BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear

Subject: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 07:50 AM

I think we have discussed and rehearsed the arguments. I suggest that those who are dissatisfied with the current arrangements for who gets what should keep asking the BBC about two issues:

1. The White Hare, by any current deffinition, is not a traditional song.

2. The method of deciding who gets awards is unclear, unavailable and not trusted by lots of people who are the natural and continuing supporters of folk music.

If these points do not matter then neither do the Awards. Since the Awards are the BBC Awards, the BBC should:

1. Remove the song from the traditional catergory

2. Tell Snooth Opps to reveal the details of exactly how Awards are given

3. Organise a system that is open, transparent and trusted.

BBC Messageboard

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 08:31 AM

Have we finally established the truth of our suspicion that the White Hare is not traditional? I ask because on the Lakeman album, despite being almost unrecognisable, is a version of "The Setting of the Sun" which is I think traditional although you would not know it from the Lakeman rendition.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 08:43 AM

Having heard it. Is it At The Setting Of The Sun, a version of Polly Vaughan? That seems to be about somebody whothought his girlfriend was a swan, not a hare, and then shot her.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 08:55 AM

Yes, CR, that's the song. Then he hoped for death to meet her at the setting of the sun. I learned that one from my late wife (which is why I now sing it) who used to sing it back in the 60s with a band called the Chapmen.

My point is that if SL takes one traditional song and murders it, he might do the same to another, so if there was a traditional "White Hare" the SL thing might be it with a bastardisation of the tune or a wholly new tune

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 09:16 AM

Hmm, the BBC board does make some things clear - it is lyrics Lakeman, melody prob. trad arr. Lakeman.

However the pfaff of having to register etc, and the apparently heavy-handed moderation means I won't be there.

I would like to compliment post 92 (by, I think, Countess Richard in another guise) which reaches IMHO the correct conclusion that the body of "trad" items is probably now fixed unless library research increases their number and post 104.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST, PRS Member
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 11:21 AM

Just for the record you get the same money for Trad Arr as you do for a fully-written song.

It's all based on percentages. Trad doesn't get a percentage, you get the lot.

So
Music: Trad arr 'PRS Member'/Words: 'PRS Member'
is the same as
Words and Music: Trad arr "PRS Member
is the same as
Words and Music: 'PRS Member."

I've just double-checked

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 11:41 AM

Oh yes, the money is the same, but that is not the whole of what music is about, is it?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,PRS Member
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 11:50 AM

Of course not.

People were asking why the White Hare was credited as Trad if it isn't.

Why is the writer turning away royalties?

Answer: He's not.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Scrump
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 12:08 PM

Aye, a right shrewd lad is our Seth.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 12:11 PM

I suspect a little thread drift here.

Can we stick to the subject of "Open and Clear" for the Folk Awards?

Most people agree Seth has been a bit naive in this - but on the other hand he is a nice enough person.

Which is more than can be said for John "Two-fingers" Leonard.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 12:56 PM

Thanks Dave, I was beggining to loose the will to post for a while.

I feel sure the arguments here are over.

Please bother the BBC

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 01:03 PM

The mention of "The Setting of the SUN" is intriguing(I think Lakeman takes his version from Baring-Gould's "Songs of the West Country", by the way). You see, Seth Lakeman undoubtedly did issue some recordings of traditional songs this year. So it is odd that the Lakeman fans on the 150-strong jury for the folk awards did not select one of those undoubtedly traditional songs to honour with the nomination in the Best Traditional Track category. Instead, we are asked to believe that a majority plumped for the self-evidently non-traditional "White Hare". Two explanations have been suggested: first, that the voters were so stupid that they mistook the White Hare for a traditional song, and therefore awarded it the most votes(also, of course, because they liked it); second, the explanation could be that that they did not award it a majority of the votes at all, but this was done on their behalf by a "collator" acting for the managaement. Both explanations seem unlikely; which do you think might have happened? I can't immediately think of a third possibility.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Scrump
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 05:45 AM

The White Hare being issued as a single?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 07:59 AM

First step, get rid of Smooth Operations.

eric

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 09:05 AM

Render unto Caeser what is Caeser's. Lost cause.....just leave it to those who job it is to sell this load of crap.

i get a bit cheesed off when I find it invasive.... for example lakeman and Dillon turned up on the Ralph McTell 60th birthday memorial concert DVD, which wasn't cheap.

There were so obviously people in the folk clubs whose paths had crossed Ralph's in a far more meaningful way. What the hells the point of writing your biography, and then leaving them all out of your 60th birthday bash.

But radio 2, come on....who gives a monkeys bum what they get up to?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 12:01 PM

Well we are getting somewhere with the BBC. I haven't received an ameila from John Leonard - but at least it is a start!!

Dear Mr Eyre

Thank you for your email about the Smooth Operations site. I understand that you raised concerns about the Complaints page of the site -
http://www.smoothoperations.com/complaints.htm.

I've now spoken to John Leonard, Executive Producer BBC Folk Awards, at
Smooth Operations. You should have received an email from him explaining
that the page was simply a joke. However, the site has now been changed to
give people the correct email address through which to complain.

Please be assured your concerns on this matter were added to a daily log
which is made available to senior editorial staff and channel controllers.

Thank you, once again, for contacting the BBC.

Yours sincerely


Ethan Kennedy
Divisional Advisor
BBC Information

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 12:12 PM

Posted on BBC F&A site:

In response to your comments and questions about the Folk Awards, producer John has asked me to post this message on his behalf:

I have been fascinated by current message board discussions regarding 'The White Hare' debate, and I feel it is important to clarify a few points. There have been a number of questions asked, and in no particular order, here are my responses. Forgive me if I miss any specific point.

1. In the nominations round, we asked our panel to nominate up to three artists in each category - one of the categories being 'Best Traditional Track'. When the nominations were returned, members of the panel had cast their votes for 'The White Hare' under that category. (I should point out that the Performing Rights Society, and both versions of Seth's album 'Freedom Fields', credit the song as trad. arr. Seth Lakeman). Some panellists nominated 'The White Hare' for 'Best Original Song', but the majority included it under 'Best Traditional Track'. The number of nominations it received placed it firmly in the top 4 of the category, and thus it went forward into the second round of voting.

My personal definition of a 'traditional' track is any piece of music where we cannot identify the original author and where the song has passed through many hands in an oral tradition, as seems to be the case with Seth's version of 'The White Hare'. Seth and his band obviously came to the same conclusions, because on both versions of 'Freedom Fields', the song is credited as traditional. If it's not traditional, is it an original song? I would be much less comfortable if it were in the 'Best Original Song' category, because it has clearly come from different, unidentified sources. I can think of many wonderful songs, credited as traditional, which have been virtually re-written by the performers, and I think this is part of the process.

It is interesting that we had a similar dilemma last year with John Tams' 'Man of Constant Sorrow', which was in the 'Best Original Song' category, although the first verse was quite clearly heavily influenced by traditional versions of the song.

2. The process of deciding who gets which award is described in full on the Radio 2 Folk Awards website. As stated there, "the awards themselves are voted for by a panel of around 150 broadcasters, folk journalists, festival organisers, agents, promoters etc; people whose job it is to make judgements of one sort or another about folk music during their daily work. I have never asked musicians to vote because I think it is their role to make the music and other people's to judge. The voting is in two stages: the first round is open and the panel can vote for anyone they like in each of the designated categories. These votes are collated and the top four artists in each category declared as nominees. The same panel is then asked to vote again on this shortlist to choose an award winner in each category." To put it simply, those with the most votes in the first round become nominees, and the nominees with the most votes in the second round win.

I have never published the list of panellists because I don't want members of the panel open to lobbying by the better-off record companies and artists. I felt this would disadvantage smaller labels and artists who make their own CDs. However, I have no objections to members of the panel letting the public know that they are on our list if that is their choice.

3. It has been suggested on the message board that the awards must be fixed because the trophies are personalised. The awards are made by acclaimed sculptor Mick Kirkby-Geddes, who doesn't receive our order until the final votes are in and we know who has won in each category. This is the point when we discuss personalising the awards and it happens around mid-December.

4. As regards the picture on the 'Complaints' page of the Smooth Operations web site, it was put up as a joke and had been sitting there happily for 10 years. It was never intended as anything else and I'm sorry if it caused offence. None was meant, and in that spirit, I've asked our web team to remove the picture.

John Leonard
Executive Producer, BBC Radio 2 Folk Awards

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 12:58 PM

This is probably the wrong place but:

This is all very plausable but "The White Hare" is not, by any definition, a traditional song. Why did so many people think it was?

Perhaps we could be told how many actually voted?

"These votes are collated and the top four artists in each category declared as nominees." What does collated mean in this context?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: The Vulgar Boatman
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 04:34 PM

Enlighten me, O ye faithful, for I am with the Drummer on this and simply don't understand a)what the fuss is about and b)why any practitioner of traditional music should be even remotely interested in this shite.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 04:38 PM

Hear, hear. Give it a rest.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 05:32 PM

Go away Leonard - we're onto you :-)

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 05:35 PM

"Enlighten me, O ye faithful, for I am with the Drummer on this"

Read the other thread with an even slightly open mind, Boatman. Please (Drummer's mind has been closed for decades).

It matters to EVERY practitioner of traditional music. S.O. are counting on people like you to say things like this and so let them off the hook.

Read the thread. Please

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 06:49 PM

John leonard's staement is a classic. You think he;s answering the complaints. Please take note, though, nowhere does he assert that Seth Lakeman's track "The White Hare" was in the top four of the votes cast for "Best traditional track". Which, actaully, is the very question he was being pressed to answer.
   And the fact that he is unwilling to answer the question directly cannot help but suggest that we should draw the obvious conclusion.
   Come on John Leonard, it's a simple question: is the answer "yes" or "no"?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 07:21 PM

I haven't received an email from John Leonard - but at least it is a start!!


I have. I am not going to post it because I would not see that as fair.

I will keep people up-to-date.......

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 05:14 AM

yeh like I don't play traditional music...

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,ChorleyBob
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 05:56 AM

Have we really come to this : getting all steamed up and self-righteous like Mary Whitehouse about a v-sign.Lighten up folks.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 06:07 AM

Who's giving V-signs. I just don't think these people are reachable or remotely interested in what's going on in the folk clubs.

point of information for GUEST; folk clubs are where English people are allowed to go and play what they consider folk music. Usually nowadays without let, hindrance or some prat telling you that you don't understand the traditions of the country you have lived all your life in.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 06:07 AM

Do you like football Bob? How about if the World Cup was decided by men in suits behind closed doors. Would that be a good thing?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Scrump
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 06:14 AM

folk clubs are where English people are allowed to go and play what they consider folk music. Usually nowadays without let, hindrance or some prat telling you that you don't understand the traditions of the country you have lived all your life in.

Like it weelittledrummer! :-) This could well be my definition of a folk club.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 06:16 AM

No-one said you donlt undertsand traditions Drummer - only that your mind was closed. You are displaying an alarmin cynicism about the music you say you love.

Of course these people are not remotely interested in what's going on in clubs. At the moment. It is up to us to change that. We have every right to try, and try dammned hard.

Um, "All that's needed for evil to flourish is for good men to remain silent." (help me Countess - what's the quote)?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 06:27 AM

I think that's one Lizzie Cornish is fond of trotting out.
You'll probably find it in a SoH thread.

I'm a bit alarmed at these clubs where 'English people are allowed to go and play what they consider Volkmusik. Translations of the Horst Wessel Lied perhaps? This is actually entitled Die Fahne Hoch (The Flag On High) and the prospect of this sort of xenophobic, nationalistic claptrap catching on is really scary.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 06:42 AM

not cynicism.... realism. they are part of the MUSIC BUSINESS.

Actually compared to some of the assholes in that business, the folkies are pretty inoffensive. They take care of their own fiercely ...its just minimal business pracice.

We on the other hand practice our MUSIC AS AN ARTFORM. We do it cos our lives are better than without it.

I have observed there is not much confluence of interest between the two parties.

Watch carefully - perhaps your observations will lead you to the same conclusions.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 08:34 AM

"They are the music business / we practice music as as artform?"

Yes to the first, and a partial yes to the second.

We folkies strike an uneasy balance between art and business, (even the most determinedly 'amateur' song club may need a few bob for the room, and most people will buy CDs or books or instruments or something at some point).

But the awards, as you say, seem to be only about business.

In which case, how can the BBC possibly fund them?

Either the project is commercial, (with no BBC funding they could do what they liked, and we could only voice an opinion), or it must operate within the BBC ethos.

For now it's the latter. So the awards must confirm to BBC standards on transparency, honesty, balance, and cultural depth.

They can't have it both ways.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 09:40 AM

Curiouser and curiouser. I've just been into my local branch of HMV (God help me!) and, browsing in the 'Folk' section came across a Seth Lakeman CD. This was the CD containing the infamous 'White Hare' track. I can't, for the life of me, recall what the CD was called - but it did have a flash on the front saying, "revised version" (revised from what, I wonder?).
There was a track list on the back of the CD, but none of the tracks were attributed. There was also some small print, copyright type blurb on the back, but I couldn't read it because it was mostly obscured by the HMV bar code.

What was most surprising, though, was the price - £7.95!! Someone must really want to shift those CDs; I wonder why?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Scrump
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 09:45 AM

Freedom Fields is the CD. Revised version refers to the fact that it has beenm re-recorded. The original version was recorded a few years ago and had simpler more 'folky' arrangements - many folkies prefer it to the new one.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 01:20 PM

It's back! http://www.smoothoperations.com/complaints.htm

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 01:26 PM

Oh no it isn't:


http://www.smoothoperations.com/complaints.htm

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 02:17 PM

well it was - I swear!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 02:55 PM

We're doing an add-a-line song Over There:
BBC Song Thread
that's already been modded but I think that was because I pointed out that the scansion was sodded up.
Feel free to be topical and defamatory.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Dec 06 - 06:42 AM

Anyone hoping to use the Ffreedom of Information Act to get the voting figures will be thwarted.


The Act does not apply to the BBC in the way it does to most public authorities in one significant respect. It recognises the different position of the BBC (as well as Channel 4, S4C and the Gaelic Media Service) by providing that it covers information "held for purposes other than those of journalism, art or literature". This means the Act does not apply to information held for the purposes of creating the BBC's output (TV, radio, online etc), or information that supports and is closely associated with these activities.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 14 Dec 06 - 06:30 PM

At the risk of being boring, keep banging on at the BBC and SmoothOps. We have a very bad situation here, and it's getting worse. And it will carry on until someone makes some things about the voting procedures.
I have been in situations in the last few days when casual conversations refer make a common assumption that the awards have been fixed; and people are treating Seth Lakeman as a figure of derision to be sneered at, rather than someone to be congratulated and rooted for. This is very sad for the music we know and love. This situation absolutely must be sorted, and if Smooth Ops are not going to come clean, then the BBC should crack the whip and make them.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 14 Dec 06 - 07:04 PM

I reiterate that this is nothing to do with Seth Lakeman. If people are sneering at him, they are missing the point.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Dec 06 - 07:23 PM

Has anyone tried You And Yours? They usually go with stories like this (they'll laugh at us crazee folkies, but they'll play both White Hares, so Seth will be content).

Oh,

and one column inch in Private Eye about Producers Guidelines once forced the BBC to cancel a £350,000 series after one episode had been aired.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,whistleblower
Date: 14 Dec 06 - 07:34 PM

Greg. I'm so glad to see that Jon Host's reply on the BBC site has not closed down the debate.

I'm willing to accept the statement at face value, while remaining troubled as to why they didn't say as much weeks ago when they were first asked.

But in any event, there are a lot of other carefully phrased and very valid questions on that thread, which have been asked by some thoughtful, reasonable and well-informed people.

If Leonard thinks he can get away with stonewalling on those for ever he's not the man I think he is.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 02:45 AM

A pseudonymous "Jon Host" has made a statement on the BBC message board, but(as I have said before as nauseam( what is needed is a clear staement from John Leonard(or whoever coumted the votes). If Jon Host is a person with specific knowledge of what happened, he should identify himself. If he's just heard a version of what happened from someone else, then what he claims is of no particular value. All Jon Host's statement says is his explanation of what he thinks John Leonaeds's previous statement might mean. Interesting possibly, but it doesn't really get you anywhere.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 04:25 AM

'Jon Host' is unlikely to thank me at all for saying this, but he is Jon Lewis, a Smoothops employee, and is standing in for Mel McClellan/Ledgard, the former 'host', who is on a 'career break'. And while we're being 'open and clear' I'm Cecilia Sharp, in case anyone didn't realise.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 06:56 AM

"I'm Cecilia Sharp, in case anyone didn't realise."

Never!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Scrump
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 08:49 AM

The Cecilia Sharp?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 09:45 AM

Oh yes, that one . . .

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Fiona
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 09:50 AM

Ruth Archer on mudcat? OHHH NOOOOO!!

fx

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Pete_Standing
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 12:03 PM

Hey you two, you weren't being tailed were you?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 01:22 PM

I'm intrigued by Countess Richard's statement that Jon Host is an fact a Smooth Ops man. If true, I find this slightly disturbing. Wouldn't you expect the moderator of a BBC message board to be a BBC person? Is this what they call out-sourcing, or is it off-shoring? I'm not that familiar with the world of business.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Fiona
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 01:52 PM

Hi Greg, the host Jon, works for Smoooth Ops who are also responsible for maintaining the BBC Folk & Acoustic website. Most BBC hosts are volunteers associated with the programme the messageboard relates to. I think since folk is an area of special interest they decided to tie in the boards hosting to the website providers.

There are other hosts, I thinkmaybe from the BBC community team, much in evidence lately as they've been closing/changing the messageboards. A good host can make a huge difference, if you look at the Archers board the host is a member of the programmes production team and very proactive. Sadly the old host Mel, wasn't about much and this has contributed to some of the troubles on the BBC board.

Hope that helps,

fx

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Fiona
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 01:54 PM

Rats, I meant to add the moderators aren't anything to do with the hosts, they check messages in time order from all the boards and only really deal with the house rules.

BTW hi Peter!

fx

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 01:57 PM

So, if someone tries to complain about Smooth operations on its own website, they are greeted by a photo of someone making a V-sign. So, the person decides to go to the BBC to complain about Smooth Operations. Only to find their letter is being moderated by someone from Smooth Operations. Seems a bit odd to me. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes, as Jeeves used to say.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 02:00 PM

Fiona: you'll have to explain, I'm new to this world. is the chap called jon_host a host, or a moderator? What is the difference?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Fiona
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 02:01 PM

Sorry greg, no 'hosts' and 'moderators' are different if you follow the 'about the bbc' link at the foot of the page on the board there's more info. I'll try to find a link for you but the Archers are starting......

fx

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 02:04 PM

Jon Lewis is a host who works for Smoothops.
Mods are mindless BBC bureaucrats who zap stuff randomly.
The twin neither meet nor communicate.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 02:05 PM

Ahem, Twain.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Fiona
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 02:11 PM

Try this link for some info, I just noticed a bit on freedon of inforamtion too.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/editorialguidelines/onguide/interacting/

fx

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 16 Dec 06 - 03:41 PM

One little point forcibly struck me the other day. I have read quite a few messages from a lot of people on this subject, and have had numerous conversations about the awards with folk performers and folk fans. And I honestly can't remember one person expressing the opinion that they believed Seth Lakeman's White Hare to be a traditional English folk song. Except John Leonard, that is, the man who runs Smooth Operations (ie his is the private company that runs the Mike Harding Show abd the BBC Folk Awards). So I can't help thinking he is way out of touch on mainstream folk opinion on this one.
    (I fully appreciate that at least two people must have voted for it in this category, but that does not necessarily prove that they believed it belonged in the category: it might just mean they wanted it to win).

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST, whistleblower
Date: 16 Dec 06 - 06:21 PM

I think it's significant that Leonard has not felt able to answer, in any meaningful way, ANY of the questions asked of him here or on the BBC site - (even after admitting that he does keep an eye on both, so ignorance can be no defence).

There can be only two reasons:

1) He thinks our concerns are so beneath his dignity as to require no response. (The Enron Policy)

2) He cannot compose any answer without risking some incrimination of himself, his company or his awards - so silence is his only option. (The Jarvis Policy)

In either event that makes him unworthy of the salary that the BBC provides him on our behalf.


John - if you've never been on a media or a PR training course (which I must assume you haven't, because you're breaking every basic rule in the book), may I humbly suggest you buy yourself one for Christmas?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Dec 06 - 06:47 PM

Try this link for some info, I just noticed a bit on freedon of inforamtion too.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/editorialguidelines/onguide/interacting/

fx

Freedom of Information cannot apply - see my post 14/12/06

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Dec 06 - 07:40 PM

Freedom of information act should not be necessary.

Leonard is bound by his BBC contract to respond: To be transparent, open and honest - exactly as if he was a BBC employee.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,jOhn
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 07:21 AM

I reckon the bbc folk website is a load of shit anyway.

a while ago i joined it, and posted about a new folk club that i;d opened in hull, my post was deleted/never got put on to start with, when i asked why, i got told some crap about no advertising allowed.
load of shit, if you open a folk club, why cant you plug it on a folk site then? if i was advertisingf a car or trying to sell my guitar, then i could understand, but they are just rubbish, and shit, and i wont post nothing there anymore, so i left.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 07:43 AM

Your assessment of the BBC radio 2 message board is 100% correct jOhn.

eric

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Tim theTwangler
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 08:11 AM

Hello you catters
Interesting thread guess things have not improved since we stopped listening to the Mike Harding show ayear or so ago.
I hope the awards are not fixed as some seem to be implying here,but if they are why are they any different to all those other trade awards that are handed out every year?
You know? The ones were the major award winners seem to be the same as the list of sponsors of the event.
Someone was making a point about the tradition being fixed?
I presume in the context of there being some sort of a cut of date and anything after that is not Traditional.
It makes me laugh when a bunch of middle class wazzocks start howling and whining when they suspect that they are not being treated fairly in some way.
Grow up and get real most of the rest of your felow human beings on this planet spend all their lives being shat on by the "professional" classes.
If you want to be included in BBC folk awards go and lick arse its what you are good at.(sorry my mate ,I obviously meant do some networking! he he.)
If you are not intersted in winning it then why not go write a song about it instead of starting yet another whinge on here?
Oh BTW whats the best guitar to buy?
Merry Xmas one and all.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 08:20 AM

"why are they any different to all those other trade awards that are handed out every year"

Because, unlike all the other trade awards, they are sponsored by the BBC. Which hapens to be owned by middle, upper and working class wazzocks alike. See?

Licking should not be necessary anyway. I don't stand a snowball's chance of ever being considered, and never did. But I still think we should all always speak out for natural justice.

You don't - that's your choice.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Tim theTwangler
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 08:59 AM

There are a lot better causes for speaking out about natural justice on this dirtball planet,and whoever told you that there are any working class persons who have any ownership of anything is this middle class dictatorship we live in?
Maybe you mean because poor people pay taxes that are proportionaly higher in there effect on our living standards,we would have a stake in what the BBC does?
That is rubbish,we live in a democracy that is designed to maintain the middle and upper classes in their positions of power
The only reason you lot are moaning is that you are used to getting your own way,you feel ignored and not part of the establishment,no longer on the inside,but out in the cold with the rest of us.
Well tough!
You only belong as long as you agree to be told what to think,you need to be carefull you might start to feel marginalised and excluded
then people who dont have the balls to disagree with the system will start to humour you and snigger behind your back.
You may be shunned in Sainsbury's and passed over for promotion at work.
LOL
Better start practising your pucker then they will maybe take some of your veiws on board and you never know perhaps in a year or two if you are really good...
and without admitingthat they have changed their policies in any way you may get to be allowed to ?
What is it you want to happen exactly?
I dont think there was any mention of that on the whole of this thread was there?
Take the prize back?
Give it too .... do any of you even have another recipient in mind?
Of course you wouldnt want it yourselves thats not the point is it?
LOL
ANd a happy new year!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 02:26 PM

Tim,

why are so angry at us? This is what we want:

"I think we have discussed and rehearsed the arguments. I suggest that those who are dissatisfied with the current arrangements for who gets what should keep asking the BBC about two issues:

1. The White Hare, by any current deffinition, is not a traditional song.

2. The method of deciding who gets awards is unclear, unavailable and not trusted by lots of people who are the natural and continuing supporters of folk music.

If these points do not matter then neither do the Awards. Since the Awards are the BBC Awards, the BBC should:

1. Remove the song from the traditional catergory

2. Tell Snooth Opps to reveal the details of exactly how Awards are given

3. Organise a system that is open, transparent and trusted."

Se post 1.

You seem to assume we are all kinds of things and are guilty(?) of all kinds of class offences and that this thread and traditional song is all we care about.

I have posted on here for a few years and it seems to me that lots of people have lots of opinions and say that they take action about some of them. I guess you do as well. That makes you a bit like us doesn't it?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Tim theTwangler
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 03:32 PM

Not at all I assume you are all decent humans beings who are getting hung up about as you see it unfair winning of awards by Mr Lakeman.
My point is what does it matter?
The world is an unfair place for the majority of the population all the time.
This appears to me to be the out pouring of luke warm anger over something trivial in the scheme of things and basically some nice middle income middle englanders are a bit miffed that they dont agree with the way some other middle income middle englanders have given out an award.
The one party works for a londoncentric Broadcaster or their representetives the rest of you ?????
Just enjoy the school hols, have afine time with freinds and relations and if there is anything illegal going on the lawyers among you can progress things along the usual channels.
There are worse things being done in your Name(and Mine) that could really do with some pressure on our great leaders from people like you. Witty inteligent well educated etc.
Thats all folks
Cheers
Tim

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 04:01 PM

Seth Lakeman hasn't done anything wrong, nor has he won anything - yet. The Awards ceremony is not until next February. If Tim would care to actually read the thread, he might grasp that the putative villains are Smoothops who seem to have somehow 'manipulated' the nomination of one of SL's self-composed songs in the Trad category.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 04:10 PM

Tim the Twangler: troll or rather inaccurate estimator of other people's income and social class? The choice is yours.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Tim theTwangler
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 05:00 PM

Or maybe less interested in winning awards than some?
Whats a Troll BTW?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 05:07 PM

I have noticed a remarkable variety of opinions on this thread, but haven't so far detected anyone chasing a Smooth Operations Folk Award yet. We don't move in such rarefied social circles.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Tim theTwangler
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 05:18 PM

I forgot to ask.
If someone goes to the trouble of finding lots of bits of old songs and patching them together so they fit into a fairly old tune and sound sort of old and maybe like they should be traditional
Does that make the product of the research,the rewriting and the arranging an acceptable traditional tune or song?
I only ask because I believe that for something to be traditional it has to be part of a tradition and as far as I know an tradition is something that is actualy extant as it would be in say a family tradition of singing a particular song ar drinking a given drink at some point in time in celebration or rememberence of something or someone.
Something that is ongoing could be traditional but can something that is traditional still be considered to be traditional if it is no longer drunk,sung,performed,remembered,etc.
Would a traditional song or tune need reviving,or discovering or finding?
Surely if it were traditional it wouldnt be lost.
What it could be is a tune or song that was traditional in a certain time period.
If it needs reviving or finding or whatever that surely means it is no longer a tradition.
So Mr Lakemans song even if it is not trad at this time may be at some point in the future.
So shouldnt the BBC or their representatives be congratulated for their forsight is shortlisting it now?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 05:54 PM

(1) SL didn't 'find bits of old songs'. He wrote an original one based on a story.
(2) He fitted the song to a tune which may have been quite old (unlikely) or quite new(ish).
(3) No, this does not constitute 'a traditional song'.
(4) The White Hare (in this form) wasn't revived because it wasn't lost. It didn't exist.
(5) The tune is never likely to be considered trad (despite its unknown authorship) because its structure is not trad,
(6) Neither Smoothops nor the BBC are due for any congratulations whatsoever.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,ChorleyBob
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 06:32 PM

I'm with Tim on this one : there are a (relatively) small number of undoubtedly decent people working themselves up into a lather over something that really doesn't matter in the greater scheme of things.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Tim theTwangler
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 08:25 PM

I am sorry that I dont see this as being as important as some of you do.
If there any under hand shenanigans going on I would condem them as you would.
I still dont know what a troll is as applied to me by one of the contributers.
The reason I asked about the patching together of bits of old songs etc is that I recently heard a very well thought of proper folky explain how another of the same was doing this and from his acceptance and enthusiasm for this ladies work(which I dont know)
I have assumed that this is part of finding the music and saving it.
It came over as being part of the way of "the tradition".
I dont know wether it is generally accepted as the way to carry on by those of you who are Traditionalists if I may use that term in a none pejorative way.
If it is then I see no difference between what this guy described to a room full of folkies and what Mr Lakeman seems to have done.
I dont know Mr Lakemans veiw on this but I have generally found people that I have come into contact with on the folk scene to be as honest and straightforward and subject to change as any other group of people.
Perhaps he will withdraw his song or if he has no say in the matter make his veiws known.
I will look in in this thread again but maybe not add anything to what I already contributed.
Have a great festive season and a good new Year.
Dont forget the old saying
Just because you are paranoid .......
LOL
Cheers Tim

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 09:15 PM

Seth Lakeman has already offered to withdraw his song The White Hare, but Smoothops have so far refused to do so. It was not as though he entered it himself into a contest for Best Traditional Track, but that somewhere between 150 'experts' and Smoothops management, it has somehow been contrived that it has become so. Doubtless SL would have been far better pleased had it been nominated for Best Original Song, since it is far better suited to that category (and apparently a number of the jury did nominate it thus). What is certain is that no-one would have batted an eyelid had it been, and it might even have won.

SL has already explained that he described the song originally as trad because he had culled the subject matter from a Cornish legend and the tune from an, as yet, unidentified source musician. No doubt in retrospect he views this as a mistake, I don't think anyone is accusing him of deliberate deception, just of being a tad inaccurate.

The 'patching together' process which Tim describes is a perfectly legitimate activity which Martin Carthy (to name but one) does absolutely all the time and which usually ends up with a trad/arr attribution. The White Hare (other than its title) has absolutely no basis whatsoever in the tradition as a song, and only possibly as a tune. SL has adapted/arranged many other songs which do have an identifiable traditional origin, and could therefore have had a far better claim to pass muster as trad than this one. What is really strange is Smoothops' adamant insistence on this particular track going forward. One has to ask why.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 04:29 AM

Tim - I'll hazard a guess that you may be talking about Tom Bliss and his version ('Rue') of Mary Humphreys 'No My Love Not I', made from various other songs that Mary found in The Vaughn Williams Library?

If so there is no comparison with The White Hare.

The tune of 'Rue' remains unchanged from the original, and is clearly Trad however you look at it. Also, all the key lyrical phrases in both Mary and Tom's versions are traceable back to the various collected works - and Tom and Mary list all of these in their sleeve notes, web sites and stage intros (time permitting), so people can go back to these sources if they choose to.

The White Hare would equate better to another of the songs on Tom's solo album: Gentle Maids Ashore. This borrows various lyrical and melodic ideas from various traditional songs, to give it an authentic feel, but Tom does not attribute these in his notes (though he gives a few clues) because he has clearly crossed the line from arranging to composing. He has made a brand new song with a new tune and words (even though from an existing story - much like Seth's Hare), so it is registered as a Bliss composition, and rightly so in my opinion.

I'm hoping Tom won't mind me using his name like this. He has contributed a little to the debate on the BBC thread - so sorry Tom if not!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Tim theTwangler
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 05:23 AM

Thank you for that and yes I was refering to TB.
As I said I have not heard the song to which he was refering so cant comment on that.
I am getting the sense that the attribution attached to these none traditional songs as apposed to the actual content or musicality
or other merit that you may feel they have is what is stirring the pot here.
So will leave you too it in the (soon to be corrected belief?) that most of you that are agin' the possible award of a prize to Seth ar basing their opinion around the idea that it is ok to cobble together some spare bits and peices from a library.
Stick a nice tune on and voila a "new Trad" song is born.
But if you make a new song based on the telling of a "Trad Story"
that is not acceptable as "Trad"?
This would seem to be the perfect oportunity for one of those interminable threads about what is Trad?
So is this a thread in which the intent is to uncover a plot to award a prize undeservedly to someone in the hopes of somehow making a profit.
Or
Is it that the company involved doesnt adhere to the prefered veiw of some of you as to what is a traditional Song or tune?
I dont personaly take the veiw that anything Martin does is ordained by the gods of acceptability,although I love his music.
There does seem to be a lot of thoughtful energy going to waste here
But thanks to your kindness in trying to illuminate my ignorance I have only three questions I need to have answered to avoid disrupting my sleep pattern.
1,What is a troll?
2.what is the best guitar?
3.WHat is the point of stressing over music ,'tis either of atype you wanna listen to or it aint.
Is all a personal preference thing at the end of the day innit?
Ok four questions.
Have a fun holiday.
Tim Twangling Troll(maybe)

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,ChorleyBob
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 05:58 AM

1) A troll is someone who infiltrates a message board to deliberately stir things up ( I think)
2)The best guitars are MARTINS - but I've heard wonderful reports of Loudons
3)I couldn't agree more with questions 3. Well said, sir.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GerryMc
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 06:06 AM



FWIW

I think the White Hare is a great song. I hope it is trad coz I just recorded a version on me new live CD. (Trad. arr GM/SL ?????)


Gerry :-)

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 06:14 AM

"3.WHat is the point of stressing over music ,'tis either of atype you wanna listen to or it aint."

You are speaking purely as a consumer, not as a creator, or as someone who makes a living from music. We have a different perspective - as you would if this was about your work and pay packet.

The discussion above is about 1) whether the awards are fair to artists, and 2) whether they will help or hinder the survival of the music we care about (I presume you care, Tim, since you are here).

If it doesn't matter to you, fine. Don't contribute.

This is only 2 threads among thousands. If you're not interested in the debate don't click on this link and post (ithat's what we mean by trolling), click on any one of the hundreds of threads about guitars, where you will find answers to your question 2).

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 06:32 AM

I dont personally take the view that anything Martin does is ordained by the gods of acceptability

For the sake of clarity (would that some would marshall their thoughts into some semblance of which before posting). neither do I and it's not what I said. I was merely describing his reconstruction work, something which Mary Humphreys has done similarly with floating verses. It is not the same as writing a completely new song about a subject (eg a Cornish white bunny) which has never before (as far as can be established) occurred in lyrical form before.

The Folk Awards have two categories, one for Best Traditional Track and another for Best Original Song. It should not be hard to distinguish which songs should be in which, and for the sake of the credibility of the awards and for the profile of our music in general, the process needs to be both accurate and transparent.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST, John C
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 06:37 AM

Maybe the awards should have three 'best song' categories.

Best original

Best traditional

Best reconstruction from trad sources.

Tams' Constant Sorry would have fitted in the last too

In any event the system needs changing

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 06:45 AM

actually there are far too few categories. that's the problem. how about best original tune then - where does that go?

and what's the thinking behind best duo, best band and best live act? are the duo and band not live then? are people supposed to be voting on recorded or live output or both, and why is that not made clear? why do they send a list of CDs out when people are nominating performers - some of whom many not have put a CD out this year?

they should spend less money paying celebs to hand out the gongs and put a bit more effort into making the awards worthy and sensible in the first place

the whole thing is a mess

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Pete_Standing
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 07:04 AM

1. AS GCB said

2. I've only ever heard one Martin that sounded good - they may be good value in the US, but in the UK they don't pack huge bangs for your, err pound, this is not just my opinion, I know other people who feel the same way. There are plenty of other good guitars around, especially hand made ones. You want a good guitar, how fat is your wallet and soon do you want it? For £10k, you'll get a Sobell Martin Simpson signature, but you'll be a year older before you get it. For £1500 to £3000 you can get a hand made guitar in the UK which will be:-

a) unique
b) better than most production Martins. Now if you have a fat wallet and a big reputation, no doubt Martin will supply you with something special - I'd sooner have something unique.

BTW, don't go looking for a Louden guitar, they don't exist. But should you find a Lowden guitar, there was a period when they were considered not very good at all, but just about every Lowden I have heard is superior to a Martin.

3. From the point of a listener, whether or not is trad or not may not be important, but then again, you may not be bothered about the type of cheese you eat in your sandwiches. For an artist/composer, you will not get royalties on a trad song because you do not own the rights to it, just your arrangement. For a contemporary song you get all the rights unless you sell them to Michael Jackson. Now the issues of revenue earning potential are very important to folk musicians. There is nothing like the amount of money sloshing around in folk music as there is in popular music and many, if not most, professional folk musicians in the UK struggle to make a living. One of the most respected melodeon players in the country has said that he could earn more money as a postman.

Put yourself in the position of Kris Drever, Salsa Celtica, Tim van Eyken or the fifth placed nomination for the best trad song. You might be mightily pissed of if Seth won because you could lose out on sales of CDs, but I suppose that doesn't matter does it?

And on the subject of CD sales, I suppose we should buy from Amazon where, because of discounts, the artist earns 50p at best from an album. If you buy direct from the artist (either web site or at a concert) the artist will get considerably more by having no middle-man. What do we want? Lots of money wearing a hole in our pockets and filthy rich multi-nationals or folk artists who don't need to make a decent living by flogging their guts around the motorways of Britain? Don't forget, we lost one of the best guitar/fiddle/singers in the business when he ran into a lorry, exhausted after doing yet another gig miles from home and not being able to afford accommodation. Is this what we really want? Quality costs and we need to wake up and pay for it.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Scrump
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 07:21 AM

It's a point of principle about Seth's song being nominated as 'traditional'. It has been pointed out that the song is not trad (and Seth himself agrees). So why hasn't it been removed from the nominations? That's all we want to know - this is the issue.

If the BBC / Smooth Ops refuse to answer this question, they imply that any song could be accepted (whether written 500 years ago or this year) as 'traditional'.

(Whether the song is 'good', enjoyable to listen to, etc., is another question, and entirely subjective, so doesn't help resolve the above issue.)

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,working musician
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 07:46 AM

It's always entertaining (in the sense that an attack of shingles is entertaining) when someone like Tim the Twanker arrives on a previously thoughtful and well-argued thread, proceeds to deliver a stream of posts that are incoherent, that fail to address existing arguments, that accuse people of saying things they hadn't, and that demand clarification of points already clarified at length, before wrapping the whole thing up in phoney class-war bullshit (as if this trumped all other opinions), and then tells everyone else they're wasting time that could have better spent on more worthwhile actions. Surreal.

Some of us are getting het up because (a) we care about traditional music, and object to our (supposed) flagship media outlet make a mockery of accepted definitions, and (b) we care about the accuracy and openness of the BBC, which is a much bigger issue. I know some of the musicians posting on this thread, and they are neither middle-class do-gooders nor disgruntled wannabe award winners.

As to the guitar, I suggest you try Argos.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,ChorleyBob
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 09:25 AM

Flawed argument, working musician.
I also care about the tradition and the music but I think some peopel are in danger of getting themselves steamed up over a technicality. Just because Twanging Tim disagrees with some of the posters shouldn't debar him from having his two pennorth.
And b) in terms of accuracy and openness at the BBC - I've never heard anything so pompous. Perhaps the DG should resign!
The greater truth is a handful of embittered performers who're outside the tent pissing in, when they'd sooner be inside the tent, are stirring up as much trouble as they can to try and discredit the awards.
I'd love to be inside the tent but I've got enough self-awareness to know I wouldn't come within a mile of getting an award. It doesn't mean I'm any worse than those in the inner snactum....I'm just not award material. GET OVER IT.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Tim theTwangler
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 09:45 AM

Sounds like you got a touch of the old high blood pressure there matey.
Is another thread that some of you start because you think you know best about what folk music is and enjoy the chance to tell the rest of us how clever and commited you are.
It must really burn you up that some of the real movers and shakers in the communications industry dont bother listening to you .
Still Fretting about it will keep you warm over christmas so maybe it will save on the yule tide logs etc.
When one comes across a thread like this one can practically hear the cobwebs forming.
I am so sorry that as a mere listener to your precious and oh so wonderful music I do not understand the real and special meaning of it all and am so gratfull that you are there to tell what to think.
How would the world ever manage with out you .
Define it how you like if no one can be interested in listening to your music then there is no point to it.
It happens to all things in the goodness of time they become obsolete
is just natures way of making room for the new the vital and the interesting. It is not personel.
Oh and terribly sorry for not sticking to the arguements aproved and passed as fit to use By some w*nking musician who only appears as a guest.
Have anice day
Tim

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 10:31 AM

..So the BBC has become as shit as its braindead commercial competitors..

BBC programme & scheduling management are arrogant conceited self-centred wankers
with total disregard & contempt for the BBC's veiwing & listening public

sad..

..but far worse is happening out here in the world of dead-end jobs/unemployment and survival !!!!


so f@ck 'em !!! consume less mainstream media culture..

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Pete_Standing
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 10:38 AM

Flawed argument, working musician.
I also care about the tradition and the music but I think some peopel are in danger of getting themselves steamed up over a technicality

So we don't care then about the correct attribution of authorship or arrangements? Along with other performers, I'll remember to tell the PRS to shove it next time I'm asked to fill in a form when either doing a gig or recording.

How can you care about the tradition and yet think the "technicality" of its attribution is unimportant? The converse must also be true, let's not worry about acknowledging original work either. Its obvious that Smooth Ops and the Beeb feel the same way.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 10:38 AM

Tim,

I think almost everybody on this thread agrees that the song in question is not traditional and this includee Seth, who wrote it. Argument resolved?

Their is a continuum in folk clubs, at festivals and in recordings of songs written a few days ago by someone who is known and dozens of variants of some ballads that can be traced back 400 years without finding out who wrote any of it. Many songs exist somewhere in between.

The main difference between the thing we call "folk" ie the clubs, festivals and recordings and the commercial world of popular music is that folk is mostly made possible by people who run clubs and / or sing in them for nothing other than the pleasure they gain in keeping alive a strange collection of music.

We don't mind if you don't care. We object to Smooth Opps doing something or other in secret and confusing our general conviction that this music belongs to us all. We enjoy the Award winners, but they are only a small part of the dog and we what the contest for the curliest tail to be fair.

If you carry on abusing us all you are a troll, figure that out if you can.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Tim theTwangler
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 11:23 AM

well mate disagreeing isnt abusing.
but calling names is.
I have no interest in being told what is or isnt Trad by anyone.
It is aspurious arguement put forward by those who wish to make a little bit of turf for themselves ,somewhere were they are king.
Any one who disagrees is to be slated.
Having said that I have no arguement with anyone who wants to hear or perform the music that we all claim to love and admire.
I therefore will leave you to it in the hopes that you will all get some enjoyment and satisfaction from your own company.
Cheers

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 11:40 AM

I have just posted on the BBC site

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mbradio2/F2142825?thread=3737319

asking as we relentlessly do. I guess it is up to each to decide if we have hit a brick wall or a crumbling something or other

Cheers

Les

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 11:46 AM

Chorleybob, I'm not a performer. Neither is anyone else I know who has contributed to this thread. I have no axe to grind.

We do care about traditional music, though, and care about the value of the folk awards. While the number of artists who benefit will always remain small, I'd like to at least believe that the musicians "inside the tent" have arrived there fairly. At the moment, it feels a bit like a closed shop. Seth Lakeman's nomination has deprived someone else (who presumably performed an eligible song) of a nomination. I don't know or care who they are. I'd like to see them on the list.

I reiterate that the term "folk" has come to mean so many things to so many people. The "traditional track" award is one tiny corner of the folk industry that acknowledges the more traditional end of the market, and in fact of the culture. To have a song nominated for the award which isn't traditional undermines even that little bit of acknowledgement. That's why it's important.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 11:54 AM

Well put Ruth!

It is the people who run clubs and festivals and who sing at them that make Smooth Opps possible not the other way round.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 12:06 PM

Pearls of wisdom from Tim the Twangler:
"well mate disagreeing isnt abusing. but calling names is."

"...middle class wazzocks start howling and whining..."
"...go and lick arse its what you are good at..."

Tosser.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,Bruce Michael Baillie
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 12:18 PM

...I should imagine John Leonard cares at least a reasonable amount about folk music since he was a professional singer back in the 70's, I remember meeting him on numerous occasions and he always struck me as a decent chap, used to play with John Squire and before that Mick Miller and was booked regularly at clubs and festivals, give over hounding the poor bugger he's probably doing his best within the restraints set by those wankers at the BBC!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST, JC
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 12:19 PM

Posts to this thread seem to be about 90% who think the awards are unfair, misguided or rigged and want to see them changed, and 10% who think they are unfair, misguided or rigged but don't care.

I don't think I've seen a single post on any message board by anyone who thinks the awards are good.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 12:22 PM

Nobody doubts his musical talents or history.

How many times is it worth saying this:

"I think almost everybody on this thread agrees that the song in question is not traditional and this includee Seth, who wrote it. Argument resolved?"

This is a Smooth Opps problem not a BBC problem

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 12:30 PM

Bruce, if Leonard is doing his best within a difficult BBC brief why doesn't he say so and explain why things are done the way they are?

The BBC are VERY strict about producers staying within their house rules. I've got family who've worked for the beeb, and they tell me the awards are completely at odds with BBC rules (as has been pointed out in detail before).

The BBC are not clamping down only because the people who wield the power don't realise (yet) how far out of kilter with the Producers Guidelines the awards actually are.

Some minor changes to the system could effect a huge improvement all round - and a lot of good ideas have been posted here and elsewhere which would cost almost nothing but remove all of the problems. But Leonard won't make changes because HE thinks everything's hunky dory, and he simply doesn't care what we think.

Smooth Operations silence tells us all we need to know.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,working musician
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 01:20 PM

"The greater truth is a handful of embittered performers who're outside the tent pissing in, when they'd sooner be inside the tent, are stirring up as much trouble as they can to try and discredit the awards."

You people just don't get it, do you? You don't believe that people might take a stance on principle, as opposed to embitterment or self-interest. You can't understand that musicians might be passionate about the music they play, and object to what should be a showcase for it - a really good performance and/or arrangement of a traditional song - allocated instead to a modern composition.

I only mentioned the musicians who have contributed to the thread because Troll the Twangler was trying to dismiss opinions contrary to his own as the work of "middle income middle englanders" and "lawyers". As Ruth Archer pointed out, many of the contributors here are not musicians, just music-lovers.

Twim, I'm still trying to make sense of your latest messages, but the final sentence of your 11.23 post is clear enough, and I hope it's a promise you'll keep.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,ChorleyBob
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 02:39 PM

"You people just don't get it, do you? You don't believe that people might take a stance on principle, as opposed to embitterment or self-interest"

It's called realism , GUESTworking musician.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,working musician
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 02:54 PM

It's called "ignorance", GUEST,ChorleyBob.

And "disregarding the actual arguments for the sake of your own petty prejudices".

And "offensive".

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Tim theTwangler
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 02:56 PM

You could e mail Tony Blair I have.
http://www.number-10.gov.uk/

Maybe if you are sure of the facts and enough of you mail in about it you will get an answer from the Beeb or the Company involved.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 04:35 PM

A new player has entered the game at the BBC someone called K.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mbradio2/F2142825?thread=3737319

We are now accused of being trolls on our own threads.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 04:32 AM

k has plainly also not been reading the thread.

S/he says" "People still keep demanding answers to the questions that have already been answered."

Smooth Operations have given some answers:

They have explained (finally) that 'collation' does mean 'counting' and that White Hare did get enough votes in the trad category to be nominated. They have apologised for the picture of Leonard on their site and removed it. They have stated that the winners are not fixed to make the manufacture of the trophies easier. They have restated various procedures that we already knew from their website. They have claimed that they don't publish the names of the panel because it would put smaller, poorer, CD producers at a disadvantage.

But they have not done the following in response to questions I've seen here and on the BBC site.

They have not:

1) Given a geographic breakdown of the panel, justified the inclusion of vested interests, or given a breakdown of the percentage of vested interests to independant voters.

2) Shown any understanding of what the word Traditional means in terms of folk music, or why it's important that this definition is respected. They have not offered a sensible solution to the White Hare problem.

3) They have not answered questions about their guide list of CDs, nor responded to suggestions on how such a list could be made more open, resonable and fair.

They have not explained why they release a list of CDs rather than CDs AND gigs, when six of the awards are as much about live performance as recording; (Folk Singer of the Year, Best Duo, Best Group, Horizon Award, Musician of the Year and Best Live Act).

They have not explained why they told the panel that the list was only of (?all) CDs that contained tracks played on the MH show, when actually it is put together with 'advice' from various sources, including record companies (the big ones, we assume). Having had conflicting statements on this we really have no idea what the criteria are or what their thinking is.

They have not explained why CDs from smaller record companies do not appear on the list of CD releases, even though Leonard has claimed he want to include them in the process (for fairness) and even though they contain tracks that have been played on other BBC stations, and/or are by major touring artists.

4) They have not told us who polices the vote counting - if anyone.

5) They have not told us why the names of the panal cannot be made public, even though their stated justification has been discredited, and good reasons put forward for an open pubic system (such as large record companies actually having a major advante under the current system).

6) They have not given reasons why public voting cannot be introduced, or at least a much bigger, nation-wide panel recruited (a password-protected website-based system would be simple and fair).

7) They have not explained why the full list of nominations cannot be published. (If I had faith in the system I might be with k on this - but given the debacle I feel they owe us an explanation themselves).

8) They have not responded to suggestions that a new category cannot be introduced which could safely include songs like "Man of Constant Sorrow" and 'White Hare"

9) They have not responded to suggestions about other omissions/anomalies such as a cappella, best original tune, best trio etc.

10) They have shown no willingness whatsoever to accept their duty as a company whose salaries come from licence-fee payers to be open, responsive, honest, culturally aware etc.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Scrump
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 05:06 AM

Thanks for the detailed update GUEST.

As for the comments earlier, I agree it's a matter of principle that Seth Lakeman's song should not be considered for the Best traditional track award. It's nothing to do with the merits of the artist or the song, it's just that there's no way a non-traditional song should be nominated for the award.

Withdrawing the nomination is the only correct resolution to this issue. If the BBC/Smooth Ops don't do this, it destroys any credibility the whole of the awards have, so it's in their interests to resolve it properly, i.e. withdraw the nomination for White Hare from this award.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: oggie
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 05:39 PM

And how many angels can balance on the head of a pin? Yawn.

If you don't like it don't listen, go out and make some music, learn a new song!

Impotent rage is just that, impotent!

oggie

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 06:41 PM

oggieoggieoggie oy oy oy (in the words of the bard)

and that's exactly what those tolpuddle lads said isn't it?

just accept it when they shit on you because that's all you deserve.

yes?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Pete_Standing
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 07:52 PM

For those of us that are required to fill out PRS forms, let us just put White Hare, trad. Seth Lakeman won't get a penny, after all, the forms that I have had to fill in will not make the distiction between his White Hare and the one that is trad.

For those who miss out on the best trad track in the BBC FA, why should we worry about their lost revenue either?

Distinctions? Who needs them?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST, whistleblower
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 03:27 AM

and who says our 'rage' is 'impotent'? we employ smooth operations. we own the bbc. in the longer term we call the shots. it is only a matter of time

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 04:14 AM

"Employ" SO? Fire them if you can.
"Own" the Beeb? Cancel their next fine/court case for non-payment of licence - if you can.
Too many degrees of separation in those relationships to have any meaning at all.

But why bust a gut to persuade the Beeb and SO to do "the right thing"? Why does it matter? Neither is an authority on what is "traditional", after all. Yes, the media have the power to influence the masses into believing Seth's song is "trad", just as they have the power to influence them into believing that the next "celebrity" they manufacture is worth watching in some so-called reality show.

But we were never in folk music for the sake of what the masses believe, were we?
So why bust a gut?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST, Ex BBC producer
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 05:19 AM

Of course we can't 'fire' the BBC or Smooth Operations in so many words, George.

But the ownership situation is a fact, which is widely trumpeted by the BBC.

That means we have leverage which we wouldn't have if the awards were organised by a commercial station - and the BBC does encourage us to use that leverage.

I take it from your post that you are not perhaps 100% comfortable with the situation - just think it's a lost cause?

Well, I don't think it's a lost cause at all. I think the awards are poorly concieved and wrecklessly executed - and I have done so since I first encountered them.

If I was making a programme of that profile, with that budget, I would expect to be attacked if I carried on as casually Smooth Operations have done.

I think we should insist on an improvement - not because of any dreams of winning a trophy, or reaching a mass market, purely because I think the awards should be a credit to folk music, and at the moment they are not.

There is only one thing that is stopping our only national showcase from being a credit to everyone: JL's attitude. I think we should be doing everything in our power to persuade him to change it.

If you were up for best song, wouldn't you want to be sure you'd won on your own merits?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 05:29 AM

I have been involved with the BBC on and off since the 60's..by first association was when I was involved with Charles Parker of Radio Ballads fame, so I have encountered the very highest standards of the organisation. I have had several things on "Pick of the Week", which I regard(smugly) as something akin to an award.
   So naturally, I am shocked and horrified by what I know has been going on in connection with these awards, and also disturbed at allegations of other thinngs that may or may not have been going on. I belive in the BBC, seriously. I believe in folk music, seriously. So I think it is entirely right for people to demand improvements in the way the BBC organises(or rather outsources) its awards; and demand these imporovements now. Whether this will get people anywhere is, of course, another question. But there's no0 harm in trying.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST, Ex BBC Producer
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 06:34 AM

"there's no harm in trying."

Actually I think we have a DUTY to try.

John Leonard is to be congratulated for getting the awards commissioned in '99 (I know how damn hard that was to do, and what a major achievement).

For the first couple of years I was happy to applaud as loudly as everyone else.

But the world has moved on. Folk music is in already in a different place (partly thanks to the awards, in fairness), and it is going further down the road - and even picking up speed.

We are experiencing a surge in interest, which is excellent news, but if we're not to be criticised by future generations, we need to make sure we handle this surge responsibly.

Yes, we do need to take every opportunity to 'sell' traditional and traditionally-derived music to a wider market - partly for financial reasons and partly for cultural ones (specially English and Welsh) - but we need to do this in ways that we won't risk destroy the things which made the music what it is in the first place.

And in particular we need to repect the people who made and handed down the songs we now call tradtional - so that new-comers will begin to understand how the whole thing works.

Now. When the awards were set up the team faced a number of challenges. Their solutions to those challenges were compromises, and perhaps reasonable compromises at the time - but they were, and are, NOT reasonable compromises for the longer term.

But in spite of helpful and good suggestions from many sources over many years, there has been no change. At all.

Smooth Operations have rested on their laurels.

But those laurels are not really theirs to rest on. They belong to all of us who work with, play and love folk music.

Now if I could see ANY glimmer of hope that Leonard was at least listening I would be content.

But I don't. I see him thinking, we'll just sit tight. They'll soon get bored.

Every time someone comes on here of the BBC forum and says it we can't change anything and it doesn't matter anyway, he goes - 'yep'

And the chances of improvement dip again.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 06:44 AM

Hear hear. Very well said.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,Jenny Crawford
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 07:08 AM

There is some seriously flawed logic here driven, I suspect, by professional jealousy and a pretty poisonous campaign to discredit Smooth Ops. I am no defender of the Folk Awards or Smooth Ops --- I actually loathe the whole concept of Awards ceremonies and also hate the idea of a hierarchy in the folk scene with the hallowed krusby and co at its helm (yuk). The schmaltz and "class system" generated by the awards goes against everything I love about the folk scene.
But there's a real visciousness creeping into this thread and unless people are prepared to put their names to the posts, they mean abosultely nothing and its turning into a poison pen feast.
I also remember John Leonard from his days as a singer round the folk clubs in Nottingham and he always seemd a decent sort to me. It's gone beyond the White Hare (is it or isn't it?) debate and it now appears that him and his honchos are being castigated for being succesful and raising the profile of the music. - Jenny Crawford

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 07:21 AM

Not at all.

I think most applaud them for being successful. They are being castigated for refusing to answer some very pertinent questions - when they are required by their contract to answer questions.

That's a totally different thing.

We just want the awards to be be transparent and fair.

At the moment there is injustice even between the nominated acts (caused by the White Hare issue), and that's a symptom of either the weaknesses they built into the system or something more sinister.

We don't know which because they won't answer questions, but in either event the White Hare is proof that the awards don't work and need change.

They have brought this upon themselves.

If they changed tack and showed some willingness to respond I think most of us would be happy.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST, musician
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 07:36 AM

Musicians don't use their names here becuase Smooth Operations have power over our careers. Cowardly, yes, but some of us have kids to feed and bands to pay. It's not fair on them if we use our real names and get blacklisted.

It doesn't matter who is typing. There is no flawed logic. The awards system is full of bias. Fact. Given what you feel about awards in general, Jenny, is that a good thing?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 08:52 AM

Jenny Crawford. You are trying to turn this legitimate debate about the BBC into a slanging match by accusing people of "professional jealousy" and "poisonous" behaviour. Which people are you in fact accusing of this? And is "Jenny Crawford" actually your name? There are a lot of pseudonyms floating about. Not all musicians, incidentally, are posting anonymously in this discussion. I have noticed Ton Bliss, George Papavgeris and myself are using our actual names, and I expect there are others.
Another intriguing sideline: I believe it is still the case that John Leonard is still the only actual named individual who has stood up to claim that the White Hare is actually a traditional song. Even Seth Lakeman has back-tracked, or so I understand. It would be extremely interesting to know who voted for it, and what their relation to folk music was.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 05:12 PM

I noticed that the well-known traditional song "The White Hare" was played on the Mike Harding show tonight. The Seth Lakeman, version by the way, they dont seem to have played any other recordings of it yet. Perhaps we should request some of them?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 05:45 PM

I wonder is Seths' hair turning white with the stress resulting from the selection of his track?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 06:11 AM

I would like to re-state that I think most of us think Seth has a lot to contribute and we like his music, it is not about him or his music.

TWHINATS

Les

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 07:24 AM

I think Seth Lakeman has a lot to answer for, he must be well aware of the controversy, and there is no such thing as bad publicity, someone from PRS has already explained, the royalties are the same, authorship or ' trad arranged Lakeman '

Mike Harding played it last night, this is the start of the winning campaign.


eric

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Scrump
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 07:28 AM

Seconded Les - IMO Seth Lakeman is a talented lad and a superb entertainer with a great future. It's not his fault that the song in question was nominated for the wrong award. I have enjoyed seeing him and his band live on a few occasions and would certainly pay to see them again, any time.

So in asking for the song to be withdrawn from the nominations, I am not trying to belittle Seth or cast doubt on his ability - just on those responsible for this unsatisfactory situation, who seem unwilling or unable to appreciate the stupidity of their actions, or to rectify the problem they have caused.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: s&r
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 07:32 AM

Transparent competition, public voting, live performance....

from X factor to Folk Factor?

Now there's a thought

Stu

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 09:52 AM

Mike Harding played it last night, this is the start of the winning campaign.

I am reasonably sure you are wrong there. The results were decided in mid-December, John Leonard has said this, each winner gets an idividualised trophy and these have to be made.

I think you might be right in saying Seth has won. I think that is the heart of the problem.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,I think we should be told
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 11:05 AM

I wonder how smooth ops choose the cds it features in the review section of their s(h)ite at the BBC? Today they are plugging the reissue of <>. Are the cds on the list given out to the panel the same as those they review? If so, those featured are at an advantage over the many other which they can't be bothered to review, perhaps they should be withdrawn from next years Award list?

I think we should be told.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,I think we should be told
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 11:12 AM

What a strange format this board has, my message should have linked to the review of Greg Stevens and Crookfinger Jacks Begger Boy of the North. It's easy to enough to find, but strange that one of the people protesting so strongly here has an eligible album for the next round.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 01:12 PM

GUEST I think we should be told: I dont know quite what point you are making, but the entries   for the second round were decided a month or two ago, and the outright winners I believe were settled last week. I certainly have two records out this year that would have eligible to be included in several categories(along with at least a thousand others folk CDs that came out this year), but alas my humble offerings didn't trouble the voters' pencils. (Possibly their content, 100% traditional, were a bit inappropriate? Or perhaps they are rubbish?)
But they do make excellent Christmas presents, so get down to HMV. They are "The Beggar Boy of the North", Greg Stephens and Crookfinger Jack, Harbourtown HARCD051, and "A Trip to the Lakes", the Boat Band, Harbourtown Records HARCD047. Buy now while stocks last, only three shopping days to go.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 04:54 AM

You are labouring under a misapprehension there Greg, it's only traditional if John Leonard says so.

eric

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Scrump
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 05:01 AM

Well, may I be the first to offer my congratulations to Seth Lakeman for winning the "Best Traditional Track" award with "The White Hare". Well done, Seth! :-)

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: McMullen
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 06:42 AM

i dont like seth lakeman hes just well look at his music vidieo ANOYING!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 23 Dec 06 - 07:40 PM

Ah now I've realised what a previous post was about. My "Beggar Boy" CD is advertised on the Mike Harding/Radio 2 website. I didn't know that.
Great!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 24 Dec 06 - 07:27 PM

Its not just folk music....its Marks and Spencer folk music....!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 25 Dec 06 - 12:22 AM

so.. seth seems a nice enough bloke..

any chance he could speak up for him self here.??

i'd buy his previous CD that sounds a bit like led zep 3..

[when i find it cheap enough ]

but i just bought the 'contraversial' current CD with white bunny for the mrs xmas present
cuz it souns like its mixed more comercial chart sounding for girlies


[but me being crafty.. i got the limited edition first 'folkie' pressing with 2nd video cd..
still available on ebay at sensible prices..!!!!

ja.. punkfolkrocker pissed onj cider and so happy with modern folk CDs..

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 25 Dec 06 - 05:16 AM

any chance he could speak up for him self here.??

Why should he?

There was a letter from his management to Smooth Ops which was posted to the BBC F&A site:

"4/12/06

Seth Lakeman is extremely proud to have recently received nominations in various categories for the 2007 BBC Folk Awards and is grateful for the support he has been given over what has turned out to be a remarkable 18 months.

However, in response to recent queries about the source of the song, The White Hare, nominated in the Best Traditional Song category, Seth would like to explain where it comes from.

He adapted a tune he had heard from a local musician as a child and combined this with lyrics, which were based on a legend he grew up with and one which was also later recounted to him in a Cornish pub - the story of The White Hare.

As Seth adapted the tune and lyrics from a combination of what he believed were largely 'traditional' sources he thought it right to credit The White Hare, on his latest album, 'Freedom Fields', as 'trad/arr..', rather than suggest that it was completely 'original'.

If the BBC, voting panel and other experts involved believe that The White Hare does not fit the true definition of a 'traditional' song, then Seth agrees that it would be entirely appropriate for it to be withdrawn from the category in which it has been nominated."

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Dec 06 - 05:20 AM

John Leonard's stance since then has been that the song classes as traditional even though it even fails to qualify under Smooth Ops entry conditions:

6. TRADITIONAL TRACK OF THE YEAR
The best performance of any traditional song or tune on CD released during the past 12 months. This is a category designed to recognise the work of people recording traditional material. It is to be a new recording of a traditional song, from any tradition.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 25 Dec 06 - 07:24 AM

Its not just traditional folk music....its Marks and Spencer traditional folk music....!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 25 Dec 06 - 07:38 AM

Funny organisation, the BBC. It uses the term traditional cooking, traditional Christmas carols, traditional architecture, traditional stories and traditional family customs(i have heard all of these phrases used today). And in every case they were used in exactly the way anyway would use them. Except of course John leonard, who unaccountably uses traditional to mean "recently made".
Pray God he doesnt get put in charge of those programmes where they decided about which gems of our architectural heritage are to be saved. They'd be be concentrating resources on the giant Sainsbury's storage depot shed down the road. It's certainly traditional, it's got walls,roof and doors.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 25 Dec 06 - 08:45 AM

In this case, greg. It (under Smooth Ops) has provided its own definition of tradtional for the purposes of the awards and since suggested different meanings and its (JL) "understanding" to try to make the White Hare fit the term "traditional", changing what they had said for nomination as well as defying anything I can imagine being considered (from SL management) "the true definition of a 'traditional' song"

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 25 Dec 06 - 01:21 PM

He adapted a tune he had heard from a local musician

Like I said earlier, no evidence whatsoever that this tune was (by any definition of the word) traditional. It may or may not have been.

"Old" does not equal "traditional".

Dave

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Pete_Standing
Date: 25 Dec 06 - 06:37 PM

Lennon and McCartney were local musicians too - to Liverpool. I guess they they restricted themseleves to writing trad tunes to which they added their own words.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,punkfolrocker
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 03:04 AM

frankly.. me and the mrs dont give a folkin monkeys..!!!??

young boy seth do gurt good led zep 3 update music..


so if bbc Rad 2 folks are so thick they cant tell their trad

from their

trad arr'soles


f@ck 'em all for the corporate wa@nk @rseoles they all effin @re.!!!!!


we dont need 'em

who cares !!!???



rip it up and start again.. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 12:01 PM

Somebody seems to have had a shit Christmas. Didn't Santa bring you the toys you wanted then?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 10:09 PM

not quite as 'seasonaly drunk' as i was as last time i came here..

but listening to the pre rerecorded version on young boy seths LP again..

still sounds good enough to me..


so only reasonable tactic is to completely ignore BBC piss poor folk coverage


and get your balls and money together and put them where your mouth is

and resource a proper nationwide digital radio folk channel..


.. course you'd all be fuckin moanin and whinging and arguing with each other
and it would most probably collapse in bankrupt misery in less than 6 months..

but f@ck it why not!!!???



if only 20 of you rich folk w@nkers who can afford to buy martin and taylor guitars
just to learn basic C & G chords on
to prat about in pubs trying to
impress stoned old hippy girls
coughed up that kind of investment..

you would be at least most of the way to a real sustainable alternative
modern media channel
to showcase real folk as we truly beleive we should hear and record for posterity..


.. ps.. i love folk music.. but get right fed up with old folk self pity..

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 05:31 AM

not quite as 'seasonaly drunk' as i was as last time i came here..

Well, you could certainly have fooled me............

Dave

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 08 Jan 07 - 02:54 PM

Interesting development in this laughable saga. Apparently, according to the BBC Radio 2 message board, a compilation CD is about to be issued with all the award-nominated tracks on. And lo and behold, that famous traditional song Seth Lakeman's White Hare is not on the CD. Strange. The BBC(or should that be Smooth Ops) has declared that the nomination was valid, and that the song is traditional, so what can have gone wrong? Watch this space.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,Dan
Date: 08 Jan 07 - 03:32 PM

The terms offered for tracks included on the Folk Awards CD are generally not very good. I suspect that Relentless (the imprint of EMI that Seth is signed too) has not allowed his track to be included.

Thats all.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 08 Jan 07 - 03:40 PM

that would work - if they hadn't substituted a different SL track instead of The White Hare...

Which they have.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 08 Jan 07 - 05:32 PM

I agree with Ruth Archer, a I think GUEST Dan has got it wrong. Firstly, artists are generally very happy to get onto these compilations, they are very good publicity. And secondly, as she points out, there is another Seth Lakeman on the CD anyway, presumably representing his nomination in another category. I would be prpared to hazard a pint on the fact that the White Hare will not win the best traditional track award. I think this story is being quietly buried.
   By the way, Ruth, I'm sorry it's getting a bit edgy again now the kids are back at school. I recommend your best underwear and a bottle of vino.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Tim theTwangler
Date: 08 Jan 07 - 05:32 PM

So has he won it yet?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 08 Jan 07 - 06:00 PM

Well who knows? Unless you're a Smoothops insider (which I'm certainly not).
The annual beanfest/squandering of licence-fee payers' cash doesn't happen till 5 February. It'll be funny (not) if they announce The Colliers instead.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Scrump
Date: 09 Jan 07 - 05:40 AM

White Hare has been issued as a single, which is the main reason for not including it on the Folk Awards compilation. Sales of the single would be affected otherwise. That's the reason, it's nothing to do with the controversy about the song.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 09 Jan 07 - 07:01 AM

Scrump, the White Hare is already on an album and a single. How does that affect things? Believe me those compilation albums are very good for artists. If he's not on it, there's a reason of some kind, and I'd be very surprised if is was anything to do with his people trying to protect single sales. Which, surely, are well in the past? I thought the single has already had its rise and fall in the ordinary way of things, wouldn't that be the case?
I don't understand the music business. Do you think perhaps the single sales will rocket when the awards are announced, but that that wouldn't happen if it was available on a compilation> I can't really see that.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Scrump
Date: 09 Jan 07 - 09:13 AM

Well, greg, Seth is on the compilation, along with all the other nominees, but with The Colliers, not White Hare. So obviously he will get the benefits you describe from being on the compilation.

It's just the choice of track that's been questioned. Seth was also nominated for "Folk Singer Of The Year", so the track could be anything by him (if he had only been nominated for the Best Trad Track, White Hare would have to be chosen, I assume).

Many people who buy compilation pop CDs don't bother to buy the singles. Maybe the same logic is applied by record companies to folk compilations, so they wouldn't want to jeopardise sales of the White Hare single by including it on the Folk Awards album.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Tim theTwangler
Date: 09 Jan 07 - 11:17 AM

5th Feb,eh!
So as an ignorant troll I am wondering what else is in the category and,ignoring the white Hare track,what do you knowlegables fancy to take the Trad prize?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 09 Jan 07 - 02:51 PM

Tim van Eyken's Barleycorn. Narrowly pipping The Grey Cock by Eliza and Salsa Celtica.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 10 Jan 07 - 10:37 AM

Scrump: I see your point, that he's nominated in several categories and the one track is standing for all. It makes sense. Having said that, I'm still prepared to bet that he will not win in the trad category, and that all claims about the the White Hare being traditional will be quietly forgotten by John Leonard, and by SL's business associates. And I would still love to see the voting figures.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Scrump
Date: 10 Jan 07 - 10:56 AM

Yes, I think the controversy must have seriously spoilt Seth's chances of winning the 'trad track' award, so he must now be front runner for the FSOTY award ;-)

Although of course it will all depend on the unbiased opinions of the individual voters, no doubt :-)

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 16 Jan 07 - 05:04 PM

I hear there might be some BBC radio coverage/response to the controversy over the albino bunny this week...can anyone confirm?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 16 Jan 07 - 05:11 PM

Modesty ought to forbid me from drawing attention to this thread ......

thread.cfm?threadid=98104&messages=4

but it doesn't.........

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 08:34 AM

Being discussed on Feedback now.
Traditional prize to a self written song.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 08:55 AM

Loving John Leonard claiming that, because the STORY is a traditional legend, that makes the SONG Seth has written based on the story traditional too...

What a disingenuous load of claptrap and a pathetic excuse for keeping the song in the running. There's nothing more infuriating than when someone won't simply admit that they're wrong, and back down. It's very Blairite.

Sad thing is, the typical R4 listener won't understand the issue because of the way JL has spun it, and that Dave didn't get a chance to reply and challenge him.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: John Routledge
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 08:58 AM

Well said Ruth. Leonard was not convincing in the slightest!!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Marje
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 09:32 AM

Seconded. Or thirded, or whatever. I don't believe for a moment that either Seth Lakeman or John Leonard could imagine that such a sycopated, guitar-reliant tune could be traditional, nor do I believe that he just "heard it in a pub as a boy" and remembered it. It's just not that sort of tune. And he must then have sat down and written the lyrics to fit the tune - the traditional story didn't just leap into metred verse all by itself. I suppose it was easier to call it all "trad" than to say: "Words by Seth Lakeman. Tune copied from someone but I can't remember who it was."

Well done, Dave, for drawing attention to it. Perhaps both the singer and the BBC will take a bit more care with their categories and their attributions in future.

Marje

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 09:56 AM

Two-Fingers Leonard contradicted his own criteria for entry qualification to the Best Traditional Track category, which are:

The best performance of any traditional song or tune on CD released during the past 12 months. This is a category designed to recognise the work of people recording traditional material. It is to be a new recording of a traditional song, from any tradition.

This is not the same as what he said, which was:

My personal definition of a 'traditional' track is any piece of music where we cannot identify the original author and where the song has passed through many hands in an oral tradition, as seems to be the case with Seth's version of 'The White Hare'. Seth and his band obviously came to the same conclusions, because on both versions of 'Freedom Fields', the song is credited as traditional.

Whatever. Neither can be applied to The White Hare.

He also raised the entirely irrelevant issue of PRS which would make not the slightest difference because you get the same money for Trad/Arr as you do for a wholly self-written song.

The only new thing he actually said was that the number of votes cast for the top four in each category will be published after 5 February on the website.

Dave Eyre was clear and concise, John Leonard was his obfusticating self. Nothing new there.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 10:13 AM

"where the song has passed through many hands in an oral tradition, as seems to be the case with Seth's version of 'The White Hare'."

So John Leonard really believes that these are traditional lyrics?

I heard her in the valley,
I heard her in the dead of night.
The warning of a white hare
Her eyes burning bright.

Careful you don`t catch her
Give her right of way.
For she will look upon you,
And steal your soul away

For the white hare is calling,
She's dancing in the night.
She'll be out `til the morning light.

Out upon the heather
A shadow came onto me.
Her hair was hanging over,
Her face I could not see.

She ran behind the rocks,
I heard the hounds cry,
The image of a woman
With head she held up high.

For the white hare is calling,
She's dancing in the night.
She'll be out `til the morning
With her eyes burning bright.
The white hare is calling you.

If you go hunting,
Calling out your prey,
If you see a fair maid,
Her hair an ashen grey,

Careful you don`t catch her,
Give her right of way,
For she will look upon you,
And steal your soul away

For the white hare is calling,
She's dancing in the night.
She'll be out `til the morning,
With her eyes burning bright.
The white hare is calling you.


If so, he's the only person who does - including Seth.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 10:16 AM

I had never heard the song before today when they played a clip on Radio 4, it sounded more soft rock/Neill Young than folk music to me anyway, it wouldn't have sounded out of place being sung by the Eagles.
Traditional was something it definitely didn't sound to me!
Giok

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: guitar
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 10:33 AM

it doesn't trad to me either.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,Norman Bates
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 10:42 AM

John [ it's trad if I say so ] Leonard wouldn't tell the truth to save his life, and he wouldn't know a traditional song if kicked him in the bollocks.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 10:49 AM

Norman, I am with the general drift of wht you say, but perhaps you are understating your case? I supose all that troble in the shower has made you careful

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,Guest, Save the White Hare
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 11:13 AM

>>John [ it's trad if I say so ] Leonard wouldn't tell the truth to save his life, and he wouldn't know a traditional song if kicked him in the bollocks. <<

Oh so true. With a really shifty witness like that giving evidence in my defence I'm doomed!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 11:39 AM

Anyone wishing to listen to it again - an elderly - avuncular even - mudcatter talking about the Folk Awards, can listen here where there is also an opportunity to email the "Feedback" programme and let them know what you thought of John's performance.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 11:54 AM

Cheers, Uncle Dave!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 12:00 PM

Well done Dave. John Leonard used some very standard bits of obfuscation. Like making the obvious definition of traditional(different versions, oral transmission) as if he was disagreeing with Dave, thus subtly suggesting that dave must be talking nonsense.
Then the very, very, very interesting suggesting that he'd checkeed last year's voting patterns, and pointing out that taking out the votes of the people with a businesss interest wouldn't have changed the result. Sounds very convincing. But why did he pick last year, particularly, when people are complaining about this year? Go figure, as they say.
    He also, very openly and frankly, offered to publish the votes for first, second, third and fourth place( in a few months time when controversy has died down). And pointed out that nobody would be interested in who came tenth or fifteenth. Anotherr classic piece of misdirection. Who has asked him who came tenth or fifteenth? Who could care less?The interesting question is, who came fifth? because they deserve the kudos of a nomination, and the money that goes with it. Of course, it might have been one of Seth's actually traditional tracks, which would be very funny.
   All in all, a total failure, because what we all want is for the awards to be open, and the winners to be admired. All Smooth Operations are doing is making the awards look dodgy, and Seth Lakeman to get laughed at. It's a shame, and the problem could so easily be dealt with.
A final point, to which I don't know the answer. John Leonrad meatphorically spread his hands wide in an honest fashion and said that SEth Lakeman has said it was traditioinal on both CD versions, and that he (JL) supports him. Isn't it in fact the case that SL has now withdrawn the claim. and the single(issued most recently) has trhe song credited to Lakeman? Leaving John Leonard as the only person in the world who thinks it's traditional.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 12:13 PM

Yes - he was basically lying when saying that it's been credited as traditional on all the CDs - what about the two different versions of the album?

I say he's lying because the issue of the different attributions on the various CDs has been discussed ad infinitum in this debate, both here and on the BBC messageboard - there's no way he could be ignorant at this point of the fact that what he said simply isn't true.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 01:00 PM

I started this particular thread and I am not sure I have anything new to add. People above have made the most crucial points.

But I have listened to the programme twice on Listen again and would simply say:

1. Dave made his points well but the format of the programme Dave first, John second, no come back, enabled John to tell his own story with out recourse to the points made by Dave.

2. John Leonard, when asked to define "traditional" gives us

a. No known composer and
b. passed through many hands.
Who could argue? The White Hare is not trad.

3. When talking about the song JL quickly moves from "The Song" to "The Story" and argues the "The Story" to be trad. and hence the song! The tune was picked by Seth as a boy and modified. mmmmmmm.

4. JL then alludes to the traditional song "The White Hare" is if the two songs are closely related as different variants of many trad. songs are. Seth's song is not related in this way, if at all.

Points 3 & 4 seem to show JL being somewhere between devious and dishonest in defending his position and this is the second issue that brings so many of us to this conflict:

Why is JL the only person who will not say TWHINATS? Does he have something to hide? Lets make no bones about he is extremely experienced and talented and generally a force for good. Why has JL talked himself into this corner? That is why we seek clarity.

Thanks to Dave for a good job well done in the face of much nonsense!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST, whistleblower
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 01:00 PM

the while hare is only the tip of the iceberg

far worse has happened in the past and will happen again if they don't clean up their act

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 01:28 PM

Intigue, intrigue! Or is that another thread?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Tim theTwangler
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 01:42 PM

I thought Dave did a good job of putting over the arguement against.
The program format was biased in favour of the company spokesman.
And by using that format the Official line was given a deal more reasonble feeling than you would have gotten if there was an opportunity for dave to come back and challenge the information given by the spokeperson.
HHHmmmmmm.
The Format of the song extract sounded no more traditional to me than all around my hat by Steeleye.
The arrangement etc did not conjure up finger in the ear type performance at all.
Is that what the Trad/not trad arguement boiled down to?
If twas a trad story, and Mr lakeman wrote it in his own style and borrowed an old tune that he then arranged.
And spliced it all together. I am really sorry and mean no offence but that does sound a bit like what I am told others do.
frankly if I didnt know what a huge amount of indignation it has caused to some of you on here(sorry for making fun of your genuinely held beliefs)I would have said it was just a good song with a decent beat.
But not what I would want to hear at our local folk club on a singers night.
Back to Tim the troll then.
If I arranged and recorded a Traditional (as defined by the majority veiw on this thread)song and it had a heavy reggae beat and Bodrhan riffs driving it. would it count as traditional?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 02:16 PM

In this discussion I would refer colleagues to the highset authority:

John Leonard, when asked to define "traditional" gives us

a. No known composer and
b. passed through many hands.

Sounds good to me. Do it Tim, as Martin Carthy has said the only bad thing you can do to trad songs is to stop singing them.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 02:22 PM

The other White Hare referred to was recorded from Joseph Taylor (of Brigg Fair fame) and a version was recorded by the Waterson's on "The Watersons", both of these can be found here It bears no relation to this song at all. There was another version of the same song recorded by Kidson.

I have no objection to self-penned songs, some of them are brilliant - Ewan MacColl, John Conolly and Mike Waterson come to mind. Nor is there any objection to this as a song (not especially good IMHO) but that is not the point. If dozens of people cover it like they have with "Fiddler's Green" and "The First Time Ever" then good look to Seth. I hope he makes a fortune from it.

The indignation Tim, is not from those things. The indignation is because people such as festival organisers take notice of these awards (and so they should because they ought to indicate a measure of public popularity rather than just in the folk world) to book people. Choosing this track above others forces the fifth placed artist out of the reckoning. This is not a traditional song. People may find it hard to define a traditional song and I would be one of them.

But whatever definition you come up with - something written in the past couple of years does not come into the reckoning and never has.

However the traditional the story.

Last year the winning traditional track was by John Tams and was called the "Bitter Withy". Remarkably it was the only track on that particular record not written by him.

See why people think it might be fixed?

And JL has promised to put the votes up. Are you a gambler Tim? Here is a wager. That list of votes will be the ones cast for the four finalists. You will never know which track came fifth in the traditional category.

I did make a number of those points in the recording but they were cut. I knew the format and tried anticipate his objections in advance. Some of those were edited out.

I knew he would get the last word. But for an experienced broadcaster which he is, he sounded a bit nervy.

I think it might just be more transparent next year.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Surreysinger
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 02:30 PM

It's interesting to note (and I'm going to be oh so BORING here), that there's nothing new under the sun! When the Folk Song Society was formed in 1898, J Fuller Maitland, Lucy Broadwood's musical collaborator in producing "English County Songs" in 1893, wrote to her about the putative committee of the society that "...the "faking" party is stronger there than we thought," and urged her strongly to ensure that she was on the committee to ensure that this faction did not hold sway. At the time it was very much the vogue for poets to take a traditional tune and harness it to words of their own construction, and then call the end result a folk song... sound familiar??

I have to say that I cannot for the life of me see how the choice of THIS particular White Hare song as a traditional one can be justified. I doubt very much, for example, if Mick Ryan would claim traditional status for his self-written song "King Kayley", even though the story it is woven around is a British folk tale (of wonderfully blood curdling and mystical nature), and it's performed in true unaccompanied traditional style.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 02:30 PM

Tim the Twangler: you ask if you recorded a trad song and used a reggae beat, would it be trad? Well, of course that would be eligible. But if you write a new opera about Tristan and isolde, it is not trad, and not eligible. Even though it is based on a Cornish folktale. Do you seriously think Wagner should win the Folk Awards? there are plenty of other awards for pop, and opera. etc. This is an award for traditional folk music. Which must mean something, even if there are different opinions on exactly what that something is.
    These nominations are worth a lot of money. Wagner doesnt need them. Simple.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 03:21 PM

Tim the Twangler,

Look at one of the other best trad track nominations: the Grey Gallito by Salsa Celtica, a traditional English song set to haunting Latin backing.

Of course it's still a traditional song - and an absolutely cracking one at that.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: danensis
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 03:43 PM

Is this the same John Leonard who used to arrange folk gigs in South Yorkshire?

John

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 04:04 PM

It is.......

John was a professional musician on the folk circuit until he joined the BBC at Radio Sheffield in 1976. After 4 years as the station's music producer he joined Network Radio, Manchester as a producer of music programmes for Radios 1 and 2. In 1993 he became Editor of Radio 1 North and was responsible for bringing to the network Janice Long, Andy Kershaw, Simon Mayo and Mark Radcliffe. John has been nominated for six Sony awards, winning 3 of them. In 1995 John left the BBC to join Nick Barraclough at Smooth Operations. In 1998 John returned to his first love, working in folk music, when Smooth Operations won the commission to produce Radio 2's folk-roots show. John lives just outside Oldham with his wife and five children. He sports an EFDSS-approved folk-singer's beard and has many jumpers.

From the Smooth Ops site......

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 05:14 PM

Can we offer a line to JL?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,folkyBob
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 05:17 PM

Is this STILL going on........you guys need to get out more!
Frankly, you're lucky that such drivel(i.e. disappearing up your own fundaments about whether a poxy little song is trad or not) gets such wide exposure and its only because the BBC is so PC and obligated to include all whingers, grumblers, renegades and saddoes, that anyone's given you time of day. MOVE ON!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 05:45 PM

Thanks for your considered comment. You must be John Leonard hiding behind guest!!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 06:01 PM

Dont hang about eavesdropping on websites it's nerdy

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 06:05 PM

"obligated"? Surely the word is "obliged". Stick that up your fundament, bob.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 06:15 PM

Bob - it's not the issue of attribution that matters. It's what this 'mistake' tells us about the awards system. We are seeking honesty, integrity, truth and fairness, not attribution.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,The DG
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 06:31 PM

Given Leonard's pedigree with the BBC you'd think he'd be better at responding to listeners' feedback (it IS covered in training).

If he'd given sensible, full answers to reasonable questions, it would all have blown over long ago.

He has only himself to blame if people are chasing hares now.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 06:40 PM

"obligated"? Surely the word is "obliged". Stick that up your fundament, bob

See Fowler's modern english usage , Ruth, before you get noughty

OBLIGATED - as a synomym for obliged(having received a favour etc) is now a mere solecism; but in the full sense of bound by law or duty to do something it is still used,especially in legal language.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 06:40 PM

I agree. It's interesting that he suddenly says "of course we'll publish the voting figures" as if it's such an easy, simple request with which to comply - so how come he's ignored it for the last two months?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 06:49 PM

Oh, forgive me - I never realised folkybob was a member of the legal fraternity. I just thought he was an arse.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,Folkybob
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 06:57 PM

11.30 in the big brother house and Ruth is feeling defensive.....

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 07:06 PM

You'll be bloody lucky.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Tim theTwangler
Date: 20 Jan 07 - 03:19 AM

Well since Sam left I suppose......
OK I think I am starting to get the hang of this now.
So the way of the performing is not important but just a matter of taste.
but.
The song has to be by anon and the tune too.
Both having been changed and altered as they pass throuhg the hands of many and varied performers?
And age is not important because if it is by Anon there is no record of when it came into being.
So what is the difference between a folk song and a traditional fold song?
Can the former be new?
Also does the style of performnce and arrangment make any difference in this case?
Dave I totally agree your on air protaganist did come over a bit dodgy like.
I often wonder at the arrogance of a lot of the producers and spokesment that turn up on that program.
If they were any more set in their way and devious sounding we would probably be allowed to veot for them at the next general election.
They are never ever wrong.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 20 Jan 07 - 05:45 AM

Tim, I've expressed this before, but I'll say it again, mostly because I'm rather fond of the sound of my own voice.

Folk as a genre is, I think, almost impossible these days to quantify or put parameters around. It's come to mean different things to different people, from contemorary singer-songwriter stuff to artificial media constructs like "nu folk" and "twisted folk", right though to traditional music. Now, traditional music is much easier to define: it's music or songs without an identifiable author, and it's usually got a history of being passed down orally, often through many generations.

Looking after traditional music is like looking after any other aspect of our heritage. It's a legacy that is a living one, as so many people still sing traditional songs. How you interpret them is open to debate, but personally I love the whole range of interpretation, from the most stripped-down,unaccompanied singing right through to Eliza and Salsa Celtica's version of the Grey Cock. It all keeps the tradition alive.

One of the issues that has really wound me up in this whole debate about the White Hare is that it seems to undermine the very concept of traditional music. The BBC has ONE award in its whole arsenal that has been specifically created to acknowledge traditional song...and if it will defend the right of a song which is clearly not a traditional song to be nominated in that category, it makes a mockery of the category itself. And if you love traditional music and feel that it has a right to be acknowledged within the BBC Folk Awards, that makes you rather sad. Well, it makes me sad, anyway.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 20 Jan 07 - 06:38 AM

I like the sound of your voice too Ruth, especially when it speaks so much sense.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 20 Jan 07 - 08:56 AM

Right back atcha, Uncle Dave!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,John Amendall
Date: 20 Jan 07 - 09:31 AM

>>One of the issues that has really wound me up in this whole debate about the White Hare is that it seems to undermine the very concept of traditional music. The BBC has ONE award in its whole arsenal that has been specifically created to acknowledge traditional song...and if it will defend the right of a song which is clearly not a traditional song to be nominated in that category, it makes a mockery of the category itself. And if you love traditional music and feel that it has a right to be acknowledged within the BBC Folk Awards, that makes you rather sad. <<

That is where I am too. It annoys me that a song that was essentially written 5 minutes ago (in folk terms) ever got classed as "traditional". I really don't like the idea that if a performer is getting a bit of stick in folk circles for not doing enough trad material that he then decides "Oh I'll write a trad one then". That the guy the BBC has delegated custodianship of the process then colludes in trying to cover-up the subterfuge INCENSES me.

As to the whole tale about hearing the tune somewhere in the past, isn't it strange that either the original writer or interpreter has not come forward yet and cried "foul. Where's my money?". The song has had plenty of air-play. Even if he/she doesn't listen to the radio, I'm sure he/she has friends that do and should have recognised it by now. So why has no one come forward and said "it's mine?"

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST, JC
Date: 20 Jan 07 - 09:44 AM

IF we accept Leonard's assertion that there really is a proper voting process, and that the panel really does exist, and does indeed vote,

and IF we accept that he's is telling the truth when he says a majority of these people voted White Hare into the trad category,

then it only proves that he's invited the wrong people to vote on folk awards onto the panel, so none of the votes mean anything at all.

If we don't then it can only be a put-up job aimed at lining pockets.

Either way it's an abuse of OUR money

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 20 Jan 07 - 10:18 AM

"As to the whole tale about hearing the tune somewhere in the past, isn't it strange that either the original writer or interpreter has not come forward yet"

I've said this before, too: the first time I heard the song was in a session. Someone played it, and i said to my friend, "That's got to be a Seth Lakeman song."

I'm not musically sophisticated enough to describe how an artist develops signature musical styles, but I have listened both to Kitty Jay and Freedom Fields, and my initial feeling, without ever having heard the song before, was tha tthe tune had Seth written all over it.

I'm just saying.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 21 Jan 07 - 06:58 AM

For those who missed the original broadcast on Friday, there is a repeat this evening (Sunday) at 8.00 pm.

Can I suggest you email "Feedback" with your opinion. Clearly they listen!!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,Deep Throat
Date: 21 Jan 07 - 08:01 AM

I want to know which version of "The White Hare" is supposed to be the song that is nominated.

The version on the *first* edition of Freedom Fields has an extra verse to the version they put on the second edition and the single. That is in addition to the completly changed arrangement without banjos or Kathryn Roberts. Mike Harding always plays the first version (probably because it sounds a bit more "folky") even though you can't buy it any more. But it is quite important which version of a "trad" song really is being nominated, isn't it?

As Sir Walter Scott might have said, "Oh what a tangled web we weave, When first we practise to..."

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 21 Jan 07 - 08:08 AM

I presume it's the EMI release (electric, no Kathryn).

When I was at Folk Devils record shop in Whitby last weekend, they had the first version of the CD still available, clever things. So if anyone is interested...

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Betsy
Date: 21 Jan 07 - 08:16 AM

Why can't we have access to the list of people who supposedly comprise the Voting Panel ? Simple enough isn't it ?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,John Amendall
Date: 21 Jan 07 - 08:20 AM

Stories reach me that Lakeman & Leonard are already reheasing an old Flannagan & Allen number for their special performance at this year's Folk Awards.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Run_Rabbit_Run

The part of the farmer has yet to be cast, but I think there may be volunteers amongst us.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 21 Jan 07 - 10:01 AM

Nice one John!!

If you listen to the programme you will hear JL's justification for not publishing the list.Interestingly top try and stop him making that point I accepted it in the original piece I did. I suspect we were both edited.

Dave Eyre

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Jan 07 - 07:22 PM

I can't seem to find the previous threads on this topic - my screen is only showimg me as far back as early Jan.

Could some kind person please post a link/s?

There were some important points I'd like to read again before taking next steps.

Thankyou

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Scrump
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 04:26 AM

I finally managed to listen to this today, before it disappears up the BBC's backside.

Well done Dave for getting it 'Eyred' (sorry!)

By his own definition given on air in the programme, John Leonard seems to have ruled out Seth Lakeman's White Hare as a runner for the Trad track award. The presenter should have picked him up on that, IMO.

So disappointing in a sense but having raised the issue, I hope it will make them think a bit harder next year - probably too late this time.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 04:30 AM

To Guest:

As far as I am aware there are no previous threads. There was a short thread that drew attention to the radio programme.

There is a thread on the BBC 2 message board This link should take you there: http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mbradio2/F2142825

If you have any thoughts you want to share feel free to contact me (I am the person complaining on the broadcast).

Dave Eyre

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 05:07 AM

There was long thread with some quite detailed points made about Smooth Operations logic, and the BBC producers guidelines. There were also links to the BBC Governors site and comments thereon.

Les started this thread to sum up the arguments in that earlier thread - but even though I've set my computer to read 90 days I can only go back to Jan the 5th.

Some fairly senior performers are picking up on this issue and would like to read what both sides have been saying.

We're aware of the BBC forum.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 05:55 AM

thread.cfm?threadid=96615

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 06:01 AM

Thanks for that Countess Richard - you beat me too it.

For anyone else with the problem I found it by clicking on the first name in the thread - then looking through all his posts till I found something that remotely looked like it!!

There is probably an easier way..........

And "Guest" I respect your need for privacy. It is interesting what you say about senior performers. I understand that discussions have been going on an a "closed" list. Do not worry no-one has broken any confidences but it would be nice of thus could be summarised if at all possible - without mentioning any names.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 06:11 AM

Some fairly senior performers are picking up on this issue and would like to read what both sides have been saying.

JL made a belated statement on the BBC Board - more or less saying what he said on the programme.

Smooth Ops operate the BBC board for them - so they really have has a number of questions to answer all of which they have ignored.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 06:22 AM

Thank you Countess.

Even closed lists leak, so people tend to be guarded.

Those who want to post here are probably already doing so, but I'd surmise that, of those few who have made a contribution in this other place, most would appear to agree with the majority view here.

That said, there are plenty who say nothing, and for all I know they may hold quite the opposite view.

For myself I think things have come to a pretty pass when professionals, who put themselves on the line night after night for this music, do not feel able to contribute openly to what should be a healthy debate about a very pleasant, worthwhile and noteworthy event.

But then I'm one of them, and the truth is that a tiny handful of people have managed to effect a stranglehold on the single dedicated media outlet for this industry, and in so doing have acquired massive power, without - it seems - much of the responsibility that is supposed to go along with the spending of public money, or the separation of personal gain from public promotion.

And some of those people, it has to be said, do have a reputation for vindictiveness (which may be unfounded for all I know, but who wants to take the chance)?

Dave - are you planning to go back to Feeback, to make a rebuttal?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Scrump
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 06:41 AM

I just wondered: is it possible for a transcript of the BBC Feedback article featuring Dave Eyre and John Leonard to be published here, so that we can see what was said once the programme has been removed from "Listen Again" (which I guess will be pretty soon now)?

I for one wasn't convinced by JL's 'explanation' of the voting system and the reason for including White Hare as 'traditional'. As I said above, regarding the latter, the definition JL gave of 'traditional' seemed to imply that the song shouldn't have been included - from memory, he said that a traditional song was one where we don't know who the author is. But we do, in this case, don't we?

And as someone said earlier, he said that Seth could have got more royalties by claiming he wrote it, which of course isn't true.

I was disappointed that the interviewer didn't pick JL up on eother of these points. What's he there for if he doesn't do that?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 07:05 AM

Indeed, Roger Bolton did not pick JL up.

The entry criteria for Best Traditional Track, as published by the Smoothies themselves, is the best performance of any traditional song or tune on CD released during the past 12 months. This is a category designed to recognise the work of people recording traditional material. It is to be a new recording of a traditional song, from any tradition.

And the money you get from a self-written song is exactly the same as what you get for Trad/Arr.

As for a 'reputation for being vindictive', never. I should think my invitation to the Brewery this year is just delayed in the post. And the Smoothies would never exclude anyone from their forum for telling it like it is, would they?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 07:09 AM

If you go to Listen again you can hear the Feedback prog. as many times as you like. I listened a couple of times and this is the bit I thought most valuable:

John Leonard, when asked to define "traditional" gives us

a. No known composer and
b. passed through many hands.

Discussion over

TWHINATS

And it is a lovely sunny day here in Chorlton cum Hardy, so to speak

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 08:03 AM

Thank you.

I am not intending to go back to Feedback since - FOR ME - I feel it would be a waste of time. It would look like I am trying for a second go and criticising the firm that made the programme. They weren't perfect but neither am I and I am not naive enough to think my words would not be cut. (Though I tried to be succinct). At least they did not move them around.

If folk performers or those others who have read this thread, are prepared to contact "Feedback" either via the BBC website or via the production company "Testbed Productions" [e-mail] then I would be happy to re-appear on the programme - or listen to someone else do it. Not bothered either way. The contact is Penny Vine. They have gone back to programmes before so if there are enough of you prepared to be "Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells" or in Les's case "of Chorlton" or Ruth Archer's case "of Ambridge" then they may take notice.

It might be worth making the point that people are actually afraid to appear on the programme because of S.O.'s monopoly.

And to "Guest" I can promise you that no-one has broken any confidences, or even dropped any hints, simply that I managed to add 2+2.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Scrump
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 08:05 AM

If you go to Listen again you can hear the Feedback prog. as many times as you like.

True Les, but for how much longer? I was only suggesting a transcript would help in future, when people won't be able to "listen again".

Yes, JL's "definition" of 'traditional' seems to disqualify the song in question - so why on earth didn't the interviewer say so? Is he a mate of JL;s or what?

I haven't listened to "Feedback" before but if this sort of feeble response is what you usually get on the programme, I don't think I'll bother again.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 08:08 AM

I think I can answer that by saying he (Roger Bolton) is just a presenter....everything will have been set up beforehand.

And the way to get back at them scrump is to write to them as I did. See my previous post which tells you where to go to and who to talk to.

They aren't perfect - but then neither am I!

Best regards,

Dave

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,working musician
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 11:12 AM

The sad thing about this mess is that interpreting a traditional song is a quite different musical exercise from writing a new one. Taking old material, finding its emotional heart, constructing an appropriate musical arrangement and telling the story properly, while making it sufficiently gripping to engage an audience in the twenty-first century, is as great a creative challenge (in some ways more so) than producing a piece of new material. As has been pointed out before, the BBC has the one Folk Award devoted to the recognition of this talent, so why debase it? The irony is that many of the young musicians the MH show likes to feature - Eliza, Spiers and Boden, Tim van E. and Devil's Interval - are doing precisely that, often in innovative and exciting ways.

It would be interesting to see the voting figures, but even if we do (and believe them) I would still bet you anything you like that not all those who voted for SL's "White hare" had actually heard it. "Ah, Seth Lakeman, he's hot shit right now.... The White Hare, oh yes, I vaguely remember that's a traditional song.... tick the box."

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST, Tom Bliss
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 05:24 AM

I fear I may, over on the BBC site, have contributed to some confusion over the registration of The White Hare with PRS.

I checked with them when the debate first began, having asked the question there and had no answer.

I'd understood that I'd been told it was registered as Tune: Trad arr Lakeman, Words: Lakeman.

However, I've just doubled-checked - and it seems that both words AND tune are down as Trad arr Lakeman.

This is actually what I put on the BBC, having only been concerned to answer my own question on whether it as registered as an original Lakeman or not - so at least that was correct, but others have suggested otherwise here so I thought it should be re-stated clearly for the record.

FYI the arrangement was registered in March 06, by EMI, and has not been changed since.

Now I'd understood - as have others here - that John Leonard has suggested that Seth will get less money from PRS for performances of HIS OWN version of the White Hare.

Actually he'll make exactly the same as if he'd written it - as PRs confirmed this morning.

However, John would be correct if he was saying that Seth may get less money overall, in the final anlysis - because any PRS member can record 'Seth's' words and tune, make some minor alterations, and register his or her own arrangement - exactly as anyone may with any traditional piece.

People are already putting the song onto their albums (Gerry McN - is that you, Mate?). Those who don't want to, or can't, register a new arrangement, can call it simply 'Trad.'

There are, of course, also a number of registrations of arrangements of the very different traditional song The White Hare.

I'm not sure how royalties are divided between different arrangers of Trad tunes. I'll ask next time I need to talk with PRS.

By the way, I did mention the circumstances (as explained by Seth) behind his arrangement of White Hare, and they did express surprise that it could have been registered as Trad Arr in those circumstances. It would not normally quality with such a gestation.

I'm not quite sure where that leaves everyone, but I thought I'd better clear up any confusion I might have helped to cause!

Tom Bliss

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 05:38 AM

Great post from Tom.

Can I suggest that as many of you as possible put it on your records and just call it trad arr. whoever.

My bet is that EMI would scream the rooftops off!!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Scrump
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 05:41 AM

Having listened to it again, I wonder if it was a mistake to try to address the two issues in the same complaint:

1. The nomination of Seth L's song for best trad track
2. The transparency of the voting

The programme only devoted about 5 minutes to the whole item, and most of it was spent trying to persuade Leonard to disclose the number of votes. What he has ended up doing is simply to promise to disclose the number of votes for the 4 nominations in each category. So we won't know about any of the other items on the short lists, or the names of voters, etc. I doubt we'll be able to learn much from that. It would have been more interesting to know how many votes the 5th nomination in the trad track category got. JL's 'justification' for not publishing all the votes (numbers only, no names) was hardly convincing.

The issue of a non-traditional song being nominated for a trad song award is to me more important than knowing how many votes were cast. Leonard was allowed to get away with an unconvincing justification for White Hare being included, while the presenter focused on the other issue.

I'm not criticising Dave for raising it - he did a good job getting it discussed on air. But maybe out emails to the BBC should focus on the White Hare issue - what do others think?

Another point: Leonard claims Seth L "heard the tune in a pub as a lad". How does he know it wasn't under copyright? Maybe I could claim I wrote it and it was me he heard - but I doubt I'd get away with it :-)

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 05:56 AM

When I wrote I emphasised the lack of transparency since I believed that was an issue that would get it noticed.

When I did the recording I tried to emphasise it was about this one song - since I wanted JL to defend it. They took a bit of both I am afraid - but that happens. Remember the recording was edited - which I expected.

As far as taking a copywrite tune - he does say he altered it. But since he registered it as Trad. go though, do likewise and record it as Trad. He can't complain - though his record company might!!.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Scrump
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 06:17 AM

Let's all record it then - should be a nice little earner :-)

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Pete_Standing
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 09:54 AM

one of many recordings on ourtoob although all the rest seem to be by the great man himself

So EMI, as in the words of the Small Faces, "what you gonna do about it?"

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 07:17 AM

Listen to Feedback this Friday, 1.30 rqadio 4. A little birdie tells me that they may be revisiting this topic.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 08:45 AM

Excellent news - Power To The People!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,SethYettie
Date: 05 Feb 07 - 11:21 AM

With the folk awards on the horizon, and the sound of plastic corks being eased gently from myriad bottles of cheap Chilean red, here's yet another cheap parody. Tune is "Jolly Old Hawk", and it was written while I was in the shower this morning. i reckon that's longer than Seth spent on his.


Jolly white hare and her ears were pink

Now let us sing
Who's going to win the award but me?

Jolly white hare and her ears were pink
Wrote it one night after lashings of drink

I left the pub and I'd had 20 whiskies
Walked home o'er the moor and the hares they were frisky
When I got in, I wrote it all out
Crawled into my bed and promptly passed out

Jolly white hare and her ears were pink
Wrote it one night after lashings of drink

Woke the next morn, there it was on the table
But I had forgot that I'd written this fable,
A traditional tale of a sweet Cornish hare
That turns into a mad bint and gives you a scare

Jolly white hare and her ears were pink
Wrote it one night after lashings of drink

Wrote it one night after 20 libations
Then told a good story to Smooth Operations:
"It's an old Cornish legend from Looe by the shore
That's why the rhymes and the scansion are poor."

Jolly white hare and her ears were pink
Wrote it one night after lashings of drink

The tune I once learnt from an old Devon man
Who travelled the country in his caravan
I memorised each little phrase and each note
But it still sounds like everything else that I've wrote

Now let us sing

Who's going to win the award but me?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Scrump
Date: 05 Feb 07 - 12:15 PM

Here, Seth, you're not taking the p*** out of my traditional song, are you?

Btw, I gave the lyrics to a very well known guitarist and fiddler who will be there tonight. If anyone from this group is going, maybe they could request it :-)

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 05 Feb 07 - 01:27 PM

Every word of this ditty from Seth "Not-Of-The-Lake" is absolutely true, inspired by copious quantities of Chilean red. I do believe The Little Hobbit may be requested to sing it. Whether he will I know not but I do hope someone snaps Two-Fingers Leonard's face.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 05 Feb 07 - 01:55 PM

I have reason to believe SethYettie's version has also been taken to tonight's festivities...

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: AlexB
Date: 05 Feb 07 - 02:05 PM

Makes me wish I was there really.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 05 Feb 07 - 03:21 PM

I understand someone - believing that the Mods would all be at the Folk Awards - have posted this on the BBC Message Board.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 05 Feb 07 - 03:22 PM

very naughty!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 05 Feb 07 - 05:20 PM

Tim Van - Best Traditional Song

Would this be an appropriate time to declare this thread to be well and truly dead?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 05 Feb 07 - 05:33 PM

*starts nailing the coffin shut*

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 05 Feb 07 - 07:00 PM

Curmudgeon of Sheffield writes:

Bang!!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,Keith
Date: 06 Feb 07 - 03:34 AM

It is not as open and clear as you might think.

Someone at the BBC has put up a set of results on the website where Burlesque won Best Album. This has just given Phil Jupitus on 6 Music a few problems, because having believed the news braodcast saying Seth Lakeman had won both Folk Musican of the year (sic) and Best Album, he could only find one reference in the detailed list when he just read it out. I've capture the current form of the press release below, because I don't think it will stay like that for long, although with Smooth Ops, who knows where the [muddle] goes....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio2/events/folkawards2007/winners.shtml

Quote


BEST GROUP – BELLOWHEAD

Formed by the duo John Spiers & Jon Boden, the eleven-strong big band made their debut at the 2004 Oxford Folk Festival and were named Best Live Act at the Folk Awards in 2005. Their spectacular multi-genre arrangements of traditional song are truly unique. The line-up includes acclaimed individuals like Benji Kirkpatrick (guitar, banjo, bouzouki, mandolin), Paul Sartin (fiddle, oboe), Pete Flood (percussion), Rachael McShane (cello, fiddle), Giles Lewin (fiddle, bagpipes) and Gideon Juckes (sousaphone, tuba).

BEST ALBUM – BURLESQUE: BELLOWHEAD BEST ORIGINAL SONG – DAISY: KARINE POLWART

The Scottish singer-songwriter took three prizes at the 2005 Folk Awards and followed up with her second solo album Scribbled In Chalk, full of typically moving and thought-provoking songs. Formerly a member of Battlefield Band, Malinky and MacAlias, she has a Masters Degree in Philosophy and abandoned a secure career as a social worker to work full time in music. In the last year her music has been heard on everything from the BBC's updated Radio Ballads to soap opera Hollyoaks and The Hairy Biker's Cookbook!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 06 Feb 07 - 03:37 AM

R4 Today have also just said that Freedom Fields won Best Album. Who indeed knows where the muddle goes?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Tim theTwangler
Date: 06 Feb 07 - 03:48 AM

HHHHhmmmmmmm!
OH well Back to the grassy knoll!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 06 Feb 07 - 03:55 AM

Of course it isn't a fiddle.

Sorry............................

I may have a source here.........I'll see what I can find out....

Best regards,


Dave

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Scrump
Date: 06 Feb 07 - 04:04 AM

Of course it isn't a fiddle

No, it's a violin...

... ah... sorry, wrong thread.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: KeithofChester
Date: 18 Jul 07 - 11:34 AM

It will be interesting to see what revisions there are (if any) to the BBC Radio Two Folk Awards process after all this current "excitement" about competitions run by the BBC.

BBC Suspends Competitions

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 18 Jul 07 - 12:42 PM

Smooth Operations constant excuse for not naming the judges is because it stops record companies and publicity people trying to nobble them.

Here's another way. Name a list of judges.

It is very similar to the Sony Radio Awards - which a Smooth Operations production won last year.

But this will not stop the Folk Awards. You are under the mistaken impression it is a competition. It isn't it is a publicity stunt.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 18 Jul 07 - 01:22 PM

It was nice re-reading this thread and hearing Scrumps cyber voice again. I never knew him. But he must have been body and soul into this music.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 18 Jul 07 - 02:06 PM

I wonder if there is a window of opportunity here?

Certainly if one's voice could be heard in the higher echelons of power then I doubt Smoothie Chops' secretive judging process would survive.

Any suggestions how people might go about this?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 18 Jul 07 - 02:32 PM

I have posted to the BBC Message Board about this. Any who feels that the BBC Folk Awards are as open and above board as I do, might like to read what I have said - and if they support it post to that effect.

Remember the board there is run by Smooth Operations.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 19 Jul 07 - 04:03 AM

refresh

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: KeithofChester
Date: 19 Jul 07 - 06:25 AM

I've added a post to your on the BBC Board.

BBC Folk Awards Thread

It would appear that every time Mark Thompson turns over a stone he finds a new worm on this one.

BBC Competition Story

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 19 Jul 07 - 08:50 AM

Best of luck mate. I just don't see any great conspiracy or skullduggery.

What you've got here is the rump of those guys who used to play the folk/cabaret places like The Boggery in the 1970's. They weren't much fun to be around at the time, nowadays they're an endangered species. In a way i would be sorry to see them disldged from their pathetic little nature reserve. Its their view of folkmusic.

I daresay its as valid as some of the half witted nonsense you encounter most days on mudcat.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 28 Jul 07 - 10:11 AM

Naming the judges seems to be the only feasible way of rescuing the reputation of the competition from the effects of last year' rolling low level fiasco. John Leonard, for example, issued a statement saying that only one judge had any financial interest in Seth Lakeman's succeeding in the votes(he avoids mentioned how said person voted, of course). It is a pity that he was forced to make this statement about one person's position, as if Seth Lakeman was somehow the problem. He wasn't, ansd it is very invidious to have him and his associates picked out like that. It would be infinitely better to name the panel, so that we could judge for ourselves on the people concerned. fRoots Critic's Poll seems quite acceptable, a broad range of knowledgable people tthat are identified in the published results.
    In view of the BBC's current preoccupation on where and when it has been deceiving people, obviously the topic of last year's competition is being revisited. I think we are a bit overdue for a statement on when and if the next competition is going to happen, run by who, and with what rules. I still find the whole sorry business last year extremely puzzling, and SmoothOps various statements on the subject in no way clarified things, quite the reverse. It still puzzles me who these people can have been who are meant to have voted in that very inexplicable way.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 28 Jul 07 - 10:50 AM

Here, by the way, are the raw results of the fRoots Critics Poll; not sure what happened when they added up the votes to see what got most.
http://www.frootsmag.com/content/critpoll/critics_poll_2006.pdf

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 28 Jul 07 - 10:52 AM

Funny, I thought that would be a clickie. Not sure how to turn it into one, maybe someone could help?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: KeithofChester
Date: 28 Jul 07 - 10:59 AM

http://www.frootsmag.com/content/critpoll/critics_poll_2006.pdf