Is folk a dirty four-letter word?

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: GUEST,Phil d'Conch
Date: 29 Dec 21 - 01:55 PM

Sandman: ...you do not change lyrics of pop songs when you sing them, neither does anybody else that i have heard, that is an essential difference between pop songs and folk songs.

Oy. If you can't tell Jamaican Monty Alexander from Jamaican Byron Lee, it's because you've never taken the time to listen to them. One is a jazz pianist. No sing.

I own over twelve hundred (1200) covers of Yellow Bird on vinyl. 37 countries. It's been done in Dutch, French, Mandarin and over half are instrumentals the academics are none-the-less likely to list as 'English' cutural appropriations of the Kreyole 'original.'

How in thee holy heckens does one play guitar, piano or vibes in English?

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 29 Dec 21 - 01:41 PM

I think a lot of pop has its roots in folk but maybe that is just me. I like, for instance, Jethro Tull and find them quite folky at times. More up to date, I am not that keen on Mumford and Sons but can see the folk influence. A lot of the tunes are lifted directly from the tradition (Belfast Child by Simple Minds to name but one) As kids we regularly changed the lyrics of pop songs (Is there anything that you want? Fish and Chips! Is there anything I can do? Pass the salt!) Is that folk music? What about the traditions of other countries? Is it OK to have Country Music or Bhangra at folk clubs? As I keep saying, I don't have any definitive answers as I find the lines too blurred. All I can rely on is what sounds, to me, like folk music. As such I would never be one to try and define it!

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Dec 21 - 12:52 PM

"it has been some of the low standard of singers nights in folk clubs, that has emptied folk clubs".
Spot on, The Sandperson.

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: GUEST,Nick Dow
Date: 29 Dec 21 - 10:48 AM

I think the use of the word tradition, may be causing a confusion. Within the context of Folk song, the tradition in it's entirety, has boundaries and styles. There are of course other musical traditions, but to apply them to different mediums including Folk Song/Music, when they are alien to the medium is a mistake IMHO.

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: The Sandman
Date: 29 Dec 21 - 09:29 AM

in reply to big al , it has been some of the low standard of singers nights in folk clubs, that has emptied folk clubs. al , you are missing the point , you do not change lyrics of pop songs when you sing them, neither does anybody else that i have heard, that is an essential difference between pop songs and folk songs.
yes, i do think most folk songs are better that is why i sing them because i like them, because i put them on a pedestal.
jazz singers like jazz songs for the same reason, because they like the bloody song.
steve, you like irish trad, that is why you used to play it, whereas you did not play yellow submarine at sessions did you

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Dec 21 - 05:45 AM

The years of my editing songs for our local dance teacher to use with children taught me, to my delight, that a good deal of "pop music" is far from banal. You don't have to like it or regard it as in any way linked to folk music (though you could be wrong there...), but to diss it, whilst at the same time implicitly putting folk on a pedestal apart, doesn't, er, help the cause...

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 29 Dec 21 - 05:07 AM

No I don' t think I'm saying that. Everybody has the right to sing 'in the traditional style' -if they want. I think think its hard to work out what the tradition is for most of us. The late Ian Campbell once told me his Dad's main influence as a singer was Al Jolson.

I suppose what I'm saying is that time moves on. When I first went to folk clubs in the 1960's. Fifty years ago was pre first world war. Now 50 years ago is the 1960's - well no that's 60 years ago....makes you think!

I don't think I sing Beatles/Buddy Holly songs songs in the same way they were sung originally. No more than Joan Baez sang Black is the Colour like Hamish Imlach did, or as Christy Moore does. Three totally different different interpretations of the same song.

If anything has emptied folk clubs - I think maybe its the opinion that one has sole possesssion on the way the truth and the light - that could be the problem.

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: The Sandman
Date: 29 Dec 21 - 04:57 AM

not my experience either.
one thing that has emptied clubs, are singers that are unpractised, and who talk through other singers performances, and who are not prepared to listen to practised performers, they prefer their singers clubs where sometimes the standard is incompetentand they appear to find companionship with other bad performers. This is regardless of whether the songs are folk pop or anything else.
the one thing that people are not prepared to pay for is bad performance regardless of material.
personally, i have no problem with people reading their lyrics if they have practised them, and they then perform the material well

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: GUEST,Nick Dow
Date: 29 Dec 21 - 04:42 AM

You've lost me a bit here Al. Are you saying singing Folk Song in the traditional style has emptied Folk Clubs? Not my experience.

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: GUEST,Nick Dow
Date: 29 Dec 21 - 04:42 AM

You've lost me a bit here Al. Are you saying singing Folk Song in the traditional style has emptied Folk Clubs? Not my experience.

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 29 Dec 21 - 03:51 AM

well (with all respect) - there you have your recipe for disaster and how you've whittled down membership of your gang.

English literature went through a similar crisis at the end of the 19th/start of the 20th century. Poets were writing 'in the the tradition'. They called themselves neo -Georgians, pre Raphaelites etc - it all came down to the same thing -namely eschewing the voice of the 'folk'.

Luckily we got a break and TS Eliot and others kicked us into the language of the 20th century..

Folk music is located with the 'folk' - just as the sky is located above us. Nothing the Pope or some committee of experts decree will change that.

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: The Sandman
Date: 29 Dec 21 - 03:00 AM

the fact that certain songs are 70 years old is not really relevant it is not the age of a song that makes it a folk song.
the whole point of oral tradtion quote
a
community's cultural and historical traditions passed down by word of mouth or example from one generation to another without written instruction.
buddy holly AND BEATLES songs are written down and always sung without alteration to the lyrics, therfore they do not fit under the 1954 definition, the only occasion they do, are when they are ADAPTED AND ALTERED by football crowds.
the folk do not choose anything they are fed banal pop by the media

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 29 Dec 21 - 01:40 AM

Its odd really, Jim used to rage against his experiences of when he last visited English folk clubs and (horror of horrors!) - there were people there singing Beatle and Buddy Holly songs.

Those songs are sixty (nearly 70!) years old now and they're part of the mental geography of most people living in these islands.

Who gets to choose what are folk songs? The folk of course. You can have as many societies and committees as you like, for the preservation of the arcane and the obscure. But they're all onto a bit of a loser.

'We've lost more than we'll ever know...' sing Show of Hands. Maybe! But we've gained a fair bit, and we should celebrate that.

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: Malcolm Storey
Date: 26 Dec 21 - 05:38 PM

Knew I could rely on you Dick!

Horses can certainly hum!!

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Dec 21 - 04:44 PM

Neigh, lad.

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: The Sandman
Date: 26 Dec 21 - 03:28 PM

no, not lead belly,louis armstrong.
rubbish. anyway, of courses. horses sing.

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: Malcolm Storey
Date: 26 Dec 21 - 12:59 PM

Leadbelly said he had never heard a horse sing when asked a similar question.

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: Malcolm Storey
Date: 26 Dec 21 - 10:10 AM

That would be Paul Robeson?!

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: GUEST,Albachiel
Date: 26 Dec 21 - 09:26 AM

Paul Robson is supposed to have said when asked "what makes a folk song".
He replied "Folk"

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: GUEST,.gargoyle
Date: 25 Dec 21 - 10:53 PM

Curious rhythm to some UK posts...

One, TWO, Three, ONE, Two.

Malcolm post 12/21/21

Sincerely,
Gargoyle

. Have ya noticed THAT,
Many Bits end their sentence with an up-turned questioning query?

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: PHJim
Date: 25 Dec 21 - 01:30 PM

FOLK - a 4 letter word that starts with "F", ends with "K" and if you use it, your songs won't get played on the radio.

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: The Sandman
Date: 25 Dec 21 - 07:29 AM

one of the differences between ireland and england is that CCE recives much more funding

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Dec 21 - 07:59 AM

I think that happens elsewhere too, Steve. The USA abounds with them. Isla St Clair and Eddi Reader in Scotland. Enya is a prime example of it Ireland and I am sure there are more. I am also sure that a lot of those who have 'made it' in England are happy to be integrated with the rest of us. I have experience of quite a few 'famous names' roughing it with us plebs :-) Maddy Prior, Martin Carthy and Kate Rusby to name but 3! And did Ewan MacColl exude an air of superiority or feel a need to distance?

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Dec 21 - 08:04 PM

The trouble with folk music arises when certain "folk" seize the opportunity to make a career out of it. There's a bit of a phenomenon in English folk which I could refer to as pedestalisation (get a load of THAT one, Merriam-bloody-Webster!). I couldn't possibly name names of dynasties lest I be (literally) assassinated (it's happened before...), but there are several that come to mind...Naturally, incredibly talented musicians will rise to the top in a natural way and become famous inside our bubble, but that ain't good enough for some. The genre in which I was mainly steeped is Irish traditional instrumental music. I've consorted with many of the great and the good therein and found all of them to be humble and grateful for the kudos they've received...and they'll sit in your session with you and exude not even a hint of an air of superiority or a need to distance. You're not good because you think you're good. You're good because you ARE good and because you want to be integrated with the rest of us, even the not so good. Surely that's what sets (or what should set) real folk music apart from the ultra-commercial music world... But what do I know!

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: Malcolm Storey
Date: 21 Dec 21 - 06:33 PM

Here are some snippets of correspondence with a concerned friend - no name no pack drill.

Me
So now to the latest rubbish to arrive from the front!
 
The so called questionnaire / survey must have been put together by an eight year old with learning difficulties!!
What a mess.
 
I note "they" are taking this forward on the strength of initial responses from 65 (SIXTY FIVE) persons - that's almost one in a million of the UK population. Impressive what?
 
What does the current treasurer think of the idea of throwing money away?
 
Before any decisions are made on this issue it would be far more important to look at the current staff appointments, their salaries and most importantly their responsibilities. I have a feeling there is a lot of dead wood - including those at the top.
 
WE ARE NOT A SECRET SOCIETY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
As I say above a cull is needed.


Part of reply
I've had the questionnaire, but not yet opened up .... I've seen enough Facebook messages, including from a professional statistician, rubbishing the structure to convince me that I need to be calm before I open it.

Me
Another point I made was that at the time I joined the Society they/we were pushing to attain a membership of 10,000.
The staff structure at the time including field staff was less than the current numbers.
They also did not have the benefit of computers etc to aid the running of the Society.

Membership now stands at less than 2000 (there's progress) and yet seems to cost in real terms a hell of a lot more to administer.

Lot's to think about when the body which purports to represent our interests in a culture we all supposedly treasure is in the hands of these people.

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 21 Dec 21 - 03:46 PM

Of course you are absolutely right, Dick. It was the irony of it that made me laugh. Same irony that has most of Eurovision songs in English yet the UK nearly always come last. It doesn't take much to amuse me as we head back into the dark ages.

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: GUEST,Norman Lewis
Date: 21 Dec 21 - 03:39 PM

Well, here is today's folk:

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2021/dec/20/the-10-best-folk-albums-of-2021



The Guardian top ten Folk albums of 2021

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: The Sandman
Date: 21 Dec 21 - 12:53 PM

American is an international language it is a variation of English, itis the language of the computer world, why the folk should people not speak it in belgium brussels or anywhere else.

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: GUEST,Jim Knowledge
Date: 21 Dec 21 - 12:34 PM

I `ad that Don the Dwarf in my cab the other day. `e looked like a pixie oo `ad been banned from fishing in the garden pond, well beside `imself.
I said, " Morning Shorty, whereto today?"
`e said, "Anywhere Jim I can sit down and get my `ead together".
I said, "Whatsup then?"
`e said, " It`s that Mudcat stirring things up again. They`re getting people to ask whether "folk" is a dirty word. We were doing a gig last night and some bloke suggested we ought to be cancelled, like they do in the universities, because our folk songs might make people feel uncomfortable. They might `ave been sung or written by people they dis-agree with."
I said, "I wouldn`t get out of your pram over that."
`e said, "Well, `ow would you and your band `andle it?"
I said, "We`d just announce that any folk songs we do weren`t written by anybody, they just grew on trees!!!"


Whaddam I Like??

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: GUEST,MikeOfNorthumbria, sans cookie
Date: 21 Dec 21 - 11:53 AM

Hi Steve,

Surely it's no surprise that many Brussels politicians still communicate with each other in English? How many Finns speak Portuguese? How many Poles understand Dutch?

Consider also the Eurovision Song Contest: how many of the performers who choose not to sing in their native languages use anything other than English as an alternative? (This is not because they love us - they just want to sell more records.)

And by the bye, I suspect that representatives of the smaller EU nations would oppose any attempt to impose French(or German)as the standard medium of communication between speakers whose native languages are unintelligible to each other. Much too dangerous politically!

Indeed, our current (and - I hope - temporary) absence from that forum could make the English language even more attractive to all those who feel anxious about the possibility of future French (or German) domination of it.


Wassail!

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Dec 21 - 11:16 AM

During my time working in Belgium I noticed that many speak to each other in English anyway. I think it saves trouble breaking out between Walloons and Flemish :-)

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 21 Dec 21 - 09:26 AM

Regarding the use of the English language I was most amused on the box the other day to see the Brussels politicians still spouting in English even though the UK was no longer a member. Before anyone starts I was and am a staunch remainer. Perhaps it was Irish English they were speaking. I was too busy laughing to notice.

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 21 Dec 21 - 09:19 AM

Hi Malcolm
I think your description there is a little OTT. Have you read the recent proposals in the latest EDS? They state categorically 'Please be assured that our continuing use of the word FOLK is not up for negotiation.'

I must add that I do not like the idea of any organisation changing its name unless there is a very valid reason.

This is a marketing exercise provoked by some who have suggested that the current name is to some extent confusing and/or exclusive (English).

I think EFDSS does what it says on the tin and I've presented my views in the survey. All MEMBERS have been asked to fill in a comprehensive questionnaire as a consultation exercise. To give us all something to do in lockdown no doubt.

The Scots, the Welsh and Ulster regions all have their own societies, though I'm sure they all recognise that the very nature of folk has little to do with geographical boundaries. I see no problem with including the word 'English'. It has the dual purpose of describing a geographical area and a pretty universal language.

Mike, the only disagreement I have with your points is that 'traditional' also has no connection with 'authorship'.

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: GUEST,MikeOfNorthumbria, sans cookie
Date: 21 Dec 21 - 06:45 AM

Well, hello there … it’s déjà vu all over again!

“Do We Still Need That F-Word?” was the title of an article published in issue number 68 of the magazine Living Tradition (2006). In it, I suggested that we might find it helpful to reserve the word traditional for ‘songs of unknown authorship, which have survived generations of oral transmission’, while the word folk might be more usefully applied to ‘songs – whatever their origin – that the members of a particular community sing regularly, and acknowledge as their own.’

An obvious example is ‘The Blaydon Races’. We know that the words were written by by George Ridley in 1862 (and set to an American minstrel-show tune).   So, it isn’t traditional in the same sense that - for example - ‘Lord Randal’ is. Nevertheless, Blaydon Races has been sung as their local anthem by generations of Tynesiders - at school, in their homes, and at football matches - and it seems petty and pedantic to deny it the status of a folk song.

Looking back on those thoughts with fifteen years of hindsight, I’m still willing to stand by them.

Wassail!

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Dec 21 - 03:18 AM

Sorry Steve but I got bollocked in no uncertain terms when I said that folk was what we perceived it to be. Not by you I add but a number of people told me that personal perceptions had nothing to do with it! I do not believe that anything should go at folk clubs. There have been times when I have thought something was not folk but the number of these were tiny compared to the vast majority of songs that were folk. Even if they were not 1954 folk, :-) That doesn't help us of course.

So,what type of folk is being referred to in the opening question?

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: The Sandman
Date: 21 Dec 21 - 03:11 AM

Hear Hear,Malcolm.
I am proud to be a Folk Singer,Ihave been singnig Folk songs[ not rave on, for over 35 years and it dont seem a day too long.

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: Malcolm Storey
Date: 20 Dec 21 - 08:23 PM

It has actually become a dirty word at the EFDSS (English Folk Dance & Song Society) along with English (very dirty) and Society (smutty) according to the clowns employed to run it.
Sensible questions addressed to "Officers" are ignored and it would be easier to get answers from the Government spooks than anyone at Cecil Sharp (remember him?) House - no doubt soon to be renamed 37 whatever street it is on.

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 20 Dec 21 - 05:07 AM

In answer to the the original question - yes 'folk' is a dirty word....filthy and depraved.
Once again I am outraged! Just the thought of doing it it in public....!

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: GUEST,Anne Lister sans cookie
Date: 19 Dec 21 - 03:37 PM

I remember a conversation with a child at a school where I worked who was asking me about my music, having heard me play some songs to the class. "I like folk," he said, confidently, "but I can't remember - is it fast, or slow?"

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 19 Dec 21 - 03:19 PM

Anyone with any sense, even academics, only use the 54 def as a guideline. Phil and Rigby hit the nail on the head. Much of it is a matter of personal perception and opinion. We all have our own opinions on what we would consider 'folk' and no 2 opinions are exactly the same.

BTW football chants are most definitely folk and most of them are sung so that makes them very much folk songs by any definition.

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: GUEST,Phil d'Conch
Date: 19 Dec 21 - 03:08 PM

I've found Yellow Bird covered under everything from exotica to schlager. They're just retail inventory locations. It's all good.

Genre are defined by three distinct business entities: producers, artists and consumers. The Haitian song Choucoune has always been a middle class urban lounge tune on that island. But if Moses Asch records a certain Mudcatter and Pete Seeger cover they can call it 'folk' if they want to and anybody can listen to it as same. But it's still the same song with just the one discography.

There are no "No" votes in comsumerism, only "Yes." As long as the minimum for your business model agree, it really does not matter how many consumers do not like your stuff... or your labels.

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: GUEST,Rigby
Date: 19 Dec 21 - 02:57 PM

Musicians often dislike being tagged with a genre label. I don't think it's just a folk thing. No-one wants to be considered pop, or MOR, or AOR.

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: GUEST,jag
Date: 19 Dec 21 - 12:56 PM

I was meaning inheritors of a tradition of getting together and singing songs or playing tunes/dancing as a social activity. A 'what the folk sang however it got onto the street' approach.

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: The Sandman
Date: 19 Dec 21 - 11:58 AM

here is my opinion for what it is worth, the first one is more likely to evolve and change, RAVE ON when it is sung always appears to have the same lyrics, so according to the 1954 definition it is not folk. but i think you might get a more intersting answer if you contacted Martin Carthy

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: The Sandman
Date: 19 Dec 21 - 11:54 AM

Why dont you ask,Martin?

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Dec 21 - 11:39 AM

Using the 1954 definition results in football chants becoming folk songs. I am not saying the definition is faulty and, as Steve pointed out, it does help academics study the genre. As far as I can see though it does nothing to help potential folk club audiences to decide who to go and watch!

If Ed Sheeran performs "The Parting Glass" is it folk?
If Martin Carthy performs "Rave on" is it folk?

There are too many corner cases and exceptions for me to help define it!

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 19 Dec 21 - 08:30 AM

IMO in order to be an 'inheritor' you would have to have been an active participant in the 'community' the song was part of, i.e., a particular occupation, a hunt pack, a ship's crew, the armed forces, a playground community, a village community etc. Otherwise, like me, you are a re-enactor. I learnt several songs as part of my family, but I would say had I not become part of the folk scene these songs would have been long forgotten so I am definitely to all intents and purposes, a re-enactor.

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: GUEST,jag
Date: 18 Dec 21 - 05:10 PM

I think many self-described traditional musicians regard themselves as inheritors rather than re-enactors. Indirect inheritors.

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 18 Dec 21 - 05:00 PM

Well put, Phil!

Subject: RE: Is folk a dirty four-letter word?
From: GUEST,Phil d'Conch
Date: 18 Dec 21 - 04:17 PM

A very British (Isles) thread. View from the colonies:

Some Southern Baptist folk didn't much care for Stalinist or mainstream pop (capitalist) folk.

It doesn't matter how or when one defines [X]. Most folks won't know or care and somebody is always complaining.

'Traditional' comes with the same baggage as any other form of reinacting, martial, maritime, what-have-you. That exotic wood fiddle bow won't make it past Customs and your 19th century ship's rigging won't stand for the Health & Safety inspector.