|
18 Aug 00 - 05:10 PM (#280428) Subject: The singer or the song? From: GUEST,Pearl Bodine What is more folk, "folksinger" singing a Beatles song (say Rick Fielding doing "In My Life") or the Beatles doing a folk song (say "Maggie Maggie May")? These are real examples. Is it that the song has been handed down through the oral tradition or that the singer plays acoustic guitar? |
|
18 Aug 00 - 05:13 PM (#280431) Subject: RE: The singer or the song? From: MMario not all acoustic guitar is folk either. I would say it depends on the song, the singer, the style of playing and the style of singing. all four can effect how "folky" something sounds. Then of course there is the slight matter of personal preference and taste. |
|
18 Aug 00 - 05:16 PM (#280437) Subject: RE: The singer or the song? From: Liz the Squeak Doesn't someone have to die horribly or have 6 illegitemate children/adulterous couplings to make it folk??? I say, who gives a folk, as long as the song goes on (not unlike Celine Dion's parts..) that's all that matters. LTS |
|
18 Aug 00 - 05:31 PM (#280446) Subject: RE: The singer or the song? From: Bernard I do a wide variety of stuff, from finger-in-the-ear traddy, right through to Beatles 'classics' ('Blackbird' is an oft-requested favourite). I reckon folk music is what people want to hear, defined by whether you still have an audience when you've finished... The standard of performance can never be separated from the appeal of a song - even a truly great song loses its edge when performed badly... I've been a 'folkie' since the late 1960's, so I've seen lots come and go. What always stays stable is the 'singability' - can the audience join in? Having said that, it's important to keep one's repertoire fresh. If someone 'doesn't like it because they don't know it', I gently (with the aid of a lump hammer) point out that every song they know started as one they'd never heard before!! |
|
18 Aug 00 - 10:03 PM (#280550) Subject: RE: The singer or the song? From: GUEST |
|
18 Aug 00 - 10:29 PM (#280556) Subject: RE: The singer or the song? From: CarolC Guest (who goes by many names), what is this incredible obsession that you have with trying to pigeon-hole and define what is or is not folk music? Respectfully, Carol |
|
18 Aug 00 - 11:24 PM (#280586) Subject: RE: The singer or the song? From: rabbitrunning As a newbie I'd guess that the guests are trying to figure out where the lines are. I've given up and am now ignoring them. ;D |
|
19 Aug 00 - 12:15 AM (#280610) Subject: RE: The singer or the song? From: Art Thieme |
|
19 Aug 00 - 01:32 AM (#280647) Subject: RE: The singer or the song? From: CarolC Thanks, rabbitrunning. Are you talking about the Nazca lines? I think they're on the crop circle thread. |
|
19 Aug 00 - 02:07 AM (#280652) Subject: RE: The singer or the song? From: GUEST, Banjo Johnny Has nothing to do with guitar, acoustic or otherwise. The guitar was practically unknown outside of Spain until the 20'th century. == Johnny |
|
19 Aug 00 - 05:53 AM (#280689) Subject: RE: The singer or the song? From: The Shambles Without the song, there's no show. |
|
19 Aug 00 - 09:45 AM (#280724) Subject: RE: The singer or the song? From: raredance Art always says the most cogent things rich r |
|
19 Aug 00 - 02:42 PM (#280817) Subject: RE: The singer or the song? From: GUEST,Noreen (in Lincs.) But he has been rather asyllabic lately. Noreen |