by the furious vendetta that so many of you here seem to go on the moment Conrad posts about anything at all...I mean, how can this one guy with a few oddball opinions be such a threat to our collective existence here? Why do a number of people here reserve a special form of personal vitriol for him? Why are they so concerned about Conrad on a very personal level? Why does Spaw continually stalk Conrad on this forum, apparently for the sheer joy of verbally abusing and assaulting him at every possible chance? He obviously enjoys doing it. ;-) Would someone else's enjoyment of doing the same king of thing to Spaw or to Kat or to you or to me be seen in the same way?

What is the point of this collective oldtimer gangbang/mindfuck of Conrad every time he dares to post here about anything? How can one eccentric man be made to serve as a whipping boy for all your collective fantasies of all that is politically evil?...and is that a healthy thing to engage in? Does Conrad merit this degree of negative attention?

What happened? Did he moon all of you once at the Getaway or something? Did he piss on the Mudcat Constitution? I'm puzzled, and I'd like to know.

Or is it all some kind of huge in-joke which I'm not in on because I wasn't here when it started? Man, I hope so. Otherwise, I think there are a few people here who need counseling or something.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: frogprince
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 01:08 PM

This whole brewha comes out of an explicit effort by the BNP to coopt English folk music as a tool for the promotion of virilent racism. A lot of decent people over there are trying to counter that. Conrad has been taking every possible tack, over and over, to argue against their efforts: "it's unfair, it's a one-sided political agenda, it's not good for the over-all health of the folk music scene". For some "silly" reason, this constant harping has made a lot of us more than a little suspicious as to Conrad's own
"silly" stance, and whether he is a person we would want to associate with.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: frogprince
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 01:25 PM

A few years ago, at a public banquet, I was seated by a man who mentioned that he would like to obtain a copy of the movie "Birth of a Nation". It never occured to me to judge him, or make any assumptions about his politics, on the basis that he wanted to see that highly significant bit of movie history for himself. Then he went on to say that, while the KKK was originally founded for a good and necessary purpose, he would have to admit that it had sometimes gotten a little out of hand. Somewhere along there I began to suspect that he was a rather "silly" person.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 01:27 PM

Ron-

"Wrong. Folk music comes out of a community"

Yes and no.

Prior to war, civil rights, alt lifestyles issues several important dimensions of our world opened the ears if you will of a new generation.

Very complex.

Part rebellion against urbanization - anything non tech anti tech non urban would do.

Part rebellion against two generations of musical tastes that of their grandparents and of their parents.

What was the old music- commercial, crosby, sentatra....of the grand parents tin pan alley. Manufactured hits, commercialism- anything anti comercialism would do =music of the people

Perhaps going back to the ancient song hall a bit of a retro look- the days of the follow the bouncing ball (still seen in pizza chains in the 70s) desire to sing and not be sung at.

They could have turned to jazz but it was far too abstract and additionally within the fifties possibly a bit of something from the shaddows- night club, drugs, tobacco and possibly a bit on the far side of the racial divide....too alt culture

Lots of other things happened as well....but many dimensions make the receptivity for group change.

So the ears were open to a product to fit them. Folk music was that product. However those with the power of possessing the stages and media provided a product, their personal product flavored with their interests- as seger says lefty politics, civil rights. (nothing wrong with those issues or their freedom to do so) So they got the product but in a flavor manipulated by those with the power who as we have seen generally flowed politically one way.

Any folk music would have done the job. There was much in Seegers work that was popular as his political however he only had one flavor of political and so did most of those with the power of the media and the stages. So as the issues came along into the ears went the only thing that was available and out came then your community. Lefty single side single issue folks. Behold the power of folk music a phrase seeger used a few times in the documentary.

Now when the issues were resolved and the sounds of the community marketed and packaged in the great american age set market place america moved on to other issues and Under Regan heightened community and the patriotism that lasted to the first gulf war. People in this new community seeing only the one sided one issue culture in the previous generation found it branded and the brand was not of their liking so folk music wound down.

That is why at the concert of seeger related lefty music at Glen Echo the audience was predominantly over 56.

No you dont have to have balance but if you refrain from branding the entire community and genre things have more potential for growth.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 01:51 PM

Frogprince - I see. So how long has this brouhaha (with Conrad) been going on? It seems like a big waste of energy to me.


Conrad - You are quite correct that the folk music movement was a movement against the music of our parents (Sinatra, Big Band, Tin Pan Alley, etc), and that it contained the various other protest aspects you mention...hostility to urbanization...affection for old country ways of living...and so on...

It wasn't that folk music caused all that, but rather that folk music was tailor-made to express varous forms of restlessness and rebellion of the time, that's all, and young people were after all resisting the values of their elders. Very plainly.

I detested Sinatra, Big Band music, and Tin Pan Alley. I also detested the USA's imperial wars. I would have done so regardless of whether there was a folk music movement or not, but folk music certainly helped to bring together people who felt as I did at the time, and it strengthened those feelings in people.

It seems to have been a natural evolution of society at that time.

Now, Bob Dylan, for one, started out fully embracing the leftist radical sort of ethic of the folk music movement, and was deeply in it through the period of his first 3 albums...but he soon began to become uncomfortable with it, because he instinctively resisted the idea of becoming "the spokesman" of anyone's political agenda. So he stepped away from it beginning around 1964-5, started writing more personally oriented material, and that really upset his audience who looked upon his departure from the overtly political music as a betrayal.

They were mistaken. He didn't want to be used as other people's poster boy, that's all. And I think he had begun to feel that people who set out to "change the world" are largely caught up in their own ego enhancement and are usually fooling themselves. I would say that that is the case...in many cases....but not in all. There are some people who devote their lives to political action in a very real way, and are not fooling themselves. In other words, they're doing it for the right reasons. Most people do it just for the big rush of hearing themselves talk, in my opinion, but a few people do it because they genuinely have real compassion for humanity and are willing to put themselves on the line for others. Joan Baez is one such person, in my opinion.

Dylan's concern seems to have been primarily to express himself in a way that spontaneously made sense to him and fulfilled him. I can't argue with that. He's not a crusader, he's a writer. He often writes great material that will inspire many, and that's his job, but it's not his job to man the barricades. If you want someone to man the barricades, look to Joan Baez. She'll do it.

There's nothing unusual about the fact that modern folk music has an aging audience which is growing smaller. The same is true of Sinatra's music, Big Band music, oldtime country music, rock n' roll, and every other form of popular music we've ever seen.

It happens. Things change. Old styles fade out and new styles come along. Don't worry about it. It will cease entirely to be a problem for you and me and everyone else here on the day that each one of us dies....and the world will continue merrily on and produce new musical styles, and the same things will happen all over again.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 01:58 PM

Hawk....If the question is, am I a competitive bully....yes....always have been. But I argue and disagree with pdq, Doug R, and others that I don't treat that way do I?   Know why?

None of the others are hypocrites and Conrad is the hypocrites hypocrite. Everything is OKAY! with Conrad but can't we just give each side a chance??????   Conrad came along here with a lot of good research in Irish music from the orange side and then lobbied for how wonderful it was even though he wasn't that way himself but....Then he would go on and prove he was then deny it. I know where Doug stands......I know where pdq stands.....and if I disagree as I often do, so be it. But Conrad never "means" it for himself, he just wants to point out the error of our ways......yeah, right. Someone can be the biggest racist or whatever in the world, just admit what you are....simple.

Now am I all worked up over Conrad? LOL....No, I really love it when he shows up with his latest bullshitting blather. The current one is choice!   And his last post?   Talk about gibberish.........No, he gives me some laughs but I am also not going to let him pull his "not me" routine.

RON OLESKO: If you can translate Conrad's latest, I can't wait to hear your take.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: olddude
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 01:59 PM

Songs are songs, there is nothing that I know of in any free nation to stop someone from singing or writing anything they want. Getting someone else to listen or buy or hire you to perform is another matter entirely ... Maybe the reason Pete is so revered is that he hits a spark inside most people of the concept of right and wrong ... maybe it is also his skill as a musician and his connection to the common masses, Maybe that is why he is Pete. However, anyone else is fully free to express their voice in song also ... that does not mean that a promoter who really is in it to make a living and a profit will hire them or even listen to their music ... There is no "fair" in music business nor should there be .... It is all about quality and all about skill and all about appeal and all about staying alive financially.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 02:04 PM

The dirty, 4 letter, "F" word in this language is not fuck.......fair is the dirty word.

A fair is a place you go to see quilts and cakes and tractors and hogs. YOu can eat grasy fried everything and watch a horse pull or a demo derby there sometimes too. If you live in the midwest you might even have a Combine Demo Derby!

Fair as a concept of equality is a cop out. It has no place in any business or even most other enterprises.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Bettynh
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 02:04 PM

Conrad, I have to again wonder how old you are.

The recordings of the Carter family and other early local musicians had a huge influence as well. Pete Seeger was joined by Elvis Presley, Johnny Cash, Doc Watson, and a flood of others who capitalized on that early music. Not to mention what happened when it influenced English musicians with skiffle. Pete's audience has always been tiny compared to Elvis's.

Audiences are self-selecting, aren't they? The Dixie Chicks' audience changed dramatically a few years ago, primarily because of "those with the power of the media and the stages." They have a huge audience now. And it's not Republican.


So I guess the real question is:



What is folk music?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: olddude
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 02:26 PM

when i was a kid my dad would say as soon as you figure out life isn't fair the better prepared you will be for adulthood. he was right as usual, most of the musicians on this site are better than 90% of the commercial offerings today imho   it sure isn't fair they get no recognition, but it is life

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 02:28 PM

The receptivity of the sounds, feelings styles of folk music was created by the environment- many many factors.

People were ready to adopt something that provided those feelings to them.

When all of the above mentioned back country inspired and foreign inspired music turned up it was therefore popular because the qualities it possessed were the qualities that the ears of the next generation looked for.

Many of those who were in possession of the stages and media flavored folk music in a particularly lefty, civil rights way (nothing wrong with those issues) they could do it because they were in power- just like every group in power can set the tone. These folks provided only one channel most of the time to a receptive population.

When the major issues developed they were in command of the ears and went full steam ahead- their concerts no different than any other political rally or propaganda event.

The question is did they lock out the opposing view because of their possession of the media and the stages and power of music?

Anything folk would have been ok for the audiences the essential qualities were there. Seeger did play stuff that was not political however whenever the songs were political they were one flavor.

Of course when the issues came up civil rights, war etc....those fed the single political line naturally followed but more importantly the entire gnere was branded.

yes issues come and go however, folk music has to find a more efficient pathway through them so that it does not have to be frequently be knocked down and revived. The way forward is balance and welcoming of all sides even if you have to work to invite them and bring them all together. If you believe your issues are correct you will not mind sharing the stage and the media.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 02:31 PM

Okay, Spaw, I get your drift... ;-) I can certainly see how much fun you are having every time Conrad launches a thread. Strangely enough, it doesn't seem to bother him. Maybe he enjoys the attention.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 02:34 PM

"RON OLESKO: If you can translate Conrad's latest, I can't wait to hear your take."

My take is that Conrad is using his own opinion to define "folk music" and not recognizing that the music that grew out of the folk revival is not FOLK MUSIC with capital letters, but rather a type of folk music that represents a very specific community and era. It also has commercial roots, and we could really go off on a tangent as to whether or not it is a true genre of "folk music".

I also think he is failing to recognize that the right wing music he is seeking exists in other forms and genres.

You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 02:37 PM

You start from some extremely questionable premises then traverse across the slippery slopes of poor logic to arrive at a a laughable destination. Truly one of your best efforts there!

Here's a typical Coradism relating back to my last post:

"......and media flavored folk music in a particularly lefty, civil rights way (nothing wrong with those issues).....

I just love it when you demonstrate my points for me so quickly.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 02:40 PM

Thank you Ron! Well done!

And Hawk.......Hey....He LOVES the attention. And I've always been willing to give it to him!

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Rapparee
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 02:40 PM

But then again, as Gary Larson wrote, "Suppose they gave a war and EVERYBODY came?"

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 02:41 PM

I have to admit that I get a warm glow in my heart whenever I imagine John Wayne getting his ass kicked by a bunch of little Asians wearing black pajamas.... ;-) (There's nothing wrong with that, is there?)

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: katlaughing
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 02:50 PM

So as the issues came along into the ears went the only thing that was available and out came then your community. Lefty single side single issue folks. Behold the power of folk music a phrase seeger used a few times in the documentary.

Conrad, you make it sound as though we were all automatons led on by the "Pied Piper-Seeger"...no brains of our own to even discern anything different OR to have our own agendas based on our upbringing, education, and experiences.

I grew up in the late 50s-through the 60s. First and foremost what was influential in my life, music-wise, was that of my family, musicians all, which included MANY genres including cowboy, big band, classical, folk and trad., jazz, my parent's favs, i.e. Arthur Godfrey, etc. Then, when I was 8 we got a tv and I heard even more "folk" on the Andy Griffith show and others, only a bit later on the Smothers Brothers' as well as Ed Sullivan who didn't have any discernible agenda as far as I was concerned...just great variety even while he was considered, among some, as a kind of figure to poke fun at BUT had good music regardless...first to have the Beatles, etc. There were also fun variety shows which offered a...well, a variety. There was so much music, from so many different avenues, there was no chance of a brainwashing you seem to assume took over us all. Which, in my case is kind of funny as I suppose you could find a way to claim I was completely brainwashed growing up with only one tv station available and in the wild, isolated Rocky Mtn. West. Remember that old adage, "when one assumes it makes an ass of you and me."

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 03:12 PM

We in Scotland, are lucky to have traditional music, which is for the most part non-political in the modern sense.

Its all about love, life, sorrow and happiness.......from the time when these things meant something tangible, when people still had a little feeling left in their souls.

Nothing to do with commercialism, self promotion, or stuffing your pissy little opinions down other peoples throats

Pete Seeger, Billy Bragg, et al....they make me fuckin laugh.
Ego's on legs.....Folk music never changed anybody's political opinions, but It can make us all feel what it's like to be alive.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: John P
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 03:29 PM

I think there are more love songs than any other type. Should they always be balanced with hate songs? Should churches be asked to include satanic music in equal amounts with the hymns? Maybe we should ask every classical concert promoter to include a few country western songs in each program?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 04:09 PM

We could have more capitol letter folk as the type referred to by the person from scottland above but for the manipulation of the market place and political brand that it received.

As a result of political branding folkies are perceived as lefty and when that turns a significant number of people off who are not now perceiving "flower children, lefty, druggy hippies" in a positive light not only the market suffers but folk music at large fails to achieve what it could had the brand not been put in place.

No people are not automotons however if the only political view they hear through folk music is from leftys what else are they going to do. If they wanted to stick with folk music that was their only choice. Cultivation of a wide range of folk politico alternatives would solve this problem and help maintain and develop audience.

We will only create more of a capitol letter folk when we broaden the perception of the community and genre to include diversity and that goes for all the political issues. Don't call it censoring call it diversification.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 04:19 PM

Sorry Conrad, you are entitled to an opinion - but that does not mean you are correct.

If the music and audience wants to change, it will.

Folk music is what it is. People accept what they want. If there is an outcry for the type of music you request, it will come. Right now, the songs deal with issues that apparently make you uncomfortable. Fortunately, the world will keep spinning.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 04:25 PM

Scottland.......Its up the road in Columbus, the farm that's Scott's calls Scottland where they test their grass seeds and Weed-N-Feed and the like. I had no idea they had such a tradition of music.........


Seriously Conrad.......Fess up. You were dropped on your head as a kid weren't you? Or has your brain mushed out from the CO emissions from those P.O.S. artcars that you drive?

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 04:30 PM

Stick your cornbread and molasses!.....Bannocks n' heather honey fur right trolls!!

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: katlaughing
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 04:36 PM

...capitol letter folk.. What? Do you mean like yourself?

So I guess the music of the civil rights movement such as We Shall Overcome, War, Blowin' in the Wind, etc. didn't change anyone's mind, huh?

And, where is it that someone, in this country can adhere to folk music only? Unless they are living in an isolated enclave there is no way they can escape the rest of the world and its music.

Also, the days of Hating Hippies, cutting off their hair, etc. are long gone...they were only a small part of that era, the rest were actually doing things like marching, going to jail for their beliefs, aiding young men who didn't want to be cannon fodder...those people are now in in the mainstream, by and large, even if they do still love/sing folk music, and I don't hear any negative BS about hippies, etc. But then, I am living in puir ol' isolated Coloradah, agin, wadda I know?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: olddude
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 05:04 PM

I think I said in a prior post, anyone is free to write any song they wish and perform any genre of song they wish in a free country. Now if anyone else finds it interesting fine for them. But trying to tell people how it should be with music is like trying to put a size 12 foot in a size 6 sneaker. It won't ever fit ... There is not 1 side only in music, there is music people want to hear or enjoy and music they don't want to hear ... if what you are saying was of any appeal to anyone then it would be performed written and played ... but for the 5 or so people who many want to hear it ... no folk club wants to undertake that and lose patrons ... my take anyway, but you are sure most welcome to your own opinion. Music is a matter of taste. ME I don't like rap music, I am on record for that, but then, rappers don't like my old country either ... and that is fine actually. I would say, write your songs or sing whatever you want ... If someone wants to listen ... that is ok with me ... but you cannot force people into a box on music ... it doesn't work that way ...

Anyway I wish you only good things

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 05:32 PM

"there are more love songs than any other type. Should they always be balanced with hate songs?"

Abso-fuckin'-LUTELY!!! ;-) Of course! Let's have equal time for hate songs.

Consider, for example, this great hate song by Howling Eddie Cranshow:

Scum Are Only Scum! ( a mild protest song)

I play in all the street fairs
I fiddle and I hum
With my gitbox and fiddle
Which clearly pleases some
It pleases all the old folk
And it pleases homeless bums
But the ones it doesn't please
Are the bloody fecking scum!

Because scum are only scum
They're ugly and they're daft
They know they're only scum
Without artistic craft
They're rotten stinking bleeders
Who all should get the shaft!
Yes, scum are rotten scum
They're rotten fecking scum
Let's toss 'em in the Channel
And provide no bloody raft!

Scum are fecking losers
Scum are stupid sods
If I could get me hands on them
I'd give 'em all the rod
I'd punch their ugly faces
I'd call 'em nasty names
I'd tell 'em all to go to hell
I'd set 'em all aflame

Because scum are only scum
They're ugly and they're daft
They know they're only scum
Without artistic craft
They're rotten stinking bleeders
Who all should get the shaft!
Yes, scum are rotten scum
They're rotten fecking scum
Let's toss 'em in the Channel
And provide no bloody raft!

Scum are stupid useless gits
Scum are bloody fools
They stand on other people's toes
They break Queensberry's rules
They will not share a bit of bread
They don't respect the poor
They eat in fancy restaurants
And act like bloody boors

Because scum are only scum
They're ugly and they're daft
They know they're only scum
Without artistic craft
They're rotten stinking bleeders
Who all should get the shaft!
Yes, scum are rotten scum
They're rotten fecking scum
Let's toss 'em in the Channel
And provide no bloody raft!

Don't dare to come around near me
If you're a bleedin' scum
For if you do I'll take my shoe
And plant it up your bum!
You might think that I'm helpless
You'll find I'm bloody not!
I'll box your ears and black your eyes
You rotten scummy sot!

Because scum are only scum
They're ugly and they're daft
They know they're only scum
Without artistic craft
They're rotten stinking bleeders
Who all should get the shaft!
Yes, scum are rotten scum
They're rotten fecking scum
Let's toss 'em in the Channel
And provide no bloody raft!

I wish these rotten scum would die
And leave good folks alone
They poison every public place
'Cause they're got hearts of stone
Their lifestyle is contemptible
Their manners are obscene
They've all got little beady eyes
And their tongues are coated green!

Yes, scum are only scum
They're ugly and they're daft
They know they're only scum
Without artistic craft
They're rotten stinking bleeders
Who all should get the shaft!
Yes, scum are rotten scum
They're rotten fecking scum
Let's toss 'em in the Channel
And provide no bloody raft!

Howling Eddie Cranshaw, Folkways of East Anglia 2009

The above dialectic appears to be aimed primarily at "upper class twits" and the like, people who are roundly despised by Howling Eddie, a man who is proud of his humble working class roots and not afraid to drop his aitches in polite company...

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 05:48 PM

To those who think some of us are being a bit hard on Conrad and his viewpoint:    I think you need to take a look at these pictures. It might give you a clue as to why a lot of people here don't take kindly to what Conrad is peddling. If you still don't understand, then I'm afraid your moral compass has lost its needle.

You see, we've been here before, and these are a few of the things that happened:   THIS. And THIS. And THIS. And THIS. And THIS. And THIS. And THIS. And THIS. And all thought by THESE folks to be making the world a better place.

Conrad might like THIS. It's the cover of a piece of music from Germany in the 1930s. The title means something like "Hail to the Chief."

The above are images from over half a century ago. Caused a lot of problems. Millions—many millions—of people wound up dead.

The following images are from today:

THIS. And THIS. And THIS. And THIS.

Who do you suppose is THIS young man's hero?

If THIS doesn't give you cold chills, turn your stomach, and/or make you very angry, then as a human being, I would say that they may as well put a tag on your toe, throw a sheet over you, and close the drawer. Because morally speaking, to all intents and purposes, you're dead.

In The Inferno, Dante had a few things to say about people like that.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 06:16 PM

So don I dont hold such views but you seem to be afraid to let people choose what views to hold

thats called freedom- I guess freedom is for you what you appreciate

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 06:18 PM

Why in the world should I connect any of that stuff with Conrad, Don?

I thought you would provide links to things he himself has said. Instead you provide links to pictures of violent things a great number of other people, both living and dead, have done, implying that Conrad is for all those things. WTF is that about??? How does it in any way implicate Conrad?

Would you like it if someone posted a bunch of pictures of child abuse and genocide here and then said, "This tells you all you need to know about Don Firth." ???

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 06:18 PM

remember also that many things we find in our society today - alternative lifestyles, alternative moralities public behaviours would have been thought terrible by our ancestors only a few generations back.
The question is how do we use music to get them to talk to one another rather than to be hostile and keep them apart.

You dont think all voices can sing in the choir....Sad!

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Rapparee
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 06:52 PM

Would they? Or were they, like prostitution, simply ignored and assumed to be "for the best"?

Oscar Wilde certainly had an alternative lifestyle, and his "boyfriend", Lord Alfred Douglas, wasn't the nicest person. All of Whitechapel, New York's Five Points, San Francisco's Tenderloin...they were alternate lifestyles. So were the Shaker Communities, Amana, and other such places. Even the Wobblies, the WCTU and the suffrage movement were alternative lifestyles.

So what else is new?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Stringsinger
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 06:58 PM

This thread is appropriate to the music side of Mudcat.

1. Whenever music and politics are discussed, it seems stylish to separate the two as if
there is a neutral position musicians are supposed to take. In fact, most artists have a political statement to make one way or at least a point of view in their music. There are
never generally two sides taken at once. It can be argued that all artistic expression is political since it reflects the views of the artist. Pete always presented songs that did not necessarily reflect his views on humanity or politics. The Smothers Brothers were musical satirists not unlike those on SNL.

2.Pete has never staged a political rally in his concerts. He has played at rallies for unions, and some political organizations but his concerts were not rallies. It is not censorship to exclude songs that don't reflect your political or personal point of view. With this logic, any religious songs could be construed as censorship also. If one is looking for a "fair and balanced" approach to a point of view from any artist, this is in vain. Was Pete a leftist? Of course. Did he have to give the stage over to some right-wing country singer like Toby Keith to balance his program? Of course not.

3. A folksinger/writer can do both concerts and political rallies. They are not the same.
Pete has appealed to a broad spectrum of audiences because he has not conducted political rallies as concerts. Many artists are political organizers but they do so without necessarily turning their concerts into rallies.

4. The documentary showed Pete's ability to think through ideas and carefully assess them. All "politicos" can't be painted with the same brush. The idea that the folk revival was manipulated by political activism sounds like the criticism given by the John Birch Society, The Anti-Communist Christian Crusade and Joseph McCarthy. Folk music is absent from television now because it had been co-opted by the commercial music industry and they squeezed the last drop of profit from it. In the days of the folk revival, not every other college kid carried a guitar. There were many who didn't know much about folk music or cared little.

Folk music is not any bigger than it was because it is not a product of popular music.

The political ideologies require a specific definition. Not all Lefties thought alike.
The Kremlin did not hand down edicts to American folkies. This is simply not true although it has been used as a pretext to intimidate those who were deemed subversive in music. The Beatles were attacked as anti-American by these vicious Bircher groups.
(Check "Rhythm, Riots and Revolution" put out by them).

There was never a real monolithic set of political ideas by early Leftists. Woody Guthrie himself was thrown out of the Communist Party for being too radical. Pete had left the Party a long time ago. Burl Ives was a leftist for a while until he was attacked for his views. Josh White was threatened by the FBI. There were a lot of lefties that had different ideas. Some were anarchists, socialists, communists, and there were differences in the ideas that encompassed these categories.

Nothing has gone wrong. The popular music industry dropped the stereotypical image
of folk music in its marketing campaign because it relies on trends that change from decade to decade. In essence, it has nothing to do with real folk music.

It is true that the Left was responsible in many ways for the folk revival but not in any
doctrinaire or systemic way. It was an outgrowth of the time that culminated in the
60's. The Popular Front of the 30's and early 40's was pretty much universally accepted in the US until the cold war manipulations by demagogues of McCarthy's ilk.







So WWW what went wrong? More than politics though.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 11:05 PM

Did he have to give the stage over to some right-wing country singer like Toby Keith to balance his program? Of course not.

exactly!

but he would have been doing a better job and more worthy of his sainthood if he opened the floor that he alone almost, possessed to others.

This is what you do when you are confident of your position. Who cares let the audience decide if you are primarily interested in music. Seeger was primairly interested in using the power of music to support only one point of view. In this way he can not be separated from those who on the other side of issues who did the same. (german nationalism on and on)

And he was successful. The possibility of someone doing the same thing on a from the bad or dark side is scarry. But if Seeger did it -that makes it right...No....the power folk music was simply used without competition for political purposes. That is never right.

That makes his concerts political rallys hammering at one political view alone endlessly.

Yes he did other things and yes he fought for good causes. But the fact that he manipulated the interest via music on behalf of one point of view is not good. I am sure that If he had been more balanced more inclusive the people would have made the right decisions anyway. So why not diversify access to media and stages?
He could have done this. So not my problem his.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 11:33 PM

Conrad, you can keep swinging, but you are missing every pitch. Your ideals of what a performer should do with this so-called "balance" makes very little sense. You are looking for a debate, not a performance. Your idea of "diversify" has little merit and it is a problem in your eyes only.   

Keep at it though, your attempts to justify your position and reasoning make for good theater.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 11:40 PM

We need fewer performers, even though we do not have enough and more emphasis on singing and the real folk experience.

I want to hear ordinary people on the radio and at festivals not performers who have money for unions and fly across the country.

I believe that all desire their fair share and are worthy but we have to do something about the ordinary folk or folk in caps as you put it.

I see only exclusion via branding and excessive profit taking.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: artbrooks
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 11:50 PM

I'm unclear on the meaning of your reference to "German nationalism". Pete Seegar is principally a post-WW2 individual, especially as far as him influence upon the American public is concerned - you aren't confusing him with Woody Guthrie, are you?

It seems that your premise here is that every musician - and (by extension) every public figure - should see him/herself obligated to give equal time to the other point of view. That is, every minute that Pete spends (or ever spent) on a stage should be matched by another musician of equal talent and repute (sorry, but I can't think of one) at the same time, on the same stage. Alternately, he should sing songs espousing a viewpoint with which he disagrees, presumably with the same fervor and conviction. That would logically give us John McCain giving speeches praising the concept of health care reform or (more historically) Martin Luther King Jr. preaching the virtues of segregation.

I think that your position is fatally flawed.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 11:52 PM

Jaysus, Little Hawk!!

Conrad is advocating a philosophy and a world view that prevailed in much of Europe in the mid-twentieth century and engendered the atrocities that are shown in the pictures. Or if he is not advocating the philosophy itself, he is advocating that if it should rear its head again, we should not only tolerate it, we should welcome it in our social and musical circles.

Would you like it if someone posted a bunch of pictures of child abuse and genocide here and then said, "This tells you all you need to know about Don Firth." ???

That, Little Hawk, doesn't deserve an answer. Once again, you cling to Dante's "colorless neutrality," no matter how much you try to deny it. You say you believe this, that, and the other thing, but then you criticize people who take a strong stand on important issues.

Conrad, I believe in freedom, including the freedom to hold whatever views you want. But when you speak out in favor of a philosophy that advocates the kind of things that led to what is shown in the photos I linked to, then I feel it's my duty as a moral human being to speak out strongly against it.

That's freedom. I have the freedom to criticize what you advocate. So don't you--or Little Hawk--try to muzzle me!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: olddude
Date: 24 Mar 10 - 12:05 AM

maybe ya can drop old Pete an email explaining your position, do let us know how it goes, you can contact your folk clubs also. let us know how that goes also. we will wait to hear how ya made out

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: olddude
Date: 24 Mar 10 - 12:23 AM

guys, it is clear that nobody says this stuff. he is fucking with everyone and having fun . that is the only logic here

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: katlaughing
Date: 24 Mar 10 - 02:06 AM

...He could have done this. So not my problem his.

I'll bet ol' Pete is sure gonna lose sleep over that! Criminey!

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Mar 10 - 02:12 AM

I'm not exactly clear what the heck Conrad is advocating, Don....and, believe me, I've been trying to figure it out, but he seems to talk in circles.

What I am questioning is your hysterical overreaction to him which appears to me to be verging on some kind of bizarre obsession. You seem to want to equate him, Conrad, with every form of fascist political evil you can dredge up out of past history, and I've no idea what basis you have for doing that. What exactly has Conrad said or done that terrifies you so?

Your notion that I am showing colorless neutrality is laughable and utterly without foundation. ;-) It's hilarious. I keep hearing it from you and it indicates to me that you simply don't comprehend anything I say...or you're too impatient and intent upon your own arguments to bother even trying to understand what I'm driving at.

What am I colorlessly neutral about when it comes to politics? I detest fascism, I always have despised it, I detest the Republicans, I am utterly against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan whether Bush pushes them or Obama does, I'd like to see the major USA banks that just got bailed out nationalized, and their boards of directors put in jail for defrauding the public. I'd like to see Bush and Cheney on trial as war criminals. You think I'm neutral? Ha! I'm about as neutral as Che Guevara, mister. I despise the political right and the goddamn corporations who engineer war and I long for the day of their utter demise.

But I don't regard Conrad's confused ramblings on this forum as being important enough for anyone to get upset about. It's a tiny tempest in an even tinier teapot. I think you're emotionally addicted to fighting with a few specific individuals on this forum that you've identified as "one of THEM" (the evil people), Don, and that you achieve nothing by so doing except stressing yourself out, stressing others out, blowing off a lot of hot air, and creating longstanding and profitless feuds with a few people that can never be resolved and that won't achieve one useful thing in terms of human rights, free speech or anything else that actually matters.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 24 Mar 10 - 07:45 AM

I am not a supporter of fascism, at all never was.

I do however support a free society in which everyone has the freedom to play and create music, peacefully and express their opinions peacefully- all heads can be reared even the ugly ones. Just so they keep their hands to themselves and remain peaceful. How could anyone have a problem with that? From my conservative, relatively, position there are lots of things that I dont agree with fascism is one of them but I realize that my freedom is dependant upon the freedom extended to others.

Don, I lived in Munich, I worked with the guys who were present when the camps were liberated the stories are terrible. I oppose it, that said the fascism you fear also understood the power of music. It was used to support their cause effectivly and was an important tool. They thought their point of view to be good just as the lefties of the 50s thought that their cause was good.

No matter what the cause manipulation of the politics of the nation by the power of music is not helpful. To avoid this one would think that opening the stages and media to a wider range of political philosophy and diversity would help. We have to work keep music music rather than political mind control dominated by one point of view even if we believe that point of view to be right. Those who wish to move politics around can always go to political rallys.

I am opposed to commercialism it has a right to exist but should be minimalized. Commercialism should serve FOLK MUSIC which should be a lifeway and not primairly a business. When it grows as a lifeway the commercial sector which assists it will also grow.

No one political view should be used to brand a genre of music or group.All arab's arent terrorists, all folkies aren't lefties and we have to find out how branding happens and find a way to end it.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Rapparee
Date: 24 Mar 10 - 10:25 AM

If I buy a ticket to a concert by Pete Seeger, Tom and Dick Smothers, Joan Baez, and Tom Paxton I'm going to listen to them. When I recently went to a Solas concert, I went to listen to Solas. When I bought a ticket to a concert by Tommy Makem, a concert by the Clancys and Robbie O'Connell, to a PDQ Bach concert, I went to hear them. If I want to go to a concert called "Songs of Nazi Germany" I'll buy a ticket and go.

It's called "Freedom of Choice" and I'm sick and tired of people telling me what I can or cannot do in the name of "diversity" and "political correctness."

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: EBarnacle
Date: 24 Mar 10 - 10:56 AM

You cannot send Pete an e-mail. He is, at least in that respect, a trog. He can be contacted by phone or letter. I believe the phone is an unlisted number.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 24 Mar 10 - 12:10 PM

"No one political view should be used to brand a genre of music or group."

Why not? That makes it a genre in itself by definition.

Conrad, you are twisting definitions to fit some sort of ideal that seems to be uniquely your own. You seem to feel that by having a protest song you are excluding the opposite point of view. The idea of freedom is to allow both to do whatever they choose. The idea of freedom is that you do not have to accept and you can fight that point of view. This occurs.

It really seems you are building scenarios that do not exist just for the sake of creating an argument. Shame on you.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: DougR
Date: 24 Mar 10 - 04:21 PM

I dunno, Spaw, sugar in cornbread? I guess it might work in Mexican Cornbread, but still, I dunno.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: pdq
Date: 24 Mar 10 - 04:29 PM

That should be 1/4 cup white sugar, I believe.

Other additives may include very small pieces of crisp-fried bacon.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: katlaughing
Date: 24 Mar 10 - 04:44 PM

The only way we ever ate, and still do, cornbread in our family is with butter and sugar on it. Brown sugar these days, but there is nothing better than to cup open a hot piece, dab on the butter and sugar then put the piece back together. Yummy! I heard from someone that it was a southern tradition to do that to baking powder biscuits which we also do. If it is, it came down from my dad's granddad from West VA.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 24 Mar 10 - 05:26 PM

Little Hawk, I thought you were up on the history of World War II, but apparently you missed the important parts, including the things that led up to the fascist takeover of Italy and Germany and the oppression and government sponsored mass murder that followed.

There is nothing like "hysterical overreaction" about my objections to what Conrad is saying. It's a sense of history and the knowledge of where the philosophical and political principles that he wants us to "tolerate"—in the name of freedom (!!)—can eventually lead when put into action. And to me (and apparently to many others on this thread), what Conrad is advocating is patently clear.

And as to the last paragraph of your post just above, leave off with the armchair psychoanalysis, Little Hawk, your not very good at it. You totally misinterpret what I'm about, and you seem to be trying to denigrate me in the process.

And as to your "colorless neutrality," thats been the theme of your long history of sitting in the lotus position on your mountaintop and saying "tsk tsk" when someone takes a strong moral or ethical position on some issue. Smug, superior, and above it all. You say (as you just have) that you feel strongly about a lot of issues, but when do you ever really speak out strongly about them? Are you afraid to get in there and argue your positions? Apparently so, because all I ever see is you sniping at those who have strong viewpoints and who state and defend them.

And you will note that I'm not the only one who has remarked on this.

####

Conrad, if you are aware, as you say you are, of the brutal excesses that took place under fascism—and are aware of the fact that this was a direct outgrowth of the kind of political ideology that spawn them—then tell my why you think we should be tolerant of—specifically—fascists?

Fascism is directly inimical to individual freedom. I don't see how someone who claims to favor freedom can possibly be tolerant of a political ideology that states up front that the State is everything, and that individuals, rather than being free, must be subservient to it.

Conrad—and Little Hawk—are you familiar with Martin Niemöller and the famous quote that is attributed to him? If not, I suggest you look it up.

Don Firth

P. S. Just in case anyone doesn't really understand what fascism is all about:

Fascism . . . is a radical and authoritarian nationalist political ideology. Fascists seek to organize a nation on corporatist perspectives and values.

Fascism believes that a nation is an organic community that requires strong leadership, collective identity, and the will and ability to commit violence and wage war in order to keep the nation strong. It identifies violence and war as actions that create national regeneration, spirit and vitality. It claims that culture is created by collective national society and its state, that cultural ideas are what give individuals identity, and thus rejects individualism. In viewing the nation as an integrated collective community, it claims that pluralism is a dysfunctional aspect of society, and justify a totalitarian state as a means to represent the nation in its entirety. It advocates the creation of a single-party state. Fascist governments forbid and suppress openness and opposition to the fascist state and the fascist movement. Fascism rejects and resists autonomy of cultural or ethnic groups who are not considered part of the fascists' nation and who refuse to assimilate or are unable to be assimilated. Fascists consider attempts to create such autonomy as an affront and threat to the nation.

Why should we be tolerant an ideology that is directly opposed to democracy, individual freedom, diversity, freedom of conscience, and everything else that we hold as essential to living in a civilized world?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Mar 10 - 06:22 PM

Now that is irony......LH take note

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 24 Mar 10 - 07:10 PM

I know you've called me a "liberal fascist" on occasion, Ake (which is, of course, an oxymoron and a total misuse of both terms), but the irony, as you see it, is. . . ?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 24 Mar 10 - 08:09 PM

don you are mixing up political ideologies with people who are simply thinking about them and crafting songs- songs dont kill people.

And with one stream of political ideology coming from seeger smothers et al - simply manipulation at the exclusion of others I think maybe but no one has found the evidence yet.

When any political group ones you like, ones you dont like use the power of music to dominate the media and bring about political change it hurts folk music in general.

Songs are songs- they dont kill anyone unless manipulated to do so.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: olddude
Date: 24 Mar 10 - 08:51 PM

Well Conrad
right now far more popular than any folk music is Gansta Rap that talks about committing acts of violence and beating up women so you do already have what you are looking for ... just pull up any of those lyrics and have a look and listen ...

For the 12 people outside of this site that listens to Pete anymore there are millions listening to the Gansta Rap folks ... so there ya go

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 24 Mar 10 - 08:58 PM

Songs are songs- they don't kill anyone unless manipulated to do so.

Propaganda songs express a particular viewpoint or ideology. And some ideologies advocate violence.

With what some people think of as "leftist" propaganda songs, I don't blanketly accept any of them as expressing my viewpoint, save that I'm for promoting peace and I'm opposed to racial, economic, or any other kind of oppression. But I don't see those things as being "leftist." I see them as the position that any decent human being would take.

I've heard Seeger sing labor songs and civil rights songs, but those, the labor songs in particular, are generally historical. And usually he sings only a few per concert. I've never actually heard the Smothers Brothers sing a political song. If they have, I've never heard it. I generally don't go to concerts or other performances where I know the singer is going to concentrate primarily on political or protest songs.

And in my own concerts and performances, I rarely sing politically oriented songs;   and I'm certainly not going to sing a song that advocates a political position I don't agree with. I don't believe this has cost me—or folk music in general—any fans.

I don't think I've ever heard a fascist propaganda song, and I can't imagine what one might be like. There are, of course, things like marches and other militaristic music and a few songs like "The Horst Wessel Song," but nothing I can think of that could be considered "fascist folk music."

Conrad, I don't think any genre of songs is "dominating the media" in any political way. So when it comes right down to it, it looks to me as if you're trying to promote a nonexistent category of songs.

Can you give me some examples of fascist songs?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 24 Mar 10 - 09:14 PM

Just because you or we agree with a position does not mean that it should be the exclusive position projected by "the folk" however that is what seems to have happened.

Unless someone comes forward with the encorporation of opposing viewpoints in these programmes or concerts.

No matter what political persuasion and they are all persuasions rather than utopias- all political persuasions philosophies have flaws none are perfect not even ours- those who adopt them believe them to be right.

Just like you believe that your views and the philosophies you support are correct and right. That does not mean that the world is not filled with other philosophies that may also be viaable.

So if we get them all in the same room I dont think anyone will attack anyone else but at least each side gets heard out. If you never meet then you can never share or convince anyone.

The philosophies I support all need help in practice and perhaps in basic constructs.

To fill the media with one side is media abuse. Seger and all flew the banner of inclusion while excluding the political views of other philosophies and groups. That is unless someone comes forward to demonstrate how they were more open- in which case they were manipulative.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 24 Mar 10 - 09:23 PM

Geeziz Conrad.....Everybody and their grandmothers have tried to explain this to you but I think it best if you simply go find a mirror somewhere, stare intently at your image, and repeat the word "Bumblefuck" at least a thousand times. Perhaps then all will be clear..................

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 24 Mar 10 - 09:49 PM

"When any political group ones you like, ones you dont like use the power of music to dominate the media and bring about political change it hurts folk music in general."

If you could back that up with evidence there would be something to discuss, unfortunately you just keep sharing your opinion.

You fail to see that Seeger and the Smothers were NOT excluding the views of others. If you, as everyone else seems to have realized, that the Smother's Brothers and Seeger WERE offering an alternate view at a time when the media was highly slanted toward the right.

You keep insisting that folk music should share both sides. It does. You only need to open your ears and evolve beyond the cocoon you've wrapped yourself in.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 24 Mar 10 - 10:15 PM

Again, Conrad, could you name some folk songs, ballads and such, that you feel are being excluded because of the "left-wing" bias of the singers? What songs would you like to hear sung?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 25 Mar 10 - 07:17 AM

Ron- once again seeger and smothers projected only one view unless you can demonstrate otherwise. They may have operated their own programs and concerts but they were also ambassadors of the folk movememnt at large as they were the only folk stages and outlets. Therefore they should have been more responsible and projected a wider range of opinion so that the folk movement would not have been branded as it was.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 25 Mar 10 - 07:48 AM

Obviously you couldn't find a mirror.

If you really don't understand why Pete or anyone else didn't invite the "opposition" to perform then you truly are a fuckin' mental case.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 25 Mar 10 - 09:31 AM

They did not invite others of opposing viewpoints because it seems they wanted to use their power of the media to dominate the discussion.

It is a bit different when you are the only show in town.

If you are truly open and fair and sharing and want peoples to get together as proclaimed by seeger and others then you will invite diversity even if you have to do it yourself.

Remember we dont really know. Did seeger and smothers et all turn down material or refuse artists the ability to share the stage. And if that would not work did they find songs to sing themselves.

Of course they did not have to do this but it might have helped keep the entire folk scene from being branded which most likely hampered its growth.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 25 Mar 10 - 10:45 AM

"Ron- once again seeger and smothers projected only one view unless you can demonstrate otherwise. They may have operated their own programs and concerts but they were also ambassadors of the folk movememnt at large as they were the only folk stages and outlets. Therefore they should have been more responsible and projected a wider range of opinion so that the folk movement would not have been branded as it was."

Conrad, that makes absolutely no sense. You have expectations that have no basis in reality. Art is subjective, it is not all encompassing. I don't care what song you are listening to, you are hearing the viewpoint of the singer and or writer.

"Did seeger and smothers et all turn down material or refuse artists the ability to share the stage."

Again, that makes no sense at all. It is their stage at that point in time and they are entitled to do as they choose.   THEY DO NOT OWN THAT STAGE - IT WAS SIMPLY THEIR TURN TO BE ON IT!!! Capish?

Freedom of speech does not require the artist to make such conditions as you are seeking. Your suggestion actually flies in the face of what freedom of speech is all about.

The responsibility for obtaining diverse opinions belongs to the audience, not the artist. It has always been so, it will always be so. If that ever changes, we are all in trouble.

You cannot regulate art.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: EBarnacle
Date: 25 Mar 10 - 10:48 AM

Conrad, answer the question. What concrete examples have Pete, et al, excluded or prevented from being performed, played over the air, sung, etc?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 25 Mar 10 - 11:18 AM

No EB....You don't understand! Conrad wanted them to issue engraved invitations to share the program and perform all the music that shows anothere side. Indeed if there are 4 or 5 other viewpoints, all of them must be given equal time and cosideration because all have a voice in the choir.

Now the fact that you do not understand this is because you are sane and rational and living here in the real world whereas Conrad is a fuckin' moron with all the deductive powers of a concussed aardvark and lives in the land of the Terminally Screwed.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Bettynh
Date: 25 Mar 10 - 11:45 AM

"They did not invite others of opposing viewpoints because it seems they wanted to use their power of the media to dominate the discussion"

What exact power did comedy show hosts and a man who had been banned from national media for 10 years, and whose one song was chopped short, have? The power of history, perhaps, but not a lot at the time.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 25 Mar 10 - 01:42 PM

You haven't answered my question, Conrad, so I'll ask it again:

Can you give me some examples of fascist folk songs?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Bettynh
Date: 25 Mar 10 - 03:48 PM

Don, I worry for your blood pressure. Conrad seems to be a troll, although of the folk persuasion. I'm betting he's a} young and b} not from this country. In any event, he's woefully ignorant of the history of this country during the 60s and that PBS special didn't help. I had to explain to a recent college graduate that the USA didn't win the war in Vietnam. She'd avoided all history in college, and the US history teacher in high school "ran out of time" to teach any history after WW2.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 25 Mar 10 - 04:52 PM

"Conrad seems to be a troll, although of the folk persuasion. I'm betting he's a} young and b} not from this country. In any event, he's woefully ignorant of the history of this country during the 60s and that PBS special didn't help"

I don't think that is the case at all. I cannot recall meeting Conrad, but if memory serves me correct, I did a phone interview with him on my radio program. We discussed the tradition of "wassail" and he was very eloquent and fun to talk with.

While I seriously question some of the statements he has made in this thread, and I do not agree with his politics (as I am perceiving from his notes), I will say that he knows history, even though his interpretation may be different from ours.

He certainly is pulling our strings with this thread, but if you read between the lines, this whole discusssion does give us cause to think - whether that makes us uncomfortable or not. Perhaps that is the true purpose of his actions?

I would certainly never expect any artist to give anything other than their opinion. I host a radio program, and I will be the first to tell you that I am not aiming to be fair and balanced. I give a stage to the artists I choose, and while I will try to play both sides of an issue - if it makes artistic sense to do so - I am not out to do anything other than promote the artist that make up the folk community.

There are several factions to that folk community, and the fact that there is a liberal lean to the point is just another aspect to that community.

If I want a debate, I will go to a debate. If I want to attend a Pete Seeger concert, I will attend. At either event, I know what I am getting.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 25 Mar 10 - 05:25 PM

No worries about my blood pressure, Bettynh. I'm fine.

I would, coolly and calmly, fight any attempt at a resurgence of fascism in the world, because being an old geezer, I remember WW II. Being too young at the time, I didn't know the history of what led up to it, but back in the days of antiquity (my youth), history classes were well taught and thorough, which, apparently, is not the case anymore.

When British and American troops discovered the death camps, I recall seeing photos of the kind I linked to above in Life Magazine (large format photo journal, weekly, 10¢ an issue). Everybody I know was shocked and horrified at what they saw. We all knew that the Nazis were brutes, but until those pictures appeared, we had little idea of the magnitude that brutality could reach. And the idea that this sort of cold, systematic, industrialize mass murder was done by intelligent and supposedly civilized human beings was more appalling still!

I had a friend, the son of a prominent theoretical physicist who was a friend of Albert Einstein, whose family managed to get out of Hungary just hours before the Gestapo came to haul them off to a concentration camp. Reason? They were Jewish.

But they had other plans for my friend's father. They intended to force him to help them in their efforts to develop an atomic bomb. But fortunately for the future of the world, my friend's father managed to escape along with his family.

And there is no doubt that if the Germans had succeeded in the development of the A-bomb (and they were chillingly close when the war ended), they would have used it. And undoubtedly one of the first targets (possibly combined with their V-2 rockets, or more likely, the A-9 A-10 multistage intercontinental ballistic missile they were developing) would have been London. You can imagine what course the war would have taken then, if Germany actually had such a weapon, along with an ICBM delivery system.

If the war had lasted a few months longer. . . .

And now we seem to have people who want to see it happen all over again. Or want us to tolerate those who want to see it happen all over again.

In practical terms, I, personally, don't need to worry about it much. As I said, I'm an old geezer and one by one a lot of my contemporaries (such as actor Robert Culp, with whom I had a nodding acquaintance as we were both students at the University of Washington, and who was a year older than I am) are toppling off the twig, so although my health is good (and my blood pressure reads about 120 over 70), I am aware that the lead horse of Time's Wingèd Chariot is snapping at my rear end. So if a Fourth Reich comes into existence, growing, say, out of the BNP or the American Nazi Party or the Aryan Nations (or all three!), I probably won't be around.

But I have a son. And nieces and nephews. And friends with children. . . .

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 25 Mar 10 - 05:42 PM

Well said Don. Everyone is allowed free speech, but we cannot allow ourselves to tolerate hate. It scares the hell out of me that there are young people joining these hate groups, and we need to understand why they are doing it and remind ourselves of the dangers of not fighting fascism.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 25 Mar 10 - 09:13 PM

Ok folks- public information- I have a resume page out there but here fore you.

Age 56
Married
one child
republican (US which does not mean I support anyone)
Student of history
Folk musician- professional
storyteller- professional

Focus- revival of FOLK MUSIC that is revival via lifeway with professional folk music appreciated but in second place.

Simply because FOLK MUSIC is the best way to safeguard the legacy.

Art Car Artist- Nationally Recognized

Horn Hatter- Developed the horn hat and the horn coat and the horn jacket not as costumes but as instruments.

Visionary Artist

Author

Publisher

Folk song transcriber- see my various collections

Ron- the next wassail book is nearing I think, completion and as at about 900 Pages.

I am Us Citizen but lived in the UK London 60s went to College there Durham, Van Mildert,70s and in munich 70s....

Specialist in music of the North East, Uk. Orange, Unionist Songs, St. Brigid of Kildare, the Gunpowder plot celeberations, Wassail....

Strong believer in folks having an academic interest celebrating what tey write about or dont do it at all.

So a bit of background and by the way....

Not a Racist
Not a fascist
No political side in Irish politics just advocate for the under represneted.

Pro fare price beer
Anti- commercialism

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: EBarnacle
Date: 25 Mar 10 - 09:55 PM

OK, Conrad, let's put the shoe on the other foot. Since you are not willing to answer concretely on the left side of the ledger, who on the right side of the ledger has allowed leftist opinions at their events?

Don, was that Leo Szilard by chance?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: emjay
Date: 25 Mar 10 - 10:30 PM

I'm sure I should read every post on this thread before I get all worked up and write something, but I'll read 'em all later. this is an interesting one.
And the recipe looks good. i printed it.
Some thoughts,
the victors write the history books,
the losers write the songs

I've always thought people who like and sing folk music are more liberal because of the social history in the songs
And anyway, folk musicians are just generally smarter than average
Martie

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 26 Mar 10 - 12:07 AM

Thread drift:

EB, my friend was Elmar Lanczos. His father was Cornelius Lanczos. [PHOTO] But I would be very surprised if Cornelius Lanczos and Leó Szilárd were not acquainted. [BRIEF BIOGRAPHY]

The bio doesn't say anything about his getting his family out of Hungary, but I got the story—as well as he could remember it, because he was pretty young when it happened—from Elmar.

I met Dr. Lanczos on two occasions. Rather small in physical stature (maybe 5'6" or so), he was still very impressive. He looked like a falcon. And I had the impression that his brain emitted a 60-cycle hum!

Elmar told me that in Hungary, the name is pronounced "LAHN-tsosh." But to make it a bit easier on English speakers, they now pronounced it "LAHN-choss" ("choss" with a long "o").

Elmar was an important part of the folk music scene in Seattle in the late Fifties and on. He couldn't sing for sour applesauce, but he had no particular ambitions along that line. He owned a house north of the University of Washington, and on weekends, it was almost always fine with him for folk song enthusiasts to gather in his living room and sing until the wee small hours of the morning. He also had a monumental record collection of folk music, which he was willing to lend to various singers to learn songs from (provided he knew they would handle the records carefully).

He was a writer, and the hoots in his living room came to a halt for a year or two when he went to studied at Trinity College in Dublin, but resumed when he returned.

He died a few years ago from bone cancer. He left two sons:   Andrew, who lived in England for awhile and now lives in Tel Aviv;   and Ely, who lives in Seattle. His widow, Alice, is a very good friend of Barbara's and mine, and we get together often.

A picture of Cornelius Lanczos sits on Alice's mantelpiece.

People like Elmar Lanczos are the salt of the earth.

Don Firth

P. S. Elmar recounted an incident about his father. Dr. Lanczos was to deliver a lecture in a college auditorium, and when he walked out before the crowd of scientists and students, someone handed him a lavalier microphone that hung on a ribbon around the neck. Dr. Lanczos fumbled with it a bit and couldn't figure out how to put it on. So the fellow who handed it to him came out and helped him with it. The mic was on, and Dr. Lanczos was heard—loud and clear—to say to the fellow helping him with the mic, "I'm only a theoretical physicist."

Big roar of laughter!

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: bseed(charleskratz)
Date: 26 Mar 10 - 02:47 AM

I get it, Conrad. You think Pete and the Smothers Bros. should have invited pro war, pro segregation, anti-union, singers onto their shows, maybe like country music groups in the Sixties invited pro-integration singers into The Grand Old Opry or like their successors in 2003 and 2004 welcomed The Dixie Chicks? Or maybe like the Tea Party folkies welcome Barney Frank and Dennis Kucinich to their shindigs.

I'll bet you believe that THE MEDIA has a liberal bias, too, don't you?

Charles

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: EBarnacle
Date: 26 Mar 10 - 07:43 AM

Don, Very impressive. As a statistician, I was familiar with Tukey's work. I did not know that Lanczos had gotten there first.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 26 Mar 10 - 08:46 AM

If people like seeger and smothers suggest that everyone get together and hold hands they should do it.

Seems like they only wanted to hold hands with themselves.

You can't have unity or even seriously think about it until the other side is invited to the party.

No they don't have to do it but if it turns out they never invited the other side well then.....called monopoly.....and it shows that they were not entirely fair with their out front statements about world peace unity, cultural understanding.

Yes- world peace on their terms. Don't ya think that puts them on exactly the same level as george W Bush and nixon. Remember all politicos tell you that they are right and good patriots etc. But to be fair with the other side is another thing.

Then they went and branded the entire folk community as lefty hippy as well..

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Bettynh
Date: 26 Mar 10 - 10:18 AM

"Then they went and branded the entire folk community as lefty hippy as well"

The English language can be such a trial. In particular, please define the word "they" above. In your current post, you seem to use this word to mean "people like seeger and smothers", "all politicos" and the final reference, unlabelled, above. Who did this "branding"? What does a "left hippy" look like in this day and age? And of course the ultimate question on this forum:




What is the entire folk community?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: frogprince
Date: 26 Mar 10 - 10:31 AM

I love the concept(if concept is an applicable word) of folk singers promoting "world peace on their terms".
I was finishing college in Arkansas during the later days of the Vietnam "Police Action". A few students took part in an anti-war march; there was at least one sign that said "Pray for Peace"; A larger number of students countered with a pro-war demonstration; there was at least one sign that said "Pray for Peace, but Like an American". Forty years later, I can still only speculate as to exactly what in hell that was supposed to mean.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 26 Mar 10 - 11:24 AM

yes they means the lefties etc...self described as such.

lefty hippy is still a useful term- and those described would not mind you using it about them.

I am called a hippy frequently although I have not much to do with the definition.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 26 Mar 10 - 12:41 PM

"You can't have unity or even seriously think about it until the other side is invited to the party.

No they don't have to do it but if it turns out they never invited the other side well then.....called monopoly.....and it shows that they were not entirely fair with their out front statements about world peace unity, cultural understanding."


You continue to skirt reality and suggest a dream world wear everyone sings Kumbayah, flowers are always blooming, everyone is healthy, and the sun always shines.

No one in their right mind would expect an artist to implement to their art and forum as you are suggesting, the idea is that there should be multiple forums to allow all viewpoints to be shared. That my friend, is the reality everyone else is working for.

Your claim about their stance on what they should do to prove their belief in unity is about as sound as the line in Monty Python that "if she weighs less than a duck, she is not a witch."   

In every conflict there are two sides and the solution is both sides coming to resolution. Your methods for achieving resolution would only work if both sides operated under the same terms, but we both know that was not the reality. The Smothers Brothers and Seeger were trying to find a forum that was denied to them.   It also seems that you are in denial of that FACT as well, Conrad.

They do work toward reaching compromise and achieving the unity that you describe, but compromise does not equate to capitulation of the ideals for which they are fighting.

Sorry Conrad, you keep skirting around the issue and you are still refusing to answer questions posed to you. Rhetoric does not win arguements.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Mar 10 - 02:59 PM

I'm trying to imagine Pete Seeger calling himself a lefty hippy...and I can't.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Bettynh
Date: 26 Mar 10 - 03:02 PM

Oops, that was me imagining Pete. ;)

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: olddude
Date: 26 Mar 10 - 03:54 PM

- Sunny Side Of Life -        

There's a dark and a troubled side of life
There's a bright and a sunny side, too
Though we meet with the darkness and strife
The sunny side we also may view.

   Keep on the sunny side always on the sunny side
   Keep on the sunny side of life
   It will help us every day it will brighten all the way
   If we keep on the sunny side of life.

The storm and its fury broke today
Brushing hopes that we've cherished so dear
Cloud and storm will in time pass away
The sun again will shine bright and clear.

Let us breathe with a song of hope each day
Though the moments be cloudy or fair
Let us trust in our Saviour away
He keepeth everyone in his care.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: bseed(charleskratz)
Date: 26 Mar 10 - 05:55 PM

Spaw, I just ran across this thread last night--and I thought your first post to it was over the top even for you. Then as I continued to read *"#1 PISSANT*'s continued lame-ass restatements of his original post I realized that--as usual, behind your masque of moronity, you were dead on again.

Charles (seed)

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 26 Mar 10 - 07:38 PM

Kumbayah= seeger did sing that but when you sing it only with your own tribe then what good is it? Seeger called himself a lefty several times in the fore mentioned documentary hippy maybe not....but close.

cant remember what questions I have not answered refresh the brain cells.

Busy with art today attached a turbine fan to a 12 food tall tree stump branch- on the other side hangs a tuba spinning in the wind....

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Bettynh
Date: 26 Mar 10 - 08:08 PM

::::waving little fan over both of Conrad's brain cells...have a cup of chamomile tea:::

What are some fascist or at least very right-wing folk songs of the 1940-1970 period?

What does a lefty hippy look like today?

Do you think THE MEDIA is biased?

What right-wing event featured left-wing personalities on their stage?

How much sugar should be in a good cornbread recipe?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 26 Mar 10 - 08:13 PM

Conrad, the "lefty hippie folk singer" is a stereotype that never really existed, except in the minds of people who hadn't a clue as to what was really going on in the world. I was there, and I know.

True, there were the so-called "flower children," and the "If you go to San Francisco, be sure to wear some flowers in your hair" things, but this didn't really last all that long, and it was not especially an aspect of the folk music revival. And Pete Seeger and the Smothers Brothers didn't have anything to do with that—except in the simple minds of people who like to stuff several disparate factors that they feel characterize an era into one sack, so they can reduce them to proportions that they can comprehend.

I was (am) a singer of folk songs. I got interested in folk music a couple of years before you were born, and by the time you were born, I was starting to get paid for singing engagements. Many of these were regular, long-term engagements in clubs and coffeehouses.

Ah, coffeehouses! Those infamous hippie hangouts!

Well, Conrad, let me clue you in. Most of the people I saw in coffeehouses were university students. They tended to dress casually, but not sloppily. Most of them (including me and the other singers) got regular haircuts and were clean-shaven. In some of the coffeehouses, especially late in the evening, it was not unusual to see a few patrons there wearing tuxedos and formal gowns. They were dropping in after attending an opera, a symphony, or a ballet.

Not exactly the stereotyped "lefty hippie folkie" hangouts that you, and a lot of other people who were never actually there, are picturing in your mind. No, Conrad, the image you have of that era bears very little relationship to what was actually going on at the time. We weren't all standing around holding hands, dancing the hora, and singing "Kumbaya," and "Michael, Row the Boat Ashore." Nor were we all singing labor songs and anti-war songs.

If you want to get an idea of the kind of songs that were being sung, take a look at books like Carl Sandburg's American Songbag or Lomax's Folk Song U. S. A. or Cecil Sharp's English Folk Songs from the Southern Appalachians. Or listen to the early records of Burl Ives, Susan Reed, Richard Dyer-Bennet, Ed McCurdy, Cynthia Gooding, and Joan Baez (when she was singing ballads). Later, some of the younger singers were learning songs from records by The Kingston Trio, Peter Paul and Mary, and the more commercial folk groups.

Remember, I was there, saw it, heard it, participated in it.

And as I have said several times here, I have heard Pete Seeger live, in concert, several times, and out of, maybe, thirty or more songs, some three or four at most might be what one would call "songs of social protest." And most often those would be historical in nature (pre-Civil War anti-slavery song or a union organizing song from the 1920s or 1930s).

And I remember watching the Smothers Brothers television show. I don't recall them doing much, if any, in the way of political material. I do recall the brouhaha over CBS trying to censor Pete Seeger's singing of "Waste Deep in the Big Muddy," which your whole thesis seems to be based on.

You're tilting at windmills, Conrad. And remember, the Knight of the Rueful Countenance, the original tilter at windmills, was delusional.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 26 Mar 10 - 08:20 PM

Hey, Bettynh, you know what a lefty hippy looks like today?

He or she looks like middle or upper management and works for Microsoft!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Bettynh
Date: 26 Mar 10 - 08:31 PM

LOL Don!

Another thing we haven't mentioned is the reason all those guys were in school and hanging around coffee houses in 1968. The draft. Young men of that era were in school, in jail, underground, or in the armed forces. The Tet offensive had just happened.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 26 Mar 10 - 08:34 PM

Wow....A tuba in a tree with a fan blowing on it. That's real art. Maybe you could hang a trumpet in a boxwood with a personal fan blowing on it and you'd have Bonsai representation as well! Yeah....Just like those piece of shit hulks you cover in tin cans and leftover paint you call artcars. That takes a real genius........Or those horn coats.....sewing a baritone horn or something into a coat....I am in aw...........................Like aw hell or aw shit or aw ain't this trash real fuckin stupid?

Seriously Man, that "art" you do is just some really dumbass stuff, just ignorant as all hell. But I guess you're happy huh? I mean if ignorance is bliss, you are probably fuckin' orgasmic!


Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 27 Mar 10 - 09:25 AM

No fan blowing on it- natural wind....nope- boxwoods aren't tall enough yet but some day. Oh well thats 500 in support just this last week and one against. No accounting for taste but it takes all types to sing in the choir.

The happyness that comes from my artcars just driving the streets is truly amazing. The horn clothing sounds really wondrous when it plays.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Stringsinger
Date: 27 Mar 10 - 07:31 PM

The lefty-hippie is a myth as Reagan's welfare queen.

The left employed a kind of discipline that hippies ignored. Many on the left emerged
as conservatives in their left-ness. This was true of the CPUSA.

Conrad, one of the reasons Pete Seeger was so attacked was that he was popular
with people of different political persuasions and thus considered dangerous by
right-wingers of his time. He could reach out beyond his perceived ideology which was
magnified by his detractors for political reasons. Pete never sang to just his own tribe.
He reached many people. And guess what, he still does.

One of his big fans was Nelson Rockefeller.

Conrad, Nixon and Bush were politicians. Pete is an artist/performer/songwriter.
He transcends a narrow ideology that you attribute to him.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 27 Mar 10 - 08:41 PM

dont think so I am convinced that as well as being a great folklorist he is a very calculating politico. He used song better than anyone else imho.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: EBarnacle
Date: 27 Mar 10 - 09:08 PM

Conrad, go back to my definition of political speech way above. If you have an opinion, you are making a political statement. Do you maintain that all music should be amoral and unopinionated? Booring!

The questions you never answered include mine: Can you cite any examples of right wing venues which have included left-wing or even neutral speech? Please be concrete and cite more than one example if you can. After all, everyone should present balanced shows, right?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 28 Mar 10 - 12:08 AM

Sorry Conrad, you are coming across as a real hypocrite with your statements about politics and music. You certainly aren't practicing what you expect others to do based on your posts.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 28 Mar 10 - 01:08 AM

Conrad, I believe Stringsinger knows Pete Seeger personally.

You're just guessing, and you're wa-a-a-ay off base.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Stringsinger
Date: 28 Mar 10 - 12:41 PM

Conrad, you are adding your voice to the growing attack on anything that isn't associated with right-wing politics by your accusations. You claim to be neutral but in fact by your politicizing you are enabling these kinds of attacks. You are beginning to sound like
Joe McCarthy.

You are generalizing without a real knowledge of the relationship between folk music,
the left-wing movement, the Southern reaction, the folk revival in the popular music field
because the blanket statements that you are making are simplistic at best and false at worst.

If it wasn't for Pete Seeger introducing Earl Scruggs style of banjo playing in New York,
the devotees of bluegrass would not have grown so fast. Pete did more to celebrate the
Southern banjo styles in the rest of the country than almost anyone except for his late half brother Mike. Pete has never been partisan when it came to American folk music. That idea is just plain wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 28 Mar 10 - 09:41 PM

No wrong!

When did pete seeger hold hands with anyone he did not agree with.

Not that he had to but it would have been the right thing to do.

Have him contact me and I will ask the relevant questions and get back.

It does need some more research.

But when you want to hold hands holding hands with those who agree with you is easy . Seeking out and holding hands on the same stage or same programme now that is achievement.

Seeger et. al. seem to get the reputation for uniting people. I don't think so. Uniting them to his own way of thinking is not uniting anything and brainwashing using the only available channel for one point of view is not good.

Seeger did many fine things and its a long list. But political bridge building was not one of them although he talked about it. So far no evidence he actually did it himself. But I am no expert. Let the experts find a time when he joined hands with people he disagreed with patched things up and shared the stage equally.

Now that is the ethical thing to do. No I dont know where the oppostion was however I did meet a researcher at loc recently who could cite chapter and verse on a few of them.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Art Thieme
Date: 28 Mar 10 - 09:50 PM

Sadly, a main reason what went down THEN hasn't been taken to and replicated now, is THE DRAFT. --- And that has made all the difference!

As far as Peasant is concerned, his main problem seems to be that he is anti-SEMANTIC!

Art

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 28 Mar 10 - 10:15 PM

"Seeger et. al. seem to get the reputation for uniting people. I don't think so. Uniting them to his own way of thinking is not uniting anything and brainwashing using the only available channel for one point of view is not good."

Do you keep putting your foot in your mouth on purpose?

What is with you and hand holding?   YOU are the one who seems to be brainwashed with only one available channel for thinking and one point of view.

Sorry Conrad, but our version of "uniting" seems to be very different from yours. No one needs to sit down and hold hands with fascists, murders, racists or other thugs to create a better world. The outcome is not to "unite" but rather create a world in which we can hold hands without having to worry that they will take your hand and not give it back. Peace and love does not mean acceptance of what is wrong, it is defeating it. Pete is a fighter who fights the good fight.   Can you honestly say you do the same?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Art Thieme
Date: 28 Mar 10 - 10:22 PM

Ron,
Right on!!
Art

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: EBarnacle
Date: 29 Mar 10 - 12:03 AM

Enough of responding to this troll. His mind is as closed as his mouth is open.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 29 Mar 10 - 07:07 AM

Ron either you are a uniter of the people or one who stays appart. Uniting people who are all the same already is not uniting anything.
No you dont have to agree with people to hold their hand or be nice to them. Sorry!

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 29 Mar 10 - 09:41 AM

"Ron either you are a uniter of the people or one who stays appart. "

Conrad, once again, you are wrong.

Your definition of "uniting" also needs work. It is not as cut and dry as you are trying to believe.

Uniting is not simply agreeing to disagree. Uniting is removing obstacles that prevent people from having the opportunity to unite. Acceptance of an obstacle and allowing it to fester does not unite.

Your narrow view of the world is just that - a narrow view. All you have been doing in your posts is proving that your position is hypocritical. If you were truly honest with yourself you would step back and re-read these posts and realize the smarmy tact you have taken.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 29 Mar 10 - 12:42 PM

Nothing wrong with agreeing to disagree is there?
You are a step ahead.

those with differing opinions need to get together before they can work out compromises.

So first you agree to disagree then you modify each other's beliefs so that compromise can be reached.

Seeger and the leftys just sung with and to people they agreed with-their view or the highway. Ethnocentric-narrow.....pie in the sky utopia- end war- peace now= love everyone.....(except I guess people you disagree with)

These are good good goals however you can not operationalize them without taking first step of inclusion, sharing the media, the stage, the dance.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: frogprince
Date: 29 Mar 10 - 12:46 PM

How can all you liberal fascists be so blind as not to see the obvious merits of itchymickey's argument. For cryin' out loud, most folk performance has been blatently biased for decades, at least. Bob Dylan never invited anyone to come up and sing a song favorable to the man who caned Hatty Carol. The Chad Mitchell Trio mocked both the KKK and John Birch Society outright, and never invited anyone onstage to sing anything favorable to either group. Tom Paxton has yet to invite anyone onstage to sing a song from the viewpoint that Tinky Winky the Tellatubby is, in fact, designed to convert young people to homosexuality.
But, in comparison: You'll never go to a Southern Gospel convention, without hearing someone who has been invited to sing material with an atheistic slant. You'll never hear Hank Williams Jr., or Toby Keith, perform, without inviting up someone to sing something with a leftist message. The whole situation is indefensible!!!!!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 29 Mar 10 - 12:47 PM

"These are good good goals however you can not operationalize them without taking first step of inclusion, sharing the media, the stage, the dance."

You are a step behind.

The first step was having Seeger and the Smothers GET a stage to share their opinions - they were the ones who were excluded from the media, stage and dance.

There were not JUST singing to those who agreed with their view. It just isn't true that that they were preaching to the choir. Even if they were, that choir deserves a forum too.

You keep failing to recognize that one basic FACT.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Bettynh
Date: 29 Mar 10 - 12:57 PM

EB, he's good practice. I can't argue coherently about health care or business practices, but Conrad uses some of the same techniques as those I feel are wrong about those issues.

So, Conrad, you said, "Seeger did many fine things and its a long list."

Let's hear your list.

"When did pete seeger hold hands with anyone he did not agree with"

Does shaking the hand of the man who came to kill you count?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 29 Mar 10 - 03:32 PM

Hold hands with fascists?

I've heard this story a number of times, but to make sure I had it right, I looked it up in a little book entitled The Power of Stupidity.

A scorpion wants to cross a river, but it can't swim. It asks a frog for help. The frog is apprehensive, but the scorpion promises, "I won't sting you. If I did, I would drown!" So the frog takes the scorpion on his back and ferries him across the river. When they reach the other bank, before he gets off the frog's back, the scorpion stings the frog.

The dying frog asks, "Why? I've ferried you across the river, and now, after doing you this favor, you repay me by stinging me! Why!??"

"Because," say the scorpion, "that is my nature."

Look at history. Look at the nature of fascism. Then, think about the frog and the scorpion.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 30 Mar 10 - 07:26 PM

Only if they keep their hands to themselves and are peaceful.
No one is advocating putting up with any violence. Surely singing songs is not harmful.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 31 Mar 10 - 06:14 AM

But Conrad......Isn't that the point you're trying to make? You're saying singing is harmful as it can influence someone in one direction so the other side needs equal time?

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 31 Mar 10 - 06:29 AM

When one monopolizes the stages and media it is not good but songs themselves are harmless.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 31 Mar 10 - 07:49 AM

Do you honestly believe that?

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 31 Mar 10 - 10:05 AM

I hardly think the Smothers and Seeger "monopolized" the stage and media - the opposite is the reality.

I just could not picture the dorky type of concert that Conrad is trying to push. Who in their right mind would enjoy such an event? Music is not a debate. Art, literature and music are the perspective of the artist who is imparting their craft - no one is expecting a balanced picture, and if they received it, they would be experiencing something that is hypocritical and a lie.

Mark Twain once said that people who do not read newspapers are un-informed, and people who do read newspapers are mis-informed.    His point was that the reader needs to seek out their own balance, not expect to have it handed to them.

Conrad, you are twisting in the wind with your opinion on this one. You are certainly entitled to think as you wish, but that doesn't mean you are correct.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: olddude
Date: 31 Mar 10 - 10:16 AM

someone said before, If they pay to go to a John Prine concert,
they sure as heck hope he will monopolize the stage. That is what people came to see and hear and PAID for.   I would be pretty upset if I paid good money and ended up seeing the stage shared by someone else for half the concert ...

It is their concert, pay and go see them or don't pay and don't see them. The beauty of freedom is we have the choice on how to spend our money and what entertainment we choose to spend it on ... right

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Bettynh
Date: 31 Mar 10 - 02:25 PM

"When one monopolizes the stages and media it is not good but songs themselves are harmless"

Good grief. The Smothers Brothers Show was an hour a week 40 years ago. Pete Seeger's tv appearances were probably less than 100 over his lifetime of 90 plus years. Their radio appearances and recorded music are similarly minute, comparatively speaking. Pete wrote a column for Singout magazine, read by a limited audience. What, exactly, monopoly are you talking about?

Consider the songs "We Shall Overcome" and "Joe Hill." Explain why they are without power.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 31 Mar 10 - 02:52 PM

"What, exactly, monopoly are you talking about?

Consider the songs "We Shall Overcome" and "Joe Hill." Explain why they are without power."

Conrad will never admit that the monopoly came from the "other side" that limited opportunties for appearances on the radio. Conrad fails to understand that having an opportunity to share views IS the sharing of that stage by the owners of the platform - not the artists who are using their opportunity.

Conrad will never admit that folk music comes from a community, and the community that "created" Joe Hill and we Shal Overcome is a folk community.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: frogprince
Date: 31 Mar 10 - 03:06 PM

Peasant, you deny any personal fascist leanings. If so, I must say you have done an incredible amount toward making yourself misunderstood here. I first noticed you when you objected to "alienating" fascists. At every turn, you seem to advocate welcoming extremists beyond the pale of what is normally considered the "right wing", and actively inviting them to share the stage. I believe that you said you are an American in the UK. One question: Do you believe that, for the sake of fair balance in the U.S., an effort should be made to bring the KKK and similar white supremists
to the stage to share their perspective?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 31 Mar 10 - 03:30 PM

Conrad, read a little history, for cryin' out loud!!!!

On August 18th, 1955, Pete Seeger was subpoenaed to appear before the House Un-American Activities Committee, and as a result of that encounter, he was banned from appearing on television, his recordings were banned from radio, and most organizations considered him "too controversial" and cancelled his concert bookings.

This lasted for quite a while. In 1963, "ABC Hootenanny" wanted Joan Baez to appear on their show, but she, and a number of other singers, refused until they booked Pete Seeger, which they (ABC) refused to do.

Finally--Finally—on September of 1967, at the insistence of the Smothers Brothers, Pete was allowed by CBS to appear on their September 10th show. When Pete sang "Waist Deep in the Big Muddy," CBS cut it from the show.

At the Smothers Brothers' insistence, he reappeared on their February 25th, 1968 show where he was allowed to sing the song.

So, Conrad--you tell me who is censoring whom here, and who is denying whom the right to appear on stage and sing what they wish?

And who is "monopolizing" the stage?

Get a grip, man!

Don Firth

P. S. By the way, "We Shall Overcome" was an anthem for the Civil Rights Movement.

I don't consider the Civil Rights Movement to be a negative.

Do you?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: emjay
Date: 31 Mar 10 - 03:50 PM

There are some really strange statements and semantics on this thread.
A Southern gospel convention where an athiest is invited on stage? I have never heard of that!
Or that Hank Willimas Jr. or Toby Keith invites a lefty....
I'll be darned. That would be totally unexpected by audience and by lefty, wouldn't it?
Egad. None of the C&W crowd had any time nor even kind words for the Dixie Chicks. And the straight gospel crowd doesn't even like the tongues talkers (and vice-versa) let alone the athiests.
And what on earth is a "liberal fascist?" Isn't that an oxymoron? Perhaps the writer meant an extreme fascist -- or it is considered fascist to push ones leftist views?
Pete Seeger is a great American hero who has spent a lifetime singing and doing what he believes.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Bettynh
Date: 31 Mar 10 - 06:09 PM

"Seeger did many fine things and its a long list"

Not really. He played banjo and wrote a book of instructions. He made friends and was loyal to them. When attacked verbally, he invoked his Constitutional right of free speech (as opposed to right to refuse self-incriminalization). He built 2 houses and a boat. He is a husband and father. For a long time he wrote a column in a magazine with a tiny circulation. He's lived a long time. He traveled with his family when he could. He has been consistent in his thinking, and admitted he made mistakes.


It's not what Pete has done for us, it's who he IS.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 31 Mar 10 - 08:13 PM

seeger was a great guy who did many things wonderous

but sharing the stage with those with whom he disagreed....

I don't think it ever happened....

do you know the definition of hyporcrite?

seeger often preached that we should all come together....

What then was his problem?

Don't think he ever shared the stage with an opposing political view.
Ok then prove me wrong!

Cant get people together unless you share the media which he and smothers and othes dominated.....

So what is the end view.... a man who brought people together or a man who insisted on one point of view.

Bringing one point of view together at the expense of all others is not an achievement it is manipulation of the media. No differnet than nationalist germany.

of course you could prove me wrong!
Go for it!

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 31 Mar 10 - 09:41 PM

Conrad, fascists don't want to come together.

Oh, yes, I'm quite sure they would love to get their propaganda out there, but in the end, "togetherness" is not their thing.

Ask 6,000,000 Jews, and still more millions of gypsies, homosexuals, the handicapped and developmentally delayed people ("defectives") who were sent to the death camps.

Oh, sorry! You can't ask them. They're all dead!

No. That kind of "togetherness" is nothing I will ever give a podium to! And frankly, I am amazed and not just a little disgusted that someone other than a fascist might want to give them one.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: artbrooks
Date: 31 Mar 10 - 10:10 PM

"Don't think he ever shared the stage with an opposing political view. Ok then prove me wrong!" Prove he didn't.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 31 Mar 10 - 10:28 PM

My challenge predates this- Did he ever share the state or any medium with anyone he disagreed with.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 31 Mar 10 - 10:32 PM

It is important to know that those who commanded the media and the state in representation of folk music abused their access by pumping the consumers of their media with one politicial point of view.


This imho is nothing different than the use of the media and stages to do the same for any other political caause such as nationalist germany in the early 20th centruy.

CB

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 01 Apr 10 - 02:06 AM

In short, Conrad, you're trying to draw a parallel between Pete Seeger and Adolf Hitler?

Unbelievable!!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 01 Apr 10 - 06:09 AM

they both made use of folklore to push through a political agenda

german folklore is still branded with this

folk music in the USA is also still branded as lefty, hippy.

Great parallel I think!

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 01 Apr 10 - 06:34 AM

April Fool 365 days a year on this thread.....It is the only explanation for Conrad's point of view as he is completely alone in holding it.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 01 Apr 10 - 09:02 AM

What Conrad fails to recognize is what he considers "abuse" is simply a folk evolution. The way the folk revival evolved was certainly influenced by the left - but there was also a strong conservative faction involved as well. The whole "folk revival" took root in the early part of the 20th century when there was a conservative movement to preserve ideals and traditions - often making them appear more relevant than they really were. Folk music has always represented the feelings of a community, and what it evolved to was not so much a media-driven revolution, but an evolution of the needs of the community.   Perhaps "folk" faded from public attention because the needs have changed.

Again, it is simply stupid to expect an artist to dilute their songs or performances in the fashion Conrad is suggesting. It is hypocritical of the art.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Bettynh
Date: 01 Apr 10 - 10:52 AM

"Don't think he ever shared the stage with an opposing political view.
Ok then prove me wrong!"

In January 2009 Pete sang with Bruce Springsteen at a show that included John Roberts, Dick Cheney, George W. Bush, and some other people. They didn't all sing, though. Roberts muffed his lines. According to youtube, more people watched Pete than the others.

"Cant get people together unless you share the media which he and smothers and othes dominated"

Please define media and dominate in the above sentence.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: frogprince
Date: 01 Apr 10 - 05:04 PM

Peasant, you deny any personal fascist leanings. If so, I must say you have done an incredible amount toward making yourself misunderstood here. I first noticed you when you objected to "alienating" fascists. At every turn, you seem to advocate welcoming extremists beyond the pale of what is normally considered the "right wing", and actively inviting them to share the stage. I believe that you said you are an American in the UK. One question: Do you believe that, for the sake of fair balance in the U.S., an effort should be made to bring the KKK and similar white supremists
to the stage to share their perspective?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 01 Apr 10 - 05:35 PM

Pete Seeger's goals are freedom, decent working and living conditions for everyone—which is to say everyone—and a peaceful world in which everyone gets along, or at least resolves their differences peaceably.

Adolf Hitler's aspirations were to roll over and crush any and all who disagreed with or resisted him, dominate the world militarily, and ethnically cleanse the world of "undesirables and defectives," which involved the cold-blooded industrialized massacre of all but physically fit members of the "Aryan Race."

And you, Conrad, see parallels between them.

Okay. . . .

That you actually believe this is going to take a little while to absorb.

Don Firth

P. S. By the way, Conrad, how is your state of health and physical fitness? Are you blond? Are your eyes blue? No taint of "Jewishness" in your heritage?

Just curious. . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 01 Apr 10 - 05:37 PM

"but sharing the stage with those with whom he disagreed....

I don't think it ever happened...."


Your entire arguement hinges on that single statement - and you have created your own criteria. You could put anything in that first sentence -
"but walking on water... I don't think it ever happened"
"but finding a cure for cancer... I don't think it ever happened"
"but hitting .401 for the Yankees... I don't think it ever happened"
"but turning a frog into a prince... I don't think it ever happened"
"but making Conrad face reality... I don't think it ever happened"

You - and only you - have created a standard that you do not even hold up yourself to, and you cannot name a single artist who ever did what you suggest. Yet, because the impossible never happened, Pete Seeger and the Smothers Brothers were wrong for their actions.

Does this honestly make any sense to you?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Bettynh
Date: 01 Apr 10 - 08:02 PM

:::Conrad is over in the corner, curled up and producing odd blatting sounds by blowing into his sleeve. He's forgotten how to form full sentences.:::


We all realize that you'll say anything at all to "defend" youself, Conrad. Take a deep breath and step back a bit. Is it fair to say that you're worried that folk music in Germany and England seems to be manipulated to have an political overtone? Do you think that has happened in the USA and you're using Pete Seeger and the Smothers brothers as examples? Do you understand that part of the problem is your very narrow definition of folk music?

In the mean time, admit that you have no idea, apart from that tv documentary, of who Pete Seeger or the Smothers brothers are. You've been out of the USA for 45 or more years, don't speak the language, and have no idea of what happened then or now. Start another thread after you've gathered your wits.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 01 Apr 10 - 08:03 PM

One of Pete Seeger's recent projects:    CLICKY.

One of Adolf Hitler's most recent projects:    CLICKY.

Should Pete Seeger have invited George Lincoln Rockwell or David Duke to have joined him on the stage?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 01 Apr 10 - 10:53 PM

Conrad, I've asked you a couple of times what songs a fascist might sing that would express his or her position and you've not answered the question, so I must presume that you, too, are at a loss. So I did a bit of googling and came up with the following entry in Wikipedia. So, for your enlightenment and edification, you might want to read this.

CLICKY.

You might also take note of the fact that, now, in Germany, singing songs directly associated with the Third Reich is illegal, and can get you three years in the slammer.

For example, this is rather crude English translation from the German of the first verse and chorus of a fascist song:

We National Socialists
Want no Reactionaries
We hate Jews and Marxists
Long live the German Revolution!

Chorus:
Onward, brothers, to the barricades!
The Führer calls, follow him now!
Reactionaries have tried to betray him
But the Third Reich will triumph nevertheless.

How do you think these sentiments might go over at your local folk club?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 02 Apr 10 - 07:48 AM

Yes it has been a bit of a tradition to use music to bring about political change.

That does not make it good or right.

Any time music is used in this way or any narrowing of the availability of music in public forums- music suffers.

When music is branded as being of a generation, a political point of view, economic class it is cut off from people who are not in that group or do not share the political viewpoint.

When the musical venues, media polarize the music and it becomes branded as on one side of an issue it also stands to loose when the issue or point of view it is branded with falls out of favor. In this case they were on the winning side but in other cases - nationalist germany the music still has not recovered from the stigma of association with a political brand. One should not put music in tat position.

The safer position is to do everything possible, even listening to music that you do not agree with played by people that do not share your views so that open, inclusive public forums for music can be constructed such that the music is branded as an all inclusive community discriminating against no one, a political.

This is not to say that music can not be used by politicos but let it be used at designated political events and not folk festivals unless those festivals present music of a broad inclusive spectrum.

Did the message come before the market place. I think not. The issues were not there when the market for folk music opened up. The market was dependent upon many different dimensions-generational change, nature of past popular music, factors relating to industrialization technology and cities.

The ear was simply ready. Those who had access to the ears with a product that fit could flavor it any way they wanted. The choice could be to present a spectrum of points of view or a narrow manipulative point of view. The ears would hear whatever put into them of a folk nature that made them feel good.

How do you keep music from being branded? You work very very hard to present balance even at the cost of waiting with your point of view until songs of an opposing point of view are produced. There is no real necessity to have political music- lots of other songs to fill the time.

I dont see the manifest destany of political manipulation. It can be eliminated and the music will do much better expanding without it.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 02 Apr 10 - 07:51 AM

No matter who sings I think we should be glad to hear them. Listening does not imply support for anything but music and performing. Works of art are works of art. Discrimination is not good. Inclusion makes the music stronger and gives the audience choice.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 02 Apr 10 - 07:57 AM

I guess freedom of speech is dead in germany so you wish it to be universally dead? I would not agree with the opinions but I have to support the freedom to sing whatever you want. To ban freedom of singing means that some day it will be turned against you and now it will have precedent to occur. Watch out how you take rights from people lest it happen to you.

Again songs are primairly artworks.

Good to see your attitudes about freedom coming out. Anything can be free just as long as you agree with it.

Thought so!

You are just the flip side of the same evil process.

Find yourself a political convention and leave folk music forums alone.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: artbrooks
Date: 02 Apr 10 - 08:05 AM

Find yourself a political convention and leave folk music forums alone. Right back atcha, Conrad.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 02 Apr 10 - 09:15 AM

Conrad,when are you going to stop with the B.S. opinions and start giving us some facts - show us a single artist who lives up to your expectations of delivering a fair and balanced performance?

You keep repeating yourself over and over and over again, and you are certainly entitled to an opinion - but move the discussion forward. We understand what you would love to see in YOUR ideal world, and we all know what the REAL world is about. If you cannot give us anything concrete, perhaps your arguments have run their course?

Art and politics have always been mixed, and they always will be. Folk music is certainly influenced by a number of forces, it always has been and always will be. YOU CANNOT MANUFACTURE SOMETHING UNLESS THERE IS A NEED. Say what you will about the media and politics, the output has always been that they meet a need. There is no right or wrong, there just "is". As observers and participants, we watch what is

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Bettynh
Date: 02 Apr 10 - 10:52 AM

Conrad, I'm sorry music has suffered so in Germany. The US constitution doesn't allow that sort of censure.

"This is not to say that music can not be used by politicos but let it be used at designated political events and not folk festivals unless those festivals present music of a broad inclusive spectrum"

What does a folk festival in Germany look like?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 02 Apr 10 - 11:04 AM

"Again songs are primairly artworks."

You should clarify - that is YOUR OPINION, not a fact. There is ample evidence that songs have been used for more than just art. What about work songs? Religious songs? Much more than "art".

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: frogprince
Date: 02 Apr 10 - 11:41 AM

Peasant, at one moment you effectively imply that it would be best if we just don't sing any songs with any political implications. Then Don Firth comes up with a piece of vile Nazi crap, and you lament the kind of "evil censorship" that keeps something like that off the contemporary music stage.

And as for the utter nonsense about waiting to produce a song until a song from an opposing viewpoint has been written: That piece of Nazi crap was written before anyone ever heard of Pete Seeger, Si Kahn, or Utah Phillips.

If you don't have an underlying political agenda of your own, your thinking is simply muddled beyond belief. If you are trying to push a personal agenda covertly, you are unbelievably thick headed if you don't realize how transparent you are.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: frogprince
Date: 02 Apr 10 - 12:07 PM

Conrad:Do you believe that, for the sake of fair balance in the U.S., an effort should be made to bring the KKK and similar white supremists to the stage to share their perspective?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 02 Apr 10 - 03:44 PM

Presumably in reference to my post with the Wikipedia article and the bit of fascist song—and the notation that the singing of songs of the Third Reich is illegal in Germany:

"I guess freedom of speech is dead in germany so you wish it to be universally dead?"

That is completely disingenuous, Conrad. Freedom of speech is NOT dead in Germany, as, I'm sure, will be attested to by any German Mudcatter or Mudcatters who live in Germany (and there are some). What they have done—and which has been rightly done in many countries—is to outlaw hate speech.   Speech that attempts to promulgate hatred of, or incite violence against, particular groups of people such as, in the case of the Third Reich, Jews, gypsies, non-whites, and people with disabilities, who were regarded as "a burden on the State."

Freedom of Speech is not, nor should it be, without some rational limitations. In many countries, including the United States, if one were to simply verbally threaten to kill or injure someone else, this is considered assault, for which one can be legally prosecuted.

Another example would be if you were to call in a false alarm, reporting that there is a fire when there is no fire, you can be charged and prosecuted for this. And trying to claim that you were merely exercising your Constitution right of freedom of speech would not be a defense.

There is the old cliché about Freedom of Speech not extending to shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater. If you do this, and people panic and are injured or killed in their rush toward the exits, you are legally liable. Likewise, if you incite someone to kill or injure someone else. You are equally guilty, both legally and morally.

Best, in your zeal for Freedom of Speech, not to forget that.

No, Conrad, trying to incite hatred and violence, either in speech, in writing—or in song—is not protected by the doctrine of Freedom of Speech.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 02 Apr 10 - 09:10 PM

And, Conrad, here is something more to which you might want to give some serious thought:

If you promote the provision a rostrum to someone who campaigns for a system that advocates the kind of atrocities committed by fascists some seventy years ago, and that system then has a resurgence, and as a result of that, the whole thing happens all over again—and again tens of millions of people die as a result—then YOU share the moral responsibility for that.

Think about it!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 02 Apr 10 - 10:01 PM

Frogprince said:"If you don't have an underlying political agenda of your own, your thinking is simply muddled beyond belief. If you are trying to push a personal agenda covertly, you are unbelievably thick headed if you don't realize how transparent you are."


This is exactly what Conrad does and why I gave up on serious discussion with him years ago. He has done some good research on Orange tradition songs and it was obvious that it was also his conviction.......but he did the same thing there he is doing now. He seems to believe that smoke, mirrors, and misdirection, will somehow work for him but the reality of his position is obvious. I personally care less for a person's position, even if I completely disagree, than I do about his truthfulness in standing up for that position. Be honest about what you believe and I can handle it. Deny what you believe while trying to defend it as if you don't......yeah, that's an asshole.....and a coward.

Does the shoe fit Conrad?

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 03 Apr 10 - 10:31 AM

I always am amazed that people seem to want to ban hate songs.

It generally turns out that they want to ban only the hate songs of people they do not agree with.

All other hate songs are ok.

For example I cite the ancient threads that I was involved with in regard to songs of solidarity of the loyalist, orange, protestant, unionist tradition of the island of ireland.

I was told that they were all hate songs however those telling me this were perfectly happy to play and listen to the equally warlike songs of solidarity of the other side.

While opposition to hatred, killing and evil is admirable censorship in any form is worse.

Where will it end and would you be comfortable were the other side the victor, with their censorship and destruction of the songs you hold dear?

Censorship like torture is not an acceptable strategy.

What about the opposite of hate songs- the go out and get someone pregnant songs- the songs of maying? Those opposed to loose sex would think them terrible as would those wishing to control population growth.

You can always find a way to hate something but it takes real courage to welcome opposing views.

Perhaps too those proposing to ban and censor anything involving hate or killing etc....simply do not believe in free will. They assume that those listening to lyrics will go and act them out-I don't think this is the case. Music is a strong tool but people are generally on the whole rational.

With music context of performance is important. I would think differently of a song sung as part of a political rally than I would of one sung in an open forum where all songs are welcome. Intent is important.

Censorship my friends can not be excused in a free society in any form. Just because you wish to eliminate the music of causes you hate does not make it correct or appropriate.

If the intent of performance is the enjoyment of the art of music all can be and should be welcome. If you choose to sing the songs of politics make an effort to demonstrate that opposing views are welcome on your stage- seek them out and invite them but never allow a general folk music stage to be dominated by one point of view intentionally.

(of course special focused workshops are not the same as general performance stages)

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: frogprince
Date: 03 Apr 10 - 10:50 AM

A friend was just telling us that he and his wife went for a two hour horseback ride in one of the national parks. Before long they noticed that they kept coming back to the same place from several different directions.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 03 Apr 10 - 12:02 PM

Conrad, you are still dangling in the wind. You have yet to give us an example of an artist that practices what you preach.

There is a HUGE difference between "ban", "censorship" and outlawing hate songs. Censorship is wrong, so is inciting hatred and violence. You do not seem to see a difference. Why have any laws?

There is a freedom to have and express opinions, but when it crosses the line and incites violence - it must be stopped.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Bettynh
Date: 03 Apr 10 - 12:32 PM

"Censorship my friends can not be excused in a free society in any form. Just because you wish to eliminate the music of causes you hate does not make it correct or appropriate."

You chose an American parable of just this situation to argue for "fair and balanced" presentation. And you will not stop. You are too dangerous to ignore.

So far we have:

You are 56 years old. You were born American but left in the 60s, between the ages of 4 and 14. Educated in England and Germany, you now live in Germany. You know and admire "songs of solidarity of the loyalist, orange, protestant, unionist tradition of the island of ireland." You have found that some people adamantly disagree with you. You devote time and energy to art projects. Some people don't like your art. You come to this forum to provoke. You are stubborn and avoid ever admitting error, to the extent of playing the fool.

Take a deep cleansing breath, Conrad, and go to the top of the discussion and read it again. After thinking about it, if you have something to say, try to say something coherent. We'll wait right here.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 03 Apr 10 - 01:24 PM

You can dodge the issue all you want, Conrad, but that does not absolve you from being
morally responsible

for whatever you do, whatever you say, and whatever you advocate and support.

Censorship has nothing to do with it. It's a matter of cause and effect.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 03 Apr 10 - 03:31 PM

There is a great difference between singing a song to create violence and singing a song of solidrity -a patriotic song for enjoyment, entertainment, wonder. A picture of a chainsaw for example is in a gallery for aesthetic purposes. A picture of a chainsaw in a gallery with a sign next to it telling people- get one of these and kill someone is creating violence.

All to do with purpose. At a political rally such a song would be to move people to action. (my point is that when smothers and seeger sang their political songs they were trying to move people to action that is they were then conducting a political rally rather than an entirely aesthetic experience.)

At a folk festival or general setting- radio programme the same song could be sung or played to provide entertainment. A good tune, great rhyme of lyrics, great fit between tune and lyrics- sort of like Enya- no one listening in the usa hardly knows a word she is singing yet the music is enjoyed. For all people know she could be singing a song of solidarity favoring one side in battle.

I would not advocate singing songs in general settings- a festival a concert or on the other media to cause violence. I do not believe in purposeful political use of songs or the media.

Censorship is telling a person that they can perform a song. You want to tell people that they can't perform songs because of their political beliefs or the content of the song-censorship. And in this thread just because they dont agree with you.

As for seeger and smothers No! I am looking for evidence for when they denied someone a place on their stage. I do know that generally they dominated the media and presented only one point of view. I also do not know of anyone from the opposition that they invited. This would make a good research paper.

Yes a person can dominate with one point of view that is their right.
Is it good when those in such positions limit what is heard to their point of view- no.

Although to hear some here one would think that the trashing of the songs of one side is something we have to do and will continue doing I say that the process is wasteful, limits the development of folk music and gives folklorists headaches as they then have to re discover lost, discarded, banned and forgotten music.

IMHO the best possible environment for music is one wherein the greatest number of songs, points of view, styles, traditions can co-exist and where the genre is not allowed to be branded as being entirely of one political flavor.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 03 Apr 10 - 04:12 PM

"I do know that generally they [Pete Seeger and the Smothers Brothers] dominated the media and presented only one point of view."

Dominated the media!?? That, Conrad, is one of the most ridiculous things that anyone has ever said. It more than amply demonstrates that you are either deliberately distorting history or you have no idea whatsoever of what the real situation was.

Pete Seeger was DENIED access to the media for years, and the Smothers Brothers were more of a stand-up comedy act who used parodies of folk music to get laughs. They were hardly famous for their political views.

You simply don't know what you are talking about.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 03 Apr 10 - 04:53 PM

Further:

"I also do not know of anyone from the opposition that they [Pete Seeger and/or the Smothers Brothers] invited."

Of course not! Nor did anyone "from the opposition" (and who are you referring to here, Conrad? The American Nazi Party? The Ku Klux Klan? Or for that matter, the Heritage Foundation or the Project for the New American Century?) invite them. They were hired to sing by entrepreneurs, concert promoters, and festival organizers who knew exactly who they were and what sorts of songs they were liable to be singing. If Pete were hired by the International Longshoreman's Union or the Communications Workers of America, they would certainly not be happy with him if he invited a fascist folk singer or a racist folk singer (if there ever were such things!) to join him on stage.

Think about it!

No one from the Aryan Nations or other White Supremacist groups ever invited Pete to sing at any of their functions.

Also, think about that!

"This would make a good research paper."

It would make a damned thin research paper.

Don Firth

P. S. Okay, Conrad, if you want to hear a concert in which all points of view are represented, then I suggest that you organize it yourself. And see just how well it goes over.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Bettynh
Date: 03 Apr 10 - 05:00 PM

"I do know that generally they dominated the media and presented only one point of view. I also do not know of anyone from the opposition that they invited. This would make a good research paper."

Please write that paper. You are very wrong.

"Censorship is telling a person that they can perform a song."

And could you proofread your posts if not that paper before you post? Giving a clue about which post set you off would be helpful, too.


:::Conrad now is standing against a brick wall. His head is bruised and he's forgotten about periods, commas, and capital letters. Something shiney is dangling from a tree above him:::

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 03 Apr 10 - 05:24 PM

To clarify-=they dominated the folk music media.

They used their position to have political rallys but called them concerts.

They talked about bringing all people together but did not invite all sides as far as we know. So rather difficult to accomplish that mission.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 03 Apr 10 - 05:25 PM

If I were an entrepreneur or concert promoter, I would not hire a singer who sings political songs I disagree with. No, I am not censoring this or any other singer. I am not preventing—in fact, I cannot prevent—any other concert promoter from hiring him or her. They can if they wish. I have neither the right nor the power to prevent them.

I have no obligation to provide a platform for the promotion of ideas in which I do not believe. Nor do I have any right (or, for that matter, the power) to try to prevent someone else from doing it.

And as a singer, I don't sing all that many politically oriented songs, nor do I—or will I—sing political songs that I don't like or that promotes things I don't believe in. That is my right! Nor do I feel obligated, if I am the one who has been hired, to invite anyone else to sing with me, nor should I. Especially someone who promotes things that neither I, nor the person or organization who hired me, believe in.

Conrad, to force a singer—or a concert organizer—to do things like that is worse than censorship. It is forcing them go against their own principles and beliefs.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Stringsinger
Date: 03 Apr 10 - 07:26 PM

Conrad, Pete has held hands with many he did not agree with politically. One notable
incident in the PBS bio of his life, a man came down to a concert to kill him. Toshi said to Pete, "You really have to sit down and talk to him". Pete did, and the fellow who was obviously opposed to his political views had a fruitful conversation with him. The man changed his mind.

It has to be said that if it weren't for Pete, what we know about folk music today wouldn't exist. He befriended many of a "conservative" banjo picker in the South, learned from them and always respected their music. Even the crotchety old Bascom Lamar Lunsford had a respect for Pete. He did more for the five-string banjo than did Earl Scruggs who I admire. Pete introduced the Scruggs style of playing in New York and Chicago before many people knew who Scruggs was.

The idea that Pete didn't bring people together is ludicrous. His raison d'etre was always union and that wasn't just with people that agreed with him.

To denigrate Pete as an artist and paint him as a polemicist and a political demagogue
displays the height of ignorance as to who Pete is. Opinions are cheap but those based on poverty of factual information is just creepy attack behavior.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: artbrooks
Date: 03 Apr 10 - 07:53 PM

"To clarify-=they dominated the folk music media"

There might be a very slight possibility that this applies to Pete - at least in the sense that dozens, if not hundreds, of commercial folk musicians were singing his material throughout the sixties. [I mean commercial in the sense that they were paid for doing so.] But the Smothers Brothers? They were neither particularly musical nor particularly funny, and it is either a miracle or an indication of how low the tastes of American TV watchers had already fallen (or maybe both) that their show lasted as long as it did.

Conrad, nobody here is trying to censor you, just as nobody ever tried to censor any singers/musicians on the right during the height of the last folk music revival. However, it doesn't seem that you are listening to what anyone else here has to say, regardless of how politely or rudely they choose to say it. You are entitled to your opinion, and I suppose that is true no matter how far from the facts of the situation it strays.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Bettynh
Date: 03 Apr 10 - 09:02 PM

Conrad, have you even heard the song that you're so adamant about? It's here. The words are there for reading in the extended description box. It's interesting that some commenters have made parallels to GW Bush and Iraq and, more recently, Obama and health care. It's a song about an event in a training camp during WW2. It's about following orders without question. People still sing it. Vietnam was never mentioned. Thanks for making me look it up and remember that.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: artbrooks
Date: 03 Apr 10 - 09:15 PM

Betty, even the least politically sophisticated of us at the time - and that would have been me - understood that song to be an analogy of the Vietnam War.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Bettynh
Date: 03 Apr 10 - 09:47 PM

Art, that interpretation is from the audience. Kids today understand it to mean something entirely different, and they're not wrong. It's a good song, and I'm happy that it doesn't have a short shelf life.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 07:55 AM

Exactly-

Some people do not understand the concept of tolerance simple and for them inclusion means only including what they like.

Sorry that is wrong.

As far as the song the Big Muddy- I do not champion the song or worry about it. I cite it as an example of the lengths some went to make sure the voice of one side of the argument was heard.

The smothers faught and won once pete was hireable.

It would have been in the spirit of inclusion and tolerance and the broader view had they invited or found someone on the other side to invite and fight for as well.

Yes they could do what they wanted but shouldn't it be an obligation or at least a kind thought to think that without forcing them those who used the national media could do more than one channel in their presentation.

Now....please let me know if you find that they did invite someone or turned someone from the other side down or included someone on the other side.

That is the question. Did this one sided use of the media occur.

About my writing style. I work these responses in between work on a break generally after tossing logs around out back. I do not consider them formal writing. But I do try to respond.

Someone mentioned moral obligation. Don't make me laugh. Morality has changed in contemporary practice and law several times in my 56 years of life. Morality is not universal it is culture and nation state driven. My only obligation is to support tolerance, inclusion and fight the discrimination that keeps people playing and including only things they agree with. We need to get over this flaw.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 09:21 AM

"That is the question. Did this one sided use of the media occur?"

Of course it did and that is exactly what everyone else on this thread has been saying because it ONLY MAKES SENSE! If I am having a party I don't invite broke-dick assholes I don't like.

So Pete did The Smothers show and Barry Sadler did Ed Sullivan. So what? THis bullshit you're trying to sell has no basis in reality.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Bettynh
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 11:50 AM

"those who used the national media could do more than one channel in their presentation"

I found this. From the background and Pete's costume, it's the same session as the (second) Big Muddy appearance. I don't know if it was actually aired, however. Exactly who or what song could respond to Big Muddy, I don't know. I don't know a song that has "following authority blindly no matter what is a good thing" as the message.

"Morality is not universal it is culture and nation state driven."

Wow. That is not my understanding of the word morality.

"About my writing style. I work these responses in between work on a break generally after tossing logs around out back. I do not consider them formal writing. But I do try to respond."

You'd do better to go back out to toss some logs around again and come back to edit before hitting the Submit button. Responding with nonsense just to make a response is not helping here. Punctuation and full sentences have to replace tone of voice. By refusing to copy in specific posts to which you're responding you are being rather rude.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 04:58 PM

You preach tolerance as a blanket virtue, Conrad. That anything and everything should be tolerated.

Or is this not what you are saying? If not, then you'd better make that clear.

There are certain human behaviors and situations that are simply intolerable, and I've already linked to a number of them (the detritus of mass slaughter). Others are easy enough to enumerate:    child abuse, spousal abuse, pedophilia, cruelty, brutality, cheating, dishonesty, deception, indifference to the suffering and distress of others—the list goes on and on!

Conrad, I'm sorry. I simply will not accept your doctrine of universal tolerance.

Isn't there something that you will not tolerate? Or do you find any kind of behavior acceptable?

Don Firth

P. S. And morality is not elastic. No recognized philosopher will accept that—with the possible exception of Friedrich Nietzsche. Nietzsche said a number of good things, but—his was the concept of the Ûbermensch—the Superman, which Adolf Hitler latched onto. Nietzsche was Hitler's favorite philosopher, largely because he was interpreted as saying that Man is above morality. Whether or not he actually said that is open to debate.

But one of Nietzsche's bon mots:    "Goest thou to woman? Do not forget thy whip!"

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: EBarnacle
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 07:29 PM

Folks, quit trying to teach a pig to sing. It's a waste of energy and it only annoys the pig.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 04 Apr 10 - 11:21 PM

You are right. It appears that Conrads points - his opinions and not an ounce of fact - have been negated by all of our opinions AND facts that were presented to him. At this point, it has only become an exercise in seeing how defensive he can get in holding up his weak arguements. He clearly could not defend his position and there is nothing left to say.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 06:17 AM

If you open your minds you will see defenses above.

You will also see a remarkable degree of intolerance expressed by others above.

An interesting degree of intolerance and opposition to inclusion of other points of view and those who have different cultural belief and value systems.

Joining someone in song is not necessarily believing in anything it is just song and music. Get over it.

Such intolerance of the views and customs and beliefs of others that you do not agree with will never move the world closer together. you become as bad as those you oppose.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 10:23 AM

The only person I see being intolerant is you Conrad. You are the person who is asking an artist to censor their music. You are the one who started this thread with your opinion that music and politics should not mix - when historical fact shows that art has ALWAYS been connected with art.

Anyone can sing songs of hatred if they wish. Anyone can protest songs of hatred - just as you can protest the songs of peace.

NO ONE should ever join in on a chorus of something they do not believe in. IF you feel differently, you are in an extreme minority.

Your opinion has been voiced, your position has been deflated, get over it.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Bettynh
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 11:56 AM

"Such intolerance of the views and customs and beliefs of others that you do not agree with will never move the world closer together."

In this very thread several members who disagree adamantly about many things have found common ground in cornbread and beer, Conrad.

You refuse to support or clarify your argument/position/whatever you think. Your tactics of random bluster and vague attack are pretty common, though. Do you know the work of Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh?

Thanks for nudging me into an afternoon of watching Pete Seeger and the Smothers brothers. I didn't enjoy the skinhead music at all but, thanks to you, I know it's there.

With that said, I'm done. You're wrong, Conrad, on many levels. I'm pretty convinced that argument is futile at this point.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Stringsinger
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 12:55 PM

Conrad, I will not apologize for my intolerance of stupid ideas and needless "red-baiting".
We can agree, however, to disagree as person to person. I don't think "tolerance" is a be-all or end-all to world peace. I don't tolerate fascism, cruelty, violence, prejudice or those who find it necessary to "beat their drum" in expressing their ideas.

People sing songs for different reasons. What must be "gotten over" is the idea that
there is a monolithic way of viewing these reasons.

I like to sing songs that carry positive messages of peace, love and justice because
they are important to me.

A simplistic analysis of Pete's contribution to the music world is not to be tolerated
for any reason.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 02:11 PM

I just heard this on the news this morning.

There is a song that has been going the rounds in South Africa for the last few years. It's called "Kill the Boer." It must be a folk song. Nobody knows who wrote it, and it is sung by some black South Africans.

During these last few years, some 3,000 white farmers in South Africa have been brutally killed.

Conrad, can you explain to me what the aesthetic values of this song might be? I'm afraid it escapes me.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 03:16 PM

Songs dont kill people people kill people.

Songs are just songs.

Perhaps it is a great tune and good poetry- one can recognze it as a treasure at that level alone without thinking about politics =probably the song is not even in english!

The word is Aesthetics look it up.

Amazed to see that folks here seem to think songs are some sort of evil curse or prayer. Interesting.

The oscar meyer song is catchy and cute. Brilliant- its about ballogna does it make people go out and kill animals>? Is it threatening to veggans? Does it cause kids who eat the stuff to have high fat levels in their blood? Obesity? Does it make everyone drop all their food and go out and subsist on ballogna.....

Ha!

So if you sing a song that you dont agree with people go out as in the Monte Python scotsman sketch raise their arms and kill people.

Wild!

What a group of anti free will folk this thread has uncovered.

Feel free though to sing your own mantras I'm not hugging anyone though as a result. I might tap my foot, dance about or enjoy the rhyme scheme.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 03:41 PM

"Songs dont kill people people kill people."

No one ever clained that they do. YOU made that statement. Guns don't kill people either.

Songs inspire. Songs motivate. Songs get people thinking.

Face it Conrad, if you were tolerant of songs and really belived what you said, you would have had no reason to start this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 04:21 PM

its not the power of music so much as the abuse of forums and media to motivate that this is about. There is absolutely nothing wrong with sharing a stage with someone who sings songs with meanings you don't understand or like. So why did it not happen more often. I think because some people think they have a monopoly on the right. And others think songs are voodoo incantations.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 04:35 PM

No one is abusing their forum - that is where your entire argument falls apart. YOU are the only one who set limitations on what the forum should be.

You say that there is nothing wrong with sharing a stage with someone whose songs and meanings you do not agree with. In print, that sounds like a noble idea - but reality shows that doesn't make sense. Would you recommend singing songs about pedophila alongside nursery songs?

Your entire premise is faulted because you created the critera. You have been shown how one-sided your view of the world is, but you continue to disregard and ignore questions placed to you and end up responsing with more rhetoric.

There is nothing wrong with having a forum to say what you wish to say - and there is nothing wrong with saying something through song or art.

You are simply wrong Conrad. It has gone beyond your opinion, you have created criteria that is unjust. Shame on you.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: mousethief
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 05:37 PM

Conrad: There is absolutely nothing wrong with sharing a stage with someone who sings songs with meanings you don't understand or like.

There's nothing wrong with it, true. But that doesn't mean it has to happen. It doesn't mean anybody has an obligation to make it happen. Look, there's nothing wrong with riding a unicycle while picking your nose with a retractable pen. Nothing wrong with it at all. But that doesn't mean anybody's going to do it. We can invent "there's nothing wrong with it" scenarios until our hands bleed but so what? It means nothing. Zilch. There's nothing wrong with people seeing the world the way you do. They just don't.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 06:02 PM

Conrad, lest you think getting hinky is going to lend support to your argument, "aesthetic" is the adjective form of the word "aesthetics" (noun), and it is not required that it be capitalized. Acceptable modern spellings: "esthetic" (adj.) and "esthetics (n.)."

I don't need to look it up . I know what it means. I took a couple of courses in the subject while I was attending the University of Washington School of Music.

If you don't like what I'm saying, then try to refute it, if you can. But lay off the feeble attempts at personal slurs.

Busy right now. I see this thread is well in hand, but I'm liable to be back later.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 06:08 PM

And, Conrad, just to keep the record straight, the words are "bologna" and "vegan." Make a note of it.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: mousethief
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 06:39 PM

Vegan bologna REALLY sucks.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 09:46 PM

Conrad, you keep repeating (speaking of mantras) the canard that Seeger and other "liberal" folk singers dominated the media and continue to do so. That you said it in the first place shows a really abysmal knowledge of history, and to keep saying it when those who were there (which you were not) describe how it was anything but the way you keep saying it was displays—    Well, I won't say what it displays, least Little Hawk come on this thread and go "Tsk! Tsk!" at me, as he is wont to do whenever I call things by their right names.

I first saw Pete Seeger in concert in Seattle in 1954 (the year, according to what you have said, when you were born). He was on the Blacklist at the time, but he was sponsored by the newly formed Pacific Northwest Folklore Society. We sponsored the concert, not because Pete was a political figure, but because he was an excellent and knowledgeable singer of folk songs, and we wanted to hear him. The concert was held off-campus and he had a relatively small audience of 90 people. He sang for over two hours, and during that time, he sang maybe three songs that might be construed as having political overtones, but he put all three of them into their historical context.

It was NOT a political rally.

We had a party after the concert, during which we got a chance to meet and talk with him. Pete didn't talk about politics at all. And during the party, he was friendly, outgoing, and generous. In fact, toward the end of the party we sat around cross-legged on the living room floor (Pete too!) while he showed me and a couple other people some tricky guitar licks!

I saw him several more times, and the same thing pertains. None of his concerts were what anyone could call "political rallies." This, despite the fact that there were a lot of men in grey suits and red neckties sitting around listening grimly, and neither smiling nor laughing even when Pete sang about the "Foolish Frog" and "The Cumberland Mountain Bear Chase."

As far as this forum being dominated by "liberals," if you seriously believe that, you haven't been reading many threads. Certainly not very carefully. Besides, due to the nature of the forum and the fact that it is essentially an unmoderated "free-for-all," the idea that it is "dominated" by any particular viewpoint is just plain foolish. In fact, there have been quite a number of contributors from the UK who are pretty obviously associated with the BNP, although they won't admit it.

And I'm just a bit suspicious about you, considering that your main thrust has been to insist on tolerance for fascists.

Assuming that you are not a member of such an organization or movement, but are just ignorant and naïve, to get an idea of the kind of people in whose behalf you are speaking out, I suggest you see where that ideology can lead—and where it has led in fairly recent history; within the memories of many people still living.

Get yourself a copy of THIS book and read it cover to cover. Then you may not be so ignorant about what you are in favor of promoting. If you don't want to buy the book, your local library undoubtedly has a copy. It's pretty much the definitive work on the subject.

Also, contrive to get a copy of THIS. Warning: this book is not for the squeamish! It will show you World War II up close and personal! Get it. Read it. Look at the pictures.

If you have the guts!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: EBarnacle
Date: 05 Apr 10 - 11:18 PM

A propos of of this thread, there is a very heated discussion going on among the partipants in the Clearwater Revival Working Group. I would not be taking this public except that someone else already outed it.

The Tea Party in the Mid Hudson valley area has announced that they will have a table at the activists area at the festival. Needless to say, many people have their backs up and wish to ban them. My response is more in line with what Pete and Toshi did [cited above].
I believe we should allow them to come but also invite the Coffee Party people to come and put their tables next to each other.

Who knows, they may even talk with each other or...God Forbid, learn something instead of ranting at all the Lefties around them. The marketplace of ideas, you know.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: mousethief
Date: 06 Apr 10 - 12:46 AM

Conrad: Did Seeger and smothers censor which is to say deny others access to their stages?

That's not what censor means. A private individual is under no obligation to make available to all applicants any means they have of disseminating information. You might as well say that if I put a "Vote Republican" sign in my front yard, I am censoring the Democrats unless I also allow them to put a "Vote Democrat" sign in my front yard. The Smothers Brothers are not required to give equal time to all political points of view on their television show, and failing to do so is not "censorship." They don't do anything to stop their political rivals from speaking out on the stage next door. If they had power over all the television shows in the country and imposed a moratorium on whomever they disliked, that would be censorship. But in general "censorship" is something that governments do, not private individuals.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 06 Apr 10 - 02:07 AM

mousethief is correct.

Pursuant to the fact that I spent some years in broadcasting as an radio announcer, producer, and news director:

Regarding the broadcast media:   The Federal Communications Commission requires that if a station presents a person or program that represents a controversial position, that station must provide equal time for the opposite view to be expressed—if the advocates of that point of view desire to do so.

But—a private individual who owns a club, theater, or other venue is not required to give "equal time to answer." He or she is, in no way, required to give a platform to views with which they do not agree.

In the case of the Smothers Brothers show, the network, CBS, could have been required to give equal time. But—NOT the Smothers Brothers. Or Pete Seeger.

One might note that, at present, the FCC seems to be asleep at the switch when you watch Fox News Service with their "fair and balanced news" and note how incredibly biased it is.

I am sole arbiter of the message on whatever bumper-sticker I may wish to put on my car. No "equal time to answer" required.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 06 Apr 10 - 07:16 AM

Well we have learned a few things here-

-No one has to give equal time to the opposing view

-however many here think that it is not a good thing to work hard to bring in opposing views.

-Many here believe that no one with views they do not agree with should be given a stage anywhere.

-One should never sing songs that one does not agree with not even simple sing along for arts sake.

-People are generally opposed although there have been a few in support of using folk music as a way to exchange views in dialog from one side to another in an open free accessible stage or media.

-Some people seem to think that a folk song is not art nor music but simply a sort of incantation that projects political views above all else. Therefore singing a song that you don't agree with will be dangerous to everyone.

-There is little appreciation for songs of all political flavors as woerks of art and literature and that it is wrong to accept the equal validity of the hopes of all peoples singing together.


This my friends is why folk music has failed to expand in America today. This is why music has only developed on one side of the political divide as it has. This is why folk music has been branded as something those opposing your politics dont feel welcome doing.

Yes you might think your cultural world view is right, correct, moral however, we live in a world of rich and diverse cultural expressions in which your narrow one is just one and no better than any other.

You would be the people who cover up nude statues, fail to collect songs with erotic verses and grind to dust any song that you do not agree with. You by so doing invite the same fate.

You my friends are cultural imperialists.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 06 Apr 10 - 08:49 AM

You my friend are a spin doctor.

You are trying to censor folk music.

You are putting restraints on the free speech that is entitled to Pete Seeger, the Smothers Brothers and others BY FORCING THEM TO FASHION THEIR MESSAGE TO YOUR STANDARD. You completely igonre the fact that THEY were the ones who were marginalized and THEY were the opposing view that was given a forum. Now, you say that they should "share" that forum - when the opposing view already had forums of their own.

No one, other than yourself, has said that artists of any stripe should not have a stage.   YOU refuse to acknowledge that there is a difference between being given a chance to share a message and having to tolerate the message. Just as you seem to have tuned out to the message of the left, many of us have expressed an intolerance to HATE and VIOLENCE. This has not been a discussion of health care reform or immigration laws where opposing viewpoints are shared. We have been discussing FACISIM.

NO ONE, other than yourself, has made a claim that folk songs is anything but art. YOU are the one who refuses to accept that art and politics are allowed to mix.

You have expressed a twisted sense of "equality" where you are expecting people to accept facism and hatred as something that should be tolerated. Sorry, but the rest of the world will continue to fight these crimes against humanity while you fool yourself into thinking you are learning something from it.

You keep spinning the message we have been trying to share with you - we are not the ones who are intolerant. We are the ones who are imploring the sharing the wealth of cultural diversity.

Sorry Conrad, but if there is a "cultural imperialist" in this discussion it has been you.   No matter how you try to twist this around, it is obvious to the reader that you are making statements that are simply not true and twisting the truth to fit your own designs.   

You are exhibiting a high degree of intolerance in each message you post.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 06 Apr 10 - 10:08 AM

Yes! Intolerant of the attitude that if you don't agree with a song you cant listen to, join in or play it. I admit it!

Thank you for making my point that those who are in positions to safeguard the rights of both sides of any agrument to compose and play their music freely are witholding air time, stage time and tolerance from all but those they agree with.

Just remember your culture is but one of many sharing the earth.
Remember also that I dont want to force anyone to do anything however some paths may be recommended. Sometimes changing the culture means doing things a bit differently.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 06 Apr 10 - 11:57 AM

No, thank you for making my point!!

Just remember - your culture is but one of many sharing the earth. I'm don't want to force anyone to do anything. Changing the culture means doing things a bit differently.

While you won't admit it, the "withholding" of air time, stage time and tolerance is NOT the issue that you are attempting to paint. Once again, you refuse to acknowledge that you are advocating censorship.   

Free speech is not sharing an opportunity, it is having an opportunity to share.   This forum is a perfect example. You do not have to make an addedum to your post to add an alternate point of view - but I have the opportunity to do so. The "stages" that you feel are being witheld have historically been withheld from people like Pete Seeger.   I will fight any attempt to censor people like Pete, and you are trying to censor him.

Shame on you Conrad. Play fair, or don't play at all. You are sounding like a spoiled child who wants to change the rules of the game so that you can score points.   The playing field should be level, and it is, so long as people like you do not attempt to restrict the freedom of speech. Your spin doctoring won't work.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: EBarnacle
Date: 06 Apr 10 - 11:58 AM

Conrad, try reading what others post with an open mind. Note the discussion of 11:18 several above your most recent. We are doing our best to decide what is right at a folk music venue devoted to what you would classify as left-wing environmental causes.

Ignoring the opposition does not make it go away. the question becomes whether or not we wish to give them a platform. One of the most effective techniques politician have in the electoral process is to never mention their opponent by name and to deny them the ability to debate them face to face. In the larger context, though, sunlight is the best sanitizer. That is why we are having the discussion.

In the limited context being discussed here, Would you expect a Tea PArty Rally to invite the New York City Labor Chorus to sing at one of their events? Of course not. In addition to being everything they are against, they have probably booked the site for a specific time and have their own agenda to get through that day.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: frogprince
Date: 06 Apr 10 - 12:40 PM

Same song, 413th verse, could be better, but it's gonna get worse.

The whole thread, in a nutshell; some people don't care to sing songs favorable to racism and warmongering, and they feel no need to extend invitations to racists and warmongers to appear with them on stage; Conrad believes that these people have a deathlock on folk music, and that their behaviour constitutes censorship and "cultural imperialism". On the other side, singing racist material or any other "hate music" is fine art, of no political significance, and should be encouraged for the sake of diversity.

Why is my head spinning?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Bettynh
Date: 06 Apr 10 - 12:47 PM

Conrad has taken the argument here

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 06 Apr 10 - 05:04 PM

No a different argument but same flys.

Sometimes the views of others are and can still be recognized on an artistic level universally as such.

No one is asking that you agree with them~!

I don't like all the paintings in the national gallery of art. I don't like the same ones each day. However they all have a right to be there no matter what the message of the artist might have been.

Music is art politics is just a label and you can always see behind that and find the art.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 06 Apr 10 - 05:10 PM

"I don't like all the paintings in the national gallery of art. I don't like the same ones each day. However they all have a right to be there no matter what the message of the artist might have been."

WRONG!!! The choices of what paintings hang are the responsibility of the curator. He or she choses what is shown - based on the criteria of the exhibit and the limitations of space. Not everything gets hung up.


"Music is art politics is just a label and you can always see behind that and find the art."

Exactly. We can find the art behind protest songs in folk music. What are you missing?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Stringsinger
Date: 06 Apr 10 - 05:26 PM

I'm not sure this exercise in rebuttal is worth the time but it might shed some light
on the misinformation and misapprehensions that some have about folk music and the left.



"No one has to give equal time to the opposing view"

Many have considered ideas that would be an opposing view and decided that they don't work. This is not blind prejudice but the exercising of reflection.

"however many here think that it is not a good thing to work hard to bring in opposing views."

Opposing views having been considered must have resolution. It's not a sign of personal integrity to hold opposing views at the same time.

"Many here believe that no one with views they do not agree with should be given a stage anywhere."

This isn't true. I think that a stage should be given to anyone with the right of an audience to accept or reject the performance through their attendance

"One should never sing songs that one does not agree with not even simple sing along for arts sake."

No. Most of us who sing folk songs will sing songs we don't agree with because our selection is in a context of programming. I think that a broader view of songs has to be in a specific context reflecting the views and taste of the performer.

"People are generally opposed although there have been a few in support of using folk music as a way to exchange views in dialog from one side to another in an open free accessible stage or media."

A song is not a Socratic dialogue. I have given concerts where I presented an anti-union song with a pro-union song. I also have presented songs representing both sides of the American Civil War. There is an old saying, "those with a completely open mind have wind blowing between their ears." People invariably have a point-of-view which does not always turn on a dime but is forged out of a lifetime of experience. This is necessary to wanting to sing songs in the first place or to present them in a context that reflects the views of the performer.


"Some people seem to think that a folk song is not art nor music but simply a sort of incantation that projects political views above all else."

I don't know any performing artist who thinks this way. Most of the propagandists are in politics and cynically know that their ideas are being used to manipulate public opinion. Not so for performing artists who feel deeply about what they are expressing. There is not one artist I know who places "projecting political views above all else" and if this is a view of Pete Seeger, then, I must question the ability of the person who says this to receive any artistic endeavor with understanding.



" Therefore singing a song that you don't agree with will be dangerous to everyone."

Singing any song will be dangerous to some one.

"There is little appreciation for songs of all political flavors as woerks of art and literature and that it is wrong to accept the equal validity of the hopes of all peoples singing together."

Since there are many different audiences for songs of all political flavors, this can't be true. But a song is not politics. It's an artistic form of expression. I know of no artist
who wants to manipulate public opinion on politics through the use of musical performance art. There are those who are not in music that claim this. It is paranoid and specious thinking and denigrates the role of the musical artist in society. This is generally a pursuit of attacking the artist for political reasons and is usually by those who have an political agenda and are not in the arts. Therefore the artist is considered by these types to be dangerous.
.


"This my friends is why folk music has failed to expand in America today."

Folk music is expanding in America all the time. There is more diversity in the area of folk music in America today than at any time.

" This is why music has only developed on one side of the political divide as it has."

This is not true because actually the role of folk music as an expression of the left-wing
in the US has broadened and diversified. It is no longer narrowly confined to the left.
Pete Seeger, for example, has been recognized as an important artist by American presidents and has fans from many different perspectives, politically. The only ones who criticize him are those who have a paranoid political agenda themselves. This is the reason there are no folk songs attached to The John Birch Society.
These songs don't exist except as satires.


" This is why folk music has been branded as something those opposing your politics dont feel welcome doing."

This is about attacking the messenger. The only "branding" that has been done historically is by right-wing ideologues who consider "folk music" to be dangerous
or sinister.

"Yes you might think your cultural world view is right, correct, moral however, we live in a world of rich and diverse cultural expressions in which your narrow one is just one and no better than any other. "

With this kind of logic we can equate democracy with Naziism. There has to be a preferred correct moral view between the two. Beheading in a public display for punishment of a crime has to be seen in a moral context and if diversity means accepting this, then as Pete Seeger has said, "I say it's spinach and to hell with it!" (Paraphrasing
the New Yorker article on propaganda from the young child's viewpoint).

"You would be the people who cover up nude statues, fail to collect songs with erotic verses and grind to dust any song that you do not agree with. You by so doing invite the same fate."

I don't see this as valid. People are fortunately more complex than that. Lakoff refers to the "bi-conceptual" as one who might profess a political ideology and behave differently from it in practice. This appraisal appears to be simplistic.

"You my friends are cultural imperialists."

There is no justification for friendship here. I don't think that anyone here on Mudcat
wants to foist their ideology or viewpoint on any one else. We each have our opinions
and in some cases they are well-grounded in reflection and sensible sensitivity.

I see that this post represents a narrow idea of politics, ideologies and appraisal of
what is actually being said here. An attack on Pete Seeger or the Smothers Brothers as being agents of Stalin or reflective of any monolithic political movement is vicious and
cold but most of all has no basis in fact.

Frank

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 06 Apr 10 - 07:19 PM

If you read this thread more closely you will find that
_________
A song is not a Socratic dialogue. I have given concerts where I presented an anti-union song with a pro-union song. I also have presented songs representing both sides of the American Civil War.
==frank
__________

Is just the sort of proposal that many opposing my statements suggest is taboo. That is singing any song that they do not agree with.
I suggest that on the level of art a song is a song. Unless people believe that singing a song that one does not agree with is some sort of curse or prayer that will cause people to get up and do violence....

Yes folk music is expanding but not as fast as it should generally because it has been branded and also age set defined through commercial marketing.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 06 Apr 10 - 07:31 PM

"Is just the sort of proposal that many opposing my statements suggest is taboo. That is singing any song that they do not agree with. "

Hold on - point out where anyone said it was "taboo". Show me where we said "any song" that we do not agree with should not be sung.

It is all about context and freedom of artistic expression. You come across as if it should a requirement and politics should not be introduced in song.

Your spin doctoring is failing.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: mousethief
Date: 06 Apr 10 - 07:45 PM

Folk music would expand faster if we just let Nazis share the stage. There, it's been said.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 06 Apr 10 - 09:20 PM

Once again I did not say that politics could not be introduced into song but that song should not be performed in folk contexts for political purposes.

On this thread individuals have said that they would never sing a song they disagreed with.

Read them.....

Yes if more effort had been put into presenting a broad spectrum of thought in the folk language of music there would be even more folk music today and more people would find it something they would wish to enter into.

With the branding of the past the door is half closed- to all those who do not agree with liberal left etc....had it not been branded the door would have been entirely open. Or perceived that way.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 06 Apr 10 - 11:52 PM

Hey, if you can't get a paying gig, and still want to play for people...there's always rallies, and benefits........

Besides, folk music as merely a protest, is just another protest..
"Art for therapy might be good therapy..but might not be great art!"

Oh, and by the way, We love Smothers and Seeger!

Speaking of 'protest' songs'..here's the first one of the wave, that sparked many others.......(I mixed sound for him, when he played Santa Fe).....
If you want something to protest, get beyond petty bitching!


Needs re-visiting

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Stringsinger
Date: 07 Apr 10 - 05:45 PM

Conrad, I see no reason for tolerance for "red baiting". I also think that an appeal to hear all sides of a question without condemning some is sophistry.

Rallies and protests have moved the U.S. forward in many ways by stopping unneeded wars, protecting civil rights, equal rights for women, child labor laws, social security and so what if these songs are used in a concert? Art is not this bloodless and cold entity that is afraid of its shadow. We need more concerts that are political rallies. This would open the door to more dialogue and not shut it. Censoring political content is one way of shutting the door on open dialogue. If "art" is the rarified out-of-body mist of elitism, then it would serve no important function. I am in favor of anyone who has something to say politically in song to be able to do it. The audience will be the best judge of what is meaningful for them, not some half-assed critic who is obsessed with their limited view of "art".

It is precisely because of the political and social topical song, the U.S. enjoyed and still enjoys a revival in the U.S. I submit that one of the obstacles to the spreading of folk music in the U.S. was some of the up-tight folklorists who wanted to keep their music somehow pure and deny its change. Politics has a place in music as much as American citizenship. It's not necessary to agree with every statement an artist makes in order to
enjoy their performance. I think of religion as a kind of politics and I do enjoy some religious songs without agreeing with their meaning.

Separating social content from art is Don Quixote at windmills.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 07 Apr 10 - 09:22 PM

separation of social content from art is not argued here.

providing access to all sides of an argument if possible is. Domination of limited media is discouraged.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 08 Apr 10 - 01:32 AM

Tell that to Fox News Service, Conrad.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 08 Apr 10 - 02:00 AM

Stringsinger: "We need more concerts that are political rallies. This would open the door to more dialogue and not shut it. Censoring political content is one way of shutting the door on open dialogue."

To be fair, that is what Hannity, and the Tea Partiers are doing, by the way...so even if we don't agree with their politics,they're doing it.....Now remember what you said,..."Censoring political content is one way of shutting the door on open dialogue."

I think one should listen CAREFULLY to both(or three) sides, compare them to the FACTS..(and make a concerted, objective effort, not based on a preconception, of what they SHOULD be), before there is any 'side choosing'. Even a broken clock is right, two times a day!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Stringsinger
Date: 08 Apr 10 - 09:55 AM

There is no art or performance value in what Hannity or the Tea Partiers are doing.
If so, there would be more interest by the public in what they had to say.

I could acknowledge some performance value there if it existed.

Listening to the "facts" is like interpreting the bible or the Constitution. Besides,
where do you hear valid facts these days? On mainstream media?

The cliche about the broken clock doesn't apply to the international time zone.
You could be wrong somewhere all the time.

Side choosing is not so important as a decision made on a willingness to assimilate information that makes sense. Eventually a decision has to be made as to what is sensible and what is nonsense.

When it comes to performance art, politics is not as important as the performance.

Hannity, Palin, Limbaugh and the Tea Partiers are poor performers because they make no sense, they are boring and stupid.

"Taking sides" is an assumption that receiving information is analogous to being on a sports team.   This is not the issue. It is a matter of judgement (some might call this judgmental) based on reasonable information.

Access to all sides of the argument doesn't mean all sides are correct. And access to all sides doesn't belong necessarily in a concert or political rally.

There is this myth that open-mindedness without conviction is desirable. Being open-minded isn't necessarily agreement with an idea.

There are some ideas that are intolerable.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 08 Apr 10 - 08:53 PM

No- taking sides with an artform is intolerable. Remember that you might think you are right but so does the other side. Do you want them to exclude you when they get into power?

Therefore keep the genre of folk music open to all. Grind no one to dust dismiss no ones opinion just because you may think you are right.

No one has the right to trash the art of another. Yet some here seem to support that view.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 08 Apr 10 - 10:47 PM

If fascists manage to take over, then, believe me, you will have far more important problems than what songs you can sing.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 09 Apr 10 - 01:11 AM

Just read your post, Stringsinger...you must be dizzy from all that spinning. That is the clearest example of indoctrinated spin I think I've ever read! Good job, keep it up,....see if you can walk straight now......

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 09 Apr 10 - 01:37 AM

Don Firth: "If fascists manage to take over, then, believe me,......"

IF?????????????
HOP ABOARD THE CLUE TRAIN.......

Dearest Donny,
Nazism (Nationalsozialismus, National SOCIALISM) was the ideology and practice of the Nazi Party AND of Nazi Germany. It was a unique variety of fascism that involved biological racism and anti-Semitism. Nazism presented itself as politically synergistic, incorporating policies, tactics and philosophies from RIGHT-AND LEFT-WING ideologies; in practice, Nazism was a far right form of politics.

If you read, and comprehended my prior posts, especially during the primaries and election, you may have stumbled upon this quote(from me),..... "Right wing and left wing are on the same bird!"

Respectfully(this time),

GfS

P.S. c/p from Wikipedia

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 09 Apr 10 - 10:08 AM

very good! Each practice their own myopic wisdom of trashing the other's art.

I dont defend political points of view I simply defend art and we have to stop the process of censorship, and trashing of the art of either side.

Song have to thread the needles of history in order to survive. We have to make the eyes of the needle bigger and present music as a language rather than an ideology or media to be possessed rather than shared.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 09 Apr 10 - 11:24 AM

Regarding fate of a politicized musical tradition when the opposite side takes over.

Consider the recent debates in regard to torture.

The most important most often cited case against torture has been the assumption that the reason the good people don't torture is because they do not wish to have torture visited upon them when the good guys are captured.

Same for folk music. When the tide changes you loose if you are overly one sided- branded.

Actually with Regan and the rise of consevative points of view this is exactly what happened to folk music. It lost its issues. Civil Rights and the war and then being branded lefty-hippie it was not selected by the people who made the choices when the culture changed.
This would not have happened had a wider variety of views been presented.

Each time we loose a song we loose a treasure no matter what the song is about.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 09 Apr 10 - 02:57 PM

GfS, your clue train ran off a cliff several threads back.

Have you been following this thread at all? Do you have any idea what Conrad is really on about?

I didn't think so!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 09 Apr 10 - 05:09 PM

Actually that is correct. Right wing and left wing are on the same bird and if you only let it have the one and not both the bird has difficulty flying.

Great!

Same with folk music. If you eee a bird with only one wing and that one not for you one would not want to go for a ride on it.

Brilliant

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 09 Apr 10 - 05:26 PM

Folk music is not a bird.

Folk music has many different facets - it all depends on which community and style you are looking at.   

Songs are products of the writer. It is not a commercial venue that will form the song, it is the life and observations of the writer.

Conrad keeps harping on "one brain" and "one sided", but the reality becomes obvious to anyone who reads these posts - Conrad is the one who has focused on one side.

Folk music NEVER lost it's issues. If Conrad truly had been paying attention during the Reagan years, he would have discovered a surge in protest songs that surpassed the output of the 1960's - and the trend continues today.   The conservative media may not give everyone access to these songs.

Conrad is tap dancing on a fence and does not realize that there is solid ground on both sides. Conrad is looking at the world in his own reality, and he does not grasp that the reality the rest of us live in are exactly the opposite of what he is claiming.

The sky is not falling. The music is not being "hurt". The music exists for what it is. It does not exist for the purposes of being scrutinized by critics like Conrad- it exists as an expression of the artist.   Conrad suggests a censorship of the artist view when he suggests "balance".   Balance only comes from the artist.   

The playing field is level, what they players do on it is their choice.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 09 Apr 10 - 06:58 PM

GfS, I know what fascism is and I know what Nazi-ism is. I am not going to write a whole treatise on the minute points of political science every time I mention either one or the other just to forestall some self-appointed know-it-all such as yourself from jumping on my case and trying to "correct" me when there is nothing to correct, just because you're carrying a grudge from another thread for my having rolled over you like a juggernaut of reason and logic and showed you up for the charlatan that you are.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 09 Apr 10 - 09:50 PM

Nonsense, Don!!!

As long as the so called right wing and left wing are fighting, the truth is obscured by the mindsets of each. the truth is, the 'fight' between the two wings is very much a contrived apparatus, while our rights are being whittled away making accommodations for new policies, that are against the very foundation on which those who distort claim! ....such as yourself!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 09 Apr 10 - 11:12 PM

Your usual banal double-talk. "Right wing" and "left wing" are merely buzzwords. Imperfect analogies and they explain nothing.

A society is not a bird.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 10 Apr 10 - 04:45 AM

Have another!

I won't tell the Audubon Society....they study and protect and appreciate birds.

Hey, I've got a bird for you..........

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 10 Apr 10 - 07:25 AM

The main issue here is the contrast between the work done by seeger-smothers etc. 60's USA folk movement,much of it good work, in the area of cross cultural traditions and their seemingly lack of interest in political objectivity- political bipartizanism.

Did they work as hard to join hands with their political rivals as they did working to get us to join hands with members of other cultures far away and those pursuing class warfare?

When you look at it from the standpoint of human rights etc. I am sure that those in the distant cultures that we were encouraged to get to know and love had a very spotty track record themselves.

So if your issue with people you disagree with you is that anyone you dont share values with should be ignored if not removed from the earth or minimally discuraged from appearing in folk venues and media then would not the same apply to folk in foreign lands?

We don't know yet wether seeger and or smothers turned away people they did not agree with who wished to share their stages. We don't know that they did not send missions of discovery (as the seegers did to foreign parts) out to those on the other side of the political divide.

I think that they did not. I guess you could prove otherwise.

But by the tone expressed in this thread thus far I think political myopia, ethnocentrism and exclusion of any view that is not the received view is still very strong in the folk music community a place where all should be welcome all the time no matter what the politics.

Rememer that cultures around the world have values different that our own. To inflict our own values upon other peoples is to invite them to do the same to us. We need to separate political propagandizing and dominance from folk music as in the separation of church and state. It does not mean that churches cant exist but that we can all live together providing that it is done peacefully and within the laws. We need the ecumenical style events that happen between churches with vastly different beliefs. For that to happen imho people in the folk music community have to lower the drawbridges.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 10 Apr 10 - 09:48 AM

"Did they work as hard to join hands with their political rivals as they did working to get us to join hands with members of other cultures far away and those pursuing class warfare?"

What on earth do you consider the outcome? When you have issues such as war and civil rights - the outcome is joining hands after the issue is resolved.   

Your Pollyanna view of the world ignores the struggles that are being fought and the reason the struggle exists. Expecting participants to bend over and grab their ankles is not going to bring forth change.

Shake hands?? Is that the sort of outcome you wish for criminals?   Would you have wanted to shake hands with a Hitler or a Stalin after their crimes were uncovered and their plans defeated? Is that going to bring world peace - or would it encourage others to commit crime if the retribution is a hug and a kiss?

Conrad, you continue to play spin doctor and gloss over the realities. Your continued reference to promoting cultural traditions is ignorant of the facts that the rest of us are well aware of, yet you continue to disregard.   With each post you are coming across as more unglued and nothing more than a person out of touch with reality and their own environment. It may be an act, but it is failing.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 10 Apr 10 - 10:07 AM

I agree completely Ron.

Maybe the fumes from not bathing regularly have caused brain damage. There has to be some sort of explanation to it. Maybe it is a combination of that with CO poisoning from his high emission level "Artcars."

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Stringsinger
Date: 10 Apr 10 - 08:47 PM

Political views are not monolithic. It's rare to find two Socialist scholars who agree on everything..

There is no "party line" now.

Songs are a reflection of people who sing them. They don't require censorship in order
to please everyone.

I wonder if the Right/Left thing has run out of steam? The only people who seem to be really worried about partisanship are those who are unsure of their own political values.

Otherwise, why bother?

This argument has no analogy in the Separation of Church and State because
those who sing songs for political purposes know that government policies will not be controlled by songs. Religion, maybe, but not songs.

Since there are so many political reasons to sing songs, there is no reason to compromise by an attempt to be "even-handed". Fox News doesn't present songs because that is a sort of "party line" which belie the artistic components of a song. Obviously, there is no Fair and Balanced there but a use of the term to exploit and reframe.

There are different approaches to anthropology. Some work within a culture and others stand outside. In any case, there is no reason to claim objectivity in this work.
Biases will always be there. Mead, Benedict, Herskovitz, Sol Tax, Redfield all have different points-of-view and different politics as a result. The goal of total objectivity is chasing after windmills. We are all products of our culture and our views are formed by being forged through our life experiences.

Pete Seeger is a consumate artist who has galvanized audiences not because he is a polemicist but because he has humanitarian values that are communicated in his performance. The Smothers Brothers are funny not because they were polemic either,
but had a genuine insight into satire.

Class separation is not a myth, it is a reality. The rich are waging war against the poor
by attempting to suppress ideological differences. There is not a reaching out by those on Wall Street, today.

There are distinct flaws in various cultures throughout the world. , I am
glad that there are not Islamic beheadings or honor killings, Catholic auto-da-fes, Israeli or Serbian genocidal occupations, dictatorial movements,Protestant burning witches or promoting such, cannibalism or other gross human violations that many cultures bring with them. It's OK to be intolerant of these things.

Pseudo-objectivity does not address these characteristics. It's necessary to be
critical of these cultures when they employ inhumane behavior.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Stringsinger
Date: 10 Apr 10 - 08:50 PM

There are distinct flaws in various cultures throughout the world. , I am
glad that there are not Islamic beheadings or honor killings, Catholic auto-da-fes, Israeli or Serbian genocidal occupations, dictatorial movements,Protestant burning witches or promoting such, cannibalism or other gross human violations that we have to tolerate.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: mousethief
Date: 10 Apr 10 - 10:02 PM

The rich are waging war against the poor and middle class by manipulating business practice, government policy (especially taxation), and fiscal policy.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 10 Apr 10 - 10:21 PM

And Conrad is waging war against the environment..................

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: mousethief
Date: 10 Apr 10 - 11:31 PM

Conrad is waging war against reality.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Apr 10 - 01:54 AM

a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYI8HRdO5Zg&feature=related">and you thought about sides????

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Apr 10 - 01:55 AM

a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYI8HRdO5Zg&feature=related">and you thought about sides????

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Apr 10 - 01:58 AM

It wouldn't work...trying again.......

..and you think about sides????

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 11 Apr 10 - 03:59 PM

Stringsinger wreote- It's necessary to be
critical of these cultures when they employ inhumane behavior.

Immoral inhumane all the same.

I think I already mentioned baby killing, then there is the death penalty,

Just because behavior is foreign to your mindset does not mean it is essentially anything its just behavior. Ok if you dont like it then dont do it but if others wish to play a game that you disapprove of and they are free to leave then it should not matter.

Folk venues might consider operating like libraries- most libraries do not censor anything. They simply work with the way they present it in creative ways- adult sections, behind the counter sections, but they dont censor Ideas as you wish your stages and media outlets to censor them.

Bumper sticker for you -

FEAR No ART

The feeling that the west has a monopoly on morality and right and wrong is simply silly.

Work to bring in as much diversity that you can and make everyone singing whatever they bring welcome.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: mousethief
Date: 11 Apr 10 - 05:13 PM

Conrad: The feeling that the west has a monopoly on morality and right and wrong is simply silly.

Relativizing morality doesn't make the BNP okay.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 11 Apr 10 - 05:25 PM

Like them or not (I dont) you have to recognize that they are a choice or you will go no where.

They are a party in the discussion.

That is not debatable- you cant tell them to go away any more than they can tell you to go away.

Therefore by recognizing their right to have a point of view, and by inviting them in rather than excluding them you can work on the debate and if you do your work you will have no fear of them but if you demonize them there is no talking no negotiation and therefore no easy resolution.

So bring them in, have a battle of the bands and win the debate.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: mousethief
Date: 11 Apr 10 - 05:29 PM

You can't debate with a club. These people aren't interested in debate, they're interested in taking over. Wake up. "Peace in our time" isn't.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 11 Apr 10 - 08:16 PM

Sounds like you have a club
They have a club

If they want to change how music is done they have a point of view.

You have to acknowledge that they have the right to a position different from your own and everyone should be heard out.

If you think your position has merit well then defend it and it will prevail.

You dont make it easier by simply telling the other side to either go away or shut up.

This will not decide the argument the general consensus of the population will do that and if the population sees you as wishing to exclude other side from the debate it will be more difficult for you as you will then be exhibiting the characteristics of your opponent.

Examine also the point being made.

There are always ways to improve on the status quo and perhaps some changes can be managed that would be fair and helpful however, simply stating that your position is the only rational one and is inherently perfect will not help anything.

The art of compromise is important but the art of free dialog is necessary first and if you simply won't talk the general population may just go with the other side.

This thread concerns the domination by the media and performance by one dimension of the political argument. When you exclude an opponent or point of view as unworthy you are doing just the sort of co-opting of the received view that is being argued against here.

If you demonize your opponent the outcomes are limited- one side will be tossed out of the ring by the people. With more discussion more outcomes would be possible perhaps an adjustment that will accommodate both sides.

As with people the evolution of musical traditions is far from perfect or efficient. Course corrections are always possible that can improve things in the future. No one course is necessarily correct or perfect. There is no organic evolution according to some form of natural law. It is all done by people pushing here and pulling there.

It does not have to be one way or the other. If a group concludes that it has gone a bit too far in one direction or another they have a right to put that to the people.

Heritage is as important as innovation. Heritage once was innovation. It is a treasure and imho we should do what we can to carry as much of it through time as is practical. Perhaps simply adjusting emphasis is needed- sort of an affirmative action program for heritage music if the case can be made that it is being abused by lack of venues and training or airplay. But if you simply tell the other side that they are out of order none of whatever possible accommodation and adjustment will occur. Just a few ideas this is not the thread for that discussion except that adjustment should be tried diversity of opinion should be encouraged and not attacked.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 11 Apr 10 - 08:38 PM

"Work to bring in as much diversity that you can and make everyone singing whatever they bring welcome. "

That is exactly what Pete Seeger and others have been doing. You seem to equate "diversity" with acceptance of criminal behavior and anti-social agendas that promote denial of rights as well as existence.

Your idea of what constitutes "culture" is warped and your lame spin-doctoring isn't working. No one is buying your bullshit. When will you realize that you can keep twisting words?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 11 Apr 10 - 08:40 PM

"Just because behavior is foreign to your mindset does not mean it is essentially anything its just behavior. Ok if you dont like it then dont do it but if others wish to play a game that you disapprove of and they are free to leave then it should not matter."

And "compromise?" There are certain things that one simply cannot compromise with. To do so is to abdicate any pretense at ethics or morality.

Conrad, when it comes to matters of "baby killing" or declaring wars of conquest or the industrialize slaughter of "undesirable" people, yes, that kind of behavior is foreign to my mindset. And, yes, you are right. It IS "behavior. But I would hardly characterize it as "just behavior" (using "just" in whatever sense of the word you want).

Yes, it does matter. And yes, I disapprove of it. AND I disapprove of any person who can contemplate such things and dismiss either them, or the advocating of them, in any form (speech, writing, song, whatever) as something that "should not matter" as guilty of contributing to these things whenever and wherever they might happen.

It's called "moral responsibility." And Dante, in his Inferno, says that the lowest level of Hell is reserved for those who, when confronted with a moral issue of this nature, simply choose to "look the other way" or "do not want to get involved."

I hope you can enjoy it down there, because that seems to be the moral choice you have made.

After all, choosing not to choose IS a choice. Whether you like it or not.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 11 Apr 10 - 11:47 PM

What evidence do you have that seeger went out and brought to his concerts a wide range of political diversity- who did he invite>? Did he ever turn anyone away? We dont know but my theory here is that he kept political diversity out preaching only one view. This does not parallel his championing of exotic cultures which may actually have had some political beliefs and practices that might not have been approved of had they been better known.

Thats not spin.

If major powers in the folk world blocked political diversity they should be given credit for it and the branding of folk genres that resulted.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 11 Apr 10 - 11:52 PM

Don- Morality and ethics vary from place to place and time period to time period. There has been more change back and forth on these through time than anything else.

You were brought up with them so they loom large in your cosmos your culture.

When others differ with you it is more important to talk with them and listen to their songs than it is to drive them away or call them evil.
They could do the same to you.

If you recognize that songs and poetry are simply a language of expression and not actions in and of themselves you will see that there is reality only in deeds not in poetry about deeds. In an open cultural non binding forum everything has to be on the table.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 12 Apr 10 - 12:14 AM

"what evidence do you have that seeger went out and brought to his concerts a wide range of political diversity- who did he invite>? Did he ever turn anyone away? ":

There you go again - twisting your own statements when you cannot answer the challenge.

You were originally speaking about cultural diversity, then you change the game to include a word "political" diversity.

Don't you get it? A protest song protests an existing condition - the very fact that you have a protest song is PROOF that diversity exists.

"In an open cultural non binding forum everything has to be on the table."
It already is. That is the point of protest.

Pete invites CULTURAL diversity in all his music. His travels around the world, the films he produced, all part of an agenda to show the diversity of cultures and lifestyles - and thought.

Pete often sings a song called "Die Gedanken Sind Frei" - thoughts are free.   The song was banned by the Nazi's.   So much for political diversity from the other side.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 12 Apr 10 - 08:00 AM

Ron you are not getting it. Political diversity means people you don't agree with who have just as much a right to express themselves in folk music venues as anyone else. Yes pete protested but he did not bring in folk singers from the other side of the equation as far as I know as he did with other cultures that people might also have not been comfortable with.

Yes he invited cultural diversity even though it was quite possible that some of the politicos of the cultures he brought in may have exployted people, women etc and were absolute rulers.

He did not bring in the same sort of political diversity choosing to keep it lefty liberal as far as I know.

Yes he sang a song banned by the Natzis but did he sing a Natzi song or allow or invite someone to do so.

Pete is often given credit for uniting people but that did not extend I believe to people of different ideological backgrounds and values.

IMHO someone so powerful in folk music missed a great chance to avoid the political branding that folk music received.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 12 Apr 10 - 08:43 AM

Sorry Conrad, you are the one who is "not getting it". Your opinion ignores the actual truth.

Plain and simple - it is not the burden of any venue or artist to insure diverse opinions are aired.   Each venue or artist is responsible for sharing their own vision - and the audience listens to what it wants to hear.

Pete Seeger has no reason to avoid political branding. The opportunity exists for any artist to share their politics - the fact that there is not a strong "right wing" folk movement is a reflection of the community that created it. THAT is what cultural diversity creates. Water seeks it's own level, so does opinion. As long as there are no dams built to prevent water from freely flowing, nature takes it's course. It really seems that you are trying to alter nature.

You are placing demands now on artists, venues and even the audience. Having a "right" to express an opinion exists. Your attempt at censoring an artist is wrong. You won't admit it, but what you are doing IS advocating censorship.

I know you will continue to spin off your mantra and avoid answering questions - but I will attempt once more.

NAME ONE ARTIST OR VENUE THAT PRACTICES THE DIVERSITY YOU PREACH.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 12 Apr 10 - 01:50 PM

It is obvious that Conrad has never been to a Pete Seeger concert. It is also becoming increasingly clear that Conrad has no understanding whatsoever of ethics and morality.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 13 Apr 10 - 11:47 AM

Conrad has won me over. I am now out fighting for those he says deserve accessibility.

Conrad, if you read the "Mudcat Update" thread you will see that I am forceful in saying we need accessibility for trans-sexual cross dressing Albanian hat blockers doing nude Morris Dancing while smeared in yak dung and Marmite.

I hope the rest of you can see the sense in this as well.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 13 Apr 10 - 03:40 PM

Rather than using up band-width to post this in two places, see my post over HERE.

Wait for a few seconds for it to load.

Don Firth

P. S. By the way, Conrad, the term for Germany's National Socialist Party back in the 1930s and 40s is spelled "N A Z I." No "T." In this context, the "Z" is pronounced like "TZ." So, "Nazi" is the correct spelling.

What did you say you got your college degree in? Obviously not English composition. Perhaps in "creative writing?" Very creative, including creative spelling, grammar, and punctuation.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Art Thieme
Date: 13 Apr 10 - 08:03 PM

Around 1959 I recall vividly that Pete was a guest on a TV show hosted by Hugh Hefner. The weekly show in Chicago was called "Playboy's Penthouse" and it featured lovely ladies and guys sitting around a nice apartment and holding various alcololic beverages while Pete informed them with his music. I taped some of it. Still have it.

Not exactly holding hands witth the enemy, but...

Art

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: mousethief
Date: 13 Apr 10 - 10:32 PM

Spaw, I hope you allow trans-sexual cross dressing Albanian hat blockers doing nude Morris Dancing while smeared in yak dung and Vegemite to share the stage with the trans-sexual cross dressing Albanian hat blockers doing nude Morris Dancing while smeared in yak dung and Marmite. Otherwise you would clearly be unfairly discriminating against the trans-sexual cross dressing Albanian hat blockers doing nude Morris Dancing while smeared in yak dung and Vegemite. By allowing the trans-sexual cross dressing Albanian hat blockers doing nude Morris Dancing while smeared in yak dung and Marmite to hog the stage all to themselves, you relegate the trans-sexual cross dressing Albanian hat blockers doing nude Morris Dancing while smeared in yak dung and Vegemite to second-class status.

And I know you don't want that.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 13 Apr 10 - 10:45 PM

. . . and a partridge in a pear tree?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: mousethief
Date: 13 Apr 10 - 10:58 PM

But should the partridge be allowed to hog the tree all to herself? Isn't incumbent upon the partridge to invite some cuckoos, mynabirds, dodos and a peregrine falcon, even though she disagrees with their politics and one of them wants to eat her, lest she be guilty of politicizing the tree?

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 14 Apr 10 - 01:35 AM

Donny: "Conrad, when it comes to matters of "baby killing" or declaring wars of conquest or the industrialize slaughter of "undesirable" people, yes, that kind of behavior is foreign to my mindset. And, yes, you are right. It IS "behavior. But I would hardly characterize it as "just behavior" (using "just" in whatever sense of the word you want)."

Baby killing??? ....undesirable people??? Do that mean you oppose abortion????

This should be an interesting SPIN!!!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 14 Apr 10 - 06:44 AM

Tell ya' MT, if all those birds are showing up then I think Conrad needs to take the responsibility for cleaning up all that birdpisshhit. I mean that is a whole shitload of birds,so to speak, and I just have a Cockatiel but if I'm figuring right based on Cockatiel pisshit, we could be up to our asses in birdie style pisshit in no time. Since Conrad doesn't bathe regularly he might not notice.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Don Firth
Date: 14 Apr 10 - 02:10 PM

GoofuS, I was referring to infants and children, not unborn fetuses--as was the post from which I was quoting (you really have to learn to read everything before you start popping off). This thread is not about abortions. If you want to discuss that, start another thread.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: Stringsinger
Date: 14 Apr 10 - 02:40 PM

Conrad says, "Just because behavior is foreign to your mindset does not mean it is essentially anything its just behavior. Ok if you dont like it then dont do it but if others wish to play a game that you disapprove of and they are free to leave then it should not matter."

Inhumanity does matter. This interpretation of "objectivity" is callous. This is true particularly if others "play a game" that harms other people which happens all the time.

As for audience reaction which is what I assume this statement is about, then certainly
anyone is free to leave or respond. What matters however is the nature of "the game"
and its impact on society.

Genocide is "essentially its just behavior". It's not "just" behavior in any sense of the meaning. There is a complete lack of social responsibility and consideration in this point-of-view.

Scientifically speaking, what constitutes a baby is not what anti-choice people say it is.
"Baby killing" is a loaded propaganda term and flies in the face of critical scientific objectivity.

There are opinions that are fact-based and education-based and there are those based ignorance and suppositions that can't be supported by evidence. Not every opinion has merit. Some are deluded.

Libraries should not be shut down just because they contain information with which some may disagree. But not every book read does not require agreement. Some books contain fatuous information. Some libraries in this country are invaded by those who would censor certain books because it is felt that they are not "acceptable". Mark Twain and Studs Terkel come to mind.

The idea that "Art" is somehow immune from the passion of ideology or politics is a form of censorship. Let's not rock the boat. Folk songs don't fit this description. Many are intensely political and to deny this is to show ignorance of this form of expression.
There are plenty of examples of this with which most Mudcatters are familiar.

Subject: RE: BS: Seeger Smothers Party- Left=right?
From: GUEST,KP
Date: 20 Apr 10 - 06:31 AM

List of Smothers Brothers Episodes
SMOTHERS BROTHERS COMEDY HOUR EPISODE SCHEDULE

According to this, Seeger appeared twice on the show, would that be right?
KP