|
17 Nov 19 - 04:08 AM (#4019653) Subject: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Iains Definition: In the study of folklore, the folk process is the way folk material, especially stories, music, and other art, is transformed and re-adapted in the process of its transmission from person to person and from generation to generation. To be brutal, when it comes to the transcription of the spoken word: mondegreen: a misunderstood or misinterpreted word or phrase resulting from a mishearing of the lyrics of a song. Origin 1950s: from Lady Mondegreen, a misinterpretation of the phrase laid him on the green, from the traditional ballad ‘The Bonny Earl of Murray’. Example: Three score and ten They longed to fight the bitter bight They long did fight the bitter night Bonnie ship the diamond The Diamond is a ship, my lads; For the Davis Strait we're bound. The quay it is all garnishèd With forty lashes round. With bonnie lasses 'round. Is it simply the outcome of Chinese Whispers or something more profound? When every phone can capture sound and vision getting it wrong is simply sloppy workmanship, although the diction of some artists can present a challenge. Did the rot set in when collectors first ventured into the wilderness with their waxed cylinders, gained impetus with the spread of radio, then TV and finally killed the process when perfect reproduction was available to all. There is another aspect: Money! Since music and lyrics could be copyrighted there was a chance to make money. Jazz,blues, folk, pop - all could gain airtime and generate a few bob For me there is another problem. What for me are striking tunes and lyrics have not been added to or altered and do not always make sense. "Carrickfergus" Why is Killkenny mentioned other than the fact the Lower Carboniferous, Butlersgrove Formation was black and extensively worked One starry night(Liam Weldon collected this love song from the Traveller/Tinker community in the early '60s.) This song borrows from Carrickfergus and has always struck me as needing more verses. Likewise Farewell, Farewell by Richard Thompson. The three songs/tunes above are highly evocative and thus should be prime candidates for the folk process,yet are untouched! This is a bit of a ramble but in the folk thread I received no response when I asked the question is the folk process dead.(in the western world, specifically the UK) If the folk process is dead is the artform also dead or simply more organised/labeled/pigeonholed/constrained and prevented from mutation by the accurate transmittal, available to all, in the modern world? Was the folk process in reality a sad comedy of errors given substance by tunnel visioned academics? |
|
17 Nov 19 - 04:13 AM (#4019656) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: The Sandman not at football matches where songs are altered and evolve frequently, that is no guarantee of quality but it is happening |
|
17 Nov 19 - 04:17 AM (#4019659) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Big Al Whittle Well we can always hope. |
|
17 Nov 19 - 06:24 AM (#4019690) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Steve Shaw In the sphere of traditional Irish instrumental music there's still quite a fierce emphasis on learning tunes by ear being the only right way to learn 'em. I've learned a lot that way but I can't deny that I've learned a good few from CDs. To me that's second-best but I wouldn't say it's unacceptable - as long as you've learned plenty the hard way, which generally means going to play in sessions. At least if you've done that you've learned not to be inflexible... |
|
17 Nov 19 - 07:03 AM (#4019695) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Backwoodsman ”Three score and ten They longed to fight the bitter bight They long did fight the bitter night” I’ve always sung “They long defied that bitter night” because... 1) It makes sense, whereas ‘’longed to fight’ makes - to someone who has spent a fair amount of time at sea in sailing-ships - no sense whatsoever, and 2) That’s what I heard sung when the song first came to my attention. |
|
17 Nov 19 - 07:13 AM (#4019701) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Dave the Gnome As long as yo don't sing "and battled with the smell" after it will be fine :-) |
|
17 Nov 19 - 07:13 AM (#4019702) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Interesting Iain. Reminds me of Child's approach to English literature. So far from being a 'critic' or a student of poetic effects and meanings, the edition of poets he edited sought to do precisely that, to get at what was believed to be the 'intentions' of the poets, deciding which versions were and were not accurate. Raises some interesting questions, ones applying to monks copying out old manuscripts, who are said to have made mistakes. Even more so when you consider a song travelling across national boundaries when translation errors occur. The most famous example of a cock up I know of relates to the use of the term 'virgin' by mistake in relation to the mother of Mary, a mistake which adversely affected views on women and sexuality for very long periods of history. |
|
17 Nov 19 - 07:17 AM (#4019703) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Pseudonymous I can add to this as a person who has had a version of an old song collected. The changes we made to the words were deliberate, and intended to make a point. In fact, from time to time it has changed again. I don't know if you will have other people who adopted songs to answer you, but here is answer number one. |
|
17 Nov 19 - 07:46 AM (#4019714) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Jack Campin It's easy to think the process doesn't happen any more because recordings by professionals don't reflect it. They'll never use a version evolved in a pub session or football terrace when they can get a certified copyright-free version with added source-researcher's cred from a print or sound archive source. People who think they're part of a carrying stream of tradition when they do what Steve describes are kidding themselves. Their efforts will be dissipated as soon as their listeners forget. And there's nothing at all wrong with that. Art does not need to persist to be worthwhile. |
|
17 Nov 19 - 07:55 AM (#4019716) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Pseudonymous I cannot just find the example, but the other week I found some 'folk' videos on line, under which the singers had quite consciously put that they had learned the song from another singer. these were modern (ie late 20th early 21st century songs. This seemed to me to be a way of putting out a claim to be 'real' trad, so be part of the folk process I think people who collect recently written songs sometimes do this as well? Also, I would take up and interrogate the use of the definite article in the strap line. I get tired of reading about 'the tradition' as if there were just one tradition. Another piece of equivocation, and in a few rare cases - since most on the folklore scene think carefully about things- uttered or written by people simply too lazy or disinclined to think with more care about the words they use? Not saying the OP was using 'the folk process' in any lazy way, though clearly there is an intention to provoke debate, just setting out some responses. Jim Carroll will be along to wreck the thread before long. Shall we write his posts before he gets here? We all know what he's going to say. |
|
17 Nov 19 - 08:08 AM (#4019720) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Dave the Gnome There is a good example in the Oldham Tinkers latest rendition of "Peterloo". The original poem by Harvey Kershaw finishes with "The Free Trade Hall it stands today on the fields of Peterloo". The Free Trade Hall was sold off to private developers by the idiots at Manchester council and all but the facade was demolished to make way for an hotel. John Haworth, who wrote the music and jokingly calls Harvey a "derelict" post, now sings "The Free Trade Hall shoud stand today on the fields of Peterloo". Folk process in action! |
|
17 Nov 19 - 08:40 AM (#4019732) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: The Sandman YES dave but people rarely and never in my experience alter the words of popsongs everyone sings yesterday as it was written it is not evolving lyric wise |
|
17 Nov 19 - 08:50 AM (#4019733) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Iains Raises some interesting questions, ones applying to monks copying out old manuscripts, who are said to have made mistakes. The early Church was very selective, the Book of Enoch was mostly excluded from Christian canons, and it is now regarded as scripture by only the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church and the Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church. The early folk collectors would have also have censored the more prurient verses, as they came from a time when even table legs were draped to preserve their modesty. It is difficult ti be certain what was original, what was deleted and what was modified. It is not a subject I have studied but even "sciences" such as archeology are not immune to having the narrative hijacked. It is a brave man that raises his head above the parapet and expounds a counter argument against his peers. In the early 20th century Wegener was ridiculed for proposing continental drift. In the 1960's the causative agent, namely plate tectonics, was pretty much taken as a given as soon as it was proposed. Progress inevitably ends up a blind alley on occasions, before it stumbles along a more fruitful path. What the early collectors say they did as opposed to what they actually did is a bit of a conundrum. There is also an argument that by collecting they sterilised the folk process, if you believe such a beast exists. I can believe mutation exists, it is the supposed scale I have a problem with. |
|
17 Nov 19 - 09:24 AM (#4019746) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Pseudonymous I am not by any means denying the existence of oral traditions either relating to song or to stories. Partly that I think people sometimes claim more certainty in particular cases than particular facts will bear. I am happy to believe that in some cases people try to replicate words they have heard exactly but fail, and that in other cases, 'riffing' on the words, using 'floating verses' (or 'commonplaces' a controversial term used within folklore) to do this. In so far as songs sometimes tell stories, well people do embroider stories. This is a problem affecting the data gathered by folklore researchers from their subjects: they seem not to factor into their discussion the fact that the person telling them stories is err, a story teller! Hendrix: kiss the sky/kiss this guy We thought for a long time that Harold was the Lord's name: it was certainly the name of a nice uncle we had. |
|
17 Nov 19 - 09:26 AM (#4019747) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Just realised how inappropriate it was to use the term 'cock up' in relation to the myth of the Virgin Mary. No cock ups in sight... |
|
17 Nov 19 - 10:14 AM (#4019769) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Big Al Whittle We took Bob ylan in the cellar and beat a confession out of him. He said, it was me I did it... |
|
17 Nov 19 - 10:19 AM (#4019772) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,HiLo Why on earth would anyone change the lyrics to Yesterday or suggest that it is not "evolving", whatever that means. Am I to understand that the folk process can only happen when songs are altered ? |
|
17 Nov 19 - 10:24 AM (#4019776) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Iains It was I said the fly, with my little...............(Roud 494) |
|
17 Nov 19 - 10:52 AM (#4019778) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Mo the caller Well, if I learn a song with an Irish place name which I might mispronounce I'll change it. Or alter an Irish turn of phrase to something that comes more naturally from an English mouth. If that's the 'folk process' it's still alive. But it has changed a bit, now that we can compare different versions on Mudcat - pick and mix. |
|
17 Nov 19 - 11:18 AM (#4019782) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Howard Jones It would be quite difficult for a modern song to go through the folk process, because both the singer and the audience are likely to have the original in mind and will be well aware of any deviation from the "correct" version and will keep it on track. However it's not impossible, where a song has become so well known that it has become separated from any original performance or text against which it can be benchmarked. To give one example, "In My Liverpool Home" is very well-known in the city and beyond, and has attracted lots of additional verses. Despite being by a known author and dating only from the 1960s it could now be said to have become a traditional song. |
|
17 Nov 19 - 11:25 AM (#4019783) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,patriot in THE PLOOMAN LADDIES, the line 'Sing laddie-o and sing laddie-i The plooman laddies are a'the go' is obviously wrong & easily corrected, but as this is what was collected by Arthur Argo, would that be OK? Likewise, in Willie Scott's recorded version (more than once!) of'THERE'S BOUND TO BE A ROW' 'And as they hustle me about if I don't scrape and bow, and say yes sir and thank you please there's bound to be a row' can we change this to make sense & where does it end? |
|
17 Nov 19 - 11:32 AM (#4019785) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,jag I can't recall anything as an example, but I have been taught songs by ear at workshops that have had phrases changed to make them more secular or gender nuetral or to scan better with a 'new' tune. If people relied on recordings of the workshops to cement the words in memory they might spread with the changes made. Seperatly, what is the practice amongst story tellers ? That seems very close to narrative ballads. |
|
17 Nov 19 - 11:48 AM (#4019788) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,HiLo Making them more secular or gender neutral does not seem to me to be a process, it seems more like a an attempt at imposing proscribed speech. I think Woody Guthries "This Land is Your Land" may be an example of folk process as some countries have inserted their own Place names and their physical attributes. But then, some might argue that This Land Is Your Land is not a folk song. |
|
17 Nov 19 - 11:50 AM (#4019789) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Iains Off on a bit of a tangent: Storytellers. A bit of a cobbling together of the origin "In ancient Celtic society, bards held a position of esteem, second only to kings. Bards memorized vast amounts of poetry which they performed live, and their poems and songs were often the only historical record available. Some may consider them to be historians. Bards evolved into storytellers called "seanchaí" who wandered from town to town. In this informal way, an ancient oral literary tradition continued into modern times. The seanchaí is an important link in Celtic/Irish cultural heritage and continues to play a dominant role in the oral tradition, bringing old stories to life for modern-day listeners." Historically, a Scottish clan chief would have had a Shennachie, who was essentially the genealogist, historian, storyteller and keeper of the memories, traditions and ceremonies of a clan or family and its Chief. These days, the recently launched Shennachie Network and the Council of Shennachies aims to offer support for just such a role. The Network is a way to provide support and ongoing education for anyone interested in the business of a Shennachie, while the Council will include those properly appointed by a Chief as his or her Shennachie, once they have passed certain tests. As Shennachie to the Chief of Durie, the Council of Scottish Clans and Associations (COSCA) and to the Order of Alba, my role isn’t new, but it is one that maintains a connection between past and present. We perhaps need to step back in time to better illustrate the role. The McMhurichs (Curries) were hereditary Shennachies to the MacDonald Chiefs, especially Clanranald. On the accession of a new Chief, the Shennachie would recite the genealogy and hand over the white wand of Chiefship. At the coronation of Alexander III on Moot Hill, Scone on 13 July 1249, he was greeted by ‘a man of the Highlands’ – who would have been a Shennachie – who addressed him with the proclamation ‘Beannachd Dè Rìgh Alban’ (God’s Blessing on the King of Scotland) and went on to recite the King’s genealogy. Simple enough back then, but things are a little more complex these days. With the internet, online genealogy, DNA tests, increased interest in heraldry, social media and clan gatherings, it would be impossible to have one person look after it all. However, it is a good idea to have a back stop in the shape of someone who understands enough to marshall the various components. The difference between a Shennachie and a Bard may seem like a fine line. And at times they were the same person – economy of scale, if you like – but they did perform different functions. Any self-respecting Chief should have a Shennachie, a bard, piper, harpist, bladier, sword-bearer, chaplain and so on. An especially grand Chief might have had a hereditary physician (Beatons to the Macleans of Dowar and MacBeths on Skye), purse-carrier (MacSporran to the Lords of the Isles), steward, dapifer and the like. Everyone who wishes to join the Council of Shennachies will have to pass three online courses – Family History Research: from the Beginning (Scottish genealogy); Genetic Genealogy: an introduction (DNA); and An Introduction to Heraldry – offered by the University of Strathclyde, or provide evidence of similar attainment. The university is involved because ten years ago, I set up a professional programme in Genealogical, Palaeographic and Heraldic Studies. The tutors who went through the programme are the same people who now teach the online courses. There is growing interest from a number of Chiefs, while the idea of the Shennachie initiative has the support of the Lord Lyon King of Arms, Rev. Canon Dr. Joseph Morrow, who is the High Shennachie of Scotland, The Society of Scottish Armigers (a US educational body that provides the public with information about the Scottish system of heraldry, its traditions and laws), the Standing Council of Scottish Chiefs in the shape of its Convenor, Sir Malcolm MacGregor and the Council of Scottish Clans and Associations (COSCA). There are a number of Shennachies already in existence, appointed as such by a Chief. And for a Shennachie to be appointed and recognised, there has to be a Chief involved, it’s not enough to say, ‘I have appointed myself Shennachie to the MacSomethings’ or ‘I’m Shennachie to the Clan Association’. Looking ahead, the formal launch of the network and council will take place in June or July, while a discussion on insignia is underway. However, as this touches on matters Heraldic, the Lord Lyon is considering whether a properly appointed Shennachie should have a special additament to Arms. |
|
17 Nov 19 - 11:51 AM (#4019791) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Are there any special aprons involved? |
|
17 Nov 19 - 12:03 PM (#4019794) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Iains Yeah, they call them sporrans |
|
17 Nov 19 - 12:11 PM (#4019796) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Big Al Whittle 'Why on earth would anyone change the lyrics to Yesterday' Derek Brimstone did... Leprosy Little bits are falling off of me |
|
17 Nov 19 - 12:18 PM (#4019802) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Joe G Never mind country versions of 'This Land' - Roger Davies does a county version about Yorkshire! Roger is another example of an excellent singer songwriter who in many of his own songs writes about local places and writes in the folk idiom. |
|
17 Nov 19 - 12:36 PM (#4019808) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Pseudonymous When we say 'Scottish', do we mean the Scots tribe who came from Ireland, (and here I am drawing on limited knowledge of Scottish history drawn mainly from Neil Oliver) or the NE Picts, not to be confused with the other Gaels? And where do the Viking Lords of the Isles come into it? I get so confused. |
|
17 Nov 19 - 12:44 PM (#4019812) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Iains Separately, what is the practice amongst story tellers ? That seems very close to narrative ballads. The traditional storytellers were the repository of history therefore the emphasis was on accuracy of transmittal, presumably without a third party exerting a "malign" influence. That is if you tend towards the idea that story tellers are the modern descendants of the bard and the filidh(in Irish terms) To suggest the Mabinogion or Táin Bó Cúailnge (The Cattle Raid of Cooley) were subject to the folk process, would I suspect, be regarded as rank heresy. But others may argue otherwise. |
|
17 Nov 19 - 12:51 PM (#4019815) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Iains When we say 'Scottish', do we mean the Scots tribe who came from Ireland, https://thegeneticgenealogist.com/2007/06/13/using-dna-to-reunite-the-clan-gregor/ https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/mac-gregor/about/background With modern research that question may perhaps be answered. |
|
17 Nov 19 - 12:51 PM (#4019816) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,jag Making them more secular or gender neutral does not seem to me to be a process, it seems more like a an attempt at imposing proscribed speech. (HiLo) So what sort of deliberate changes are allowed within 'the folk process'? If the folk change it for whatever reason, the folk change it. (And if there are no folk - yes it has died) |
|
17 Nov 19 - 12:56 PM (#4019817) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,jag That is if you tend towards the idea that story tellers are the modern descendants of the bard and the filidh(in Irish terms) (Iains) I would include the tellers of the Norse sagas, who, I understand, might have no more inhibitions over changing things to improve a cracking yarn than a Holliwood scriptwriter. |
|
17 Nov 19 - 01:20 PM (#4019819) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Lighter All very interesting, but much misses the point. The better question is not "Has the folk process died?" but "What has it done for us lately?" No number of anecdotes about mondegreens and forgetting and occasional revised lines and altered pub songs and ad-libbed lines to chanteys and even respectful Carthy-style pastiches can match the output of the "folk process" before the appearance of the phonograph. Ask yourself. Where is the mass of new, post-1900 Child-type ballads, other than the occasional imitation that may get sung (but probably not much changed) by a handful of people? Where are hundreds of post-1900 broadside-type ballads known and sung, often to competing airs, by a fair part of the population? Where, for that matter, are the recent, folk-processed tales of Arabian Nights quality? Etc. The most vital folk traditions in the English-speaking world today are in Anglo-Celtic and American "old-time" music , in jokes, in African-American "toasts," and in bawdy songs. Except for the anonymous jokes (mostly here today and gone tomorrow), these minor genres are appreciated and furthered by comparatively few. Hip-hop lyrics are surely a folklike genre, but the individual songs are either strictly copyrighted and/or performed by very, very few. With the minor residual exceptions noted above, the "folk process," by any normal definition, has been supplanted by the all-pervasive (and all-copyrighted and all-technically sophisticated) "pop culture." Or so it seems to me. |
|
17 Nov 19 - 01:22 PM (#4019822) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Captain Swing Here's a confusing one - 'Dirty Old Town' *not a folk song and written as part of a play about Salford * became accepted by many as an Irish folk song after being recorded by the Dubliners * became a pop song when recorded by the Pogues who used the term "gasworks wall" rather than the original "gasworks croft" presumably to make the phrase nearly rhyme when there are no other rhymes in the song (or because the Pogues had failed to do any research) * "gasworks wall" now used widely in folk clubs, sessions and open mics So a non-folk song goes through the folk process by becoming a pop song! |
|
17 Nov 19 - 02:09 PM (#4019831) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Iains There is an argument that essential knowledge was transmitted through myth. I am thinking specifically of Hamlets Mill: An Essay Investigating the Origins of Human Knowledge and Its Transmission Through Myth by Giorgio de Santillana and Hertha von Dechend "Von Dechend has argued that the astronomy of the most ancient civilizations is far more complicated than we have hitherto realized. She sees myth as the technical language of a scientific and priestly elite; when, therefore, a myth seems to be most concrete, even gross, it is often using figurative language to describe astronomical happenings . . . Von Dechend's thesis that there is an astronomical dimension to myth that is not understood by the conventional archaeologists of myth is, I believe, quite correct" (Thompson Other scholars have since concurred with the basic premise of Hamlet's Mill, that mythology and astronomy go hand in hand. Joseph Campbell even goes so far as to point out that the numbers associated with the ending of world, as recorded in the Icelandic Eddas, are identical to the numbers used in Hindu World Age calculations, and both ultimately refer to precession. This heresy, when published, stirred up a hornets nest but the numbers in these myths combine rather frequently to construct meaningful precession numbers. If these numbers are to be believed they need to be transmitted accurately down the generations. Poetic license due to the folk process would cause havoc -so where does that leave us? |
|
17 Nov 19 - 02:47 PM (#4019840) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Steve Gardham Agreeing with Jon, the whole process has changed mainly due to modern technology, but there again at one point the printed broadsides were modern technology. The process itself hasn't died as similar things still happen and some obvious examples have already been quoted which are still very much alive, if some of them are much depleted. BTW the process always consisted of 2 interacting elements; accidental alteration caused by faulty memory and revival; and conscious creativity of those with the wherewithal. This applies to almost all folk activity. An important element to this folk activity is the community aspect in that these activities take place within specific communities. However oral tradition is not exclusive to the masses or the 'peasantry' (to use a much used word from the past). Folk ballads for instance have been, at points in their past, as much the preserve of the elite as 'the people'. Anna Gordon, Elizabeth St Clair, etc. Here's an example from this very afternoon. I have just about learnt a song by osmosis which is sung by another of our lead singers. It was written in the 60s by a friend of ours and we usually finish with this splendid song. Said lead singer will be away for 3 months next year and for any gigs in that time I would like the song still to be available to the group, so I sat in my car waiting for my wife doing some shopping and decided to see what I could remember of the 4 verses. All but 2 lines quickly came up (not verbatim of course but near enough) and as soon as I got home I looked up the 2 lines. Got it! Folk process? You tell me. I know I've said this many times before but before somebody jumps in with 54 I personally wouldn't strictly speaking call what the IFMC came up with a definition. It is a very useful set of descriptors for researchers like me but in order to qualify for 'folk' status the item in question doesn't have to comply rigidly with all of the descriptors and the descriptors themselves are not finite in that they do not have hard and fast rigid boundaries. |
|
17 Nov 19 - 02:53 PM (#4019842) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,SoloSongwriter I feel as though songs being composed for the sake of popular consumption and, usually, copyright, are very difficult to imagine being touched by the folk process. Songs that were made up to tell stories, preserve historical and cultural events, etc, could be more affected in centuries past by the folk process because there was no ownership/rights endgame in mind. |
|
17 Nov 19 - 03:12 PM (#4019848) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Steve Gardham Whilst this is certainly true SS there are still plenty of songwriters about who couldn't give a toss about copyright and are just happy for others to sing their songs. Also there are plenty of 'folk songs' even the traditional ones that we know the author of, even some of the Child Ballads. After 70 years they go out of copyright and mine don't get copyrighted at all. All of the songs I sing that are not from oral tradition have been written by people I know or knew personally. |
|
17 Nov 19 - 03:27 PM (#4019856) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Absolutely agree that at one point the broadsides were modern technology. |
|
17 Nov 19 - 03:33 PM (#4019858) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Pseudonymous And I also agree with Steve Gardham's 2nd and third paragraphs. |
|
17 Nov 19 - 04:15 PM (#4019873) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Steve Gardham Sue I'm absotutely slick of you crivicising my 1st, 4th and 5ti aragraphs!!! Recognise the impersonation? No names, no packdrill. |
|
17 Nov 19 - 04:21 PM (#4019875) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Iains Very interesting responses.In retrospect I should have titled the thread "What is the folk process?" Steve Gardham makes the very valid points that accident and artistic improvisation both had a role. This neatly provides the distinction, in my mind, between the "purity" of story telling where the essential core element has continuity through the generations although the extraneous detail of the narrative could be given a little artistic improvisation, as opposed to song where both tune and lyrics could be given a massage without any harm. I would argue story telling often contained a core that required integrity of transmission, whereas song was a more "relaxed" medium where the essential message allowed more leeway in transmission. The two served different objectives of bard and minstrel(to put it crudely) |
|
17 Nov 19 - 04:43 PM (#4019882) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,jag I would argue story telling often contained a core that required integrity of transmission Some of discussion of the current "Folklore: Rumpelstiltskin, thousands of years old?" is of multiple versions, retelling of stories and recurrent motifs. I think we should distinguish stories intended to store unwritten history from those that were entertaining or moral tales that could change as society changed - or be recast in ballad form. |
|
17 Nov 19 - 04:48 PM (#4019883) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,jag Changing a song to make it gender nuetral may be regarded as politicaly correct. Changing it from religion to religion might have been politically essential for survival |
|
17 Nov 19 - 04:51 PM (#4019884) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Hello Steve no names no packdrill. I will add to the discussion about copyright and 'process' that there are lots of singers and guitar players who "don't give a damn" about copyright eg in informal personal context eg one's own home (won't raise open mikes, darn it just did). Had it done so, I should maybe never have learned guitar, at least not via the person to person methods I did learn by in my own home and those of friends, using stuff including Neil Young (whose work I did not even particularly even like at the time, though I do now). And I passed on what I had learned, even, I guiltily admit, to pupils in school on school premises. Folk process, "you tell me" as somebody else said. I learned melodeon mainly using books - written by somebody called Mally if my memory serves me aright. And played for Morris dancing, not sure if that was folk or not. |
|
17 Nov 19 - 04:54 PM (#4019885) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Pseudonymous jag Interesting ideas in your post. I think some stories got moved from religion to religion. No disrespect to religions intended (I'm atheist, raised Methodist) but Noah is in more than one. Sorry if this is thread drift. |
|
17 Nov 19 - 05:33 PM (#4019890) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Steve Gardham Mally is an old mate of mine going back to the 60s when we were both part of morris teams in Yorkshire, he of the West Riding and me of the East Riding. If morris dance isn't folk I don't know what is. It has a continuous tradition going back at least to the 17th century and probably earlier. In between the first and second revivals a few teams kept it going but WWI nearly wiped it out as it did with other traditions. Before anyone chips in and says morris was never traditional in Yorkshire we also danced Yorkshire Longsword taught by dancers from traditional teams. There is a sleight (sic) irony here, the chap who taught us their dancing, his team had stopped dancing which is one reason why we learnt the dance. Next thing we know directly due to our interest the old team reformed and soon had 2 teams dancing and their teams are still going whereas ours folded in the 90s. |
|
17 Nov 19 - 05:57 PM (#4019891) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Steve Shaw Mally came to a Bude Folk Festival in the early nineties and I bought a B/C box off him. I seem to remember that we had Waterson/Carthy, Eliza and Nancy Kerr, Dave Burland and Coope, Boyes and Simpson. A few weeks later, after I'd found I couldn't get on with it, he was gracious enough to let me swap it for an Erica D/G job. He was an ace player of Irish tunes on the D/G box as he proved in the festival sessions in the Brendon. I bought his Absolute Beginners book and, though I got the knack of playing both sides, my bellows technique never got beyond the elephantine. That box still languishes on top of our spare room wardrobe... I've stuck to the harmonica since then. I dabbled with a bodhran for a time but I saw the light. I should have been jailed for that of course but I got away with it. If you play the diatonic harmonica you have to change things a bit to get them to fit your axe. That's either me applying the folk process or me pissing around. Take your pick... :-) |
|
17 Nov 19 - 06:06 PM (#4019892) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: leeneia Has the folk process died? Not at my house. I folk process stuff all the time. Yesterday I was practicing a piece from Praetorius for the offertory at church. I just couldn't get a high E-flat I liked, so I took the music over to the computer, fired up Noteworthy Composer and re-wrote the measure they were in. Nobody complained. (This was on a soprano recorder.) |
|
17 Nov 19 - 08:01 PM (#4019909) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Steve Shaw Yebbut can the folk process involve computers and writing things down...? |
|
18 Nov 19 - 02:05 AM (#4019945) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: The Sandman Steve, only if you are dyslexic |
|
18 Nov 19 - 04:38 AM (#4019967) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Pseudonymous We did clog dancing. NW type. |
|
18 Nov 19 - 04:39 AM (#4019969) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Well, they danced; we played. |
|
18 Nov 19 - 04:44 AM (#4019973) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Pseudonymous and we got the dances out of books, so not folk process. And I think we were all pretty middle class, middle class lefties mostly with one or two I'm not sure about with hindsight may even have been Tories on the qt. |
|
18 Nov 19 - 04:58 AM (#4019977) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Iains The oral transmission of stories maintains integrity, the aural transmission of "ethnic music and song" reputedly must mutate like a flu virus as it transmits from host to host. In reality the latter must be happenstance and not a compulsory process So perhaps the folk process, as defined, is simply incorrect and causing much unnecessary conflict? |
|
18 Nov 19 - 05:01 AM (#4019979) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Iains species to species, not host to host |
|
18 Nov 19 - 05:31 AM (#4019984) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Pseudonymous For some reason, I'm hearing potential chimes with Fukuyama's claims about the end of history? Not sure whether Iain's is suggesting that the definition is wrong, or that the 'folk process' is wrong. I'll maybe have to interpret this in line with my knowledge of Iain's politics, one of my 'things' being looking for underlying bias in discussions of folk. And they appear to be of a sort with which , have to say, with respect, I find myself in no sympathy whatsoever. |
|
18 Nov 19 - 05:48 AM (#4019988) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,jag As I said above, I don't think oral transmission of stories neccesarily maintains integrity. I find the mututation of song and music more convincing as an observation of something that often happens than as a requirement. If one's interest is in 'the folk process' it seems reasonable to set aside songs for which it demonstrably has not happened. |
|
18 Nov 19 - 05:54 AM (#4019991) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Iains I am suggesting that the insistence that a song must undergo some kind of transition by the people before it can be accepted as legitimate folk is erroneous. It may happen, equally it may not. If the process may or may not occur it would seem rather silly to insist that it is an integral part of the folk process. That argument is valid regardless of political affiliation. |
|
18 Nov 19 - 06:06 AM (#4019996) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,jag If one accepts that a song written by one of the folk can be a folk song even if it is handed on without change then it opens up another bag of worms. Who are the folk? |
|
18 Nov 19 - 06:11 AM (#4019998) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Iains Who are the folk? The unattributed their names lost in the mists of time. If we did know their names would it still be traditional folk? |
|
18 Nov 19 - 06:29 AM (#4020002) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Iains https://www.terriwindling.com/blog/2019/08/the-child-ballads.html According to Child the folk process died years ago "Child was a textual scholar rather than a field collector, and he put his massive ballad compilation together by seeking out every manuscript copy of ballad material he could lay his hands on, with the help of a small army of fellow scholars searching out songs and fragments of songs throughout the British Isles. Another reason he depended on manuscripts rather than the memories of folk musicians was that the British popular ballad, in his view, was no longer a living tradition. The ballads he sought were the ancient ones -- not the “broadside ballads” that dominated the nineteenth-century folk musician’s repertoire. Broadsheet ballads were authored song lyrics designed to fit traditional tunes, cheaply printed and sold for pennies on street corners from the sixteenth century onward. These were contemporary compositions, rather than ancient poetry from the oral tradition -- though sometimes broadside ballads mimicked the language of much older songs, and determining which was which was a problem Professor Child was both intrigued and vexed by. His view is not one that I share. It almost comes down to the following argument: We ain't got a clue who the author is therefore it must be genuine folk rather than plastic manufactured folk My view is simplistic: If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then a duck it surely is. If you want to argue whether it is a muscovy duck or a khaki campbell duck, or a Welsh harlequin duck that is a choice for you. . |
|
18 Nov 19 - 07:13 AM (#4020011) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Jack Campin Tunes (both instrumentals and the airs to songs) get processed a lot more than texts, and the processing usually passes unremarked. Hamish Imlach came up with his tune for "Black Is the Colour" when (probably in a drunken stupor) he couldn't remember the John Jacob Niles one properly. Most people in Scotland now sing it his way: it's a great improvement. And they also don't realize it's different from the original. Then there's accidental plagiarism. Gordon Duncan coming up with "The Sleeping Tune" on waking up from a drunken coma at Lorient after hearing the "Kerfank 1871" an-dro the day before; Dick Gaughan composing his tune for "Both Sides the Tweed" by a subconscious shift of mode and tempo from "Rosin the Bow"; Phil Cunningham turning "She Was Poor But She Was Honest" into "Sarah's Waltz" by some associational process Sarah would probably prefer we didn't think about. And virtually any instrumental dance tune is fair game for mutation. It's unlikely that any professional will take up an amateur-generated version as their own, but they'll always do the same sort of recomposition. |
|
18 Nov 19 - 08:01 AM (#4020017) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Kenny B(Inactive) Jack is this the sort of thing you mean BTW my uilleann contact formerly a member of the Battlefield Band doesn't remember piper w Jig Doll in Glasgow ill keep asking Female Drummer Yelows on the Broom |
|
18 Nov 19 - 08:04 AM (#4020018) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Mr Red RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? - No but it has changed**. In the 1980s, at a regular Folk Club, I used to tell lightbulb jokes. They thought I was getting cheap laughs. As if! But after about 6 months I revealed (in print) that I had been demonstrating Folklore to a bunch of Folkies. To this day, I am not sure they all got it. I guess it might work better now fashion has moved on. So is it fashion or folklore in the modern idiom, and after a time (please specify) is there a difference anyway? **that's the Folk Process for you! |
|
18 Nov 19 - 08:15 AM (#4020020) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Jack Campin Adam McNaughtan is a very self-aware scholar and I doubt he used that tune for "Yellow on the Broom" without knowing exactly where it came from. A better example of an instinctive tune sponge would be Matt McGinn, who hardly ever used a traditional tune without changing it in some way - his compositional process seems to have been much like that of a football-terrace bard. |
|
18 Nov 19 - 08:24 AM (#4020022) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Lighter > If we did know their names would it still be traditional folk? As somebody once said (more or less) long ago, "A peasant-made pot is still a peasant pot, even if we know the name of the peasant." Let's not fall into the fallacy of defining things by their origin (in folk studies, usually presumed origins) instead of their nature. |
|
18 Nov 19 - 08:39 AM (#4020027) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,jag How about a peasant-style pot made by an anonymous non-peasant who has learned and practiced the skills of a peasant pot maker? |
|
18 Nov 19 - 12:20 PM (#4020081) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Lighter That's a peasant-style pot. If we know it's been made by a non-peasant. If we don't know, it's just a peasant pot. And the laugh's on us. If we do know, and we know it was sold as authentic by a con artist, then it's a fake peasant pot. Which has no effect on our appreciation of real peasant pots. The knowledge is annoying, though. |
|
18 Nov 19 - 12:53 PM (#4020096) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Dave the Gnome Is a rustic vessel to cook gamebirds a peasant pheasant pot? |
|
18 Nov 19 - 01:32 PM (#4020106) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,jag Why might we appreciate a peasant-made peasant pot more than an aesthetical and functionally equivalent fake peasant pot? |
|
18 Nov 19 - 02:01 PM (#4020112) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Dave the Gnome If you used it to cook gamebird flavoured quorn would it be a fake peasant phoney pheasant pot? |
|
18 Nov 19 - 02:12 PM (#4020113) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Lighter > Why might we appreciate a peasant-made peasant pot more than an aesthetical and functionally equivalent fake peasant pot? Because we don't like to be fooled. But if you're just talking about appearance and functionality, without regard to the place of the pot in the tradition of peasant pots, or as evidence of that tradition, then possibly (and with reason) you couldn't care less. |
|
18 Nov 19 - 02:17 PM (#4020114) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Steve Gardham Lovin it! |
|
18 Nov 19 - 02:23 PM (#4020115) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Lighter Thanks, Steve. As an umpire at home plate once supposedly said, in his own defense, "I call 'em like I see 'em." |
|
18 Nov 19 - 02:24 PM (#4020116) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Steve Gardham What I want is a proper peasant pheasant cooked in a proper peasant pheasant pot. I may be off my dot but I want a peasant pheasant from a pheasant peasant pot Plastic pheasant pots and porcelain peasant pots, they're no use to me! If I can't have a proper peasant pheasant pot, I'll have a pot o' tea. Oh, and I'm a pedant! |
|
18 Nov 19 - 02:39 PM (#4020120) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Iains But, but, but was a peasant pot thrown or coiled? |
|
18 Nov 19 - 02:43 PM (#4020124) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Phil d'Conch In the span of four human generations the Anglo-American Merchant Marine adapted pop minstrelsy to chanties and launched a thousand 'authentic' folk songbooks. Commerical phonographic (no TV, radio, print &c) credits currently listed on Discogs: Paul Campbell = 425 Woody Guthrie = 1519 Ewan MacColl = 1124 Pete Seeger = 2333 Paul Campbell – not folk process. Very fake but likable enough for a few represses here and there. 'Twas ever thus. |
|
18 Nov 19 - 02:58 PM (#4020131) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Steve Gardham Coiled only I'm afraid. None of that phoney modern technology for us pedants (sorry, peasants) |
|
18 Nov 19 - 03:10 PM (#4020134) Subject: RE: Folklore: From: Steve Gardham At the risk of opening the usual can of worms, you can't answer that question 'Has the folk Process died?' without either defining what you mean by 'folk' or at least giving us a brief summary of who you think can be included in the term. Once you have established some sort of concensus there you then need to remind everybody precisely what the 'folk' Process' consists of. Not too difficult if you accept the descriptors given in the 54 description. (I won't call it a definition but that's just me). Or perhaps not! |
|
18 Nov 19 - 03:42 PM (#4020139) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Dave the Gnome A long, long time ago I can still remember when the process used to make me smile I can't remember if I cried When I thought it said his Windows bide But something touched me on the side The way the folk process died And we were singing (with our fingers in our ears)... |
|
18 Nov 19 - 03:54 PM (#4020146) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Steve Gardham Nice one, Dave. |
|
18 Nov 19 - 03:58 PM (#4020148) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Iains The way the folk process died! Is that the 4 verse with 20 choruses or the 40 verse version. We need to know these things. |
|
18 Nov 19 - 04:07 PM (#4020153) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Joe G 'Starry, starry night.....' Sorry no stars allowed in the folk scene |
|
18 Nov 19 - 04:22 PM (#4020158) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Has the folk process died? Whose folk process, where? Just a thought. |
|
18 Nov 19 - 04:38 PM (#4020162) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Iains Definition of Folk Music, decided by the International Folk Music Council in 1954. @Steve Garham. Definition of Folk Music, decided by the International Folk Music Council in 1954. Folk music is the product of a musical tradition that has been evolved through the process of oral transmission. The factors that shape the tradition are: (i) continuity which links the present with the past; (ii) variation which springs from the creative impulse of the individual or the group; and (iii) selection by the community, which determines the form or forms in which the music survives. The term can be applied to music that has been evolved from rudimentary beginnings by a community uninfluenced by popular and art music and it can likewise be applied to music which has originated with an individual composer and has subsequently been absorbed into the unwritten living tradition of a community. The term does not cover composed popular music that has been taken over ready-made by a community and remains unchanged, for it is the re-fashioning and re-creation of the music by the community that gives it its folk character. I have more than a few problems with the defintion of 1954. 1) continuity which links the present with the past; To me that reads pretentious bullshit. Perhaps someone can rewrite the phrase where it actually has some meaning. 2) variation which springs from the creative impulse of the individual or the group; Correct me if I am wrong but we appear to have a rough consensus that a)stories pass down essentially unchanged b)Lyrice may change due to mishearing word, they may be deliberately changed for whatever reason, but may remain unchanged c)Tunes may or may not change There is no compulsion for a,b, or c to occur. 3) selection by the community, which determines the form or forms in which the music survives. To be crude, if it is popular it will hit the charts if it is unpopular it will be found in a dusty tome(hopefully) Having got the above out of the way what are we left with? 1(A popular song will survive, regardless 2)The lyrics may or may not change 3)The tune may or may not change What we are left with is a kind of medieval top of the pops defines folk. But transmittal today is electronic therefore the 1954 definition says there is no more folk music being created. Most posting totally reject this idea. Back in the sixties new folk creations were commonplace. working man only 19 Both these songs sound like folk to me. I am quite happy to see someone shred this post, I do not have aproblem that others may see things differently. |
|
18 Nov 19 - 04:48 PM (#4020166) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Kenny B(Inactive) In relation to the obviously heathy reports of the UK Folk scene by the people actively involved is it safe to assume that the process is healthy too what is the Folk Process Related threads: Folk Process - is it dead? (244) The Folk Process (181) Steps in the Folk Process (54) The New Folk Process (youtube link) (19) What does the term 'folk process' mean? (23) Tthis has been discussed amicably in similar threads before and it still appears to be healthy. What I want to know is,if it has died where and when is the funeral and what will the hymns be? |
|
18 Nov 19 - 04:53 PM (#4020168) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Joe G Glad to see the folk process process is healthy :-) |
|
18 Nov 19 - 05:14 PM (#4020171) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Steve Gardham You keep suggesting this idea, Iain, that stories (or folk tales) are 'passed down essentially unchanged'. In my experience I find this quite wrong. IMO stories vary verbally just as much as songs or ballads as they are passed on. Just one example, Snee Vitchen und der Sieben Dwarven (excuse spelling) comes from the same root as 'Goldilocks'. Not many people know that, but think about it. The characters have changed and G is much simpler but it's the same plot told in very different ways. Similarly 'Tom Tit Tot' is essentially Rumplestiltskin but the wording is as different as 2 versions of the same ballad. The concepts in the 54 are quite simple and easily digested. I don't have a problem with the continuity element. I agree it hardly needs stating in light of 2 and 3. Your 2b is quite right and should have been included (See later historical comment). I agree there is no compulsion, which is why I refer to them as descriptors/guidelines, rather than hard and fast principles. They are very likely to happen but they do not stop a song from being part of the process when taken individually. Surely 3 can't be argued with. It stems from the Darwinian evolution thesis of the survival of the fittest, putting it crudely. By mentioning what happened in the 60s and today with newly created folk songs you are falling into Jim's trap of using 2 quite different meanings of folk music. The use of the word when applied to oral tradition is only part of the meaning when applied to what is perceived by the words in today's world. You can't apply the same rules to both. What sounds like folk is part of the modern day wider meaning and the 54 descriptors were never meant to apply to this. |
|
18 Nov 19 - 05:15 PM (#4020172) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Iains To say the process is healthy would suggest the 1954 definition is in dire need of revision. Yea or nay? It is having one hell of a wake judging by the number of venues indulging. Perhaps it is a Finnegan's Wake. Perhaps we should blame the morris dancers. |
|
18 Nov 19 - 05:23 PM (#4020174) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Hymns for the funeral: Jerusalem ? I quite like Blake |
|
18 Nov 19 - 05:28 PM (#4020175) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Steve Gardham Sorry if I'm splitting postings but I've spent ages typing out long threads recently and in the past only for them to disappear into the ether. IFMC history. In 54 reps from many countries (about 60 I think) got together to come up with a working definition, at the instigation of Annie Gilchrist of the EFDSS (and president of IFMC) and a few others. There was a lot of disagreement even then as you would expect with so many different traditions. Quite a few of those present wanted to include all sorts of stuff others wouldn't allow in. In the end they had to accept democratic vote which they agreed to and the definition was actually drawn up by AGG and approved by the majority. Even this had to be tweaked a few months later as one of the descriptors in the original had been that folk music must be anonymous, yes, I agree, ludicrous and unworkable. It was immediately dropped after several noted folklorists pointed this out. (I can expand if necessary). Since the 'definition' was adopted there have been all sorts of holes poked in it. I think it still stands because there is no longer enough interest in folklore matters internationally to be bothered to change or qualify it. All of this is from memory (I was only 7 in '54 but I had read the wonderful Opies' book on childlore) so it might not be totally accurate. Having said all that, in my own researches it still is workable as a crude set of guidelines and I do use it, as do other researchers in the field. I do not however know anybody, scholar or academic, who tries to apply it rigidly. |
|
18 Nov 19 - 05:29 PM (#4020177) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Steve Gardham Iain, please remember that the second revival was only in its infancy when the '54 descriptors were put together. |
|
18 Nov 19 - 05:48 PM (#4020182) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Steve Gardham Iain, you are still confusing songs from the oral tradition with what is happening on the folk scene today and since 1950. One forms part of the other. By all means have a go at defining the wider meaning of folk, but I'll guarantee we'd all come up with something different. I'm quite happy with a broad sweep of, 'if it sounds like folk it is folk'. As others keep saying other genres don't need hard boundary definitions and they get along fine. Why should we be different? Don't pander to the trolls. |
|
18 Nov 19 - 05:51 PM (#4020183) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Pseudonymous May I float the idea that sometimes people get the definition problem base over apex. I think Steve (who I know has supported the more 'factual' approach of Roud) might find something to sympathise with in the idea that you have a look at what happened (which isn't always possible) and then find words to describe it afterwards. Whereas (and here I risk getting on my hobby horse) sometimes, it seems to me that within 'folk', people adopt definitions for ideological grounds and then seek to select the data to fit them. It isn't even as if I dont' sympathise fully with a lot of leftie stuff (though often it is just so out of date viz a viz climate crises/identity/race etc), just that the analytic/historical side of me sees it so clearly whereas people inside what I sometimes call 'the bubble' don't. Sorry if I appear to be trolling, let me know if this is how you see it and I shall go away (once bitten twice shy) |
|
18 Nov 19 - 06:00 PM (#4020185) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Pseudonymous And obviously, sometimes the 'right', especially nationalistic varieties, also seeks to make use of 'folk' too. Again, sorry if this comes across as off piste / trolling. It is not intended to disrupt, though I am aware it sort of 'interrupts' a very interesting discussion between Steve and Iain - which I look forward to hearing more of. |
|
18 Nov 19 - 06:00 PM (#4020187) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Joe G Thanks for that summary of how the definition came about Steve. Must admit until Jim mentioned it I had never heard of it. Totally agree with you - if it sounds like folk it is folk to me and that is all that really matters :-) |
|
18 Nov 19 - 06:16 PM (#4020193) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Steve Gardham Sue You have provoked some interesting discussions and appear to be coming from a different angle. As far as I'm concerned this surely must be welcomed. I think you are absolutely correct in your second sentence (The others are pretty good too he added hastily). I do think that Harker has something sensible to say on this. The early collectors are a perfect example. They assembled this body of selective material and then 50 years later their followers decided to justify this with a 'definition'. There was definitely an English lead on this and a lot of the objections from other countries' scholars were based on this selectivity. However, the descriptors do largely work for this body of selective material. Unfortunately for them some of the descriptors also work on some of the material they rejected. |
|
18 Nov 19 - 06:22 PM (#4020198) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Dave the Gnome One nun dead! |
|
18 Nov 19 - 07:48 PM (#4020221) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Steve Shaw As a semi-outsider in the matter of the history of folk music, except in the narrow field of Irish traditional instrumental music, I find myself thinking that there's an awful lot of up-your-own-bum stuff in these discussions (ever the diplomat). I remember that Woody Guthrie said that he "made up" songs (I suppose as opposed to "composing" them or "writing" them). Well I guess that somebody, or a bunch of somebodys, "made up" every single piece of music way back in the mists of time, so it seems odd to me that a major qualification for a song being a folk song is that its origins are lost or that it's "anonymous." That's just accidental. Somebody or other still "made it up" and, qualitatively, it should be no different, say, from a song of similar era whose maker-upperer we DO know the name of. To me, that anonymity thing is a cod-qualification. There are loads of Irish tunes that I've played for years, assuming they were traditional, only for me to find out by accident that a named fellow had composed them. Could have fooled me, but then to me "scholarship" doesn't sit easy with my need to go out and have fun of a Friday night, and I'm damn sure that for every "scholar" laying down the lines there are a hundred people playing the music who give not a damn. This "folk process" malarkey simply means that we don't look at written-down versions or learn stuff rigidly by repeated listening to records. It's a rather haughty (and somewhat forbidding) expression which attempts to formalise the cheerful and chilled and casual approach to tunes or songs we've heard our mates or our dads and mums or their mates doing and we've copied them fortuitously imprecisely. You can't do that unless you're having fun... They played Ewan singing Manchester Rambler on Radio 3 (!) this morning. If that isn't folk music well I'll eat my hat. But it don't qualify, do it? So what is it then? Enough. I'm going back in me 'ole... |
|
18 Nov 19 - 08:12 PM (#4020225) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Lighter > the 1954 definition says there is no more folk music being created. Most posting totally reject this idea. Steve Gardham is 100% right. After my 15 years at Mudcat, I think it's very true that "most" of us truly believe that "folk music" is still being created on a grand scale, maybe even more than in the past. But they're referring to a very different sort of music, partly because they were led astray by '60s marketing ploys, partly because they feel a fondness for various romantic connotations of "folk music." Was Shakespeare Shakespeare? Depends on who you mean by Shakespeare. |
|
18 Nov 19 - 10:40 PM (#4020236) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,HiLo No, he wasn’t,Shakespeare , he was another man of the same name. sums up the folk thing for me. |
|
19 Nov 19 - 01:43 AM (#4020240) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: The Sandman 99per cent folk song collectors have an agenda of what they perceive as collectable, an exception was alfred williams, who asiunderstand it collected everything that he heard being sung |
|
19 Nov 19 - 04:39 AM (#4020261) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST a fondness for various romantic connotations (Lighter) Coming back to the rustic pot. If your authentic pot and my craft-potter lookalike are next to one another on the mantlepiece how much of the difference between them is romantic connotations associated with the 'real thing'? A ceramcist studying rustic pots would need to know, or maybeseek to tell us, which was which. Is a romatic view, maybe a romantic view of the politics of a time past, lurking in the objections to the 'looks like a duck and quacks like a duck' approach. |
|
19 Nov 19 - 04:40 AM (#4020262) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,jag Sorry that was me |
|
19 Nov 19 - 05:08 AM (#4020263) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Iains @ Steve Gardham. You raise some interesting points. I concede your point on stories I was thinking more in terms of mythology/folklore where a core idea remains intact over long periods of time as in the welsh and Irish example I quoted. The cattle raid of Cooley originated in the first century BC according to some sources snd was transmitted orally until the 6th century when it was first written down. It was the function of the bards to be a walking talking history book up until the church took over their role with the advantage of using written record.They survived in Ireland in some form up until the 17th century. Your point about fairy tales is very valid., There is a flood mythology in many cultures worldwide. To argue it was the same one would be a bit of a stretch, but there are areas where horrendous floods occurred at the end of the ice age, two would be the scab lands of North America and the English Channel. There is also evidence of ancient mega tsunamis (the chevrons in Madagascar may have been created by a 91m tsunami) If a cargo cult developed in PapuaNew Guinea on the basis of Dakotas dropping manna from Heaven,then a wall of water 91m high would likely have an even more striking impact on the few that got away andfigure prominantly in any subsequent tales. This can be developed in all sorts of ways. Ihave no problem accepting the same core story can be spread within different cultures(as the fairy tale you offer as an example) sometimes the core story may relate to identical events in different places. I keep banging on about the core for one reason. Some of these "myths" contained information. It is Sellers’s contention, eloquently expressed in her recent book, The Death of Gods in Ancient Egypt, that the Osiris myth may have been deliberately encoded with a group of key numbers that are ‘excess baggage’ as far as the narrative is concerned but that offer an eternal calculus by which surprisingly exact values can be derived for the following: 1 The time required for the earth’s slow precessional wobble to cause the position of sunrise on the vernal equinox to complete a shift of one degree along the ecliptic (in relation to the stellar background); 2 The time required for the sun to pass through one full zodiacal segment of thirty degrees; 3 The time required for the sun to pass through two full zodiacal segments (totalling sixty degrees); 4 The time required to bring about the ‘Great Return’4, i. e, for the sun to shift three hundred and sixty degrees along the ecliptic, thus fulfilling one complete precessional cycle or ‘Great Year’. Computing the Great Return The precessional numbers highlighted by Sellers in the Osiris myth are 360, 72, 30 and 12. Most of them are found in a section of the myth which provides us with biographical details of the various characters. These have been conveniently summarized by E. A. Wallis Budge, formerly keeper of Egyptian Antiquities at the British Museum: The goddess Nut, wife of the sun god Ra, was beloved by the god Geb. When Ra discovered the intrigue he cursed his wife and declared that she should not be delivered of a child in any month of any year. Then the god Thoth, who also loved Nut, played at tables with the moon and won from her five whole days. These he joined to the 360 days of which the year then consisted [emphasis added]. On the first of these five days Osiris was brought forth; and at the moment of his birth a voice was heard to proclaim that the lord of creation was born. Elsewhere the myth informs us that the 360–day year consists of ‘12 months of 30 days each’.6 And in general, as Sellers observes, ‘phrases are used which prompt simple mental calculations and an attention to numbers’.7 Thus far we have been provided with three of Sellers’s precessional numbers: 360, 12 and 30. The fourth number, which occurs later in the text, is by far the most important. As we saw in Chapter Nine, the evil deity known as Set led a group of conspirators in a plot to kill Osiris. The number of these conspirators was 72. With this last number in hand, suggests Sellers, we are now in a position to boot-up and set running an ancient computer programme: 12 = the number of constellations in the zodiac; 30 = the number of degrees allocated along the ecliptic to each zodiacal constellation; 72 = the number of years required for the equinoctial sun to complete a precessional shift of one degree along the ecliptic; 360 = the total number of degrees in the ecliptic; 72 × 30 = 2160 (the number of years required for the sun to complete a passage of 30 degrees along the ecliptic, i. e., to pass entirely through any one of the 12 zodiacal constellations); 2160 × 12 (or 360 × 72) = 25,920 (the number of years in one complete precessional cycle or ‘Great Year’, and thus the total number of years required to bring about the ‘Great Return’). Other figures and combinations of figures also emerge, for example: 36, the number of years required for the equinoctial sun to complete a precessional shift of half a degree along the ecliptic; 4320, the number of years required for the equinoctial sun to complete a precessional shift of 60 degrees (i. e., two zodiacal constellations). These, Sellers believes, constitute the basic ingredients of a precessional code which appears again and again, with eerie persistence, in ancient myths and sacred architecture. In common with much esoteric numerology, it is a code in which it is permissible to shift decimal points to left or right at will and to make use of almost any conceivable combinations, permutations, multiplications, divisions and fractions of the essential numbers (all of which relate precisely to the rate of precession of the equinoxes). The pre-eminent number in the code is 72. To this is frequently added 36, making 108, and it is permissible to multiply 108 by 100 to get 10,800 or to divide it by 2 to get 54, which may then be multiplied by 10 and expressed as 540 (or as 54,000. or as 540,000, or as 5,400,000, and so on). Also highly significant is 2160 (the number of years required for the equinoctial point to transit one zodiacal constellation), which is sometimes multiplied by 10 and by factors of ten (to give 216,000, 2,160,000, and so on) and sometimes by 2 to give 4320, or 43,200, or 432,000, or 4,320,000, ad infinition. If Sellers is correct in her hypothesis that the calculus needed to produce these numbers was deliberately encoded into the Osiris myth to convey precessional information to initiates, we are confronted by an intriguing anomaly. If they are indeed about precession, the numbers are out of place in time. The science they contain is too advanced for them to have been calculated by any known civilization of antiquity. Let us not forget that they occur in a myth which is present at the very dawn of writing inEgypt (indeed elements of the Osiris story are to be found in the Pyramid Texts dating back to around 2450 BC, in a context which suggests that they were exceedingly old even then.(https://erenow.net/ancient/fingerprints-of-the-gods-the-quest-continues/31.php) There is a passage in the Old Norse Poetic Edda known as the Grimnismal, a passage spoken by the god Odin in his disguise as Grimnir, in which the end of the world is described. Describing the scene in which the slain warriors of Valhalla issue forth to battle against the forces of destruction in the battle of Ragnarok, the Grimnismal tells us that five hundred gates and forty more are in the mighty building of Walhalla eight hundred Einherier come out of each one gate on the time they go out on defence against the Wolf. 540x800 = 43200 Now you may think the above is a load of old bollocks but: The numbers clearly relate to precession. It is critical the numbers transmit accurately otherwise we have events like Ramadan and Easter darting about all over the place, because the numbers are plain wrong. Apologies for being longwinded but it is the only way to make the point that core is key and must maintain integrity. Decoration around the edges is not a problem.How ancient societies came by these precessional numbers opens up another can of worms. So coming back to the discussion I would argue some songs and stories may change overtime, some may not. It depends on the tale/narrative. Prior to the age of scrivenors a professional class(bards) was responsible for the transmittal of history. I doubt they allowed themselves too much poetic license. To the purist Caxton started the rot followed by the broadsheet ballad printers. But was there ever a time the downtrodden masses burst into self penned song or is it a device invented to further pigeonhole the genre by academics? My view is that old or new it is all folk.- happy,sad, bawdy, historical, mythical - box it up how you like. Do not be surprised if my box is different to your box. Does it really matter? The entire exercise of dissection is entirely subjective therefore if there is discussion on boundaries, it is not a subject to get embroiled in bitter argument-that just stifles discussion. I dont care if someone picks holes in my analysis, they may well be better qualified to comment or simply construct a more balanced argument. If the majority posting here take the broader definition of folk, as I do, surely that calls for the 1954 definition to be modified. and thanks to guest Kenny for drawing attention to other threads on the subject. |
|
19 Nov 19 - 05:10 AM (#4020265) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Jim Carroll "have an agenda of what they perceive as collectable" Nonsense, I'm afraid Dick All folk song collectors went out to collect folk songs If we'd been train spotters wed have gone ou to watch trains, not buses Iw as our job to find fok songs, it would have been musicoligists to collect everything the folk sang If we'd have none that we'd have to haves spent the rest of our lives sorting through many hours of recordings to sort out the folk songs from everything else and our singers would have died off if we'd have gone gor everything they had As it was, we spent many hours recording background information and opinions from the singers There were few, if any full-time collectors, so our time had to be given with the view to having earn a living in full time jobs Give us a break Jim |
|
19 Nov 19 - 05:46 AM (#4020272) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Aha, now I just found something in which an 'expert' states that Walter Pardon learned some of his songs by listening to records on a wind-up gramophone. Any ideas who this expert may have been? And on whether or not this same expert later vehemently denied that any such thing happened. Which ones and were they recorded or not? We shall never know. What we do know is that there were disagreements about whether Put A Bit of Powder on it should have been released, one argument being that it wasn't all folk. And for me there were clearly 'agendas' some of them potentially valid, one does not have to take sides on this, but it seems undeniable that there were agendas. If this is regarded as trolling I am sorry. It sort of extends the 'have an agenda about what is collectable' point to a wider one including 'have an agenda about what is issuable on record as part of a project of presenting a particular singer to the public'. Please let me know if this comes across as trolling. And I shall go away. I am sure everybody is grateful that so much material was captured on tape or via transcription. The point has been made very often on these threads. |
|
19 Nov 19 - 06:00 AM (#4020282) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Jack Campin This new book shows how far things have moved on with the craft of collecting. Lots of practical advice that goes WAY beyond the "1954" platitudes in this thread. Gilman and Fenn, Handbook for Folklore and Ethnomusicology Fieldwork (2019) |
|
19 Nov 19 - 06:18 AM (#4020285) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Interesting reference Jack. Thank you. I guess this book is about how to answer the question posed by this thread in such a way as to produce findings that are relatively transparently arrived at and can be evaluated? It seems to me that what Steve says about the '54 definition makes sense, trying to come up with a definition that fits various international contexts must be tricky. I know there has been a lot of discussion of definitions.... |
|
19 Nov 19 - 06:20 AM (#4020286) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Iains I do not believe the umpteen ways of skinning a cat has been applied in this thread about collecting. Collecting is a given. It is what is being collected that is the issue. It is it's categorization in terms of an inadequate definition that is under discussion. If you think it is all platitudes perhaps you should find another thread. |
|
19 Nov 19 - 06:24 AM (#4020287) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Jack, it seems that some of the stuff in the book applies generally to qualitative research, with specialised material for a specifically music-related context. If I had money to spare I might buy it. I have read stuff about qualitative research before and even done some myself at a low and unpublishable level. Obviously, one cannot expect amateurs to achieve what this book suggests, which, regrettably, leaves both their methods and their findings vulnerable to critique. But as I have learned, pointing this out isn't necessarily the way to make oneself popular on Mudcat. :( ;) |
|
19 Nov 19 - 06:26 AM (#4020288) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Ians: if that was directed at me, then as a courtesy I shall not post any more. Thank you for an interesting thread. I shall continue to read it with interest. Adieu! |
|
19 Nov 19 - 06:53 AM (#4020292) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Iains No Pseud it was not aimed at you. I find your contributions thoughtful. I have a problem with a thread being dismissed as platitudes. |
|
19 Nov 19 - 07:04 AM (#4020295) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Jim Carroll Why is it that the only people who ever cite '54 are those who seem to have an objection to any form of definition, I wonder ? Any definition is an attempt to identify the uniqueness of that being defined There are a whole bunch of books on collecting written by people who have spent years on the folk-face rather tat sitting on their bums warming the seats of institutions. Kenneth Goldstein springs immediately to mind, Lomax has written numerous guides to the activity, Bruce Jackson, who trawled the Texas prisons wrote one, Henry Glassie, did an excellent guide based on his work in Ireland, Tom Munnelly put out a private document based on the comprehensive collecting of Irish folklore written by Sean O'Sullivan. All these people weer active collective collectors and all made it quite clear that each particular field demands it's own particular knowledge and skills To dismiss the work of those with some background in ewhat they wrote of and claim that any work covers everything and negates everything les id somewhat.... can't think of an apt word Personally, I have found the work of Glassie, Munnely annd Goldsien the mostt usefull to date, with a fair measure of the experiences of D K Wilgus and Eleanor Long thrown in for good measure And of course, there's always Helen Creighton and Edith Fowke to fall back on Jim Carroll |
|
19 Nov 19 - 07:04 AM (#4020296) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Jack Campin I was the one who used the word "platitude". Current books on folklore studies, like the one I pointed to, have more than 100 years of experience since Sharp's time to draw on, and that experience is both about methodology and practicality. It's worth finding out how other people have wasted their time, made avoidable mistakes, got arrested or shot at, found religion and contracted STDs in the course of their fieldwork. |
|
19 Nov 19 - 07:31 AM (#4020299) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,jag How often did the collectors collect everything that a source singer could recall? If they didn't collect everthing how did they chose what they collected? Did they explain to others how the choice was made before or after they did the choosing? Those are questions that could come after reading a basic book about sampling. |
|
19 Nov 19 - 07:38 AM (#4020300) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Steve Shaw Still sitting here as a semi-outsider, I'm just musing that an activity that involves informal socialising, enjoying the crack/craic, often getting a bit pissed with your mates, singing old songs and changing things a bit because you can't quite remember it all or like it better your way/your dad's way, same with old tunes, doing your own thing with people of similar sentiment, etc., needs a bunch of academics in a committee room to anguish over a definition of what we're doing/should be doing/shouldn't really be doing if we want to call it what they see as "folk..." Anyone care to define classical music? Off to the committee room then! :-) Defining it won't preserve it. That just puts people off. What preserves it is people having fun with it. |
|
19 Nov 19 - 07:43 AM (#4020301) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Lighter > how much of the difference between them is romantic connotations associated with the 'real thing'? Plenty. I'd say the words "connotations" and "associations" in general account for every bit of the substantive (i.e., non-microscopic) difference. A person who knows nothing about rustic pots, like me, would declare them to be "obviously" identical. But if I were told (truthfully or otherwise) that one was a fake/counterfeit/imitation, I would value it less, or not at all, even while appreciating the skill of the faker/emulator. Is the famous version of "Edward" a "folk ballad"? The question can be a red herring. What's interesting are matters such as the formal and thematic qualities of "Edward," the degree of somebody's editing (if any), how and where (if we care) it was obtained, what it resembles, who (if anybody) likes to sing or recite it, how much of its history or background can be discovered, and innumerable other questions of human interest - to people who are interested in them. The 1954 definition describes a real phenomenon, an identifiable kind of music and song. Other kinds of music and song are other kinds. So what? That says nothing about their quality or value. Whether a piece can be fit (or be forced to fit) the '54 definition doesn't affect the definition's accuracy as a description of an identifiable category. All such fitting does, it seems to me, is affirm that the fitter likes to think of the piece as "folk" - for whatever connotations and associations that may have for him. Researchers, listeners, and performers will all go their own way. The play's the thing. |
|
19 Nov 19 - 07:54 AM (#4020305) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Iains Jack Campin I think I was too ready to jump in there, I apologize. |
|
19 Nov 19 - 08:07 AM (#4020306) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Iains https://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode/how-myths-evolve-over-time-and-migrations/ An interesting bit of research. https://www.jstor.org/stable/6151?seq=9#metadata_info_tab_contents |
|
19 Nov 19 - 08:18 AM (#4020309) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Iains: cheers. Jag With you on 'sampling'. The same thought had occurred to me with respect to making assertions based on interviews within 20th century folklore work. Sandman has made a related comment in the past when he has questioned how far generalisations based on one or two 'traditional folk' singers could be generalised to apply to them all. In some frames of mind I might feel like Steve Shaw does. But not all of the time. |
|
19 Nov 19 - 08:31 AM (#4020311) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Jim Carroll Value has nothing to do with collecting or shouldn't have It is not up to us to decide the value of what the folk had to offer and the more they had to say about their songs and stories, the better. The uniqueness of their songs and stories become obvious the minute you talk to the singers - they regard them as different - who are we to argue ? I've put up far too many examples of their doing so for it to be necessary to repeat but it really is time sme of the 'researchers' and singers started to listen to and act on what they had to say The fact that ballads like Edward still remained important to the older generation, particularlty Travellers is important in its own right - I will repeat what Wexford traveller, Pop's Johnny Connors said about it because I believe it can't be repeated enough “I’d say the song, myself, goes back to.... depicts Cain and Abel in the Bible and where Our Lord said to Cain.... I think this is where the Travellers Curse come from too, because Our Lord says to Cain, “Cain”, says Our Lord, “you have slain your brother, and for this”, says Our Lord, says he, “and for this, be a wanderer and a fugitive on the earth”. “Not so Lord” says he, “this punishment is too severe, and whoever finds me”, says he, “will slay me, “says he “or harass me”. “Not so”, says Our Lord, says he, “whoever finds Cain and punishes or slains (sic) Cain, I will punish them sevenfold”. And I think this is where the Travellers curse come from. Anyway, the song depicts this, this er.... 1 call it Cain and Abel anyway; there never was a name for the song, but that what I call it, you know, the depiction of Cain and Abel.” I believe our old songs are important history carriers describing the experiences of those most effected but least consulted by the events described - wars, land siezure, upheaval from countryside to towns, women used as ladders to be climbed to improve social status, those who follewd their men to war and loaded the guns on the front line.... all writ large in our folk songs We recorded a song here in Clare that described (in comic terms) an event during the War of Independence that failed to make the history books and has been completely forgotten by today's locals HERE Lumping these songs in with those bought on song-sheets and in books is, to me, to reduce the importance of our traditional songs We have yet to follow up our discovery of the local song-making traditions that were features of rural life throughout rural Ireland, particularly among the undocumented Traveller communities We haven't begun to understand how our oral songmaking worked and if we are ever to get anywhere making an educated guess much of the information lies in the songs themselves and what the singers had to say about them Time after time we were told how important these songs were to the people who retained them (even to the extent of one singer describing how he once tried to teach his dog to sing to stop them from dying with him) If they weer important to those people surely they have to be important to us (even if it is only for their continuing entertainment value) Jim |
|
19 Nov 19 - 08:47 AM (#4020317) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Jack Campin I'm just musing that an activity that involves informal socialising, enjoying the crack/craic, often getting a bit pissed with your mates, singing old songs and changing things a bit because you can't quite remember it all or like it better your way/your dad's way, same with old tunes, doing your own thing with people of similar sentiment, etc., needs a bunch of academics in a committee room to anguish over a definition of what we're doing/should be doing/shouldn't really be doing if we want to call it what they see as "folk..." The point was to define the remit of an association with its own journal. If you could write up enough of the social interactions you listed in a sufficiently enlightening way, you might have got your article accepted, though it would have taken some work. This is what you'd have been trying to fit into. Looks pretty straightforward to me what the writers were interested in discussing with each other. Part of the index for the first few volumes Do you see anything there about telling people in a British pub what to do? Entomologists don't give orders to cockroaches. |
|
19 Nov 19 - 08:50 AM (#4020319) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Jim Carroll "Entomologists don't give orders to cockroaches." Far too often it's forgotten that the collector is the pupil and the singer the teacher and not the other way around Jim Carroll |
|
19 Nov 19 - 08:52 AM (#4020322) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Iains Entomologists don't give orders to cockroaches. Wonderful! nearly made me spill my coffee. |
|
19 Nov 19 - 09:08 AM (#4020327) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,jag But if I were told (truthfully or otherwise) that one was a fake/counterfeit/imitation, I would value it less, or not at all, even while appreciating the skill of the faker/emulator.(lghter) It's the emulation aspect I have been thinking of. As an aside there are those who would say the emulator should have been using their skills to do something 'creative', which thought comes after reading a line in the book page linked by Iains "The power of imagination of man is rather limited" I think the history of the songs and tunes is fascinating but for me it is in the context of 'what the folks sang' (or played) and separate to the side of things Steve Shaw summarised. How much of Steve Shaw's "informal socialising, enjoying the crack/craic, often getting a bit pissed with your mates, singing old songs and changing things a bit because you can't quite remember it all or like it better your way/your dad's way, same with old tunes, doing your own thing with people of similar sentiment" was what Walter Pardon's forebears were doing in the singing room at the Mitre Tavern? If it it was similar and the folk process was alive then isn't it still alive now? |
|
19 Nov 19 - 09:19 AM (#4020330) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,jag @Pseudonymous (mainly). On the sampling. I think in the Walter Pardon thread Jim Caroll gave a full list of his repertoire as known by the collectors. Including the music hall and parlour ballads. I think The Sandman has referred to one of the older collectors elsewhere who took the lot. I can see that the 'first revival' collectors didn't have the resources to collect it all and can't see Sharp using his time to note down parlour ballads. By Sharp's time the entymologists where kiiling everything within the capability of their collecting tools and tipping it out on the bench when they got home. |
|
19 Nov 19 - 09:24 AM (#4020332) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Jim Carroll "'what the folks sang' (or played)" That's fine Jag, for those who are interested in that sort of thing - it's also important, but in practical terms, unless you are prepared to devote far more time then most of us had/have, you really can't do it all It was extremely difficult to get, say Walter Pardon or Mary Delaney to sing their non-folk songs Walter described them (on tape) as "them old things" and deliberately took up his family's traditional songs as a young man because his relative contemporaries had abandoned them for the "modern stuff" Mary firmly refused to sing her extensive C and W songs into a tape recorder because, she claimed, I only sing them cos that's what the lads ask for down in the pub" Jim |
|
19 Nov 19 - 09:33 AM (#4020333) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Jim Carroll By the way "Entomologists don't give orders to cockroaches." Another thing far too often forgotten is that Cockroaches don't take orders from Etymologists and is disparaging to suggest that singers take orders from collectors THat needs to be remembered by those accusing us of manipulating our singers Both Walter and sean nós singer Joe heaney were very much their own men, but both have been accused of being stupid and malleable enough to allow commentators to manipulate them Joe Heaney's epic interview session with Maccoll and Seeger stands as one of the most important examples of a traditional singer talking of his art, yet it has been bedevilled by accusations that the singer was gullible enough to be manipulated by his collectors Anybody who spent time with Joe would know that Joe wasn't that type of individual Jim |
|
19 Nov 19 - 09:33 AM (#4020334) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST But, but, but was a peasant pot thrown or coiled Call me "Just a plucky peasant pheasant pot chucker" but if it was cast it wasn't peasant either. Mr Red (ex potter, & sometime plucky pedant) |
|
19 Nov 19 - 09:36 AM (#4020337) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Jack Campin Far too often it's forgotten that the collector is the pupil and the singer the teacher and not the other way around That isn't a relationship that leads to good fieldwork, either way round. It's perfectly possible to value the people you're studying as human beings without taking their word for it on everything. Nigel Barley quotes a saying among anthropologists: "when the culture you're studying starts to seem normal, it's time to go home". |
|
19 Nov 19 - 09:36 AM (#4020338) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: The Sandman alfred williams was the collector i mentioned |
|
19 Nov 19 - 10:03 AM (#4020345) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Lighter > If it it was similar and the folk process was alive then isn't it still alive now? But at some point in the past, it was vibrant. Now it seems to be on its last legs. Of course, they've been saying that for a hundred years, but those opinions were based largely on nostalgia, wistfulness, and a necessarily limited fund of knowledge. Now we see a lot more of what's happening - and isn't. |
|
19 Nov 19 - 10:07 AM (#4020346) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Pseudonymous I agree with Jack Campin's comment on not necessarily taking the word of those you are 'studying' on everything. But for a reader of the output of such studies, the context etc. etc. will also affect how far they take the word of the subjects, as presented/recorded as a reflection of the facts. |
|
19 Nov 19 - 10:23 AM (#4020351) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,jag But at some point in the past, it was vibrant. Now it seems to be on its last legs. What do we know about past timescales? Are we comparing the last 50 years or so with a much longer period in the past, rather than "a point in the past" ? |
|
19 Nov 19 - 11:32 AM (#4020356) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Lighter Period, not point. |
|
19 Nov 19 - 11:44 AM (#4020360) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,jag All the same, we are comparing 50 years or less now with multiple periods of that length in the past. How much folk processing was done between 1750 and 1800 and how did it compare with what is done now. |
|
19 Nov 19 - 11:49 AM (#4020362) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Was it A L Lloyd who said that once literacy was invented there could be no pure oral tradition? Please excuse me if this is wrong. Somebody made this point. Not sure I agree with it, as there may still be some pockets of culture not touched by literacy... |
|
19 Nov 19 - 11:58 AM (#4020365) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Steve Gardham Whoever said it and no matter how accurate it was we all know we are not dealing with pure oral tradition here. Like most things in the world evolution has taken place and accelerated evolution in many things. Rather than admit the 'folk process has died' I prefer to think, it has changed, out of all recognition maybe, but something resembling it is still there. |
|
19 Nov 19 - 12:05 PM (#4020370) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Iains once literacy was invented there could be no pure oral tradition If true(and I do not know enough to comment) then in Ireland pure oral transmission ceased a long way back. It is held by some that Ogham script predates the early Christian church in Ireland, maybe predating it's 5th century arrival by centuries. Are we talking widespread literacy of Victorian times, or of a very small elite dating back to Roman times(in the uk) https://www.jstor.org/stable/25516056?read-now=1&seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents |
|
19 Nov 19 - 12:28 PM (#4020375) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Jim Carroll ") then in Ireland pure oral transmission ceased a long way back" No it did not and that was exacerbated by th fact that many Irish singers did not read English as their main language was Irish Even in the first half of the twentieth century many Irish, while being able to read, often struggled to both read and write English, particularly in The Gaeltachts, though they often sang English songs The Travellers could neither read nor write as a community and their pariah status made it highly unlikely that they could seek assistance from the settled communities - this was still largely the case in the 1970s Travellers were the most important preservers of many of our longest and rarest ballads and stories, all learned and carried orally The subject of learning songs from print is complex, many singers didn't trust printed versions, others treated the printed word as sacrosanct and unalterable and, unless the songs were perfect (many broadsides couldn't be sung without radical alteration) they were rejected as not good enough It is nonsense to claim there is no such thing as an oral tradition, almost as nonsensical as suggesting that so many traditional songs originated from print Jim Carroll |
|
19 Nov 19 - 12:35 PM (#4020378) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: punkfolkrocker Bloody hell... I take my eye of this thread for 2 days.. .. and there's no way I'll ever catch up on reading it all... Have I missed much...??? Sooooo... Is the folk process dead..??? on drip feed in a coma...??? skipping about merrily Twice Round the Daffodils...??? on it's way home in a taxi with an oxygen cylinder for when needed...??? I wish I had time to read the past 2 days posts to find out... |
|
19 Nov 19 - 01:10 PM (#4020382) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Jim Carroll In my opinion, for what it's worth, as a creative enity, it's been dying inge the mid 19th century and is all but gone Jokes are still told and football chants still made, but are they too basic to be creative.... I've ben told kids no longer make songs - dunno I think somebody mentioned Mondegreens - I don't believe mistakes are part of the folk process, which, o me, implies deliberation Jim |
|
19 Nov 19 - 01:12 PM (#4020384) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: punkfolkrocker So bearing in mind I've missed out on a lot of the usual 'debate' since I last looked in here... I could settle comfortably for a constructive explanation that: .. a previously long recognised folk process has become nearly obsolete. But life goes on.. New different unfamiliar folk processes are evolving, while we older genertions still obsess obliviously about our fading older established folk process...??? Personally, I'm no longer young and culturally in touch enough with those new processes, but neither do I have a vested interest in the old one that they are supplementing, or replacing... All I can do is keep an open mind and try to be aware that new things I might not understand or even like, are developing... |
|
19 Nov 19 - 01:37 PM (#4020389) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Steve Shaw The trouble with being creative is that it might take effort. I would have thought that a true folk process would be severely hobbled by too conscious effort. Now spontaneous creativity when you're not even thinking about being or trying to be creative... I would have thought also that the easy availability of the written word, of scores, of cheap tune books, of anything you like up on YouTube, of music lessons executed by classically-trained teachers, plus the increasing ability of people to make use of these things (some of us folkies are middle-class university types, tha knows, not horny-handed sons of toil...) might militate against the hallowed folk process. On the other hand, there's fierce resistance to the open use of such things (music stands verboten, or at least ridiculed...) in many quarters, etc. We just have to worry whether the people passionately arguing about it, as here (healthy) are in declining numbers (not healthy...) |
|
19 Nov 19 - 02:37 PM (#4020399) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Iains Jokes are still told and football chants still made, but are they too basic to be creative. The trouble with being creative is that it might take effort. How about Ball of Kerrimuir r. I last heard it in the prospect of whitby on wapping wall over 50 years ago. It must have had a thousand verses then. it was only based on villagers back then- now it uses the entire county. But to be serious, there seems to be a majority agreement the folk process has not died, it has merely evolved as it did when literacy arrived on the scene, was further modified by collectors attempts to codify the genre, and finally changed out of all recognition by scientific advances from the wax cylinder, to the tape recorder and through to the ubiquitous mobile phone. If the general consensus on an international thread is that folk is alive and well then it could be that the some who beg to differ perhaps should step back and re evaluate. Even collecting modifies the folk process just like Schrodinger's dammed cat. |
|
19 Nov 19 - 02:48 PM (#4020403) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Jim Carroll "Ball of Kerrimuir r." Like all jokes it is centuries old and has added and shed dozemns of verses thoughout that time It has also been in print with dozens of verses I believe jokes are the nearest things we have o a folk process and have always been bemused by how they have travelled often unbelievably quickly but....! Like all forms of folklore, the media has made an oral tradition virtually unnecessary Nice one in Ken Loachs's latest masterpiece Did you hear of the dyslexic insomniac who lay awake all night wondering if there was a Dog Jim Carroll |
|
19 Nov 19 - 02:53 PM (#4020407) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: punkfolkrocker Iains -... Ding dong dox pussy in a box... there you go.. the start of a 21st centuryfication of an old folk rhyme... |
|
19 Nov 19 - 04:02 PM (#4020417) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Lighter > If the general consensus on an international thread is that folk is alive and well then it could be that the some who beg to differ perhaps should step back and re evaluate. Are birds dinosaurs? In the past twenty or so years, I've heard many paleontologists say they are. So are dinosaurs alive and well? I don't think so. Except by special pleading, Of course there's an evolutionary and physiological connection. But in other than attention-grabbing contexts, if one likes to call birds dinosaurs and nothing else, one might either find one's sanity questioned, or else be thought of as a twit. I'll repeat: it all depends on who you mean by Shakespeare. Doesn't make a damn bit of difference to Shakespeare. One further point: labeling complex things often depends on what you mean by "is" or "are." |
|
19 Nov 19 - 04:37 PM (#4020424) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: GUEST,Pseudonymous Referring back to the definition offered in the OP In the study of folklore, the folk process is the way folk material, especially stories, music, and other art, is transformed and re-adapted in the process of its transmission from person to person and from generation to generation. Taking a broad view, especially noting the word 'stories', then I don't think it is dead. So for example, within families, accounts given of relatives (person to person and generation to generation); narratives relating to society (see Brexit for example) Does this make sense? |
|
19 Nov 19 - 05:19 PM (#4020431) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Dave the Gnome If the folk process no longer exists and to be a folk song, it must go through the folk process, can any new folk songs ever exist? |
|
19 Nov 19 - 05:50 PM (#4020435) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Steve Shaw You're in a minority of one, Lighter. Birds are indeed dinosaurs. They are theropod dinosaurs, a group that had its origins in the Mesozoic. It's the scientific consensus, old chap. And I agree with it. |
|
19 Nov 19 - 06:49 PM (#4020453) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Lighter I once heard a paleontologist say, "There's really no difference between a T. rex and a chicken." If you offered to put him in a cage with one or the other, I think he'd see the difference. So, Steve, you'd think I was perfectly normal if I always said things like, "Look at that flock of dinosaurs perched on the wires!" "I'm going dinosaur watching in the woods." "Kitty caught a dinosaur today." "Dino want a cracker?" Not as jokes, mind you, but always. A bird may be a dinosaur in one sense, but a bird is not a dinosaur in any other sense. Word meanings (and definitions) come from consensus, not from fossils. |
|
20 Nov 19 - 10:01 AM (#4020469) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Dave the Gnome There are many things that are in two categories. Trains, for instance, are modes of transport but you don't get many mode of transport spotters. I don't see why you cannot refer to a single thing by two names depending on circumstance. |
|
20 Nov 19 - 10:03 AM (#4020470) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Dave the Gnome Changing words is all part of the folk process anyway :-) |
|
20 Nov 19 - 10:23 AM (#4020476) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: punkfolkrocker I'm still waking up.. old dinosaurs...????? I suppose some folk clubs might be a bit like jurassic park...???? ..aging dinos moaning that modern birds with their cheery chirruping aren't singing properly like tricerotops and bronto did back in the prehistoric primeval era, when everything in life was much better..... |
|
20 Nov 19 - 10:30 AM (#4020477) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Lighter > I don't see why you cannot refer to a single thing by two names. Some people refer to many different things by the same name. A name like "folksong," for example. |
|
20 Nov 19 - 11:10 AM (#4020485) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Iains > I don't see why you cannot refer to a single thing by two names. Traditionally an Anorak is a a trainspotter, for example. |
|
20 Nov 19 - 11:35 AM (#4020489) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Steve Shaw "...back in the prehistoric primeval era, when everything in life was much better....." Including Raquel Welch's nappy... |
|
20 Nov 19 - 11:42 AM (#4020490) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Steve Shaw "I once heard a paleontologist say, 'There's really no difference between a T. rex and a chicken.'" Which just goes show that even palaeontologists can be silly. As a matter of fact, Mrs Steve is used to my saying that I'm just going out to feed the dinosaurs. |
|
20 Nov 19 - 11:43 AM (#4020491) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Iains Traditional folk as mandated by the 1954 definition is a dinosaur(a veritable T. Rex judging by the responses generated) However the ontogeny of it's bird offspring is keeping the phylum alive. The dinosaurs could not compete in the modern world, they were but one more of evolution's blind alleys, but if you accept the concept that ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny then the genre is beating it;s wings strongly and little eggs are constantly hatching. |
|
20 Nov 19 - 12:20 PM (#4020501) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Joe G This is getting increasingly surreal :-) |
|
20 Nov 19 - 12:23 PM (#4020502) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: punkfolkrocker The earliest known folk club... |
|
20 Nov 19 - 12:26 PM (#4020504) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Jim Carroll "This is getting increasingly surreal :-)" You may write that down as they say in Dublin when they agree with you Nice to know people take folk music seriously - warms the cockles... Jim |
|
20 Nov 19 - 12:30 PM (#4020505) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: Iains Sometimes analogy saves acres of words! |
|
20 Nov 19 - 12:40 PM (#4020510) Subject: RE: Folklore: Has the folk Process died? From: punkfolkrocker "analogy" - ain't that what they sell in tubes at the chemists to soothe piles...??? Some old folkies must have constant chronic hemorrhoids judging by their bleak outlook on life...??? I was never a happy bunny when mine thrombosed... |
