 sj |
||
|
||
New Book: Folk Song in England
|
|
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: The Sandman Date: 19 Dec 17 - 05:14 AM jim, would have been a fine politician,he has principles which is more than most of the self seeking politicians of today have. i would vote for him to be prime minister |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Vic Smith Date: 19 Dec 17 - 06:20 AM Meanwhile, back at Folk Song In England by Steve Roud which is the subject of this thread, though it has not been referred to in the last 45 posts. Here is another on-line review on the book. It is another that is factual rather than analytical, but as has been pointed out, there are few with the background, experience or skill to give a detailed in-depth assessment of the book's implications. Read it at - http://www.folkradio.co.uk/2017/08/folk-song-in-england-by-steve-roud/ |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Vic Smith Date: 19 Dec 17 - 06:28 AM Here's another on the Spiral Earth website - rather better written than the previous one, but as a regular reader of that website, it is usually the quality of the writing rather than the opinions that grab me - though it is best when interesting opinions and good writing are combined - http://www.spiralearth.co.uk/folk-song-england-steve-roud/ |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Vic Smith Date: 19 Dec 17 - 07:07 AM Here is a third and it is the one that I like least of all the reviews that I have read. It is interesting in that it is written from someone from outside the small pond of traditional music enthusiasts; someone from the big waters of mainstream music. Cally Callomon started off as the drummer and songwriter for 70s punk band The Bears and 80s indie band The Tea Set. He has many other associations with the music industry - Art director, sleeve designer, manager. record label boss, A&R man and so on. It is not that it is badly written, it isn't, but there is a streak of pretentiousness running through it that irks me. The names that are dropped, in alphabetical order, are - Beethoven, Bob Dylan, Fairport Convention, Elton John, Van Gogh, Vivaldi, Rob Young - you can get a fair idea of the review from those names. For all that, the review is not without merit. He claims to have spent three weeks reading the book and I can believe it. He does offer some outsider's analysis which if not particularly well informed, still makes valid and relevant points. It is on the Caught By The River website at - http://www.caughtbytheriver.net/2017/09/09/folk-song-in-england-steve-roud-cally-callomon/ |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Jim Carroll Date: 19 Dec 17 - 07:27 AM "though it has not been referred to in the last 45 posts." Hardly irrelevant to the discussion that has gone on here, though, for accuracy's sake, it was referred to 23 posts ago, but who’s counting? "Spiral Earth" More unqualified praise, largely deserved, without touching on the problems that both Roud's and Steve Gardham's claims raise regarding whether the folk made their folk songs - obviously a point to be ignored, here and elsewhere. In the end, these claims actually boil down to suggestion that there is no such things as 'folk song' and that they are all basically part of the pop songs of the past. Not worth debating, of course!! Throughout this argument I have had a nagging feeling of deja vu, so out of curiosity, I re-read Dave Harker's section on Child in his 'Fakelore' and was immediately struck with the though; "so this is where this is all coming from" - the doubt cast on the authenticity of folk songs, the denigration of past collectors.... it's all here. Harker adopted the attitude of making a hit-list of collectors and attempting to destroy their work, their credibility and, in some cases, their characters. As much as I was disturbed by the behavior of David Bearman at the time, I was with him 100% on this scurrilous behaviour Bearman's attitude was echoed elsewhere throughout the folk world at the time; so much so that I heard Harker say one in Sheffield that he refused to speak in public because of the hostile reception his claims were getting. And here we go again - same script, different actors, and this time apparently, a willingness to let this behaviour pass though on the nod. The times they certainly are a-changing Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: GUEST,guest jim carroll admirer Date: 19 Dec 17 - 08:07 AM Jim Carroll for prime minister |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: GUEST Date: 19 Dec 17 - 08:08 AM Thanks for the links to the reviews. I am going to get this book and it is the 'Caught By The River' review that most re-assures me that I will actually read properly it rather than pick at it. In particular the reviewer's "Roud ... ... sets us on a wider excursion into a history all of its own, social, economic, political and artistic." and also his highlighting Roud's mention of "definitional expansion" Neither of those get much priority in the other reviews or in the discussion here. |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Steve Gardham Date: 19 Dec 17 - 09:30 AM In the end, these claims actually boil down to suggestion that there is no such things as 'folk song'(JC) Absolute poppycock! My research on fakesong predates Harker's book by quite a number of years, so wrong again! I too was a big critic of the book because of its political spin, (much like yours) but that was the major criticism of reviewers and CHRIS Bearman's critique was solely on what Dave had to say about Sharp. Unfortunately the excellent research carried out was overshadowed by the politics and the criticisms of Sharp, and Chris's stink kicked up. Most researchers who are left actually think that Dave & Chris were at opposite ends of a spectrum and both had their own agendas. More anon. |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Steve Gardham Date: 19 Dec 17 - 10:34 AM Vic, Many thanks for the 3 reviews. I actually enjoyed reading them all and found nothing to disagree with. In fact I haven't yet seen a bad review and don't think I'm likely to. The last one, the River one, I found excellent, particularly coming from someone with a wide grasp of the background of other genres. I loved the phrase 'hideous songbirds of the spoilt-boys-in-pain found on the internet today.' |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Jim Carroll Date: 19 Dec 17 - 11:35 AM "My research on fakesong predates Harker's book by quite a number of years, so wrong again!" Your research may predate it but your conclusions and your derogation of other researchers very much postdate it. "Absolute poppycock!" Really? If you pich in every genre of song and if anybody can arbitrarily and unilaterally redefine it as takes their fancy, we have nothing left. "because of its political spin, (much like yours) " There you go again - anybody who contradicts you has an agenda You really are something else Steve ! My conclusions were drawn from reading and practice and eventually from going and asking the remaining practitioners what they thought. No doubt you'll come up with an 'agenda' for Mikeen, Tom Lenihan and Walter Pardon if this drags on long enough You really don't like it up you, do you? Your tendency to substitute personal insults for honest responses puts you in line for a place of honour on the B.S. threads You have my arguments Steve - the crappy hacks, the ability of working people to make songs, the use of vernacular and trade terms, the identification of 'the folk' with the contents of their songs, and the total recognition by them as their own. After a few feeble and contradictory on-the-spot excuses, you have now resorted to wild haymaker-swings at everybody who gets in your way. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Steve Gardham Date: 19 Dec 17 - 12:29 PM No matter how you spin it it still doesn't make sense. "You really don't like it up you, do you?"(JC) You really think your inane insults get to me? What makes you think that? The only evidence of that is that I'm still here. "Your tendency to substitute personal insults for honest responses puts you in line for a place of honour on the B.S. threads."(JC) That's the funniest thing I've read in ages. Tell that to the many people you have insulted on Mudcat. 'Personal insults'. BTW I'm really holding back on those. |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Jim Carroll Date: 19 Dec 17 - 12:33 PM I have not grainsulted you here, neither |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Steve Gardham Date: 19 Dec 17 - 12:39 PM ? |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Jim Carroll Date: 19 Dec 17 - 12:54 PM Whoops I have not gratuitously insulted you or anybody else on this forum - I tend to try and give as good as I get, you are case in point Without any former rancour, even argument, you responded a point I put up by sweeping it aside as starry-eyed romanticism - that is when I first encountered your technique in dealing with something you didn't agree with There followed a period of arrogant condescension and, when you found yourself unable to aoid the points I was making, a list of feeble excuses like "hack didn't really mean bad", or seagoing and farm-working hacks, or hard pressed broadside writers taking time out to study newspapers to familiarise themselves with vernacular terms or trade practices or nautical and farm equipment - all on past threads. Then we had Child changing his mind about broadsides and realising they were not that bad after all..... Finally, you insisted we take our differences off line where your poured vitriolic abuse and adequate displayed you ignorance and sometimes antipathy of folk songs. This isn't scholarship Steve; it's the agenda driving that you accuse Sharp of - you appear to need working people never to have made songs - and you accuse me of having a political agenda!! I am not surprised you find Harker's research excellent Harker compiled a hit list of every researcher he could lay hands on, denigrated their work and insulted them as individuals - you seem to have learned well from his technique I feel somewhat flattered to be included in your similar list along with Child and Sharp I invite you once again to respond to my points - if you do, I have possibly been put on the right path, if you don't, you have made my point for me Win-win as far as I'm concerned Is this really how you think a serious researcher behaves? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Steve Gardham Date: 19 Dec 17 - 01:41 PM Oh dear! As I said before and I will repeat as often as necessary, quote me accurately or not at all. All of the above bar one have been twisted and spun or taken well out of context. Some of the above points are actually the opposite of what I have said. 'Win-win' The game continues! |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Vic Smith Date: 19 Dec 17 - 02:32 PM 'Win-win' The game continues! More like 'lose-lose' as clashing personalities start to overwhelm reasoned argument. Just a few more comments of this nature and Joe Offer will be hovering with his mighty axe. You are both members; why not resort to Private Messages? |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Jim Carroll Date: 19 Dec 17 - 02:46 PM Fair enough You refuse to respond on the grounds that it might harm your case That'll do nicely - nobody can claim I haven't tried At least it helps he decide where I should take my arguments from here The niche thing about these forums is that once said, things stay said for the world and his brother to decide for themselves Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Steve Gardham Date: 19 Dec 17 - 02:57 PM "The niche thing about these forums is that once said, things stay said for the world and his brother to decide for themselves". That works both ways. To be honest I'm surprised Joe hasn't come along a lot earlier. PMs, we've tried that. I'm surprised you didn't hear the explosions. Besides I can't imagine Jim being suppressed in that way. He likes his audience too much. The only reason I've been tagging along is this is the best publicity for our case we've ever had. Thanks, Jim! |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Jim Carroll Date: 19 Dec 17 - 02:59 PM " likes his audience too much." For Christ's sake Steve - is there no end to your childish and defensive personal abuse Grow up, will you Never mind - more for future use Jim Carrol |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Steve Gardham Date: 19 Dec 17 - 03:08 PM 'childish and defensive personal abuse' as opposed to 'geriatric and aggressive personal abuse.@ |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Steve Gardham Date: 19 Dec 17 - 03:12 PM By the way, folks, this is really all friendly banter. A merry Christmas to all our contributors! Jim, have a good Christmas and see you in the New Year if we haven't been shut down by then. |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: RTim Date: 19 Dec 17 - 03:57 PM Maybe the time has come to end this thread - and at the same time remind JIm C. that Steve Roud has written and had the book published - if you don't like the contents - get your own published........... Tim Radford |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Steve Gardham Date: 19 Dec 17 - 04:12 PM Can I remind you all that Jim has seemingly not published anything on the origins and evolution of folk song and this forum is seemingly his only outlet. Please try to be a little more tolerant. |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: The Sandman Date: 19 Dec 17 - 05:16 PM "Maybe the time has come to end this thread - and at the same time remind JIm C. that Steve Roud has written and had the book published - if you don't like the contents - get your own published........... Tim Radford ' What a ridiculous comment, it is not necessary to have a book published to enable a person to hve an opinion. Ihave had disagreements with Jim, but on this occasion Ithink he haa destroyed Steves arguments comprehensively. |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Steve Gardham Date: 19 Dec 17 - 05:36 PM I'm sure Jim will be delighted with that endorsement! |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Jim Carroll Date: 19 Dec 17 - 07:26 PM "'geriatric and aggressive personal abuse." Ageist as well" Everything I have said here has been directly related to what you have claimed - every single thing There has been no personal abuse unless you believe my describing your be "childish " after your uncontrolled outbursts of temper I have put my case as articulately and as clearly as I can and have asked you to respond - you refuse to do so You have tainted and destroyed your own arguments with your behaviour here - far more than I could ever have dreamed of doing If others wish to take these discussions further, I am happy to do so "Can I remind you all that Jim has seemingly not published anything on the origins and evolution of folk song" And now you reduce the discussion to a pathetic pissing competition. "Please try to be a little more tolerant." And patronising to the last This thread and statements you have made on and off forum will stand as a permanent monument to your scholarship as far as I am concerned and no doubt resurface in future discussions wherever they occur. if you don't like the contents - get your own published........... I am appalled that somebody I thought I respected should resort to reducing this to a pathetic level of elitism Shame on you Tim - I do hope you take a long spoon to that particular dinner party Sadly Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Jim Carroll Date: 19 Dec 17 - 07:51 PM "I'm sure Jim will be delighted with that endorsement!" Is there any reason I shouldn't be? I assume the exclamation mark was a typo!! Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: GUEST,Jerome Clark Date: 19 Dec 17 - 08:56 PM Amid the personalities and the insults here, actual ideas and insights sometimes raise their heads. Though an American, I read and enjoyed Roud's book soon after it was published. Now it's time for Jim Carroll to drag himself away from Mudcat mud fights and write his own book, drawing on his own experience and understanding. I would read that volume as fast as I could get it into my hands, and I expect it would be a welcome and valuable contribution. The thread, however, has run its course. The debate will (and should) continue, but a scholarly argument laid out at book length would surely be a far more productive forum. |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Jim Carroll Date: 20 Dec 17 - 04:56 AM "Now it's time for Jim Carroll to drag himself away from Mudcat mud fights and write his own book," I doubt if that's going to happen Jerome - Too late in life and too much left to do Our life has been spent recording singers and assembling as much of what they had to say as we could lay hands from other sources as we have been able One of the greatest gaps in out knowledge of folk song 'The Voice of the People' has been the opinions of 'the Folk' themselves - though the history of research they have been treated as opinionless sources of songs and the songs have been treated as out-of-context artefacts - entertainment and little else - a Voice of the people with no voice! Any possible solution to the enigmas that have been fought over here lie in what little may have been gathered and locked away in archives, or lying in manuscripts and old tapes. It is this gap that allows any self appointed 'expert' to make a name for themselves with their outlandish theories. I can't believe that, throughout the BBC five year campaigns, nobody ever 'talked' to the contributors and asked their opinions on the treasure trove we took from them. This whole business has smacked of academic 'ivory towerism' from the beginning - an undoubted unchallenged expert in his field (Steve Roud), turning a centuries-old accepted view of folk song on its head (apparently without discussion) and re-defining it to include material that was made to sell to the folk rather than having been made by them to reflect their lives and opinions - nobody, however respected and talented has a right to do that. Folk academia has created cliques and factions - it has even invented its own impenetrable language that puts their opinions out of reach of those not 'in the know' I've already given my opinion on the price one has to pay for some of the published works If we (as a bunch of human beings - The People) want to know what the TSF is thinking, we have to go to the mountain, Mohammed-like - no way to share knowledge on the 'people's music' Throughout this argument I have been subjected to being talked down to because I choose not to be one of the inner circles – not a new experience One author/academic (mentioned here) once told us that what we had to say after thirty years work with Travellers was wrong because she had studied the subject in college. We entitled our article on Walter Pardon 'A Simple Countryman?’ having been told by a noted researcher that Walter "must have been “got at” to hold the opinions he did, because 'he was - " simple countryman'. Even here we have strange comments about him "not being much of a pub singer" - based on the erroneous view that our folk songs were centred around the pubs. The discussion here smacks of academic elitism - those who have published and those who haven't, and who has said nice things about what they claim - I was once offered a list of qualified people “who agree with me”, by an exponent of the 'broadside origins' theory, in substitute for rational arguments – (now he has thrown in my age as a factor of what I have to say) Here the number of 'nice' reviews by largely unknown (to me) reviewers of Roud's book has taken the place of detailed discussion. Any sense we are ever going to make out of folk song is going to come from a co-operative and intelligent (and above all, friendly) analysis of the songs themselves and an assessment of all past research - not the arrogant and often personal 'Dave Harkerism' that has re-surfaced here (though even Harker made a number of points well worth consideration). One of the warmest feelings of achievement I have ever experienced was when Clare County Library accepted our collection, appointed two librarians to work on it and allowed us to give back to the Clare people the songs they had given to us - that's what research should mainly be about. SONGS MUSIC Even this is only a partial achievement - there are masses of interviews their resources wouldn't allow them to include Limerick University have accepted the offer of our library for the use of the students at their 'IRISH WORLD ACADEMY of MUSIC and DANCE' http://www.irishworldacademy.ie/ and are discussing the idea of setting up a website to do a similar job on the rest of our collection Ironically, if what Walter Pardon had to say about his songs is ever to see the light of day, it will be through a West of Ireland academic institution as there doesn't seem to be an outlet in Britain any more. The 'Voice of the People' has long been a muted and limited one - now it seems to have been all-but silenced by being lumped in with and overpowered by that of the Music industry. Folk songs were a way 'the folk' entertained themselves, but they were much, much more than that – they were and are essential part of their/our oral history - there are no other significant examples of this because it was always thought that 'ordinary people' had nothing to say for themselves and needed spokesmen to speak for them Far from this discussion being over, I don't think it has even begun It will take place in the friendly, respectful manner it needs to be, if I have anything to do with it, if not here, somewhere where people are prepared to listen and share ideas and not fly kites or just stand by and bow to the kite runners Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Vic Smith Date: 20 Dec 17 - 07:14 AM The focus in this thread on the single issue of who did or didn't compose what we have come to call 'traditional songs' obscures the width and depth of this book. It is much more than a single issue work and has many implications. It does not set out to rubbish the achievements of earlier researchers and credits the scholars whose work built the foundations of folk song study. Roud does regret instances amongst the pioneers' work where he can produce evidence that they brought a preconceived agenda to their work or where he can point to assumptions made on insufficent evidence, eg, Sharp writing Some Conclusions.... a relatively short time after hearing a traditional song sung for the first time. The attitude towards only using 'evidence' in historical research is now the norm amongst modern academics not just in folk song studies. The research involved in Roud's book is meticulous and has been made over four decades of deep interest in the subject. It is part of a very wide interest and knowledge in a whole range of popular musics. I know that he was surprised recently to be asked to deliver a series of lectures on the history of rock music to London-based college of an American university. He told me that he was amazed how little knowledge the students had in an aspect of a subject that they were majoring in. Throughout the book he bemoans the lack of solid information currently available and calls for more and deeper research on the subject. I defy anyone to provide anything in the book to challenge the rigorous discipline on his fact-based approach. The widespread praise and admiration expressed in the reviews that I and others have posted or linked to here is fully justified. |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Jim Carroll Date: 20 Dec 17 - 07:44 AM "The focus in this thread on the single issue of who did or didn't compose what we have come to call 'traditional songs' obscures the width and depth of this book." The width and depth of the book calls into question the subject matter - folk song - and whether it exists apart for other genres of song Until that is sorted out, it makes it impossible to make a fair assessment of the book If we are talking about the music of the people we have to know what part the people created in producing that music Roud spends a fair amount of space discussing glees, which owe more to Hndel than they do to the people Music Hall is where they went to passively be entertained rather than to express themselves The London singing Taverns, raised by Roud and Gardham, were, according to authority, Selenick, the haunts of middle class gentlemen, the broadsides were town based while our folk songs are mainly the probable creations, certainly entertainments or the rural working people. For me, the secondary problem with Roud's book is that it is an excellent work marred by irrelevant clutter that helps obscure the real subject. For me, the book is a welcome addition as an essential reference work (with qualifications) What it lacks, for me, is the proselytizing zeal of Lloyd's book (for all its faults) It also lacks the love and warmth that helped put a lifetime's worth of petrol in my tank Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Steve Gardham Date: 20 Dec 17 - 03:35 PM "If we (as a bunch of human beings - The People) want to know what the TSF is thinking, we have to go to the mountain, Mohammed-like - no way to share knowledge on the 'people's music' "(JC) "Alternatively, you could make us all aware of what is taking place".(JC)17 Dec 2017 9.58 No problem. There are no closed doors. All meetings are open to allcomers and much of what we discuss is available on the TSF website which is where I presume you found my article based on one of the presentations some years ago. Martin Graebe the secretary frequently offers to send recordings of what has transpired out to members. Last time I looked JC was a member. (SG) But just to be clear and for the uninitiated: 20 years ago Steve Roud and a few others of us got together and decided it would be a wise move to bring together all those people, academic or independent who were interested in folk song research to avoid duplication, share ideas, and promote understanding in the subject. The Traditional Song Forum was formed with 3 or 4 meetings a year spread out all over the country. (Dublin and Edinburgh have already been included, but Sheffield and London tend to have been used most). The membership of researchers from all over the world has gradually built up and we currently have about 250 members. Many of our members have produced books, articles, reviews, websites, indexes during this period and many of these are produced in co-operation with each other. Quite a number of our members have contributed to this very thread before they were put off by my and Jim's rantings. Our full day meetings consist of in the mornings TSF business and a round robin of present members' latest projects and discussion. The afternoon consists of 4 or 5 presentations mostly by members but sometimes invited guests as well. The evening is often taken up with a singaround at a local hostelry. Now for the last 10 years both Steve and I and others have given presentations on the relationship between urban commercial song and oral tradition so the subject is by no means a new one. Everyone who is in the TSF who looks at the website and follows the detailed notes (and recordings) posted by our very able secretary/webmaster Martin Graebe, or who attends our meetings cannot fail to have been acquainted with the views expressed on the origins of the songs. Curiously I can't remember in those 10 years anyone opposing the facts and opinions we have presented. JC, if I'm reading this aright and you are offering your front room for one of our meetings I'll see what I can do. Unfortunately my passport needs renewing, but I can get that sorted. In short...all of the information is out there. First stop, try our website at Tradsong. |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Steve Gardham Date: 20 Dec 17 - 03:36 PM I should add, that's apart from all the books, articles, reviews etc we have had published. |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Vic Smith Date: 20 Dec 17 - 04:11 PM Steve wrote - try our website at Tradsong. There have been problems with this website as this statement at its old location makes clear:- This website has now been replaced by a newer version which you can find at |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Steve Gardham Date: 20 Dec 17 - 04:26 PM Thanks, Vic. |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Dec 17 - 05:11 AM "JC, if I'm reading this aright and you are offering your front room for one of our meetings" How on earth would that help get the activities of TSF to the general public Steve? As about as reasonable as suggesting poor poets made our folk songs What is wrong with putting your activities up on your website in one form or another as debating topics and invite people to participate? From the "not available" notice I got from Vic's link, that might be a problem at present Your change of definition would have been an ideal place to throw open such a debate I've always found that the best way to share ideas is to go out to people and not expect them to come to you. "uninitiated:" Interesting choice of word!! Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Richard Mellish Date: 21 Dec 17 - 05:58 AM Jim said "How on earth would that help get the activities of TSF to the general public Steve?" It's surely only a minority of the general public who have any interest in folk song at all, and a minority of the minority who might have any interest in the activities of the TSF. |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Dec 17 - 06:18 AM "It's surely only a minority of the general public who have any interest in folk song at all" That is because that is the attitude we have done nothing about Richard The greatest failure of the revival was that we failed to get over the importance of folk song, not just fo the general public but to the world in general One of the greatest problems has been that the exponents of folk song have failed to take their art seriously enough to demand and raise minimum standards Now that has extended to turning the clubs into 'anything goes' venues where you might or might not come away having heard a folk song If we don't take our art seriously we can't expect anybody else to. I think the claims being made here are likely to worsen and confuse things rather than clarify them AS far as those already involved, if revolutionary views such as these have been discussed elsewhere, they should have been publicied throughout the folk movement (or what's left of it) rather than having it sprung on us a a fait accompli in a tome that only folkies are going to acquire Folk song, as far as I am concerned is, or should be a national treasure Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Vic Smith Date: 21 Dec 17 - 06:33 AM The link that I cut'n'paste from the old Tradsong website above has the usual "www" in it. Further investigation showed me that this was not needed. This one works in Sussex. I hope that it works elsewhere - http://tradsong.online/ |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Dec 17 - 06:37 AM Thanks Vic Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Steve Gardham Date: 21 Dec 17 - 09:44 AM 'How on earth would that help get the activities of TSF to the general public Steve?'(JC) Sorry, Jim. I misunderstood your request. As for general public access, as I stated earlier, all of our meetings and activities are open to everyone. Unfortunately our funds won't stretch to a massive advertising campaign with TV adverts etc., and there is an element of truth in what Richard has to say. Can you imagine the general public wanting to leave their TVs, i-pads, pap music to listen to what we have to offer? We do our best by running free concerts on a regular basis with good quality artists and organising a largely free folk festival. 'What is wrong with putting your activities up on your website in one form or another as debating topics and invite people to participate?' (JC) What a good idea! Perhaps you'd like to suggest it on our mediated public forum, 'Tradsong'. 'Uninitiated' (SG). Yes, I see what you mean. Thanks for not putting too much spin on it. Of course newcomers must stand on one leg and recite Tamlin backwards whilst dancing a morris jig. 'The greatest failure of the revival was that we failed to get over the importance of folk song, not just for the general public but to the world in general.'(JC) I have a considerable measure of agreement here. The old fogies like you and me failed to attract younger members when we had the chance. Some of us buried our heads in the sand and didn't read the writing on the wall and others buggered off to other climes. Perhaps our adherence to '54' put a lot of them off. There has been a certain measure of success achieved, however, by making folk music a little more like the sort of music that IS popular, no matter how unpalatable that might be to us. 'If we don't take our art seriously we can't expect anybody else to'.(JC) Quite, but not moving on is preventing academia taking our subject seriously. Looking at it in romantic terms is not going to help our cause. We need to be realistic and honest.(IMO) ' I think the claims being made here are likely to worsen and confuse things rather than clarify them' (JC) Confuse who? British researchers seem quite happy with the way things are going. If not they need to speak up. 'sprung on us'(JC) We've been discussing this for quite some time now. Vic reckons 5 years. I gave you plenty of warning. 'Folk song, as far as I am concerned is, or should be a national treasure'. (JC) Absolutely! Which is perhaps why in the last 15 years the BL has placed many audio collections online, the EFDSS has had hundreds of thousands of pounds for placing as many of the mss online, the Carpenter collection has been funded, etc. |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Steve Gardham Date: 21 Dec 17 - 09:55 AM That's apart from the many broadside collections placed online. Somebody must value them, even if they are doggerel dunghills as you claim! |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Dec 17 - 10:27 AM "as I stated earlier, all of our meetings and activities are open to everyone. " If they happen to live in the vicinity they take place It doesn't take massive funding to alert people involved of what you are doing A quick glance at the archive doesn't leave me to believe thare has been deep and widespread discussions on the turnaround in our understanding of what folk song is The internet has opened up undreamed of opportunities to share ideas - no evidence this has happened, plenty of evidence ot the tearing up pf past scholarship and the denigration of our greatest scholars - that disturbs me deeply How about the mountain coming to Mohammed fore a change? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Vic Smith Date: 21 Dec 17 - 10:30 AM "in the last 15 years the BL has placed many audio collections online, the EFDSS has had hundreds of thousands of pounds for placing as many of the mss online, the Carpenter collection has been funded, etc." If we have failed in selling our music to the general public, then it is not for want of many of us trying, but the fashion has become for music to be presented in a glitzy showbiz way and classical, folk and jazz musicians find it difficult to go along with this. I hate what Parisian Afro-Beat has done to the way traditional African music is presented in Europe but I can see that poor immigrant musicians also want to carve a career for themselves to give them some sort of financial security. They cannot afford to do otherwise. The job of the older enthusiasts now must be to make the performances that they enthuse over accessible in an attractive way on the internet. Fortunately, we already seem to be ahead of the game with what EFDSS and BL have done in England, ITMA in Ireland and Tobar an Dualchais in Scotland. The latest trend is for archives of regional/area/county basis to be extended and brought to be the attention of local historians, teachers looking for aspects of their own locality for topics, librarians etc. Archives of County Clare Libraries and the Sussex Traditions project have already been mentioned in this thread, But pioneering local work was undertaken in South Yorkshire and much has been achieved in Devon by the Wren Project and in Gloucestershire. Pete Haywood was speaking to me about starting something similar for South-East Scotland and there are probably others that don't come to mind at the moment. |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Steve Gardham Date: 21 Dec 17 - 10:57 AM 'tearing up of past scholarship and the denigration of our greatest scholars' (JC) This IS a gross exaggeration and I won't let it pass no matter how many times you spin it. Every time anyone mentions the failings of past scholars they go out of the way to state how overwhelmingly they respect the great bulk of their work. They are not gods or saints to be worshipped religiously. I don't know anyone who does not have the greatest respect and admiration for Professor Child's work. There are flaws which he acknowledged himself, but these pale into insignificance alongside the bulk of his work. This religious worship is the biggest thing preventing our research being taken seriously. It is a relief that seemingly only you are promoting this. 'If they happen to live in the vicinity they take place'(JC) What had you in mind, Jim? We hold our meetings all over the country, and as I stated, we have been to Dublin and Edinburgh. We all have limitations on our time. Some of our members are still working. Others can't afford to go to every meeting, travelling round the country. A nice wish list but impractical. 'How about the mountain coming to Mohammed for a change?'(JC) Is Mohammed going to supply a room, refreshments and some travelling expenses? Otherwise we have to stick with the very generous people who offer the hospitality of their institutes and universities. 'It doesn't take massive funding to alert people involved of what you are doing'(JC). EFDSS website, Our own website, Mudcat, our own Forum, folk magazines. Perhaps you're volunteering to pay for an advert in the Sun, or the Irish Times. I'll send you a personal email if you like keeping you up-to-date as to where and when the meetings are. As I stated, at a local level we go into schools and other institutions to spread the word, run free concerts, workshops and numerous other little ways of spreading the word. I'm sure you do all this in Ireland, but we are not sitting on our arses as you imply. |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Dec 17 - 11:15 AM "Somebody must value them, even if they are doggerel dunghills as you claim!" Meant to respond to this Steve You may write this on a sheet of paper, wrap it around a brick and throw it through my window, if the fancy takes you but it doesn't alter one iota the fact that they are the doggerel dunghills Child described that Child described Remind me of how many copies of The Birdie Song or Viva Espana were sold Broadsides have their own value as 'Curiosities of Street Literature' as does the Tabloid Press - a gauge of the times as seen through the eyes of a hack I spent years trawling the collections for singing material and found little; the Critics plundered what was available for their themed albums and found some, but criously, the ones they used soon disappeared from their repertoires because, like all pop songs, they were one dimensional and came with a shelf-life. I have one in my repertoire which I have sung for half a century and which still pleases me because I worked hard on it to remove the sharp corners and the clumsy verse and a good friend put an excellent tune to it - I'm referring to 'The Ranter Parson and the Cunning Farmer's Wife' There was enough in the original Madden broadside to suggest it might once have been part of the two-way traffic between tradition and broadside - country humour is very different that that of the big city. I find it significant that the one collectd by Vaughan Williams in East Anglia is the only oral tradition version. The broadside writers were poor poets the folk poets were not - they wrote (and sang) as they spoke "it is not for want of many of us trying, " I'm fully aware of that Vic, and those of you who still carry the banner have my deepest respect It was the lack of respect for the songs and the failure to apply standards that killed the scene, not the lack of effort and enthusiasm of the work-horses. I'm delighted that people like Pete and Paul Wilson are taking up the challenge, especially in areas with such a rich history, but we all need to get our act together and singing from the same hymn-sheet if we are going to get anywhere. Thisrty odd years ago Irish music appeared to have no future and was referred to as 'diddly-di music' - now youngsters with skills challenging those of the greats are flooding onto the scene The fact that a small number of people got together and built a foundation based on the older styles and music for what was a rapidly disappearing culture, has guaranteed a future of at least two generations for Irish traditional music Tee youngsters can take the music wherever they wish (and they do) but there is now a home base to return to to remind them what it's all about Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Steve Gardham Date: 21 Dec 17 - 11:31 AM We have AGREED with you and Professor Child on numerous occasions that the bulk of the material printed on broadsides is of no interest to folksong researchers except for comparison perhaps. But to taint the whole genre with this attitude is actually detrimental to our cause. To criticise the whole of any genre in this way is extremely prejudiced and contains not a vestige of scholarship. As I've stated on this thread before, by and large I agree with Child about the grubbing through mountains of this stuff. I've been there. The 'moderate jewel' reference I don't agree with, but that's a matter of opinion not fact. What is a fact is that Child included a whole section on ballads from broadsides mostly that show not a vestige of oral tradition. |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Dec 17 - 01:04 PM “We have AGREED with you” No you have not – you have gone around in circles, first thy were misjudges artists who were peorducing good songs (a constant theme with your claims that they must be good because so many people bought them) to a collaborative school of good ones, to hacks with enough time on their hands to research their songs in the newspapers, to seagoing and land-labouring hacks who had lived the conditions described in their songs, and now to “tainting the whole genre” presumably by my targeting a few bad ones There is no consistency to your claims. They were notoriously bad writers working under pressure to churn out their songs – and doesn’t their output show the conditions and the lack of skill In comparison to the oral tradition, even in its dying years, it was conveyor belt work compared to the creations of craftspeople – or people just making songs on what was going on around them on a daily basis. In order for deskbound townies to have produced our folksongs they would have had the imagination, writing skills and time displayed by Hardy, or Dickens or Melville, with the knowledge of a Wimberly, the psychological insight of a Freud and the knowledge of social history of Eystyn Evans or George Ewart Evans The continuity of utterance of our folk songs, the uses of commonplaces and incremental repetition, et all, suggests a socially common source which would need a team of students working in unison to achieve – you have suggested that. We’ve already discussed the familiarity and insider knowledge contained in our folk songs and got nowhere. The “I know a folk song when I here one” definition is as reliable as any at one level to realise that hacks could not possible have made them You need to approach and answer all these anomalies before yo can begin to make such claims as you have made. We have had an indication of a creative oral tradition totally independent of literary influences dating back one thousand two hundred years in these islands – what happened to it? Why did Mrs Laidlaw do her conkers when Scott started writing her songs down if they came from print in the first place – was she as starry eyed naïve you claim Child and Maidment (and me) were to believe her songs came from her own people? Child went to the Broadsides to dredge up every example of ballads he could – he chose them because of what they were – ballads, not because he believed they were good He is to be admired for that – hope he wore protective clothing Do I believe ‘Seventeen Come Sunday’ or ‘Banks of the Sweet Primroses’ came from the same school as the ‘Cat’s Meat Man’, or ‘Tarpauling Jacket’ or ‘Self Destruction of a Female by Throwing Herself of the Monument’? I most certainly do not – why do you? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Dec 17 - 01:41 PM 'We have AGREED with you' I assume that's the 'Royal' we, by the way Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: New Book: Folk Song in England From: Steve Gardham Date: 21 Dec 17 - 02:10 PM 600? |
| Share Thread: |