Different types of contemporary folk

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Feb 19 - 02:11 PM

Westhoughton Folk Club used to audition potential singers for floor spots on guest nights. But not on the stairs or in a passage. The auditions happened in the club on a singers night. If you were not good enough, you did not get a spot on a guest night. Dunno If they still do it.

Bugger all to do with this thread but of interest to some I suppose.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 25 Feb 19 - 03:12 PM

Just remind me, whoever, are there hard and fast boundaries between other genres of newly created songs and contemporary folk song? And if there are what might those boundaries be?

And to those that don't accept the term 'contemporary folk song' what alternative are you offering for say MacColl's songs and similar?

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: The Sandman
Date: 25 Feb 19 - 04:49 PM

her is another oneHEV YEW GOTTA LOIGHT, BOY? [HAVE YOU GOT A LIGHT, BOY?]
Allan Smethurst, "The Singing Postman," released 1966.

I had a gal, a really nice gal, down in Wroxham way.
She were wholly nice to me back in the old school days.
She would smile all the while, but Daddy didn't know all.
What she used to say to me behind the garden wall:
"Have you got a light, boy? Have you got a light?"

Then one day she went away. I don't see her no more,
'Til by chance I see her down along the Mundesley shore.
She was there twice as fair. Would she now be true?
So when she sees me passing by, she say, "I'm glad that's you!
Have you got a light, boy? Have you got a light?"

CHORUS: Molly Windley, she smokes like a chimney,
But she's my little nicotine gal.

Now you'll see her and me never more to part.
We would wander hand in hand together in the dark.
Then one night I held her tight in the old back yard.
So when I tried to hold her close, she say, "Now, hold you hard!
Have you got a light, boy? Have you got a light?" CHORUS

By and by, we decide on the wedding day,
So we toddles off to church to hear the preacher say:
"Do you now take this vow to honour all the time?"
Before I has a chance to stop her, she begins to pine:
"Have you got a light, boy? Have you got a light?" CHORUS

Now the doctor tells me a daddy I will be,
So when I ask him, "What's the score?" he say there's only three.
So here I go, cheerio, to see how she do fare.
I know what she will say to me as soon as I get there:
"Have you got a light, boy?"

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Feb 19 - 08:41 AM

I read your description of the styles used, Dick, and even though I had to use Google to understand some of it, it did make sense. Not sure what you are trying to achieve by pasting random song texts here though :-S

To all and sundry.

We have to accept that all songs were written and/or arranged by someone. They did not spring out of thin air. The difference between folk and commercial songs is that, in the commercial world, someone makes money out them. We have seen, on many occasions, that the two worlds collide and a folk song starts to have some commercial sucess. Think Paul Simon and Scarborough Fair here. We also have commercial songs, IE those that were copyrighted with the specific intent of making money for the composer, that have become accepted as folk songs. The example here could well be Dirty Old Town but there are many more to chose from if that offends anyone!

We must accept therefore that there is an element of crossover and so there should be. I spent ages this morning trying to figure out where all this was leading me and concluded that, for me anyway, it seems to boil down to commercialism. To be in the folk camp means that it cannot be commercial. This, in my mind anyway, covers a lot of what has been discussed about copyright. Even songs within copyright are not making money if they are sung at folk clubs. Well, not yet anyway! So I think copyright is a red herring.

The next thing is what is acceptable to the audience at a folk club and that is where Dick's analysis comes in. There is a certain cadence to the music enjoyed at folk clubs. This combines with the lyrics to make only certain songs enjoyable for most of the audience. I am not saying everyone at a folk club will like all the songs but, chances are, a high proportion of them will enjoy a large percentage of the songs.

In a nutshell, I agree that there are no contemporary folk songs as such but there are many contemporary songs that are enjoyed at folk clubs. However, to most people such a distinction is purely academic so the shorthand "contemporary folk" will continue to be used. Songs within copyright will continue to be sung at folk clubs and no one is going to come and break legs for doing that. New songs will be written and introduced in folk clubs and if they go commercial, good luck to them. I doubt it any of the authors will say you can no longer sing them for free.

It is a complex and interesting topic with no right or wrong answers. Thanks to all who have contributed so far.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Iains
Date: 26 Feb 19 - 09:14 AM

In a nutshell, I agree that there are no contemporary folk songs as such

That is where you, I and many others disagree!

I like sandman's proposition, but I would go further and say it is not only the tune construction but also the lyrics make a contemporary folk song. Does a component of the old grey whistle test come into play perhaps?

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Feb 19 - 09:53 AM

"are there hard and fast boundaries between other genres of newly created songs and contemporary folk song?"
Nobody is attempting to create hard and fast anything any more that they are bandying '54 about
As to what a folk song is - as a researcher, you shouldn't need to ask that - it's part of the job description
"And to those that don't accept the term 'contemporary folk song' what alternative are you offering for say MacColl's songs and similar?"
How about contemporary songs using folk forms and functions
These have never been a problem as far as the clubs are concerned (only when researchers who should know better appear not to be able to tell the difference between newly-composed songs and the real thing -
The real bone of contention is the lack of connection between real folk and what has become a large block of material that has nothing whatever to do with or sounds like folk   
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Feb 19 - 11:07 AM

Far more than commercialism Dave
The structure, sound and content of the songs and how they featured within the communities that made them their own identify them as what they are
We came to the folk scene drawn in by songs that had long been established as folk
- nobody went around with a rule book - they didn't have to - they sounded as they sounded and we took to them in thousands
People sang them, listened to them, wrote and argued about them - and went out and looked for more
Go through the lists - the BBC project, the hundreds of collections, the output of labels like Topic.... they are sogs of an identifiable type   
When you asked the source singers you got similar responses
Jean Richie summed it up perfectly when she wrote about her experiences in Ireland
"When you asked for the old songs you got everything from 'Home Sweet Home' to 'Danny Boy'.... then I sang them Barbara Allan; that's when the old folk songs came pouring out".
THey are of a related and identifiable type - nothing to do with the fact that some of them were commercially produced
Jim

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Feb 19 - 11:17 AM

Can I just add here that this "anything goes" attitude is a very, very new kid on the block
A few years ago I began sending Steve Roud lists and examples of the songs we collected - quite correctly, he chose the traditional ones for his numbering system and ignored those that were not 'folk'
A typical example was a C and W song entitled John F Kennedy we'd recorded from a Traveller whose repertoire also included a version of the Seven Gypsies (from his mother) and several other genuine folk songs
To my knowledge, that has never been given a Roud Number (quite rightly) yet he now argues that everything a traditional singer sings is a traditional song - a screeching U-turn
What new information do we have that suddenly makes pop songs 'folk songs' deserving of Roud numbers - buggered if I can see any
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Feb 19 - 11:40 AM

nobody went around with a rule book - they didn't have to - they sounded as they sounded and we took to them in thousands

Indeed, Jim. I think you have just summed up my point about what a "folk audience" takes to. Most people do not know the background of a song unless they have heard it on the TV or radio. When they go to a folk club and hear a song that sounds like a folk song to them, as far as they are concerned, it is a folk song. Whether it was handed down from horny hand to horny hand or whether it was written by an accountant last week does not concern them.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Feb 19 - 11:51 AM

"Most people do not know the background of a song unless they have heard it on the TV or radio"
No-no-no
The songs that launched the revival were accessible on neither to a great extent
The mainstays were 'Lloyd/Vaughan Williams's 'Penguin Book of Folk Songs and MacColl and Seeger's 'Singing Island
Peoplew ere looking for an alternative to what was being pumped out by the media
The best of folk song was to be found on The Third Programme, which nobody but the toffs listened to
As Ewan and Peg entitled their four part article for Folk Review "And So We sang"
And yes - one of the side efects of the clubs was that people began to care where the songs came from - you need to dig out some of the magnificent articles from the time - Roy Palmer, Ian Campbell, Karl Dallas, Roy Harris.... a steady stream, sorely missed
You onle have to read the sleeve notes of the Topic or Folkways albums to see how deeply some people became - booklets in themselves, some of them (particularly Folkways)
Jim

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Feb 19 - 12:12 PM

That's what I said, Jim. The songs sung in folk clubs were not generally on radio and TV and I believe that is still true. Most people have no idea where the songs are from. They only know if they like them or not.

I went to see Mark Dowding last night (us Lancastrians have to stick together!) He is very knowledgeable and has a vast array of songs as well as being a brilliant performer. He announced all his songs with the right credits and sang a range from traditional to contemporary. The range of contemporary songs were from writers as wide ranging as Harry Boardman and Stanley Accrington and included a few from Peter Bond and Mike Harding. Had they have not been announced I would have no idea, and cared little, if they were ancient or written last weekend. The point is, they were all right for the folk club. No one was making money out of them. They may have been in copyright but they were not commercial. They were folk songs.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Gozz
Date: 26 Feb 19 - 12:17 PM

To support Dick's claim that people believe some song's are traditional, I would point to a story recounted in "Picking Sootie Blackberries" (the songs of Keith Marsden). The person who the story is told about was a respected folk singer in these parts and in Padstow over the May Day festivities. He had big arguements with his son-in-law about Bring us a Barrel, refusing to believe it was not trad until he was actually introduced to the writer.

Some years later, having sung the chorus many times in morris circles and not knowing the origins, I had also made the same assumption until I came to find the words to add it to my repetoire. That makes at least two of us.

Another song to be added to that category would be Dave Webber's May Song. It is a true story that is told there as well about the Padstow local who made comment about him singing it in the Ring O Bells at St Izzy because he wasn't a local. I am sure the list of such songs and stories about them could fill up many threads on their own, so I will just cite those true stories for now.

I would also like to comment on Vincent Black Lightening. It tells a story, from the viewpoint of someone who is outside of the normal boundaries of society, but from a sympathetic point of view. There is a tragic end and perhaps some sort of moral. All seem to me to be elements one would find in folk songs and to my mind more of such elements than I would expect in a pop song.

Just my two penneth.

Gozz

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 26 Feb 19 - 12:59 PM

I am beginning to detect a coming together here. I see nothing fundamentally wrong with what anyone has put in the last 20 or so posts.
If I can just be allowed a bit of pedantry (I'm trying to play devil's advocate just to clarify and hopefully move closer to a consensus). The movement is against using the term 'contemporary folk song': Jim suggests, 'contemporary songs using folk forms and functions' which is a mouthful even if it is a good description. If they are contemporary songs using Jim's description why can we not use for shorthand 'contemporary folk songs'? If not then it still needs a short phrase that can be trotted out.


Once again, off topic, but I can't let the nasty digs pass, Professor Child's collection was 'inclusive' and included a whole lot of material that didn't quite fit his parameters. The same applies to the Roud Index. It tries to be inclusive. If there are some inconsistencies in approach then such has ever been the case when it comes to material like ours. Arguably better to be inclusive than exclusive and upset a whole load of people whose songs were not included for whatever reason.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Feb 19 - 01:32 PM

I can see the sense in using the known phrase "contemporary folk". Everyone knows what is meant and when discussing it in a more academic way such as this, we know of his shorthand for the longer description.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Feb 19 - 01:40 PM

We know of his = We know it is

Damn you spill clicker

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Feb 19 - 01:59 PM

'contemporary folk song'
I can see nthing wrong with this in the club context as long as it is applied to songs which have been made using folk form, thus achieving homogeneity and giving the audience what it came to listen to
It is when it is used to cram in anything that takes any fancy - the 'singing horse' school of non-thought
"digs pass,"
I don't do 'nasty digs' - I leave that to those who describe the pioneers as romantics and who suggest that Child couldn't tell the difference between his formal poetry and his folk ballads   
Roud shiftedf from just including folk songs to anything the source singers sand, not to make sure he missed nothing but - well- god knows why - it just didn't make sense, especially as he didn't include everything the source singers sang - how could he
THere is no justification whatever for giving a Roud number to an easily traceable composition of the early twentieth century by an American boxing promoter who had never set foot in England -especially as our last big souce singer has dismissed all such songs as 'not folk songs'
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 26 Feb 19 - 02:19 PM

>>>>>'It is when it is used to cram in anything that takes any fancy - the 'singing horse' school of non-thought'<<<<<< Whilst this would be impossible to police, Jim's perception of this as a massive problem is way off the mark. Folk music, as more people have witnessed than have denied, is alive and well in England albeit not so much in the earlier format of the folk club. Festivals, singarounds, weekend gatherings, sessions, concerts, etc., are all very healthy in all of the places I visit. Here's a new suggestion, Jim, have a look at the website 'Mainly Norfolk' which deals mainly with recordings. This aspect looks very healthy to me. A wide range of young performers performing largely traditional material with a sprinkling of contemporary folk.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 26 Feb 19 - 02:29 PM

Jim,
The Roud Index is simply a tool, a catalogue, primarily so we can find versions of songs, and we can compare and research versions. How does the fact that there are a few songs in there that don't tick somebody's box affect that usage?

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 26 Feb 19 - 02:39 PM

>>>>>>I can see nothing wrong with this in the club context as long as it is applied to songs which have been made using folk form, thus achieving homogeneity and giving the audience what it came to listen to<<<<<<<.

I think we can call that consensus. Debate over.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Feb 19 - 02:47 PM

Jim

"The mainstays were 'Lloyd/Vaughan Williams's 'Penguin Book of Folk Songs and MacColl and Seeger's 'Singing Island"

In what years were these published please?

"The best of folk song was to be found on The Third Programme, which nobody but the toffs listened"
Toffs? amongst my family and friends this would have been seen as an insult. It's the first time I have been described as such.
This is the second time that you have mentioned that nobody listened to these programmes. I have no doubt that the audience wasn't large but I believe that the folk audience at that time was mainly interested in the American material which had become more well known via Skiffle. This was available in such programmes for instance as Guitar Club, 6.05 Special, Easybeat and blues programmes made by Paul Oliver.

You mention Folkways which being in New York issued mainly US material. In fact their Harry Smith collection did an amazing job in building a very large audience for folk music. And, it was made up of re-issues of commercial recordings.
Folkways were available in England but only clandestinely or on acetate dubs. At that time they were not licenced for issue here. As a consequence they were expensive. Shops such as Collets and Dobells were raided by customs and the "illegal" product confiscated.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: GUEST,Hootenanny
Date: 26 Feb 19 - 02:48 PM

Apologies the Guest above was me.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 26 Feb 19 - 03:33 PM

59 & 60 respectively.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 26 Feb 19 - 03:37 PM

The singing of trad English songs in Hull started about 1963 with the Watersons. I'm not aware of anything else in our archives before that. I came along in about 65 after a couple of years avidly listening to American stuff.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: GUEST,Hootenanny
Date: 26 Feb 19 - 05:50 PM

Apologies if you consider this as thread drift but Steve Gardham's post at 03.33 sent me to my bookshelf and there I found The Penguin Book of American Folk Songs with notes by Alan Lomax.
On the first page it states the following;

"Unless otherwise stated the songs in this book are drawn from previously copyrighted sources and, as composite versions, have been adapted and arranged by Alan Lomax, by John A Lomax or by other editors. They may not be reprinted, recorded, or used for commercial purposes without the written permission of the authors, through Ludlow Music Inc., Columbus Circle, New York, or Essex Music Ltd, London".

One song included here is what I believe was the first song recorded by the Carter Family in 1927. In which case it would have been copyrighted by Ralph Peer and A.P Carter. It would therefore still have been in copyright I believe, Whether it was written by Carter is questionable I believe. To me without checking it against the Carter recording I cannot see how it has been adapted.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 27 Feb 19 - 03:46 AM

I think, as per my earlier post, that copyright is a red herring when it comes to songs performed in folk clubs. I know it makes a massive difference for any commercial venture such as publishing or recording but I have never heard of anyone being sued under copyright law for singing a song at a folk club. Contemporary Folk (shorthand for longer meaning as discussed above) can be in copyright but depends on being the right 'type' of music for folk club audiences.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Feb 19 - 05:49 AM

The Third Programmer was largely regarded as aimed at the educated elite - recognised for Classical Music and learned talks
The small listernership was a standing joke - I remember The Goons threatening someone to 'Ten years hard Third Programme listening'
"You mention Folkways which being in New York issued mainly US material"
Not the case - Folkways had a massive international catalogue
I think copyrighting arrangements was largely an American thing, though I know MacColl publicly criticised Luke Kelly for the Thee Dubliers attempts at it.
The first court case involving a traditional song occurred quite early over the authorship of 'Wreck of the Old 97'
Jim

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Feb 19 - 07:41 AM

Re Folkways I assumed that you were speaking of it in terms of material used in UK folk clubs; Woody Guthrie, New Lost City Ramblers etc. I am fully aware of the scope of Moe's recordings but I don't think any of his rain forest type recordings were available, or in demand in the UK legally or otherwise.

"I think copyrighting arrangements was largely an American thing, though I know MacColl publicly criticised Luke Kelly for the Thee Dubliers attempts at it."
DESPITE THE FACT THAT HE HAD DONE IT HIMSELF!?

I am well aware of the Old 97 too. Norm Cohen gives a full account of it and all the claims, counterclaims and appeals in his book Long Steel Rail.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: GUEST,Hootenanny
Date: 27 Feb 19 - 07:43 AM

Damn,

I did it again. The above post was me.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Feb 19 - 08:53 AM

" rain forest type recordings were available, or in demand in the UK legally or otherwise."
They were - and they extended far beyond South America - still have some Eastern European albums
Some of MacColls early Ballads also appeared ion the label - three of them were among the first I bought and were instrumental in converting me to the real thing
Be interessted to learn what traditional stuff MaColl copyrighted
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: GUEST,Hootenanny
Date: 27 Feb 19 - 11:01 AM

Jim,

Re Folkways availability I am referring to the days before you entered the folk music world if we can believe your own telling that you first encountered it in 1966.
Did I say that Folkways were NOT available? No. I explained that they were and the situation at the time.

It was a copyright of an "arrangement" that you referred to I have a publication dated 1957 (again pre-dating your interest by nine years) which includes the song "Rothesay-O", "Traditional", "Words and Music arranged by Ewan MacColl". Ditto for the song "Calton Weaver" which doesn't include the description "Traditional".

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: GUEST,jim bainbridge
Date: 27 Feb 19 - 12:38 PM

I remember going to Collet's in New Oxford Street about 1964 and being delighted to find the Folkways (cardboard cover) LPs of the Elliotts of Birtley and the Borders LP featuring Willie Scott et al, so they were available then.
There were also LPs on the same label of Ewan MacColl, singing the bothy ballads he'd recorded from Scottish singers. It struck me then that it would have been more acceptable if those original singers had been on the record, rather than the collector's version....

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Feb 19 - 12:41 PM

Don't think so Hoot - I was well into it by then
I joined the Spinners Club in Liverpool in 1961/2
Don't know what your publication was, but nothing I have by MacColl, going back to 'Scotland Sings (1953) is copyright (both of those you mentioned are in 'Scotland Sings' and Personal Choice (1962) and are attributed to the collections they came from)
Jim

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 27 Feb 19 - 03:15 PM

My copy of Travellers' Songs Of E & S clearly states ' @ Ewan MacColl and Peggy Seeger 1977'. Oh, and several pop stars appear in the Acknowledgments.



By the way, I'm being facetious deliberately. On p31 under the title 'Copyrights' they state. 'The modern practice of copyrighting traditional songs is a subject of continuing controversy. It is our opinion that if copyright MUST be assigned, then it should be to the singers.

My own view is much more simplistic. They are public domain and therefore impossible to copyright. You can only copyright a particular arrangement.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Feb 19 - 03:35 PM

Jim Carroll:

The time I am speaking of is still before your involvement by four years. I apologise for getting the date wrong I think 1966 was when you said you came to London.

The publication I have was as I said above dated 1957. So obviously Ewan changed his mind after 1954 and back again at a later date and again according to Steve's posting.

Jim Bainbridge:

Yes Folkways were available in 1964 but my first was a ten inch acetate dub by Woody Guthrie with Sonny Terry purchased from Colletts New Oxford Street shop probably 1957. I have a similar dub from a Folkways dub of New Orleans Jazz recordings.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: GUEST,Hootenanny
Date: 27 Feb 19 - 03:39 PM

This is becoming a habit.

The post above was me.

Steve;

You are probably already aware of this but if Ewan and Peggy recorded a song on a commercial disc and it got played in public and or broadcast then they were entitled to royalties through PPL provided that they were registered with them. Registration cost nothing then. I guess it still costs nothing.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: GUEST,jim bainbridge
Date: 28 Feb 19 - 05:44 AM

maybe that financial incentive is why we never got LPs of the original singers rather than the EM version- he didn't do it on the Elliotts' LP but maybe he was happier copying Scottish stuff than mining songs from Durham?
Getting a bit off the subject this, and although I don't recognise 'contemporary folk' as any more of a genre than folk or trad, I can't see why there would be any problem with a folk or trad performer adding their own version of a modern song to their repertoire- we can't just STOP the development of the music!

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Feb 19 - 07:08 AM

"My copy of Travellers' Songs Of E & S clearly states "
The book is copyrighted because it was edited by Ewan and Peggy - all such works belong to their editor
The individual songs most certainly are not, which is what we are discussing - the new 'Penguin Book of English Folk Songs is copyrighted to Steve Roud and Julia Bishop
Hoot quoted an earlier book - I though I had all MacColl's publishes stuff - I'd love to add this one to the collection   
Another bit of MacColl necrophobia bites the dust, it would appear

"Financial incentive"
MacColl, Seeger and Parker were paid by the BBC for the work they did on the programme - not for the songs
"we never got LPs of the original singers rather than the EM version"
After two of the radio ballads, MacColl and Seeger dited two of teh best albums ever produced of field recordings - 'Now is the Time for Fishing' after 'Singing the Fishing' and 'The Elliots of Birtly' after 'The Big Hewer'
There was to be a third on The Stewarts of Blair after the Travelling People (we have the edited recordings), but Folkways never issued it.
The Radio ballad team made a verbal contract with all those recorded at the end of the interviews - again, we have the actuality
I have no idea whether the BBC or Folkways ever honoured those contracts - I assume they both did (though I do know from experience that the BBC only paid a pittance and most of the record companies weren't much better, if they paid at all)
It was never really about money in those days and with some of us, it still isn't
Do you have the title of that 1957 publication Hoot - my two, containing the two songs you mentioned, are dated 1953 and 1964 - not copywriter either side of your date ?
It's become a 'must get' (there is no evidence of it on either the MacColl site or in 'The Essential MacColl' lists of publications
A mystery indeed
As far as our own collecting goes, we credit the songs as being traditional but the versions attributed to them (not copyrighted)
Jim

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Feb 19 - 07:45 AM

Interesting to not that Neither Alasdaire Clayre (Seeds of Love) and Frank Puslow (Hammond and Gardiner Collection) never got around to copyrighting their arrangements - very much a phenomenon of tthe pseudo-folk scene
Off to see Hamlet -- see y'all tomorrow
Jim

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: GUEST,jim bainbridge
Date: 28 Feb 19 - 08:29 AM

I was have always wondered why on earth EM did not use the original singers on that Folkways CD of Scottish ballads rather than record his own version, as he did.
The information that payment was due to PPL registered SINGERS rather than the recording company for broadcast songs just made me wonder whether this lay behind the decision to do that- the fact that EM & PS issued many recordings of 'source' singers later is not in dispute.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: GUEST,Hootenanny
Date: 28 Feb 19 - 09:26 AM

Jim Carroll

"Hoot quoted an earlier book - I though I had all MacColl's publishes stuff - I'd love to add this one to the collection   
Another bit of MacColl necrophobia bites the dust, it would appear"

Could you state clearly what you are implying here?

Can I ask for a straightforward answer?
ALSO I didn't mention a book put a publication. I know you are a stickler for correct description.

Jim Bainbridge:

Re PPL; Peforming singers/musicians get royalties as do the recording companies. They too have to register. If the record company doesn't register neither get royalties.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: GUEST,Hootenanny
Date: 01 Mar 19 - 06:13 PM

Surprise, surprise ???

Re my question above; No answer.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Mar 19 - 02:39 AM

"Could you state clearly what you are implying here"
I'm not "implying anything Hooy - I asked yo to name the bokk you said you had containing the two songs you claimed MacColl had copyrighted songs - no implication - just a simple request
Sve claims thheir Traeller songs were copywriter - - the book, 'The Songs of the English and Scottish Travellers' was copyrighted (as was 'The New Penguin Bokk of Folk Songs') - the individual songs certainly weren't - they remain in the Public Domain, as they should   
"Surprise, surprise ??? Re my question above; No answer.."
I've been away since Thursday and arrived back rather later than I intended - what are you implying
Still like to know what the publication was
I have become rather bored with all the 'MacColl stories" - most unsubstantiated and virtually all which painted a picture of somebody I never knew and bore little resemblance to the MacColl I met in the mid sixties and who I came to regard as a friend and source of ins[piraition over the twenty-odd years I knew him - that goes for his partner, who I still regard the same
I'm really not interested in the opinions of those who didn't know him, nor their largely unsubstantiated stories - I am interested in the wealth of research and ideas that he left behind - the fact that it is virtually impossible to discuss those ideas because of a mountain of "name-change - war record" garbage, interests bme deeply
I sat with two friends yesterday, both singers and both fascinated by the work Pat and I described we did in Ther Critics Group - we had to put coats on to protect ourselves from the blast of two open minds
Jim

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: GUEST,Hootennanny
Date: 02 Mar 19 - 04:53 AM

Jim,

When did you ask me for the name of the book or the bokk?

As I pointed out above it is not a book , I said publication.

You stated that you would like to add it to your collection. With your wonderful ability in the field of research you should be able to locate a copy without too much trouble. It is the last eleven words of your comment that puzzle me.

So, will you please answer my question? I doubt it. Obfuscation appears to be your stock in trade. I was implying that you never come up with a straight simple answer.

It's reassuring to know that you spent a day with two people with open minds. Hopefully some of it rubbed off on you.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Mar 19 - 07:59 AM

"I said publication."
How can I locate it if you won't tell me the name ?
Irt seems it is to remain your secret - think we're finished with that particular MacColl legend, don't you ?
Try getting a discussion on MacColl's actually work without the usual garbage and the clouds will soon lift

I have spelled out exactly what I mean by folk song here a dozen times along with precedents, sources and clear definitions
I have yet to nearer than Ray Davis and the Kinks to date
Petrhaps you might care to offer yours ?
Jim

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Richard Mellish
Date: 02 Mar 19 - 08:11 AM

This thread has gone a long way towards answering a question that I was thinking of starting a new thread for: for those who are happy to apply the label "folk" broadly, rather than narrowly to traditional material, what are their criteria for what qualifies?

Steve's
> 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)

is helpful and reminiscent of Steve Roud's discussion in the Introduction to The Book.)

The first time I heard Vincent Black Lightening I had some trouble following the plot, which suggests that it isn't quite as pared down to essentials as some of the big ballads, but it does tell a story, through a combination of description and dialogue.

The pop world is a closed book to me, my main experience being the songs that one is exposed to in shops, hairdressers, etc, characterised by much repetition of a few words (if the words are audible at all above all the other noise) and much percussion. But I get the impression that that is one end of the pop spectrum, with the other end shading into "contemporary folk" or whatever we want to call that.

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Mar 19 - 08:27 AM

CONTEMPORARY FOLK SONG
Made circa 1925/30, somehere in North Clare, probably Corofin, composer unknown; celebrating the new women' hairstyle which replaced the custom of wearing the hair long and hanging down the back
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Mar 19 - 08:34 AM

ANOTHER FROM A DECADE EARLIER
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Mar 19 - 08:39 AM

CONTEMPORARY SONG USING TRADITIONAL FORM
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: GUEST,jim bainbridge
Date: 02 Mar 19 - 08:52 AM

Jim C- I do not understand the mention of Ray Davi(e)s & whether you consider his work of any value?

Also, nobody wants another argument about Ewan MacColl- we know your views about that.
As far as I can see, there are no 'unsubstantiated stories' about him on this thread, so when there has been no criticism, such a stout defence of the man seemsseriously over the top, so just get that chip off your shoulder & stop provoking arguments when they do not exist!

Subject: RE: Different types of contemporary folk
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Mar 19 - 09:28 AM

Ask whoever raised The Kinks as a contender for the folk scene - try the next thread
I have no interst in arguing about MacColl though I do find it arrogant for somebody to claim nobody wants to argue about him - did you conduct a survey maybe?
You are aloowed to discuss whatever you want which falls under the remit of the forum, which I understand is the traditional arts
If I said similar there'd be howls of 'folk police' from here to Ulan Bator
"As far as I can see, there are no 'unsubstantiated stories' about him"
We've just had one along with a reluctance to substantiate it
Until we are given substantiation it will remain unsubstantiated
You brought in the subject of miners songs and money recently - care to substantiate that one
Refusing to discuss te work and ideas of one of the greatest contributors to folk song is about as far over the top as it gets
Jim