Folkwrongica

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

I got absorbed enough in this Guardian piece to miss my tube stop:

http://music.guardian.co.uk/folk/story/0,,2071468,00.html

A lot of its anecdotal material is good and I can't much disagree with the central argument (tho as they admit Tosches summarises it more neatly) but I didn't like the conclusion - even as a staunch poptimist "the inherent democracy of pop junk" is a MASSIVE handwave.

Comments

Re: in conclusion

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

It's the inherent democracy bit I didn't like!

Re: in conclusion

[jauntyalan.livejournal.com]

is strikes me that the core of this is about the process of creation once again. a quick modification of "they defined folk music not by the song, but by its performance method" takes us not to performance, but the genesis of the song.

and we're into manufactured v 'wild' pop. the manifest idea of folk is 'wild pop'.

Re: in conclusion

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

I like the idea of wild pop.

Re: in conclusion

[jauntyalan.livejournal.com]

why though?

isn't this just a way to talk about the songs that everyone likes, the first past the post 'what shall we sing on the terraces/round the bonfire'

Re: in conclusion

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

Because the word democracy elides the way those songs become popular, I guess.

calling London Bootleg Orchestra

[katstevens.livejournal.com]

Or in the Brothers Bar field!

Re: calling London Bootleg Orchestra

[jauntyalan.livejournal.com]

bootlegging is nu-folk