Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.

Subject: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: Charlie2
Date: 22 Aug 00 - 12:07 PM

I've been a Pete Seager fan for years. He is nothing short of the last of an era gone by. But my question is, do we love him more for his work with the Weavers or as a solo performer. I think the issues were always center stage, but the humor of the Weavers is HISTORIC while Pete's solo work I found at times too dogmatic (for lack of a better word). What do you think?? Its all good.

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: kendall
Date: 22 Aug 00 - 12:42 PM

at the risk of upsetting the upstart, I say, Pete Seeger IS the Weavers

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: GUEST,Ron Olesko
Date: 22 Aug 00 - 12:47 PM

I beg to differ. The Weavers were beyond any individual. When Pete Seeger left the group they carried on and recorded some of their finest work with Erik Darling. I'm not knocking Pete by any means and while he was the most "famous" member the group was bigger then any of it's parts.

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: catspaw49
Date: 22 Aug 00 - 12:50 PM

I think Seeger's influence cuts such a broad swath across folk music that to pick one thing out of it would be futile and a bit silly. I don't believe he'll be remembered more as a solo artist or as a part of the Weavers, but rather as the penultimate folksinger.

Spaw

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: catspaw49
Date: 22 Aug 00 - 12:56 PM

gawd I hate typos......gotta' pruufreed mor

Spaw

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: Bert
Date: 22 Aug 00 - 01:02 PM

The first time I saw him on TV in England (it was a solo performance) he made a bloody fool of himself. So I've never been what you might call great fan of his. He's good, but I think he works better 'with' people. He was great with Arlo.

Bert.

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: Tiger
Date: 22 Aug 00 - 01:11 PM

'Spaw - the "next to last" folksinger?

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: catspaw49
Date: 22 Aug 00 - 01:13 PM

yeah........geeziz.......

Spaw

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: SINSULL
Date: 22 Aug 00 - 01:24 PM

I am with Bert on this one. I saw Pete Seeger at Carnegie Hall in the late 70s/early 80s(?). It was a fund raiser for Chile with Joan Baez as the featured performer.He appeared confused and performed badly. The audience was baffled although I will admit most of them didn't seem to have a clue who he was. He came across as a nice old man with a banjo. Depressing. I still listen to the Weavers.

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: Mark Clark
Date: 22 Aug 00 - 02:05 PM

I've been a Pete Seeger fan for I'd guess fifty years, from the Weavers' first commercial success to last tour he did coming through here. I have found him consistantly amazing each time all the time. His ability to involve his audience in the music and help them think about something outside of their daily routines is a treat all by itself. He and his banjo never failed to surround hatred and force it to surrender. I don't worry about who will carry on the music as much as I worry about who will lead the fight or even remind us occasionaly that there is a fight.

As for the Weavers without Pete, they are still the favorite folk group in our family and that includes all the performers who were at various times members. I enjoy bluegrass, blues, Cajun, African, Celtic, field recordings, commercial-singer-songwriter, old-timey, but if I had to be limited to a single group's body of work, I think I would choose the Weavers.

I guess I should add that with the exception of "Wasn't That A Time" I've never seen Pete on television or film. I know his work only from recordings and live concerts.

Peace,

      - Mark

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: kendall
Date: 22 Aug 00 - 02:10 PM

I heard/saw Pete at the National Press Club some two years ago. He seemed out of sorts, but, he is still the greatest! Hell, even I have a bad hair day now and again. As a matter of fact this is one of them.

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: Wesley S
Date: 22 Aug 00 - 02:11 PM

I like apples AND oranges. A world without either one of them would be pretty dull. So why choose ?? Lets enjoy both.

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: Mrrzy
Date: 22 Aug 00 - 02:14 PM

I loved the Weavers, and I love Pete Seeger. One of my twins' very favorite children's records is Pete's Children's Concert at Town Hall. However, I will admit to listening to very little recorded after, say, 1970, so I don't know what I'd think about him if I actually followed his career. Anyone see today's article about him getting his banjo back? He thought it had been stolen from a concert, but turns out he drove away with it on the roof of his car and someone who'd never heard of him found it and returned it. Story available at washingtonpost.com, didn't copy the url in time...

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: Mrrzy
Date: 22 Aug 00 - 02:15 PM

Just noticed there's another thread about the banjo incident...

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From:
Date: 22 Aug 00 - 05:36 PM

I have few heroes in this world. I'm getting older and was always cynical but to misquote the words of Brian McNeil's Strong Women'I think that Pete Seeger 'is the light that shines acoss the stormy skies' Pete's a fanatic about his music and all fanatics have a serious shortcoming or two but I wouldn't have him other than how he is Few people in this world are 'owed' as much as Pete Seeger and I personally thank him for fifty years of pleasure and enlightenment

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 22 Aug 00 - 05:58 PM

I don't know how typical of people living in the UK I am but I had heard of Pete Seeger years ago but it was only when I saw the name the Weavers mentioned a few times in forums that I found out who they were and I have still not heard them so I pass on this one!

Jon

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: Bud Savoie
Date: 22 Aug 00 - 07:37 PM

My fanaticism with the banjo and folk music in general I owe more to the influence of Pete Seeger than to anyone else. I saw him just two weeks ago, and he's still got what it takes.

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: Chicky
Date: 22 Aug 00 - 08:10 PM

Hmmmm - I don't know about "Pete Seeger IS The Weavers" - I would have said that of Ronnie Gilbert instead.

Compared to Ronnie, I see Pete not as a singer/performer, but as a banjo player and collector of songs. The rich caramel of Ronnie's voice, and the passion of her performance, hold far more appeal for me than Pete's over-earnest stage presence and thin vocals.

Just my humble opinion, of course. I had a dear friend who spent many long months trying to introduce me to the Cult of Pete Seeger - but I'm afraid I Just Don't Get It.

Cheers
- Chicky
(ducking fruit)

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 23 Aug 00 - 06:22 PM

First I knew of Pete Seeger was hearing, via radio, a live performance from Carnegie Hall in which he sang a song called, I think, "Oh Freedom" ("...And before I'll be a slave I'll lie buried in my grave..."). Not sure if it was his own song, but the performance blew me away. Later when I saw various Seegers in action, I was generally disappointed. They all seemed handicapped by over-earnestness, to pick up on a word someone else used above. By the time I saw the Weavers on telly, it was old footage (with PS in the line-up) and they looked rather a tame lot of oldies.

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: gillymor
Date: 23 Aug 00 - 09:27 PM

I liked the Weavers and I love Pete but I have to agree with Chicky (at least the part about Ronnie Gilbert). Her lovely voice soaring over the top of everything is really what set them apart performance-wise, IMO.

F

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: GUEST,Arkansas Red-Ozark Troubadour
Date: 24 Aug 00 - 02:54 PM

Since I was first introduced to the Weaver's back in 1960 I have been a big fan. I enjoy Pete with them and sometimes as a solo act. Erik Darling did a fantastic job replacing Pete as did Frank Hamilton who replaced Erik. Each of these banjo players have gone on to do solo work just like Pete did. Erik and Frank are still doing folk concerts. Whether it's with the Weaver's or on a solo tour, good music is good music. No one ever seems to mention the great guitar work of Fred Hellerman. It's either Ronnie's voice or Lee's bass. Face it, just like gumbo the Weaver's had the right ingredients to satisfy our musical appetite. I was a Kingston Trio fan until I heard the Weavers. From there it was to Uncle Dave Macon and more traditional "hillbilly" music. If it hadn't been for the Weavers I probably would have never been guided to real folk music. I sincerely thank them all. Past and present members.

Arkansas Red-Ozark Troubadour Ozark Mountains, Arkansas

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: Charlie2
Date: 24 Aug 00 - 04:15 PM

As far as Pete BEING the Weavers, I have to agree that they were a "group" in the strongest sense. I really think that all of them added a great deal to the mix and created a vert timely folk music that is somehow timeless. If the Weavers were playing today, I'm convinced that they would have enjoyed an equal response. I think this is so because, where Pete's solo work sometimes opened up his left flank to the cannon balls of cynicism, the Weavers phrased things in such as way that they did, in fact, surround hatred and kill it. In short, they had a ton of heart. Like Dylan in his early years, it is hard to take a stance against them and that is why they endure so well in my opinion. The Kingston Trio were fun to listen to, but today, they only serve to show why the Weavers were as important to american music as Louise Armstrong, Duke Elington and Elvis.

Subject: Does Anyone remember the Raunch Hands?.
From: Charlie2
Date: 24 Aug 00 - 04:18 PM

There used to be a group around Harvard called the Raunch Hands. They played with Joan Baez and co. back in the day.

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: thespionage
Date: 21 Jan 05 - 03:16 AM

I realize that this thread is over four years old, but I thought I'd give it a reprise. Mark Clark, who is apparently now inactive, said that the only footage he saw of Pete Seeger was from "Wasn't That a Time!" There is, in fact, a fairly sizable amount of Pete footage out there...and it occurred to me the other day how much of it I own.

In addition to the aforementioned documentary of the 1980 Carnegie Hall reunion, in Alice's Restaurant Pete plays two of Woody Guthrie's songs for Woody in the movie, "Pastures of Plenty" and "The Car Car Song," and Arlo joins him with harmonica on the first and sings and plays guitar on the second. Pete Seeger also appears in "Peter, Paul and Mary: Carry It On" as well as "Smothered: The Censorship Struggles of the Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour." In addition to all of this is the Homespun video "Pete Seeger: How to Play the 5-String Banjo."

As for the Weavers vs. solo question, I'd say that Pete Seeger is/was an excellent folksinger *and* an integral part of the Weavers so it's really too hard to differentiate between the two. If he were in two different folk groups that may be easier. You just wouldn't say that John Lennon was worse or better once the Beatles broke up, would you?

I'm looking forward to future responses.

Russ
Practitioner of Thespionage and Folk Music

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: Dreaded Thumbpick
Date: 21 Jan 05 - 09:36 AM

The last time I saw Pete in performance was about 5 years ago. He was playing with his grandson.

His voice didn't have much left but his stage craft was still magical. He sang within his range. His banjo playing was appropriate. What I mean by that is that Pete is a phenomenal banjo player but you will almost never hear that on his songs. He never overshadows lyrics.

Also, if you want to know the incredible dynamics that Pete lends to singing groups, go back and listen to the Almanac Singers recordings. The Almanacs included Pete, Woody Guthrie, Lee Hays, Millard Lampell, Ronnie Gilbert, Helen Schneyer and others at various times. Their recordings of political music are wonderful. There's a great Bear Family set called "Songs for Political Action" which has all of the Almanac's recordings included.

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: Flash Company
Date: 21 Jan 05 - 11:26 AM

Saw Pete live in the Free Trade Hall, Manchester UK not long after his run in with the McCarthy people. Magic was the word. The first person to make me realise I could maybe sing some of those songs myself and get away with it.
I once saw a description of Lightnin' Hopkins which referred to the rooster crow in his voice, Pete had that too.
I knew The Weavers rather better after Pete left than before, liked them, but saw the Reunion in 'Wasn't that a time' on tv. Wish I'd known more of their earlier stuff than 'Goodnight Irene'.

FC

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: PoppaGator
Date: 21 Jan 05 - 12:03 PM

I am much more familiar with Pete as a solo artist than with the Weavers. And I'm American -- it's not just Brits who "missed" the Weavers, it's more of an age issue.

I first became interested in folk music in about 1963 or so, at which time the Weavers were already a thing of the past, at least as far as I knew, but Pete Seeger was a huge presence as an individual. As time I went by, I heard *about* the Weavers, but never really *heard* them.

At some point, I realized that the hit recording of "Goodnight Irene" that I heard on the radio as a very young child was undoubtedly by the Weavers, but I never heard them first-hand in "real time," neither in concert nor on a contemporary recording.

Pete was, and still is, a unique performer with an uncanny ability to involve his audience. Unfamiliar as I may be with his early career as a Weaver, I can't see that there would be any important difference between Pete-as-solo-act and Pete-as-group-member. I think thespionage's analogy to John Lennon is pretty apt.

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: GUEST,Art Thieme
Date: 21 Jan 05 - 01:08 PM

I agree with all of the positive comments made in thiis thread about both the Weavers and Pete Seeger (as a solo).

I disagree with all the negative statements made about both.

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: Amos
Date: 21 Jan 05 - 02:59 PM

See the amazing thread "What was Lee Hays Like?" for an insight into the Weavers as a dynamic, electrical group wholly in addition to Pete's magic.


A

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: Peter Kasin
Date: 21 Jan 05 - 03:48 PM

Spaw, "penultimate" means "second best." I think you meant "ultimate," no? Don't mind me, I'm just showing off my real good english talk.

Pete Seeger, solo, always has this incredible ability to connect with an audience, move them, and get them singing. His charisma really shines when he's solo. I grew up seeing him as primarily a solo act. My sister and I used to go to his free children's concerts, in the late 1950's. I never saw him with The Weavers live, so don't really have that experience to compare the two. I prefer his solo recordings, to The Weavers recordings, though, particularly At The Village Gate, Vol. I, The Pete Seeger Sampler, and American Industrial Ballads.

Chanteyranger

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: GUEST,Mark Clark
Date: 22 Jan 05 - 02:25 AM

I'd forgotten that Pete appeared in the Alice's Restaurant film. Thanks for reminding me. Our band got to share the bill with Pete—and a lot of other people including, I think, Art—once for a Sing Out! benefit in Chicago. That was certainly a very big thrill for me.

Oh, and Chanteyranger, I think you'll find that penultimate means next to the last, not second best. At least that's the U.S. definition.

      - Mark

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: thespionage
Date: 22 Jan 05 - 02:51 AM

No problem Mark. By the way, how do you italicize?

Russ

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: Peter Kasin
Date: 22 Jan 05 - 03:38 AM

Oops, you're right, Mark Clark. I was told it meant "second best,' and so always thought that. A check into Webster's reveals the definition you stated. I always learn something on Mudcat.

Chanteyranger

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Jan 05 - 10:33 AM

To italicize:

1. put "<" then "I" then ">"
2. type what you want italicized, then finish with
3. "<" followed by "/" followed by "I" and finally ">".

Pete Seeger is one of my favorite voices to listen to (easy on the ears). I love the Weavers music as well. Neither would have been terribly famous -- would be almost entirely "unknowns" today if not for the HCUA (of MCarthy/Kennedy fame). Seeger apologized for his "slavish following of Stalinism" but should be more forthcoming in the uncountable number of articles and stories about him in subsequent years. He should make it clear that, no matter if anyone thinks that the HCUA was wrong in their pursuit of communists, he was a communist. Still is.

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: kendall
Date: 22 Jan 05 - 11:07 AM

Communist in the true sense of the word, not in favor of totalitarinism.

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Jan 05 - 11:39 AM

Stalinism, to be exact.

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: thespionage
Date: 23 Jan 05 - 01:13 AM

Joe Klein in Woody Guthrie: A Life talks about how the Party of which Pete and Woody were members often had little to do with communism and resembles the liberal Democrats of today.

Russ

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: GUEST,banjopicker
Date: 29 Nov 11 - 12:12 AM

I know this thread hasnt been posted in 6 years but to the "GUEST" Who said that the weavers would not be popular if not for the HCUA THEY WERE POPULAR and even if they wasnt the weavers Ronnie would have made it in some other music area along with Lee with his song writing ect

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 29 Nov 11 - 01:01 PM

plus they were the first commercial folk group to arract any notice.

Subject: RE: Pete: Weavers vs. Solo.
From: Elmore
Date: 29 Nov 11 - 02:43 PM

None better than Pete in concert. One day in NYC my grandmother and I were watching him set up for an outdoor event, and Pete stopped to talk with us about the Clear Water. Both my grandmother and I were charmed. I'm glad that he's still active. Elmore, age 70