The songs for this week were "Can the Circle Be Unbroken," "The Banks of the Ohio," and "The Cuckoo Bird"
I thought the reading for this week was pretty interesting. I'm not sure how I felt about the definition of a folk song that they gave, "a folk song is song that survives without the necessity of commercial media." On one hand, I think this definition is too restrictive. First, there's a lot of songs -- and this was mentioned in the reading -- that get covered by pop singers and so their presence is refreshed. I guess we don't know what would be the counterfactual...
The other thing I thought was interesting was that the Fisk Singers were introduced, the article talked about them fundraising through their recordings... but isn't this a form of commercial media? Shouldn't this automatically disqualify them as being folksingers singing folksongs?
The article portrays commercialism in a negative light, and I understand that. I often find myself around people who are against commercialism (eg. Emir Kusturica) but I don't necessarily agree that it is all bad. Maybe it's the econ major in me, but I think we need it to an extent.
Part of the reading mentioned that Alan Lomax "was not a folk scholar" and that "he was less concerned with presenting authentic performances than with offering versions that showed American folk music at its best -- even if that meant adding a stanza from another version or helping his informants to remember forgotten lines." (47) How does this fit in with the anti commericalist view?
It was interesting to see Berkeley mentioned in so many parts...
My favorite song of the week was "Banks of the Ohio." I really liked the contrast of the song -- from the first two verses I was convinced it was going to be a happily ever after love song until it took a total 180.
I thought the reading for this week was pretty interesting. I'm not sure how I felt about the definition of a folk song that they gave, "a folk song is song that survives without the necessity of commercial media." On one hand, I think this definition is too restrictive. First, there's a lot of songs -- and this was mentioned in the reading -- that get covered by pop singers and so their presence is refreshed. I guess we don't know what would be the counterfactual...
The other thing I thought was interesting was that the Fisk Singers were introduced, the article talked about them fundraising through their recordings... but isn't this a form of commercial media? Shouldn't this automatically disqualify them as being folksingers singing folksongs?
The article portrays commercialism in a negative light, and I understand that. I often find myself around people who are against commercialism (eg. Emir Kusturica) but I don't necessarily agree that it is all bad. Maybe it's the econ major in me, but I think we need it to an extent.
Part of the reading mentioned that Alan Lomax "was not a folk scholar" and that "he was less concerned with presenting authentic performances than with offering versions that showed American folk music at its best -- even if that meant adding a stanza from another version or helping his informants to remember forgotten lines." (47) How does this fit in with the anti commericalist view?
It was interesting to see Berkeley mentioned in so many parts...
My favorite song of the week was "Banks of the Ohio." I really liked the contrast of the song -- from the first two verses I was convinced it was going to be a happily ever after love song until it took a total 180.
No comments:
Post a Comment