 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Folk Music of the Future
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: MyRedneckBiting(An Anogram) Date: 19 Jan 02 - 01:00 AM An interesting thought occurred to me as I was reading through the site, and I thought I might share it with you all, even though I'm sure this is nothing new to anyone here. 500 years from now, what music from this era will be considered folk music? All of it? Some of it? I wonder. Because, sadly, the bands and singers that achieve mass popularity are not necessarily representative of good music (which--I swear--really is still being produced). There are some bands who should be remembered 500 years from now as being "good," just as Mozart and Bach are remembered by us as "good." My real question is this: What bands and/or performers do you think should be remembered in 500 years as representative as the best of our era--which I will define as 1950 to the present? My answer: 1. Buddy Holly- for starting it all 2. The Beatles- for being the first to be "pop" 3. The Beach Boys- for exemplifying surf rock 4. The Doors- for Jim Morrison's amazing voice 5. Jimi Hendrix- for great guitar playing 6. The Ramones- for being the bridge between surf rock and punk 7. The Clash- for just being great 8. Pink Floyd- for The Wall 9. Weezer- for Pinkerton, and for redeeming the 90s by encouraging nerds everywhere to play guitar 10. Nirvana- for Seatle grunge 11. The Palace Brothers/Palace Music- for Ohio River Boat Song, and for being folk 12. Jethro Tull- for keeping tradition alive 13. Ric Ocasek- for The Cars and for producing some brilliant records 14. The Cure- for goth AND new wave 15. Bauhaus- for Bela Lugosi's Dead These are some I thought of off the top of my head that are easily recognisable. Others that would make my personal list: Modest Mouse, Travis, Sebadoh, Elf Power, The Rentals, Stereophonics, and many others. -Bridget McKinney 01 19 02
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: Clinton Hammond Date: 19 Jan 02 - 01:28 AM I donno... But it kinda makes me wish that cryogenics even had half a chance of working, cause it would be neat to come back and find out eh! ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: Jack the Sailor Date: 19 Jan 02 - 04:09 AM Rap and hip hop is the folk music of today. It will supercede all "anglocentric" music and become the dominant folk form by 2025 and continuue that way for at least 1000 years. That is part of the apocolypse. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: Liz the Squeak Date: 19 Jan 02 - 04:13 AM You missed the C off one of those Jack! LTS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: swirlygirl Date: 19 Jan 02 - 10:42 AM Well peeple are still singing songs nowdays that are a couple of hundred years old at least, just doing them in a style that's evolved...so I guess that's what'll be happening...constant evolution...you can still sing the same old shit, just in a different way... :) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: Mr Red Date: 19 Jan 02 - 11:26 AM MyRedneckBiting(An Anogram) Is that ANAgram or ANONgram? I think the bands you list will be regarded not as singing folk songs but popular music, pop music, mental wallpaper etc of the 20th C. What will be regarded as folk is that which manages to span an era &/or generations that transcend the switches of fashion, is sung by Jo Public hermself, and needs to accommodate the fashions of what we (as in the we 500 years from now) in our conceit, call "folk". Anyway this close-up all we can do is offer that 500 year gap some quality suggestions for them to disagree (or not) with. I thnk Martin carthy, John Kirkpatrick, David Bellamy, Nick Jones, and a host of similar because they both loved and cherished the tradition but were alive to the quality of the moment. If you want genuine folk look at the advertising jingles (aka Street Cries) football songs (cf Morris Ditties?) and angry brigade demonstration chants. "What do we want?" "Proper folk music?" "When do we want it?" "500 years from now" "What do we want.................................. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: Amos Date: 19 Jan 02 - 12:23 PM LOL! I think leaving Evis off would be a serious mistake. I would imagine that "Love Me Tender" will be known long after "Aura Lee" is forgotten. But you never know with popular thought where it is going to jump. 500 years is an awfully long time in terms of human change. How much of the world of 1500 could we even recognize, et alone sing about? And given the incredible accelerating curves of
(a)mass media cycles the mind boggles trying to think what sort of environment, culturally, technically, and physically, will be around in 2500. It is possible by then if we don't wipe ourselves out, that a great diaspora will have occurred carrying the species across the far reaches of the galaxy. The forms and structures of their songs written for unknown instruments and drawing on unimaginable experiences may be beyond our experience completely! At the same time it is possible that media will enable us to hear any song ever recorded at will by voicing a request. And given that we tend to dive into anachronistic creativity and worship past eras at regular intervals I am sure there will be plenty of reconstructed Elizabethan and Victorian performances, as well as any hit parade in our current period, available to draw from. On the other hand it is equally possible that music as we know it will not exist, having been supplanted by an art form which touches the heart more directly through brain-field fluxes. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: GUEST,Balnak 29 Date: 19 Jan 02 - 01:39 PM Greetings to all 21 st Century Foke Muzic peeple from Century 26! We were able to devize a means to interface with internet traffic of your era in Century 25, and thus I'm able to sned you this message. How ironic that I should come across this dizcushion. You peeple have no idea how lucky you are to live in what we call the "Golden Age of Foke Muzic", when many of our grate songz were first writed. We revere such Foke Artists as Alanis Morrissette, the Backstreet Boys, P Diddy, Grand Funk Railroad and (of course) Queen! We do not know these people such as Dylan, Beatles, Martin Carthy etc of whom you speak. Were these peeple of the Jazz Era wich preceeded the "Golden Era of Foke"? If only u could visit our "MUzeeum of Foke", and view the ancient CD TEchnology that was once uzed to create music! We also have a collection of items, once conziderd mythical, but are now thought to have ackshually been used to make muzic! These things are called names such az "banjoe", "git-tar", and "fiddul", but we have not yet dizcoverd where to insert the CDs to make them play. In the name of Britney, may you continue to party! Balnak 29
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: michaelr Date: 19 Jan 02 - 03:30 PM Redneck - what exact tradition would you say Jethro Tull is keeping alive? Michael |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: Mudlark Date: 19 Jan 02 - 03:32 PM Balnak...surely in your archives you have some Bluz guys...what about Ledbelly, Lightnin Hopkins and the right Rev. Gary Davis??? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: Mark Clark Date: 19 Jan 02 - 05:15 PM I don't know, Bridget. You haven't listed anybody that I'd consider a source for a future folk song. Everyone you list is in the catagory of highly paid professional performers and composers. If you look at the material in today's folk collections, you don't see much music with any genuine attribution. The old music with attribution is generally heard in symphony halls, not folk clubs. The Beatles might be thought of as the Beethovens of rock and roll; they didn't invent the form they used but they took it in a new direction. I was a teenager when Buddy Holly hit the charts. If it hadn't snowed that night, we'd have driven the 50 miles or so to hear his concert on “the day the music died.” We loved Buddy's music... but we never thought of him as “starting it all.” Still don't think of him that way. Even Elvis, though a wonderful innovator, was just building on what had already been laid down by the genuine innovators of the form. I think the musicologists of 2502 will make field trips to find out what songs people sing in their homes and gathering places, then research them to discover their earliest forms. I don't think they'll regard the commercial archives as folk music. Of course I could be wrong. I think the earliest tune to get any air play that is regarded as rock and roll may be a song called Shaboom or Sha-boom from about 1951 or so. I've been searching the Net trying to find the group that recorded it but haven't hit it yet. Sha-boom was the first pop song to really have the beat and feel of rock and roll. If you're looking for the origins of rock and roll you might want to listen to people like T-Bone Walker, Big Joe Turner, Ike Turner (his band played on Rocket 88 in 1951, arguably the first actual R&R recording), Fats Domino whose recording career began in 1949, Charles Brown, The Moonglows (1952), the list goes on and on. You can see a reasonably good timeline (Macromedia flash) at The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame site. They don't seem to have good history on Rockabilly though. Of the acts you listed in your initial post, I'm guessing only the Beatles have any chance of being remembered in 500 years and their music still won't be folk. You'll hear it inside the transporter played by the 101 Synthesizers. - Mark
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: Amos Date: 19 Jan 02 - 08:43 PM I flipped over Sha-boom in my teens, and can still sing it end to end. Beat the hell out of the competition. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 19 Jan 02 - 10:18 PM I'd imagine it'd probably be Chinese or Indian. Hardly likely to be from the Anglo-American corner of the globe. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: Ebbie Date: 19 Jan 02 - 10:48 PM Why specify 500 years as being the future? Look back- and see when the current changes began. Probably about 4 generations is all it takes for 'most everything to be new. A hundred years. In the lifetime of some youngsters today. What is scary to me is the idea that 'music' may someday mean only recorded entertainment. Even today I have heard someone say that only "successful" music was worth listening to. Admittedly, he was a singularly narrow (read 'stupid') non-musician. But I suppose the day could come that the songs and tunes everyone knows will all be studio-controlled, effects-enhanced productions. How would 'Catters feel about the idea that live, amateur music isn't worth doing? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: Bill D Date: 19 Jan 02 - 11:09 PM It seems to be the feeling of every generation that the music that 'hit' them when they were young & impressionable will be THE music that lasts!.....Pooh! You just can't predict...(well, except that so many records are kept now of who 'sold' the most and who was voted "Pop Clod of the Year"....this assures some sort of immortality, but not necessarily lasting reverence among the 'folk') Names will be known...like Elvis & Beatles & Dylan...doesn't mean they will be sung... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: Genie Date: 20 Jan 02 - 12:46 AM Mark, the "Sh-Boom" that was popular where I lived (NJ and IL) was by the Crew Cuts, a cover of a song first done by a black group. (They also covered The Penguins' "Earth Angel;" maybe it was the Penguins who first did Sh-Boom, too.) I agree 500 years is too far away to predict. But if you want to bet on what folks will be singing (knowing) a few generations from now, look at songs kids learn before their teens -- very singable, perhaps with choruses, etc. E.g: also, look at songs that get "covered" again every decade or so, e.g., What I'm saying is that a song lasts not so much because of the original artist or arrangement as because of its "catchiness" or "singability" for the public and/or because its lyrics are relatively timeless (not trendy) and the song lends itself to different arrangements and stylings. The songs that end up being widely known and sung by a population are not necessarily great art or even the equivalent of a No.1 hit. If a hit song doesn't sound good without without a full band and back-up singers, it probably won't become a "folk" song in this sense of the term. Anyway, what do I know? Genie
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: Genie Date: 20 Jan 02 - 12:49 AM Don't count out Spanish, McGrath. Genie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: M.Ted Date: 20 Jan 02 - 01:07 AM Sha-Boom! was done originally by The Chords, but covered by the Crewcuts, who had the bigger hit--It was from 1954, though, so it was hardly one of the first rock tunes to get wide airplay--but there was some deal about it--Louis Jordan was played a lot during the 40's, and Louis Prima, as well--Everybody has a different idea of what was the first rock'n'roll and what wasn't--I'm a big booster of the Delmore Brothers, myself-- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: Mark Clark Date: 20 Jan 02 - 02:55 AM Yeah, The Chords. That's the ticket. Don't know why I thought they were earlier. Charlie Feathers was one of the Rockabilly pioneers I was trying to remember. It seems to me there were others as well besides Cash, Perkins, Lewis and Presley. - Mark |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: M.Ted Date: 20 Jan 02 - 10:57 AM Thanks for linking that Charlie Feathers obit--his name came up a couple days ago--I think he peformed quite a number of years ago with a Sun revival band, at the Smithsonian Folklife Festival, and I was trying to figure out if it was him--great talent, though, and like many, mostly overlooked--remember Hardrock Gunther? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: Mark Clark Date: 21 Jan 02 - 01:25 AM Do you mean this Hardrock Gunther? <g> - Mark |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: English Jon Date: 21 Jan 02 - 04:29 AM Mr Red - do you mean Peter Bellamy? David is an ornithologist. Maybe birdwatching will become the new folk. In the immortal words of Eliza Carthy: "9/8's (Hornpipes) are the new black" EJ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: Dave the Gnome Date: 21 Jan 02 - 07:01 AM 500 years in the future eh? Who knows what. I think it was one of Michael Moorcocks books (Count Brass possibly?) that had four ships named after the horsemen of the Apocolypse, Jhon, Powell, Jorge and Rhungu. the flagship of the fleet was named after the mighty God, Arral Vilsun. (Spellings probably wrong but sentiment the same!) The funniest one though was in the another one of his (Dancers at the end of time) - 'Lake Billy the Kid. Named after the famous astronaut and entrepreneur of the 20th century who gained his name because he had the hindquarters of a goat...' ;-) It would be nice to know wouldn't it! David Bellamy is actualy a botanist btw, Jon, but I know what you mean. Probably came from the flower power era...? Cheers Dave the Gnome |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: GUEST,Stavanger Bill Date: 21 Jan 02 - 08:53 AM The question posed prompted me to think of anything from approximately 500 years ago that I knew or had heard, to try and see if looking back gives any indication of what sort of thing endures. Of what I would term "folk" I only came up with three: 1. "Greensleeves" written and composed by Henry VIII. 2. "Jock O' Braidislee" 3. "Earl of Totnes" There are obviously loads more, Gregorian Chants I don't count as they were definitely not folk music. I'd go along with Rap being the most likely western(????) candidate - but I'd also go for Indian, Hispanic or Chinese being the main influence 500 years hence. One thing I am fairly well convinced about is - that if you've got to plug a whole pile of stuff in, then amplify and mix it to get the required result - it doesn't stand a cat in hells chance - as stated above Joe Public has got to be able to do it, on his ownsome, acoustically if he plays an instrument, without have to rely on one Watt of electrical power. My opinion only. Only hope there will a similar forum to this because without any question of doubt, folkies in 2502 will still be asking questions, requesting help with lyrics, tunes, etc. Cheers Bill.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: Mr Red Date: 21 Jan 02 - 01:22 PM Now I always thought Gregorian was a game of chance. GUEST,Balnak 29 we can hear you, can you hear us there is another obscure instrument you may have come acros called a Termi-Null. It plays paper sheets, all you do is mark and feed it the ticket. We seem to have lost the Tune known as "Lottery results July 22 2002". I wonder, do you maybe have a record of this, just the first 6 numerals representing the notes will do, we can fake the rest. PM me though, I want it to be a surprise. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: Amos Date: 21 Jan 02 - 01:34 PM LOL, Red!! There's aman with a sharp eye for opportunity if ever there was one.... A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: Genie Date: 23 Jan 02 - 06:42 AM Bill Stravanger, I think you may be on the right track -- i.e., looking at what 500-year-old songs are still sung now. Most of the ones I can think of are Christmas carols or other hymns. Some others, more in the "folk" tradition, have evolved over the centuries, so that few people today sing the "same song" that was sung 500 years ago.
Bridget, to me it seems strange to think of "folk music" in terms of singers or groups. To the extent that a song 'belongs' to a particular artist (group), it would seem, almost by definition, it's not "folk," even if it has a 'folky' sound. It becomes folk music when people sing it in informal settings, teach it to their kids, etc. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: GUEST Date: 23 Jan 02 - 08:47 AM This thread seems to be a "what is folk music" discussion come in through the back door. Watching an archaeology special on PBS last night, I found a point made by one of the talking heads to be salient to the "definition" question regarding folk. Consider if you will, that in order to study anything, the current tendency is to sort things into classes of similar things. In archaeology, it would be the physical appearance of the artefact, in folk music it would be done by the similar sounding tunes and lyrics with similar sounding themes. So we contemporary humans quibble a bit over whether this one tune belongs here or here, but largely we agree that this is a folk tune and that is an aria (or whatever). This is where the epiphany came from for me, watching the program. Once we've got ourselves all these neat little classes and categories and types and things, we forget totally that they were arbitrary choices that we made, and that they are choices we made for convenience sake, not because the divisions, definitions, etc. are "truth" or even that they are "real"! They are simply the labels we slapped on them to make it more convenient for us to look at them, listen to them, and then organize the information in such a way that we could deal with it. Something to think about perhaps, next time y'all feel compelled to distinguish between folk music and pop music, perhaps. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 23 Jan 02 - 10:10 AM Actually I think it's most likely to be didgeridoos and bodhrans, and legends round the campfire in the ruins. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: MMario Date: 23 Jan 02 - 10:18 AM I suspect the tune to "gilligan's Island" will survive. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: SharonA Date: 23 Jan 02 - 10:40 AM "...distinguish between folk music and pop music" ....Well, yeah, we should. In the original post by MyRedneckBiting (Bridget McKinney), she mentions Mozart and Bach as "good", but they were really writing the pop music of their day – music that was for sale (paid for by patrons and concert-goers) – not what we refer to now as folk music (such as "Greensleeves" cited above). They may not have called it "folk music" 500 years ago, but now that we've created that category – and thrown 500-year-old (and older) songs into that category along with today's music of the same style – my opinion is that the name will stick. So, to answer Bridget's question ("500 years from now, what music from this era will be considered folk music?") I would say: the same sort of music that is considered folk music now. Webster's dictionary offers a good definition: "(a) originating or traditional with the common people of a country or region and typically reflecting their lifestyle; (b) a form of contemporary music written in imitation of and having qualities of traditional folk music such as stanzaic form, refrain and simplicity of melody." (Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary, 1973). What popular music will be remembered in 500 years as being representative of the 1950-2002 era? That's pretty much been answered already: music done by Elvis and The Beatles, maybe Buddy Holly, maybe The Doors or Pink Floyd or The Who, less possibly Janis Joplin or Jimi Henrix. But probably not too much of the post-Vietnam-and-pre-terrorist-attack-period music will be remembered, though I'm sure some history texts will mention disco music and other dance music, just as the 1920s (post-World-War-I-and-pre-Depression) is remembered for Charleston-style dance music without highlighting any names of composers. What folk music will be remembered in 500 years as being representative of the 1950-2002 era? Some of the songs of Pete Seeger and Tom Paxton, to be sure. Who else... Leonard Cohen? Loudon Wainwright? Our own Bert? ;^) Who knows? But whatever folk music of this era is still being sung by folks in 500 years will have been changed by "the folk process" into something we might not even recognize. Can you imagine how many versions of "Blowin' in the Wind" there will be by then?!? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: SDShad Date: 23 Jan 02 - 12:09 PM I'd have to put the Grateful Dead up there, too. This is based, as much as anything else, on the marvelous, impromptu, extended acoustic jam of "Scarlet Begonias" that a number of us did late in the night at a New Year's party earlier this month. I think the "homes and gathering places" criteria set above by Mark Clark is nicely met by many Grateful Dead tunes--I don't know of a single time in an informal circle at a party or other gathering that jamming on a Dead tune doesn't draw more attention of other gatherers than most contemporary music, and the rhythms are fun for nonmusical folks to grab a shaker or rainstick and join in the vibe. The Dead being more of a live band than a studio band (the greatness of "Workingman's Dead" and "American Beauty" notwithstanding), so their work translates nicely to the non-professional, non-studio setting of the common living room. Chris |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: GUEST Date: 23 Jan 02 - 12:13 PM Actually, I think it is silly to speculate as to what *anything* will be called in 500 years, much less the oft-debated, never-agreed term "folk" music. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: GUEST,Arkie Date: 23 Jan 02 - 12:15 PM Some interesting ideas, but all hypothetical. In 500 years there will be no folk music. If present trends continue, every song, book, paragraph, sentence, and thought will be copyrighted. The good side of all this is that the fee for thinking about performing a song will be less than if it is actually done. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: SDShad Date: 23 Jan 02 - 12:22 PM Well, I find it silly in extremis to speculate on the moods, thoughts, life, and possible cosmetic surgery history of Britney Spears, let alone spend any time discussing her music. But for those who wish to, there is, appropriately enough, a forum on Usenet called alt.fan.britney-spears, and you won't find me wandering onto it and anonymously telling them they shouldn't be having the conversations they're having. But apparently that's just me. Chris |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: Lonesome EJ Date: 23 Jan 02 - 12:41 PM Greetings once more from Century 26. Sorry it haz taken me so long to come back, but I have 500 yearz of Internet Forumz and Chatroomz to vizit, so u can imagine! Askshually, it has been 28 years since my previous post, but I set the DateTarget for Jan23 2002 for convenience. First, to Mudlark, YES we have many Blooz artist we revere, foremost among these being the Great Michael Bolton. Our schoolchildren study hiz works, and, in fact, the National Anthum of the nation of the United American Eastcoast States is Time LOve and TEnderness. I don't know Lightnin Hopkins or Gary Davis, although Leadbelly is a common ailment among those who don't take their digestive capsules daily. Red, u do not fool me with your lottery ticket request, sly fellow! But here in the Future, we are able to examine the phenomenon called "Alternate Life Pathz". By examining the Life Path you would be destined for as a Lottery Winner, I see much danger. It would take only 3 and 1/2 years for you to blow all the winnings, at which point you would die on your Lear Jet from an overdose of nymphettes. For now, goodbye ancestral onez! I will check back in 20 or 30 yearz! Balnak 29 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: Lonesome EJ Date: 23 Jan 02 - 12:43 PM Damn! Who is this "Balnak 29" and why is he using my cookie!? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: Grab Date: 23 Jan 02 - 12:49 PM When did Mozart and Beethoven become folk music? Not in any classification I've heard anyone come up with! If it requires large quantities of equipment and/or people to reproduce the music, chances are it's not folk and won't ever become folk. If a reasonable approximation can be produced by a few people with acoustic instruments, chances are it can be absorbed into folk. Looking back, I guess you could trace the appearance of new styles of music though. Disco and house might be remembered as a brief intermediate stage on the way to modern rap/hip-hop/rave stuff. Rock might trace from early blues through 50s and early 60s electric rock'n'roll, branching into heavier rock pioneered by Hendrix and more pop-rock from the Stones/Beatles/Doors, with the further branch to heavy metal in the 70s (Black Sabbath, Judas Priest etc), and the numerous bands since then in that general area. Grunge music might feature somewhere, but only in the same way as the New Romantics would - more of an image thing than anything musical, really. Graham. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: SharonA Date: 23 Jan 02 - 01:54 PM Question for Balnak 29: Are you related to Bob and Glenda 53? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: Genie Date: 23 Jan 02 - 04:36 PM Grab, Many classical composers, including Beehoven, Liszt (or is it "Lizst?), Mozart, etc., borrowed melodies from folk music, and both "popular" and "folk" music borrowed them back. "For He's A Jolly Good Fellow" can be found in Beethoven's "Wellinton's Victory," e.g., and, as I mentioned above, lots of folks have written lyrics to the "Ode To Joy" portion of Beethoven's 9th. Popular and folk music (arbitrary as that distinction might be) very often use tunes that can be found in "classical" music. Genie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: SharonA Date: 23 Jan 02 - 05:02 PM Genie: And don't forget Aaron Copland. His "Rodeo" contains musical reference to "Goodbye Old Paint" and "Bonyparte", and I believe it's his "Appalachian Spring" that incorporates the song "Simple Gifts". Ah, but I think you've hit on a major difference between classical music and folk music when you use the term "classical composers ". Classical music is written expressly for orchestral instrumentation by the composer or composers beforehand, while folk music instrumentation is generally improvised (though once an arrangement is agreed upon between the players, it can be repeated and rehearsed for performance). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: Amos Date: 23 Jan 02 - 06:07 PM Balnak: Thanks for restoring my confidence in humanity, man!! Lonesome EJ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: GUEST,Les/ Manchester uk Date: 24 Jan 02 - 12:56 PM Music can be placed along a continuum from Art Music to Folk Music. Art music is composed by someone. Folk music comes out of a process of oral transmission and change and sometimes becomes quite different because of the process. (Sea Shanties, old songs & tunes)
Most stuff called folk song is probably Art but who cares. Folk music will continue where their is an oral tradition.
Bob Pegg considers Rugby Songs and Rock bands playing covers to be an oral tradition |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: Mr Red Date: 25 Jan 02 - 12:40 PM SharonA Blowin in the Wind will be a) a nursery rhyme b) an advertising jingle for baked beans c) a windsurfers (aka Rugby) song d) hardly heard e) a curiosity that will tax the minds of amateur politico-historians who know but are amazed at why it was ever considered a political hot-potato or f) all of the above. I predict. lets wait and see if I was right, eh? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: Lonesome EJ Date: 25 Jan 02 - 01:11 PM Well, Red, Turn, Turn, Turn is already being used as background music for a wine commercial, so anything's possible. You reckon Pete just needed some cash? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: Genie Date: 25 Jan 02 - 11:57 PM Well, if the music of anyone from the last half of the 20th C., I would be surprised if the list does not include Lieber and Stoller!
Genie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Folk Music of the Future From: Genie Date: 26 Jan 02 - 12:02 AM I TRIED to "unsend" that one, to correct themistake! I meant to say "If the music of anyone from the last half of the 20th C. is remembered a hundred years later, I would be surprised if the list does not include Lieber and Stoller! Hell, they even have a Broadway musical dedicated to their songs! Genie §:-) |