 sj |
||
|
||
What's wrong with 'Folk Music'
|
|
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: Steve in Idaho Date: 19 Mar 02 - 06:31 PM I loved the film, thoroughly enjoyed the CD, and could care less about what it wasn't. It got my son to listening to Nickle Creek, and then to remembering the music he grew up with (Folk, Bluegrass, Country), and asking me for my Dad's guitar - so he could start playing music to my Grand Daughters. Now it just doesn't get any better than that. I agree with Ron, Jerry, Spaw, Frank of Toledo, and Rick Fielding. And I have a lot in common with the rest - Later Tators - :-) Steve |
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: catspaw49 Date: 19 Mar 02 - 07:49 PM Hi Steve...........WOW....Nickel Creek. I swear those kids have really got something going besides talent and desire. I (or Karen) have played their album for all kinds of people and invariably it gets great response. Such a great combination of folk/trad/blues/bluegrass/country/pop that they really defy description except....They be great!!! That's about all the description needed! Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 19 Mar 02 - 08:39 PM "It's important that folk performers remember their role is to entertain an audience, not preach at it. What I've found appealing about this music all my life is that it covers all aspects of how we, as people, live. Not just romance, or light subjects, but everything."
Everything includes preaching. And a lot of other things. Music is to help you get through life, hard times as well as good. That involves a whole lot over and above entertainment. If there's a serious subtext to this film, and I think there probably is, that's a key element in it. |
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: Jerry Rasmussen Date: 19 Mar 02 - 11:23 PM Geez, Toadfrog! You must go to open mike nights! What a gross overgeneralization about singer/songwriters. I don't think I ever heard a song by Bill Staines as an example) that was self-pitying. Subjectivity? That's what every one of these posts are... including mine. Sentimental? How about Old Blue? That's enough to reduce a feller to tears. And it's not by a contemporary singer-songwriter. "Singer-songwriters" are like truck drivers, dentists, garbage collectors and Priests. And folksingers who've never written a song. There are some good ones, and some bad ones. I've heard 'em both. I remember hearing a guy singing a song against guns, with a chorus that recommended flushing them down your toilet. I suspect his day job was as a plumber. I don't like the touchy-feely songwriters any more than you do. But, they ain't all there is, and they aren't all self-piitying...
Honest... Jerry |
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: Steve Parkes Date: 20 Mar 02 - 03:34 AM Persdonally, I've always had trouble accepting that Cinema is an art form! With a (realtively very) small number of exceptions, a movie is not literature, it's entertainment. Noting wrong with entertainmnt, and not to say e. can't be Art, but you take my point, I'm sure. I enjoyed the film and the songs, but I wasn't under any illusions that it was a true and accurate picture of life in (wherever it was) in the (whenever it was); anyway, I'm not an American, so I have an excuse. I've always been very aware of my roots, thanks to my family; and as I get older I appreciate my roots all the more. Steve |
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: Pied Piper Date: 20 Mar 02 - 10:03 AM I've not seen the film but I have heard some of the music and sound OK to me.I agree with the point made previously that a small percentage of people involved in "folk music" seem to think it belongs to them and would rather it stayed as an endagered spieces so they can feel superior about preserving it.People with this attitude seemed to take over the folk club seen here in the UK in the late seventies to such an extent that most people I know would rather have there finger nails pulled out than go to one.This is a pity as the situation is much better now, clubs being much more eclectic relaxed and informal.I'm afraid The term "folk music" does have negative associations for most non-folkies, certainly over this side of the pond. My own musical interests cover a lot of forms from many of the worlds traditions, and access to to these resources has never been easier.Musical traditions are never static and all this crossfertalization has, and will throw up some strong passionate forms to enrich the lives of all 6,000 million of us.Modern human biengs have been makeing music for tens of thousands of years before I was born, and will be making it when I'm dust, the thing is to be part of the process and pass on as much to the next generation as you can. All the best PP |
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: GUEST,in the Mudcat Observatory Tower Date: 20 Mar 02 - 10:36 AM Read what he writes elsewhere at Mudcat, then read between the lines of Dick Greenhaus' post. There are three possible conclusions: 1) The "O Brother, Where Art Thou" soundtrack is not available through Camsco; 2) Dick Greenhaus somehow holds the soundtrack musicians of "O Brother, Where Art Thou" accountable for Bob Dylan going electric at the 1965 Newport Folk Festival; 3) some combination of 1) and 2). |
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: GUEST Date: 20 Mar 02 - 11:05 AM I'm LOL, great observations. Same thing goes for the "sound track" CD of Soncatcher. I assume that dick greenhaus is actually referring to the "Songcatcher" CD. If that's the case, he should read the CD cover. Nowhere does it claim to be a "soundtrack." It states, "music from and inspired by the motion picture." dick greenhaus wants to blame the CD for not being what it doesn't claim to be. |
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: dick greenhaus Date: 20 Mar 02 - 01:58 PM Re me and Dylan-- I never cared whether or not he went elctric. I don't begrudge him his success. I like some songs he's written. I dislike is singing. I detest the hokie Okie accent. I've sold several copies of the "Songcatcher" CD to people who were under the impression it was a real soundrack CD. They were also disappointed. I a[pologize for any errors I've made concerning the O Brother CD; I've been particularly sensitive to the "I'll Fly Away" track because I've had over 50 requests for the Kossoy Sisters CD, and Rykodisk has pulled it off the market reportedly at the behest of the movie producers. I still think that a "soundtrack" album should be taken from the soundtrack. I liked the music in O Brother; didn't care much for the film. I loved the music in Songcatcher, admired the scenery and the acting, and hated the story line. CAMSCO does sell the O Brother CD. It also sells Dylan CDs, as well as a host of other CDs by performers I don't personally care for. |
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: Herga Kitty Date: 20 Mar 02 - 02:09 PM Wet = lacking oomph, insipid, not visceral. Folk music = not commercially viable (when it is, it gets called something else). |
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: Fortunato Date: 20 Mar 02 - 02:20 PM I use the term Roots music in my blurbs and discussions to describe the early sources for songs in two genres, Old Time Country and Rock N' Roll. Here in DC the term Roots Music came up and gained in usage because we have audiences here (young and old) that appreciate knowing that The Carter Family, Jimmie Rodgers, Emmett Miller, etc. and their music, vocal styles, etc. are the 'roots of Country music and Bluegrass. It first surfaced when Billy Hancock and Tex Rubinowitz began to seek and perform the Jump Blues classics of the 40's, like Cadilac Boogie and Goodrockin' at Midnight by people like Clarence Gatemouth Brown, side by side with Gene Vincent's Race with the Devil. It's an education factor that people never fail to question. If I said "Folk music" they have a pre-conceived notion, the same with Bluegrass and Blues and so on. I use 'Rootst to move people beyond to where the musical lines blurr and intersect. There' nothing wrong with Folk Music as a term, but if you want to take folks a little further...Cheers, Chance. |
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 20 Mar 02 - 02:27 PM I quite like the expression "roots and shoots" to mean the traditional stuff, and the new stuff growing out of the tradition. |
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: John Routledge Date: 20 Mar 02 - 02:42 PM Is this an element of what is wrong with folk music: The Revival now seems to comprise Chorus songs, funny songs and parodies; together with the flattening of the tunes of the more difficult ballads to mke them easier to sing. Things are of course less demanding this way. |
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: DaveJ Date: 20 Mar 02 - 02:45 PM Dick Greenhaus said,
"I've had over 50 requests for the Kossoy Sisters CD, and Rykodisk has pulled it off the market reportedly at the behest of the movie producers. I still think that a "soundtrack" album should be taken from the soundtrack. " Re: The side track of the flag issue that crept in here: All I can think about is the words to John Prine's song,"Your flag decal won't get you in to heaven anymore..." Obviously John Prine is a lefty pinko 'folk' musician... Or is he a "singer song writer?" DaveJ |
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: GUEST Date: 20 Mar 02 - 03:28 PM I a[pologize for any errors I've made concerning the O Brother CD; I've been particularly sensitive to the "I'll Fly Away" track because I've had over 50 requests for the Kossoy Sisters CD, and Rykodisk has pulled it off the market reportedly at the behest of the movie producers. That's odd, Amazon.com and Rykodisc.com are selling the Kossoy Sisters CD for $11.98. It's currently a featured CD at Rykodisc.com where they're specifically hyping the fact that "I'll Fly Away" is used in "O Brother, Where Art Thou". Cdnow.com is selling it for $11.49. I guess Camsco isn't always the best source for folk music. |
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: GUEST Date: 20 Mar 02 - 03:33 PM Here's Rykodisc's page for The Kossoy Sisters CD, |
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: dick greenhaus Date: 20 Mar 02 - 05:44 PM Rykodisc, CDNow and Amazon are apparently as remiss as CAMSCO in failing to update their pages. I've attempted to purchase the CD from all of them, with no success. |
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: Nigel Parsons Date: 21 Mar 02 - 05:49 AM The "Roots and shoots" comments remind me of the job interview, psych appraisal. "If you were an animal, what animal would you like to be ?" "A Panda" "Oh, why would you choose a panda ?" "Because it eats, roots, shoots and leaves"
|
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: GUEST,Declan Date: 21 Mar 02 - 06:32 AM It doesn't matter much what you call it, juist do it ! or should that be a /. A lot of this discussion is about music industry stuff, which most of the time has very little to contribute to the musical content. Someone up there said people has a duty to 'entertain' - I don't agree, a lot of folk music is not 'entertaining' in a passive, you perform and I'll be entertained sort of way, some of it is meant to be educational, helps to remind people of their roots etc. It is not and should not always have to be about having happy clappy people smiling all the time. I never understood this thong about singer songwriters - is it the fact that they sing or write songs that bothers people. Problem here is that singer/songwriters have become a genre (whatever that is) and have been dubbed uncool by some of those who seek to tell us 'rootsies' what we should and shouldn't like. I had a funny experience a couple of years ago when someone who had gone to see Hal Ketchum on my recommendation cane and thanked me for it. He said "I thought he was going to be a singer songwriter, but it turned out he was "Country Blues" and I really enjoyed it. So Hal Ketchum isn't a singer/songwriter ? In the UK the Folk Roots magazine dropped the 'f' word a few years ago and becme fROOTS. Someone writing to the daily newspaper at Sidmouth pointed out that if that festival followed suit it would become the Sidmouth International festival of fArts ! As for OBWAT, I enjoyed it a lot and love the soundtrack. Unfortunately a lot of comedy is parody at some sort of a level. Anyone seen the St Patricks day jokes thread. I enjoyed a lot of them but had heard most before. But I wouldn't take offence at any of it. |
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: GUEST Date: 21 Mar 02 - 08:07 AM Declan says "Someone up there said people have a duty to 'entertain' - I don't agree, a lot of folk music is not 'entertaining' in a passive, you perform and I'll be entertained sort of way, some of it is meant to be educational, helps to remind people of their roots etc. It is not and should not always have to be about having happy clappy people smiling all the time." One of my favourite quotes is a dedication in a book of poetry by Danny Abse "I hope this seriously entertains" "Educational" can be boring or entertaining as can all forms of performance and all forms of art. Entertaining does not have to be happy clappy.It can be intellectually challenging AND entertaining.Yes you do have a duty to entertain if you work professionally in the arts, but what entertains some, bores others, or goes completely over their heads.Every artist has to find the audience that is entertainable by what they do. Those that don't find an audience are not entertaining anybody, except probably themselves.
|
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: GUEST,Declan Date: 21 Mar 02 - 09:49 AM And what's wrong with entertaining yourself. Where I come from folk music is not all (yet) professional and not viewed by most as being an 'art', most people who play in sessions for example do so for themselves and each other. If other people enjoy it (and a lot do) its a bonus. Some people may call this a selfish attitude, but it means that you don't have to compromise what you like doing for commercial purposes. This attitude is probably the main reason why I still have the 'day job'. |
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: harvey andrews Date: 21 Mar 02 - 10:56 AM "And what's wrong with entertaining yourself" Well it's a bit like masturbation, best not done in public. I posted the previous to Declan but it came up as Guest, so I've got my cookie back now The point I'm trying to get across Declan is that music is a pleasure, and like sex a pleasure best shared. You seem to be putting across the idea that giving pleasure at the highest level is in some way selling out. This smacks of the attitude I've come across in my musical life that asks "you don't want to be successful do you?", as though being successful at what you enjoy is some kind of crime. I know many people in many walks of life who have been successful and have not compromised what they do for commercial purposes, and that includes many of the great names in folk music. Martin Carthy(M.B.E.) has been a prime example. I don't understand this attitude and never will.The more people who enjoy what I enjoy the better. I wish the radio was swamped by it, I wish it was the whole of the Top Ten, I wish it was on television every night! But I fear that would drive the anti-commercialists into sessions of whatever it had replaced. Joy is what it's about. Joy to the world!!! |
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: GUEST,Declan Date: 21 Mar 02 - 11:22 AM Sorry if you've misunderstood what I'm saying, and I think you have. I am delighted for the success of people like Martin Carthy and I wish that there were a lot more examples like him. I don't think there are too many. Even in the case of MC, I think many outside the immediate folk world would be asking Martin Who? (I don't mean any offence to the great man by that, I just think its true). But there are a lot of people who have made enormous contributions to folk music who have never strayed much past their local pub, and these people are also successful, but not in the commercial terms that you are speaking of. Nothing wrong with that either. What I am trying to say is that if a group of people want to play a particular style of music together, for their own amusement, there's no harm in that. Its how folk music started in the first place, and how its been continuing to happen, even after folk music was no longer all that fashionable after the 60s folk boom. If people want to take that and share it with the rest of the world that's fine too, but often somewhere in the middle of that the music biz takes over - and a lot gets lost in the translation. Give me a little session in the corner of a pub over a big concert hall any day. |
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: DaveJ Date: 21 Mar 02 - 12:00 PM Similar to Dick Greenhaus, I have had no luck in ordering the Kossoy Sisters CD at Rykodisc. So I tried CD Universe. They are hyping it as if it were a new release due out on 2 Apr. 2003...so I pre-ordered it(;-I) at the following prices: Quantity Title Config Price Total ----------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Bowling Green CD $8.39 $8.39 ------------------------------------------------------------ SUB-TOTAL: $8.39 SHIPPING: $2.99 ORDER TOTAL: $11.38 We'll see what happens. Dave |
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: Steve Parkes Date: 21 Mar 02 - 12:07 PM I think all live entertainers who are actually entertaining interact with their audience: even if it's not explicit, they will respond to the audience's behaviour. If you go to a concert of classical music, say, where you listen (and enjoy), it's not what we'd call entertainment; at least in its colloquial sense. I'm going to stop now: maybe "what is entertainment?" is much like "what is folk?"! Steve |
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: harvey andrews Date: 21 Mar 02 - 01:43 PM yep, I think you're right. The word has been corrupted to mean something other than it should. "Occupy agreeably" is one of my dictionary's definitions, and I would suggest an audience at a classical concert, a folk concert or a session in a pub are all being agreeably occupied by music. |
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 21 Mar 02 - 02:06 PM I think if you follow the analogy/pun about playing with yourself too far, performing in front of an audience would start sounding a bit dodgy too.
A lot of the time in folk music the distinction between the performer and the audience isn't that great. A group of friends playing music together in an informal setting can be both at the same time.A band playing music for dancing and a caller would look pretty silly without the people on the floor dancing.(That sometimes happens, and they can look pretty silly.)
Whatever word we use for - and entertainment is one which has been degraded - if you aren't grabbing someone's attention and making them want to hear more, something's badly wrong.
I love the story Steve Knightley (Show of Hands) tells of the time he rang up an insurance agent for cover, and he said he played music, and the man wants to know more, and he explains that he's what might be called a folk singer. And the insurance agent says "Oh that's fine. It's just that you'd have had to pay more for the policy if you'd been an entertainer." |
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: GUEST,Declan Date: 22 Mar 02 - 05:51 AM I'll settle for that definition of entertainment. I sometimes find myself in situations when playing in a pub where everyone around is talking loudly and not apparently listening. I think if we were to change what we were playing to some more popular type of material we'd get more attention, but that wouldn't be the type of music we'd want to play. You occasionally meet people who seem to think that you are a juke box. "You call yourself an entertainer and you wont play ...". Or "sing something we all know" - that song hasn't been written yet and the ones who ask you for that usually know less songs than most other people. I don't feel any particular obligation to entertain those people on their terms. In my case they haven't paid in to see me, if they had it might be a different story. However even when people don't seem to be listening you are probably adding something, even if its only 'atmosphere' - I don't fully understand what that is, but people talk about it a lot. I remember at a party a long time back saying to somebody that I wasn't going to bother playing any more because no one seemed to be listening - he pointed out that when the music stopped the level of conversation died down, so it must have been adding something. Quite frequently people say things like, I always enjoy you're session because it doesn't interfere with our conversation the same way that some of the other (amplified) singers who come here do. Sometimes I think this is a bit of a backhanded compliment, but I usually take it in the spirit in which its meant. But maybe they'd enjoy it more if they stopped talking and listened for a bit! |
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: harvey andrews Date: 22 Mar 02 - 07:04 AM Oh Declan..you're talking "jukebox". The level of converstaion dropped because they weren't talking over your noise. I had this last week at a special gig in a hotel for a fan who'd been asking me for years. Eventually I gave in but insisted it had to be in a separate room, with a sound system and theatre style seating. he persuaded 60 people to come along (this is a small seaside village in Wales) most of whom had never heard of me.From the moment I started I knew I had three audiences. Those who could concentrate and were on my wavelength, those who were trying hard and beginning to enjoy something different, and those who couldn't concentrate and were fidgity. At the interval a group came and bought cds and said they were enjoying what I was doing but not the seating arrangement. They wanted a cabaret style with tables etc. I suggested this was because they wanted to talk as I sang and they agreed that this is what they always did. For them music of any sort, yours or mine, will always be background and there's nothing we can do about it. They probably have the TV on all day without looking at it. Silence is their enemy, challenge their nightmare.I explained to them that every performer has to control their environment to give of their best and that theatre style seating was my way of control in the case of an audience not knowing what I did. The group stayed in the bar drinking and the rest came back to the room and had a great night.Then one more of the group bought a c.d at the end!There's nowt queerer than folk!! |
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: GUEST,Fortunato Date: 22 Mar 02 - 08:59 AM As I'm home sick with the flu. I'll jump back in here. Rick Fielding and Jerry Rasmussen have expressed above two points that bear some attention. Rick has expressed a preference for "authenticity (which CAN be entertaining if done right!)". I have the same preference (we went to different schools together as children but listened to the same music). Jerry gave the perfect example of the schism between Bluegrass and Folk, (and Blues) in my opinion. The preconceived notions of each camp block the crossover of fans. Now the great Folk Performers routinely cross the 'lines' to perform Old Time, Blues, and Bluegrass, (ever listen to Doc Watson?). Some great Bluegrass performers, like the Country Gentlemen and the Stanley Brothers perform Folk music. And who could say much Blues is not Folk? But the 'Bluegrass Fan' may shy away from Folk music and likewise the "Blues Fan' because they have a vision of Joan Baez singing "We Shall Overcome", or Pete Seeger singing anything. So if I want to bring an audience with wider demographics to my show, video, CD, movie, what do I do? Do I take 'authenticity' as my touchstone, or do I take 'connections' as my touchstone? In my opinion the answer is connections. I want to build bridges from where music fans in related genres are to where my music is. Does that mean that authenticity can be dismissed? Absolutely not. But I MAY sacrifice some things to build a bridge. 1) Two examples. When I first saw OBWAT I disliked the repetition of lines by the 'back up singers' in "Man of Constant Sorrow". I was used to the 'traditional' singing of the song. But upon reflection, if that 'Motown' arrangement bridged the gap to a wider audience, and, by so doing, brought new ears to music I love, well, damn, Phil, what's wrong with that? 2)Recently when arranging a Carter Family song I found that I had learned it with the Carter's 'Cut Time', that is they dropped measures. But in order to make it more readibly playable for my wife and others we reinserted the dropped measures. Authentic? No. Does it change the song? Yes. Something gained, something lost, but a bridge was built to perfomance today. I would make a case, when aiming for a broader, underexposed audience, for Authenticity with careful, intentional modifications that respect the music but may bridge the gap for the audience. Regards, Chance. (I'll stop here, I have to go blow my nose and spray my throat and whine for a while. (Just kidding Jerry!)) |
|
Subject: RE: What's wrong with 'Folk Music' From: Phil Cooper Date: 22 Mar 02 - 01:12 PM Fortunato, Absolutely nothing wrong with your point, mentioned above. I agree about bridging the audience/performer gap. In my earlier post, primarily agreeing with Jerry, I neglected to define what I meant by "entertain." I didn't want to write something about the length of "War and Peace" to clarify my concept. My aplogies if that led to some confusion.
|
| Share Thread: |