What makes a new song a folk song?

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 07:51 AM

Dick -- Sorry, but that form of words, if not a threat of violence, will do till a threat of violence comes along. I once had a similar exchange with Fred McCormick, who then tried to climb down when I challenged it as a threat of violence and said he had only meant I could get an earful. When I responded that that was an empty threat, as I was perfectly capable of returning as good an earful as I got [which Jim could doubtless respond to you], and that it still came across to any thinking person reading it as a threat of violence, he let the matter drop.

I do not think it either courteous or politic to threaten people that they had better keep out of one's way 'or they will be very sorry'.

Very sorry!

≈M≈

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Bounty Hound
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 08:09 AM

Help me out here someone please,

Jim said 'I can't hear the words of Bounty's two songs - no matter how long he has being performing them - that is what I said and that is what I meant.

Now what I'm trying to establish is
A: is there something wrong with my hearing?
B: is there something wrong with Jim's hearing
C: is it a case of Jim having a closed mind and only hearing what he wants to hear?

The issue here, is that according to Jim, folk/rock makes traditional song 'meaningless' as you can't hear the lyrics. Now I'm not asking you to comment on whether you like folk/rock as a style, as that of course is a matter of personal taste, but to listen objectively and let me know whether you can hear and understand what I'm singing

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jO4PrQZgahA

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 08:09 AM

" all i can say to him is keep clear of West Cork, "
That is - as far as I'm concerned, a threat of violence.
Perhaps if you desisted from directing virtually all your postings to me and/or stopped making them e#very bit as insulting as you accuse me of doing, this might not happen in the future.
I'm beginning to know how Jill Dando felt
"MacColl did rather well out of the music industry"
MacColl wrote a love song for Peggy - twenty years later it was taken up by the pop industry - nothing wrong with that, nothing wrong with anybody doing the same
It's a million miles from throwing open the doors of folk clubs to a predatory industry and hanger-on organisations like PRS and IMRO and claiming that their general output is 'folk'.
The Music Industry has no interest in nothing that can't bring in big megabucks - its influence on folk music in the past has done nothing but major damage.
Thanks for the Buffalo correction Mike
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: The Sandman
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 08:22 AM

" all i can say to him is keep clear of West Cork, "
That is - as far as I'm concerned, a threat of violence.
Perhaps if you desisted from directing virtually all your postings to me and/or stopped making them e#very bit as insulting as you accuse me of doing, this might not happen in the future."
more poopy cock, any threat of violence is in your over fertile imagination you booby.
"The Music Industry has no interest in nothing that can't bring in big megabucks"
bad grammar,it should be anything, your comment no interest in nothing is a double negative, ends up meaning the opposite.

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: TheSnail
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 08:36 AM

Sorry for not taking part the last couple of days. We've had a busy weekend with John Kirkpatrick giving us two all day workshops ("Modes in Traditional Music" and "English Traditional Song") as well as his Saturday evening appearance at the club. All in the upstairs room of a pub. All sold out. One of the floorsingers did a Walter Pardon song - "Down by the dark arches".

Anyway, I think it is time to stop taking this thread seriously. You can't reason with someone who isn't listening.

Following Jim's hints about heavy metal folk, I suggested booking this band http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIXV2NhLb_0 but the rest of the committee felt that they were more Early Music than Folk.

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Lighter
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 08:47 AM

Very much fun, Bounty Hound. I really enjoyed it.

I could understand most of the words, but even though I *know* them, there were still parts that I couldn't make out.

Of course, I'm a furriner. That could explain it.

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 08:52 AM

Thanks for that -- much stimulated!!!

Saltarello: exemPlararily Perfectly Peppery Piping.

Like, -- Like!

☺〠☺~M~☺〠☺

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Howard Jones
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 09:13 AM

The fact is we are talking about two entirely different things - traditional music, and what goes on in folk clubs.

What Jim means by 'folk' is the raw material, the genuine tradition which came from within real communities. However, while the likes of Walter Pardon, Fred Jordan, the Coppers etc appeared in folk clubs from time to time these were rare occurrences, and folk in its raw form seldom formed part of the folk club experience. What you got was 'revival folk', where traditional songs were reinterpreted, whether by the singer-with-guitar stereotype, the folk-rock of Steeleye and Fairport, the synth-folk of Pyewackett or the fusions of the current young generation. When I started going to folk clubs, what I understood by 'traditional music' was Martin Carthy, Nic Jones, Tony Rose etc. However whilst I wasn't much interested in Bob Dylan, Ralph McTell, Donovan etc I saw no great conflict in having this music performed in the same club. It was all part of what I, and more importantly everyone else, understood by 'folk'. It still is.

Jim thinks 'folk club' is an inaccurate term for a club where he can't expect to hear traditional music. Perhaps he's right, however like the word 'folk' itself, 'folk club' has become a shorthand for a certain type of music and a certain type of performing environment. People know broadly what to expect.

'Folk' is not alone in this. What about 'jazz'? If I go to a 'jazz club' I don't know whether to expect traditional jazz, swing, bebop, jazz-rock ,or a myriad of other forms - all very different sounds, but all 'jazz'

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Teribus
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 09:29 AM

Strange that in the apparent mass desire to see "Folk music" as being of the people, by dint of the singer-songwriter putting it "out there" and by what is regarded as being popular with the people why no-one in this threads 13 pages has mentioned Rap. After all it tells of oppression and injustice, it describes social inequality and a whole host of other issues that affect the lives of various communities.

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Musket
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 09:33 AM

If you go to a pudding club, do you expect spotted dick or an embryonic sprog?

Or both? :-)

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Lighter
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 09:40 AM

Rap has been mentioned but ignored.

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Bounty Hound
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 09:51 AM

I mentioned it in the context that 'rap' is a word coined to describe a style of music, much the same as 'folk' is.

And thanks for the kind words Lighter :)

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Phil Edwards
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 10:30 AM

Hi BH

I could understand most of the words, but even though I *know* them, there were still parts that I couldn't make out.


'Fraid that's my experience too.

I had terrible handwriting when I was a kid and, after much encouragement, taught myself a clear style (italic, as it happens). The author of the book I used said that the test of a clear hand was that you could make out all the letters even if you didn't speak the language. (Tougher than it sounds!) Similarly, I think the test of a clear singing voice is that you could take down the lyrics even if you knew nothing about the song.

Hardly any rock singers pass that test, and a lot of folk singers fail it too. So it's not as if you're in bad company!

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Phil Edwards
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 10:38 AM

Jim thinks 'folk club' is an inaccurate term for a club where he can't expect to hear traditional music.

Jim can speak for himself, but I'll put forward a slightly different position. I think that traditional music is worth hearing and worth playing, and that there are very few opportunities to do so. Although a few sessions do have the word 'traditional', by and large your best chance of finding anything traditional going on is to go to a folk club/session/whatever. Getting to a club and only hearing one or two traditional songs all night - or, as has happened to me, hearing none at all except the one you sing yourself - isn't a matter for the Trades Descriptions Act, but I do think it's a damn shame.

I don't know, though. Diane Easby used to say we should just stop using the word 'folk' altogether (although it didn't stop her having some fairly forthright opinions about 'f*lk', as she called it). Maybe that's the answer: the sessions and singarounds can call themselves 'traditional' (or 'mostly but not exclusively traditional), and the 'folk clubs' can call themselves 'acoustic nights' or 'open mic's.

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Musket
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 10:38 AM

I mentioned rap too, same as punk and myriad others. Music of the people, written by and for, describing the world they inhabit.

Or folk music, as we call it.

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 10:54 AM

"You can't reason with someone who isn't listening."
Neither can you with someone who refuses to state their position.
"Jim thinks 'folk club' is an inaccurate term for a club where he can't expect to hear traditional music."
Sorry Howard - from the word go I have been associated with clubs which provide both traditional song and new songs created using traditional forms - I thought I'd said pretty clearly that I have never been part of a club that doesn't allow both - but I, happy to repeat it.
The clubs I have problems with are those used as platforms for music that has no connection with folk song whatever.
I would apply a different criteria when I'm writing on the subject, but I still advocate the making of new songs as being an essential part of the revival.
"If I go to a 'jazz club' I don't know whether to expect traditional jazz, swing, bebop, jazz-rock ,or a myriad of other forms"
But you don't expect 1950s pop songs or heavy metal - or do you?
"can call themselves 'traditional"
Problem with this is the claim of many "anything goes" merchants ifs that anything that happens at a folk club can be described as 'tradition' because clubs have their own traditions and we should vacate that term as well.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: The Sandman
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 11:38 AM

"But you don't expect 1950s pop songs or heavy metal - or do you?"
no and in my experience you very rarely get 1950s pop songs, and i get booked regularly at folk clubs, so can talk with more experience than Jim Crroll. jim you should try going to folk clubs in the north east of england, try the wilsons clubs stockton on tees , blaydon, kiveton park sheffield etc

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Bounty Hound
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 11:55 AM

thanks for your response Phil, so that's two that could hear at least most of the words, often of course in a conversation, or listing to a song being performed, you don't necessarily pick up every single word, particularly on one listen.

still of the opinion that Jim, who maintains he can't hear any of the words, (we know does not like folk/rock)is not listening or debating with an open mind.

I've just started a new thread to discuss whether a folk/rock arrangement makes a traditional song 'meaningless' (no need to post on that one Jim, we know where you sit!)

John

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Richard Mellish
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 12:31 PM

A slightly belated response to Jim's 15 Sep 14 - 04:18 AM response to mine of 14 Sep 14 - 03:36 PM.

> The term is not used by "the man in the street" in any significant sense, certainly not enough to re-define it, as is being claimed here.

The term "folk" (as applied to music and song) is certainly used and understood in the broad sense by many more people than the specialists who would prefer to keep to the narrow meaning. If you asked random people what "folk song" means I think you would find few who would have no idea at all. But you probably would get a variety of answers.

> The two you mentioned* have survived for centuries in the mouths and memories of innumerable singers up to the point where they had all but disappeared - that's what gave them their claim to being folk songs - they were the property of the folk and were almost certainly made within the old folk communities. <

* "William and Lady Marjorie" and "King Orfeo"

Maybe they were at one time sung by many people. But is there any evidence of that? I was reading somewhere recently (but I forget where) the suggestion that some of the classic ballads collected from the likes of Mrs Brown may have been created by the litterati of that time or not much earlier. (Maybe Steve can amplify?)

(I said) "Consider all the ballads about kings, lords and ladies, those about sibling murders "
and Jim said "Not sure of your point here ..."

Only that that we don't need to have been in the situations recounted in the traditional songs to be able to empathise with the characters.

> Change is not a defining feature of what makes folk song, though it can be part of the process.

I was citing changes to (comparatively) recent songs not to suggest that that alone makes them folk songs but only as evidence that the folk process has not ceased, as I think Jim has claimed.

Picking up a different sub-thread; I tried listening to that video of The Blackleg Miner. What Lighter said, "I could understand most of the words, but even though I *know* them, there were still parts that I couldn't make out", goes for me to. AND it seemed to me that a few of the words were not sung at all: for example one line appears to start "Catch the throat ...", rather than "To catch the throat".

I will refrain from any comment on the aesthetics.

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 12:53 PM

no what jim means isn't the raw material

folksong is wonderful. its a means of self expression open to everybody living in England and speaking English. you can write a song, sing it in a folk club - you don't need to fanny about begging record companies to record you, middle class publishers to publish . you can go out and within a week you will have published your creative effort to more than if you'd got it printed in the observer.

the thrill of creation is an unspeakable joy. to meet someone else writing about their life is wonderful. if the song is good -its like sharing their lives, their sense of humour.

no doubt - jim's writers had something to say one day... but its not got much chance of being heard. his followers insist on singing in weird voices - trying to duplicate something that happened centuries ago. and as you can see - every attempt to make it more understandable is sneered at.

and what's worse is this patina of respectability - on what were pretty subversive statements.
the raw material....nah!

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: TheSnail
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 01:39 PM

Jim Carroll
Neither can you with someone who refuses to state their position.

I have stated my position. Here is what I said a few days ago. (With typos corrected.)

As Howard has patiently pointed out to you "folk music" has had a far wider and less well defined meaning to the majority of people who use it than you would like. This has been true for a very long time, quite possibly since before 1954. I'm afraid you can't reshape the world to how you want it to be. The Singers Club and Court Sessions, despite not saying in their names what they did, lived on their reputations. Take a little time and find out the reputations of clubs you might visit. Sometimes you have to go beyond SOUP and read the list of ingredients on the tin and ask for other people's opinions.

The clubs that you disapprove of have a well estabished precedent for calling themselves Folk Clubs largely derived from the USA usage. Neither you nor I have the authority or power to stop them. In practical terms, I have a simple policy for dealing with clubs that are not playing the sort of music I'm interested. I don't go. There is one club around here which I generally think isn't worth the bother although it does book performers of traditional music from time to time. I know of none where there is absolutely no traditinal music or song to be heard. Perhaps, since you are so well informed on the subject, you could tell me where I could find one.

But you don't expect 1950s pop songs or heavy metal - or do you?

No, and like Dick, I don't get them. I'd be intrigued to hear heavy metal in a folk club. Could you tell me where?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksfWmJsQg4A. I don't speak German but it sounds as if he ennunciates very clearly.

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Bounty Hound
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 02:01 PM

Thanks Brian, you've just blown my disagreement with Jim as to whether folk/rock makes traditional song meaningless right out of the water with that link, didn't understand a bl..dy word! Meaningless! ;)

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 02:18 PM

I can't speak for other parts of the country but in the north of England the local area folk magazines have for many years listed all of the area folk clubs (using the sense accepted by the 'folk') along with the type of folk music you are likely to hear there, i.e., tune session, open mic, acoustic, trad, mixed, etc. Many also have online registers. Indeed this very forum has threads on 'What's on Where'. All of the big festivals advertise their wares in great detail in the recognised national folk mags. What's the problem?

Phil and others, you are perfectly entitled to want 80% trad content wherever you go for your music. In fact I'm very much with you. Problem is the majority of folkies are happy to listen to a good even mixture. We're not all living in the dim and distant past. Some of us prefer to live in 'living memory' past, and God forbid, some people actually like living in the present!

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: johncharles
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 02:24 PM

If anyone wants a 100% traditional folk club Start one. Problem solved.
john

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 02:54 PM

'. I'd be intrigued to hear heavy metal in a folk club. Could you tell me where?.

well steeleye were quite heavy - they cite Quo as a major influence -

but you don't seem to like them , or have much respect for them. i always thought they were too traddy by half!
When Tim retired to the Canary isles, some Spaniards asked him - what is that strange accent you sing in , which part of England do they speak like that?

how to explain, its was the lingua franca in traddy clubs! Although nowadays since Kate Rusby - the thing is for ladies to slip in the Yorkshire vowel sound - like Kate does.

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 05:31 PM

'I was reading somewhere recently (but I forget where) the suggestion that some of the classic ballads collected from the likes of Mrs Brown may have been created by the litterati of that time or not much earlier. (Maybe Steve can amplify?)'

Hi, Richard,
You naughty boy! Apart from the thread drift you are introducing you know very well if we start discussing the latest academic thinking on this one the hot air already being blown is going to turn into a maelstrom.

Instead, take up Jim's very appropriate suggestion and read David C Fowler's brilliant book 'A Literary History of the Popular Ballad' 1968 which to the best of my knowledge hasn't been bettered or criticised. It only goes upto 1800 but very few Child Ballads are post 1800 in origin anyway (IMHO)

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 06:19 PM

Snail, 01.39
Some very sensible posting.
There was and is a long-lasting folk club in my area. I went along a couple of times to see what went on. The music was obviously there as background because the audience were happily talking through it. I voted with my feet.

When in my 20s I was even more of a purist than Jim is now, there were 2 clubs at the pub I frequented, one having a strict trad policy and one with mostly political leanings. My girlfriend of the time wasn't as bigoted as me and went to both clubs. I never set foot in the political one, even though I was a staunch socialist.

Jim voted with his feet in a much more drastic way and I think he has missed out. There is plenty of evidence of a thriving folk scene with a strong trad element in England and whatever the youngsters are doing with it they are at least there doing it and some of them are bloody miles better at it than us old farts. (IMHO)

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: TheSnail
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 07:13 PM

Thanks, Steve.

whatever the youngsters are doing with it they are at least there doing it and some of them are bloody miles better at it than us old farts.

We're booking quite a few of them. For instance, this bunch in November.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOujPcQXgfE

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Musket
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 02:21 AM

Dick, you mention Kiveton.

Back in the days of it being at The Lord Conyers, I once got a right mouthful off Ernie Sissons for singing a Monty Python comedy song. "This is a traditional club!" he said.

Next time, I sang a song I wrote and told some bollocks about it being collected in Scotland by a librarian from Wombwell etc etc. Wellsie told me I'd never go to heaven...

Happy days.

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 04:15 AM

"We're not all living in the dim and distant past."
Whatever got you into folk song in the first place Steve?
That statement could have been one made by any 'anything-goes' folkie at any time over the last forty years - really doesn't give me too much confidence in some of the other things you've been arguing.
Sorry, I like my research with nowt taken out - 'anything goes' doesn't hack it for me when it comes to documenting or understanding the results of our lifetime's work.
There's a great deal of posturing here, but very little of substance
Plenty of abuse - even an ominous threat (just checked the alarm system - have yet to fit the bullet-proof windscreen into the car in case we do decide to visit West Cork) and a lot of misrepresentation.
I pointed out that there is not a workable alternative to the definition we have already - that appears to be the case.
I asked if, as I punter, I have a right to choose the type of music - it seems I haven't (Bryan, for all his aggressive blustering, is remarkably reticent when it comes to putting his money where his mouth is)
Muskett has shown his contempt for the people who put our musical food on the table in massive dollops "loosen your braces and sit down, drink your pint and we'll show you how it should be played", sums it up nicely.
Al and Bounty seem to regard argument and honest criticism as "insulting"
No new definition - just "it is what i say it is because I say so".
Many years ago I did vote with my feet, as did many others, because our choice was removed from us as to what we would hear when we went to a folk club and we were not particularly impressed with what on offer in place of what had been struck off the menu.
I was lucky where I lived - the clubs I could still frequent continued to feed both of my interests, as a lover of folk song and as a researcher.
The listening gradually disappeared elsewhere - if I want to listen to 1950-60s pop songs, I'll dig out my old Jerry Lee Lewis and Buddy Holly records played by the masters, rather than seek out poorer tribute versions at folk clubs.
Last week our radio producer friend proudly gave us a CD she had produced, entitled 'Unfolding - young musicians from East Clare' - an album of around twenty players, ages ranging from 11 to 19, playing Irish traditional music on fiddle, flute, concertina, harp, accordeon.... like old masters.
Sorry - I'll stick with what we have and what makes sense.
It seems totally illogical to me to have spent most of my life listening to, enjoying and researching a music that carries one type of enjoyment and information and then going to a folk club to be given something that has neither audible nor informative cohesion - "Now for something completely different" worked fine for Monty Python - not for me.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Phil Edwards
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 04:44 AM

Oddly enough, I read something from an old copy of an Irish satirical magazine the other day, complaining semi-seriously about how the bars were being taken over by ITM virtuosi, driving out the good old Country and Western acts. This was in 1978 - just about the time English clubs were going the other way, apparently.

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Bounty Hound
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 05:05 AM

'Al and Bounty seem to regard argument and honest criticism as "insulting"

Not so Jim, but the 'honest' bit worries me, looking at your comments about the video, you do seem to be in a minority of one with your issue over hearing the words, and I'm well aware that the vocals in that clip sit nicely above the accompliment, so please don't 'insult' me by trying to tell me anything different.

I've therefore got to question your motives for the statement, and can only conclude that it is born out of your dislike for folk/rock as a style (which I happily accept as we all have differnt tastes) and a desire to argue for the sake of it!

There is also your unsubstantiated claim about the demise of folk/rock, which in all probability was made for the same reasons.

The problem is Jim, when you post dogmatically about something you clearly do not have the expertise in, it cheapens everything you say. I'll say once again, I have great respect for your work, but please keep your comments to that area of expertise and don't argue just for the sake of it, then we can simple agree to differ on matters of taste, and all get along fine!

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 05:24 AM

"you do seem to be in a minority of one "
At least two others have commented at not being able to hear the words, and one posting on the other thread put my attitude in a nutshell - "Meaning, who needs meaning" - I do, for one.
The vocals are drowned by the accompaniment in some places and in general, the accompaniment doesn't (accompany, that is) it dominates, making the words irrelevant and turning the song into a piece of well-performed music - fine, if you like that sort of thing - not what I expect from a song with as strong a message as 'Blackleg Miner'.
I have no motives other than the one I have stated.
I post what I believe to be the case from my background in research
My attitude down the years has regularly changed with the information I have received from those researches - that was what I hped to find here onlt to find, once again, that there is nothing serious on offer - plenty of abuse though.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Musket
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 05:29 AM

{sigh}

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Bounty Hound
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 05:37 AM

'At least two others have commented at not being able to hear the words
Actually Jim, what they both said was that they COULD hear most of the words, which is somewhat different!

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 05:56 AM

One comment was "I could hear most of the words but there were parts that I couldn't make out - not good enough for what is essentially a short song made up of narrative threats.
Sorry Bounty - you are being selective in what has been said and you are falling back on the old get-out-of-jail-free card of blaming the listener.
I don't play an instrument, but when I sang regularly I did so with accompaniment.
I was lucky enough to be part of a workshop alongside one of the masters (mistresses) of folk accompaniment - I have a magificent three-tape recording of one of her talks
Please don't tell me what I know and what motivates me - it "cheapens" what you have to say
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Phil Edwards
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 06:52 AM

Actually Jim, what they both said was that they COULD hear most of the words, which is somewhat different!

BH - please don't drag me into your argument with Jim. When I said I had difficulty hearing (some of) the words, I was saying (politely) that the words weren't as clear as I'd like them to be, and thought it would be taken that way. I also thought it'd be taken as constructive criticism, not used as ammunition against somebody whose comments I basically agree with.

If you're interested, I think what makes (some of) the words hard to hear isn't the mix or the volume of the backing, so much as the amplification of the voice itself, combined with your (and the other guy's) intonation.

in general, the accompaniment doesn't (accompany, that is) it dominates, making the words irrelevant and turning the song into a piece of well-performed music - fine, if you like that sort of thing

Listening to Bellowhead (it might be easier to talk about a third party rather than hang all this on BH's own music) I often find myself thinking two things at once: "That was absolutely brilliant!" And "What's happened to the song?"

What would you actually learn if you learned Roll Alabama from Bellowhead's version, or Tom Padget from Spiers & Boden's? Would it make you want to seek out unaccompanied versions of those songs? I'm really not sure.

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Bounty Hound
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 08:20 AM

Phil, sorry to cause offence, but just to point out that Jim was quoting you first, saying that at least two other people could not hear the words, and I was merely correcting him as what you both said was that you could hear most of the words.

Jim,
'you are being selective in what has been said and you are falling back on the old get-out-of-jail-free card of blaming the listener.
I'm being selective! you said 'At least two others have commented at not being able to hear the words' and what the people you were 'quoting' actually said was 'I could hear most of the words'

Then you say 'Please don't tell me what I know and what motivates me - it "cheapens" what you have to say' haven't I said something similar to you earlier today with reference to you comment about the 'demise' of folk/rock!

You really can't have it all ways Jim, perhaps it is time that you accepted that with the best will in the world, you don't know everything, you have no right to comment on anyone's taste, other than your own, and probably most important, that despite the acknowledged work you've done, you don't own the tradition, and if others wish to treat it in a way that you may not approve of, then that is absolutely fine, because it is their tradition too and you have absolutely no right to say anything further than it's not to my taste!

Nuff said, I've got a life to get on with!

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Richard Mellish
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 09:28 AM

It has been commented on other threads here that accompaniment ALWAYS detracts from the song to some degree, so is justified only if it adds more than it takes away. I subscribe to the view that an accompaniment that causes ANY words to become hard to hear has gone too far. An alternative viewpoint is to be concerned only with the overall sound, but in that case "tra-la-la" or no vocals at all would seem to do just as well.

A lot of us find drawing-room-style settings of folk songs pretty cringe-worthy, but at least the words remain clearly articulated (arguably to excess).

Opinions as to what should qualify to be called "folk song" and what shouldn't, even among the contributors to this thread (never mind the rest of anglophone humanity) seem to be irreconcilable. Words and melody as collected by collector X from singer Y in 190Z, but performed with an umpteen-piece band complete with drum kit, is one interesting test case. The opposite, words written last week about some recent event but sung unaccompanied to a traditional tune, is another. And then there are the songs that Bert Lloyd introduced to the repertoire, where much uncertainty remains as to how much he found somewhere and how much he concocted himself.

Even the corpus of collected songs that I think we would all agree are folk songs is by no means all of a piece, made in the same style by the same sort of people. There are major differences between (to give a few examples) Young Hunting, No John, Dame Durden, hunting songs, highwaymen's supposed last words, and broken tokens.

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: The Sandman
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 09:31 AM

Subject: RE: 'Traditional' folk/rock - meaningless?
From: Good Soldier Schweik - PM
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 12:16 PM

words are clear.

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 09:43 AM

The main reasons why arguments are so incoherent on threads like this are contributors keep going off at a tangent, they are often arguing from a different standpoint to others they are arguing with, and some insist on arguing about things they even admit they have very little recent experience of. This also leads to several arguments going on simultaneously.

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 09:49 AM

"We're not all living in the dim and distant past."
Whatever got you into folk song in the first place Steve? (Jim)

This is a cheap shot, Jim. You are fully aware that I dedicated my life to traditional song in its many forms. Because we love this music it doesn't mean we have to close our minds to other music, even music that comes under the wider umbrella of 'folk' music.

In answer to your question, the material sung by my own family, the stuff I heard in the playground and street, the cruder stuff I heard in the cadets and playing rugby, and then The Watersons introduced me to other singers like Walter and Harry Cox. I soon became friends with several traditional singers.

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Lighter
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 10:01 AM

> Words and melody as collected by collector X from singer Y in 190Z, but performed with an umpteen-piece band complete with drum kit, is one interesting test case.

Anyone who wants to use "folksong" in a broad sense sjuld read no further.

For the three or four others:

I'd call that an orchestral arrangement of a folksong, but hardly a folk performance.

One of Lloyd's texts, unless made from whole cloth, would be a personal version or semi-commercial or revivalist modification (or whatever) of folksong X. In other words, one more version/variant of a folksong, albeit in very restricted circulation (i.e., among folkies only).

A song about a recent event sung unaccompanied? Too soon to say, but for the moment merely "folklike" or an attempt to emulate a folksong.

BTW, the noun "folk" has a rather different distribution that "folksong." It's another of the million illogical developments of language that no one can do much about.

If I say, "I like folksongs," an array of specific possibilities is understood, with older rural traditions being near the top if not quite dominating.

But if I say, "I like folk," the most likely implication is that I like commercial modern arrangements of trad songs plus the latest singer-songwriter material. Suddenly the perceived emphasis is on the style and contemporary relevance.

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 10:43 AM

"This is a cheap shot, Jim."
No it isn't Steve - but it most certainly is to suggest that attempting to define fork songs for what it is is "closing our minds to other music".
My love of music ranges from Haydn to Peggy Lee and very much in between.
The fact am prepared to discuss many of them for what they are and where they came from, widens my approach, rather than narrowing it.
I've already asked you to say how wide your umbrella is - does it include folk metal and 50s pop songs?
Whether we like it or not, the basis of the music we are talking about lies somewhere in the "dim and distant past".
I have no argument with any of those you mention, though one of my mother's favourites was Bing Crosby singing 'When the Blue of the Night Meets the Gold of the Day, which she sang around the house - never a folk song in a million years, as much nostalgic pleasure though it might give me personally.
UI've got very tired being slagged off for being a book folkie or cosigning folk song to museums.
Can't tell you how disappointed I was when you joined them with your "living in the dim and distant past" jibe - very depressing.
"please don't drag me into your argument with Jim."
Sorry Phil - not my intention - I had trouble in following the plot from the manner in which the songs were performed - I assumed you had
If that is not the case, muy apologies
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Phil Edwards
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 10:46 AM

Interesting point about 'folk' vs 'folksongs' - and 'folksong' is even more restrictive.

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Phil Edwards
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 11:01 AM

"please don't drag me into your argument with Jim."
Sorry Phil - not my intention - I had trouble in following the plot from the manner in which the songs were performed - I assumed you had

No problem - I was agreeing with you & asking Bounty Hound not to presume I was on his side.

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Bounty Hound
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 12:19 PM

'& asking Bounty Hound not to presume I was on his side
I was not actually presuming anything Phil, and had not really thought of it in terms of 'sides'

However, when you copied and pasted Lighter's comment 'I could understand most of the words,.... I took that to mean that you could hear the words, unlike Mr Carroll, who said If one hadn't been labeled @Blackleg Miner' I wouldn't have recognised it in twenty years - and I've been singing it for forty and then went on later to declare that the song was meaningless as the backing drowned out the words.

Now here's my problem, the vocals on that particular video sit well up in the mix, and to say that you can't hear the words is plainly and simply wrong. If Mr Carroll had said that he didn't like the arrangement, or that some words were indistinct, I could have readly accepted that it was not his taste, or maybe my vocal was less than perfect, however, his statements that the song was 'unrecognisable' and 'meaningless' were clearly designed to provoke, and I really fail to understand why he feels the need to do this.

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: TheSnail
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 01:23 PM

A while ago Steve Gardham said You're wasting your time repeating this over and over. It will never sink in! with reference to trying to get the message through to Jim. True in a way but it does still serve a purpose.

I used to work in IT and a colleague told me of one office where he worked where they had a giant soft toy stuffed rabbit sitting in a corner. If you got stuck on a problem, rather than wasting anybody else's time, you would go and explain the problem to the rabbit. By the very act of explaining the problem you would, very often, find the solution on your own. Jim is our Stuffed Rabbit. He doesn't actually listen to a word you say but helps to clarify your own thoughts.

Bearing that in mind -

Jim Carroll
I asked if, as I punter, I have a right to choose the type of music - it seems I haven't
Yes you have Jim you just can't do it on the basis of a club using Folk in its name. Quite a few clubs that don't follow your definition (whatever that is, it still isn't clear) do and have done for a long time. I'm not saying I approve of that. I'm not saying I disapprove of it. I am just saying it is so. There is nothing you or I can do to change that. Nobody owns the copyright on the word "folk". You said yourself "Many clubs were "not to my taste" in the old days, but we managed to co-exist comfortably." That was my experience as well. Why did it become a problem for you? You just have to read a bit further down the label.

"Bryan, for all his aggressive blustering, [Ya gorra larf.] is remarkably reticent when it comes to putting his money where his mouth is" Does anybody else have clue what he is on about there? If you're going to be insulting, Jim, at least try and be comprehensible.

No new definition - just "it is what i say it is because I say so".
In what way is that any different from "corresponded to what I thought folk song sounded like"?

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 01:39 PM

The 'living in the dim and distant past' jibe was aimed at those who won't accept that songs written over the last 60 years and those written in the last year can't be folk songs by any definition. They are being written, sung and listened to by people on the 'folk scene'. There you go, Jim, there's a definition for you.

To go back to the OP I suggest you go to a recent edition of a comprehensive dictionary that is annually updated. Not much use going to the one on the shelf that's sat there for 30 years for up-to-date definitions.

Subject: RE: What makes a new song a folk song?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 03:00 PM

"In what way is that any different from "corresponded to what I thought folk song sounded like"?"
It comes with a researched and long-established definition - that's what way - nuffin to do with me - blame those who did the work long before came on the scene.
It is not "m" definition - merely one I find a handy guide.
Will sort out the rest of your points later
Jim Carroll