mudcat.org: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
Lyrics & Knowledge Personal Pages Record Shop Auction Links Radio & Media Kids Membership Help
The Mudcat Cafeawe

Post to this Thread - Printer Friendly - Home
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]


Its why people dont go to folk clubs....

Northerner 15 Sep 12 - 05:52 AM
Big Al Whittle 13 Aug 12 - 03:55 PM
Don Firth 13 Aug 12 - 03:11 PM
Don Firth 13 Aug 12 - 02:44 PM
The Sandman 13 Aug 12 - 12:48 PM
Leadfingers 13 Aug 12 - 08:46 AM
johncharles 13 Aug 12 - 05:50 AM
GUEST,Don Wise 13 Aug 12 - 05:09 AM
The Sandman 13 Aug 12 - 03:30 AM
Richard Bridge 13 Aug 12 - 03:02 AM
Tootler 12 Aug 12 - 07:52 PM
Leadfingers 12 Aug 12 - 06:39 PM
GUEST,Blandiver 12 Aug 12 - 04:58 AM
Big Al Whittle 12 Aug 12 - 03:20 AM
GUEST,Blandiver 11 Aug 12 - 05:11 AM
Big Al Whittle 11 Aug 12 - 04:29 AM
GUEST,Blandiver 10 Aug 12 - 07:20 AM
the lemonade lady 10 Aug 12 - 05:01 AM
Richard Bridge 10 Aug 12 - 04:50 AM
Musket 10 Aug 12 - 04:01 AM
GUEST,raymond greenoaken 09 Aug 12 - 05:27 PM
GUEST,Blandiver 09 Aug 12 - 05:10 PM
Steve Gardham 09 Aug 12 - 04:40 PM
GUEST,Charles Macfarlane 09 Aug 12 - 04:19 PM
The Sandman 09 Aug 12 - 04:07 PM
TheSnail 09 Aug 12 - 03:38 PM
GUEST,Blandiver 09 Aug 12 - 03:28 PM
GUEST,raymond greenoaken 09 Aug 12 - 03:02 PM
GUEST,Charles Macfarlane 09 Aug 12 - 02:31 PM
johncharles 09 Aug 12 - 02:08 PM
GUEST,raymond greenoaken 09 Aug 12 - 02:06 PM
GUEST,Charles Macfarlane 09 Aug 12 - 01:49 PM
GUEST,Blandiver 09 Aug 12 - 01:34 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 09 Aug 12 - 01:20 PM
SunrayFC 09 Aug 12 - 01:01 PM
GUEST,bouzouki bob folkestone 09 Aug 12 - 12:16 PM
GUEST,Blandiver 09 Aug 12 - 12:12 PM
GUEST,Blandiver 09 Aug 12 - 12:04 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 09 Aug 12 - 11:58 AM
GUEST,Charles Macfarlane 09 Aug 12 - 11:28 AM
Richard Bridge 09 Aug 12 - 11:19 AM
GUEST,Blandiver 09 Aug 12 - 08:16 AM
johncharles 09 Aug 12 - 06:23 AM
Big Al Whittle 09 Aug 12 - 05:02 AM
GUEST,raymond greenoaken 09 Aug 12 - 04:41 AM
johncharles 09 Aug 12 - 03:39 AM
GUEST,Blandiver 08 Aug 12 - 06:59 PM
GUEST,Charles Macfarlane 08 Aug 12 - 06:20 PM
Richard Bridge 08 Aug 12 - 03:25 PM
Richard Bridge 08 Aug 12 - 03:23 PM
Share Thread
more
Lyrics & Knowledge Search [Advanced]
DT  Forum
Sort (Forum) by:relevance date
DT Lyrics:






Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: Northerner
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 05:52 AM

I was at a folk concert at my local town hall last night. We had Martin Carthy and Dave Swarbrick giving two one hour sets. They were good though I do prefer a folk club setting rather than a concert. It was well attended. I looked round the room and wondered why more of that audience didn't support the local folk clubs.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 13 Aug 12 - 03:55 PM

Its like a Shakespeare speech really - you can't get the intensity without knowing the words.

having said that Don - in this age of teleprompters. I think things are going the other way. Its like the times table - kids today they'll find a way of doing everything without knowing anything at all.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: Don Firth
Date: 13 Aug 12 - 03:11 PM

But what about blowing the words in front of a live audience?

Not good! But audiences are generally quite forgiving. Unless, of course, you do it a lot. One or two brief goofs per concert is generally forgotten when the concert is over. And everyone does it. The first time I heard Pete Seeger live, he forgot the words in one line of a song. But other than a brief hiccup in the rhythm, most people didn't even notice it. I did, because I knew the song. But Seeger covered it masterfully by making up the next line on the spot (one of the advantages of knowing the words and knowing what they mean and what the song is about, which is one of the reasons Mr. Street, my voice teacher, kept at me about knowing what the words mean and what the song is all about).

In classic guitar concerts, I've seen Segovia blow it a couple of times. I was very familiar with the pieces he was playing, one of which I had attempted myself. But he covered so smoothly that only another classic guitarist, who was familiar with the piece, would notice—and marvel at how smoothly he covered it!

On one occasion on the "Ballads and Books" television series, I was singing "The Gypsy Davey" and blanked out on the next verse. As I said, live, no cue cards. PANIC! I launched into playing the melody line on the guitar, and by the time I got to the end of the tune of the verse, I remembered the next verse. Careful questioning of a couple of people I knew watched the show established that everyone assumed that I had intended to do it that way.

You can't really pull shenanigans like that unless you know the song.

Don Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: Don Firth
Date: 13 Aug 12 - 02:44 PM

I've seen and heard Pete Seeger, Peggy Seeger, Ewan McColl, Joan Baez, Theodore Bikel, Richard Dyer-Bennet, Sandy Paton, and several dozen other well-known singers of folk songs live and in concert, and I have NEVER seen a singer in those lofty heights of professionalism use a crib sheet. I have also seen a number of what might be called "real" folk singers (grew up in the tradition) such as Lightnin' Hopkins, Mance Lipscomb, Mississippi John Hurt, and Almeda Riddle at folk festivals and in concert. And they didn't use crib sheets either.

I have never used them myself, nor did I have cue cards when I was on live television.

Anyone who aspires to sing for other people, whether professionally or just for fun should have enough respect for their audiences that they LEARN the song.

I once had a voice teacher who had me bring my guitar to the lessons, and after we had gone through the routine of vocal exercises and matters of vocal technique, he would have me sing whatever song I happened to be working on at the time. He would often stop me in mid-verse and ask me "What, exactly, does that line mean?" Now, he knew perfectly well what it meant, but he wanted to make sure that I knew what it meant and wasn't just singing it by rote—like, unfortunately, many people do. He wanted me to know what the song was all about, the better to be able to put it across to the audience.

It's an essential part of the minstrel's art.

Don Firth

P. S. Now, I might use a crib sheet taped to a microphone in a recording session, just to make sure I don't blow the words—which everyone does from time to time—and save having to do a re-take. When you're paying for recording studio time, retakes can get a bit pricey.

But in front of a live audience? Tacky!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: The Sandman
Date: 13 Aug 12 - 12:48 PM

One who is unable to see over the top of his/her music stand will play blindly on whilst chaos spreads across the dance floor.
anarchy on the ukceili


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: Leadfingers
Date: 13 Aug 12 - 08:46 AM

I have NO problem with any performer at a Singaround doing a NEW (To Them) song having an Aide Memoire , but holding the Bloody Book in front of your face is (In MY Opinion) BLOODY Rude

This (NO offence to our Transpond Members) is a habit that has sadly crawled across the Atlantic - " I will now sing from Page 76 0f Sing Out" is the cue for MUCH page rustling as EVERYONE gets the book out !


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: johncharles
Date: 13 Aug 12 - 05:50 AM

If I am doing a gig with our group then yes learning the words is essential. If i do a floor spot then sometimes I will have the words particularly if it is a new song.
Poets always seem to read the words do they have an exemption?
As for oral transmission I think this something of a lost art in our highly literate and technological society.
john


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: GUEST,Don Wise
Date: 13 Aug 12 - 05:09 AM

Speaking from experience.........

Learning the song or tune by heart so that you can perform it without a crib-sheet gives you a much more personal, intimate relationship with it. It's this which can turn an, on the face of it, trite or uninteresting song/tune into one which grips the listener.
    As far as tunes for dancing are concerned, a bandleader who learns his tunes can rescue a potentially shambolic ceilidh. One who is unable to see over the top of his/her music stand will play blindly on whilst chaos spreads across the dance floor.

Don


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: The Sandman
Date: 13 Aug 12 - 03:30 AM

Tootler, frequently they do not make a god job of it, because they do not know the song well.
for a trained actor the situation is different he/she has acquired a reading and interpreting skill, most floorsingers reading from words do not have that skill,I have come across one or two exceptions.
is it acceptable for paid guests to have words? if it is not , then it could be argued that the same standard could be applied to floor singers.
another point against floor singers having words is that it creates a small barrier between them and the audience.
part of the skill of performing [in my opinion]is the abilty to ad lib if there is a temporary memory lapse


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 13 Aug 12 - 03:02 AM

Eye contact helps convey a song. Same in karaoke.

Words sit uneasily with the transmission mechanisms envisaged by the 1954 definition, but it is a part of it which I have argued should be altered.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: Tootler
Date: 12 Aug 12 - 07:52 PM

Using words or otherwise has absolutely nothing to do with the 1954 definition.

Anyway, why shouldn't people have the words in front of them when they sing? As long as they make a decent job of singing the song it doesn't matter a damn how they they do it or what aids they use.

I know some very good singers who always have their words in front of them. It's a safety blanket.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: Leadfingers
Date: 12 Aug 12 - 06:39 PM

Another BRIEF insert - not as long winded as some posts - There are two 'Folk Clubs' within easy reach of my hovel that I DONT go to simply because NONE of the floor singers can sing without the Bloody Words, and often held up between the singer and the audience .
Where does THAT fit the 1954 definition ??


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: GUEST,Blandiver
Date: 12 Aug 12 - 04:58 AM

To paraphrase the late great Julius Henry Marx - I would join no Folk Club that would have me as a member.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 12 Aug 12 - 03:20 AM

I still think a big sign could be the answer.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: GUEST,Blandiver
Date: 11 Aug 12 - 05:11 AM

I recall wandering into the back room of a certain pub back in 1979 with a friend, both of us post-punk / proto Goth Romantic, Marcia in heavy make-up, and dressed to kill, and being looked at in horror by the others who were making ready for the evening. They whispered amongst themselves and delegated one of their number to approach us.
'Er - actually - it's a Folk Club in here tonight,' he said, most put out as we sat at a corner table with out pints and fags.
'We know,' said Marcia. 'We've come to see The Watersons.'
'Oh - we thought - well - we don't usually get your sort in here - '
'Frost and Fire mate,' laughed Marcia. 'It's a f*cking classic. I was brought up with it.'
Of course back then your average folkie would have been in their late 20s (I was 17 / Marcia 15). Strange times, but typical of your friendly folk vibe, then as now.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 11 Aug 12 - 04:29 AM

Perhaps the answer is more obvious. and All we actually need are big signs outside the pubs saying FOLK MUSIC CLUB here!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: GUEST,Blandiver
Date: 10 Aug 12 - 07:20 AM

In my dealings with Exeter over the years I've established that he is human, despite his extra-terrestrial status. Indeed, he insists (and who am I to doubt him?) that it was due to the intervention of extra-terrestrial intelligences some 50,000 years ago that humanity owed it's 'Great Leap' into the realms of culture & cognition without which we'd still be scrambling around in the primordial wilderness and the Arts & Sciences (much less the Folk Arts & Folk Sciences) would never have existed. In the murky realms of mythology, religion and folklore we find hints that this is the case, everything from The Bible to current UFOlore (and before & beyond), though I've seldom come across a positive spin on it. Even the brilliant Quatermass & the Pit is none too positive, and the long awaited (30 years!) Prometheus even less so.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: the lemonade lady
Date: 10 Aug 12 - 05:01 AM

Wild Rover is a bonus track on our live CD, but is very different.

Lol!

Sal


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 10 Aug 12 - 04:50 AM

Copyright arises automatically so nothing has to be "copyrighted". However the English law relating to works with no human author is murky - see Ssn 9(3) and 178 CDPA 1988.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: Musket
Date: 10 Aug 12 - 04:01 AM

2012 definition

Still trying to change the world with three chords and a plan, after all these years.....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: GUEST,raymond greenoaken
Date: 09 Aug 12 - 05:27 PM

>Thank-you for your offer of translation. I fear this is going to be a full-time job. Does this also cover material already posted?

Hmmm – let me think about that...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: GUEST,Blandiver
Date: 09 Aug 12 - 05:10 PM

,perhaps a voice of sanity is in this ocean of delusion

Come on in, GSW - the water's lovely!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 09 Aug 12 - 04:40 PM

Raymond,
Thank-you for your offer of translation. I fear this is going to be a full-time job. Does this also cover material already posted?

I was rather amused at your idea of Jim and me on the same board. (I'm very definitely not a member of the '54' club, though I do find it useful when cataloguing). I actually agree with bits of what Jack says, which is often those few bits which I can follow.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: GUEST,Charles Macfarlane
Date: 09 Aug 12 - 04:19 PM

>        From: GUEST,Blandiver
>        Date: 09 Aug 12 - 03:28 PM
>        
>        >        It's the commonality between us that defines us as a species.
>        
>        If there was such a thing as commonality, Macfarlane, you'd be celebrating our differences with sweet brotherly love instead of hurling your diarrhoea at me like an enraged baboon.

Again, you are quite simply wrong. You accuse me of "hurling your diarrhoea at me like an enraged baboon", but what have you been doing all this time? You previously accused me of being aggressive & insulting, but so have you in at least equal measure. Your very hypocrisy shows that we are much, much more alike than you care to admit.

>        It's the differences that matter, and the uniqueness, the diversity, and the blessed fact you are nothing like me, nor I like you. And for that fact alone you me count me a very happy bunny indeed.

Again, this is simply wrong, I am much more like you than different from you. You're confusing what distinguishes individuals in a species with what defines a species.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: The Sandman
Date: 09 Aug 12 - 04:07 PM

ah,an appearance from The Snail,perhaps a voice of sanity is in this ocean of delusion


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: TheSnail
Date: 09 Aug 12 - 03:38 PM

I'd just like to say that, having been around traditional music and song for about forty years, I had never heard of the 1954 definition before I joined Mudcat.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: GUEST,Blandiver
Date: 09 Aug 12 - 03:28 PM

Actually it's Richard who still has faith in the 1954 Definition - he'll frequently mention it in his posts when referring to 'real' (or Traditional) folk songs. It was his somewhat humourless contradiction of my wee jape over the 1954 Japananese Karaoke Singer fulfilling the 1954 criteria that caused the present unpleasantness, though for some reason Macfarlane thinks it has nothing to do with the discussion. Go figure.

It's the commonality between us that defines us as a species.

If there was such a thing as commonality, Macfarlane, you'd be celebrating our differences with sweet brotherly love instead of hurling your diarrhoea at me like an enraged baboon. It's the differences that matter, and the uniqueness, the diversity, and the blessed fact you are nothing like me, nor I like you. And for that fact alone you me count me a very happy bunny indeed.

*

It's the bells you know; ring, ring, ring, he goes all hours of the day

The days she can generally cope with; the nights, however, are a different kettle o' fish...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: GUEST,raymond greenoaken
Date: 09 Aug 12 - 03:02 PM

>and at one point you went along for the ride

Thank you for that illuminating definition of "obsessed". Now I can take to my bed a bit more knowledgable than when I left it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: GUEST,Charles Macfarlane
Date: 09 Aug 12 - 02:31 PM

>        From: GUEST,raymond greenoaken
>
>        By the by, I'm still waiting for Charles to supply the documentary evidence of my obsession with the 1954 Definition. I promise I won't eat or sleep until he provides it.

Obviously, the remark was aimed rather more at Blandiver than yourself. So far, the phrase 1954 occurs 23 times in this thread, oops there's another one, but it is necessary to distinguish between original invocations in relation to the Definition, and those that are quoted in reply and the one that is coincidental. The score for original invocations is:
        Blandiver:        12
        Yourself:        1

So, you can see that noone else here is interested. It's just Blandiver riding his hobby-horse, or rather flogging it to death, and at one point you went along for the ride.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: johncharles
Date: 09 Aug 12 - 02:08 PM

"Dear Master Macfarlane,
little Jack's composition may be a little confusing at times. It's the bells you know; ring, ring, ring, he goes all hours of the day.
Yours, Mrs. Blandiver."
p.s. Jack there is no teasing some people.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: GUEST,raymond greenoaken
Date: 09 Aug 12 - 02:06 PM

If anyone wants any help with Mr Blandiver's pronouncements, ask me – I know exactly what he means. It's not hard – trust me.

>The exact opposite of the truth.

That's good enough for me!

By the by, I'm still waiting for Charles to supply the documentary evidence of my obsession with the 1954 Definition. I promise I won't eat or sleep until he provides it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: GUEST,Charles Macfarlane
Date: 09 Aug 12 - 01:49 PM

>        From: GUEST,Blandiver
>
>        >        You might say our uniqueness is defined by the diverse nature of the parameters of our similarity
>
>        Crivvens again! That's a wonky one even by my standards.
>
>        Well, I'd say our diverse individuality (subjectively / culturally) is that which defines our humanity.

You probably don't realise it but that is actually ambiguous. By using 'that which' instead of 'what' - something I do frequently - you've given that statement two possible meanings. I'm pretty sure you mean ...

        "Our individuality defines our humanity"

... and if that's what you meant, why not just say that, instead of using the laboured, long-winded, and, as it turns out, ambiguous phrasing that you did? The other possible meaning is ...

        "Our individuality is whatever defines our humanity"
        
... which says something rather different.

Either way, it's wrong anyway ...

>        It is the differences that make us what we are as both individuals

Fine so far

>        and as a species;

The exact opposite of the truth. It's the commonality between us that defines us as a species.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: GUEST,Blandiver
Date: 09 Aug 12 - 01:34 PM

Nowt to do with me, Shimrod - I'm just channeling this stuff for a chap called Exeter from the planet Metaluna. Scientists? Schmientists! Forgive my bias (and curse my enthusiasm) but really things haven't been the same for me since they installed this wretched Interrossiter chip in the old amygdala.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 09 Aug 12 - 01:20 PM

Thank you Mr B. Have you copyrighted that phrase, by any chance?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: SunrayFC
Date: 09 Aug 12 - 01:01 PM

I feel I should say something....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: GUEST,bouzouki bob folkestone
Date: 09 Aug 12 - 12:16 PM

hi richard   sad news bo foaks has just passed away overnight 9 aug 2012 will be greatly missed at tenterden folk festival and every event he lit up with his endless talent and warmth.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: GUEST,Blandiver
Date: 09 Aug 12 - 12:12 PM

You might say our uniqueness is defined by the diverse nature of the parameters of our similarity

Crivvens again! That's a wonky one even by my standards.

Well, I'd say our diverse individuality (subjectively / culturally) is that which defines our humanity. We all have finger prints (at least those of us with fingers) but no two sets are alike; genetics likewise. It is the differences that make us what we are as both individuals and as a species; and the fact that we may all see things a little differently, and how we share our opinions in a constructive & open hearted way in a spirit of wisdom, enlightenment, general crack & coloquy... You know the sort of thing - it's the Mudcat way!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: GUEST,Blandiver
Date: 09 Aug 12 - 12:04 PM

Crivvens! And to think my original quip about the Japanese Karaoke Tourist & the 1954 Definition (of 05 Aug 12 - 12:37 PM; my point of re-entry into this interminable thread) was actually meant to be a wee tease. Funny how things end up, ain't it?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 09 Aug 12 - 11:58 AM

I couldn't help but note the following phrase from further up the thread:

"You might say our uniqueness is defined by the diverse nature of the parameters of our similarity."

Brilliant! Now, if only I could work out what it means ... ?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: GUEST,Charles Macfarlane
Date: 09 Aug 12 - 11:28 AM

>        From: GUEST,Blandiver
>
>        Firstly:
>
>        >        >        So - come down from your high-horse and talk to me man to man.
>        >
>        >        Oh, we're plucking phrases from a spaghetti western now are we?
>
>        I was thinking more of Hollywood Westerns ...

Again, you've completely missed the point, which is that you frequently pluck quotations and phrases out of the air and include them, presumably because you think they sound impressive and/or cool, without regard to their relevance, appropriateness, accuracy, or usefulness. The original quote from yourself about high-horses was an example - it was irrelevant both to the wider thread topics or the specific issues I raised against you. In other words, it was just more bullshit.

>        The second is more serious:
>
>        This is irrelevant to this discussion, but it is another unsupported assertion stated as though it were fact. Care to find a creditable reference for it?
>
>        This would involve trawling through the legacy of Kinsey's Team who were widely reputed to have numbed their own sexuality to such an extent they could only 'get off' by recourse to increasingly bizarre & self-destructive practices. Worse (much worse as I say) is that they drew much of their published data (i.e. the sexual responses of infants) from the paedophiles with whom they frequently colluded, and, by implication, encouraged. Yorkshire TV made a documentary about this in 1998; Hollywood made a biopic comedy in 2004.

You may be correct, or you may not, but either way you STILL haven't pointed to a creditable reference for it. Given the relative enormity of what you are claiming, I would have thought there would be something out there.

>        As for its relevance to the discussion, I offered it as a precedence on the limits that human scientist have in gaining an objective perspective on any aspect of human behaviour / culture without losing sight of the fact that it's always going to be subjective anyway. I guess to believe otherwise takes real faith, huh?

If you'd read and tried to understand the original research in the other thread, you'd know that this allusion of yours was completely irrelevant both to this thread topic and that research. Your further attempts to justify its inclusion merely further prove your ignorance and misunderstanding of scientific methodology.

>        "So what has all this to do with the 1954 Definition, Blandy?" I hear hapless reader ask.

I don't see or hear anyone ask that. I've never mentioned 1954. Seemingly, the people here most obsessed with that date are yourself and Raymond Greenoaken. Most, quite possibly all, of the rest of us couldn't give a FF about what happened in 1954. I have said as much, quite possibly more than once, yet you persist in bringing it up.

>        Well, [more irrelevant bullshit] mutable.

>        The 1954 Definition is [more irrelevant bullshit].

THE 1954 DEFINITION IS IRRELEVANT TO THIS TOPIC.

>        Perhaps Richard would like to paraphrase that for me so it meets with his exacting standards of conciseness and clarity.

I'll save him the trouble ...

BULLSHIT


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 09 Aug 12 - 11:19 AM

Easy. There you go again.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: GUEST,Blandiver
Date: 09 Aug 12 - 08:16 AM

Sorry about this but Re-reading through Macfarlane's post of 08 Aug 12 - 06:20 PM whilst doing some tedious digital editing I find there are a couple of things that I would be remiss in not responding to...

Firstly:

Oh, we're plucking phrases from a spaghetti western now are we?

I was thinking more of Hollywood Westerns, sort of John Wayne style. If paraphrased in Spaghetti Westerns I can, off hand, think only of Tuco (Eli Wallach) in The Good, the Band and the Ugly who after shooting an vengeful opponent from beneath his grubby bathwater utters the immortal line: "When you have to shoot, shoot. Don't talk." It just happens to be a classic scene from one of my all time favourite films:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZXlhSgq7us

*

The second is more serious:

This is irrelevant to this discussion, but it is another unsupported assertion stated as though it were fact. Care to find a creditable reference for it?

This would involve trawling through the legacy of Kinsey's Team who were widely reputed to have numbed their own sexuality to such an extent they could only 'get off' by recourse to increasingly bizarre & self-destructive practices. Worse (much worse as I say) is that they drew much of their published data (i.e. the sexual responses of infants) from the paedophiles with whom they frequently colluded, and, by implication, encouraged. Yorkshire TV made a documentary about this in 1998; Hollywood made a biopic comedy in 2004.

As for its relevance to the discussion, I offered it as a precedence on the limits that human scientist have in gaining an objective perspective on any aspect of human behaviour / culture without losing sight of the fact that it's always going to be subjective anyway. I guess to believe otherwise takes real faith, huh?

"So what has all this to do with the 1954 Definition, Blandy?" I hear hapless reader ask. Well, The Pragmatist (like any linguist) observes and describes the mutability of language in terms of its living usage. The Pedant, on the other hand, prescribes grammatical correctness by way of enforcing a holy law in fear of the feral reality of the wilderness, innit? The Pedant will thus delight in the Oxford Comma, whilst the Grocer's Apostrophe will reduce them to blustering fits (we've seen a fair few of these from Bridge & Macfarlane I have to say). The Pragmatist, OTOH, will delight in the Grocer's Apostrophe as integral to the living lore of language, regarding with suspicion any correctness that insist language is anything other than mutable.   

The 1954 Definition is prescriptive musical pedantry that has nothing whatsoever to do with the entirely pragmatic musical usage it attempts to define. It's appeal is, therefore, always going to be to the more egg-bound Folk Enthusiast (those self-styled purists we're always hearing about?) for whom Taxonomical (and Taxidermic) correctness is paramount.

Perhaps Richard would like to paraphrase that for me so it meets with his exacting standards of conciseness and clarity.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: johncharles
Date: 09 Aug 12 - 06:23 AM

people not going to folk clubs may have found something better to do.
john


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 09 Aug 12 - 05:02 AM

Well Charles, you have a thooughly incomprehensible way of expressing yourself - but there are some nuggets of insight hidden deep in all those words.

i doubt I could keep up a correspondence with you. (You should work for the tax people - everyone would just see the letter and say - ah fuck it! I'll pay.)

However I think you are in the right - particularly about the standard of entertainment in folk clubs.

This tradition business has been very selective and self important about what it has decided to sustain.

Very recently I watched Josh White Jnr's tuition dvd on his Dad's guitar style. And the strange thing - there was a style of guitar playing, I hadn't really seen ,anything like since Gerry Lockran retired. A style totally gone.

We thought Carthy, Jansch etc were Lords of everything they surveyed - technique wise - and of course they weren't. They were just very talented charismatic individuals.

Nic jones, Carthy, Jansch, Dylan even, were very dangerous people to try and emulate. their earnestness and brilliance at what they did sort of made it work for them. It absolved them from doing anything much in the way of presenting their work and explaining it. The minstrelsy of Seeger, derek Brimstone, Maccoll, Cosmotheka - people working from a more theatrical background are what made people understand and feel that folk music was their friend.

Nowadays every young playeryou see is so damnned earnest. You want to shake them and say - wake up smell the protoplasm! - you are not bringing down thetablets of stone from Mt Sinai. We are of the same flesh as yourself.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: GUEST,raymond greenoaken
Date: 09 Aug 12 - 04:41 AM

I had a strange and troubling dream last night. I dreamt I was present (but out of sight) at an emergency meeting of the 1954 Club, that shadowy sodality dedicated to the worship and sanctity of the holy screed known only as The Definition. Chairman Richard Bridge called the meeting to order with a peremptory crack of his gavel on a bust of Cecil Sharp.

"Emergency meeting now in session," he intoned gravely. "Tonight's business: we gotta do something about this guy Blandiver. For years now under a range of implausible cognomens he's poured scorn on everything we hold to be inviolable and beyond refutation. We've sent the big guns in – Carroll, Gardham, Peters – but they just can't get a bead on him. What to do? It's time for the Final Solution…"

The sanguine faces around the table turned waxen at these words.

"You mean…?" croaked one.

"Yes," spat Bridge. "—The Prof. "

A shudder of nameless dread ran round the table.

"There is no alternative. He's the only guy with the guts to insist on a rigidly literal interpretation of Blandiver's every utterance. It's the only way — pure, lethal pedantry. It never fails."

"B..but…" stammered another, "it's never been done before on Mudcat. It could (gulp) destroy civilized discourse forever."

"That's a risk we gotta take," growled Bridge. "All in favour…?"

At that point I awoke, relieved that if was only a dream. Then I logged onto Mudcat…


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: johncharles
Date: 09 Aug 12 - 03:39 AM

who is right?
john


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: GUEST,Blandiver
Date: 08 Aug 12 - 06:59 PM

but you should note the conciseness and clarity of my remarks on this thread, in contrast to your own.

Well, Richard, I was all ready to rock 'n' roll but your boy MacFarlane's just pipped me in the sesquipedalian stakes. I thought I was good, but - I managed maybe 30% of that last post before I felt my life just ebbing away. I suspect maybe that was his intention; let's hope so, eh? Either way I am, for once, quite lost for words.

See you on another thread sometime, old timer!

Happy trails, Jack Blandiver.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: GUEST,Charles Macfarlane
Date: 08 Aug 12 - 06:20 PM

>        From: GUEST,Blandiver
>
>        If you didn't understand it, you'd be hard pushed to differentiate between the recitation of a shopping list or a love poem.

Well again this is just plain wrong. You'd almost certainly be able to differentiate between the two through intonation, style of delivery, etc.

>        This is what 'all Pop Music sounds the same to me' means - it is a confession that states: 'I don't understand it, neither do I wish to; I am better than that. I am vastly superior & very happy in my reactionary ignorance.'

AFAIAA, noone here has said "I don't understand it, neither do I wish to; I am better than that. I am vastly superior & very happy in my reactionary ignorance.", nor even just "all Pop Music sounds the same to me", while the referenced research said something different, but of course you couldn't be arsed to read it, perhaps because your arse was too busy saying: "I don't understand it, neither do I wish to; I am better than that. I am vastly superior & very happy in my reactionary ignorance." ...

>        Pop Music DOES All Sound The Same
>
>        > From: GUEST,Blandiver
>        >
>        > What utter rot [irrelevant and ignorant rant snipped]
>
>        > From: Jack Campin
>        >
>        > Somebody didn't read the article.
>
>        > From: GUEST,Blandiver
>        >
>        > True; I got bored after the first few words.

So, it's just as I said. You are denigrating a piece of scientific research without even bothering to try to understand it.

>        Or quite possibly not.
>
>        Well, speaking empirically, evidence would suggest this to be the case. It certainly is with me. The one is enriched by the knowledge of the other, and all points in between, and beyond, & most of my Jazz pals (and Folk ones for that matter) are similarly thorough in their musical appreciations. It's all part of the fun, don't you know? People who love Milestones might not get Bitches Brew but I've yet to meet a fan of Bitches Brew who wasn't of the opinion that every utterance by The Dark Magus is worthy of our attention. This is how we learn. Same goes for Rahsaan Roland Kirk & Sun Ra, who for all their radicalism & experimentation schooled a whole generation on the importance of knowing what went before.

The trouble with using selective criteria such as "it certainly is with me" and "most of my Jazz pals" is that it is almost always possible to find opposites. For example, punk was so self-obsessed that its exponents openly confessed to rejecting the entire preceding musical history of mankind. Even Billy Bragg, who now likes to think of himself as an advocate of folk music, was one of the leaders of Britain's "anti-folk" movement of the '80s (with friends like that does folk music need enemies?).

Hence "Or quite possibly not".

>        but I don't think this same methodology applies in any way to Art, high or low, Popular or otherwise, much less how we appreciate & experience such things either collectively or individually.

If you'd read and at least tried to half-understand the research referenced in the other thread - you don't have to understand all the parameters and statistics of graphical networks to get the drift - you'd realise what an ignorant ass you are making yourself appear.

>        For sure, Scientists can tell us what an orgasm is, but it's worth noting that Kinsey and team went impotent as a consequence of their infamous studies of human sexuality.   And worse. Much worse.

This is irrelevant to this discussion, but it is another unsupported assertion stated as though it were fact. Care to find a creditable reference for it?

>        As far as Pythagorean theory goes ... Listen to one of Partch's pure thirds and compare it to that on a piano,

You don't need to listen to Patch to hear a pure third, you can hear one simply by suitably tuning a guitar, which I've already done, and I've already stated that the Western tempered scale is a compromise. Your point is?

>        or a melodeon.

Being English I use the term 'melodeon' to apply to a diatonic instrument which plays in a limited number of keys rather than a chromatic instrument which can play in them all, which I call a 'button accordian' or simply an 'accordian' for a keyed instrument. As I've always understood it, though a search shows that hard facts are hard to come by, a melodeon is tuned to a natural scale, so should contain pure chords EXCEPT possibly for the tremelo which may or may not be deliberately introduced by voicing, while an accordian is tuned to a tempered scale. In fact I've heard some experts say that's where the latter's name comes from because it is in 'accord' with all the keys, though I've seen other reasons for the name on the web. This could easily be the subject of a whole new thread, and probably has already been, but I don't intend to go further than that here.

I merely used it as an example of an instrument that I believe is tuned to a natural rather than a tempered scale.

>         Otherwise [snip irrelevant wittering] anyway.

>        On another level ... Here's a thing - even in a belfry of 8 bells there are a possible 40,320 change variations; on 12 there are 479,001,600 (source - WIKI). I don't think the innumerable melodic, rhythmic, harmonic, textural & technological factors of the innumerable idioms & exponents (present, past & future) of popular music & song have to fear they'll be running out of material any time soon.

In the 1970s, someone said to me that you could never program a computer to beat a chess grand-master, but it has since happened. The number of moves in chess is huge, but it is finite, which is partly why this has come about. Similarly, even given the constraints I outlined previously, the possible number of musical combinations is huge, but is still finite. Further, for all your protestations, nothing like the full gamut of possible combinations have ever been used, and the number actually in use in pop music is decreasing, as the article you were too lazy to read showed. Therefore, your use of the word 'infinitely' was wrong whether you want to use the word exactly or loosely.

>        Whatever the scientists tell us, Heaven and earth will pass away before human ingenuity and creativity grows weary from the lack of stimulation of new music, popular or otherwise.

Another bland assertion stated as though it were fact. Neither of us can possibly know the truth or otherwise of this, so it's not a useful thing to say.

>        >        Witness what has happened in this thread.
>
>        Okay. You've misunderstood pretty much everything I've said

I don't believe that's so, but if it is so, whose fault is it? If you want to convey ideas unambiguously to other people, you must learn to put arguments in a rational way, not spout endless quotes plucked out of the air because they seem vaguely connected with the subject, or because you just happen to like them because you think they sound cool.

>        but feel you have to disagree with it anyway.

I'm merely trying to force you to be argue in a rational manner, rather than bullshitting.

>        To do this you ...

With remorseless rationality have just pointed out every mistake that you've made, and you sure have made plenty.

>        in an attempt to turn me into a fool

Really, I wouldn't go there if I were you, the reply - that I don't even have to try to do that for you, because you're an expert at it yourself - is from your point of view dangerously obvious and easy for me! The best thing you can do when you're in a hole like this, is stop digging.

>        instead of spending time actually attempting to understand or address anything I've written

Most of it has been one or more of illogical, irrelevant, not useful, or just plain wrong.

>        In so doing you not only reveal your own somewhat superficial knowledge of a number of subjects, but a rather irate personal proclivity towards precriptive righteousness (a quality I regard as a complete anathema to a come-all-ye world view).

Now THAT I would say is aggressive & insulting.

>        And who mentioned the 60s anyway, daddy-o?

Certainly not me, until you did. And I'm not your daddy - if I was unfortunate enough to be so, I hope I'd've managed to thrash some sense into you by now.

>        Despite the emergence of a possible Third Wave revival this past decade & a half or so, Folk is still very much a thing of the 50s.

If the current standard of performance of folk music was still at the level it was at in the 50s and 60s, I suspect that there would be many more people in the clubs. One of the pleasures of digitising all my vinyls last year was rediscovering just how professional, slick, and entertainingly good were many of the top folk bands of the era - for example The Clancy Brothers, The Dubliners.

In the late 60s, I used to go every now and then to a pub on the Isle of Dogs to see a band called The Levity Lancers who played a riotously eclectic mixture of Jazz, Music Hall, Vaudeville, etc, interspersed with double entendres, blue jokes, and ribald stories. Unfortunately, I don't believe they were ever recorded, let alone live. As long as they were playing there, that pub was always heaving, the moment they left, it died, and was never as full again. Even as late as the 80s folk scene, there were acts like Cosmotheka who used to pack them in, and again, although they produced a studio album, they were never recorded live.

If it wasn't for albums like ...
        The Dubliners - Finnegan Wakes (Live at the Gate Theatre, Dublin)
        The Dubliners - Live at the Royal Albert Hall
        The Clancy Brothers & Tommy Makem - Hearty & Hellish
        The Clancy Brothers & Tommy Makem - A Spontaneous Performance Recording
... AFAIAA of which only Hearty & Hellish was ever released on CD, and maybe not even that, it would be easy to forget just how massively popular folk music was at the time, and, more importantly, WHY!

If you want to get bums on seats, you have to entertain them.

>        If people don't go to folk clubs anymore it's because they're just getting old, or they're not as thick on the ground as they used to be, or because the 50's Traddy vision has become diluted by an MOR tendancy towards idiomatic Dylanesque singer-song-writing.

No, some of the above may be true, it's not worth arguing the toss either way because it's not why people don't go to folk clubs. If people don't go to folk clubs, it's because the standard of entertainment in them is not what it used to be to pull them in.

>        So - come down from your high-horse and talk to me man to man.

Oh, we're plucking phrases from a spaghetti western now are we?

>        As for the rest - well, what I have written, I have written.

And, believe me, it speaks volumes, but probably not in the way you intend.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 08 Aug 12 - 03:25 PM

Sorry Sweeney - but you should note the conciseness and clarity of my remarks on this thread, in contrast to your own.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Its why people dont go to folk clubs....
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 08 Aug 12 - 03:23 PM

(2) (Of England and America) 'Two nations separated by a common language.'

Sometimes the inquirer asks, 'Was it Wilde or Shaw?' The answer appears to be: both. In The Canterville Ghost (1887), Wilde wrote: 'We have really everything in common with America nowadays except, of course, language'. However, the 1951 Treasury of Humorous Quotations (Esar & Bentley) quotes Shaw as saying: 'England and America are two countries separated by the same language', but without giving a source. The quote had earlier been attributed to Shaw in Reader's Digest (November 1942).

Much the same idea occurred to Bertrand Russell (Saturday Evening Post, 3 June 1944): 'It is a misfortune for Anglo-American friendship that the two countries are supposed to have a common language', and in a radio talk prepared by Dylan Thomas shortly before his death (and published after it in The Listener, April 1954) - European writers and scholars in America were, he said, 'up against the barrier of a common language'.

Inevitably this sort of dubious attribution has also been seen: 'Winston Churchill said our two countries were divided by a common language' (The Times, 26 January 1987; The European, 22 November 1991.)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate
Next Page

  Share Thread:
More...

Reply to Thread
Subject:  Help
From:
Preview   Automatic Linebreaks   Make a link ("blue clicky")


Mudcat time: 21 August 3:24 PM EDT

[ Home ]

All original material is copyright © 1998 by the Mudcat Café Music Foundation, Inc. All photos, music, images, etc. are copyright © by their rightful owners. Every effort is taken to attribute appropriate copyright to images, content, music, etc. We are not a copyright resource.