 sj |
||
|
||
Review: Walter Pardon - Research
Related thread:
Walter Pardon - which song first? (45)
|
|
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: Steve Shaw Date: 16 Nov 19 - 04:41 AM I must confess that I haven't been following this thread too closely, but, having just caught up, I must say that "whining responses" seems like a very inappropriate and, ironically, a whining response to Jim. I read what Brian says and I recall that he is always polite and mild-mannered here (as in real life). It really is ridiculous that an unsigned-in anonymous person can wade in here by starting a thread that appears to have vexatious intent. It feels like the Wild West. Anyway, that's what I think and I'm sticking to it. And to Irish tunes... |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: GUEST,Keith Price Date: 16 Nov 19 - 05:34 AM "Jim Carroll and his whining responses"Joe Offer that's a disgraceful comment in the context of this thread. |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: Jim Carroll Date: 16 Nov 19 - 05:53 AM Thank, but please don't get this thread closed lads - it is too important and mostly enjoyable Jim |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: Steve Shaw Date: 16 Nov 19 - 06:44 AM Got it, Jim. |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: GUEST,Keith Price Date: 16 Nov 19 - 07:44 AM Same here, Jim. |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: GUEST,jag Date: 16 Nov 19 - 07:54 AM Thank you Joe Offer for the youtube playlist. I think it would be really good, and in keeping with having "research" in the subject line if someone (Pseudoymous?) collected all the references to sources of information relevant to Walter scattered in this discussion and put them into one post without any comments. However, I am not going to read it again to do that. Most of the criticism of the way that those who met Walter Pardon presented him seems to relate to concerns that there would be with any account relying mainly on interviews and first-hand anecdotes. I am sure the difficulties have been well-chewed over by journalists and oral historians. Sometimes without an appropriate question something would not be said and would be lost forever. With no questions something that was unclear would never be clarified of rephrased in a better way. What seem to be inconsistencies could not be clarified. |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: Jim Carroll Date: 16 Nov 19 - 08:24 AM THere has never ben any question that anybody ever interfered with what Walter had to say about folk song - this has been plucked out of the air and the fact that it has been presented in a political light, it is clear where it is coming from It is based entirely on the discredited argument that singers were incapable of thinking for themselves As far as Pseudonymous role in all of this, given his behaviour, he should not even be here - he has (hllf) been described as a (T)roll by a moderator and no troll should ever be taken seriously What next - should we hold an enquiry as to whether Travellers are "Thieves, poachers and scavengers" alongside discussing their role as Tradition Bearers? Walter's recordings are already archived in full in several places and in the not-to-distant future will be put on line by The British Library - I suggest that this distasteful aspect of what otherwise should have been a hrealthy discussion of a much loved traditional singer should be formly placed in the dustbin of history There really is much more to learn of this fine singer without cluttering it up with scurrilous innuendo Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: punkfolkrocker Date: 16 Nov 19 - 08:28 AM Jag - you touch on a point I wanted to raise, before this thread went completely kerplunk... Weekly and monthly music papers and magazines have filled millions of pages with interviews, articles, and criticism since the mid 20th century... My youth revolved around the NME, Melody Maker, Sounds and various other short lived publications.. That's basically how most of us aquired our music knowledge decades ago... The journalism could be frivolous, or deadly earnest.. The NME would encourage young writers who were pretentious tosspot wannabe intellectuals, randomly dropping in trendy university jargon words like 'paradigm','hegemony, and 'semiotics' to make themselves sound clever and superior... But it was predominently jobbing jounalism, or enthusiastic fanzine writing.. Doing it mostly for love of music. Not bloody elitist too far up their own arseholes academics, hijacking music, scrabbling for academic status and research funding... Granted though, the more pretentious NME writers made some of us curious about those unfamilar clever sounding words, preparing us for our own problematic encounters with such 'specialist' academic vanity jargon on our own degree courses... |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: punkfolkrocker Date: 16 Nov 19 - 08:44 AM As I try to refrain from presenting my personal opinion as statements of fact... I omitted the word "parasites" and phrases like "vampires sucking the life out of music", and possibly far worse that could occur to me, when I refer to certain types of music academics... |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: Joe Offer Date: 16 Nov 19 - 10:27 PM It's got to the point where I'm grateful for Mudcat shutdowns, because it gives us a chance to breathe. Walter Pardon is a fascinating person to study, and this should be a very fruitful discussion. I acknowledge that Pseudonymous appears to be targeting Jim Carroll, and that is unfair. But Jim Carroll goes absolutely bonkers when anyone disagrees with him, which makes him a ready target for whatever troll wants to come around and make trouble. In short, Jim Carroll draws trolls like flies, because it's certain that Jim will put on a good show whenever anyone says anything that sets him off. I fully realize that the Carroll/Shaw faction thinks all this is the fault of Mudcat, that we should control anyone that Carroll/Shaw deems to be objectionable. And for the most part, they are correct in thinking that such people and posts are objectionable. I won't argue with them on that - but yet they claim that Mudcat is "supporting" these objectionable people, which is certainly not true. The fact of the matter is that there is a limit to the amount that we can control objectionable posts. Once a message is posted, most of the damage has already been done. I suppose that deletion might serve in a way to "punish" the offender, but I honestly think that is of little value - trolls look for immediate effect, and deleting a message five minutes after it's posted has little effect. And when we delete messages, it destroys the continuity of the discussion and more-or-less destroys the thread. So, instead of responding to requests that we delete objectionable posts, we ask Mudcatters not to respond to such posts, and to stay out of combat. A few objectionable posts don't do any harm if the discussion continues, but if the "good guys" respond to the challenge to battle, the thread is sunk. So, we ask Mudcatters not to do battle. It really doesn't matter who's right or wrong - it's the battling that ruins threads. It has been our principle for a long time to close threads when they get bogged down in battle, and to delete messages only sparingly. Some moderator - I don't know who - tried to fix this thread by deleting dozens of messages, but it really didn't fix the problem. I undeleted a few messages that were on topic, but I'm not going to undelete them all - and I'm not going to let such mass deletions happen again. For the most part, Music threads that end up in battle, will be closed. So if you don't want a thread to be closed, don't do battle, even if you're sure you're right. I'm currently watching the "Current state of folk music," "Travellers," and Walter Pardon threads. All of these threads have been the site of skirmishes. If the skirmishes become battles, the threads will be closed. Thank you. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: Brian Peters Date: 16 Nov 19 - 11:17 PM Point taken, Joe, but the trouble is that inflammatory and (more importantly) grossly misleading posts can be expressed in the most anodyne language but nonetheless incense those of us who are passionate about the topic and the need for accuracy.
-Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: punkfolkrocker Date: 17 Nov 19 - 01:43 AM "And the point is that this thread is supposed to be about Walter Pardon." Joe - that's the problem. It soon became aparent that this thread wasn't about Walter Pardon. The OP's intention was more likely to exploit Walter Pardon merely as a device for launching an attack on a previous generation of UK Folk researchers... Which is why I suggested extracting any useful information and ideas this thread elicited under false pretences, to form the basis of a new dedicated 'factual' Walter Pardon resource thread... Possibly a moderated perma thread if a knowledgable Walter P enthusiast could be interested in taking it on...??? Then just abandon this thread to sink into oblivion... If the OP still wants a serious discussion on the unreliability of amateur / hobbyist / non-scientific research methods, then it's up to Pseud to try again with less malicious intent, or smug academic conceit... He/she/they may have lost our trust for now, but some of us may be fairly forgiving folks if we think a second chance is deserved...??? |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: Jim Carroll Date: 17 Nov 19 - 03:52 AM "Carroll/Shaw " It really is time this abusing o membesr stops Jowe - it is becoming trollism in its own right There are no "factions" here Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: The Sandman Date: 17 Nov 19 - 03:58 AM Steve Shaw has not contributed to this thread has he? I am going to start a thread about Harry Cox, in my opinion one of Englands finest trad singers |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: Jim Carroll Date: 17 Nov 19 - 04:08 AM I am going to respond to Jowee's remarks fully in the hope that he has the courage yo leave my reply up I do not "go bonlers if someone disagrees with me" If I do, can someone produce an example of my doing so I have not insuted anybody here (apart from the toll who has opened a hate thread aime at me and spread personal and inaccurate details over the forum (whih were left there several days befor being removed) I argue as articulately as I am able whenever I disagree with something If that is going "bonkers" I must get a new dictionary I have been told by a mod (not Joe) that I must stop arguing - Joe has described by doing so publicly as "troublecausing" If we can't disagree passionately ofver things we feel are important, what the hell can we fo Noe Joe - where exactly have I gone "BONKERS" Steve Shaw has been dragged into this yet he has posted twice to this thread and we hardly meet on other threads, yet he is presenting us as some sort of a Cabal Soething appears to be going on here and I have no idea what it is Perhaps a public explanation might be in order Jim Carroll I |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: Jim Carroll Date: 17 Nov 19 - 04:17 AM I did that in a hurry and when I was somehat stunned Here's the corrected version without the typos I am going to respond to Joe's remarks fully in the hope that he has the courage to leave my reply up I do not "go bonkers if someone disagrees with me" If I do, can someone produce an example of my doing so I have not insulted anybody here (apart from the troll who has opened a hate thread aimed at me and spread personal and inaccurate details over the forum (which were left there several days befor being removed) I argue as articulately as I am able whenever I disagree with something If that is going "bonkers" I must get a new dictionary I have been told by a mod (not Joe) that I must stop arguing - Joe has described by doing so publicly as "trouble-causing" If we can't disagree passionately over things we feel are important, what the hell can we do So Joe - where exactly have I gone "BONKERS" Steve Shaw has been dragged into this yet he has posted twice to this thread and we hardly meet on other threads, yet he is presenting us as some sort of a Cabal Soething appears to be going on here and I have no idea what it is Perhaps a public explanation might be in order Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: Dave the Gnome Date: 17 Nov 19 - 05:05 AM Where did you go bonkers? Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: Jim Carroll - PM Date: 06 Nov 19 - 02:53 PM ... Oh - and he ate like a pig ... Maybe not quite bonkers but I wouldn't say it was a sane response to Nick's innocent comment either. There are plenty of other examples of your inappropriate and often confusing responses to inoffensive posts that you seem to be attacks. |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: GUEST,JoeG Date: 17 Nov 19 - 05:11 AM Well said Joe I keep trying to keep the 'Current state' thread on track and amicable but it isn't easy |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: Jim Carroll Date: 17 Nov 19 - 05:21 AM "Oh - and he ate like a pig" That is how walter as descibed and if you describe putting that up as "not quite bonkers" we have different attitudes toward our traditional singers We really are on opposite sides here, aren't we Thak you for giving what I said consideration Joe - really is appreciated Jim |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: Dave the Gnome Date: 17 Nov 19 - 05:58 AM That is how walter as descibed No it wasn't. Yet another bonkers assertion. |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: Steve Shaw Date: 17 Nov 19 - 06:03 AM You may be a moderator, Joe Offer, and you may think what a great idea it is to calm things down with your cod-moderate posts, but this sort of Aunt-Sally stuff is not only fake news but it is also highly inflammatory: I fully realize that the Carroll/Shaw faction thinks all this is the fault of Mudcat, that we should control anyone that Carroll/Shaw deems to be objectionable. And for the most part, they are correct in thinking that such people and posts are objectionable. I won't argue with them on that - but yet they claim that Mudcat is "supporting" these objectionable people, which is certainly not true. There is no "Shaw/Carroll faction." We do not ask you to control people on the basis of our finding them "objectionable." The objectionable nature of posts is generally self-evident and those posts don't need any "deeming" by me or Jim or anyone else. I for one have not accused you of "supporting" objectionable posters, though your arbitrary treatment of the people here who you don't like is positively eyebrow-raising at times when set alongside the indulged horrid behaviour of trolls who call people Jew-haters, bog-trotters, Abbottamus and the rest, and yes, I've raised that with you a number of times. You are rather good at excusing yourself from taking the awkward actions you should be taking (in m'humble - it's never my gig) and you do it by shoving the blame on to victims. As for Jim, I and a number of others have pleaded with him, in the forum and by private message in many occasions, to ignore troll posts, so I have no idea as to what you mean by "faction." I absolutely agree that the best policy is to blank these people out. But by blaming the victims of trolling, which appears to be your only modus operandi, you are simply inflaming the situation. I've got very good in recent weeks at ignoring Iains, but it still irks me to see moderators having a go at Jim and not him when Jim, ill-advisedly in my opinion (and Jim is fully conversant with my opinion, be assured), chooses to respond. Even if you can't see it, I can plainly see which of the two of them is infinitely worse. Quite right, I haven't posted anything much at all about Walter Pardon but I've read the thread. But I would ask anyone who thinks that this somehow disqualifies me from posting to the thread, let me just remind them that I've been a signed-up member of this forum for many years and I unfailingly post under my one and only real name. So save your criticisms, please, for the anonymous non-member who opened this thread in the first place. Thanks. I'm off out of the thread but I shall continue to follow it with interest, as long as it's about Walter, and there's much constructive comment about him to be made in spite of this thread's bastard nativity. |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Date: 17 Nov 19 - 07:04 AM Recap 1 A helpful poster early in the thread mentioned a thesis by David Hillery, which is very interesting. Hillery compares the work of several 'traditional' singers, including Pardon. I shall have more to say on this later. However, at one point, he shows awareness of the issues I raised at the outset, namely the biased ways that Pardon and his life are sometimes presented. Hillery's point is a wider one. He homes in on the way the places where folk singer live tend to be presented. He thinks that these places tend to be described as isolated. He thinks this is because it suits the agenda in terms of something like cut off from the wider world, more likely to be unaffected by outside influences. This is exactly what I thought (as mentioned above) when I found within the output of the Pardon industry (look that word up in a dictionary if you find its use here odd) assertions that Knapton was in the early years of Pardon's life 'cut off'. The 'evidence' for this was that the roads were not 'made up' (made of tarmac?). Quite apart from the fact that we had a thriving economy before tarmac was invented, so the idea is itself very very odd, those who came up with it and even published it seem not to have done their background research. This would have demonstrated, as I said, that Knapton had a railway station in the 19th century, serving both passengers and goods. But I was pleased to see that I am not the only one who looks back at the literature produced in the Revival and more generally on folk and sees how biased and selective its reporting can be. 2 I double checked on Pardon's early links with the Methodist chapel in Knapton. Shepherd's history of the place lists several names as attenders at a youth group there. Pardon's name appears along side others; the list seems to have come from old records, and it includes other residents born at around the same time. Knapton during Pardon's time experienced all sorts of music and culture, including amateur Shakespeare, entertainments with wind-op gramophones etc. 3 If I remember aright, even the claim that Pardon's grandfather learned his songs from broadsides has been challenged on this thread, and this comes from Pardon himself in an early interview. The grounds for the challenge was itself potentially dubious, claiming that the family were 'hoarders' which for me evokes images of people with some sort of clinical condition. However, it seems that Pardon himself stated that he believed that the broadsides were thrown out when there was a clear out after his grandfather's death. 4 It has been explained that the importance of Pardon comes because he learned his songs the traditional way. Of course, he didn't learn them in quite a traditional way, and I think Hillery also picks up on this. The key here is Pardon's assertions that he did not sing the songs. Singing the songs might be viewed as a key part of learning in the traditional way. 5 @ Steve Shaw: This thread is not meant to be a 'love in' in praise of Walter Pardon. It is meant to take a look at the way he has been presented via sleeve notes, web pages, lectures, etc etc and to try to sort out fact from opinion. 6 Yes, I am an anonymous poster. Deal with it. |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: Jim Carroll Date: 17 Nov 19 - 07:08 AM "That is how walter as descibed" Walter was described as having eccentric eating habits As far as I am concerned bringing up the eating habits of anybody, particularly one of Britain's most important traditional singers is beyond belief I know Walter well enough to know he would have been both embarrassed and bemused at such behaviour as he would have been about one posters (in the past) describing elderly people's dress habits as "tit trousers" Such insensitive (at the very least) behaviour has no place in discussions of our old singers I suspect your continued "bonkers" assertion is is a sign of guilt as much as anything else - at least I hope it is I suggest you try putting yourself in the place of the person you are writing about Dave I've said why I recte openly to trolls Steve As much as I agree with you in general, the fact that the one in question has been allowed to behave as he has unchecked for about three years tended to duggest that ignoring him wasn't working I didn't make my reactions a running bttle (as I used to), but I felt in necessary to remind people who should have stopped him years ago that he was still at it As you say, the reaction was to place the blame on his victims, so one became a pair, so to speak Jim |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Date: 17 Nov 19 - 07:09 AM It seems to me it might be a good idea to get a thread entitled Walter Pardon, uncritical praise and fan contributions only. Because then somebody might say something to the point regarding his singing style and technique. Apart from Carthy's over the top praise of his 'timing' (AKA strook), there has been surprisingly little. I know this is difficult, (and again, Hillery sets out some of the more technical difficulties in describing music) but it was striking to me that so few people have found anything to say on this, even those who want to prevent anything other than adulation. |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Date: 17 Nov 19 - 07:48 AM I am struggling to find evidence that Pardon ever sang his songs in a traditional way ie context, as opposed to concerts and folk clubs, all of which are modern non traditional contexts. The idea that his style was learned from Billy is contradicted by a lot of other evidence, including Pardon's own. My granddad was a better singer. |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Date: 17 Nov 19 - 07:56 AM And if I have said something which does not reflect the facts (few as they appear to be), happy to be corrected and to learn, which was partly the point of the OP. Win win situation for me. Thank you all. |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Date: 17 Nov 19 - 08:08 AM Back to the beginning: A basis for discussion. Walter Pardon: Fact, Fiction, and Ideology. Walter Pardon (1914 – 1996) was a carpenter, singer and melodeon player (largely self-taught) from Knapton, Norfolk. Let us try to sort out a few facts about Pardon upon which everybody might agree. This is more difficult than one might think. As soon as one starts to compare different sources it seems that material presented as ‘fact’ by one source is contradicted by another, and is, after all, not so much a fact as an inference. Therefore, what follows is intended as a first draft, to be corrected in the light of any further evidence. |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: Dave the Gnome Date: 17 Nov 19 - 08:17 AM Walter was described as having eccentric eating habits No he wasn't. A good friend of his commented that he liked to have a fried egg with brown bread and vinegar for his tea when he went to her house so that is what she gave him. No one but you is describing that as eating like a pig or being eccentric. You are, once again, being irrational. Or to give it another name, bonkers. I dread to think what you would call me if I told you what I eat! |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Date: 17 Nov 19 - 08:22 AM Still a draft. So we have some 'facts' about Knapton, drawn largely from Shepherd's study of that village in the 20th century. It was not cut off in Pardon's youth, as has falsely been asserted within the Pardon industry. It had local gentry and skilled craftsmen as well as a range of more and less specialised agricultural labourers and gardeners. It had a railway station in the 19th century. It had both church and chapel, and one of the chapel luminaries, Amis, was also a figure in the history of the Labour movement. Pardon is known to have attended youth groups run by the chapel. It had a range of music, barn dances to fiddlers. There was a school in Knapton in the first half of the 18th century, not a church school. Not certain but must have been endowed/paid for by somebody, presumably some of the local gentry? It was not a church school, that is clear. It had the beginnings of a tourist industry as early as before WW II. Social events ranged from Sunday School outings to presentations of the plays of Shakespeare. There were some council houses in Knapton pre WW II. They got electricity in the 1940s (47 I think) |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Date: 17 Nov 19 - 08:28 AM I shall assume, unless Joe Offer explains that this is wrong, that it is acceptable to critique and comment upon the research methods, reasoning, and ideological bias of those who have produced material relating to Walter Pardon, including Jim Carroll. My view is that it should be possible to offer such a critique without it being taken as a personal assault or responded to as such. If this assumption is incorrect, I would be happy to hear it, as this would clarify things. I shall also assume (bearing in mind before anybody raises this, that one should not necessarily be applying aesthetic criteria from what the Americans call 'art music' to vernacular singing, that it is possible and reasonable to offer a view on the quality of Pardon's performances, as these survive via recordings, that is other than adulatory. Again, if this is not acceptable, I should be glad to know it. @ pfr takes one to know one :) |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Date: 17 Nov 19 - 08:30 AM Dave the Gnome :) :) |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: The Sandman Date: 17 Nov 19 - 08:36 AM The traditional way of singing was often around the home an example was Sarah Makem there was a bbc film made in the 60s that bears this out. Walter sang at home, so it seems he was singing in a similar situation to the ulster singer Sarah Makem. Sam Larner differed from this in that he was a singer who sang AT HOME in pubs, so what? |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: Howard Jones Date: 17 Nov 19 - 08:54 AM Speaking for myself, I interpreted the comments about Walter's food preferences as nothing more than affectionate reminiscences by people who were acquainted with him. |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Date: 17 Nov 19 - 09:02 AM When asked by researchers after his discovery, Pardon was asked about differences between the way he sang songs at that time (ie after his discovery) and the way he sang them in the past. Pardon says quite clearly that he cannot answer the question because he did not sing them. |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Date: 17 Nov 19 - 09:06 AM Hillery's thesis threw up a few more items for the 'resources' list in the form of articles about Pardon which I did not have on my original list. I'll draw up a list of these later. |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: GUEST,jag Date: 17 Nov 19 - 09:13 AM "The key here is Pardon's assertions that he did not sing the songs." (Pseudonymous 17 Nov 19 - 07:04 AM) That does not square with what Walter told Jim "They each had their own particular songs for these occasions. Apparently no-one wanted THE DARK EYED SAILOR so that was Walter’s song, or sometimes WHEN THE FIELDS WERE WHITE WITH DAISIES. They all knew the tunes but everybody was very protective of their own songs and did not want others to learn them. As the favourite youngster, Walter was the only one to whom Billy Gee would give his songs but none of his contemporaries wanted them anyway; they would only learn new songs as they came out." (Jim Carrol 09 Nov 19 - 05:58 AM) By the way, I just noticed that the Carroll/Mackenzie essay that comes from was titled "A Simple Countryman?". Note the question mark. If I understand the various writings correctly, most of the songs in Walter's repertoire came from his family, as a youngster he sang some of them (two are listed) and learned others from his uncle Billy and from the singing of his family. He then started singing them in his own style. Is that correct? |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: Brian Peters Date: 17 Nov 19 - 09:14 AM It's getting quite tedious having to keep coming back and rebut some of the nonsense that keeps pouring forth, but it needs to be done in case gullible readers are taken in. I'm still waiting for the OP's response to my spotting his inaccurate portrayal of Roly Brown's review,but let's proceed to a couple of other dodgy claims: "If I remember aright, even the claim that Pardon's grandfather learned his songs from broadsides has been challenged on this thread" You do not remember aright. Jim Carroll reported WP's own opinion that his grandfather learned songs from broadsides, but goes on to say that the picture is 'confused' because it rested on hearsay evidence from Uncle Billy. That's hardly a 'challenge', more a caveat. "So why should anybody be wanting to debunk the idea that Pardons granddad learned the songs from broadsheets?" Nobody actually tried to 'debunk it', though (see above). "The grounds for the challenge was itself potentially dubious, claiming that the family were 'hoarders' which for me evokes images of people with some sort of clinical condition." I've searched the thread and can find no mention of 'hoarders', or even a hint of it. Exact quote, please? However, it seems that Pardon himself stated that he believed that the broadsides were thrown out when there was a clear out after his grandfather's death." Again, a source would be useful, rather than "it seems". It's often unclear whether statements like this are referring to interview material pasted verbatim into this thread, or other sources at the end of (not always functional) links. More to follow... |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: Jim Carroll Date: 17 Nov 19 - 09:20 AM Aa reluctant as I am to post to this thread until the toll is dealt with "He then started singing them in his own style. Is that correct?" Yes he did I have no intentuion of helping re-open a discussion on Walter's eating habits based on gossip that should never have happened in the first place twenty years after his death, as far as I am concerned it has no place here Jim |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Date: 17 Nov 19 - 09:20 AM But whether or not I shall feel inclined to share the list here is another question. We don't much like the way I have been insulted and smeared. |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: GUEST,jag Date: 17 Nov 19 - 09:24 AM I crossed with a couple of posts there. I don't see why it's important that he didn't sing the whole repertoire when he was younger. I don't get this mystique surrounding people not singing other peoples songs. It just sounds like good manners to me. |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Date: 17 Nov 19 - 09:41 AM As it happens, I read the story about what Pardon asked his neighbour for when he went there for his tea as demonstrating his good manners. You ask for something that does not trouble your neighbour too much, something modest. And you never ever tell your host you did not like what you were offered. The stuff I forced down as a child due to this rule (jellied chicken stuff is an example I shall not forget and still gag at the thought of). For me the key thing in that interview was the concern of Pardon's friends in the village to protect him from potential harm after his discovery, which they seemed to think might have adverse effects on him. Luckily, as far as we can see, this did not happen. He may even have made a bob or two out of it. Different people will interpret the 'text' ie the film differently. Fact of life. Part of what makes it difficult to get at 'truth' about Pardon, as it happens. |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Date: 17 Nov 19 - 09:43 AM Jag I've encountered this stuff about not singing other people's songs at sessions. It happens. And within families, I can imagine traditions develop in terms of who sings what. |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Date: 17 Nov 19 - 09:53 AM I have no intentuion of helping re-open a discussion on Walter's eating habits based on gossip that should never have happened in the first place twenty years after his death, as far as I am concerned it has no place here Jim ha ha ha ha ha |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: GUEST,jag Date: 17 Nov 19 - 10:04 AM Pseudonymous, I think you misunderstand. I think not using someone else's party piece is default good manners. On that basis Walter not singing some of the songs that that he did sing later is unremarkable. I find it curious that mention of such etiquette is so common in accounts of older singers. As if the singers of the revival needed to be reminded of what was natural. I wonder if they wiped their feet when they came inside. |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Date: 17 Nov 19 - 10:08 AM Brian Peters wrote: "It's getting quite tedious having to keep coming back and rebut some of the nonsense that keeps pouring forth, but it needs to be done in case gullible readers are taken in." Brian, I am with you on some of this, though I feel you might have expressed yourself with greater courtesy. May I refer you back once again to the opening post in this thread: "A basis for discussion. Walter Pardon: Fact, Fiction, and Ideology. Walter Pardon (1914 – 1996) was a carpenter, singer and melodeon player (largely self-taught) from Knapton, Norfolk. Let us try to sort out a few facts about Pardon upon which everybody might agree. This is more difficult than one might think. As soon as one starts to compare different sources it seems that material presented as ‘fact’ by one source is contradicted by another, and is, after all, not so much a fact as an inference. Therefore, what follows is intended as a first draft, to be corrected in the light of any further evidence." That seems quite clear to me. I am happy that this sets out my perspective. Outlining the ideologies underpinning the way Walter Pardon has been presented is, perhaps, one way of preventing 'gullible' people from simply accepting what they are told, hook, line and sinker without critically examining the material they are being presented with. |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: GUEST,HiLo Date: 17 Nov 19 - 10:14 AM Yes, I am a guest poster...that does not make me a troll. On this forum anyone who disagrees with Jim is a Troll. Jim is a victim...of his own lack of self awareness and his inability to see any point of view but his own. As a result of having read parts of this thread I have gone away and listened to a fair amount of Walter Pardon, about whom I knew very little. What I heard I enjoyed for the most part. However, I could not listen to a lot of him at once as I find it hard to make out the words..is that just me or is he a bit of a mumbler ? |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: Iains Date: 17 Nov 19 - 10:15 AM Steve Shaw - PM Date: 17 Nov 19 - 06:03 AM Thanks. I'm off out of the thread but I shall continue to follow it with interest, as long as it's about Walter, So why drag me into your pathetic puerile squabbles shaw? I have contributed zilch to this thread. |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: Joe Offer Date: 17 Nov 19 - 10:20 AM OK, the thread is closed. Jim Carroll wanted a public explanation. Here it is. Here are the statements posted by Jim Carroll, after he had been warned to stay on topic and not to engage in combat. These statements got the thread closed:
What next - should we hold an enquiry as to whether Travellers are "Thieves, poachers and scavengers" alongside discussing their role as Tradition Bearers? "Carroll/Shaw " It really is time this abusing o membesr stops Jowe - it is becoming trollism in its own right There are no "factions" here Jim Carroll I am going to respond to Jowee's remarks fully in the hope that he has the courage yo leave my reply up I do not "go bonlers if someone disagrees with me" If I do, can someone produce an example of my doing so I have not insuted anybody here (apart from the toll who has opened a hate thread aime at me and spread personal and inaccurate details over the forum (whih were left there several days befor being removed) I argue as articulately as I am able whenever I disagree with something If that is going "bonkers" I must get a new dictionary I have been told by a mod (not Joe) that I must stop arguing - Joe has described by doing so publicly as "troublecausing" If we can't disagree passionately ofver things we feel are important, what the hell can we fo Noe Joe - where exactly have I gone "BONKERS" Steve Shaw has been dragged into this yet he has posted twice to this thread and we hardly meet on other threads, yet he is presenting us as some sort of a Cabal Soething appears to be going on here and I have no idea what it is Perhaps a public explanation might be in order Jim Carroll Thak you for giving what I said consideration Joe - really is appreciated Jim I've said why I recte openly to trolls Steve As much as I agree with you in general, the fact that the one in question has been allowed to behave as he has unchecked for about three years tended to duggest that ignoring him wasn't working I didn't make my reactions a running bttle (as I used to), but I felt in necessary to remind people who should have stopped him years ago that he was still at it As you say, the reaction was to place the blame on his victims, so one became a pair, so to speak Jim Aa reluctant as I am to post to this thread until the toll is dealt with 2 January 2020. OK. I'll reopen this thread, but I'll leave all the extraneous crap in it to show why this thread got closed in the first place. Please use this thread to discuss Walter Pardon, and nothing else. -Joe Offer, Mudcat Music Editor- |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: Dave the Gnome Date: 03 Jan 20 - 03:15 AM I think Walter's contribution to folk music was astounding. As was that by the Copper family, Fred Jorden, Scan Tester and many other source artists. At the risk of being set upon though I will admit that not all of it is my cup of tea and not being able to listen to more than a few songs at one sitting. I know this is my fault and by working at it I may get more out of their work by working at it but, to be honest, I don't want to do that. Shallow? Maybe. Short of time? Definitely! Jim did very kindly send me a CD set of "The song carriers" some years back. Thanks again Jim:-) I did find it hard going at times but persisted and learned a lot. I must try to find them again. Or download another set? Is that still an option? At the risk of thread drift into other source artists though, does anyone have any recommendations for what a Gnome of limited attention span and a liking for English dance music may enjoy? |
|
Subject: RE: Review: Walter Pardon; Research From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Date: 03 Jan 20 - 04:40 AM 1 Extant 'Research' on Walter Pardon I had prepared a list of all the references I could find to articles that mentioned Pardon, but I put it on one side when the thread was closed and I suspect I shall have to start all over. There is only one main 'academic' source, though I have found passing references in other texts. I'll put this up later if the thread survives. It is more up to date than any of the lists I have found online. 2 The Intended Topic of This thread: it may be worth checking that it is acceptable to moderators. I called the thread 'Review: Walter Pardon Research', meaning that I hoped it could 'review' the written (and filmic) work about Pardon May I set out again the topic that I intended this thread to cover. I assumed that the word 'knowledge' as applied to this section of Mudcat might include debate of a slightly more abstract sort about the literature on folk music in general and on Walter Pardon in particular. The word 'review' in the thread title was intended to indicate this. Why did I think this sort of thread might be interesting? There are several reasons. I noticed several things when going through the stuff about him that I found online: A The material tended to say as much about the ideological perspectives of those writing it as it did about Pardon himself. This applies to Mike Yates' use of a Marxist approach for one essay even though I am happy to accept Yates' assertion that he is not a Marxist, just a person who sometimes finds a Marxist approach useful. Put briefly and simplistically, and following Hillery, the ideology in question could be described as that of the 2nd UK folk revival. I am too young to have been involved in this, and it seems a matter of 'historical' interest to me in terms of 'knowledge' about folk music. I intend no disrespect to those involved, but It seems obvious to me that as the zeitgeist changes, as they do over time, more and more people will take this sort of approach, just as people now look back on Child and think about how his approaches to the ballads reflected his historical context. B There were contradictory or unclear ideas about, for example, the sources of his songs and about whether he 'preserved' the tunes by playing them on his melodeon or whether, due to the musical limitations of that instrument, he changed them, this explaining how come his tunes were different at times from those traditionally used for the songs in question. C The methods used by some of those investigating Pardon did not seem to me to be rigorous: there was use of leading questions, for example. This casts doubt on some of the 'findings' set out as a result. One example of a technique which might be questioned in places would be the use of questions requiring 'yes/no' answers. I am sorry if those involved feel upset by my pointing this out, but it is certain that if in the future people go back to these interviews to try to get a handle on Pardon these points will be made. I do not wish to disrespect the passion or commitment of the investigators involved, but I have no doubt that the approaches to an investigation can affect the results. I fully accept that I have only recently encountered the work of Walter Pardon. He is seen as important, as far as I can make out, because he is said to have learned his songs 'the traditional way', though how far even that is true seems questionable, given his own assertions that he did not sing them at the time. 2 a |
| Share Thread: |