|
14 Mar 10 - 08:02 AM (#2863829) Subject: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,beachcomber As one "isolated" from the scene for some time now I have , nevertheless, been reading some "mutterings" in the media about the beginnings of a "New" Revival of interest in Folk Music in the UK. Can it be true ? is it necessary ? wouldn't it be great ? Of course I realise that it is music of the genre "Americana" or "Old Time American " that is in question but , look what happened when the last surge of interest in that music began ? |
|
14 Mar 10 - 08:11 AM (#2863837) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Richard Bridge I may not have sen what you have seen Beachcomber, but what I have seen written as comment about "the rise of folk" seems mostly to be based in the apparent fact that there are again to be seen young women with floaty dresses writing wifty-wafty songs and playing them on acoustic guitar. The Press does not much do accurate research these days. |
|
14 Mar 10 - 08:15 AM (#2863839) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) This doesn't belong in BS! Is it true? Well it certainly seems so.. Is it necessary? Depends if you considers what hits the headlines or top ten important. Wouldn't it be great? Depends which way it goes in my humble. If we end up with a few years where trendy young folk bands are popular for a while, then the genre simply disappears once again.. then nyah. If it generates greater public interest in traditional musics in the long term, then yep. IMO |
|
14 Mar 10 - 08:47 AM (#2863848) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,beachcomber Sorry Crow Sister, what my 2nd question was meant to discover was whether Mudcatters think that a "Revival" is required or is there already a sufficiently high level of interest in "folk" music. ? But, weren't people like "Ian Campbell & Co ", "Steeleye Span", "Sweeney's Men", and so many other great "combos" also "trendy young folk bands" back when ? |
|
14 Mar 10 - 08:57 AM (#2863851) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Acorn4 It's in all probability due to a film or TV programnme. This happened with "Oh, Brother, Where Art Thou?" The music had always been there but it took the fad created by the film to raise the awareness of it. |
|
14 Mar 10 - 09:00 AM (#2863852) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) "what my 2nd question was meant to discover was whether Mudcatters think that a "Revival" is required or is there already a sufficiently high level of interest in "folk" music. ?" Sufficiently high level of public interest in acoustic guitar music by contemporary songer / songwriters or traditional folk music? To the former, well I think all commercial and popular modern music should succeed or fail on it's own merits - whatever the genre, 'folk' included. To the latter, no I don't think there is sufficiently high interest in it - in England at least. Simply because most people don't know it's there. "But, weren't people like "Ian Campbell & Co ", "Steeleye Span", "Sweeney's Men", and so many other great "combos" also "trendy young folk bands" back when ?" Sure, but I'm not sure how that relates to my comment about another popular revival potentially going the same way as the last? |
|
14 Mar 10 - 09:01 AM (#2863853) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Jack Blandiver They're always wittering about this & it all depends on what is meant by Folk - generally, alas, not a lot - just more AO/MOR acoustic shite then I'll be happy to continue tuning into Tim Westwood for something with genuine Tradition and Passion and Relevance and Exellence. HOWEVER... Take Heart! If 1903 represents Year Zero for Revival #1 (that seminal-seed visionary encounter between Cecil Sharp & John England in the mists of our green & pleasant cultural dreaming) and 1956 represents Year Zero for Revival #2 (when Baby-Boomers hip to the glories of Leadbelly, Guthrie, Holcombe et al began to look to the British source of the American Folk Boom) then by my reckoning this means we're just about on the nail for Revival #3. Already I think of this as The Post Revival, where we might sweep away the flaccid conceits of Revivals 1 & 2 (with few heroically significant exceptions only going to prove rules - Jim Eldon & Peter Bellamy to name but two) and face The Traditional Archive altogether AFRESH & Entirely Unencumbered by anything resembling Folk Music. We must become Born-Again and stand in Naked Humility before the brilliance of the Old Singers, Musicians and their Songs and go down on bended knee in reverential awe of what they represented which was so cynically pissed upon by the bourgeois / middle-class prissy parlour & MOR niceties of revivals #1 & #2. The Post-Revival will cut loose from Folk and head into hitherto uncharted waters where folkies fear to tread in dread of sirens and serpents whilst adhering 100% to the perfect principles of Traditional Song & Balladry... Enough already! But hey, it's okay to dream isn't it? |
|
14 Mar 10 - 09:13 AM (#2863857) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) SO'P, that sounds dangerously like a revolutionary manifesto.. |
|
14 Mar 10 - 09:16 AM (#2863859) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) ..you'll never headline Sidmouth with talk like that. |
|
14 Mar 10 - 09:21 AM (#2863860) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: The Borchester Echo a revolutionary manifesto Steady on. But better than his usual tripe anyway. I almost agree with some of it. But the entire premise is flawed. I wrote somewhere else (can't remember which thread) when I got in last night after an excellent set from Matt Quinn and Tom Moore, combined age 35. I don't think for a minute they consider themselves part of a "3rd revival". The glorious traditional tunes they play have always been there, obviously. All that's needed is to notice them and play them well, as they do. |
|
14 Mar 10 - 09:29 AM (#2863862) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,beachcomber Would you not accept, C.S. , that those "trendy young folk bands" ; that we have mentioned ; did play some role in raising the profile of an older type of music , by bringing their versions of "folk music" to a young, wider audience (Adapted to their accoustic guitars though it may have been - but isn't adaptation the very strength of traditional music ?) Many of this " trendy young audience " may well have become the present day supporters of the "true" tradition that you obviously love and cherish ? |
|
14 Mar 10 - 09:59 AM (#2863874) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) Beachcomber, yes the revival inspired a generation of traditionalists, and luckily for me many of them are here and generously willing to impart from their considerable experience and knowledge-base (I've had shed-loads of useful stuff thrown at me in the post by some of the grumpy awld gets here). The unfortunate thing I see with the revival however, is that the long-term consequence of some of it's (IMO) confused aims and aspirations has resulted in the generation of an entire multi-tentacled genre of - although very pleasant - 'folk-like' music which has effectively occluded the traditional material itself, from public view. And especially from view of the generations that have followed, such as me & my peers. I don't know how really popular traditional music can ever be - in the long term. Or indeed that it aught necessarly to be so. Unlike most modern acoustic 'folk-inspired' music, traditional songs (which is my personal area of interest) are *challenging*. The melodies are less so, but some of them go on and on forever, some deal with very taboo and frankly f*cked-up stuff, some are just plain odd or tough to resolve intellectually, and so-on. Not all of them, of course. Only the best of it.. ;-) As such this stuff will probably always be an aquired taste, and indeed all the more rewarding for that. Like Stilton or Lime Pickle, both of which I love. But what matters most to my mind, isn't how commercially successful folk music is, but simply how readily *practically accessible* traditional material is to anyone who might potentially find it of some interest or relevance to them. If this new revival notion, encourages people to check out and discover some of this stuff and maybe get drawn in by it, that's all good. Though I'd like to see it stay afloat next time - free from the fortunes of popular commercial folk, so that those who might be attracted will be able to find it. |
|
14 Mar 10 - 10:18 AM (#2863879) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,beachcomber How very well argued Crow Sister, I am happy to let our discussion rest with your "philosophy" on the matter. |
|
14 Mar 10 - 10:23 AM (#2863882) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Folkiedave When I go to festivals I find loads of young people playing music to a high standard. Some are on the stage and some are in the bars. That's what I call the third revival. I believe the current interest of folk is unlikely to more than slow down a bit. Some of them are also good singers. Tonight I am off to a session where there will be (I reckon - one can never be certain) lots of young people. It's a music session so probably not many songs. I first got involved around 1960 and in those days we were all into singing (except me - I know my limitations) nowadays it is mostly an instrumental revival (IMHO), though there are some good singers around too. Take a look at the front of the latest issue of the EDS magazine. Hannah is 22 and Sam 21. They play in a variety of combinations, especially Sam who is in Bellowhead, Kerfuffle, Fay Hield Trio, Remnant Kings, Hannah and Sam. As well as Hannah and Sam and Kerfuffle, Hannah is in the Demon Barber Road Show and a newer all-female group Lady Maisry. Virtually everything they do would come under the broad heading of "traditional". Of course I realise that it is music of the genre "Americana" or "Old Time American " that is in question but , look what happened when the last surge of interest in that music began? Not sure what you mean here!!? care to expand? |
|
14 Mar 10 - 10:34 AM (#2863886) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,beachcomber Good man Dave, I just meant that the "Revival" of interest in American "Folk" music/song, typified by the Kingston Trio say, of the late 50s in the USA seemed to spark off a renewed interest on this side the Atlantic also ? That "Folk Revival" of which I read recently also mentioned that bands of young people were playing "Old Time American Music" in the UK, and that it might again spark off something similar ?? |
|
14 Mar 10 - 10:45 AM (#2863893) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,Shimrod I note that there are two 'folk' CDs reviewed in the music section of today's 'Independent on Sunday' (UK newspaper). Neither of them are by people I have ever heard of and, after reading the reviews, I cannot see how either could possibly be classed as 'folk'. From the descriptions given they appear to be indistiguishable from the poppy stuff in the adjacent 'rock' and 'jazz' reviews. I suspect that the reviewers get send loads and loads of similar CDs. They then pick a handful, at random, to review and consult some chicken entrails when deciding what labels to slap on them. |
|
14 Mar 10 - 11:05 AM (#2863902) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Richard Bridge What are teh names of the guilty parties, Shimrod? THen we can consult the entrails of Mr GOogle. |
|
14 Mar 10 - 11:13 AM (#2863908) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: The Borchester Echo Looking at the Indy reviews, I suppose Mumford & Sons might be debatable (if you must) but surely no-one would dispute Lou Rhodes? No-one that is but an anorak-clad, obsessive labeller. |
|
14 Mar 10 - 11:20 AM (#2863916) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) BEcho: "The glorious traditional tunes they play have always been there, obviously. All that's needed is to notice them and play them well" Yeppers. |
|
14 Mar 10 - 12:00 PM (#2863941) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,Suibhne (Astray) But the entire premise is flawed. I wrote somewhere else (can't remember which thread) when I got in last night after an excellent set from Matt Quinn and Tom Moore, combined age 35. I don't think for a minute they consider themselves part of a "3rd revival". The glorious traditional tunes they play have always been there, obviously. All that's needed is to notice them and play them well, as they do. Always nice to see Comrade Easby et al missing the point by a million merry county miles as usual. |
|
14 Mar 10 - 12:17 PM (#2863949) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: The Borchester Echo My point is that there isn't a "3rd Revival" in progress but a continuing tradition, and a resurgence of interest spurred by excellent performances such as that witnessed last night. You on the other hand, in maundering on about a nebulous "post revival" were saying nothing whatsoever and muddying the waters for no apparent purpose. You mean you and / or the OP had a point? What was it? |
|
14 Mar 10 - 01:03 PM (#2863976) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,Suibhne (Astray) You mean you... had a point? What was it? With all due respect, Comrade Easby, you were agreeing with my point a couple of posts back & now you're asking what it was! In brief - I see no problem with the session scene; I never have seen a problem with the session scene; all my life (48 ever accelerating years & counting) I've known hundreds of great traditional players & hundreds of great traditional sessions and long may it thrive - which it will do anyway, regardless, but, saving the occasional song sung with due all-due-respect, it doesn't cross over (much) (if at all) into the Song Scene. My Post-Revival Polemic back there is to do with redetermining the aesthetical mire into which Traditional Song has fallen and taking a fresh look in the light of The Actual Tradition rather than the increasingly wearying orthodoxies of The Revival. The other point is that age doesn't come into it, and neither does so-called musicianship; drooling over youth & increasingly slick musical vituosity obfuscates the essential beauty of what The Tradition was all about. What matters is passion and a long-term commitment to the essential humanity of the craft which might allow some of the hitherto marked eccentricity, inventiveness & idiosyncasy (factors which determined The Tradition just as The Tradition determined them) to flourish and shine through. This has nothing to do with your pet GEFFs by the way, perish the thought, just placing a little value on the noise aesthetic which seems to have all but vanished from the music. I write this whilst listening to Leadbelly singing John Hardy on repeat play, very loud indeed. |
|
14 Mar 10 - 01:29 PM (#2863992) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: The Borchester Echo What I said was that small flashes penetrated the fog of chuntering and I felt I could almost agree with a little of what may have been glimmering. Though what the OP was on about in the first place remains obscure and almost certainly without point. However it now seems clearer that you are merely on a tired old anti-intellectual rant. "So-called musicianship" (as you put it) is to be despised by you when the exponents don't have enough mud on their boots and might even (horrors) have read their tunes in a book. Bollocks. Dylan does a good John Hardy. However, I'm listening to William Mittel fiffle tunes. Quite loud. |
|
14 Mar 10 - 01:45 PM (#2864000) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,Suibhne (Astray) Bollocks. Quite, Comrade Easby. I actually find Dylan physically painful to listen to, but I've been having a epiphany with Woodie Guthrie over the last few days, especially this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKWGAGPy_kw |
|
14 Mar 10 - 02:10 PM (#2864009) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,beachcomber Friends, I wasn't trying to make any point, far less "score" any. I merely asked if there was any substance in an article that I recently read (somewhere -sorry haven't a reference) that seemed to be suggesting that new young bands,in the U.K. (and some that had been playing away in semi-secret) were going back to old time American music for their material. This they described as another "Revival" to match that of the 50s the songs from which era were again being used Since I am no longer able to involve myself in the music scene and do not live in the UK I am interested to know.That's all ! I love most kinds of music and used to be an avid collector when I was able to afford it. Why obscure ? |
|
14 Mar 10 - 02:16 PM (#2864011) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) "My Post-Revival Polemic back there is to do with redetermining the aesthetical mire into which Traditional Song has fallen and taking a fresh look in the light of The Actual Tradition rather than the increasingly wearying orthodoxies of The Revival." Contemporary theatre productions of classic works of drama, are no-where like as stylistically predictable as the equivalent contemporay treatments meeted out on traditional song. In fact the only art-form I can think of in the U.K. where a similarly retentive approach may be witnessed, is architecture (thanks for that Charlie). I wonder why that is? |
|
14 Mar 10 - 02:50 PM (#2864028) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) I'd like to add to my last comment - as someone who started out basically copying revival recordings last year - that I'm as guilty as anyone in that regard. |
|
14 Mar 10 - 02:57 PM (#2864034) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Jack Blandiver The curse of the Post-Modern! As a mate once muttered in my ear at a Folk Club before heading off the bar never to seen again: "The reactionary aesthetics of folk music stand in diametric opposition to the radical political aspirations of the proponents." Or words to that effect. |
|
14 Mar 10 - 03:04 PM (#2864038) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: The Sandman New Revival,nothing wrong with that as long as its not spearheaded by Griffin and the BNP |
|
14 Mar 10 - 03:16 PM (#2864043) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) "New Revival,nothing wrong with that as long as its not spearheaded by Griffin and the BNP" Amen. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 05:12 AM (#2864316) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Folkiedave recently read (somewhere -sorry haven't a reference) that seemed to be suggesting that new young bands,in the U.K. (and some that had been playing away in semi-secret) were going back to old time American music for their material. This they described as another "Revival" to match that of the 50s the songs from which era were again being used Since I am no longer able to involve myself in the music scene and do not live in the UK I am interested to know Well I reckon I keep up reasonably well and the short answer is no. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 05:21 AM (#2864320) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Ruth Archer Dave: Noah and the Whale. Mumford and Son. And a host of other soundalike and spinoff bands. Not to mention a couple of clubs round and about. There is definitely a Radio 1/2-friendly strand of British acoustic music at the moment which takes its inspiration from Americana moreso than from British traditions, but it's a trend. And because it's trendy, I don't think it will last particularly (though some of it is very good). It's got very little to do with the English revival of the past 10 - 15 years. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 06:53 AM (#2864362) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: theleveller I'm a big fan of Mumford & Sons but I think you'd be hard-pressed to describe it as folk, American or otherwise. As for them heading a new folk revival - if they are it's passed me by. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 07:13 AM (#2864370) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: The Borchester Echo That's what I was implying by "obscure", later questioned by the OP. Sure, there's a bit of Mumfordy American-based pop around. It's any connection to the resurgence of English trad that is "obscure" or indeed of any substance whatsoever. It's all quite nice, but entirely unrelated to any "English Folk Revival", real or imagined. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 07:38 AM (#2864383) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,Spleen Cringe M&S, N&TW and so on are fairly mainstream pop/rock acts with one foot in indie/alternative music and a nodding acquaintaince with "folk" music. However, from a marketing/media/pigeonholing point of view they are as likely to be called "folk" as anything, because they play some acoustic instruments and they have a vaguely pastoral vibe to some of their stuff. Neither band - nor much of the stuff in a similar vein - is to my taste, not because it's not real folk or anything as crass as that, but because it's more R2-friendly, anodyne folk-lite destined for the coffee tables of those who find Keane and Coldplay too edgy. I'm not particularly interested in the concept of a "third revival" except as an amusing numerological parlour game. What I am interested in is people who are making music rooted deeply in tradition (including original music with all the right reference points) ploughing their own furrow and shaking off some of the mores and conventions around how traditional music should be arranged and presented in 2010. There are some brilliant singers and players on the traditional music scene, but I can't help feeling the general trend is towards a revival-lite, increasingly uniform sound which doesn't really challenge or take the listener outside of a fairly safe and comfortable folkzone. I'd draw a parallel with rock & pop - most of what I hear I wouldn't touch with a bargepole, but there have always been a core of artists who have not been afraid of taking a more exploratory and less mainstream approach. In the past - particularly in the 1970s - the folk revival has also had this, be it Shirley Collins, Mr Fox, Peter Bellamy, Ray Fisher or Pentangle. I'm not really sure who their equivalent are in the current decade. I can think of a handful of people I would put in a similar class (and a slightly bigger group who seem to straddle, to some degree or another, the new mainstream revival sound and something with a bit more bite), but I also think that many of the current crop of younger singers and players of traditional music are happy with an increasingly codified sound. That's not to slag them off or question in any way their skills and talents and commitment to what they are doing, but simply to comment that as a listener I rarely pick up much of the sort of alt vibe I find with the sort of rock, jazz, non-folk acoustic music or Americana I also listen to. Could I also add that I'm not talking here about (for instance) grafting on dadrock-style stadiumtastic drumming to conventional 2010-style trad, but something a little more intangible and subtle in approach and attitude. And please understand that this is just my personal opinion in terms of what I want to hear as an enthusiastic and discerning (!) music listener. There's surely room for this sort of thing too. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 07:39 AM (#2864384) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,Ralphie To return to the OPs question. I don't see that a Third revival (whatever that may be) is actually happening. Certainly any Americana influence isn't very evident in the UK. What is happening is that a lot of young people are finding the music for themselves. Quite ofen by associating with other young people, a lot of whom are the children of established artists, and have therefore been surrounded by the music all their lives. Try and imagine Eliza Carthys upbringing. Not only parents who performed, but an aunt and uncle too..(not to mention probably lots of other singers and musicians popping by and staying over whilst on tour. Hardly surprising that the music would just seep in, by Osmosis. Also, Degree courses like Newcastle, are producing a whole raft of new musicians and singers. So, you could call it a revival, to me it's more of a continuation. The only change is the decreasing relevance of what we would call the "Folk Club" Pre the internet era, The FC was really the only place to find this kind of music. But nowadays, access is available everywhere. Yes of course some clubs survive, and some are brilliant at it, but the new generation seem to doing it another way. So, not dying.....Just changing, as always. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 07:54 AM (#2864389) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Folkiedave Pre the internet era, The FC was really the only place to find this kind of music. Well I would hate to disagree with such a distinguished musician and babe magnet - but I think what you mean is from the hey day of folk clubs. Pre-(Say about 1955) - there were no folk clubs. You could always hear it in the pub! (Which is where I was last night). Now that is news. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 08:07 AM (#2864392) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,Ralphie OK Mr Pedant! Thats what I meant, and you know it! Hear it in a pub? I wouldn't frequent pubs don't you know... |
|
15 Mar 10 - 08:15 AM (#2864398) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: The Borchester Echo Long before I'd ever heard the term "f*lk" I was finding music in books as well as hearing it from the pub floor while grandad played it. He'd never heard of "f*lk clubs" yet had played for a pre-WW1 sword team. I got a nice little song about Junipers and Gentians from an old library book and inflicted my "discovery" far and wide till someone pointed out it was actually a mélange of Prof F J Child's Nos 1 & 2 hits. Nowadays such balls-ups can be avoided in two clicks of a mouse (though often aren't). What is on the up is far more accurate attribution and recognition of provencne which is a Good Thing. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 09:33 AM (#2864455) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Jack Blandiver but I also think that many of the current crop of younger singers and players of traditional music are happy with an increasingly codified sound. When I recently expressed the opinion that Jim Causley's music was tidy, well-ordered musical MOR blandness for the well-behaved Folk Fan insider for whom the lawlessness of the feral wilderness is anathema (see HERE) I was roundly denounced & openly insulted by an apoplectic Joan Crump - hitherto a Mudcat friend who hasn't had a good word to say about me publicly or privately since. As Spleen says, and as I pointed out at the time HERE this wasn't to slag anyone off, just point out what is, in any case, a salient truth regarding the nature of Folk Music which stands in very stark contrast to the provenance of such material for which Comrade Easby rightly calls for a recognition of in an above post. But provenance is bigger than a few well-sourced musical notes reduced to musical blandness by the favoured initiates into the heady realms of corporate Folk Celebrity. Once again I'm listening to Leadbelly singing John Hardy, even louder than last time. Would that others did likewise. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 11:49 AM (#2864532) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Ruth Archer That's because, Spinachy, I felt your comments about Jim Causley were a nasty, bad-tempered strop, which were couched within a thread about whether his music ought to be available for people to steal on line. I do think much of your posturing about Your own "feral" music is a lot of self-regarding bollocks, but it wasn't until you publicly sniped at a very talented young performer (IMHO) that I said it out loud. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 11:56 AM (#2864535) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Ruth Archer Oh, and in quoting yourself above, you forgot the bit where you said you'd had to turn off Jim's music after 90 seconds because of "consequent nausea". That gives rather a more complete picture of the mean-spiritedness to which I was responding. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 12:08 PM (#2864540) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: The Borchester Echo If there is a 3rd wave English folk revival, Jim Causley is surely right up there in the vanguard. Sean O'Greenveggie seems to base his mean-spirited view on a recorded video clip and not bothered to see him live or find out what he does. This is a young man who revived wassailing in his home village of Whimple and takes endless trouble to seek out unusual material and collaborate with a variety of fine musicians. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 12:11 PM (#2864541) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Don(Wyziwyg)T The point surely is that we now have the advantage of 20/20 hindsight. We've been there, and seen the pitfalls. This is the time when we should all be getting together, finding venues, and ensuring that it is we who decide how they are run. Don't know about anyone else, but if I were to run one, it would have a solid basis of traddies from day one, not to discourage outsiders, but to welcome, enlighten, and educate. Job Done! Don T. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 12:33 PM (#2864552) Subject: RE: BS: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,beachcomber Borchester, My question was not about "English" Folk music but about "Folk Music" in the UK, as you can see if you re-read my O.P. Where is the problem ? |
|
15 Mar 10 - 12:46 PM (#2864557) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: theleveller "This is a young man who revived wassailing in his home village of Whimple" Wassailing in Whimple! What a wonderful image this conjours up. I have a vision of Jim at the head of a group of extremely rowdy nuns, carousing round orchards after consuming large quantities of cider. Bet he could write a hilarious anecdote about it. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 12:48 PM (#2864558) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: The Borchester Echo Where is the problem? Problems so far include a conflation of Americana with Old Timey (which are absolutely NOT the same thing), O'Spinachchops slagging off a fine young performer and all who would put him at the forefront of any "revival" (even an imagined one) and the introduction of the absurd, divisive term "traddies" which is generally interpreted as a term of abuse for the out-of-touch. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 12:50 PM (#2864561) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: The Borchester Echo Bet he could write a hilarious anecdote about it Certainly he's written a song about though it doesn't involve nuns. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 01:03 PM (#2864574) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST RA says "I felt your comments about Jim Causley were a nasty, bad-tempered strop couched within a thread about whether his music ought to be available for people to steal on line." But in fact, SO'P had already said "I described his music as tidy, well-ordered musical MOR blandness because that's precisely what it is. There is nothing nasty in me saying this, nor yet do I think he should roll over and allow his music to be pirated if he can stop it." (my emphasis). ****************************************************************** So, SO'P described Jim Causley's music as "tidy, well-ordered musical MOR blandness." RA then said of SO'P, "Your own 'feral' music is a lot of self-regarding bollocks." It doesn't take a genius to spot the difference in tone and intent between the two comments. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 01:10 PM (#2864577) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: The Borchester Echo Not being a genius, I'll clarify the difference in tone and intent: O'Spinachy was being gratuitously offensive, and wrong. Her in the Ambridge cowshed was making fair comment, and is right. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 01:23 PM (#2864584) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Jack Blandiver That's because, Spinachy, I felt your comments about Jim Causley were a nasty, bad-tempered strop, In which case your feelings were wrong, Joan - as I was simply expressing an opinion within the context of an already over-heated discussion, in which I was trying to deal with all sorts of issues & misunderstandings arising instead of just leaving it to fester. My opinion of Jim Causeley's music was not in the least bit mean spirited, but a fair & good humoured assessment of the sort of remove Folk now operates from the Tradition it supposedly derives. It was not a nasty, bad-tempered strop, but a fair and respectful assessment of a musical approach which is, I feel, entirely at odds with the nature of Traditional Music as I've experienced & loved it these past 48 years. If you like such music, which is your right & entitlement, then it doesn't surprise me that you don't like what I do, and only in the fact that you dismiss what you clearly have no understanding of as being self-regarding bollocks does it bother me. You are, of course, entitled to hold that opinion (however inaccurate & malicious as it might be) but for a person in your elevated position to thus publicly (and privately) denounce me is, I feel, an abuse of influence. After all, it was not you who I criticised, but the nature of a musical approach embodied in the work of a successful artist in the light of which your response was, in two words, somewhat worrying. * This is a young man who revived wassailing in his home village of Whimple To quote by erstwhile buddy Joan Crump: Why does every aspect of that sentence depress me so much? (from HERE, to give it context, which chimes in quite nicely, I feel, with the above). |
|
15 Mar 10 - 01:36 PM (#2864593) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Ruth Archer Spinachy, Would that be before or after you said it made you want to throw up? |
|
15 Mar 10 - 01:43 PM (#2864598) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: the Folk Police Your own "feral" music is a lot of self-regarding bollocks Joan, can we have your permission to use that quote on the publicity material for Sean & Rachel's forthcoming album, please? Best, The Folk Police |
|
15 Mar 10 - 01:49 PM (#2864604) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Ruth Archer I couldn't care less. But wouldn't it be nice if all the smart-arse guests had the bollocks (self-regarding or otherwise) to use their names? |
|
15 Mar 10 - 01:53 PM (#2864609) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Les in Chorlton I go out of the front door, I walk to the pub, I get a drink and sing some songs, so do other people. We drink some more beer and sing some more songs. Then we go home revived. Is this the third ir fourth revival? L in C |
|
15 Mar 10 - 01:59 PM (#2864611) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Mavis Enderby "but for a person in your elevated position" I thought we were all equal on here? Just a thought Pete. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 01:59 PM (#2864612) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,JM "As one "isolated" from the scene for some time now I have , nevertheless, been reading some "mutterings" in the media about the beginnings of a "New" Revival of interest in Folk Music in the UK." By "mutterings", I think the OP might be referring to some of the publicity for the "Looking for a New England" trip to New York and SXSW festival. For the uninitiated, the line-up includes The Unthanks, Jim Moray, Jackie Oates, Gaderene (with Laurel Swift, Nick Wyke and Matt Norman), Olivia Chaney and The Trembling Bells, i.e representatives from most strands of what could be called "folk music", whatever you're into. So while its not a new thing to people in the UK, this is showcasing in US what has been building up in England for 10-15 years. Only a fool (implication deliberate) could deny that theres something happening at the moment, whether you approve of it or not. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 02:01 PM (#2864614) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Ruth Archer "This is a young man who revived wassailing in his home village of Whimple To quote by erstwhile buddy Joan Crump: Why does every aspect of that sentence depress me so much? (from HERE, to give it context, which chimes in quite nicely, I feel, with the above)." In my always humble opinion, the two things are not the same. It's all about context. One is about the resident of a village reviving a local custom. Personally, I don't really have a problem with that. The other is about people who have nothing to do with a particular place taking its local custom, turning into something else completely, and performing it in another location. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 02:05 PM (#2864617) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Ruth Archer Me too, Burton Coggles. And I don't see why me saying what I did, in response to Spinachy saying that Jim Causley's music made him want to throw up, is out of order. After all, Sean: maybe you simply "have no understanding of" what Jim does. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 02:11 PM (#2864622) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Goose Gander Folk, like love, is a many-splintered thing. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 02:33 PM (#2864636) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,cardboard cutout Before this thread degenerates into a "Jim Causley defence-fest", I'd re-iterate what Guest JM posted a few posts above : was the original poster prompted to make the post by U.S. coverage of the "Looking for a New England" tour to SXSW Festival in Texas, and New York? Catch that, if you're in the vicinity and you'll know where U.K. folk /traditional music has been going for the last 10 years and see a representative sample. And there are lots more of these young exponents at home here in the UK |
|
15 Mar 10 - 02:38 PM (#2864641) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: glueman Quite like Jim Causely and his music me'sen and Jackie Oates, Spiers and Boden and find Rachel Unthank's voice interesting. I could listen to Liza Carthy all day. There's a disparity between the Guardian friendly way they're presented, as young, gifted and folk without the flatulence and body odour, and the reality. They have all entertained me at different times. If there is a modern revival the engine of it may well be Newcastle's University course. We need more like it, folk removed from vested interests and strong opinions and delivered in an intelligent way. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 02:47 PM (#2864649) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,cardboard cutout "If there is a modern revival the engine of it may well be Newcastle's University course." Well no, I don't think so. It is much wider than that, and pre-dates the Newcastle course, by a small time. Of the people you mention above, it is only one who attended the Newcastle course, too |
|
15 Mar 10 - 02:57 PM (#2864656) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: The Borchester Echo It is of course good to take the opportunity to big up "Looking For A New England but this was apparently not the inspiration for the original post since it states "it is music of the genre "Americana" or "Old Time American" that is in question". Whatever that means. If USAans are expecting pale imitations of the Garth Wotsit version of country pop it is to be hoped that they will be surprised if not amazed. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 03:00 PM (#2864660) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: glueman Beachcomber, the OP, wrote about recent mutterings in the media. I take it he's referring to the new wave of folk artists that appear to be interesting the chatterati, rather than Odetta or Walter Pardon. I don't think there's been a decade since the romantic era that has lacked a folk revival of some kind, there was certainly one on the back of the Pogues popularity and bands like Steeleye Span. The tradition scrubs up rather well in a nice frock or a handsome face. Whether it'll break through into mass media who can say? Given the plethora of academic course subjects and the accepted role of education in classical music it's surprising there aren't more in traditional music. There are plenty in other traditional other craft subjects. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 03:08 PM (#2864673) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: The Sandman so this new revival has nothing to do with the EFDSS.or does it? am I allowed to mention the EFDSS? |
|
15 Mar 10 - 03:18 PM (#2864682) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Folknacious It is of course good to take the opportunity to big up "Looking For A New England" Yes, I'd have thought that was exactly what some people would have equated with a "new folk revival of folk music in england" as per the thread title and said "mutterings in the media", rather than a couple of indie band with banjos. Except that I'm also rather in agreement with what Ms Borchester wrote somewhere up above about it being a continuing process rather than a staged, stop-start one with number signs. I never liked the term "revival" anyway as it implied that the old tradition was a stiff, clearly patent nonsense. I always thought the term "revival was a bit of self-aggrandisement by MacColl and co, to make themselves seem more important in the schemes and tides of history. Looking back now, they seem more like a log jam in the stream. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 03:22 PM (#2864684) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Jack Blandiver Spinachy, Would that be before or after you said it made you want to throw up? Before - in the same post in fact - see HERE - although if you are going quote me, kindly do so without twisting my words. What I actually said was though I had to switch off at the instrumental break at 1.35 on account of consequent nausea. More spinach I think... . Good humoured as I say. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 03:58 PM (#2864708) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,leeneia Folknacious, I'm with you on not liking the term 'revival.' Media people need to create the impression that they know everything that's going on. Therefore, when they suddenly realize that somebody has been making fine music without their awareness and their permission, they label it a revival. They don't want to admit that the music has been going on quietly and constantly while they were focussing attention on pop stars. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 05:31 PM (#2864769) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: The Sandman Except that I'm also rather in agreement with what Ms Borchester wrote somewhere up above about it being a continuing process rather than a staged, stop-start one with number signs. I never liked the term "revival" anyway as it implied that the old tradition was a stiff, clearly patent nonsense. I always thought the term "revival was a bit of self-aggrandisement by MacColl and co, to make themselves seem more important in the schemes and tides of history. Looking back now, they seem more like a log jam in the stream. MacColl, acheived much more than you ever will. log jam in a stream,what a way to dismiss someone who has written sonme of our finest songs, who played amajor part in the production of the radio ballads,and who was an excellent performer, put a sock in it[your gob] folknacious you are an insignificant speck of dust compared to MacColl . |
|
15 Mar 10 - 06:09 PM (#2864792) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Phil Edwards Your own "feral" music is a lot of self-regarding bollocks Before this passes into 'catlore, can I point out that what RA actually said was much of your posturing about Your own "feral" music is a lot of self-regarding bollocks which is a bit different. (Of course, RA may have misspoken - she may in fact believe that Suibhne's "feral" music is self-regarding bollocks in its own right, or indeed that all of Suibhne's posturing about his own "feral" music (and not merely much of it) falls into that category. But she didn't say so.) yz aye, Pedant O'Radish |
|
15 Mar 10 - 06:32 PM (#2864815) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Folknacious put a sock in it[your gob] folknacious you are an insignificant speck of dust compared to MacColl Dick by name . . . |
|
15 Mar 10 - 06:53 PM (#2864832) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Ruth Archer Cheers, Pip. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 07:09 PM (#2864841) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,beachcomber Seeing that my original query has "sparked" a good old debate (incl not a little unpleasantness here and there) I have unearthed the source. Luckily I still had my copy of the Sunday Times Supplement "CULTURE" for the 7th Mar 2010. Unfortunately I am not able to reproduce it for this forum but the article , a report, is headlined "Hoedown is hot, man" with a sub heading reading "A new breed of country bands is giving authentic Americana music a British spin. Tim Cooper reports : " I hope that many of you will be able to access the report and then, ....."have at it sirs/madams". |
|
15 Mar 10 - 07:22 PM (#2864852) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Richard Bridge Oh dear, that depresses me far more. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 08:34 PM (#2864882) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Folknacious I'm now confused, guest beachcomber. . Your topic subject line was "New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England" but now it seems to be about country music/ Americana. This sounds more like the mid-80s "cowpunk" thing, the Boothill Foot-Tappers, Men They Couldn't Hang, Yip Yip Coyote and so on around the time of the launch of the Pogues. It was great fun but fizzled out as quickly as it came and was nothing to do with any so-called folk revivals. It looks like history is repeating itself right now then. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 08:46 PM (#2864886) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,beachcomber Well I am sorry for the confusion caused. I had no idea that I was putting my head in a hornets nest like this. I had thought that informality was the way of the Mudcat but I will obviously need to make sure of my definitions in future. The article confused me also but I used only the "terms" that Mr Cooper used and I hoped that I would get clarification from Mudcatters. I have absolutely no axe to grind as to the various definitions of "Folk", "Americana", "Old Time" "Pop" , "revival" or what you will. I merely sought the opinion of Mudcatters on this latest musical phenomenon in the UK. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 09:14 PM (#2864907) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: brezhnev Cheers for the info about the article, beachcomber. I'm sure the confusion gave quite a lot of people a jolly interlude in what otherwise might have been a dreary weekend. And it won't make any difference that it was all about Brit country. They'll carry on abusing each other anyway. In any case, you just prompted me to check out some of the offending alt-anglicana acts on myspace. So thanks for that. Pretty uninspiring, I thought. |
|
15 Mar 10 - 09:43 PM (#2864921) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Don(Wyziwyg)T ""and the introduction of the absurd, divisive term "traddies" which is generally interpreted as a term of abuse for the out-of-touch."" My apologies, Diane, for offending your all too sensitive feelings. The word was shorthand, used to make more concise and understandable, the message which you, in your righteous indignation, failed to notice. No change there then? Don T. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 12:35 AM (#2864982) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: The Borchester Echo "Traddie" is an absurd and divisive expression, generally interpreted as a term of abuse for the out-of-touch. Its use fails to make anything either concise or understandable. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 03:31 AM (#2865021) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Ruth Archer beachcomber: as I remarked earlier in the thread, there is a bit of a phenomenon at the moment, the most successful examples being Mumford and Sons and Noah and the Whale. Both of these bands have a distinctly American acoustic vibe (Mumford being, in my opinion, more influenced by alt-country and Americana, while Noah and the Whale seem more influenced by things like early Poi Dog Pondering). There was an article in the Guardian only a few weeks ago which focused on Trevor and Hannah Lou (who run The Lantern Society folk club at the Betsy Trotwood pub in London). This article noted the current trend of village hall gigs, but again focused on alt-folk. This is a club that's cropped up in a village hall near me: The Sunday Saloon, Quorn I'm not really sure why any of this should be depressing. It's something that's happening amongst largely young people, and they're making their own acoustic, folk-influenced music. It may not be the folk music that some UK mudcatters would listen to or wish that young people were emulating, but that's what happens when you hand over the means of production to the workers. :) Fair play to them. I would still emphasise that I don't think this more recent phenomenon is particularly related or relevant to the English resurgence of the past 10 - 15 years. It seems to be something that's happening in parallel, will achieve a certain level of BBC radio airplay, and may well not endure in the same way. The only thing I would object to in the Sunday Times article is the inclusion of the gloriously bonkers Mr Plow with the rest of the current alt-country lot. This guy belongs to no fashionable music trend - he is a true one-off. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 04:38 AM (#2865049) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Jack Blandiver Pedant O'Radish Sycophant O' Radish more like, Phil; an apple for Miss Umbrage which has not only earned you a nice little merit badge but the enduring contempt of at least one of your classmates. Tosser. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 04:56 AM (#2865060) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Les in Chorlton Sean, have I missunderstood this? "Your own "feral" music is a lot of self-regarding bollocks Before this passes into 'catlore, can I point out that what RA actually said was much of your posturing about Your own "feral" music is a lot of self-regarding bollocks which is a bit different. (Of course, RA may have misspoken - she may in fact believe that Suibhne's "feral" music is self-regarding bollocks in its own right, or indeed that all of Suibhne's posturing about his own "feral" music (and not merely much of it) falls into that category. But she didn't say so.) yz aye, Pedant O'Radish " Isn't Mr Radish making a claer point in the middle of the usual pile of old tripe that passes for discussion in ths place? best wishes Les |
|
16 Mar 10 - 05:15 AM (#2865066) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Mavis Enderby Suibhne - that was completely out of order imho. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 05:49 AM (#2865080) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Les in Chorlton Back to this revival thing. I have the general impression of more people and groups of people singing and playing mostly but not exclusively traditional songs and tunes. Quite a lot of these have a high level of musicianship and groups or bands are playing lots of instruments in interesting combinations. They often sing old songs in fresh ways and dig up versions of songs I have not heard before. Their are a lot of festivals, and sill clubs, where these people can be seen. Lots of recorded music is available and in the last few years thousands and thousands of old tunes have been published by all sorts of people like John Adams at the Village Music Project, Matt Seattle Great Northern Tune Book, students from Newcastle and The EFDSS. Call it what you like but it seems easier to hear and be involved in "mostly but not exclusively traditional songs and tunes". And , since you ask, 1st and 3rd Wednesdays, Songs, Last Tuesday, Tunes, The Beech, Beech Road, Chorlton, Manchester Best wishes L in C |
|
16 Mar 10 - 05:50 AM (#2865081) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: the Folk Police Re my post of 15 Mar 10 - 01:43 PM. A case of engaging the typewriter before engaging the brain and letting the heat of passion get in the way of a more reasoned response. Apologies to Joan/Ruth for any offence caused. Now can we all get back to loving one another? Please? |
|
16 Mar 10 - 06:11 AM (#2865087) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Jack Blandiver Suibhne - that was completely out of order imho. Whatever spin one chooses to put Joan Crump's pronouncement that much of your posturing about Your own "feral" music is a lot of self-regarding bollocks it only serves to justify her having said it in the first place. That Pip decided to do so on a point of pure pedantry is only to add insult the injury already suffered, thus might I question his motives in so doing, especially in the light of Joan's response & her evident feelings on the matter as articulated elsewhere. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 06:15 AM (#2865088) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: The Borchester Echo Funny that. The Betsey Trotwood is almost next door to where the Guardian used to be and the Sunday Times was just round the corner before the Dirty Digger uprooted it to Fortress Wapping. When I went there recently I found its dreary alt shambolism depressing and underwhelming and I'm appalled that the OP should be propagating a wicked rumour that this is all that's happening in the English "acoustic" field. But as I remarked previously, it's not all horrendous: Mumford & Sons is quite nice but fairly irrelevant. What's sad though is that just over the Farringdon Road is where the Metropolitan, home of a fabulous English session, used to stand but, hey-ho, there are plenty of vibrant others arising from the resurgance since the mid-90s which is entirely unrelated to and indeed preceded the current ripple of pseudo-Americana. "Traddie" is absurd and divisive and "f*lkie" (yuk) even worse. Labelling participants is just as bad as strict delineation of genres. And it doesn't stop the unwashed from sometimes turning up for a ceilidh in checked shirt, cowboy boots and shrieking "yee-ha". The OP complained earlier that I shouldn't be talking about just English music but music played in England, as though it was me that was being exclusive. Not so, I was once in an Old Timey band and will always seek out authentic visiting mountain musicians. And we do have our resident treasure, Tom Paley. What is at stake is excellence of execution and performance and an understanding of where the music is coming from. And there's plenty of that. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 06:41 AM (#2865099) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: theleveller Personal animosities aside, "self-regarding bollocks" could also be couched as "an individualistic, unconventional and enthusiastic approach". Hopefully dodging the sycophant tag, I like that and I like much of what I've heard of S O'P's music – it fits my own approach to music (which, I have to admit, I sometimes worry is perhaps self-regarding bollocks - but, if so, it's MY self-regarding bollocks). As regards the relevance to this thread, maybe it's this way of approaching folk music that is leading to the over-engrandising tag of a new "revival". More likely, though, it's just individuals interpreting and playing the music in a way that they enjoy and perhaps others do as well. Hope so. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 06:43 AM (#2865101) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Jack Blandiver "Traddie" is absurd and divisive and "f*lkie" (yuk) even worse. Labelling participants is just as bad as strict delineation of genres. There is a photo which you'll find in the booklet of your cherished copy of the Free Reed Peter Bellamy anthology Wake the Vaulted Echoes in which our hirsute hero sits beside a scrabble board on which are the words BORING BLEATING OLD TRADDY. Whilst MtheGM has recently revealed that the photograph was taken by his late wife, we know nothing of the source of this pejorative appellation spelled out with such evident glee - much less the word score. Was it a review? Or else a disgruntled folkie entirely unimpressed by our hero's masterful vocal stylings much less his choice of repertoire? God knows there were plenty of those, in the light of which TRADDY strikes as being somehow triumphant, working on any number of levels, often out of pure irony given the breadth of musical appreciation which one invariably finds is the lifeblood of any Traddy thus called. Of course Bellamy's musical eclecticism is the stuff of legend, and, like any True Traddy, he contextualised English Speaking Traditional Song relative to all Great Musics of Planet Earth and strove passionately for its wider acceptance without compromising one jot on either its musical integrity or that of its singers, Traditional or otherwise. If this is what it means to be called a TRADDY, then by all means count me in! |
|
16 Mar 10 - 06:52 AM (#2865108) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Don(Wyziwyg)T """Traddie" is an absurd and divisive expression, generally interpreted as a term of abuse for the out-of-touch. Its use fails to make anything either concise or understandable."" Fine!....Whatever! The message of course still ignored. Don T |
|
16 Mar 10 - 07:02 AM (#2865112) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Hamish About this time last year, May 2009, FRoots had a front page cover with a title very like that. It was called "New English Folk" and featured: Ian King, Nancy Wallace, Mary Epworth, Olivia Chaney. Ian King is fabulous, whereas I'm not convinced from the one short gig I saw of Mary Epworth. Many of them were quoting Shirely Collins and suhlike as being major influences. (With apologies for not having trawled through all previous posts on this thread.) -- Hamish |
|
16 Mar 10 - 07:16 AM (#2865118) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Jack Blandiver "an individualistic, unconventional and enthusiastic approach" Right on! Thanks for pointing that out, theleveller. Actually I should accept such criticisms as compliments especially given my TRADDY reputation in most quarters of the folk scene where all I do is Traditional Song. Hell, I've lately switched from Black Sea Fiddle to Normal Fiddle (pretty much) just to avoid the questions, although one fiddler was surprised that I used the normal tuning given my use of drones, which you don't hear too much of these days. That said, with respect of the individualistic, unconventional and enthusiastic approach I'm using one of those weird looking Chinese repro Baroque 5-strings off ebay - looks and sounds amazing - this one here but we got it for under £100 including postage... |
|
16 Mar 10 - 07:17 AM (#2865119) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: matt milton revival always struck me as a silly term, much like other silly terms like 'hiring fair' etc etc i like the tongue-in-cheek term 'folk scare' that one wag coined. Both Utah Philips and Dave van Ronk had a great attitude to the revival, I reckon: both simultaneously deeply involved in it, appreciative of it and yet viewing it with a rather bemused, ironical detachment. Ultimately, you can say what you like about the 50s/60s folk revival, but it enabled and fostered a lot of good art - not just traditional music - that I love and always will. Music by musicians such as: Martin Carthy, Shirley Collins, Watersons, Jansch, Renbourn, MacColl, Peggy Seeger, Davy Graham, Anne Briggs, Sweeney's Men, and then fed into decent 70s songwriters and guitarists like Nick Drake and Dave Evans. It also brought to light an awful lot of old traditional singers who we might not otherwise be listening to. It was all part of the same wave. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 07:21 AM (#2865122) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Banjiman "self-regarding bollocks" I want a pair! |
|
16 Mar 10 - 07:21 AM (#2865123) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: matt milton As for today? There does seem to be more interesting folk, and related, music being made, more often, and in more places, than there was in, say, the 1980s and 1990s. But that might simply be that it's easier to find the stuff now, thanks to myspace, youTube etc. Just don't call it a revival - it does nobody any favours. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 07:25 AM (#2865125) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,beachcomber It's funny, Borchester Echo, how you seem to imply that I am trying to "propagate" any particular rumour by asking a question about it. In fact I have given you that opportunity that you have so vigourusly grabbed to refute it. The article clearly refers to " a new wave of bands and singers..." and this was the phrase that aroused my curiosity. There is no more to my question. But maybe you have not read the piece ? If so there is little more I can say to allay your suspicions. I would really appreciate an unconfused answer rather than unsubtle hints that some dark "anti-traditional music" agenda is being pursued. I did say that I have no axe to grind in the matter, my query was purely an attempt to get the opinions of Mudcatters whom I know to have their fingers on the pulse of the music scene in the UK (All of it). My Thanks, again, to those people who have answered my question completely. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 07:41 AM (#2865134) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: matt milton "When I went there recently (the Betsey Trotwood) I found its dreary alt shambolism depressing and underwhelming and I'm appalled that the OP should be propagating a wicked rumour that this is all that's happening in the English "acoustic" field. But as I remarked previously, it's not all horrendous: Mumford & Sons is quite nice but fairly irrelevant." I've mentioned this before, but Lantern Society at the Betsey is an OPEN MIC club. It therefore is de facto going to be a bit hit and miss, depending on who's there on any given night. As an OPEN MIC night, performers aren't going to have had soundchecks etc. So it will be a tad shambolic, yes. Have I mentioned that it's an OPEN MIC night? (still, gimme alt.shambolism over a Smooth Operations type folk act gig any day of the week) If you are interested in some of the musicians associated with it, I'd recommend checking out their myspace pages: Trent Miller, Boycott Coca Cola Experience, Pepe Belmonte, Jack Day, Sunnie Dae (no relation), the Hanging Ropes, Harrisburg, Andy Hankdog, Emily C Smith, Dan Raza. The Betsey Trotwood has a country/bluegrass/old-timey loving manager, so he inevitably programmes a lot of americana-leaning acts. so it's not that representative in that respect. Other London venues & clubs are also available : Windmill Brixton, Green Note, the Gladstone, the Local Crouch End, Slaughtered Lamb, the Old Nuns Head, Dulwich Hamlet Football Club, the Deptford Arms, the Magnolia East Dulwich, and of course the Oscar-winning Magpie's Nest. I'd prefer it if the above listed names were a little more traddy and a little less singer-songwriter, to be absolutely honest, but then I tend to share S O'P's attitudes towards the majority of the young folk acts performing traditional material these days: I find them too middle of the road and well-groomed. They just sound like the Corrs or something. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 07:52 AM (#2865144) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: theleveller ""self-regarding bollocks" I want a pair! " That would give you a whole new outlook. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 07:56 AM (#2865146) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Banjiman That's Pants Leveller. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 08:16 AM (#2865161) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Jack Blandiver My self-serving bollocks have never been right since my vasectomy anyway, hardly the wonder I'm a bit - er - sensitive in that area. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 08:16 AM (#2865162) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,Working Radish, Fawning Lickspittle In Resid Well, it seemed to me that the message that was getting through was "RA thinks SO'P is a rubbish musician", when what RA had actually said was "RA thinks SO'P sometimes talks rubbish on Mudcat" That's not a nice thing to have said about you, I don't endorse it and I don't blame Suibhne for taking offence. But I just wanted to make the point that there's a difference between being criticised as a Mudcat poster and being criticised as a musician - that is, one is much, much, much, much less serious than the other. (Example: me. I wouldn't be writing like this if you'd criticised my singing, let me tell you.) |
|
16 Mar 10 - 08:42 AM (#2865184) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Jack Blandiver "RA thinks SO'P is a rubbish musician", She clearly does think that though, Pip - thus the self-serving bollocks comment must be taken along with the likes of THIS. Personal opinions are all very well, but for a person with Joan Crump's not-inconsiderable influence to go public in such a way... well, it's hardly going help ones cause at all now, is it? |
|
16 Mar 10 - 09:10 AM (#2865199) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: glueman Why ARE folkies so damned unpleasant to each other? I guess it's the weight of dead people bearing down on them that justifies such unspeakable barbarism to the living ones. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 09:21 AM (#2865205) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: The Borchester Echo While it's indisputable that O'Spinachy's influence is less considerable than that of the Queen of the Borsetshire Cowsheds, it is undeniable that he publicly dissed Jim Causley in an extremely unmusicianly and unfriendly way. The very utterance that a performance from a fellow musician made him want to throw up more than merits the riposte that his own utterances are "self-serving bollocks". To the seaside totter (were you there at the Napoli?): You said: what my 2nd question was meant to discover was whether Mudcatters think that a "Revival" is required or is there already a sufficiently high level of interest in "folk" music. You have been told by others apart from me: YES. and then: I merely asked if there was any substance in an article that I recently read Again, as I and others have already said, NO. I and others have told you what is actually happening out there today, always has been but more so during the past decade and a half. The Guardian piece you saw was merely a piece of lazy writing based on "what's the next big thing" and as such, not worthy of much consideration. Why don't you get out there and see for yourself? |
|
16 Mar 10 - 09:34 AM (#2865209) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: matt milton Jim Causley is brilliant Jim Causley is rubbish Jim Causley has a beautiful voice Jim Causley can't sing for toffee Jim Causley is the greatest singer of his generation Jim Causley is a pretty good folk singer Are we really to suppose that, were Mr Causley to read the above list, he would be alternately whooping with joy/bursting into tears based upon how convincing he found the truth-content of each individual statement in the series above? Of course not. S'OP didn't publicly diss Jim Causley. He publicly dissed Jim Causley's music. (And since when was dissing someone's music beyond the pale?) I disagree that he did it in unmusicianly way; I'd say on a scale of 0-musicianly it was probably a 6.5. I would agree that it could be construed as "unfriendly' - that's in the nature of disagreeable cricitism. But friendship has nothing to do with it. That's why music critics generally don't review albums by their friends. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 09:41 AM (#2865213) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,Gym Cawsleigh I agree, lets just remember why we're all drawn to this website in the first place; our shared love of folk/trad/roots/acoustic music! I've never been a fan of the word 'Revival', "folk" (or just the pop music of it's time) has never died. It's hidden away quite sucessfully during times when it wasn't so trendy or collectors and folklorists were shining a light upon it. I know from experience that it carries on quite happily in it's own little way hidden in remote rural pubs and back rooms, best place for it if you ask me! But incase you think me a hypocrite for earning money from performing it, i'd just like to point out that it's a nasty habit started by wandering minstrels in the middle ages and so i'm simply continuing that particular tradition! (that and i'm too dumb to do anything else, i was a dreadful waiter!) PS i can't take any credit for reviving the Whimple Wassail, the wonderful Whimple History Society are to blame for that crime long before i got involved. The thing with tradition is, if it dies, it dies. It has done elsewhere and this little island is no different. But my personal opinion is that it will continue to evolve and flourish. It may not be recognisable as we currently know it, but that is the point of evolution! |
|
16 Mar 10 - 09:50 AM (#2865218) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,beachcomber Ah, I understand you now Borchester, |
|
16 Mar 10 - 10:18 AM (#2865233) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Jack Blandiver it is undeniable that he publicly dissed Jim Causley in an extremely unmusicianly and unfriendly way. On the contrary, Diane - it is very deniable. I denied it then and I deny it now. My dissing of Jim Causley's approach was based entirely on how far such muso-slickness had pushed the pervading folk aesthetic away from its Traditional roots. It was a simple statement of fact, couched in terms of general preference and a general concern for the current state of The Revival where such MOR blandness is pretty much par for the course. I never once questioned their musicianship or their talent - heaven knows it takes a lot of both to play music like that. I feel similarly about The Corrs, Riverdance, Irish Woman, Queen, Tijuana Brass, The Cliff Adams Singers, The Carpenters, Abba etc - great musicianly talents all, but music which ultimately binds me to the Traddy cause, replete with vernacular genius, human warmth and noise-aesthetic which I find in the music of Traditional Musicians the word over but which has been expunged from mainstream Folk Music. Note, however, that I did not direct my comments at Jim Causley personally; I simply expressed an opinion about the nature of his music in the context of a broader discussion about the imaginary impact of blogging on actual CD sales and the broader cultural considerations of mainstream commercial & concert Folk Music. That Joan reacted with what amounts to a barrage of personal abuse is therefore, I feel, entirely unjustified whatever her personal feelings about my work might be. We come to Mudcat as equals, to discuss our concerns and express our opinions - not to be roundly abused for so doing - and certainly not by those with the far-reaching influence of Joan Crump. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 10:35 AM (#2865241) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Ruth Archer Well, Spinachy does go on at some length on Mudcat about how the revival is bollocks, the tradition is/was bollocks, the collectors are/were bollocks...it would appear that very little that many of us hold in high regard (that's kinda why we're here) gets the O'Popeye seal of approval. And then he loftily pronounced that Jim Causley's music made him want to throw up, in a thread that was not even about the quality of anyone's music, but about whether music should be freely available online for other people to steal. Perhaps it was uncharitable for me to suggest that, while theft might be a problem for Jim, Spinachy might have some trouble giving his music away. I would suggest that if Spinachy does not want people finding fault with his music, his opinions or the ways in which he expresses them, he should perhaps be a bit more considered (and considerate) when expressing his own. The fact that someone has a public profile as an artist does not make them, or their music, fair game. But if you are going to dish it out, don't throw your toys out of the pram when your own music is similarly dismissed. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 10:56 AM (#2865254) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: glueman Jim Causely's stuff is fine by me, to the extent I paid money (or rather the missus did as it was a Chrimbo present) for the Awkward Recruit. Not sure why the Merkins are going their separate ways but festivals will be the less for their absense. Mind you I like Ella Edmondson which as far from the edgy edge of my record collection as it's possible to imagine. Cute girl, very interesting voice. What's not to like? I also enjoy SO'Ps ambient folk - which is possibly an insult of a duelling magnitude (though high praise indeed from Yours Gluely) - and I'm sure he'd sell loads if he was marketed as the Sound of Spring. And who doesn't want to be loved? Form a queue but no tongues. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 11:10 AM (#2865266) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: The Borchester Echo The fact that someone has a public profile as an artist does not make them, or their music, fair game Indeed it does not, particularly from someone who is a performer (of sorts) himself. Jim Causley, in common with many artists, cares a great deal what is written about him if it is inaccurate. I'm sure he wouldn't mind a cogent analysis of his style - he might indeed welcome it if it enabled him to make beneficial changes. But to state baldly that a sound clip had made you want to throw up is scarcely informative and very hurtful. As for Jim + Mawkins doing different things, it's not the end of an era but an opportunity for the individual musicians to do, well, different things as they have always done in order to progress. It does not necessarily preclude further Mawkin + 1 gigs in the future.In the meantime, get Dave Delarre's solo EP Blue Beginnings and catch up with Jim Causleys's previous solo offerings. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 11:33 AM (#2865289) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: the Folk Police Can I be the first to draw everyone's attention to Jim Causley's post of 9.41 AM above? People seem to be steadfastly ignoring it. In my humble view, it is one of the better contributions to this discussion yet. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 11:45 AM (#2865300) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,Working Radish, Fawning Lickspittle Suibhne - ah. I'd missed that earlier comment of RA's. Perhaps I was a bit too charitable. On the other hand, does anyone like your music and Jim Causley's? Would you want to be championed with "almost as good as Mawkin:Causley", or "if you liked Mawkin:Causley then check out Sedayne!" I think one reason I was fairly relaxed about the original line is that I don't think "self-regarding bollocks" is that bad, as it goes. I work on the basis that all singers are basically self-indulgent egotists (I include myself, of course) - we're all saying "hey, look at me! me, look at me!", and there's something fundamentally ridiculous about that. All singers are clowns, especially the ones who take themselves most seriously. (This is a modified form of my original theory that all performers are self-indulgent egotists; I ran that one past my wife, who said "Are you calling Michael Gambon a wanker?" There's no answer to that.) |
|
16 Mar 10 - 11:47 AM (#2865302) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,Working Radish FP - is "Gym Cawsleigh" JC? How would we know? |
|
16 Mar 10 - 11:51 AM (#2865305) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) "I'm sure he wouldn't mind a cogent analysis of his style - he might indeed welcome it if it enabled him to make beneficial changes." Should music criticism in the context of an internet music discussion board such as this, ever be intentionally directed at and intended for the benefit of artists? No I don't think so. There are the professionals that they work with in the recording industry / festival circuit and so-on, who can do that. Indeed should ANY musical criticism be deemed for the *benefit* of an artist, other than that which they might receive from tutors, collaborators and those who patronise their work professionally, or otherwise have a particular interest in promoting or supporting their career? I don't always agree with the stuff SO'P comes out with, but he's surely entitled to express a personal opinion of a peers work on a public music forum, however it may be expressed? After all I rather think that whateter SO'P or I or indeed any average punter might personally feel about Jim Causley's work, however expressed in the context of an online music discussion board such as this, isn't going to alter his fortunes in the big bright world 'out there' one teensy weensy jot. In the context of other music discussions on this board, I'll confess to have made quite a few unflattering things about popular folk musicians work myself, including some of Jim's stuff. I hope that this forum doesn't start to promote restrictions on what people feel they can say about the very music we're actually here to discuss? Because I wouldn't feel comfortable with that kind of repression of free speech at all. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 11:52 AM (#2865306) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: glueman "FP - is "Gym Cawsleigh" JC? How would we know?" Oh, I think we'd know. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 11:52 AM (#2865307) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,Gym Cawsleigh From what i wrote! PS i do admit Rolling of the Stones is a touch pukey, try my first cd from the time when i was still trying to sound like a source singer, might be more up your street. Look at ME!!!!! |
|
16 Mar 10 - 12:02 PM (#2865316) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) Kept repeating myself there - a crumbily edited post! But yes indeed, TFP Jim's contribution back there, is a most welcome one! And IMO ideally aught to suffice as a 'last word' on the matter. As such, I'll leave this thread with that. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 12:06 PM (#2865318) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Jack Blandiver Well, Spinachy does go on at some length on Mudcat about how the revival is bollocks, the tradition is/was bollocks, the collectors are/were bollocks...it would appear that very little that many of us hold in high regard (that's kinda why we're here) gets the O'Popeye seal of approval. Utter nonsense, Dolores, and you shame yourself by such a wilful misrepresentation of what I've posted here. I care very deeply for Folk & Traditional music, Revival or otherwise, but I'm also aware that much of what has gone down is less savoury regarding the nature of that Revival as a social phenomenon. It would be supremely hypocritical of me to promote the notion that all is somehow hunky-dorey, and that the ends justify the means. I think of Folk Music as my Country; just as England is my country, regardless of what I feel about its history, government and policies. In fact, it's the stuff you disagree with that makes you love it even more. Mudcat is an open discussion forum, and anything I've said here has been part of open discussion. We've had some rare old threads here but few, if any, have ever resulted in or even consisted of the sort of negativity you're talking about here. Even with WAV, I might happily trounce his less savoury ideals, but I will continue to give credit where credit's due and I'll quite happily shake his hand when next our paths cross. As I said elsewhere recently, the biggest offence I ever caused around here was defending someone else's right to call me a c*nt and not have his posts deleted by nannying moderators. And then he loftily pronounced that Jim Causley's music made him want to throw up, in a thread that was not even about the quality of anyone's music, but about whether music should be freely available online for other people to steal. More misrepresentation, Miss Umbridge! Still, you have a point to prove, so why let a little thing like facts get in the way, eh? I have addressed this issue both below and on the thread in question, which in any case was not about stealing music but the inevitability of such lawless distribution in the folkloric context of the internet. My comments about Jim Causley's music were made with this very much in mind actually, as I disputed (without any evidence whatsoever I might add) that any fan of Jim Causley's music would ever be moved to break the law, and that Jim Causley's music was, in effect, the fulfilment of Cecil Sharp's heartfelt wish that Folk Music be used for the Social Betterment of Humanity. Whilst this is cold comfort for us feral traddies lurking in the bleak & blasted hinterlands of the post-industrial North, it's sure nice to know that all is well with the wassailing revival in Whimple! Perhaps it was uncharitable for me to suggest that, while theft might be a problem for Jim, Spinachy might have some trouble giving his music away. Is that an apology I see before me, Dolores? Oh, wait a minute... I would suggest that if Spinachy does not want people finding fault with his music, his opinions or the ways in which he expresses them, he should perhaps be a bit more considered (and considerate) when expressing his own. You are my mentor in this respect, Miss Umbridge I can assure you; your various missives fired off in the direction of Lizzy Cornish have taught me all I know in the fine art of diplomacy. The fact that someone has a public profile as an artist does not make them, or their music, fair game. But if you are going to dish it out, don't throw your toys out of the pram when your own music is similarly dismissed. Not true. The fact is that if someone does have a public profile - even if that is to upload some mobile phone footage on to YouTube - it does make their music fair game - but not them, no one said anything about them - only you've dragged this into the realms of the personal. When I go public with my music I welcome all shades of comment & criticism - even it's just on my YouTube Channel, where there is an option to delete negative comments. Of course I've never used it because I feel anyone has the right to say whatever they like by way of the casually expressed opinion, the impassioned gut reaction, or even the more considered critique. So I've no problem with that at all. However, I would question the extent to which we few merry souls on Mudcat are operating at that sort of level - as Pip indicated earlier in this thread, if someone here had slagged off his singing he wouldn't take it lightly, and quite rightly so. In the open Mudcat forum I adopt a certain approach which is impersonal for the most part, unless provoked, and very different from the 'PM Me', or the 'Real Me'. The PM Realm is for the deepening of virtual friendships; if anyone wishes to take further issue with anything I've said in open forum and does so with a PM, then I tell them to take it back to open forum to be discussed openly. I acknowledge & respect the humanity of the people I communicate with here, many of whom I've met in the flesh, conversed with merrily on the blower or otherwise know personally (WAV included) any one of whom I would warmly welcome should ever our paths cross regardless of anything that's ever been said here. This is why I find your current position a little difficult to understand, when in the recent past our dealings both in open forum and PM-land have been upfront & friendly. But now you see fit to openly persecute me simply because I pointed out that Jim Causley's music made me feel queasy and that I feel that his MOR stylings run somewhat contrary to the spirit of Traditional Music I've known & loved all my life.... |
|
16 Mar 10 - 12:15 PM (#2865325) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) "PS i do admit Rolling of the Stones is a touch pukey," Jim/Gym, you're a star! ;-) |
|
16 Mar 10 - 12:19 PM (#2865327) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Banjiman "After all I rather think that whateter SO'P or I or indeed any average punter might personally feel about Jim Causley's work, however expressed in the context of an online music discussion board such as this, isn't going to alter his fortunes in the big bright world 'out there' one teensy weensy jot." CS, a lot of your posts make a lot of sense. I think this one is completely wrong though. It is exactly through forums such as this that a performers reputation is enhanced or undermined. We live in a very small village. If I said "Crow Sister is crap" or "Crow Sister is the best thing since sliced chicken" (and you valued my opinion) which is most likely to make you seek out her music? I do wish we would all take a bit more care with each other and with each other's work. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 12:21 PM (#2865331) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Jack Blandiver PS i do admit Rolling of the Stones is a touch pukey Well I think it's exquisite, Gym; seriously - a mighty piece of work that brings me back to Roger Nicolson & Jack Walton's on Times and Traditions for Dulcimer (1976) which I still regard as somehow seminal. If you want pukey check out my Epiphany 2010 version currently track #1 on my Myspace Page. Look at me! No way hose; I go to singarounds to LISTEN first, and SING second. My ego is very much elsewhere - I'm not saying where though... |
|
16 Mar 10 - 12:25 PM (#2865337) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) "If I said "Crow Sister is crap" or "Crow Sister is the best thing since sliced chicken" (and you valued my opinion) which is most likely to make you seek out her music?" Sorry to dive back in, but as a punter I'd want to know who YOU were and whether I trusted YOUR judgement. Very honestly if you were saying I was a crumby singer - I wouldn't care. It's not happened yet, but If I step out into the world - I know it sure as hell will! And I'm pretty damned sure I'll be able to cope with that, when it does. Because I don't want to be patted on the head or patronised in ANYTHING I do. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 12:28 PM (#2865342) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) Sorry Banjiman, not shouting there. I'm still smiling! Unfortunately that last post sounded a bit more 'in yer face' than it was meant too! ;-) |
|
16 Mar 10 - 12:30 PM (#2865345) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Banjiman CS, that's not what I was talking about...... It's not about the impact it has on YOU but about the impact it has on your potential audience. i.e will people listen to you to evaluate you in the first place. A performer needs an audience..... and getting heard is the most difficult bit, however good you are. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 12:32 PM (#2865349) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Banjiman p.s. I wasn't calling you crap BTW. I've quite enjoyed the little bits I've heard of you ..... hope that's not too patronising for you! |
|
16 Mar 10 - 12:34 PM (#2865351) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: glueman It's the downside of folk, everyone's a performer. Who will speak up for us folk consumers, the rare bird that consumeth all it meet? Our scratchy Argo and Topic won't last forever. Feed us please. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 12:36 PM (#2865352) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: glueman Tee Hee. Banjiman enjoyed Crowsie's bits. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 12:38 PM (#2865353) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) Fair enuff Banji! I have lots more opinionations wriggling to get out, but as I said I'd back off this thread about ten posts ago, I probably aught to get around to doing so... Mudcat {{{{{{{hugs}}}}}}}}}} to everyone, and everyone is superfab!* * can you tell it's suddenly Spring in Essex this afternoon? Actual sunshine and everything! Just in time too, bluddy Spring Equinox this weekend! |
|
16 Mar 10 - 12:44 PM (#2865357) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: glueman "Mudcat {{{{{{{hugs}}}}}}}}}} to everyone, and everyone is superfab!*" Lizzie, I command you to leave this woman in the name of Jackie. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 12:44 PM (#2865359) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: matt milton "If I said "Crow Sister is crap" or "Crow Sister is the best thing since sliced chicken" (and you valued my opinion) which is most likely to make you seek out her music? I do wish we would all take a bit more care with each other and with each other's work." But the key words are "and you valued my opinion". If I value someone's opinion and they tell me something's bad, I'm surely quite likely to agree with them! I'm not sure what you're saying there: I certainly wouldn't want them to deliberately lie to me on the off-chance I might uncharacteristically like something that they don't. That would be a bit insane. I routinely read glowing reviews of albums by journalists whose taste I know is nothing like mine: if they call something fantastic I'll know to avoid it like the plague. Equally, if they call something unlistenable, I'll probably go check it out. I think anyone reading this thread will quickly get a good measure of SO'P's tastes and predilections and be able to contextualise them. They can make up their own mind about Jim C's music. Because they're adult multi-cellular organisms capable of independant thought: www.myspace.com/jimcausley |
|
16 Mar 10 - 12:47 PM (#2865362) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) "Lizzie, I command you to leave this woman in the name of Jackie." PML! |
|
16 Mar 10 - 12:51 PM (#2865366) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Banjiman MM said: "But the key words are "and you valued my opinion". If I value someone's opinion and they tell me something's bad, I'm surely quite likely to agree with them!" So you'd be less likely to bother checking it out, right? |
|
16 Mar 10 - 12:58 PM (#2865370) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: theleveller Do you know, for one very short moment there I thought we were about to have a Mudcat folk revival love-in. I came over all 1960s and started looking for the loons. Thank god that's passed! |
|
16 Mar 10 - 01:01 PM (#2865375) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Mavis Enderby "does anyone like your (Suibhne's) music and Jim Causley's?" I do! Had an excellent night watching Mawkin:Causley last year - as far removed from MOR Blandness as you like. Fantastic musicianship - and I use that word carefully in light of Suibhne's comments above. Slick doesn't cut it either - sounds too sterile. It was the energy, enjoyment, improvisation, spurring each other on, and the performer - audience - performer feedback loop that just made it get better and better. Suibhne's music is moving in it's earthiness. He's introduced me to a range of ethnic/ancient/unusual instruments I might not otherwise encountered, and he uses them to great effect. And there's something very special about drones.... Before this gets too lovey-dovey though I still think it's out of order to call someone a tosser on a public forum! Pete. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 01:12 PM (#2865377) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: matt milton "So you'd be less likely to bother checking it out, right?" Not sure really - sometimes bad reviews still contain little details that make me want to go and have a listen. But it's almost academic, because in three clicks - a matter of seconds - I can be listening to someone's myspace or YouTube page. "Less likely to check something out" is pretty much meaningless: I check out almost everything. I'm in front of a computer all day and spend most of it listening to music (CDs, Spotify and myspace). For me, it's quite a challenge to AVOID hearing what someone sounds like these days. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 01:17 PM (#2865380) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Ruth Archer Spinachy, to be honest I couldn't care less. Couldn't be arsed to read most of your post, couldn't be arsed to read the endless disappearing-up their-own-fundament pontificating missives from certain usual suspects...just can't be arsed. Honestly. I did come on to this thread to contribute to the actual topic. Never mind. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 01:39 PM (#2865392) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Folknacious Couldn't be arsed to read most of your post Yes, I am de-arsed too. A long way back this topic was about a new revival of folk music in England, which sounded interesting. Then it turned out it wasn't, it was about nouveau indie C&W. We narrowly escaped an outburst from the paranoid quotescrambler and so far haven't been Sidmouthbabbled, but apart from that it's descended to the same old pointless Mudcat crap. I mean, what's the point? |
|
16 Mar 10 - 02:14 PM (#2865417) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,Suibhne (Astray) We narrowly escaped an outburst from the paranoid quotescrambler and so far haven't been Sidmouthbabbled, but apart from that it's descended to the same old pointless Mudcat crap. It is posts like yours which represent the same old pointless Mudcat crap, Folknacious - everything said here has been bang on thread, and constructive too for the most part - generally because, like me, people do care otherwise they wouldn't bother. Like I say, Folk is our country - we live in it, we love it, but we're under no illusions about its questionable heritage, the darker episodes of its history nor yet its current mismanagement; naturally enough we also fear for its future, and the role we each have to play therein. Still, let's all lighten up, eh? I was reading in the Radio Times the other day that as well as scrapping certain radio stations, the BBC wants to feature more folk on Radio Two. Maybe they'll be restore The Organist Entertains to its full hour slot whilst they're at it. I love that show & might lose myself in its true eclecticism, but it just hasn't been the same since they sliced it down to 30 minutes. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 03:01 PM (#2865441) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: The Sandman "It is posts like yours which represent the same old pointless Mudcat crap, Folknacious." quote. I agree . |
|
16 Mar 10 - 04:06 PM (#2865497) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: glueman Another Organist Entertains fan here. I also agree Mudcatters are too ready to shout bor-ing at any thread that doesn't follow their paradigm/prejudices. Shit flinging is not compulsory. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 08:20 PM (#2865675) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,Bardan From the limited ammount of recent releases I've heard, there is more good-quality engish folk (definitions at the ready...draw) being recorded and sold in the last few years than there had been. This might be only cos I've taken more of an interest so I've noticed or maybe the famous internet based democratisation of music is finally happening or maybe theres a resurgeant interest in it. Of course it won't appeal to everyone, and it's diverse enough that it's unlikely to all appeal to even one person. But hey, that's music for you. As to the americana side of things I've no idea but I'm sure someone here could check. I've never seen 'traddies' or 'folkies' as massively offensive. I'd tend to refer to myself by one or the other. There's stereotypes that go with folk music however you refer to the musicians/listeners and judging from some photos of the seventies and a few comments from people on here some of them are probably justified, but I'm not that bothered so long as I can listen to good music and at least try to play it. |
|
16 Mar 10 - 10:40 PM (#2865736) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: George Ellias "Folk" songs live on. I know that here in Los Angeles there are a number of young kids and young adults who are playing "old-timey" music. They may think they are reviving something, even though it is already alive. I also know a number of people who were my age (23) and are now 40-50 who played tradition around Los Angeles the same way I am. As long as it gets passed down from generation to generation i'll be happy. Mainstream media is pretty far from accepting it back onto popular airwaves and television channels, unless musicians start to tinge their new original songs with traditional verses and melodies. |
|
17 Mar 10 - 05:26 AM (#2865846) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: The Borchester Echo I've never seen 'traddies' or 'folkies' as massively offensive No? I have, though I don't think that's quite what you meant. What I said was that the terms are absurd and reinforce the public view that exponents of the tradarts are bonkers. That's what's offensive (to those who are not bonkers, that is). |
|
17 Mar 10 - 06:33 AM (#2865874) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Howard Jones I think BE is being over-sensitive. Of course, both terms may be used insultingly or disparagingly, but they are not in themselves offensive. As for public perception, surely that is due more to the stereotypes (some of which are, unfortunately, justified) than the terminology. I find them a useful shorthand - what other terms would you suggest? |
|
17 Mar 10 - 06:52 AM (#2865885) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: The Borchester Echo Oh dear. Is HJ actually unable to grasp that I am lampooning the concept that some "traddies & folkies" (for those determined to see themselves as such) can behave at times just as "massively offensively" as anyone else? And do. A "shorthand" they might be (even if expressed with syntactical coherence, but not "useful". |
|
17 Mar 10 - 07:14 AM (#2865896) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,Ralphie Well. I play Music. I accompany Singers. Some people like it. Some don't. Am I bovvered? No I'm not. Is it Trad or Folk??? Don't bloody care. It's just what I do. Ralphie (Listening to my multitracked version of Josefins Dropvals as I speak.) I think it's quite good. You might have a different opinion. But as none of you are ever going to hear it......then I'll never know, Will I? |
|
17 Mar 10 - 07:44 AM (#2865919) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,Gym Cawsleigh One more question: who/where has been allowing illegal downloads of my music? I'm so out of the loop! Also what does MOR stand for? I hope it's Music Of Renown! |
|
17 Mar 10 - 07:51 AM (#2865923) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: matt milton To those complaining this thread has gone off-track, here's an off the top of the head list of UK based young and not-so-young folk (or thereabouts) musicians currently making good music in the UK. Most of them have only come on my radar over the last 5 years. Some of them, like Ali Roberts, have been around a fair bit longer. Most are under 30. Not all of them are my cup of tea, but all are doing something interesting interesting. I've no idea if this constitutes a revival, and I wasn't listening to folk in the 1980s/early 90s, but as far as I'm aware there wasn't music this interesting being made then. Alasdair Roberts Michael Rossiter Sam Lee (and his Gillie Boys) Nancy Wallace Mary Hampton Benjamin Wetherill Jason Steel Trevor Moss & Hannah Lou David Broad Little Robots James Raynard Kittiwakes Laurel Swift Trent Miller Serious Sam Barrett Boycott Coca Cola Experience Ewan McLennan Pepe Belmonte Elle Osborne the Lorcas Benjamin Folke Thomas Caroline Weekes the Cedars Jack Day the Owl Project Matthew Ord Sunnie Dae the Hanging Ropes the Woordlarks Harrisburg Andy Hankdog Emily C Smith Dan Raza |
|
17 Mar 10 - 08:21 AM (#2865944) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Phil Edwards Splitters! |
|
17 Mar 10 - 02:09 PM (#2866182) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,Bardan I get the point about stereotypes about people who are into folk music not always being very helpful or true. But I see that as the problem rather than terms that (to me) just mean people who listen to/play folk music. If you described someone as 'gay' and then make all sorts of assumptions about what they're like as a person, the problem isn't the word gay it's silly preconceptions about what gay people are like. Maybe traddie or folkie are more pejorative than descriptive in your neck of the woods though BE. Anyway, back to the new bands/performers mentioned further up- haven't heard of a lot of those, I'll have to see if I can check some of them out next time I've some spare cash. Any particular reccomendations? |
|
17 Mar 10 - 02:26 PM (#2866191) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) "Also what does MOR stand for?" Codename: 'Mega Orgiastic Radiation' Otherwise defined as: "The hypothesised energetic physics of the subversive love-vibes of "folk music" (aka "musoc of the people"), which when radiated via 'radio waves' subtley but inevitably penetrate the brains of the multitude thus causing consequent induction of mass euphoric liberating ecstatic revolution of said 'people'" It's a dangerous assignment, but some folk's gotta do it... |
|
17 Mar 10 - 02:49 PM (#2866210) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: The Borchester Echo Here's a US review of Looking For A New England. The CD is available only as a covermount with fRoots 317/318 |
|
26 Apr 10 - 07:29 PM (#2894916) Subject: RE: New 'Revival' of Folk Music in England. From: GUEST,Phil B www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-YSgN1HoXw Jackie in the studio. |