Help: PELs & The Folk Image

Subject: RE: Help: PELs & The Folk Image
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Jul 02 - 03:24 AM

The problem is that there is not a nice neat division betwen participation and entertainment. That is what makes the law (and the proposed changes) such a dog's breakfast.

There also is no definition of what a performer is or is not. And no rational reason why a performer's activities should be subject to any restrictions. This is not the case in Scotland, which has the same safety legislation, so please tell me why it should here?

Perhaps Graham you would like to propose a non obsolete definition of what licensee will have to detail well in advance in an operating plan, One that would not include in this, non musical 'entertainments' like live TV sports events?

Subject: RE: Help: PELs & The Folk Image
From: Grab
Date: 14 Jul 02 - 08:57 PM

Mr Happy, you're saying that folk music is getting worse treatment than other forms of music. I don't think that's true - try telling that to anyone into rave music who's been arrested in whatever disused warehouse they've been using! I don't see that folk music should get different treatment from every other form of music.

Shambles, re the "not in principle intended to be public entertainment", I'm afraid I'm going to go into that point by point.

Two of the three sessions I go to regularly use microphones and amplification to ensure the whole room can hear. If this was just for the entertainment of the 10 to 20 performers (depending on how many turn up that night), those ppl could sit in a circle and dispense with all electronics. But when you deliberately send the sound to the whole room, you are performing to the whole room. Therefore it's providing entertainment for the whole room.

Even if they did just play so that only they could hear, the players are performing to the non-players - less true in session-type settings, but definitely true in singarounds. In session-type settings, the players are performing to other players! So we're all being entertained. And one of your key points is that "no-one is obliged to turn up", therefore we are all just members of the public providing entertainment to other members of the public.

Finally, the players not being obliged to turn up doesn't make any difference to whether they are performers or not. When they stand up and sing, they are performing. Therefore they are performers. What other definition is there?

I don't see that the definition is overly broad, only that it's obsolete. The "2-in-a-bar" rule became pointless as soon as amplifiers became available, so anyone could crank the knobs up to 11 and blow the ceiling off with just a mic and an electric guitar. Surely this is where the new PEL will come in, to limit only the dB level and time at which music can be played, and not the number of players? And any pub can get the new PEL, bcos it doesn't cost any more than a basic liquor license - restrictions on getting a music license will then just be based on the location and soundproofing.

Graham.

Subject: RE: Help: PELs & The Folk Image
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 Jul 02 - 08:31 PM

Lynden G (and anyone else) A fax to your MP only takes a couple of minutes, and won't cost you a penny, and it'll land in his or her pigeon-hole tomorrow. It's worth doing, and here is the link to FaxYourMP.

All I know is any time you talk to an MP to ask them why they haven't done something, or why they have, they always refer to their letter tray as a reason.

Either there have been masses of letters supporting them in something that you are against, or they haven't received any letters urging them to do something you want them to do.

So don't give them the excuse. Fax them, and keep on faxing them till they reply. Which they will, even if it's only waffle. And it just might turn out that your MP is one of the goodies on this after all, in which case he or she deserves to be encouraged.

Subject: RE: Help: PELs & The Folk Image
From: GUEST,Peter from Essex
Date: 14 Jul 02 - 07:37 PM

Roger

The problem is that there is not a nice neat division betwen participation and entertainment. That is what makes the law (and the proposed changes) such a dog's breakfast.

Subject: RE: Help: PELs & The Folk Image
From: GUEST,Lynden G
Date: 14 Jul 02 - 06:40 PM

Dear Shambles,

I'll confess to have been a little slow on the uptake here, and whilst your efforts to constantly keep this in the public mind have been (in many ways) admirable, I'm a little unsure how to help.

Please don't refer me to another thread - there are so many.

Is a letter to my MP the best help that someone who has a passing (but not passionate) interest can do?

Lynden

Subject: RE: Help: PELs & The Folk Image
From: The Shambles
Date: 14 Jul 02 - 06:32 PM

What I would add is that participatory folk activities like sessions, singarounds and Morris have and are now taking place in pubs. These are not in principle mainly intended to be public entertainment, as they are not usually provided or paid by licensees for this purpose.

Their participants are not performers, in the respect that they are under no obligation to even turn up, let alone play, sing or dance, if they do.

As such, these perfectly demonstrate the risks to traditional musical activites of the current (and most probably unchanged) broad legal definition of public entertainment, as performances of music and dancing (but not live TV in pubs), in the 95% of licensed premises that do not have PELs.

Subject: RE: Help: PELs & The Folk Image
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Jul 02 - 04:41 PM

Well said Peter.

It's a music issue.

Any paranoia the Mr Happy (and others) might have about 'folk image' is both ridiculous and irrelevant

Subject: RE: Help: PELs & The Folk Image
From: Eric the Viking
Date: 14 Jul 02 - 04:27 PM

But you have the problem, what are folk activities? Are they just Morris dancing, acoustic music sessions, Singer solo/group performances, folk rock etc? Defining folk music is very hard to do from the range of performing styles that there are. I agree it's not a heavy metal band blasting it out, or a pop, boy or girl band, I have seen from almost "thrash speed, metal" folk to a solo or duo playing with a violin and an unamplified guitar.

Surley it's the whole legislation that needs to be ammended to allow musicians of what ever stlye to perform in public?

Subject: RE: Help: PELs & The Folk Image
From: The Shambles
Date: 14 Jul 02 - 03:41 PM

I tend to agree but this is a folk site so it is probably safe to concentrate here of the specific problems that this legislation presents to folk activities.

Subject: RE: Help: PELs & The Folk Image
From: GUEST,Peter from Essex
Date: 14 Jul 02 - 01:31 PM

This isn't a "folk" issue, its a "music" issue. Making it appear specific to a single genre makes it seem less important.

Subject: RE: Help: PELs & The Folk Image
From: The Shambles
Date: 13 Jul 02 - 04:36 AM

A bit more info, from the BBC, to demonstrate our Government's view's.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/entertainment/music/newsid_1731000/1731654.stm

Subject: PELs & The Folk Image
From: Mr Happy
Date: 12 Jul 02 - 07:55 AM

Subject: RE: The Folk Image From: Mr Happy Date: 12-Jul-02 - 06:03 AM

i'm refreshing this because it's particularly relevant currently here in the uk- i.e. the PEL debacle.

the stereotyping of FOLK, does, i believe,influence the way that the government legistlates over such matters and also, just as importantly, how the media perceives it.

there's no great national outcry against making it illegal for people to gather to make music & sing in pubs & other public places also for this reason.

i could go on & on.

your comments?