Traditional ?

Subject: Traditional ?
From: George Henderson
Date: 15 Jan 99 - 08:07 AM

Hello Catters.

 

I have been following many of the threads since I was introduced to the cat by my great friend and fellow circle member Frank McGrath.

 

My contributions have been few due to pressure of work but at last I have found a little time to devote to my passion, which in case you don't know, is traditional song.

 

Therein lies a tail. A lot depends on what one terms as traditional and itis very difficult if not impossible to define that.

 

When I first came to Ireland in 1971, my definition was very clear cut. A song must have stood the test of time to become traditional and only the better ones will survive. There I was, sitting in O'Connors in Doolin, listening to a couple of people singing. Somebody sang a most beautiful love song and it seemed to me that it was a very old song. I asked about its origins and was informed that it had been written the day before. My theory was blown to pieces in seconds.

 

My mind has broadened considerably since then and my own definition of traditional song is simply a song sung in the old style. Thus songs written today can be every bit as traditional as songs written in Napoleonic times or before. A good song is a good song no matter when it was written. But I still love the old songs.

 

I would like to see comments on your understanding of traditional song.

 

 

 

Subject: RE: Traditional ?
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Jan 99 - 02:48 PM

I have said this before here but it is worth saying again I think. Just because a song is original it don't make it good but it don't make it bad either.

The same goes for older songs, just because it's old don't make it good either.

It would appear that the common understanding of what makes a traditional song, is that it's author is unknown or uncertain and that if the author is known then the song can't be traditional.

I don't think that it matters much if the song is described as traditional or not, it's the quality of the song that matters, not its pedigree or it's author.

Subject: RE: Traditional ?
From: Bruce O.
Date: 15 Jan 99 - 04:45 PM

We had a go around on this some time ago, but I can't relocate the thread. 'traditional' and 'folksong' didn't turn it up. Anyone remember it?

Subject: RE: Traditional ?
From: rick fielding
Date: 15 Jan 99 - 05:28 PM

Just as civilians have asked "is there a God", for ages, so folkies have asked "what is a folk song" or "what defines a traditional song". Perhaps we'll get the answer to the latter when we meet the former. And if He/She says "Must be folk music 'cause horses don't sing", then we'll know that Bill Broonzy had the answer all along.

Subject: RE: Traditional ?
From: John Twomey
Date: 15 Jan 99 - 05:39 PM

All songs at one time had a known author, so were they not traditional at the time they were written?

Maybe "in the tradition" would be a more apt phrase. Many of Bruce Springsteens songs are in the traditional mode. Might he someday be considered a folksinger? Are Chicago Blues folk music, rockabilly, Bluegrass, Cajun.

Subject: RE: Traditional ?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 15 Jan 99 - 05:55 PM

I found three "Methodologies" threads that relate to this subject:
one
two
three
And, for those who might be interested, I do think this subject generated more discussion than our recent "condom" thread.
-Joe Offer-