Different types of contemporary folk

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Feb 19 - 06:52 AM

Did I not say "Traditional folk is taken as read so, apart from a reference point, it is not part of this discussion." ?

Aside from that you make an interesting comment, Ake. Do you really think that there is no difference between contemporary folk and pop? I am pretty open minded about what I hear at folk clubs but I would be puzzled by someone playing Ava Max's "Sweet but Psycho", no matter how much I like it!

Interesting point by JohnnyJ about the acceptance of a song being part of it becoming contemporary folk. It does pose the question of at what point in time does it become accepted? If someone did start to play a modern composition before it was accepted as contemporary folk they may be accused of playing pop at a folk club. Then, at some mystical point in the future, it all becomes ok!

Getting plenty food for thought so far :-)

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: GUEST,akenaton
Date: 24 Feb 19 - 06:33 AM

There is no difference at all between "contemporary folk" and "pop" it's all personal preference......and a large slice of snobbery!
As usual I agree with Iains on the definition of "traditional music" which IS a separate genre, but as the lifestyles pertaining to it's place in society are almost gone, I see it being consigned to museums or a very small niche market.
Of course traditional music has always addressed the big issues. like love, death and the human condition.....but all of these things are being torn asunder as we blunder on in our search for a "truly equal society".........Traditional music or traditional values will be discarded.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: GUEST,jim bainbridge
Date: 24 Feb 19 - 06:32 AM

Hooray Sol- you're spot on!
All this arguing about the nature & definitions of a folk song is OK- people always enjoy a POLITE discussion about it & good luck to you all.
I'll continue to enjoy and perform ANY song which takes my fancy - whether it's in line with some other bugger's definition does not concern me- I've always found most folk clubs are a very welcoming place for all varieties of music & I've never been told 'that wasn't folk'- or maybe folkies are just a polite section of society?
An eminent 'folk' reviewer once said this in a review of one CD I did....
'Jim just sings the songs he likes'
- so what's the alternative?- think I know what the reviewer meant but a lot could be read into that as a reference to the folk scene....

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Johnny J
Date: 24 Feb 19 - 06:22 AM

Dave,

Arguments about "pigeon holing" are inevitable

I think the best way to look at things is whether or not a song, tune, or piece of music actually gets played or is generally accepted within so called "folk music circles"(another contentious description as opposed to its actual musical structure and/or content.

A contemporary folk song or tune is not merely a new piece which is written in the "Traditional idiom" as you have suggested. It also has to be "accepted" by performers and listeners to a greater or lesser extent.

Again what may or may not be regarded as "folk", traditional or contemporary, will also be dependent on location, the general company, and even individuals.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Feb 19 - 06:21 AM

Wish I would have had a fiver on it :-)

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: GUEST,Gerry
Date: 24 Feb 19 - 06:09 AM

The horses came early this time.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Feb 19 - 06:07 AM

I was hoping for explanations of what separates contemporary folk from the general pop chart rather than arguments about pigeon holing etc. I am not trying to categorise or set any rules. Just understand what sets it apart. I suppose that will come.

In the meanwhile I just say I disagree with the old horse phrase. It is obvious that not all music is folk music and I am sure whoever said it intended it as just a pun. Sorry Sol.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: GUEST,Sol
Date: 24 Feb 19 - 05:46 AM

I'm not a lover of pidgeon-holing anything especially songs and music. As Satchmo once said "All songs are folk songs. I never heard a horse sing."
A song is a song is a song. Vive la difference (and la hybrids).

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Iains
Date: 24 Feb 19 - 05:40 AM

At the end of the day there is not much point getting worked up about contemporary folk boundaries. One man's poison is another man's poisson.
Once, apart from limited radio and TV exposure attendance at a folk club was the only comprehensive way of enjoying/learning........ the genre. Instruments are far more widely available today(personal observation-could be wrong), young people have many more means of obtaining exposure to different genres and I suspect boundaries are far more fluid. Some people simply like the music/songs. To like it does not mean you have to research the origins of the music to the nth degree. Some do, some don't. even when they do, some get it entirely wrong. I remember reading a thread about "Farewell, Farewell" where heated arguments arose over the songs origins.(We all know who wrote it)

We are fed this bucolic idea of how traditional music arose amid the hoary sons of the soil and transmogrified over county and country boundaries into a totally different beast. This mutilation over time and space seems to be inherent in the definition of traditional Folk.
I would ask how the same process can possibly occur in the modern age with instant, accurate electronic capture and transmittal.
Of course that dirty word commercial and perhaps copyright hangs over the modern scene like a dark stifling cloud according to some. The fact is that it represents the modern world. Very few can afford to work without payment. Is not composition work, and worthy of reward?
Is entertainment not worthy of having a price set on it?

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: GUEST,Hootenanny
Date: 24 Feb 19 - 05:36 AM

Personally I feel the same as Steve Gardham, there are no lines, certainly hard and fast ones only personal preferences.

I know of two people currenttly that draw lines, a certain Mrs May and a gentleman who regularly posts on such matters on mudcat. Neither of them convince me.

If you don't like it don't listen.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: GUEST,John from Kemsing
Date: 24 Feb 19 - 05:21 AM

CONTEMPORARY ("of the time"). Surely all poetry, prose and songs were once contemporary. How one decides when they become traditional God only knows!

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Johnny J
Date: 24 Feb 19 - 05:15 AM

"Traditional folk is taken as read"

Is it? How about traditional songs and tunes played in modern style and on different instruments? Also, as discussed, many songs and tunes we think of as traditional are not and I'm not just talking about the McTells, McColls and so on.

Anyway, we're talking about "Contemporary Folk" here. To me, this is more than just new songs or tunes writen in the "traditional idiom".

Over the years, contemporary folk might have included everything from Bert Jansch, Incredible String Band, Leonard Cohen etc, folk rock bands such Fairport, Steeleye and so on. Also, whether we like it or not, more modern artists such as Mumford and Sons, some Ed Sheerin songs and so on.
We might not all agree on what is appropriate and the artists themselves may not wish it to considered to called "folk" either of course!

However, I think the test is the music is enjoyed and/or performed by folk artists in general and is "heard" or generally accepted on the folk scene.

Re Richard Thompson's "Vincent Black Lightning", the song is just a bit of fun and not to be taken too seriously. However, it is popular among many folkies and performers such as Dick Gaughan have regularly included it in their sets.
Also many other contemporary songs have been featured in folk artists' repertoires over the years. Lots of Beatles and Rolling Stones songs, for example, and many more"

e.g. Rubee Tuesday Dick Gaughan
    New York Mining Disaster   Martin Carthy
    I don't like Mondays    Dave Burland

The examples are endless. So, there's no reason why some of Ed Sheerin's songs shouldn't take hold in years to come either.

So, in my opinion, it's pointless to argue about what the music SHOULD be. There will always be some cross over and the occasional abberation. As long as we know what to generally expect when we attend a club, concert, singaround or session, that's all that matters.

Like many others here, I find that there is much about the music scene today which I don't like at all but, coversely, there's lot's of great things going on too.
There's actually more choice than ever these days and really no excuse for any of us not to find or do something which suits us. We have to broaden our horizons beyond sixties style folk clubs though.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Feb 19 - 05:07 AM

No problem, Steve. Good answer by the way. Venn diagram is more accurate for my approach I think. "Does it contain..." ? Is probably a good way to look at it. Tune and lyrics will obviously feature strongly! Each circle could probably contain its own diagram too :-)

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 24 Feb 19 - 04:45 AM

Dave there IS NO line. You draw your own lines as you suggest. Think Venn diagrams for music genres!

BTW I'd be quite interested in where people draw lines between traditional folk and pieces written say 1860 to 1910 and perhaps even later. (Sorry for early thread drift)

Subject: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Feb 19 - 04:40 AM

On the thread about UK folk clubs a sub topic appeared that became of great interest to me. It has gone far beyond UK folk clubs and deserves a thread of its own so here we are :-)

Traditional folk is taken as read so, apart from a reference point, it is not part of this discussion. The contention is with contemporary folk only and relates to where individuals draw the line between contemporary folk and pop music, and why.

There are some contemporary folk songs that we can all agree are firmly of the folk genre. Ewan MacColl's "Dirty Old Town" and Cyril Tawney's "Sammy's Bar" being good examples. There are others however that are a bit of a grey area, such as Ralph McTell's "Hiring Fair" or Tom Paxton's "Last thing on my mind". Then there are those that are downright contentious and of those I cite Richard Thompson's "Vincent Black Lightning" or, more recently, Ed Sheeran's "Nancy Mulligan".

I am not citing any of these as perfect examples and there are many more from both sides of the Atlantic that I am sure we could use. The output of Simon and Garfunkel or Fairport Convention to name but two.

I have my own personal drawn line (a record shop with Led Zeppelin as folk rock crossed it :-) ) but generally my bar is pretty low, or high depending on your viewpoint. I like McTell and think most of his stuff sits comfortably in folk. Most of Sheeran's stuff is pop but of late I can see a lot of folk 'techniques' in some of his stuff. Not a big fan of Dylan but I can see that his output is significant in the folk world. Apart from personal preference I cannot say why some 'feel' like folk to me but some don't.

So, right back to the original question. Where do you draw the line between contemporary folk and pop, and why?

Thanks in advance for a good natured discussion :-)