 sj |
||
|
||
Can a pop song become traditional?
|
|
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: Vic Smith Date: 30 Nov 15 - 01:12 PM My point is, and always has been that the people as a whole no longer play a part in the creation and dissemination - it is no more 'ours' than a tin of processed peas bought at Sainsburys Our only role is as a customer. It could be that - against expectations - that we are getting somewhere. A real difference is in the commodification of pop music. A pop song is presented by the music industry as the finished object with the recording, the image, the video etc. all bundled to make the complete commodity. This has led to the the proliferation of 'tribute' bands who try their damnest to reproduce the product by attempting to be as close a clone of the original as they can manage. With performance of a traditional song and tunes, it has always seemed to me that there are three planes operating and I always try to use as an analogy - three dimensions. One plane is the song or tune itself. A second plane is the performance that the current performer learned from. The third plane is what the current performer brings to it. This analogy held good for traditional song and music for millennia. I remember Mike Seeger saying that you don't have to go that far back in time to reach the days when the only way you could hear a song or tune was if that performer was in the room with you. From the time when the printed word became widespread, the situation has become more complex. These complexities mean that unless a basis for the parameters of any discussion can be agreed then all you are likely to get is circumlocution - and I'm afraid that is what has happened in this long thread. |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: GUEST,Anne Neilson Date: 30 Nov 15 - 01:59 PM To answer the original question -- probably not, 'in my life-time' IMHO. To address some of the more recent concerns, I'm very aware of the current wrangling about the introduction of source singers to the scene. Maybe we were luckier in Scotland (perhaps because we are a smaller community) but when the Folk Revival hit us in the early '50's, I imagine it as a great gift from a very knowledgeable Santa Claus! My English teacher in 1956 was Norman Buchan (later a Labour MP and author of two significant books of traditional Scottish song). Norman had been involved politically with the people who put together The People's Festival in Edinburgh in 1951, as an antidote to the over-priced and 'high culture fixated' official Festival -- and during that event, he was in the audience for the first People's Festival Ceilidh which was put on by Hamish Henderson. Hamish had begun to collect songs for what became The School of Scottish Studies (in Edinburgh University) and, as was his wont, generously shared his recorded material with other enthusiasts -- so, when Norman started his Ballads Club in Rutherglen Academy in 1957, we had access to recordings of source singers like Jimmy McBeath, Jeannie Robertson, Lucy Stewart et al along with Pete Seeger, The Weavers etc. Our club members sang a great range of songs -- from The Twa Corbies via The Bleacher Lassie o Kelvinhaugh to Rothesay Oh, and as we approached the 60's we added We Shall Overcome, Blowing in the Wind and Can't Help But Wonder Where I'm Bound. But the point is that I think all the Club members knew the difference between a song like The Plooman Laddies and Masters of War -- in terms of their origins. And there was also an acknowledgement of the skill of a maker in creating a new song that spoke to current concerns. (I remember the impact of Tom Paxton's Vietnam songs 'Lyndon Johnston told the Nation' and - specifically - 'Jimmy Newman') So, my bottom line is that a traditional song (handed down orally etc.) is a special thing, particularly when it has come from performers of the calibre of Jeannie Robertson etc. -- but there is no bar to another song becoming equally significant…. Provided it has significant emotional content, narrative strength and appropriate melody. (I'll be interested to hear proposals) |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: The Sandman Date: 30 Nov 15 - 02:01 PM "This analogy held good for traditional song and music for millennia. I remember Mike Seeger saying that you don't have to go that far back in time to reach the days when the only way you could hear a song or tune was if that performer was in the room with you." Now, one can have many performers in the room through the use of the computer. |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: MGM·Lion Date: 30 Nov 15 - 02:04 PM Jim -- Have as requested PM'd my current e-address to you. ≈M≈ |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: Jim Carroll Date: 30 Nov 15 - 02:38 PM "If they use these new fangled pencils to write down the words, it isn't folk. It must be a quill or it fails the 1854 interpretation. " Nope, but I suppose it gives you some sort of perverse satisfaction to put up something nobody has said - which reinforces my point. Most people never come into any form of folk and those that do no longer have a consensus of what it is. I assume the "1854" is an attempt at satie - on second thought - maybe not! "To Jim Carroll it's something to do with Walter Pardon. " More distortion of what has been said - not doing too well, are you? Your claim isn't reflected in increased audiences or popularity, whereas in Ireland, thousands of youngsters are flocking to what they know to be traditional - a lesson in that somewhere. Which can now mean anything from Beethoven to Barbra Streisand - not very workable as a definition, doncha think? "By the way, when you reach the impossible consensus on what folk is," the nearest thing we have to a consensus is the the current definition which has been fully researched and documented for over a century - perfectly possible to all but those who don't actually like folk music. I've always been fascinated to learn why people who don't like or understand something feel the urge to destroy it - any ideas? Thanks for the ray of sunshine Vic. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: Steve Gardham Date: 30 Nov 15 - 02:38 PM Jim, Can you find me please a cast-iron definition of classical music? All of the people who I know who write about folk song, and it's rather a lot, know exactly what the 54 definition is, and use it regularly as I do. None of us have a problem with using that definition or using the much wider meaning when we need to. We manage to communicate with each other on a regular basis and have very few if any arguments on the matter. Why can't you just ignore the few largely anonymous trolls here who trying to bait you? |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: Jim Carroll Date: 30 Nov 15 - 03:03 PM "Can you find me please a cast-iron definition of classical music?" This one, From the Oxford English Reference Dictionary suits me as as well as any Steve: "Classical Music n. serious or conventional music following long-established principles rather than a folk, jazz, or popular tradition. It is associated with acoustic instruments, in particular the orchestra, and the sonata form; however, modern experimental composers such as Karlheinz Stockhausen and John Cage, using electronic instruments and other devices, are generally considered to be working within classical music. The term is used more specifically with reference to music written c.1750-1800, as opposed to baroque and romantic music, and is exemplified by'-the work of Haydn, Mozart, and the young Beethoven. During this period the orchestra, the chamber group, and the various compositional forms such as symphony, concerto, and sonata became standardized." If there are divergences from this, they are by sufficient numbers of people in agreement to make them contenders , which is not the case here, which amounts to a handful of folkies making a U.D.I. on their own behalf yet being unable to agree among themselves what they mean by "folk" or "tradition". If the compiler can distinguish between other forms of music, as he/she does, why shouldn't we? You appear not to wish to respond to my point - we are not being asked to accept another definition, but to abandon the one we have for nothing. If you are prepared o do that, I am not. If there is a wider meaning, what is it? So far, the answer is the Humpty Dumpty one - "it is what I choos itr to be". '54 is a bit of a red herring - I never use it other than to someone who wishes to delve deeper a starting point. When these arguments started I had to drag down Bert Lloyd's book to remind me what it was - don't think I'd read it since I first bought the book in 1967 Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: The Sandman Date: 30 Nov 15 - 03:19 PM "I've always been fascinated to learn why people who don't like or understand something feel the urge to destroy it - any ideas?" Something you seem intent on doing when it comes to the UK Folk Revival, when are you going to give credit to Peter Bellamy and others from the UK Folk Revival, who Helped Walter get his family songs better known. |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: Steve Gardham Date: 30 Nov 15 - 05:15 PM 'This one, From the Oxford English Reference Dictionary suits me as as well as ANY Steve:' Precisely, 'as well as any'. It's not a definition, it's a short summary of descriptors and look in another dictionary or encyclopedia and you'll find differences. When I've a bit more time tomorrow I'll write you out a description of folk music that corresponds pretty much with what you have there. |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: Steve Gardham Date: 30 Nov 15 - 06:22 PM Here you are, Jim. Knocked this up in about 10 minutes. Folk Music: Often based on traditional folk music but since the 50s and the start of the second revival the term has gradually acquired a much wider meaning to include music written and composed by members of the revival. Today any music written in the style of traditional folk music or that uses acoustic instruments like the guitar and concertina is generally accepted as folk music. This wider meaning came to the British Isles from America where it had increasingly been used since the 1920s. Skiffle and American folk music suddenly blossomed in the British Isles after WWII and this sparked an interest in British folk music as well as imitation of American contemporary folk music. It was pioneered over here by such artistes as Bert Lloyd, Ewan MacColl, Martin Carthy, The Spinners and The Watersons. Alongside the increasing interest in traditional folk music many artistes began writing their own material. Once Tin pan Alley saw the commercial potential it began to spread to a much wider audience and the genre was crossed with other genres such as rock music. There you go. We won't all agree on that but it's as good as your dictionary definition of classical music. |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: Jim Carroll Date: 30 Nov 15 - 06:58 PM Is your definition documented anywhere Steve - does it have a following, where can I go to get information on it or, if if someone were to ask where they can learnn about it, which direction do I point them, how does 'Delilah' or all the other pop songs that have bee mentioned here (or don't the people who wish to call those pop songs have a say in the matter), or is it something you have knocked up for your own personal use - oh sorry - you just said you did - in 10 minutes. Well done - it took around 55 years for the IFMC to come up with theirs. Come ooooonnnn Steve - you can you claim to be a researcher and think you can redefine folk music in 10 minutes. This just underlines the ludicrousness of the situation existing in the revival as it stands today. If language means so little that anybody can adapt it for their own personal use we may as well all become hermits and talk to the mirror. And where does the music I have come to understand as Folk/traditional stand with your personal definition - how do I tell someone who asks that they have to include Blue Suede Shoes in their definition - or have they got to work out a definition for themselves? The clubs bombed because your 'anything goes' attitude took a hold in sometime in the late 70s, early 80s when it was not just possible to go into a folk club and not hear a folk song (in fact, you could no longer expect any typee of song from a folk club), but it became the norm. I really would hate to see that happen in the fiel;d of research. Far from "folk" or "tradition" being a "short" summary of a type of music, it's an extremely well researched and documented genre. I'm in the process of digitising my vinyl and cassette albums at present - not done a full count yet, but there must be around.... what.... 800 of them from Britain, Ireland, America, Canada, Europe (East and West), Asia, Africa.... all more or less fitting the description I know to have been in use since William Thoms came up withe the term'Folk' in 1846 - ten minutes - wow!! Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: GUEST,Allan Conn Date: 01 Dec 15 - 02:59 AM The classical music definition above makes kind of sense in that it recognises that even within the classical tradition the meaning of 'classical music' has more than one meaning. One more encompassing meaning and one more specific meaning. It would make sense for a folk/traditional definition to likewise point out that there are different meanings. Even looking at it from a specifically Scottish perspective it seems clear that even though we know what the 1954 definition specifically means there is a significant canon of Scottish tunes and songs that the vast bulk of performers and listeners would regard as folk music but doesn't neatly fit into the said definition. Not really talking about pop music as much as generally composed fiddle tunes and composed songs from Burns' day up until modern times. So yes I can say that I listen to classical music and know what I mean by that - and then I also know that Mozart is of the more specific classical period whilst Mahler is not! I live with that quite easily. Likewise I also know what is meant by a specifically folk/traditional song/tune - but I also know that there is a much larger canon of work thought of as folk or traditional music. Words have more than one narrow specific definition. It seems rallying against that after half a century or so is kind of spitting into the wind. |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: Bonzo3legs Date: 01 Dec 15 - 03:12 AM Folk music is what pedants want it to be. The rest of us don't care!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: GUEST Date: 01 Dec 15 - 03:57 AM If a definition of folk has been researched for over a century, it wasn't well documented or promoted. Millions of people on the planet have in their heads what they consider to be folk. That's a million different subjective ideas. Ditto pop. (and then some) I can't tell Jim Carroll what is folk any more than he can keep trying to say I and others are wrong. If baroque, chamber, orchestral, opera, piano, string quartet, new age, madrigal, blah blah can all fit into classical without anyone cocking their rifles, then traditional (whatever that means) can be a form of folk, not THE form. It isn't hard. It just means getting out more and starting to enjoy music. |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker Date: 01 Dec 15 - 04:07 AM If Music = Cheese Trad Folk = Mature Cheddar Contemporary Folk = Mild Cheddar Dairylea Cheesy Cheddar Spread should = Folk flavoured Pop music.... Easy.... That took me lesss than 5 minutes.. Next we can consider the relationship of Scottish, Irish and Welsh Cheddars to this newly forming definition = Celtic Cheddar ??? ... New Zealand and other International World Cheddars. ... and Vegan Dairy Free Cheddar which might = Electro Folk and other experimental & extreme modern variations.... Also this definition will need to account for the odd awkward bugger who tries to melt Cheddar with Stilton or Danish Blue, or even worse any of the boring bland cheeses.... Nobody likes Jazz Funk or Smooth Jazz Cheese !!! ... and the odd perverse fans of Stinking Bishop and Limburger can just eff right off.... 😜 If the Courier delivering my new midi keyboard hasn't arrived before mid day.. I might tackle Euro Folk Metal cheese just out of sheer bordom.... |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: The Sandman Date: 01 Dec 15 - 04:46 AM What has become evident is that Jim Carroll is a pedant who refuses to answer question and to quote Denis Healey a silly billy. |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: Brian Peters Date: 01 Dec 15 - 04:47 AM I'm with Steve and PFR here. After all, if you look up 'Ballad' you get definitions as varied as: 1. Any light, simple song, especially one of sentimental or romantic character, having two or more stanzas all sung to the same melody. 2. A simple narrative poem of folk origin, composed in short stanzas and adapted for singing. 3. Any poem written in similar style. 4. The music for a ballad. 5. A sentimental or romantic popular song. (Pasted from an online site, but my fat old OED lists a similar range of meanings) If Jim, Steve and I are capable of sifting those and realising that the kind of ballad we're interested in is #2, I really don't see why we can't do the same with 'Folk Song'. Personally I think the old (1954 if you insist, yawn) definition is more coherent than "something sounding vaguely like a traditional song", "something sung to an acoustic guitar" or "something performed in a folk club", but dictionaries define words according to contemporary usage. |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: GUEST,Raggytash Date: 01 Dec 15 - 05:19 AM I have to say Jim that in the late 70's early 80's in Manchester the folk club scene was vibrant. One possible cause of it's later fall from grace might well have been the several people sitting room a table like Ena Sharples, Martha Longhurst, Minnie Caldwell and Albert Tatlock bemoaning the plight of the 1954 definition. Just a thought. |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: Jim Carroll Date: 01 Dec 15 - 06:10 AM "If a definition of folk has been researched for over a century, it wasn't well documented or promoted. " Remind me - how long you've been on the scene? Of course it was well documented and promoted Sharp published his 'English Folk songs, Some Conclusions' in 1907 - the Folk Song Journal had come into existence 8 years earlier. He published his Somerset and Appalachian collection and got folk songs put into schools - we were intoning Early One Morning and Oh No John in the 1950s. His colleagues, Lucy Broadwood, Frank Kidson and others were publishing collections - folk songs all - no equivocation. There was a landslide of works both collections and scholarly works on folk song throughout the first half of the 20th century in England and Scotland and particularly in America By the fifties there was no doubt whatever what folk song meant - them the BBC mounted a huge collecting project in thee early 1950s and broadcast it in a series of progremmes 'As I Roved Out' Similar things wee happening in Ireland with Ciarán Mac Mathúna's broadcasts. There was ever a doubt what folk or traditional meant. The deliberately generated fog spread about by interested parties is a relatively new thing - it helped **** up the folk scene, and now, it appears there are some among us who would have it do the same for research. "Millions of people on the planet have in their heads what they consider to be folk. " I very much doubt it, but if there are, you are not among them as you haven't been able to produce a description of what you mean by folk so far other than "whatever I choose to call folk" - that seems to sum sum up the present 'definition'. " I really don't see why we can't do the same with 'Folk Song'." Fair enough Brian - but again, that doesn't seem to be what is happening here. The amount of aggression, insulting behaviour and contempt for the old singers and their songs indicates a hostile takeover by people who neither know about nor care for folk/traditional song. That takeover has affected the club scene adversely and it certainly doesn't bode well for the future of song. I can only point again to what's happened in Ireland, where, simply by identifying what me mean and centering our attention on it, it's future has been guaranteed for at least another two generations. Can't see why we should abandon that chance for a small group of people who can't even scratch together an alternative explanation that enough support to make it a definition. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker Date: 01 Dec 15 - 07:12 AM I prefer strong mature Cheddar - it's definitely my favourite. But then I'm Scrumpyshire born and bred... My forbears would have most likely been dotted around lying cidered up behind hedges within a 20 mile radius of where Sharp was cycling around bothering the yokels... 😜 Blimey.. now wouldn't it be weird if I had a blood link back to one of the singers he pestered... That's only just occurred to me...???? |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: GUEST,Musket Date: 01 Dec 15 - 07:14 AM I do keep looking in on this thread for a giggle. PFR - Brilliant idea. I'm off to write some stinking bishop for the folk club I am at tonight. Lovely to see Jim reckoning if you haven't been around as long as him your opinion is shit. Do back off Jim. Your knowledge of your small section of folk is quite good as far as it goes but you do yourself no favours judging the wonderful wide genre of folk by it. If I thought people would enjoy my own modest contributions more by wearing my trousers up to my tits I would do so. Mind you, a mate said I was living the dream by wearing a waistcoat on stage whereas to be fair, it was there to a) disguise the beer gut and b) handy little pockets for finger picks, capo etc. I haven't laughed so much since a certain "living the dream" announced at a festival that the next song was one that he learned at his mother's knee. Then proceeded to sing a John Connolly song..... Luckily, I am heartened by the exciting revival in folk and roots music by a much younger generation. Even only last night at a club, the highlight for me was a young lady in her early '20s singing wonderful interpretations of a few traditional songs plus a couple of her own compositions. Living folk, if you ask me. |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: MGM·Lion Date: 01 Dec 15 - 07:15 AM Using 'pedant' as a derisory or pejorative term — how pathetic! I should have expected better of the likes of Dick. One of those irregular verbs, innit: "I am accurate; you try to get things right; he is a pedant". The greatest compliment ever paid me on a forum was the assertion "MGM your pedantry is legendary". Long may it remain so; and if Dick wants to make it a sneerful occasion, then I hope it keeps fine for him. ≈MGM≈ MA, FRSA, OLP*≈ *Official Legendary Pedant |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: GUEST,Stuart Estell Date: 01 Dec 15 - 07:28 AM I'm reminded of something that was once said to me in a totally different context, discussing the taxonomy of plants: "the plants don't know what species they are." The main disadvantage of the broad way in which "folk" is used from my perspective is that it means that if I crack open something like Spotify and search by genre I end up hearing lots of stuff in which I have no interest at all. But as long as somebody waters the plants, we'll be fine. |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: MGM·Lion Date: 01 Dec 15 - 07:44 AM Returning to topic of the thread:— Is it not at least arguable that certain songs which started life as copyrighted pop songs have become traditional by being traditionally used on specific occasions? Two examples which spring to mind are "Happy birthday to you" [see wiki entry -- apparently, according to some authorities, its © will not expire till next year]; and Liverpool FC's supporters' anthem "You'll never walk alone" which began life in a Rodgers & Hammerstein musical but whose title now surmounts the entrance to Liverpool's Anfield Stadium. ≈M≈ |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: Jim Carroll Date: 01 Dec 15 - 07:56 AM "Lovely to see Jim reckoning if you haven't been around as long as him your opinion is shit. Never said that not do I believe it Why do you people have to be son incredibly dishonest and nasty? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: GUEST,Raggytash Date: 01 Dec 15 - 08:07 AM Tell you something Jim, I bet you arguing about the definition could clear a room full of folkies quicker than my singing. |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: Jim Carroll Date: 01 Dec 15 - 08:36 AM "I bet you arguing about the definition could clear a room full of folkies quicker than my singing." Some people get pleasure from arguing, some from singing, some from just listening - I'm lucky to enjoy all three. There seems to be a disturbing (I find it disturbing) tendency to argue that we shouldn't think about, discuss, or seek to learn about the music we're involved in. Irish singing has it's problems at present, but a couple of weks ago we spent an extremely enjoyable two days at Limerick Uni at a traditional song conference. Some of the best and most skillful singing there came from young lecturers and students who could sing the socks off most of the singers I've heard from the U.K. in a long time - they loved the songs well enough to make a good job of them and knew about them - a magic combination. The highlight of the trip was in the students bar on Tuesday night. Crammed full of young people who had nothing to do with the conference, we were told that we wouldn't get enough attention for a session, but when somebody started to sing - complete attention for two and a half hours. When the bystanders were asked to sing, we got eight young people, four from Ireland, two from Europe, a Mexican and a Brazilian - all singing traditional from their home place songs well. Folk song proper no longer has a relevance - not in my experience. Anybody who has any doubt about youngsters getting involved in traditional singing should try the Sunday night singing sessions at The Cobblestone in Smithfield, Dublin - youngsters singing with the enthusiasm and skill that first brought me into the revival. While evenings like that happen, I'll keep arguing, if it's all right with you. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: GUEST,Howard Jones Date: 01 Dec 15 - 09:00 AM We have been over this time and again. Firstly, it is impossible to define any genre of music, the best you can get is some kind of yardstick to compare it with and see which is the nearest fit. This is not a question about music but about language. Language, especially English, is flexible and a word can have different meanings or nuances of meaning depending on the context. In general speech "folk music" has a far wider meaning and is used to encompass almost any acoustic music. We may not find that very helpful, but that is how people use the word. "Traditional" also may have a wider meaning in general speech. We talk of "traditional" Christmas carols, but many of them are not traditional in the sense we use the word on here, and many have known and acknowledged composers. Likewise it may be "traditional" to sing "You'll never walk alone" at football matches, but that doesn't necessarily make it a folk song. In any specialist discussion group where the differences are more relevant, not to say more important, we can expect words to be used in a more precise manner. Every specialism needs its own jargon. What I find continually disappointing that on Mudcat we still seem to be unable to agree how to use words in a more precise, technical manner. There are a number of reasons for this, whether it is Jim's refusal to acknowledge that language has changed and "folk" is no longer synonymous with "traditional", those who reject or sneer at the 1954 definition (failing to understand that it isn't a definition at all, merely a yardstick). or those who have a vested interest in having their own compositions recognised within an accepted genre. There is also the difference between American and British usage, along with different cultural assumptions. Nevertheless, it would make discussions easier if we could agree on a shared terminology, and might avoid these interminable and unresolvable "What is folk?" trheads. |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: GUEST Date: 01 Dec 15 - 09:37 AM "Remind me, how long have you been on the scene?" -Jim Carroll, a few posts above. Looks like "you people" read Jim's posts even if his own recollection gets fuzzy. Didn't you learn "you people" from sitting on Keith's knee? |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: Jim Carroll Date: 01 Dec 15 - 10:35 AM ""Remind me, how long have you been on the scene?" " That was in reference to this "If a definition of folk has been researched for over a century, it wasn't well documented or promoted." It had sod all to do with how long you had been on the scene - just a reference to what I believed to be a stupid statement. One of the first things I learned when w ran workshops was that everybody brought something to the music no matter how long they'd been on the scene. I'd resent claims that seniority brings authority, the same way I resent the twot who keeps suggesting that people have no right to comment and criticise because they aren't singers or they don't command such-and-such a fee - made at least once on this thread and often elsewhere. If I have given a different impression - I apologise. It goes against how we have always worked. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: Steve Gardham Date: 01 Dec 15 - 11:07 AM Hi Jim, So I knocked it up in 10 minutes. So you don't like it? Which bits precisely do you not accept or not agree with? |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: Vic Smith Date: 01 Dec 15 - 11:11 AM The discussion has brought many interesting thoughts and posts about how folk songs develop, what should be in and what should not and though it has not been free from rancour and point-scoring, it has never descended to the level where I felt that the mods were about to step in and close the thread. When he frees himself from his profound disputatious tendencies, (not that often, I'll agree), I find much to sympathise and agree with in what Jim Carroll writes. His views are clear and unchanging and in many ways that is admirable. If we are to take a wider view and step out of the small broom cupboard of Mudcat for a while, we find quickly that we are in a different world. Here is an example of what I mean. The influential, very widely used American website and some time magazine, Folk Alley is a place that I visit from time to time. It avoids analysis, takes an uncritical, inclusive approach and avoids the sort of internecine rows that Mudcat revels in. Generally, it does not cater for my fairly purist views, but every time I go there I find something of interest. I had remembered that they had held a poll to establish The 100 Essential Folk Songs and by that they meant recorded performances - no attempt was made to define what was allowed. Here are the results 1-100 in terms of votes:- This Land is Your Land - Woody Guthrie Now, to my way of thinking less than 10% of that list are folk songs and an even smaller percentage are of performances of folk songs that I would enjoy - Anne Neilson comes closest to my idea of what it's all about when she writes:- So, my bottom line is that a traditional song (handed down orally etc.) is a special thing, particularly when it has come from performers of the calibre of Jeannie Robertson etc. -- but there is no bar to another song becoming equally significant…. We have to accept that the list is indicative of American opinion even though there are more songs that are out and out pop songs than out and out folk songs. If we want to inculcate people towards our own approach and views, we have to proceed in a way that demonstrates why we love what we call 'authentic' without being didactic or precious in our methods. |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: GUEST,Allan Conn Date: 01 Dec 15 - 11:55 AM When the local fiddlers in these part of the woods sit down for a session of "traditional fiddle music" what they actually play tends to be a mixture of actual traditional tunes (ie written by anon) and tunes with a known composer. They don't seem to differentiate much between them if at all. They just all sound like Scottish fiddle tunes hence people regard it all as folk music. |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: Jim Carroll Date: 01 Dec 15 - 12:30 PM "So I knocked it up in 10 minutes. " Sorry Steve - shouldn't have done that - battle fatigue. Basically, I don't disagree with much of what you wrote - I think it's a fair summary of what happens in many folks clubs. What worries me is that if we can scribble our definitions off in ten minutes, why can't everybody? I come to folk song from a number of directions, as do you. I enjoy listening and singing, but I also believe it carries a load of important historical and social baggage with it. I have to either make rational sense of both of them together or treat them as separate entities. Up to now it's been no problem The clubs I have been involved with basically featured traditional songs, but also encouraged the singing and writing of new ones. I became hooked on ballads through listening to MacColl, who insisted that traditional singing would have no relevance if new songs weren't added to the repertoire. He probably wrote more contemporary songs than anyone on the scene, yet he was accused of being a purist ("finger-in-the-ear" was based on the way he performed). Around a quarter of my own repertoire are songs that have been made during my lifetime. My real concern is that the further you move away from the exiting definition without replacing it with another that we can all agree on and work with, the more chance we have of losing what we've got. I don't think I imagine the hostility I sense when these topics come up. Again apologies Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: MGM·Lion Date: 01 Dec 15 - 12:40 PM "Likewise it may be "traditional" to sing "You'll never walk alone" at football matches, but that doesn't necessarily make it a folk song." .,,. Nobody said it did, Howard. The term 'folk song' appears deliberately to have been omitted from the thread title, and whether a pop song can become such is not what is being discussed here. (However, I did put this very example, as to whether 'walk alone' could be regarded as a folksong when sung at Anfield, as I have related here before, to Bert Lloyd in an interview I did with him for Folk Review (Sep 1974). "Folk in function but not in form," he replied. "In folk, does not the function define the form to some extent?" I rejoined. "It does to some extent," he conceded.) ≈M≈ |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: GUEST Date: 01 Dec 15 - 01:39 PM Ralph Vaughan Williams made his stash turning traditional tunes into themes in scores he could then copyright and collect on. When Ewan MacColl or Bob Dylan borrowed heavily (to sanitise the term) from traditional song in order to be able to receive royalties as the writers of the song, were they no longer folk? Defining and categorising opens more cans of worms than it settles arguments. But the one about music of the people is the funniest yet. My two year old granddaughter will be able to get up and sing a Sugar Babes hit once it goes out of copyright and becomes traditional folk then. |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: The Sandman Date: 01 Dec 15 - 02:10 PM MGM , You are behaving like a Booby[ one of your own terms]. the dictionry defintion of pedant I was going with was: a person who annoys other people by correcting small errors and giving too much attention to minor details, it fits Jim Carroll perfectly, he quibbles over minor detail but will not give credit To Peter Bellamy and other uk Folk Revivalists who appreciated Walter Pardon. not only is he a pedant but he is predictably tedious. |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: Steve Gardham Date: 01 Dec 15 - 02:51 PM Jim, As usual in threads of this sort there are all sorts of discussions going on at once. What I am seeing is a person who I respect immensely (despite our few disagreements) being baited and sidetracked by all sorts of trolls. ''I don't think I imagine the hostility I sense when these topics come up.'' There are people here like Brian, Vic and Mike who have a great deal of knowledge and integrity. Your arguments would be much more cohesive if you ignored the trolls and those with a chip on their shoulder. BTW, it's very gracious of you but no need for apologies. What it actually says, the fact that I can run off a description in 10 minutes, fits in very well with what Vic is saying. Like you, I don't like the idea that 'folk music' is now being used to cover a whole swathe of commercial music, but there's absolutely f**k all either of us can do about it. |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: Jim Carroll Date: 01 Dec 15 - 02:58 PM "When Ewan MacColl or Bob Dylan borrowed heavily (to sanitise the term) from traditional song in order to be able to receive royalties as the writers of the song, " Don't know about Dylan but perhaps you could enlighten us on the songs MacColl "borrowed heavily from"? Having observed your hit and run tactics, I don't for one minute expect an answer to this. Take a peep at the Essential Ewan MacColl Songbook and you'll find Peggy took great pains to identify where his songs came from - virtually all traditionally based. Then again - it's pretty easy slandering someone whose ben dead for over a quarter of a century, just as easy as taking the piss out of old people. You really are a piece of work - aren't you? "You are behaving like a Booby" Are you surprised that you got kicked of another forum for your atrocious behaviour Dick? Keep it up and you'll end up with two-of-a-kind - then you can aim for a prile. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: GUEST,Howard Jones Date: 01 Dec 15 - 03:20 PM Mike, my point was not about whether "You'll never walk alone" is a folk song, but about different uses of the word "traditional". In the context of folk music it has a certain meaning, but in general usage its meaning is wider, and it may be "traditional" to perform pieces of music which are not traditional in the folk sense, either by origin or in style. Bert Lloyd's comment about "folk in function but not form" says it far better than I did. |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: The Sandman Date: 01 Dec 15 - 03:38 PM I am being accurate you quibble over minor detail, but do not acknowledge the importance of members of the UK Folk revival in helping to promote and encourage Walter to share his family songs with outsiders. Booby is a term MGM has thrown at members of this forum from time to time, one thing MGM about is that he has a fine style with his insults, so I am sure hoe doesnt mind if the compliment is returned. |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker Date: 01 Dec 15 - 03:52 PM MGM - The Bard of Mudcat Jim - The Keeper of The Scrolls In my imagination... not sure which one most looks like Gandalf..... 😜 |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker Date: 01 Dec 15 - 04:05 PM ... and Dick - A Warrior Minstrel Hobbit/Leprechaun.... Hmmm... almost on our way to a Dungeons & Dragons Chess set.... 😜 |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: MGM·Lion Date: 01 Dec 15 - 05:15 PM Don't mind at all, Dick. You are welcome to any of my customary vocabulary which will inspire you to such Olympian flights of rhetoric, you Luvverly Big Booby, you! I remember a good song called "Compliments Returned": wasn't it Tony Rose who used to sing it? ≈M≈ |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: Jim Carroll Date: 01 Dec 15 - 07:08 PM In my imagination... not sure which one most looks like Gandalf Wrong again - that'd be me dad! Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: Western Trails Date: 01 Dec 15 - 11:18 PM I think that modern popular songs could easily become folk songs if they either enter the oral tradition, or otherwise continue to be sung and listened to long after their initial heyday. I mean, Camptown Races, Oh Susanna, and Old Dan Tucker all started as minstrel songs and then became folk songs. |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: GUEST,Howard Jones Date: 02 Dec 15 - 04:03 AM For a song to become "traditional" in the sense that I understand it, it must become separated from its original and take on a life of its own. In the past, before recordings, that was relatively easy, but nowadays it is much more difficult to separate the song from a definitive recording of it. Many pop songs have proved to be long-lasting and have entered popular culture, but it is difficult to think of, for example, "Yesterday" without thinking of the Beatles' version, or "Wonderwall" without referencing Oasis. It is not just the song which enters popular culture but a particular recorded version of it. We also no longer have a popular singing culture which allows or encourages the development of pop songs into traditional ones. With original recordings to refer back to, the idea of a "correct" version is ever-present. If people sing at all, it is very likely to be karaoke where they sing along to a version of the recorded original. Other performers may create their own covers, which may be very different, but these are consciously different versions rather than developing through a "folk process". It may be easier for songs in the folk miliue to become "traditional", as these are more likely to be spread by other singers taking them up and performing them live. This is certainly true of a lot of folk dance tunes, which are passed between musicians at sessions and may quickly become detached from their original title and composer; many are assumed to be "traditional" in origin, and probably now meet the criteria through the way they are disseminated and the variations which creep in. For pop songs, which are known principally from commercial recordings, it seems far less likely that this will happen, but it is entirely possible and cannot be ruled out. |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: Vic Smith Date: 02 Dec 15 - 06:24 AM What Howard has written above would seem to be a development and elucidation of what I wrote in the second paragraph of my post on 30 Nov 15 - 01:12 PM and as such I find myself in total agreement with it. |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: GUEST,Allan Conn Date: 02 Dec 15 - 08:38 AM I do a version of Cousin Jack which I realised was different when I went back to listen to Show Of Hands. The chorus is basically the same but the verse is a different though very similar tune! So it is still theoretically possible for the folk process to work despite the recorded versions and youtube etc. Anyway re the link below. According to the 54 definition I take it there should be no such thing as a composer of traditional music? However that is one of the categories in the Scots Trad Music Awards! So as a whole the Scottish folk music fraternity seems to recognise that folk/trad music consists of more than the narrow definition. http://www.folkradio.co.uk/2015/11/mg-alba-scots-trad-music-awards-album-of-the-year/ |
|
Subject: RE: Can a pop song become traditional? From: GUEST,Howard Jones Date: 02 Dec 15 - 10:36 AM Allan, the 1954 "definition" describes folk music as the product of a process of evolution by oral transmission within a community. It explicitly states that this can be applied to music which has originated with an individual composer and has subsequently been absorbed into the unwritten living tradition of a community, as well as to music which originated anonymously within that community. It is concerned with the outcome, rather than the origin. It is therefore entirely possible for a folk song to have originated from a known composer. From that point of view, composed songs which remain substantially unaltered are not "folk", no matter how popular they may be or how important a place they hold in the repertoire of that community's musicians. That might include songs which have emerged from that community but which have not yet had time to go through the evolutionary process. However the 1954 definition was drawn up for the purposes of academic study, and most modern performers will take a broader view and consider anything from the community's repertoire. To take your earlier point, if the Scottish fiddle tradition contains a large number of composed pieces, played more or less faithfully to the original, I don't see how this is devalued because they fail to meet the academic criteria for "folk music", or that they should be of any less interest to modern performers. It is very clear from the context of your link that the Scots Trad awards are interested in a style of music, rather than an academic study of its origins and development. There is nothing inconsistent with using terms differently in different contexts, and I see nothing inconsistent with including newly-composed material in a style which leans towards traditional Scottish music in these awards, whilst recognising that these are not (yet) "folk music" from an academic point of view. If we could only remember this distinction between academic study and collecting, and a modern community of live amateur and professional performance, and realise we are talking about entirely separate but related things, then a lot of acrimony could be avoided. |
| Share Thread: |