BBC Folk Awards last chance

Subject: BBC Folk Awards last chance
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 10:34 AM

I thought I would start a new thread since we don't have much time left. Folkie Dave did a great job in getting to Feedback and making our case. John Leonard also did our cause a lot of good with this quote:

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

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

Please contact Feedback:

[e-mail]

with short polite points indicating that John agrees with us that TWHINATS and so should be withdrawn from that category.

Cheers

Les

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards last chance
From: GUEST,The Pink Giraffe
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 11:10 AM

Last chance? No, I think there's plenty of time before the awards ceremony to get Mr Lakeman to write a winning song about me and enter it into the traditional category.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards last chance
From: Folkiedave
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 11:27 AM

Whilst I appreciate your humour they decide around the middle of December.....

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards last chance
From: GUEST,The Pink Giraffe
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 11:31 AM

So? They'll change the rules. Again.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards last chance
From: Scrump
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 11:39 AM

Good suggestion Les. Are you sure that's exactly what JL said, as regards his definition of 'traditional'?

I wouldn't want some nitpicking BBC jobsworth (or JL himself, for that matter) to worm their way out of it by saying "Ah, but he didn't say that" (like a politician would do if you quote something that's not 100% correct in every detail).

It would be good to see an exact transcript of what JL said on the programme (at least, regarding his definition of 'traditional') so we can all quote him correctly and not have our objections thrown out on a technicality.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards last chance
From: GUEST,Deep Throat
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 11:40 AM

He is rehashing the old Punch Bowl album that he put out before Kitty Jay for re-release in April or May. There might be room for a newly written traditional song about a pink giraffe on that...

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards last chance
From: greg stephens
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 11:54 AM

I have still not managed to detect a single named person, other than John Leonrad, who believes WH to be a traditional folk song. So, as always, I keep wondering, just who are these people who voted for it? Now, I know wild anonymous allegation shave been made, but I dont believe SmoothOps fixed the voting. these votes were indeed cast. So my question as before is "Who voted for it?"
    Come and identify yourselves. Even one of you?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards last chance
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 12:09 PM

Perhaps it was a person or persons who have him booked for their festival this year and want to ensure a good attendance?
Giok

Cynical; moi?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards last chance
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 12:09 PM

This is pretty well, with out ums and aghs, what he said:

"My opinion is . First of all you don't know the composer, you don't know the person who actually wrote this work. It has perhaps been shaped by many hands, passed through many minds, many performers have performed it."

Chase it from here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/progs/listenagain.shtml#f

Greg has the most interesting questions. who voted and what were they thinking about?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards last chance
From: Marje
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 12:39 PM

I e-mailed them to say there was a world of difference between saying you can't remember whom you got a tune from and saying it has no known composer - especially when the tune is so transparently modern. I said quite a bit more - I think I asked whether Leonard had cloth ears - but I ended up by saying they'd let him off too lightly.

Marje

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards last chance
From: Folkiedave
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 12:46 PM

Good for you Marje.................

Dave

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards last chance
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 12:48 PM

Thank you Marje - well done.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards last chance
From: greg stephens
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 08:13 AM

I agree with Les. If anybody has any points to raise about J Leonard's performance on Feedback, now is the last moment to raise them, as they will now be putting the next programme together(it goes out on Friday at 1.30)

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards last chance
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 08:24 AM

The Folk awards site has been down for cleaning but is back now.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards last chance
From: Scrump
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 08:42 AM

My 5p's worth went in, FWIW (5p?)

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards last chance
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 09:26 AM

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

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

I'd just like to point out that this definition is wrong (what would you expect from someone like John Leornard?).

A song does not have to be from an anonymous source in order to be classed as traditional. For example, 'The Famous Flower of Serving Men' is traditional but appears to have been written by a person called Laurence Price, in July 1656 (see Roy Palmer's 'A Book of British Ballads, p.187). This ballad was not traditional when it was written but became traditional after it had been sung and altered over the centuries. In the same way Seth Lakeman's song 'The White Hare' is not traditional, but, in the unlikely event that it gets taken up by a culture which relies principally on oral means for song transmission, may become traditional at some point in the future ... possibly ...

Please note that none of this should twisted, in any way, in order to make the Seth Lakeman song eligible for the traditional song prize - the song is not, by any stretch of the imagination, traditional!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards last chance
From: Scrump
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 09:35 AM

The gist of my email to Feedback was to focus on the fact that JL's own 'definition' of 'traditional' contradicted the choice of White Hare for the Traditional Track award list. I also expressed mmy disappointment that the interviewer didn't press JL on this point.

Unfortunately, this may result in my contribution to the debate being binned, as the interviewer won't want to draw attention to any inadequacy in his technique on this occasion.

I couldn't give a stuff about knowing the number of votes cast for the top 4 in each case, which was the only concession made by JL. I didn't refer to this in my email, as I didn't want to dilute what I consider to be the main point (above).

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards last chance
From: greg stephens
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 01:37 PM

Scrump: the usefulness of knowing anything about the votes cast is it would enable one to make some statistical analysis of what is going on. Clusters are very interesting. And the fifth vote would be the most intriguing, as that is the person/group who has been done out of thousands of quids' worth of free advertising.
    The real info that would be pricless(but we won't get) is the identity(or business background) of those who affected to believe that the song is traditional (by voting for it).

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards last chance
From: AlexB
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 02:20 PM

JL also tried to confuse issues with the White Hare in the tradition, saying "just because there is a documented version of the White Hare somewhere, doesn't mean you can't have different versions of that coming through a different route. Surely that's a true definition of what traditional is."

When emailing my point that Seth's ong was not traditional I also touched upon this saying how the two were not the same song coming through different routes.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards last chance
From: Folkiedave
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 02:23 PM

John Leonard was a professional folk singer when the Watersons were at their height.

He knows better than to believe what he said there. That was my mistake mentioning it. There was a good reason at at the time but I am damned if I can think what it was now!!

Dave

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards last chance
From: AlexB
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 03:33 PM

Dave - You thought people might have been confused and thought Seth's song was the trad White Hare without hearing it.

"It shares a title with a well known traditional song, and that may have confused the judges. But this is clearly not a traditional song, anyone listening to it would know that immediately."

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards last chance
From: AlexB
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 05:11 PM

Scrump asked for a transcript, so I listened to it again and typed it up as best as I was able.

Roger Bolton: I'm not sure if Dylan can be categorised as a folk singer any more. Anyway, despite just issuing his best record in years he hasn't been nominated for the 2007 Radio 2 Folk Awards, which will be held on February the 5th. The Awards, which focus attention on the world of folk music, are voted for by a panel of around 150 broadcasters, folk journalists, festival organisers and agents. These people choose their favourite tracks and artists in different categories, from which a short list is compiled. The panel then votes again on the short list, and the winners are declared on the big night. So far so.. admirable you may think, but David Eyre, a folk fan from Sheffield, thinks their may have been dirty work at the crossroads, since he can't understand how one particular song was short listed in the category "best traditional track".

Dave: The issue is centred on the selection of this one song, Seth Lakeman's "The White Hare". It shares a title with a well known traditional song, and that may have confused the judges. But this is clearly not a traditional song, anyone listening to it would know that immediately.

RB: Would they? Would you? Here is that track, Seth Lakeman's "White Hare".

[clip plays]

David Eyre also thinks that the 150 people who vote on the short lists might not be entirely independent, since many may have been connected with promoting certain records or singers.

Dave: It would be nice if, for instance, we had the number of votes that were cast. I want the Folk Awards to be successful, I want them to be regarded as a quality standard, and I want the Awards to mean something, and by choosing a non-traditional track for the traditional track listing, uh, that's dented that to a certain extent. I just want transparency, and I know a lot of folk fans agree with me.

RB: David Eyre. The producer of the awards is John Leonard of the independent production company Smooth Operations. I asked him first to explain why Seth Lakeman's song appeared in the traditional category.

John Leonard: Seth thinks it's traditional, he's.. he's put it down as traditional on his cd, on both versions of the cd so he's had two chances to think about it.

RB: But you don't just accept his definition, do you? He might think "hey, I'm going to win in that category more than another so I'll call it traditional." I mean you must have objective criteria for it, don't you?

JL: Yes, it... it is a very strong category so I don't think he would think that. I think he would think more in terms financially, and er.. if he called it his own song he'd earn more royalties, and so he's obviously done a lot of hard thinking about it.
Um.. I think.. uh it.. what is a traditional song? I think that's the question you've got to ask, and uh...my opinion is, first of all you don't know the composer, you don't know the person who actually wrote this work. Its perhaps been shaped by many hands, its passed through many minds, many performers have performed it and.. I talked to Seth about it when the question arose and we discussed where he'd got the song from. Now first of all, the words - the story - are a traditional West Country legend. They tell the story of the white hare. The tune Seth heard in a pub when he was a lad. He went home, learnt it and has played it and changed it and altered it a little bit. But he felt that because it had come from so many different sources, he didn't actually know who'd written these words - he couldn't trace it – he decided it was more honest to put down that it was a traditional song rather than to claim that he'd written it. And I think that it is the true definition of what a traditional song is. Just because there is a documented version of "The White Hare" somewhere, doesn't mean that you can't have different versions of that song coming through a different route, surely that's true.. a true definition of what traditional is.

RB: Well... Dave Eyre has another point, he thinks that the 150 people who vote on the short lists might not be entirely independent, and his answer is why not make the process transparent. You know, so for example we.. there.. we would know the numbers of votes cast, first for the nomination and then for the selection that put it first, second or third and how many votes it takes to get nominated and so on.. would you be that transparent?

JL. Um.. possibly. I mean we.. we have about 150..

RB: Ohh. Well what would persuade you, what would persuade you then?

JL: Let me tell you how we do it first of all, 'cause that's not quite accurate. There are about 150 people that we invite to vote, and round about 80% of them do, and they are drawn from people like: broadcasters; journalists; agents; record companies; people who run festivals, peoples whose job it is to make decisions about folk music during their daily..

RB: And can you be sure they are entirely independent?

JL: No, some of them are not entirely independent. That, you know, because obviously if we go to, its a very small community, and so if we go to a record company...uh.. they might vote for their own people. So we did a very interesting exercise this year. We looked at last years results and took out the votes of all the people who could be said to have a vested interest, and it made virtually no difference at all. Uh, people are very honest when they vote.

RB:But if people are very honest, then why not just let it be transparent and give the information, put it on your notice board and then everybody can see who voted for what, why and, presumably, end of controversy.

JL: I don't, the reason that I don't publish a list of the people who vote, because I think it would focus attention on them and the better off performers would be able to lobby for their votes.

RB: Well, how about the compromise, where all you publish is the number of votes cast?

JL: I have absolutely no problem with doing that at all. What I don't, what I..

RB: So you are going to do it? You're going to do that then? So everyone can switch on and look at your noticeboard, you're website and then they'll know.

JL: Let me tell you what I don't want to do, first of all, and that is go beyond the four that are nominated. Because where do you stop? Now if you say, if I want to go down to number ten, would you want to know that you tenth or fifteenth best this year? Or would you prefer to know that you'd just not been voted for? That's how...

RB: Alright, how about votes for the top four then?

JL: I don't see why not.

RB: The producer of the Radio 2 Folk Awards, John Leonard. And he said he would publish those figures on the Radio 2 folk website after the award ceremony, so as not to give away who the out and out front runners are before the big night.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards last chance
From: Folkiedave
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 06:01 PM

Thanks for that Mad Person.......

Dave

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards last chance
From: greg stephens
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 06:15 PM

Very interesting to see John Leonard's words in black and white. For example, his statement that Seth Lakeman's claims on two separate CDs shows that Seth had really thought about it; and was convinced the song should be described as traditional. Now John Leonard knows as well as I do that Seth Lakeman has subsequently withdrawn this claim, and the single version of the song is credited to S Lakeman. So why didn't he mention this very relevant fact? Because it totally destroys his argument, that's why. But I really can't see what JL is up: surely he was aware people would listen to his staemnt, and point out the discrepancies?