|
13 Jun 00 - 06:11 PM (#242075) Subject: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: The Shambles In the some of the debates, musical and otherwise that we have had on The Mudcat the terms, 'lumpers' and 'splitters' are mentioned. These terms had their origin in biological classification. 'Lumpers' being those who lump species and groups together and 'splitters' who would divide into sub-species and smaller groups.
Whatever the subject of the debate, these tend to be the two extremes. More accurately I think these two extremes could be described as includers and excluders.
This is not yet another attempt to start the 'what is folk' debate but to use it as an example, I would choose a larger inclusive definition than many others would. This is pretty much true for whatever the subject. Some people have strong views on what instruments should be excluded from certain types of music and I would not care, as long as they were played sensitively…..And so on.
It might be because I have a deep-seated fear of being excluded from things, who knows? It must be recognised however that exclusion is a painful process for those being excluded and my sympathies would tend to be with them. I have this mental image of a sad and lonely soul, walking home carrying their tuba, after being excluded from a bluegrass jam. Are you a includer or an excluder? Do you find yourself in pretty much the same position on this scale or does your position vary, depending on the subject? And what does it all mean and is there any hope for the bluegrass tuba players among us? |
|
13 Jun 00 - 06:20 PM (#242078) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Mrrzy I dig the bluegrass tuba. But in other news, I tend to go with what the words are doing, rather than the music... so a lot of REM I think of as folk, and a lot of Gilbert & Sullivan, and so on. Moody Blues, Yes, anyone who tells stories in song, even if the accompanying music isn't what would be called a ballad or a folk song. So I guess I'm an includer...what I think of is songs that "folks" can sing, I guess, even if some of us might have trouble with the Nightmare pattersong. |
|
13 Jun 00 - 07:21 PM (#242102) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: TerriM I think, as a folk club organiser that I am, I hope,naturally an includer, despite the number of times my senses, sensibilities and sanity have been under assault. Thre whole point of a folk club, as I saw it, was that it was for 'folk', they didn't have to be good, whatever that means, they just had to want to perform.Folk music, by it's very nature, is eclectic, and folk clubs should be driven by that and be inclusive.Well, that's my two pen'orth anyway :) |
|
13 Jun 00 - 08:49 PM (#242144) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: sophocleese How about we split the definiton and lump people into different categories? Damn it, I guess that means I'm a splitter. I must be a splitter. This doesn't mean that I exclude people but that I do make distinctions between the music, driving styles or hair colour of different people. When I describe someone as having blonde hair I'm attempting to describe as accurately as I can what I see. This is not the same as saying Susan has blond hair therefore she is a good girl and David has black hair therefore he is a bad boy. It does mean though that I can appreciate Susan hair in its golden tints and sunny brightness and David's hair for its velvety look and dramatic elegance. Occassionally I find myself in argument with a determined lumper, but it seems to me that is because the lumper is reading other definitions into physical descriptions, or is misreading my reason for describing. Certainly I agree that a folk club should be inclusive, but if the organizers of events are blind to differences of style, ability and purpose in the players than they don't help the players or the audience.
|
|
13 Jun 00 - 10:26 PM (#242171) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Mbo I'm DEFINATELY a lumper. --Mbo |
|
13 Jun 00 - 10:34 PM (#242177) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Ebbie Thread Creep Alert! "a sad and lonely soul, walking home carrying their tuba, after being excluded from a bluegrass jam." T. Shambles: what a great line! Interestingly, a Canadian tuba player that has occasionally come to Juneau does play country. Sounds pretty good too. Now back to lumpers and splitters...Ebbie |
|
13 Jun 00 - 10:35 PM (#242178) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Bill D I am conceptually a splitter, but practically a lumper.. The point is, I want the categories recognized and understood so that everything does not become mush...but...if you bring a tuba to my party and want to play "Wildwood Flower" on it, I'll play along...and to a certain extent, if all you know is "Yellow Submarine", I'll tolerate THAT too...but if you try to tell me that "Yellow Submarine" if real folk music, we go to the trenches... Every art, hobby, cultural group, etc., has 'areas' which appeal to people in different ways...it is not necessarily exclusionary to note the borders and divisions, and sometimes the 'tatters' want to go off by themselves and not invite the knitters and crocheters and whining that "well, WE use woven threads TOO" just doesn't help!... you don't have to be rude and snobby to explain that right now you just want to wallow in old ballads, and NOT have fiddle tunes interrupting...sure it's all music, and maybe all FOLK music,but......but eventually I'll want to hear the fiddles...I just want it RECOGNIZED that there is a difference!
|
|
14 Jun 00 - 12:13 AM (#242205) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Mark Cohen There are two groups of people in the world: those who divide the world into two groups of people and those who don't. I don't. Aloha, Mark (temporarily joining the group of people who post to a thread without having very much substantial to add) |
|
14 Jun 00 - 01:38 AM (#242221) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Metchosin Me neither Mark but here goes anyways. Little Richard said "Rock'n Roll is when you sing about losing your girlfriend and Country is when you sing about losing your wife." "Maybe Folk could be defined as when you sing about losing your dog.*BG* I fear I'm about to have my lumps split. |
|
14 Jun 00 - 01:59 AM (#242225) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Mark Clark Since I suspect some of my ramblings on the bluegrass thread are at least partly to blame for Shambles outstanding declaration, please let me try to convince you that I am fundamentally an includer as well. At a folk festival jam or song circle (we used to call them hootenannys) I always want every one included, whatever they play or sing. At such events I tend to think that performing highly structured ensemble music in a jam detracts from the event and makes people feel shut out. I relish the chance to hear new things and new techniques and there is no music in any style from any country or region that would cause me to turn my back. (Oh wait, I forgot about Kenney G.) I love to hear a room full of voices raised in song and I love to hear what everyone is experimenting with. That's why I spend time on these forums, because Mudcat is like that too. Any session-type event that is advertised and open to anyone shouldn't be surprised when people show up; I think a special effort should be made to make everyone feel welcome. That's the way people have treated me and it's the way I treat them. If someone wants to have a purely bluegrass jam around these parts, they usually take care to invite only experienced bluegrass players with bluegrass expectations and they don't advertise the session beyond the limited personal invitations.
"Now I don't want to get off on a rant here but..." (lights fade to black) "But that's just my opinion... I could be wrong." (lights come back up, wild applause) Cheers, - Mark |
|
14 Jun 00 - 02:06 AM (#242229) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Mrrzy Mark, there are really three kinds of people - those who can do arithmetic, and those who can't. |
|
14 Jun 00 - 03:56 AM (#242243) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Fiddlin' Big Al The third kind is the splumper. I am definitely a splumper. Played banjo with a Scots bagpiper at a luau, fiddled for a squaredance in a hot air balloon, and played banjo accompanied by a rhythm section of scantly clad logger ladies weilding running chain saws for a chamber of commerce breakfast. (Didn't stare - didn't dare.) Selective eclecticism = eclectic selectivity. Perhaps what is here is a sort of dialectical musicalism. Splumpers RULE. |
|
14 Jun 00 - 04:08 AM (#242248) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: GUEST,Roger the skiffler I suppose musically I'm a lumper as I find my favourite jazz & blues record shop (Ray's in London) overcategorizes everything to my frustration when I'm trying to decide where they'd put things. Their blues section has "honkers and wailers", for example, and the LP section "rare as hen's teeth" (with prices to match!). On the other hand, a delight to browse for the unexpected, only annoying when looking for something specific. I suspect it is the same with performing. If you are advertised as an Irish or Bluegrass etc evening people come to hear that. If you are less specific "song circle" etc then there is the pleasure of serendipity. Not that my opinion on anything folkie is worth a gnat's gonads. RtS |
|
14 Jun 00 - 05:47 AM (#242260) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: The Shambles Mark. Sorry about my "outstanding declaration", I was just born like that. Surgery hasn't helped either. I had not read your comments on the 'bluegrass thread' but I will go and do so now. The ones I have read there were very informative as indeed were all the contributions here. The reference to bluegrass was just an example.
It was interesting to read that you do change your position on the scale, depending on the subject. Unlike Bill D and I, who it seems, will always be at different end of the tennis court. 30-15 to me at the moment, I think, Bill?
But the purpose of the thread was not to argue that either extreme was the right one. But, oh what the hell….. My serve……..
I can understand the need for different types of everything but feel that there is little real danger of things becoming one large grey lump. One large, many faceted, multi-coloured and multi-cultured lump, maybe?
I believe that there always will be quite natural and clear divisions, in music anyway. More generally I think the danger comes when, in order to avoid this perceived grey lump, conscious efforts are made to design and maintain some idea of purity. For I believe that history tells us that these attempts to avoid change, to narrow, control and to some extent deny power and a say, to others are doomed to failure in the long term……….. Remember Tubby the tuba? Is there not a forth type of person, those that can understand tennis scoring? |
|
14 Jun 00 - 06:07 AM (#242261) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: The Shambles Having read Roger's post, I am not now expecting an early return of serve from Bill D. For I believe that he is already packing his bags for a visit to the record shop that Roger described.? |
|
14 Jun 00 - 08:29 AM (#242276) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Whistle Stop When it comes to musical categories, I'm a lumper. I like to mix things up, and think that most of the more appealing musical developments in history resulted from combining forms, often over the objections of the purists. In creative endeavors, synthesis is what it's all about. When it comes to playing and/or performing, however, I'm probably more of a splitter (also known as an antisocial son of a bitch). I don't generally enjoy large jams (more than three or four musicians) with no clear focus, and I don't invite others to layer their playing on top of mine without a clear concept tying the individual contributions into a whole that is greater than the sum of the parts. And in performance, there's an invisible line on the floor in front of me (defined by the lip of the stage when there is one, or else by the placement of the monitors, etc.) that audience members may only cross at their peril. |
|
14 Jun 00 - 09:08 AM (#242291) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Mooh Lumper. Recently been lumped into a recording of "Whiter Shade of Pale" where I played mandolin. It worked, but wouldn't have happened without a lumper attitude from the band which called me. I like to include other folks to play, some great fun can be had this way, and sometimes even spawns a band. Peace, Mooh. |
|
14 Jun 00 - 10:16 AM (#242313) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: GUEST,Mrr I guess, bottom line, I just like to sing along. It doesn't matter what is being sung, I just like to sing along... |
|
14 Jun 00 - 11:09 AM (#242327) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Mark Clark Shambles, my recollection of tennis scoring is that it always seems to involve a great deal of love. Enjoyed your post, - Mark |
|
14 Jun 00 - 01:15 PM (#242361) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: SINSULL Re: Mrrzy's comment: A friend of mine has a son who completed a BA in Mathematics and an MA in Computers at Princeton and Stevens while keeping a thriving concert pianist career alive. He is Russian and his language skills were so poor at the time that the NYC School system wanted to put him in remedial classes. (I wander). The point is - he claims that Mathematics is a perfect science and Music is a sub science of Mathematics. His music and math studies were, to him, one. So we're back to two kinds of people - lumpers and splitters. I myself am an elitist lumper, something akin to an exclusionist snob with wrecked cars in her front yard. |
|
14 Jun 00 - 04:14 PM (#242455) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: GUEST,Liz the Squeak I'll sing practically anything, preferably sitting down, does that make me a slumper?? LTS |
|
14 Jun 00 - 04:17 PM (#242456) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Hollowfox I find that I do both; first I split, then I lump. This shows up most when I do laundry; first I "split" the clothes into many, very specific piles (denim, towels, etc.) Then, after I do the piles that have enough to fill the washer by themselves, I "lump" the smaller loads, putting the more similar batches together, eventually ending up with "dark colors" and "light colors". |
|
14 Jun 00 - 04:24 PM (#242461) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: sophocleese So I guess the answer is that nobody is exclusively a splitter or a lumper in all situations. We all have specific and well defined areas of persnicketyness. |
|
14 Jun 00 - 04:25 PM (#242462) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: paddymac Sounds to me like Shambes has come up with what might well become the new "mother of all pick-up lines" at music related events of all kinds. I can see it now: lonely bohdran player encounters dejected tuba player in a starlit sylvan glen. "Hi! You're gorgeous, but are you a lumper or a splitter? "Well, here in the moonlight, I find you attractive as well, but I'm not familiar with your jargon and therefor don't really know how to answer your question." "It's starlight." "What? Oh! (looking toward the vault of the sky) Well, maybe it's a bit of both. It's nice, anyway." "Oh, so your a lumper!" "I'm a what?" "A lumper." "What's a lumper? "That's someone who likes to bring things together." (smiling sensuously) "Oh yes, I guess I am lumper. I do indeed like to bring beautiful things together. Especially on a beautiful night in a beautiful place like this. Say! What is that thing you have?" "It's called a bohdran" "Really? I've never heard that word for it before. What do you do with it" "Well, some people just bang on it, but I think it's better if you stroke it with feeling. You know, the kinder gentler thing" "Oh. Have you ever played a tuba?" "Well, no, not exactly. How do you do it?" "Well, it's a good idea to lick your lips first, then just blow it here." "Oh! I see. You know, I bet we could make some beautiful music together. Wanna try?" "Well, okay. How do you wanna do it?" "Well, let's start with you stroking my thing and I'll blow your thing." "Well, okay. But what's the next movement?" "Hmm, well, let's just see how this first part works, and then we cane improvise." "Say, are you a folkie?" |
|
14 Jun 00 - 04:28 PM (#242465) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: GUEST,Liz the Squeak Nice to hear about your laundry, my SO hasn't quite realised this yet - the amount of white T shirts I had has dropped dramatically, and we both own matching fuschia pink underwear now!! Guess he'd just be a lump....... But how do you separate light and dark colours when you have a pale shirt with dark stripes in it....? LTS |
|
14 Jun 00 - 04:29 PM (#242466) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: SINSULL paddymac or Catspaw??? |
|
14 Jun 00 - 04:30 PM (#242467) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: sophocleese You cover up the pale bits with dark marker Liz. Well that's what my son tried to do one day. |
|
14 Jun 00 - 04:45 PM (#242477) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: SINSULL My brothers outdid that Soph. While playing with a 22 rifle one day, they shot a hole in the bedroom ceiling. Rather than risk a well deserved beating, they fill the hole with crayons matching the ceiling. Their deed was not discovered until years later when it came time to repaint. Note to gun owners and parents in general: Lock them or your children up - your choice. |
|
14 Jun 00 - 04:52 PM (#242483) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: GUEST,Penny S. There are, by the way, microsplitters, for whom normal splitting is too much like lumping to be tolerable. Penny |
|
14 Jun 00 - 04:56 PM (#242486) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: AllisonA(Animaterra) ...for me it's more an issue of do I like my soup pureed or more stew-like? I'm definitely a lumper but I want to know what the lumps are! |
|
14 Jun 00 - 04:57 PM (#242488) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: GUEST,Liz the Squeak Are they anything like Micro chips? Can I eat them?? As one who can spend four hours sorting things into groups, I dare not delve too deeply into this, but basically, if a song/tune overlaps into 2 or more groups, you have a good song/tune, and you should proceed to sing/play it to death.... figuratively speaking of course. I once filled an old picture hook hole in a white wall with toothpaste - SO didn't notice for over a year..... once it dries, it just looks like ordinary filler. He only found out when he wiped the wall down ready for painting it.....! LTS |
|
14 Jun 00 - 06:19 PM (#242522) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Hollowfox I'm glad my kids aren't the only ones with oddly pink underwear. The stripes generally go with the majority (mostly light into the light pile, etc.) BTW, my father told me about a man whose summer job was to play "Flight of the Bumblebee" as a tuba solo in a local amusement park some 50+ years ago. |
|
14 Jun 00 - 06:30 PM (#242524) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: sophocleese Years ago my younger brother and I thought we'd cheer my sick mother up with a little skit. My brother would pretend to have his finger stuck in his ear and then, after various contortions, when he finally removed it I would pull the bathroom plunger from the wall and provide a loud POP. We rehearsed it in the bathroom several times and it all went well. Then we went to hallway by my mother's room and played it for her in the doorway. At last my moment for sound effects came and I pulled the plunger away from the wall. To my horror no loud POP sounded but instead a large section of plaster crumbled to the floor. My mother laughed and suggested I cover the spot with a poster until we repainted. |
|
14 Jun 00 - 09:42 PM (#242617) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Bill D yay, Animaterra!...you said it WELL!...(Shambles, that record shop (back up there^)would have me frothing at the mouth...I need some sort of order..whereas, I suppose you would just cheerfully paw through bins till something looked interesting) |
|
15 Jun 00 - 12:50 AM (#242688) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: GUEST,Rollo Well, if you think about it, as long folk music is "living" it is lumper's music, but when it's "dying" and just a style to be preserved it's splinter's music. the reason is, whenever the folks around make music, they bring every instruments they have, sing all the songs they have and if someone brings along the tuba he is weelcome of course, because a tuba is delivering a great base. MUSIC TIP >>> And You should watch out for Hans Theesink, a dutch blues gitar player who is often accompanied by a marvelous tuba player named jon sass. Great deal, this duo. But when folks doesnt come together to make music any onger, but just a bunch of fanatics (like me *ggg*) who remembers the music of the old days, then they just remember which instruments were brought normally and which songs were sung and poor tuba man must play some bohemian march music because noone remembers ole nick huggins bringing his tuba down to the fair in some rotten hillbilly village in the 1890ies. Maybe this is the reason I hardly play the trombone these days but my banjo begs for mercy.
|
|
15 Jun 00 - 02:09 AM (#242707) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Mark Cohen Be yourself You can't be anybody else Be yourself Or else you'll always be a nobody So be yourself, or else A hippopotamus Would look very curious Flying like a butterfly A fierce and hungry lion Would look very silly tryin' To bake an apple pie I think you'd get a laugh If you saw a tall giraffe Swinging by his tail from a tree I think an octopus Would look quite ridiculous Knitting sweaters at the bottom of the sea, so... [repeat chorus] I don't know who wrote it, but it's on Danny Kaye's recording of Tubby the Tuba at the Circus. Aloha, Mark |
|
15 Jun 00 - 06:42 AM (#242747) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: The Shambles Well I know we visited the record shop before but it does highlight the problem. To the owner of the shop above, it is in perfect order. To Bill D it is not and to Roger, it's completely over the top. You're probably right about me. I browse until I stumble upon something that looks interesting. I think that I tend to learn a little in the process too. If the music was being played in the shop however, we could all find out pretty quickly what we liked? We may be pleasantly surprised as well? |
|
15 Jun 00 - 01:27 PM (#242911) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Bill D ah, Shambles...maybe it is my advancing age that makes me so picky..*grin*...I spent many years hearing and sorting out my musical tastes, and now with a limited income and even more limited time, I want to be able to cater to my mood quickly...and there is much I KNOW I will not be interested in, so when a store has a couple of bins labeled simply 'American Folk' and 'International', I cringe. Yeah, I 'might' learn something new flipping thru all the neo-folk and pop-folk and S/SW stuff to find one or two things that I really fancy, but it seems to me that NOT breaking it down into clear categories that make sense is sheer laziness if you are in business. Same goes for advertising concerts, open stages, festivals, and song circles...if all you do at your song circle is "Rise Up Singing", say so, so I can stay home! If you bill yourself a folk-singer, but barely know anything older than Dylan, and write most of your own stuff, you are fooling two of us, me and YOU! And I would prefer NOT to spend money on a concert that I only like 10% of. I simply do not accept that having narrower, well defined fields of interest in music..(or any other area) is somehow petty and/or shallow. Dog shows, woodworking, cooking, antiques, auto racing and computers all have categories which people pick & choose among....and you see the same discussions there about lumping & splitting, but many of those groups have **DEFINITIONS** of their various formats. You can be part of several different groups, but you can at least choose. Anyway...if you bring your tuba to my party, be prepared to be locked out of the ballad room...*big grin*
|
|
15 Jun 00 - 02:39 PM (#242952) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Jim the Bart Nature does not lump or split. The universe is a continuum, without the types of seams that splitting requires and with many more degrees of subtle variation for homogeneous lumping. As a technique for understanding nature and the umniverse, both lumping and splitting have their purposes and can be useful - but only when applied properly. Both can be counter-productive when taken to the extreme, or adhered to when situations would dictate otherwise. Making distinctions is what allows doctors to figure out which ointment to prescribe, or which part to lop off, or which artery to unclog. In fact, it is our ability to make finer and finer distinctions - to measure things ever more closely - that keeps moving the species forward, technologically speaking. The thing is to be able to see the differences in like things and the commonality in disparate things. And the trick is to alter your focus. It's like the old zen riddle says: First there is a mountain, then there is no mountain, then there is. Or was that Donovan? This all applies when talking about music. I think in music, a single-minded obsession with categorization and definition is just a step on the road to madness. To say that a Tuba is not a bluegrass instrument is disingeneous; the truth is probably closer to "I don't think I like the sound of Tubas in a bluegrass band". To say that in your experience, Tuba hasn't worked well in a bluegrass context might be closer to the truth. To listen to the Tuba player play "Foggy Mountain Breakdown" before making a judgment about whether she/he adds to the music, is to hear bluegrass again, for the first time. |
|
15 Jun 00 - 06:03 PM (#243041) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: GUEST,Liz the Squeak Well I'm all for a little bit of homogeneous lumping, but who started the tuba fixation?? LTS
|
|
15 Jun 00 - 06:12 PM (#243048) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: sophocleese Well how many people on Mudcat have had their tubas fixed? I like the way you say that Bartholomew. Perhaps to refine on Shambles' categories, I'm a splitter but not an excluder. |
|
15 Jun 00 - 06:25 PM (#243064) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: GUEST,Liz the Squeak Funny you should mention getting tubas fixed - my doctor has agreed after 4 years to just write the letter!! Anyone want a spare egg? LTS |
|
15 Jun 00 - 11:04 PM (#243197) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Bill D naawww..I think I'll just plant one of those little Euphoniums... |
|
15 Jun 00 - 11:09 PM (#243200) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Bill D see...they grow up to just the right size |
|
04 Jul 00 - 09:15 AM (#251576) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: The Shambles There is some discussion on exclusion and other stuff here. Women's HearMe? |
|
04 Jul 00 - 09:45 AM (#251587) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: sledge Play on Harpgirl and do your thing. Just because I invited some friends to my home to play I would not expect to have to admit others I don't really know just because THEY felt excluded. This Mudcat thing is a very widepread community and to help bring it all a little closer these sort of things should be encouraged not critisised. |
|
04 Jul 00 - 11:57 AM (#251663) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: bbelle I enjoy all kinds of music so reckon I'm a lumper. I don't, however, feel excluded if a session or festival is exclusively about one particular genre of music. If I'm familiar with the genre, I join in ... if I'm not, I don't. I'm going to attend Steve Kaufman's Flatpickers' Kamp next June, which is specifically about bluegrass. Even though I'm not specifically a bluegrass musician, I love it, and wouldn't deny myself the opportunity because of what someone else might term "exclusivity" ... moonchild |
|
04 Jul 00 - 12:03 PM (#251672) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Jon Freeman sledge, I think you have hit on one of the problems when you say "invited to your house". Let me try again: 1. There had been a complaint made by Harpgirl that Mbo had been singing to much and not letting others get a turn and there was some disucssion and as I result, I made it possible for anybody to set up a room using my page for whatever event they wished. 2. Harpgirl comes up with a suggestion for a Hearme event that by its definition excludes certain people from participating, 3. I suggest that such an event would be better placed in a private room (cf your house). 4. Before I know it my suggestion is being read as being sexist. I'd have thought that somebody who had previously complained about not getting a look in would have been the first to understand that those rules were effectively stoping others from peforming and could have at least entered into a reasonable discussion on the possibility of using a different location. The biggest problem with that whole debate was that few people were capable of looking at a general problem which it is (or could be at some point in the future ) and has nothing to do with whether HG's suggestion was a good one or not. If people wish to use my page, a reasonable discussion on how to use it to best suit the needs of everybody would be constructive but I think that with the current feeling it would be impossible. Why is it so hard for people to simply step back a little and look at the real problem without clouding the issue with other subjects? Jon |
|
04 Jul 00 - 01:01 PM (#251705) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Áine Beating a dead horse only gets you a flattened mushy dead horse. -- Áine ;-) |
|
04 Jul 00 - 07:04 PM (#251842) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: McGrath of Harlow I like that idea of Shambles of inviting people over from one thread to another one. Thread emigration. Sort of the opposite of thread drift. I heven't seen it done like that before, and it strikes me as a handy piece of of social invention.
Of course it is wide open to accusations if splittism. It's a bit like a crowded session which is getting overwhelmed by people who are playing stuff you don't feel like playing - you might grab a couple of cronies and head off to another room.
And that seems a very sensible thing to do. It means there are two sessions on, for a start, and bioth with people enjoying playing in them. The tricky bit comes if you found yourself wanting to say "you're in the wrong session - try nextdoor."
But there are times that'd be just the right thing to say. The puzzle is working out when it is, and when it's definitely not.
Well if anyone's going to Sidmouth (and if you are, I hope we meet there), here's an example in point - The Anchor is a pub in the middle of it; and at the height of activities you'll find the Middle Bar, where there is a well established song session (already mentioned in tghis thread I think), and up the stairs nextdoor there's a bar where there's a well established tune session, mostly Irish and Scottish and that. And out in the garden there's a dance band playing with a caller , and people dancing. And out in front of the pub there's another floating session, where all kinds of mixtures of music are playing.
And I could go on and on, reminding myself of all the different venues which have developed over the years with different conventions of what fits there and doesn't. And if anyone wandered into one of them with an appetite to play music that didn't fit in there, you could always advise where it probably would. (The bluegrass tuba - I'd suggest playing it in front of the Anchor, and seeing who joined in.)
The thing is different musics can play alongside each other, and sometimes play with each other. But in order for that to happen they have to have an identity of their own which is distinct from that of the other musics.Just as when instruments to play together it's better if they have different voices.
Going apart is a necessary precondition to being able to come back into the common with a special gift to share with other people.
My house is full of books all jumbled together, and the words in my head from the different books may get mixed up - but in then books they are all there distinctnand separate, a different world between each set of covers. My records are more organised by catergories - largely because its easy to run my eyes along a varied bunch of books on a shelf and pick out the one I'm after. Can't do that with records, or even with CDs. But most of the records I've got were probably picked up by browsing through heaps of secondhand ones in boot fairs and jumble sales and so forth.
So I pick out things from a confused muddle, and that mkaes me a splitter, and then I take them home and put them on the shelves in a confused muddle, and that makes me a lumper. They aren't really opposed attitudes, any more than the different sections of a tune or a dance are opposed to each other. And if some people are more splitters than lumpers, it's the other way round form other people - and that's how dances work. |
|
04 Jul 00 - 07:06 PM (#251843) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: The Shambles There's many a good tune beaten out of a dead horse |
|
04 Jul 00 - 08:23 PM (#251865) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: GUEST,Colwyn Dane "All music is folk music, I ain't never heard no horse sing a song." Louis Armstrong. Toodle-pip. |
|
04 Jul 00 - 08:24 PM (#251866) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: McGrath of Harlow If you're into beating horses, better dead ones than live ones.
You can drag a dead horse to water, but you cannot make it drink.
But I never heard a dead horse sing.
|
|
04 Jul 00 - 09:12 PM (#251885) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Áine If you beat a dead horse long enough, you'll eventually hear the music of the flies around a bloated corpse, and the lovely splat of the putrid rotting lumps of flesh splitting apart into piles of runny ooze... Bon chance! -- Áine (I knew though forensic classes would come in handy some day...)
|
|
04 Jul 00 - 09:50 PM (#251905) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Little Neophyte Aine, that was really gross. Your description would even make a buzzard cringe. Bonnie |
|
04 Jul 00 - 09:54 PM (#251908) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Áine Why thank you, Banjo Bonnie! It's nice to know that my sixth grade gross out skills haven't completely been lost to time. -- Áine |
|
05 Jul 00 - 12:40 PM (#252231) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: The Shambles As to thread emigration, think of it more as 'manning (if I can still use that word) the lifeboats' to leave a stricken vessel. Is it still 'women and children first' nowadays? By the way, where and when did that convention start?
Ideally I am a lumper but there is no point in having a lump so large that it cannot be loaded by all who may be interested. For some reason I was reluctant to create Womens HearMe 2……..?
This thread was about grouping and there was room for more contributions. I was hoping that it could explore the question of why some groupings are acceptable and some are not? …..In a less charged atmosphere. The lifeboats however appear to be (thread) drifting where they will?……….. |
|
05 Jul 00 - 01:57 PM (#252282) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: McGrath of Harlow Clearly it's got to be children first, together with the people who are looking after them, in any real emergency. Which in most situations would mean there might not be too many men on the boats, though there might well be a number of women left on the sinking ship.
Fortunately we're not quite in that situation yet. (Have we had a Mudcat-on-the-Titanic thread yet?)
Thread drift is clearly continuing. But to get back on course for a moment (pending imminent shipwreck no doubt) - the only reason for objecting to a sepoarte group is because it might be oppressive. Which means the real question of what is oppressive and what is not, and who determines this.
I think a good way of working out what's fair and what is not would be to have a mind experiment. List a range of imaginary groups, then decide involve these kind of problems, and then work back to decide what it is about them that makes this difference,
For example, in the folk world, I see no objection to a dance team of dancers restricted to men, but I would object to them refusing to allow women musicians; however I would not make the same objection (at this time) to a women's dance team which insisted on having only women musicians.
I would object to a dance team of either gender which would only accept "white English" dancers; but I would not object to a team from a settled immigrant community restricting its membership to members of that community.
I would not object to a session having rules about the tradition of music which it focussed on, provided there were opportunities for different types of music as well, maybe on different nights.
And I see no problems at all in having a HearMe for women singers only, and I wouldn't see any problems with one for men songers only, but both of these would belong in a side room.
And that'll do for now. |
|
05 Jul 00 - 05:16 PM (#252416) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: The Shambles "For example, in the folk world, I see no objection to a dance team of dancers restricted to men, but I would object to them refusing to allow women musicians; however I would not make the same objection (at this time) to a women's dance team which insisted on having only women musicians."
I would be grateful if you could enlarge a little on what point would you be prepared to make the same objection? For does the not the longer you are prepared to make these type of adjustments to the underlying principles of equality, make the possibility unlikely, of actually ever achieving that equality? |
|
05 Jul 00 - 05:31 PM (#252424) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Áine Dear Roger, these type of adjustments to the underlying principles of equality -- Ah, I think I see the problem. This is a horse of a different colour. I do believe that the question of separate HearMe groups hangs on the question of accommodation, not equality. I don't remember having seen anyone arguing that so-and-so or such-and-such are not equal; only that certain groups (i.e., women singers, men singers, banjo players, etc.) be afforded the chance to meet together and swap songs and/or tunes. Perhaps, if you could consider the motion under the terms of accommodation, you could find a way to compromise on the issue? -- Áine |
|
05 Jul 00 - 06:00 PM (#252443) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Naemanson Funny you should mention bluegrass tuba... Actually there was a Celtic tuba at Mystic this year and it isn't his first year there. He plays in Jerry Bryant's band FinestKind (not to be confused with Ian Robb's group). The band consists of Guitar, Mandolin, Banjo and Tuba. You haven't lived until you've heard Ashokan Farewell on tuba and mandolin. He plays right along on the jigs and reels as well. Very impressive. I guess I'm a lumper. I only exclude excluders. |
|
05 Jul 00 - 06:39 PM (#252473) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: McGrath of Harlow You see, what I'm trying to do is turn it the other way round. Instead of setting up criteria and then seing what fits them, I'm seeing what seems intuitively right to me, and then trying to work out what the criteria are from thta.
I think that's deductive logic rather than inductive logic. (I'm not too sure about that - but anyway, that's what a term like deductive logic ought to mean.)
So let's say I was playing in a band for a Morris side and they wouldn't allow a woman to play on that basis, I'd walk without hestitation. But if it was a women's Morris side collecting musicians, and they said no thanks - we just have women play for us, I wouldn't feel my nose had been put out of joint. (This is a thought experiment, because that's not the music I normally play anyway.)
Now tryingbto work out why I'd feel that way, it would probably be something along the lines - "There are reasons I can imagine why a group of women would want to have a piolicy like that which could be reasonable - they might be trying to get the message across that women can do this as well as any man, they might be wanting to include particular women who might have have had very bad experience with men, violence and so forth"
On the other hand with a Men Only band, those reasons wouldn't apply, or at any rate my assumption would be that they didn't. I'd see this policy as being directly discriminatory by people who wanted to stay in charge and enjoyed throwing their weight around.
Again, I could be wrong. I suppose it might be they had wives who had told them "I can just about put up with you going off cavorting with that bunch of yobs in funny costumes - but if I hear you've been having women playing tunes for you to jump around to, you'll regret it."
These thought experiments have a knack of turning into soap opera... I should quit horsing around like this. |
|
05 Jul 00 - 10:56 PM (#252630) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: sophocleese That's interesting McGrath, approaching it from your direction. I wondered a few years ago when I was speaking to some Rotarians who had just included a woman for the first time about why this grouping was particularly exclusive and needed to have women in it. It revolved around issues of power and influence. If the majority of people in a government are male and belong to exclusively male clubs than female concerns (or concerns which are thought to be female; like childcare) are either not addressed or are addessed only as side issues rather than as important central issues. It is necessary then to break up the exclusivity of those clubs, not only with token women but with people who weigh the issues in a different fashion. A lot of the groups that you seem to find acceptable are ones that don't have clear, firm access to power or noticeable influence on the dominant culture. Fashion trends tend to be transmitted from the top down. People on Mudcat are clearly aware of the lack of folk music in the mainstream media. We cluster to gain strength and inspiration from each other and to avoid becoming a crowd of Alannis Morrisette clones. The people who represent, or seem to represent, the dominant culture are considered exclusive because they don't seem to need to cluster for strength in the same way. The water gets muddier though when you consider questions of influence and hybrids. Riverdance had some influence on popular music for a time but is considered by a lot of folkies to be a hybrid of limited authenticity. For those who had no idea of that kind of music and dance it came as a shock, pleasant or otherwise. So a group of Irish stepdancers wanting to remain pure to their pre-Riverdance traditions will be considered exclusive by those who learnt three tunes from the movie and now think they are part Irish. Then comes the knotty question of the mechanics of exclusion. Are people told bluntly, "Your opinions don't matter."? Do they work on a different sense of timing? Does A think that five seconds between songs is long enough and ten seconds means things are dragging while B needs twenty seconds to absorb the previous song before heading into the next? Is a difference in timing due to different cultures, gender, ages or something else? Are newer posters excluded when their comments or questions get buried under the familiar riffs, smartass comments and backchat that older mudcatters engage in? |
|
06 Jul 00 - 08:26 AM (#252782) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Whistle Stop Lots of food for thought here. Being relatively antisocial by nature, I'm not all that familiar with the protocols or mechanics of many of these communal gatherings of people for music and dance, so I may not have much of a frame of reference for this discussion. However, I think it's intriguing what happens when our desire for "tradition" (so central to the Mudcat) collides with our desire for equality and inclusion. As much as we may respect and be drawn to traditional modes of expression, we also should recognize that there is a lot of racism, sexism, and other forms of exclusivity built into many of these traditions. This can sometimes force us to choose between authenticity on the one hand, and fairness on the other. Speaking only for myself (of course), I will always put fairness and equality first, at the expense of authenticity if necessary. If women want to participate in a creative endeavor that is traditionally for men only -- whether it be a traditional folk dance, singing sea chanteys, etc. -- I say that they should be welcomed with open arms, and the tradition should be adapted to accommodate them. With any luck we'll be able to keep the elements of the tradition that are worth keeping, and discard the less appealing aspects. I realize that this is only one aspect of the discussion that is taking place on this thread. As for other reasons for excluding people from musical or other crative endeavors -- relative lack of skill, incompatible approach, undesirable personal qualities, etc. -- I figure it's like any other closed party. In other words, if you want to be selective, don't hold the event on the town common (or on the internet, for that matter), and make it clear from the outset that attendance is by invitation only. |
|
06 Jul 00 - 06:58 PM (#253101) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: The Shambles Dearest Keeper of the Book.
How about a tuba only HearMe session? Or one for horses?
My agreement is not important or required. To be clear I have no problem with themes, sessions devoted to single instruments or any other obvious division musical divisions.
An all-female grouping appears to have been accepted as a good idea. It is the reasons why this grouping is generally thought to be acceptable, when an all male-grouping probably would have never even been requested on The Mudcat, that interests me?
It is a little difficult for me to compromise, as the issue IS one of equality.
Well…You should demand equality……….You would probably request accommodation?
If I am being asked to accept that women have RIGHT to exclude men then I have to accept that men have the RIGHT to exclude women. The whole struggle for equal rights has then been a nonsense.
If I am being asked to accommodate the exclusion of men for the reasons given, I would point out that very similar reasons to these have been given in the defence of all-male groupings. These clubs, churches and organisations have been accused of being the last bastions of male chauvinism. I believe they are.
There are very good reasons, sometimes for loading women's views and input, as sophocleese demonstrates and Kevin mentions but you must always recognise when you do this that it IS sexist and a step both to equality and at the same time a step away from it…. It should be done rarely, with care, for as temporary period as possible, the reasons being carefully thought through and clearly sign posted.
It is an accommodation not a RIGHT.
Eyes should always be kept on the prize of eventual equality, a time when no one needs, requires or wants to further their gender or race at the expense of another's.
If we are confused, how do our children feel, trying to live and understand this double standard? Tubby The Tuba (Mrs). |
|
06 Jul 00 - 07:42 PM (#253117) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Osmium And so is the human condition only a function of its ability to apply labels (splitters); male&female, black&white, tuba&mandolin, bluegrass&jazz - and then to apply general properties to labelled groups; immigrants, emmigrants, ethnic minotrities - and then to act on such usefull classifications; social class a,d,c,d,e - and take the whole human race technically forward?. Labels have necessary but very limited use; where splitters abide make sure the show is run by a lumper and we can all go forward. |
|
06 Jul 00 - 10:12 PM (#253187) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: McGrath of Harlow Everytime I see this thread title it makes me think it should be about jobs in the old industries. You should find lumpers and splitters in a coalmine. Or maybe in a loggers camp.
Butbtomthe point. I can't see any reason why an all male HearMe mightn't be quite OK. Provided it's not the only game in town. Male Voice Choirs aren't in my view any more intrinsically sexist in principle than all male teams in field sports. Men's voices sound different from womens voices; sometimes what you want is all men singing together, sometimes all women, sometimes the mixture is what is needed. Mixed Rugby just wouldn't be the same game. (Some might prefer it, but I'd be suspicious of the motives.)
Yes, I know that HearMes don't as yet have people singing together (and can never have it, except on a pretty local basis, whatever the technology throws up, because of time difficulties), but having the odd singaround that's all male, or all female, I really can't see the problem.
And getting back to my deductive logic, I don't feel uncomfortable with the idea. And the reason for this turns out to be that, in the context of the Mudcat, there's no power or oppression issue involved. Men don't have a louder voice in the forum, or post more. At least it certainly doen't feel that way to me. And if it did feel like that to me, I'd be against the idea.
I used to be a social worker. As a man, I was very much in a minority. I just can't remember if the men in the office ever decided to set up a separate group to talk about things, but if we had it would have been a perfectly reasonable thing to do, and I don't think anyone would have objected to it. The same went for for the small number of black people in the department. But a talking group specifically set up to exclude the minorities - that would mean something very different indeed.
So far then, I can see two circumstances in which "exclusion" is ok. One is where there is no element of power and oppression involved, and it's just for some reason like getting a particular sort of sound, or some kind of physucal equivalence, in a team sport of some kind (in which category I'd include some types of dancing); and the other is where the purpose of the exclusion is to assist a group which is in danger of being excluded (or even endangered) to play a fuller role in a community or orrganisation.
|
|
07 Jul 00 - 06:11 AM (#253317) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: GUEST,Barfy I think Shambles should prefix his all his posts with "Welcome to my home page." |
|
07 Jul 00 - 06:28 AM (#253323) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: The Shambles Kevin said. "And getting back to my deductive logic, I don't feel uncomfortable with the idea. And the reason for this turns out to be that, in the context of the Mudcat, there's no power or oppression issue involved. Men don't have a louder voice in the forum, or post more. At least it certainly doen't feel that way to me. And if it did feel like that to me, I'd be against the idea."
It does not feel that way to me either and that is why it makes me uncomfortable. For if there is no power or oppression issue involved on The Mudcat, there is no NEED to exclude anyone to redress that oppression?
But how the hell would two white, institutionalised sexist males know if there were, or were not power or oppression issues involved on The Mudcat? For if only one person felt differently, we would have to accept that there were these issues, wouldn't we?
I take your 'deductive (Irish) logical' point about examining how something feels and then working back from that point. The problem with that to me is, given the nature of feelings, what feels to an individual like a nice idea today might very feel like injustice tomorrow?
That is why I think that it is so important to try have clear understood broad principles of equality, all stick to them and be aware of when and why we are departing from them. It's a bit like trying to score the 'Golden Goal', when someone keeps moving the goal posts. |
|
07 Jul 00 - 06:57 AM (#253328) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: AndyG Keeping well away from the topic and inducing thread drift:
Shambles,
AndyG |
|
07 Jul 00 - 08:26 AM (#253346) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: The Shambles Thank you for the info and the link Andy……. Very much on topic, I think but I take your point. You are very wise.
Very brave, I was going to say men but looking through their ages they were mostly boys. They certainly all became men that day. In the very best sense of the word. Do they have a song? |
|
07 Jul 00 - 10:14 AM (#253397) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: GUEST,Barfy No doubt you will write the words of one for us |
|
07 Jul 00 - 12:29 PM (#253497) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: McGrath of Harlow In a situation where there is inequality and oppression, it may well be right for the people on the bottom to get together in an exclusive way, but not right for the powerful people to do the same thing.
In a situation where there aren't any people at the bottom and people at the top, I can't see any harm in any special groupings, such as Women's HearMe's. And if it seemed there was harm , that'd be an indication that there we weren't really in a situation without people at the bottom and people at the top.
(And in fact we can't ignore that the Mudcat and the people on it, live in a range iof wider societies around then gklobe, some (most? all?) of which are a long way from being egalitarian and fair.)
"What feels to an individual like a nice idea today might very feel like injustice tomorrow" - so you change it tomorrow. I believe that holding to a firm principle can be just as dangerous as flying by the seat of your pants in these things. As William Blake said "Damn braces, bless relaxes."
|
|
07 Jul 00 - 01:00 PM (#253513) Subject: RE: Are you a lumper or a splitter? From: Jim the Bart McG of H - well said, as usual. |
