Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: GUEST,BlackAcornUK
Date: 03 Jun 20 - 12:46 PM

Agree Jim. In general, I feel the slippery slope argument is used as a blanket pass. The two main things that are being discussed boil down to (1) songs about the Jewish 'blood libel', which started the thread; and (2) songs using a handful of specified racial slurs that are widely avoided.

Steve - "none of those quotes of mine have anything to do with my wanting to "reserve the right" to use words in a racist manner."

...Frankly, this is denying it's raining when it is. Your words are as plain as day, however much you might insist otherwise.

"You are a bit too enthusiastic, if you don't mind my saying so, about defining offensiveness for all the rest of us and prescribing for us which words we should never use... No-one is going to be condemned as racist for not objecting to Paul Robeson singing.." etc and so on

Steve, I sense your frustration at tying yourself in knots; I strongly suspect you've accidentally fallen into a position which you don't even believe in yourself.

However - I didn't raise that song or those words - YOU DID - with a really peculiar set of musings about YOUR OWN WILLINGNESS TO SING THE SONG, including - even - pondering (before discounting) purring it as a lullaby to a four-year-old!

It was *never* about criticising you or anyone else for listening to Paul Robeson. That is plain as day, across all of the posts above.

It was questioning your claim to be able to publicly sing those same words *because Robeson also sang them*.

You still seem highly averse to tackling the question of why - given Robeson's own jettisoning of those words - you seem more wedded to them than him...

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Jun 20 - 12:28 PM

All "rights of free speech" have to be balanced by other peoples' rights to go about their business without being insulted or denigrated
The "slippery slope" idea is far too often uses to have the unacceptable accepted
We have a troll wandering around here at present putting forward the same argument
If people demand the right to behave inappropriately, they must to accept the right of others to ask them to stop or at least, make their feelings obvious - I've seen that happen more than once and enjoyed it

I was both alarmed and amused by the story of Eric Bogle singing his bitterly anti-racist, 'I Hate Wogs' when a member of the audience climbed onto the stage and punched him - critical acclaim in the extreme
Jim

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: The Sandman
Date: 03 Jun 20 - 12:25 PM

tavelling down the castlereagh is not trad, however would itbe acceptable to sing
I asked a feller for shearin' once along the Marthaguy.
“We shear non-union here,” says he. “I call it scab,” says I.
I took a look along the board before I turned to go:
There was twenty flamin' black legs shearin'in a row.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: Howard Jones
Date: 03 Jun 20 - 12:18 PM

If folk clubs were expected to post "trigger warnings" the list would be a long one - murder, rape, incest, domestic and other forms of violence, racism, sexism, celebration of tobacco and alcohol, hunting, shooting and fishing, and of course whaling. Not to mention a wide range of political opinions.

There is much to be offended by, and from time to time I hear things which make me uncomfortable. However we don't have a right not to be offended. I don't set out deliberately to offend anyone myself, and I hope my previous posts haven't given the impression that I don't think carefully about what I sing.

My point is that songs with outdated language are not necessarily racist in intent, and we should be careful not to jump to conclusions just because modern sensibilities are different. Of course we cannot ignore those sensibilities either. I would be very cautious about singing songs with such language, but I would not go so far as to say they should not be sung.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: The Sandman
Date: 03 Jun 20 - 12:05 PM

Meanwhile, we have trump fanning flames and using racism for his own end.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: GUEST,Derrick
Date: 03 Jun 20 - 12:03 PM

Funny things words,the same word can have totally different meanings depending on where and how it is used.
I only learnt today that Hogs eye could be used as a term for female genitalia.A hogs eye man could refer to a crew man on a river barge that was refered to as a hogs eye.
See here https://mainlynorfolk.info/watersons/songs/hogeyeman.html
Bugger is another such word as any Englishman knows,it can be a sexual act or a term of affection given the context in which it is used.
The word negro to designate a dark skinned person came from Spanish and Portuguese where it means the colour black,which in turn comes from the Latin word niger.
An innocent word in one language can be offensive in another as some car makers have found when naming a particular model of car only to find it has to renamed to sell in a paricular country.
Offence can be caused deliberatly or accidently, you can usually work out the way the speaker meant it to be understood.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: leeneia
Date: 03 Jun 20 - 11:49 AM

Are rascist songs ok?

When you learn and sing a song, you are spending time and perhaps money on it. Ask yourself if you want to spend your time and money promulgating something you hate.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Jun 20 - 11:32 AM

Agreed, Dave. As for you, Black Acorn, none of those quotes of mine have anything to do with my wanting to "reserve the right" to use words in a racist manner. You are a bit too enthusiastic, if you don't mind my saying so, about defining offensiveness for all the rest of us and prescribing for us which words we should never use. Read what others have said about context. Adopt a more rounded view. No-one is going to be condemned as racist for not objecting to Paul Robeson singing "coon" instead of "food" in an old song. If you want to go larger on that, go below the line.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 03 Jun 20 - 11:14 AM

The question is then, what would you do with such songs? Ban them from being performed in public? If so, where do you draw then line? What about songs that are offensive to the English? What about songs that praise alcohol? What about songs of domestic abuse? And who decides where to draw that line? Once you start to censor lyrics you are on a slippery slope.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: Brian Peters
Date: 03 Jun 20 - 11:04 AM

Just to be clear, it was description of the fellow with his sea boots on, who'd apparently been visiting the narrator's girlfriend, that I found offensive about 'Hog-eye'. Even though I accept it might have been regarded as innocuous in its original context.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: Brian Peters
Date: 03 Jun 20 - 10:59 AM

'qualms about singing "hog-eye"?'

Fair point, Howard. I had no idea what the expression meant when I first heard the song, but I do now. However I suspect that a lot of people don't, hence the lack of general outrage.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: GUEST,BlackAcornUK
Date: 03 Jun 20 - 10:50 AM

Howard, I think Brian has already mentioned his unease with 'hog-eye', but as you say I think the more esoteric nature of the profanity means that most people aren't familiar.

'My point is that there may be contexts where its use in performance can be justified, just as there may be situations where unbowdlerised versions of shanties could be sung. Of course considerable caution is needed.'

Personally, without a heavily caveated intro, I can't imagine those contexts where it could be justified;

Even in a dramatic context for historical verite, unless for purposes of revealing and exploring prejudice, it would seem highly gratuitous; and there are just so many other songs that could be used.

The idea of it being struck up 'un-cordoned', in the general course of a shanty session, whatever the demographic of those participating, seems quite far beyond the pale.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: GUEST,BlackAcornUK
Date: 03 Jun 20 - 10:41 AM

Brian, I totally agree with your post.

Jack, I fully agree with/share your hope that that sort of use would be challenged. My personal view is that some of the racial slurs discussed above, and the faultlines of competing nationalisms, are of different degrees of severity - though others may well feel differently.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: GUEST,BlackAcornUK
Date: 03 Jun 20 - 10:40 AM

Steve, sorry to keep pulling you up on your own previous postings, but hopefully it's clear why others may have interpreted quotes such as these as 'reserving the right' to use such language?

'Were I to find meself singing it to a bunch of grown-ups I think I'd explain that the words are of their time, and while we wouldn't use those words these days, I'm keeping them in'

'I want to hear what the song was intended to be, otherwise I just might not want to hear it at all'

'my view is that I don't care much for ridiculous rewordings of songs done largely by white men. The choice is to sing the thing, not sing the thing, change the thing then sing it, to listen or to not listen. Thank God we live in free countries (for now), eh?'

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Jun 20 - 10:35 AM

"But it never happened. Nor did any incident remotely like it."
Moot point

I've just come across a bit of racism which I find quite interesting
It's from the magnificent 'Poetry and Song series done by Argo for teachers teaching pre-teenagers so the albums, while readily avaliable, wouldn't have been aimed at the general public
Bert Lloyd , at his best, sings ' Travelling Down to Castlereigh' which has the two verses:

I asked a feller for shearin' once along the Marthaguy.
“We shear non-union here,” says he. “I call it scab,” says I.
I took a look along the board before I turned to go:
There was twenty flamin' china-men shearin'in a row.

So shift, boys, shift, for there ain't the slightest doubt:
It's time to make a move with the leprosy about.
So I'll saddle up my pack-horse and I whistle to me dog;
I left his scabby station at the old jig-jog.

The 'leprosy' term is racially abusive to the Chinese who, out of poverty, were forced to take shearing jobs at lower wages, which helped the landowners drive the wages of the indigeanous shearers down - causing racial friction
The same happened in Wales aand Nothern England with Irish labour at the time of the famine
While it's not a song I'd sing, I find it a fascinating history lesson
Would welcome comments
Jim

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: Howard Jones
Date: 03 Jun 20 - 10:28 AM

What I meant was that the word was seldom, if ever, used in shanties in a way which was demeaning or insulting to black people. Usually it was simply a description. At that time, the word didn't seem to carry the overtones that it undoubtedly does now, at least among sailors. Of course, those were less sensitive times and terms were also used about other races which would probably not be acceptable now, and I also recognise that black sailors were probably in no position to object to its usage - but that assumes they saw anything offensive in the word itself (rather than in the way they might be addressed).

Since then of course the word has become much more loaded and it is difficult to use it without appearing offensive. But context is everything. It is acceptable (or should be) in a discussion such as this, which is about the word itself. My point is that there may be contexts where its use in performance can be justified, just as there may be situations where unbowdlerised versions of shanties could be sung. Of course considerable caution is needed.

Incidentally, why do people get so agitated about the n-word but have no qualms about singing "hog-eye"? Is it because they don't know what it means? Hugill dismisses other collectors' claims it was obscene, saying they had misunderstood (although he doesn't say what he thinks it means). However according to several authorities, by at least the mid-20th century it had become a term for the vagina. Even if it didn't have this meaning for the sailors, shouldn't we now be equally sensitive to the modern meaning as we are with racial words?

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: Jack Campin
Date: 03 Jun 20 - 09:43 AM

Context dependence. Consider "Bonnie Susie Cleland". Scots noblewoman is burnt on a pyre by her own brothers because she wants to marry an Englishman. Horrific honour killing story with added nationalism.

But it never happened. Nor did any incident remotely like it. As performed to a Scottish audience, the only way to read it is as a tragic warning against that sort of bigotry.

Now imagine it taken up by an English nationalist and presented as historically factual. It then becomes a story about how bigoted, misogynistic and violent the Scots are. I would hope any performance that presented it that way would be interrupted.

Same words, two very different intentions.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Jun 20 - 09:40 AM

Er, I'm not aware that anyone is "reserving the right" to use particular words. This thread is about words or groupings of words that are already there in (mostly) old songs. We are talking about whether we should keep those words, change them or just ditch the song. There is some scope for discussion of the matter without assuming things about those of us who are posting. You are getting way too carried away. When I post above the line I like to think I'm mostly going to be posting about issues in folk music, not in some wider context. I can make that distinction. See if you can. There's always the downstairs bit...

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: Brian Peters
Date: 03 Jun 20 - 09:00 AM

We know that many shanties (and quite probably the song form itself) came from African-American and Caribbean tradition, but that doesn't make it OK to sing offensive verses in a modern context. I remember being appalled by 'Hog's Eye Man' when I first heard it sung in a folk club forty years ago and, even though I understand its origins better now, I certainly wouldn't be any more comfortable hearing an unexpurgated version today. I agree with posters who have suggested we consider how a person of colour in our audience might respond to this kind of language and, if we conclude that it would be offensive in that situation, consider again whether it's acceptable in any context.

As a performer I see no problem in changing the words of old songs for all kinds of aesthetic reasons. Research is another matter, of course. As for Sir Hugh, although I remember once hearing it performed together with a very powerful contextual introduction, it's still one of the Child Ballads I've chosen to avoid.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Jun 20 - 08:27 AM

"The album isn't going to turn anyone into an anti-semite, any more than it will make someone burn nurses or murder their daughter's boyfriends."
True enough, but that's an apples/cabbages comparison - the two are very different
Racism is not only ever-present, but it is on the rise, and in many ways, being encouraged
Worldwide Antisemitism is the oldest form of cultural hatred there is - some of us are old enough to have been alive when it reached its height - in a civilised (supposedly) world
Ther problem with our folksongs is that by and large, they are treated, even emphasised as 'entertainment' - some we are being asked to be entertained by the idea that Jews indulged in ritual child-murder
I can think of political groups who would fill pubs drinking the health to that idea
When/if our clubs become places to go to be educated as well as entertained, such songs may be acceptable - not yet, I'm afraid
Jim

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: GUEST,BlackAcornUK
Date: 03 Jun 20 - 07:03 AM

'I would see no problem at all in using it in a specialised shanty session'

I can't think of any night I've ever been to, or any venue, where this would be acceptable.

In terms of, 'It is hardly ever, if at all, used offensively.' In this sentence you pivot from a historical framing ('many crews were multiracial') to assert that 'it *is* hardly ever' offensively used *now*.

If that's your intent, it's palpably and demonstrably incorrect. Everyone is aware of how loaded, how offensive this word is not only to black people, not only to non-white people in general, but to the vast majority of the British public whatever their racial heritage. And, in my experience, it is only used without strong declamatory framing by people who take either overt or inner delight at flouting these vital contemporary social norms.

People can furtively 'enjoy' whatever words they want in the privacy of their own homes, however revolting. People using them in public should brace for challenge. But, this sort of usage that seem seek to reserve the right to is clearly racist, whether or not there are others there to hear and object.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Jun 20 - 06:45 AM

Agree fully with both those posts.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: Howard Jones
Date: 03 Jun 20 - 06:32 AM

What hasn't been mentioned, so far as I can see, is the issue of context. By and large, these songs are performed to self-selecting audiences with a particular interest in folk song, most of whom have some understanding of the origins and the contexts in which these songs were created. In my experience, most songs (and not just those which could be offensive) are usually introduced in a way which explains this. These are not songs which the general public is likely to come across without explanation or preparation (unlike performances of morris or mumming plays). By and large, this is a specialist audience of grown-ups who understand the context in which these songs arose and in which they are now being performed.

Furthermore, one of the attractions of folk music is the insight it gives us into the lives of previous generations. It should also be thought-provoking, which means it might sometimes offend some people. So I don't agree with those who say racist songs should never be performed. However they should not be performed casually and without thought to how an audience might react.

The use of outdated language does not in itself make a song racist. Again, it is a question of cotext. As Hugill pointed out somewhere, "nigger" as used in shanties was simply the commonplace term among sailors (he also points out that many crews were multiracial and generally got along well). It is hardly ever, if at all, used offensively. I would see no problem at all in using it in a specialised shanty session, but wouldn't use it in a general folk club without a word of explanation. The seaside shanty choirs who perform mainly to visiting holiday makers should probably avoid it

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: The Sandman
Date: 03 Jun 20 - 06:29 AM

i believe Vin had the right to sing his song,if one dosna agree one dosna have to clap.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Jun 20 - 06:21 AM

"Little Sir Hugh rubs shoulders on AR's album with a lot of other macabre ballads in which terrible things are done. The album isn't going to turn anyone into an anti-semite, any more than it will make someone burn nurses or murder their daughter's boyfriends. If anything it serves to remind us that anti-semitism is equally barbaric."

I agree with this (and with Dave's sentiments too). We should remember that a song exists only when it's sung. We can choose to sing it or not. We can choose to listen to it or not (unless it's foisted on us without warning, as Vin Garbutt once did at our folk club with his anti-abortion song, but even then we can reject it without getting horribly offended). I'm not in any way trying to champion songs which have racist intent. That goes against the limits of the kind of free speech that I recognise. I hear a lot of the ould "of their time" songs as having racist content without a hint of conscious racist intent. That isn't to say that they can't still perpetuate racist stereotypes. But I return to my point that we're grown ups. As such, I don't really appreciate another grown up policing the words for me. I'd rather contemplate the original and squirm as required. Or not contemplate it at all if singers choose to not sing it. That's all.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: GUEST,BlackAcornUK
Date: 03 Jun 20 - 06:08 AM

Thanks all -

Jim - I agree that there's an opportunity there for EFDSS, and the appetite of the organisation has waxed and waned over the years. over the last 10 years or so they've done more of this sort of thing, with Sam Lee's 'Magpie's Nest/Nest Collective' efforts as a promoter standing at the centre of this.

Dave - fair enough - as you can see from my forum history, I'm a fairly new user. I ran several searches for racial slurs - which returned quite a few lyric and post results - and the 'Anglo Saxon' words above, which returned lyric results only. I don't know whether search is disabled for certain profanities, or if (perhaps more likely) I haven't got to grips with the multiple search window options. I applaud your choice not to black up, or to sing such lyrics.

Rigby - yep, I've got Too Long in this Condition, and actually organised this gig for Ali in 2010 where he probably performed the song; though as a promoter, you're scuttling around too much to soak in the lyrics, and - despite having lived with a trainee Rabbi for 4 years previously - I simply didn't have the same appreciation then of the sensitivities around the words in question. As I say above, despite the cesspit of social media, I think many people are more alert to antisemitism now than was the case before. I'd be surprised if Ali chose to sing the song uncaveated now, and I think that voluble audience objection would be far more likely. Having said that, I think most people engage more with the 'textures' of live music rather than the fine grain of the lyrical experience, so many audience members would often be oblivious to such things.

Though these days I find the opening lines of Dachau Blues pretty crass, it is a direct engagement with, and condemnation of, the horrors of the holocaust; and a reminder to heed the lessons. Little Sir Hugh/The Jew's Garden, without caveats, context or explication, just keeps alive the 'blood libel' against Jewish people that - despite the aforementioned heightened awareness mentioned above - a disturbing number of people still seem to subscribe to (I've lost many painful hours arguing with open antisemites on the internet).

Further to my point above - I think about the shock, anger and bewildered disappointment that my Jewish friends would experience if unsuspectingly exposed to the song - how they might feel, to hear that in a room full of non-Jews, and nobody objecting - and I find that prospect troubling.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: GUEST,Rigby
Date: 03 Jun 20 - 04:18 AM

Little Sir Hugh rubs shoulders on AR's album with a lot of other macabre ballads in which terrible things are done. The album isn't going to turn anyone into an anti-semite, any more than it will make someone burn nurses or murder their daughter's boyfriends. If anything it serves to remind us that anti-semitism is equally barbaric.

Compare that with Captain Beefheart's 'Dachau Blues' from Trout Mask Replica. There is no racist intent there either, but I find it much more disturbing. The idea of writing a blues song about the Holocaust seems to me intrinsically offensive and staggeringly insensitive.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 03 Jun 20 - 04:16 AM

F-ing and jeffing aren't acceptable on thus forum

Whoever I agree with on this, that is wrong. There are plenty of examples of using the word fuck on this forum. Including by the moderators. It is an adult forum and we all enter it willingly. If there is racist or offencive intent I trust the moderators to remove it. If it is a discussion of a folk song that contains racist or offensive language, it should be with warts and all.

As it happens, I will no longer perform pace-egg or mummers play blacked up because of the very sensitivities we are discussing. Nor do I sing "rich as any jew" in "A mon like thee". There are better alternatives to both but that should not prevent the discussion of historic lyrics.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Jun 20 - 03:36 AM

I was associated with EFDSS for a long time not just as a member, but with working with the Librarians and movers and shakers
People like Malcolm Taylor and the Matthews and Barbara Newly became friends - they were very much Internationalists and realised the value of contributions from other nations, but as an organisation, I occasionally found it extremely WASP
It was summed up for me personally on a visit to the Herga Club when we tried to sell copies of our Irish Traveller tape, issued by The VWM Library 'Early in the Month of Spring' (the fore-runner to the present 'From Puck to Appleby' and we were firmly told by an organiser "We're an English Club"
My side of the revival was very much Internationalist, mainly because the clubs were '50 Shades of Left' - the revival owed its existence to Lefties like the WMA, Alan Bush, Bert Lloyd and MacColl and Seeger - multiculturalist all - calypsoist Fitszroy Coleman was a star of one of the first clubs
Bert's magnificent radio programmes, Songs of the People, Voice of the Gods, The Lament, Folk Song Virtuoso... internationalised the understanding of folk song for may of us
He brought The London Bangali singers and musicians 'The Batish Family' to The Singers Club - wonderful South Indian singer, Kali Des Gupta was a regular there
All this and much, much more could have been carried out by EFDSS - it wasn't - it would have been so ***** easy then - London was made up of international communities - West Indian, Greek, Turkish, various European and Asian peoples who had come to Britain and brought their voices and instruments with them
When Pat and I got the collecting bug we approached EFDSS with a proposal to set up a collecting team to comb London for it's music (originally mooted by 'The Critics Group') - we'd even devised a name 'Exiles'
The suggestion fell on deaf ears - they were all too busy waving hankies and shaking bells - they weren't even that interested in song
We approached Topic and they agreed - only if we would plan, organise and lead it
We had just dipped out to into recording Travellers and in Ireland and Norfolk - we didn't have the contacts - it became an opportunity missed
I think now Jean Jenkins at Hornimans or Lucy Duran in the (then) British Institute of Recorded Sound might have gone along but we had never met them and had no track record   
EFDSS could have boosted it's image by taking such a step - an opportunity missed by them too

We noticed on our annual visits to Ireland during 'The Troubles' what a tremendous unifying influence music has on multi-denominational and international groups - something like that is now being cried out for to drag Britain out of the racist shit-hole Britain has become thanks to opportunist politicians
Jim

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: GUEST,BlackAcornUK
Date: 02 Jun 20 - 09:14 PM

Your prerogative. Hopefully other forum users might be interested to further engage with the question of what can make for a welcoming culture within our folk community.

At the EFDSS folk educators day, the renewed risk to the loss of folk dance as a living tradition across much of the country seemed very apparent.

Folk music clubs and singarounds on the whole seem in better health, from my experience, but that's no reason to be complacent - especially given the likely profound impact on our venue infrastructure; and also, the fact that without a vaccine, singing itself is seen to be an activity that can project the virus over a wider area.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jun 20 - 09:06 PM

Well I can't be arsed.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: GUEST,BlackAcornUK
Date: 02 Jun 20 - 09:03 PM

No, I'm not pseudonymous. As I say, anyone looking at my posts for even 2 minutes will be able to find out who I am very readily.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: GUEST,BlackAcornUK
Date: 02 Jun 20 - 09:02 PM

A broader point - one of the people that got me involved in folk was a dear friend of Goan/Ugandan heritage. Together, we curated a series of gigs that reactivated Cecil Sharp House as a prominent London concert venue; and also put our savings into making a documentary about Shirley Collins.

One of the most inspirational people I've met in folk this year was folk dance instructor Andrea Queens (at EFDSS's folk educators day in February).

I can confidently assert that both would be not only mortified but really hurt and probably confused/angry about even confidently writing those words, never mind claiming the 'right' to sing them.

These are just two examples of the many non-white people making a considerable contribution to traditional music in the UK. To me, it seems not only inappropriate and unkind to create an environment which makes an important resource like Mudcat unwelcoming; it's self-defeating to any seeking to keep the tradition as vibrant and active as possible.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jun 20 - 09:01 PM

You're Pseudonymous, aren't you? :-)

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: GUEST,BlackAcornUK
Date: 02 Jun 20 - 08:56 PM

In the spirit of avoiding 'flame wars' which the forum guidance calls for, I'm not going to be drawn into returning fire on the personal insults and aspersions that you're casting - but I will extend the courtesy of taking your points one at a time.


1) 'I didn't say anything about staying faithful to the song'.

Your earlier comments tell a different story, Steve:

'I want to hear what the song was intended to be, otherwise I just might not want to hear it at all'

'I don't like seeing song words messed about with'

2) It's not my view that those are racially offensive words. Thankfully, it's the majority of society's view. Most importantly, it is overwhelmingly the view of the black community in general, and every black friend, colleague and neighbour I have now, and have ever had in the past. I have no inclination to break that covenant with the community that gets to determine which words are offensive to them, and which are not (which is a basic principle of standard equalities practice).

3) Curious point re: 'You want us to think you live in the UK' a casual glance at my previous posts would reveal links to my blog and Twitter, the town I live in, my job etc.

4) On the 'Guardian style guide,' good luck finding the use of any of those words that is not entirely framed around their offensiveness; citing their guidance whilst overlooking this key fact appears to be a case of wanting to have cake, and eat it? This inconsistency also seems present in your reluctance to tackle the points about Robeson's own avoidance of the language in question, having previously cited him as a reason to stick with said language.

5) In terms of pusillanimity - I don't find anything 'courageous' in using racial slurs without inhibition. I note that cursewords of the sort you've used tend to be deleted on the forum. I don't think they do anything to raise the tone of discussion. If it really is about 'courage', why not write to black colleagues, or to your council, or to Folk Against Facism, or Love Music Hate Racism, asking them if they'd endorse your wish to sing the song with those words?

6) I think dubbing a song in all liklihood written for minstrelsy 'a racist song' is fairly uncontroversial. As noted by me and any others, a song dormant 'in the record' is a historical artefact. A song performed in the present has the strong potential to be considered racist, especially if it includes the language we've been discussing, or other racial slurs.

7) Unless I'm mistaken, you appear to be calling me a 'white imperialist'? I've occasionally been called an anti-imperialist, but this is a new one, ha ha.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jun 20 - 07:52 PM

I didn't say anything about staying "faithful" to the song. That's a laughable allusion. And your "extremely racially offensive words" are all down to your own personal predilections. If we can't discuss those words and the context in which we find them, just on your say-so, then we don't live in a free country. We already know of your difficulties: "c-word", "n-word" and "d*rkies." It's very hard to discuss these frank issues with someone who can't even bring him/herself to utter the words. You want us to think you live in the UK. Well take a look at the Guardian style guide. If we mean nigger, coon and darkies, we say nigger, coon and darkies. No mucking about, no asterisks. Same as we do with fuck, cunt and the like (note that I rarely type those words: being pusillanimous says more about you than it does about those ancient and time-honoured words). Consider that you could actually be part of the problem. Last word: there has been, in this thread, the glib use of the expression "racist song." A racist song is a song that promotes racism. A song isn't a racist song because it contains words that white imperialists disapprove of. It might not be a song worth singing, or a song that it would be wise to sing, but there is a distinction. That's what this thread should really be about.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: GUEST,BlackAcornUK
Date: 02 Jun 20 - 07:26 PM

Jeri, totally agree that it's important to keep EVERYTHING accessible in the historical record. They're important waymarkers, and valuable social history, however uncomfortable. As you say, it doesn't in any way mean they should be sung today.

Steve, my agenda is, feeling the need to speak out against the casual use - or defence of the use - of extremely racially offensive words. F-ing and jeffing aren't acceptable on thus forum - why should it be acceptsble for much more damaging language to be bandied about?

And, *I am* discussing the issue in hand - 1) that those are not 'our' (ie white people's) words to use - far from just my view. Any of my black friends, colleagues, neighbours would say the same. Beyond Kendrick Lamar, loads of the major black figure of the last 50 years has also expressed similar views. I take my lead from that.

2) you insisted that it was all about staying faithful to the song, invoking Paul Robeson to grant credence. I've already cited three recorded versions by him where he omits all of those 'contested terms'. I'd cautiously proffer that perhaps most of his recorded versions don't use such language. This isn't a personal attack. This is carefully examining one of the main points you made.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jun 20 - 07:19 PM

That's a fair point, Jeri. As I've repeatedly said, we are grown-ups.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jun 20 - 07:11 PM

Sorry, mate, but you are attacking me personally. If I see an adverse response to something I've said, I feel the right to respond irrespective of what I might have said in previous posts. It would be really good if you could just discuss the issue to hand. I don't know who you are but you do appear to have an agenda. Nighty night.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: Jeri
Date: 02 Jun 20 - 07:07 PM

I think we can have records of racist songs, and not sing them. A friend here sang a song for several years, before I found the original, and discovered he'd changed some words. It was a damned fine song, with the changed lyrics.
But we need to have a record of the original lyrics. Otherwise, it's attempting to sanitize history. As in "No, that never happened, and you can't prove it did."
Two different things. Folk songs we sing, and archives of songs we remember.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: GUEST,BlackAcornUK
Date: 02 Jun 20 - 06:54 PM

'Rigby'. Apologies, autocorrect!

Steve, I see you replied to SRS whilst I was writing my post. She's still right.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: GUEST,BlackAcornUK
Date: 02 Jun 20 - 06:51 PM

Rugby, I understand this rationale but I think it's misplaced. I also think the artistic effect is of far lesser value than the potential hurt caused to Jewish people in the audience, or non-Jewish people like the OP who still find it very offensive.

Worse still is the cover and even legitimisation that it gives to actual antisemites who actively seek opportunities to seed those views. It's less of an issue in trad folk, in my experience, but the neo-folk scene has also seen a lot of far-right entryism (putting it mildly), including some really virulent antisemitism, and I think there's a duty to deny those ideas or the imagery that can provide cover the space to breed.

As I say, I know Ali reasonably well, and as a promoter I've put him on four or five times, including last year. I don't think he's in any way racist. I also think he probably wouldn't perform this song in the same way, if at all, nearly 10 years on from the encounter that provoked thus thread.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: GUEST,BlackAcornUK
Date: 02 Jun 20 - 06:44 PM

Steve - I thought you'd had your final say? The content of your reply makes you look worse, not better. As has been amply discussed by several posters, those are absolutely not my words to use. Frankly, I would deservedly be disciplined or fined if my employer found me writing them on the (especially if defending their deploymemt!). And that is no privation!

Sad to see you've not engaged with any of the very salient points that SRS makes, nor the point about Robeson apparently not getting your memo about protecting the 'fidelity' of the song's racist language, despite your efforts to use him as some sort of cover.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jun 20 - 06:39 PM

And as for this:

"Think of it this way: are you more worried about preserving the words to the song or about triggering events with offensive words? Are you more concerned about the property damage or the death of protesters?"

I'm sorry to say that your usual sane common sense took a day off when you typed this. First, I'm not at all worried. Why would I be. I'm passing comment in a thread on a folk music website and I've made it clear that I'm simply expressing an opinion about old songs, songs that have nothing to do with current events in your benighted country. There's no either/or, is there? Second, why would you ask me that final daft question, Maggie?

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: GUEST,Rigby
Date: 02 Jun 20 - 06:35 PM

Talking not of racist songs in general, but of Alasdair Roberts's version of Little Sir Hugh:

What his performance of that song gives us is a shocking illustration of the power that these stories hold.

For the few minutes that he is singing the song, we are horrified by the cruelty of the Jew's daughter, and we feel the pain of Hugh's mother as she searches for her lost child.

And then the spell is broken and we perceive the song for what it is.

But perhaps we've learned something through that experience? Something that we wouldn't have learned if the performance had been hedged around with caveats and apologies and historical context?

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jun 20 - 06:29 PM

I think the fact that you feel you have to say "c-word" and "n-word" instead of "coon" and "nigger" says quite a lot about your misplaced sensibilities. As for discussing this in the context of the present climate, well I for one am discussing it in the context of this resurrected thread and nowt else, thanks. We are talking about outmoded and quite likely offensive words in old songs. It doesn't matter whether those of us who wish to discuss same are black, brown, yellow or pink. We are entitled to take a view, though that's best done with a good dash of sensitivity, as ever. And my view is that I don't care much for ridiculous rewordings of songs done largely by white men. The choice is to sing the thing, not sing the thing, change the thing then sing it, to listen or to not listen. Thank God we live in free countries (for now), eh?

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: Joe G
Date: 02 Jun 20 - 05:46 PM

Well said SRS

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: GUEST,BlackAcornUK
Date: 02 Jun 20 - 05:25 PM

I agree, Stilly River Sage.

On the matter of lyrics being messed about with - as discussed, in a folk idiom, there is seldom - if ever - an authentic version of a song. They are living fragments of a collective culture, and are constantly in gentle - or radical! - flux under the pull and pressure of Sharp's continuity, variation and selection. They're not suddenly *fixed* and immutable at the moment that an 'educated' Victorian or Edwardian scribbled them down in a paddock (indeed, these collectors wrought some of the biggest changes on both tunes and lyrics). In this context, it makes no sense to object to contemporary alterations, especially if they 'keep the song alive.'

On 'My Curly Headed Baby' - it's obviously not a 'folk' song so I'm not really sure why we're now discussing it at length, but... I've done a bit of casual research. Firstly, one of Clutsam's lines of work was for minstrel ensembles, so the song was probably written for that purpose - ie, a white person's mocking caricature of black existence. Presumably not many of us are in the habit of trying to keep the minstrel torch burning in general?

In any case, since we're invoking Robeson, none of the first 3 versions of his that I found on YouTube - seeming to span his whole career - feature the n- or c- words that have been defended on his behalf. They don't feature 'd*rkie', either. So, is Robeson also a transgressor in the face of that preference not to see 'old songs messed with'? Perhaps for those who really like the song, and since such alterations were good enough for Robeson himself, the version without racially offensive words is the one to champion, sing in public or even as a lullaby?

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 02 Jun 20 - 04:14 PM

I think that people are far more likely to end up depraved and corrupted by the tripe that they hear/sing in religious hymns and brainlessly-chanted prayers. But we tend to give all that a bye.

Sorry, that is "tu quoque" or "whataboutism," and isn't what is discussed here.

I like the folk process and I enjoy different takes on songs. But I don't regard sanitisation of words that someone thinks might offend me as part of that process. Number one, I'm a grown up, number two, I don't like being patronised, and number three, I have no right to not be offended. I want to hear what the song was intended to be, otherwise I just might not want to hear it at all. I'm not going to turn into a rabid racist because I hear the wonderful Paul Robeson singing "coon" in a song.

Paul Robeson was a black-listed Black man. His experience and his choice to sing that song is perhaps a teachable moment for others, but for white performers to try to do the same thing is a toxic move. These songs are simply no longer performable in any "normal" performance way.

You have three choices: don't sing the song; sing the original, unexpurgated version; change the offending words into something more anodyne.

No, you really only have one choice. Don't sing the song. The song contains the words and changing the words doesn't mean everyone doesn't know what the song is actually about. Just. Don't. Do. It.

The last choice often yields ludicrous results, especially for those who know the original. Paul Robeson sang "coon" whereas many who sang the song later sang "food" instead, which is what you'll find if you look for the lyrics, which I find risible. Paul was a great humanitarian who fought for equal rights and who suffered for his fight. Maybe he was "of his time" and "should have known better".

He was of his time and is of this time. He knew what he was doing, he didn't need to "know better." The code-switching going on when African American or other Black performers sing these songs are like ultrasonic ringtones; European Americans aren't going to hear the meaning intended and understand.

I struggle, we all struggle, to understand how to support others at a time like this with all of the protesting. Shutting up and offering support and not trying to continue to sing racist songs and get away with it would be a great start. Rebecca Solnit coined the term "mansplaining" a couple of decades ago; I've seen that altered in recent days to "whitesplaining." This is not a compliment, yet here I am doing it myself. Singers may be purists and want to go with the oldest or Ur version of a song, but it is time to understand that those songs are off limits, or at best, in quarantine. They don't need to see the light of day right now.

Think of it this way: are you more worried about preserving the words to the song or about triggering events with offensive words? Are you more concerned about the property damage or the death of protesters?

Sorry to pick on Steve's remarks, but his are most current in this old thread.

Subject: RE: Are racist, but traditional, songs OK?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jun 20 - 03:54 PM

I have my point of view on this. My focus in this topic is that I don't like seeing song words messed about with and I've given my reasoning. I have no more to say on this. Cheers.