Throwing away the crutch....

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: John Routledge
Date: 13 Jun 13 - 05:34 AM

I was about to post but then re read Will Fly. I can't add anything so won't.

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Vic Smith
Date: 13 Jun 13 - 05:57 AM

Will Fly - (Date: 13 Jun 13 - 05:21 AM ) hits it on the head. So much so that I feel that there is no need for further discussion

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 13 Jun 13 - 07:10 AM

Marje:
Everyone just got on and learned the words. The performance benefited enormously from this, as we could make eye contact not only with the audience but also with each other as we sang our different parts, usually standing in a semicircle. it's a much more rewarding experience than standing in straight rows singing from a book.


I sing in a church choir, my wife sings in a community choir.
Might I suggest that if you know the songs, making eye contact with your audience & your fellow singers should come 2nd & 3rd to watching your conductor/director.

Cheers

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Marje
Date: 13 Jun 13 - 10:00 AM

Nigel: Well, yes and no. Obviously, knowing the songs gives you more opportunity to watch the conductor too. Having your head stuck in a copy limits this as well as all the other things you could be paying attention to.

Most times in the community choir we were conducted, but sometimes, depending on where and how and why we were singing, we weren't, we just sang together and watched each other. It's an interesting experience.

Marje

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Don Firth
Date: 13 Jun 13 - 02:42 PM

Rich, there is little I can add to what Will Fly said just above. He is exactly on point. But here are a couple more things to contemplate.

There is a reasonable expectation that a professional performer KNOW his or her material before attempting to sing for paying audiences. And successful professionals do. Knowing the material from memory is a prerequisite for professional performing—in ALL genres of music.

I have attended concerts by dozens of performers of folk music, including Pete Seeger, Joan Baez, Theodore Bikel, Ewan McColl, Peggy Seeger, Richard Dyer-Bennet, Peter Paul and Mary, Bob Gibson, Guy Carawan, and the list goes on and on. NONE of them used crib sheets or written music, save, I presume, to learn the songs in the first place.

And this extends to all kinds of music performance. Opera singers know—from memory—often fifty, sixty, seventy entire opera scores and are expected to act as well as sing their roles. I've attended concerts and recitals by well-known classical singers, and I have never seen one sing from a crib sheet or written music. Popular singers do the same and are expected to do concerts or night club sets without referring to written material, save, as I said, to learn the material, and as a memory refresher from time to time—before going before an audience.

"What about wheelchairs? Do you also sneer at musicians who use one?"

As to that comment, Rich, be it known that I had polio when I was two years old, and all my life I have walked with crutches. I got interested in folk music in the early 1950s and have been singing for audiences since the mid-1950s. In fact, I've managed to make a fairly decent career of it.

When I go on stage to sing a concert, a stage hand sets a straight-backed chair on stage, and puts my guitar on a stand beside the chair. When I'm introduced, I walk on stage—using my crutches—sit down, pick up the guitar, and start in.

If you have ever seen a television show or a film clip of classical violinist Itzhak Perlman, he (having also had polio when he was young) does the same thing:   walks on stage using his crutches, sits down, someone hands him is violin and bow, and he begins to play.

My last few performances in concerts and at folk festivals, I have had to do from a wheelchair. It does not affect my performing in any way, and the audience does not seem to care.

Now, I'm sorry you have memory problems. That's a real bummer! But unfortunately, being able to sing songs from memory is a standard requirement for professional performance. That's just a fact of life.

In more informal sessions, such as parties or at multi-performer performances at folk clubs, I would assume that, if the audience is aware of your memory problems, they would—should—cut you some slack about having to use crib sheets.

Personal anecdote:   when I was in my early teens (and walking with crutches) I "OD"ed on Errol Flynn swashbucklers and Rafael Sabatini novels (The Sea Hawk, Captain Blood, Scaramouche, et al.) and I wanted to be able to fence so bad I could taste it!

One evening I went to the local YMCA to watch a fencing class. The teacher came over to talk to me and I told her that I would really like to fence, but obviously it was impossible for me. She said, "Well, wait a minute, let's see what you can do." We discovered that with the aid of one crutch supporting me on my right side and holding the fencing foil in my left hand (I'm naturalliy right-handed), I could stand in a stiff-legged approximation of the bent-legged guard position, and although I could not lunge, I could step briskly forwards and backwards. She said that I would have to learn a strong defensive game (parries and ripostes and well-timed counter-attacks), but she could see no reason why I couldn't fence.

A couple of years after this, I entered my first competitions—against physically normal, non-handicapped fencers. Over the next several years, I competed actively. And I won a nice collection of second and third place trophies and medals. No first places. But I was having one helluva lot of fun!!

I knew that there was no way I would ever be able to fence in National competitions, or World's, or the Olympics.

But I had to keep my expectations within the bounds of realism!

So—considering your memory problem, there is no reason, if your fellow singers and the audiences in folk clubs and such are aware of your difficulties, they should not cut you some slack as far as crib sheets are concerned—and if you lay down an otherwise decent performance.

But under the circumstances, in the same way that I could not reasonable expect to be chosen for the U. S. Olympic Fencing Team, it is probably not reasonable for you to aspire to Carnegie Hall or the Royal Albert Hall.

And "elitists," "intolerant, prissy, purist dilettantes," and "pretentious traditionalists" have nothing to do with it.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Allan C.
Date: 13 Jun 13 - 02:45 PM

I keep seeing the use of lyric sheets or other "crutches" equated with ill preparedness. I can only say that this may be fine and well for people with no memory issues. The last I heard the average age of Mudcatters is somewhere close to 52. Those of us who are somewhat above the mean often do have memory issues. I can play the same songs I did regularly 20 years ago with little effort. However, despite hundreds of practice hours I have a hard time remembering some of the lyrics of songs that are newer to the repertoire. Chords are rarely an issue. My wife, on the other hand, would be at a tremendous disadvantage on both fronts if annotated lyrics were not in front of her.

There are also folks who, even with the use of cheat sheets, etc., have issues with tracking. They cannot look away from their sheets for even a moment for fear of completely losing their place.

Then, of course, there is simply the problem of stage fright. No amount of persuasion can convince some people that an audience or even a song circle might be forgiving of an error or two. I well remember my first time at a Getaway song circle. I got a third of the way through a song and simply could not remember the next chord. I simply switched to a different song. The song circle very generously forgave me.

So if you are saying that there is no place in sessions or song circles for "crutches" then you are denying a good many people, who may have some wonderful music to share, the opportunity to do so. This sounds rather selfish to me. Perhaps a solution is to have different sessions or certain times during a session in which "crutches" are allowed.

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Phil Edwards
Date: 13 Jun 13 - 03:46 PM

There are also folks who, even with the use of cheat sheets, etc., have issues with tracking. They cannot look away from their sheets for even a moment for fear of completely losing their place.


I've known singers like that - the kind of person who sings to the bottom of the page then pauses to turn the page before carrying on, wherever they happen to be up to:

Thousands or more!
Thousands or more!
Thousands

[pause, rustle]

or more!

With the greatest respect to those people, that's not a difference of ability, it's a problem - and it's a problem that's fostered by depending on lyric sheets in the first place.

No amount of persuasion can convince some people that an audience or even a song circle might be forgiving of an error or two.

They'll have realised it by their second visit. Hopefully by their third they'll have noticed that most people aren't singing from song sheets.

So if you are saying that there is no place in sessions or song circles for "crutches" then you are denying a good many people, who may have some wonderful music to share, the opportunity to do so.

I think you're confusing two very different things. If you've given 'hundreds of hours' to a song, you will know that song inside out - you'll know what makes it tick. If the words or the chords fly away when you come to perform it, you need a crib to glance at, and I don't think there's any shame in that. But someone who sings while reading a song line by line, chord by chord - just as they would if they were sight-reading - doesn't know their songs inside out, and on the whole I'd rather listen to someone who does. (To be fair, there are some very, very good sight-readers - people who can manage the expression and the eye-contact and everything - but people don't tend to complain about them.)

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Don Firth
Date: 13 Jun 13 - 04:27 PM

The first gatherings of folk singers that I attended in the early 1950s—not a "folk club" or "song circle" or anything of that nature—were simply parties to which people brought their guitars of various kinds, a banjo or two, maybe an autoharp, or just themselves and their voices. We sat on the sofa, on chairs, cross-legged on the floor, and sang, in no particular order, often solo, sometimes people joining in on choruses if appropriate.

One fellow had a weekly television show and know several hundred songs. The rest of us might know a couple dozen songs, or just a couple, or were there to try out the one song they had just learned.

There were no song books or crib sheets there. It was automatically assumed that one know a song from memory before trying to field it. We didn't even talk about it. As I said, it was automatically assumed.

The first time a song book appeared at one of these gatherings was sometime in the late 1970s, a copy of The Folksinger's Wordbook--no music, but the words to about 1,000 folk songs. Two brothers, who often attended these parties as listeners, never singing, sat there with their heads together and sang—hesitantly and stumblingly—out of the book. I don't think there was anything wrong with their ability to memorize. They were both successful attorneys. They wanted to join in the singing, but didn't bother to learn the songs.

And then, a few years later, a "Song Circle" got organized locally. We sat around in a circle and sang in order, just to make sure everybody got a chance. Worked fine for a few years, then., Rise Up Singing began putting in an appearance.   More and more people—newcomers— were singing out of the book—NOT bothering to learn the songs as we all had done. Then pretty soon, everybody was singing together out of the "Song Circle hymnal."

Many of us, like Bob Nelson, John Dwyer, Stan James, and other "old timers" stopped going to Song Circle. Thirty people, sitting around singing—hesitantly and stumblingly—"Barbara Allen" or "The Rhyme of the Chivalrous Shark" with their noses in "The Book" was a bit of a turn-off for us.

Nothing "prissy" or "elitist" about it!

But we didn't stop singing for each other, or for others who were not enthralled with this kind of group singing. We got together on our own and sang anything we felt like, solo or together as we were inspired to do by the nature of the song and the spirit of the moment, whether it was in Rise Up Singing or not. Just as we had done initially.

Which was how those of us who went on to sing professionally had learned our trade.

No "Tyranny of the Hymnal."

A song, especially a ballad, is not just the recitation of a string of words. It involves KNOWING what the song is all about. The words are just the starting point.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Allan C.
Date: 13 Jun 13 - 05:33 PM

I can't agree more that "knowing what the song is about" is paramount in importance. I know people who couldn't care less about the lyrics or even the substance of the song. They have a hard enough time just plinking along with it on whatever musical contraption they have. Often the only way they are even aware that the end of the song has come is because everyone has stopped singing!

That "the words are just the starting point" explains the folk tradition in an economy of words. I think the invention of new verses or the partial, or even complete substitution of half-remembered lyrics is the basis of what some of us still refer to as "traditional folksongs." The basic sense of the song was maintained, (usually,) even when someone changed the lyrics a bit - whether by intent or by accident of memory.

Don points out an instance of the very thing I suggested. If there are hardliners among a session or song circle who cannot abide crutches, then either the hardliners or the cripples may need to find or to create a different venue.

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Marje
Date: 14 Jun 13 - 10:15 AM

I listened to the recent Mastertapes BBC radio programme on Richard Thompson (the "A" side) in which he talked about his work and music. He was asked how he felt about doing requests, and he said it wasn't always possible because if it wasn't one of his best-known songs, he might not remember all the words when put on the spot. When you have a lot of songs, he said, you cam't retain them all, you have to go back and revise the ones you're planning to do.

So it was reassuring to hear than even successful professional performers have to keep working at their repertoire just like the rest of us.

Marje

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Don Firth
Date: 14 Jun 13 - 03:32 PM

Germaine to what Marje posted just above, I've had occasion to talk with Richard Dyer-Bennet a couple of times. I once asked him how many songs he estimated that he knew, and he responded, "About 700."

That dwarfed my repertoire at the time of about 200 songs, so I asked him, "How do you manage to keep them all fresh? Or do you?"

He said, "I regularly sing about 50 concerts a year. Some performers will sing the same songs at every concert when they're on tour, but when I did that, I found I was forgetting some of my other songs. So now I try to go through an entire concert tour singing different songs at each concert—not repeating a song until I've gone through them all. That tends to keep them fresh in my mind."

Some people don't like Richard Dyer-Bennet because of his high, light tenor voice and his cultivated, carefully studied delivery. But he was the consummate concert performer, and not so much a "folk singer" as a modern counterpart of a medieval minstrel. He didn't just learn a song, he would study it carefully, and learn as much as he could about its historical background.

There's an important difference between just learning the words of a song and knowing a song. Dyer-Bennet advocated the latter.

We only had a couple of fairly brief conversations, but I learned a great deal from him.

Excellent biography of Richard Dyer-Bennet:   

Richard Dyer-Bennet:   The Last Minstrel, by Paul O. Jenkins.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: GUEST,JHW
Date: 14 Jun 13 - 03:49 PM

I heard last week an interview with a choirboy who was one of those who sang at the Queen Elizabeth 11 Coronation. (A choirboy then) A demanding programme practised and practised by the choir. At the end of the service he realised that though he had opened his score he had never turned a page.

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Ron Davies
Date: 15 Jun 13 - 12:45 AM

It's better for all types of music if you can manage to do it without looking at "the dots".   The large chorus I belong to has just this year started doing a fair amount from memory.    We did a whole special concert (in a sold-out Kennedy Center concert hall), with some other groups, in February, from memory.   The two singers on either side of me were petrified---taking the sheet music from a classical chorus makes some feel they've fallen off the tightrope and there's no net.    But it was wonderfully liberating for the group--and now everybody knows the group can in fact do it. Which gives the whole group more self-confidence.

Without sheet music you have no reason not to watch the conductor for every nuance--which liberates the conductor for a much freer interpretation.

It also makes the sound better--no voice will be blocked by sheet music.

The audience loved it.

Admittedly we don't do it every time--not likely we'll be doing Hindemith or Britten from memory anytime soon.   But Carmina Burana has potential.

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: breezy
Date: 15 Jun 13 - 11:48 AM

Ok I aint read all the posts, but after some thought I concluded that non-performers can do as they please at sessions which are for participating rather than performing at .

Now a performer on the other hand is a different kettle of fish and must be totally conversant with the material to be performed. The audience would expect this as standard

you dont expect actors to be reading from the script when giving a performance

performers will check out their 'learning' by trying new things at sessions and would probably test themselves and not have words visible, maybe a prompter.

If I dont know it, I wont do it out of respect for the material and intended listener

And for those who fidget with song folders while others are performing you are being rude and distracting'

bye

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Jack Campin
Date: 15 Jun 13 - 12:08 PM

you dont expect actors to be reading from the script when giving a performance

One of the most internationally successful plays of recent years is "The Vagina Monologues" and it's common for the performers to do exactly that.

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: breezy
Date: 15 Jun 13 - 03:03 PM

Stuff em then.

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: breezy
Date: 15 Jun 13 - 03:08 PM

oops

Not exactly a Play though, so it could be excused, worth experiencing.

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: breezy
Date: 15 Jun 13 - 03:21 PM

no crib sheets on the youtube clips

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Don Firth
Date: 15 Jun 13 - 03:45 PM

Back in my college days, one of the things I used to enjoy was sitting around in the dorm room of a friend of mine who was a Drama major and several other people, some Drama majors, some not, and read plays. Lots of Shakespeare. No staging or props or anything, other than our copies of "The Complete Works of Shakespeare," often sharing copies and reading over each other's shoulders.

But this was for our own enjoyment, enlightenment, edification, and education. The idea of holding our little recreational readings in a place open to the public, or, God forbid! charging people to listen to us as we butchered the Bard never even occurred to us.

We have an upstairs neighbor who is an actor. He has done a bit of national television, and he has acted in the Ashland, Oregon Shakespeare festivals a number of times. He is currently very active in "little theater" here in Seattle.

He and a number of other actors have been asked to do regular "performances" in one of the big lounges at Horizon House, a big, somewhat posh retirement home in downtown Seattle. They sit up in front of the audience and read various plays, including lots of Shakespeare. And the audiences enjoy it greatly.

No staging, no costumes, no bits of business. It's very much like listening to a Shakespeare play on the radio.

But it should be noted that these are all professional actors doing this, and although they have books and scripts before them, most of the time they don't even look at them. They already know the roles.

Horizon House pays them, which, of course, comes out of what the residents pay to live there, but the residents don't have to pay directly. It's one of the services that Horizon House offers to its residents.

Somehow I don't think these people would really be interested in listening to, and certainly not in having their money spent to listen to a bunch of people sit around and "hymn sing" folk songs out of Rise Up Singing.

If people want to get together and do it (like reading plays in a dorm room) among themselves for their own enjoyment, fine and dandy. More power to them!

But expecting to charge people money to listen to something like this is a bit much.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Jun 13 - 05:46 PM

What usually happens at a poetry reading ?

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Phil Edwards
Date: 15 Jun 13 - 06:05 PM

Depends. In my experience reliance on the words often varies inversely with skill as a reader. I'm not just talking about wooden or pedestrian delivery - I've seen poets give big, dramatic renderings of their work with their eyes fixed on a printed copy. What I've never seen from this kind of poet is any engagement - however defiant or confrontational - with the audience. Poets who read to their own words are generally reading to themselves.

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: GUEST,150613
Date: 16 Jun 13 - 04:33 AM

So reading is OK for poets and is OK for actors. Isn't this 'text in hand inhibiting engagement with the audience' line a red herring in this 'crutch' debate ?
One of the most engaging renditions of a ballad I have hear was from a woman sitting motionless with her eyes closed. I don't know about he rest of the audience (though from the response they enjoyed it) but I was in the world of the protagonists of the story, not in the back room of some pub.

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Phil Edwards
Date: 16 Jun 13 - 04:43 AM

On the contrary, I think reading to the text (as distinct from glancing at it) does inhibit engagement with the audience, for poets and actors as well as singers. Regarding my previous comment, a "big, dramatic rendering" doesn't necessarily mean the poet's engaging with the audience - it can mean he's engaging with the sheer wonderfulness of his own genius.

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: GUEST,150613
Date: 16 Jun 13 - 05:25 AM

My point was that there is 'content' for which, during the rendition, the audience may wish to be engaged with the substance of the performance - what they hear - rather than with the performer. That may be what the performer wants to happen.

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Ron Davies
Date: 16 Jun 13 - 11:00 AM

It sounds like you both, 150613 and Phil, agree.

The "woman sitting motionless with her eyes closed" was obviously not reading from a text. So you both believe that a singer should not have to have a written text in front of him or her.    Which is what the vast majority of us have been saying.

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Don Firth
Date: 16 Jun 13 - 02:09 PM

One of the most engaging evenings I have ever spent was at a small theater in Seattle listening to a unique storyteller with the unusual name of Pleasant De Spain

He was something of a minstrel in his own right, but he did not sing, he told stories. For two and a half hours, my wife and I sat, enthralled, listening to him spin tale after tale, about cabbages and kings, mice and men, epic stories, jokes . . . .

As he told the stories, he sometimes walked from one side of the stage to the other and back again, sometimes to the very edge of the stage. He frequently made eye-contact with members of the audience, telling the story directly to them. The members of the audience, in turn, were open-mouth, wide-eyed, and sitting on the edge of their seats, hanging on every word.

He obviously had the stories down word for carefully chosen word, and he delivered them with the skill of a consummate actor.

With no books, scripts, or crib sheets!!

This would have broken the powerful rapport he had with his audience.

Enthralling! Engaging! Fascinating!

To me, in addition to a most unique and enjoyable evening, this was a lesson to me as a performer in how to present my songs, or whatever else I was doing, in a manner that would truly engage the audience.

Be you a singer, a poet, an actor, a story teller, or whatever, you simply cannot engage the audience in this manner with your nose in a book or on a sheet of paper.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Tattie Bogle
Date: 17 Jun 13 - 10:22 AM

Les Barker uses his books, but he still knows how to deliver his poems to huge acclaim and theatrical advantage: facial expression, pregnant pauses, body language, audience involvement (spoken poem choruses) are all there and part of any of his shows.
Pam Ayres on the whole memorises hers (when I went to see her, I think she read just ONE from a book as it was new). "Well you paid good money to see me, so oi thought that was the least oi could do".

Both respected and engaging performers, whichever way they choose to do it. I don't think Les needs to throw his books away.

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Phil Edwards
Date: 17 Jun 13 - 12:14 PM

It sounds like you both, 150613 and Phil, agree.

Indeed, I often sing with my eyes closed myself. (Not so much if I'm actually on a stage, admittedly.)

Engagement doesn't necessarily mean eye contact. Books and songsheets often get in the way, but it's not necessarily because they're physically in the way.

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: CupOfTea
Date: 17 Jun 13 - 06:29 PM

Been thinking about this more & it strikes me (particularly after someone mentioning the brilliant Les Barker, who makes reading part of his performance) that memorization of long poems or plays is no longer as prevalent, and the habit of memorization that having a decent singing repertoire requires is NOT a habit that is valued in our current educational system. Why memorize when you can just google it?

I was raised by an aunt much older than my peers' mothers, who went about the house spouting poetry for the sheer enjoyment of it, that she learned in school in the 1920s. I KNEW when she got into "Charge of the Light Brigade" she was on a pleasant ambitious tear. Long before I sang, I learned poems I liked and spent part of 6th grade learning the first three pages of "The Ride of Paul Revere" for my own amusement, and nobody around me thought that was odd. I can still recite a batch of 'em.

In high school my group of friends were all Firesign Theatre fans and could perform the whole Nick Danger saga - an entire album side. I think a good part of the enjoyment of this communal effort was that we KNEW the material completely - we used it as in-joke reference points. That KNOWING it in common gives you the chance to make a bond that performing/singing it together solidifies. There is nothing to get between the singer and the song. I've found sometimes that my playing an instrument gets in the way of putting a song across best - many times my instrumental grasp is not as solid as my vocal memory of the song.

So, I'm wondering - chicken or egg - are we having a harder time building a folk community because of "the book"/crutch getting in the way of that bonding, or does the lack of community feeling dictate use of the crutch? Either way, we loose the craic, don't we?

Joanne in Cleveland, never short for words.

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Don Firth
Date: 17 Jun 13 - 06:46 PM

Good points, Joanne!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Jack Campin
Date: 25 Jun 13 - 07:37 AM

A couple of points on this.

Rise Up Singing--which you in the UK can count yourselves lucky to be spared--is the allltime worst. [...] it makes it easy to avoid any preparation at all--especially for groups which have a lot of that particular tome.

So you can have the edifying spectacle of a whole group plowing through every verse printed in the book--though they have never seen some of them. To a tune they also don't know.

That describes the hymn singing in a typical church service perfectly. I wonder whether the reason that phenomenon took off in the US but not here is simply because Americans still go to church and they're used to it?

Back to the original issue JAJ raised: what to do about it?

I've a couple of encounters with folder-carriers recently in situations where I didn't expect to find them, and further dug in to their folders than I expected. A lot of people get MORE dependent on sheet music over time. I suspect one reason may be that the repertoire is expanding faster than they can cope with; instead of encountering tunes at their own pace, the social institutions of the session/singaround and educational workshops mean that the stuff flows into the scene faster than they can learn it. So they resort to paper as a coping mechanism. In a situation where they were just playing to mostly non-musical social and family circle, as might have been the case a few decades ago, there was less pressure to know lots of stuff.

OK, what to do about it?

The sort of hectoring intolerance and institutional barriers that some people here seem to want just won't work. That does nothing at all to encourage anyone and just makes enemies.

What I'm seeing is the development of dependence on paper as an insidious process where people aren't really aware of how much they're limiting themselves until they can't see any way out. So maybe a better approach might be to encourage people to learn to do without paper one page at a time? Anybody found a way to
organize that?

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Johnny J
Date: 25 Jun 13 - 08:09 AM

"I suspect one reason may be that the repertoire is expanding faster than they can cope with; ....... In a situation where they were just playing to mostly non-musical social and family circle, as might have been the case a few decades ago, there was less pressure to know lots of stuff."

I've not quoted Jack's entire paragraph but there's a lot of truth in this. There does seem to be many more songs and tunes these days or, at least, the availability and access is much easier.

I too have lots of tunes where I still "rely on the paper". For many of these, this is just a transient process and I will eventually know them well enough to play in public either "off by heart" or to be able to join in if someone else starts them.
Some, of course, I may never get around to learning properly for various reasons but surely these are the ones which can be safely "left out" in a public situation?

Occasionally, I may bring in a song or tune sheet for a particular item which I may wish to perform as it's topical or something I've just recently learned(The music is a safety net but I hopefully don't need to look)but I certainly wouldn't bring in sheet music as a matter of course.

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Jun 13 - 08:18 AM

How about no props for the first round of a singaround. Authoritarian perhaps but perhaps helpful.

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Ron Davies
Date: 25 Jun 13 - 08:51 AM

"still go to church'.    Sorry, that is at least 100% drivel.   I wonder if the poster is an atheist--and if atheists will ever give up ascribing all the ills of the world to religion. Even not learning songs? The idea sounds like a self-parody of paranoid atheists.

Folkies in general are not very religious.   Those who are are lopsidedly on the liberal side of the spectrum.


The more likely explanation of the spread of the RUS plague in the US is the well known US worship--of efficiency.   Why learn songs when you can get a book and read them straight out of the book?


Also, distances are greater in the US, so for some it's not easy to find a group of folks who like to sing folk-type stuff (whatever that is) within easy driving distance. So on the rare occasion they can come together, it would be nice to sing together--that is, the same words at the same time. You can also have instant community-in-a-box. Just pour it--the idea--out and add RUS--no fuss, no muss.

To be continued

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Ron Davies
Date: 25 Jun 13 - 09:10 AM

It also seems clear to me that in the UK and Ireland folks are far more interested in ballads--that is, solo storytelling, than many are in the US.   After all, the ballads in question by and large came from the UK and Ireland. They are yours, not ours, though we have our own versions.   There's the role played by Child.   But the ballads were still not home-grown American--they came from European sources.

Also, we are more likely to want to stretch the definition of folk--and 1954 is just a year. We watch you wrangle about 1954 with tolerant amusement.

For us "folk" can include virtually everything not classical or rock (and even rock is encroaching, since we are starting to do more doo-wop.)

Some include country, bluegrass, mining songs, labor songs, drinking songs, black and white gospel, labor songs-- protest songs of all types, black and white gospel, and probably more.    There are examples of many of these in RUS.

Yet another possibility is that folkies in the US have less time than those in the UK--maybe folks in the US don't retire as early.   That however is pure speculation--I have no idea if there's anything to that.

It's also possible that as the population ages and it's harder for folks in general to learn songs, UK version of a "folk hymn-sing" book may start to catch on. But it's also possible that the UK "hymn-sing book" will turn out to be an i-Phone or something similar.

But US folkies singing from RUS since they are used to hymn singing.   Not likely , to put it mildly.

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: GUEST,John Routledge
Date: 25 Jun 13 - 09:25 AM

Guest of 8.18 was me - Cookie crumbled.

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Ron Davies
Date: 25 Jun 13 - 09:29 AM

Also, it's interesting that an atheist would be an expert in "a typical church service".

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 25 Jun 13 - 09:44 AM

Some singers who accompany themselves on guitar make a point of performing without a 'crutch' (some may have crib sheets stuck to their guitars).
Some memorise songs and can perform them beautifully, but if you've seen them before you may know that their 'set' will perm any three of the eight songs you've heard them sing before.
Others have learnt lots of songs, and can sing any of them 'at the drop of a hat' (good title for a revue, that).
Some supplement their supply of memorised songs with paper versions, which allows them to try something new, or fit in with a themed evening (at short notice).
Yet others only sing from paper. They may improve, and move into one of the earlier descriptions, but probably not if they are censured for singing from a sheet.

Diff'rent strokes for diff'rent folks

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Ron Davies
Date: 25 Jun 13 - 10:07 AM

"UK folk hymn-sing book"

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 25 Jun 13 - 10:54 AM

"UK folk hymn-sing book" = "UK folk hymnal"

Precise is better (unless it's got to scan!) :)

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Ron Davies
Date: 25 Jun 13 - 11:01 AM

No problem, Nigel.   You're right, that's the obvious choice.

But whatever anybody chooses to call it, my comments stand. UK and US circumstances are often different.    I have no idea of UK conditions. Nor do UK posters of US conditions.

And as I said, it's just slightly suspicious that an atheist would finger religion as the origin of yet another problem.

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Jack Campin
Date: 25 Jun 13 - 01:16 PM

When I said Ron Davies's description matched a church service, I was talking about my own experience of them. I've spent rather a lot of time sitting in large halls with a lot of other people singing words they don't know past the first verse and don't understand at all to tunes they only vaguely get, and it wasn't in the folk scene. What I believe now is not relevant to that experience and none of Ron's business.

There is a real difference between the number of people with first-hand experience of religious ritual in the US and UK:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_attendance

It's nearly four times as prevalent over there. A difference like that is going to shape people's expectations of social behaviour well outside the religious sphere and also among people who never go near a church.

Ballads are just as much a minority interest here as in the US. You hardly ever hear them in most folk clubs. "country, bluegrass, mining songs, labor songs, drinking songs, black and white gospel, labor songs-- protest songs of all types" fits just as well here (except not much gospel).

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Phil Edwards
Date: 25 Jun 13 - 01:56 PM

Ballads are just as much a minority interest here as in the US. You hardly ever hear them in most folk clubs.

Digressing slightly, I'm happy to say I did a 35-verse version of Lord Bateman the other night; I'm ecstatic to say that it went down well. I'd encourage anyone who's got a big ballad or two up their sleeve to get them out sooner rather than later; you might be pleasantly surprised.

Oh, and obviously it was from memory. The thing about the big ballads is, they're really easy to learn - particularly if (as in this case) you haven't just learnt it from a record, but spent some time looking at different variants and putting together a version that works for you. But even if you just learned Lord Bateman the way Nic Jones or Jim Moray recorded it, I think it'd be considerably easier than learning the average Dylan song, say. You're telling a story, and you're telling it with a very rigid and predictable rhyme scheme - if you forgot the precise wording of a verse you could make it up without too much trouble.

So that's my personal solution for memory problems: more big ballads!

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Ron Davies
Date: 25 Jun 13 - 11:40 PM

"four times as prevalent".    You can rabbit on as much as you want---to coin a phrase : "show your ignorance, as waxy as you like".

But it is very unlikely that the use of RUS in the US is influenced in the slightest by church attendance. Much more likely are the factors I mentioned.

And it's still faintly amusing that an atheist fingers religion for people not learning songs.

Is it also to blame for people running red lights in the US?   I'm sure a Briton can enlighten us on this also.

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Ron Davies
Date: 25 Jun 13 - 11:53 PM

Also "not relevant now..." Methinks the gentleman doth protest too much.

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Ron Davies
Date: 26 Jun 13 - 12:05 AM

Excuse me:    "not relevant to that experience..." Don't want to misquote the illustrious poster.


But it is interesting that ballad singing is not a big feature of UK pubs. UK ballad singing sure is a big feature of Mudcat music threads, so it's reasonable that we on the other side of the Pond would think this.

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Johnny J
Date: 26 Jun 13 - 05:14 AM

Getting back to the hymns and songs in church, there's nothing worse than having to stand up and try to sing a song you don't know, quite possibly have never heard before, or the key and/or arrangements don't suit your voice.

That's another thing about community singing, of course. Many of the arrangements and keys just don't suit or appeal to everyone.

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Phil Edwards
Date: 26 Jun 13 - 06:40 PM

it is very unlikely that the use of RUS in the US is influenced in the slightest by church attendance

Not sure how you'd prove this negative, Ron, and I'm really not sure (more to the point) why you want to.

All Jack's saying is that if you randomly sampled citizens of the two countries, you'd be four times as likely to find a church-goer in one than the other. It seems like a pretty salient difference to me. Unless you're arguing that the US folk scene is disproportionately composed of atheists - and even then you'd have to argue that it's even more atheist-heavy, compared to the overall population, than the British folk scene is in comparison to its overall population.

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Don Firth
Date: 26 Jun 13 - 08:22 PM

Just an observation, but I don't think most of the people I've seen at song circle when the use of RUS became chronic, and then developed into "hymn-sing," are regular church-goers.

And as far as their religious beliefs are concerned, in never came up, but I think if it did, you'd get the full spectrum, but without the extremes, i.e., hard-charging atheist on one end, fundamentalist Bible-thumper on the other.

No, RUS and other materials crept into Seattle's previously excellent Song Circle sort of like "the Fungus that Took Over the World." And those who first organized Song Circle, such as John Dwyer, Stan James, and I, sort of rolled our eyes and left.

I memorize the songs I do and then study them 'til I know all I can find out about them. The only time I would ever have a "cheat sheet" around is in a recording session, and then, just for insurance against the occasional memory lapse.

Yes, I've blanked out on a line occasionally in live performance, but picked it up again and went on, and the world didn't come to an end.

Hell, I did a live television series some years ago, and I used neither cue-cards nor teleprompter. Once during the series, I forgot a line in a song, went into an instrumental break, remembered the line, and finish the song. I asked a number of people later on, and nobody had noticed. They just thought that I always put a guitar break there.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Throwing away the crutch....
From: Ron Davies
Date: 27 Jun 13 - 12:27 AM

"All Jack's saying...".   Sorry, that is incorrect.   He is linking spread of RUS in the US with church attendance.   You need to reread.    If necessary I will be glad to quote chapter and verse from the collected works of Mr. Campin.

It's just remotely possible that Americans know more about the causes of this phenomenon than Britons do.

Or perhaps I should explain to our UK contingent why dumbed-down community singing is spreading in the UK.    It would have precisely the same amount of value--and be just as welcome, no doubt.

By the way, I thought somebody in the UK was going to explain why religion is to blame for red-light running in the US.   We're still waiting.