Obviously, I shouldn't speak for Llig, but I'm sure he is perfectly aware that ornamentation can't stand up on its own. Furthering my forward way of speaking for my betters, I think he might answer that ornamentation is any of the ways that you attract attention to the melody - and if you don't do it (be it in form of twiddly bits, phrasing, melody variations or rhythmic variation), well you're just left with melody which, by the third time round is as repetitive as most other types of music (*cough* sorry, drifting).
On a more personal point, as a dancer (more breton than irish) I don't mind a stripped down tune and I'll likely dance to it and enjoy it. But what makes for a special night is when I get to hear something extra-special - something "clever" as you say, Diavlo. The best music is something I can both dance to and really enjoy listening to at the same time. (On the other hand, there is such a thing as too clever - I really dislike the over-the-top ornamentation of the breton biniou and bombard competitions - it showcases talent more than the beauty of the piece).
I realise now why I feel like speaking for Llig: It seems you're misrepresenting his opinion and setting up the strawman "Llig thinks ornamentation can stand on its own". If all I know of him is what I read on this board, how come I see his position of "the tunes need good melody AND rhythm AND ornamentation" as quite similar to your position of "the tunes need good melody AND rhythm but I can live without the ornamentation" as quite similar, but you see it as worlds apart?
thank you, I am of the less ornamentation more skill school. I have had the dubious pleasure of playing with fiddlers who have the most incredible ornamentation but no actual ability in basic playing. That is, not actually knowing where for example b c c# and d are on the a string. Dont get me wrong ornamentation has a place, but not where you need to learn to play first.
I just put this on the other discussion, but it's better here:
Let's take a straight forward tune, Out on the Ocean. In fact, let's just look at the first bar:
Does it begin with a slow B roll then BAG?
Does it begin with D2B BAG, as posted here?
The answer of course is both. And that belies the nature of the music. This is how it goes. And it goes the other way also. Not, and this is important, "This is how it goes" and "This is another way it can go"
Though there are many other ways it can go:
Snappy B roll then B BAG
Snappy D cran then B BAG
DBB BAG
Slow B roll snappy B roll AG
etc etc
And we could argue whether certain bits are "how it goes", or are variations, and that's a good thing. (though the arguments wouldn't be verbal, they'd be in the form of give and take when actually playing and listening). But the important point is that "how it goes" is not open to interpretation. The interpretation comes in only after you know how it goes. And you cannot CANNOT learn how it goes from the dots.
“Anyway, I have such an opposing view to you Llig, and we obviously listen to tunes in a completely different way, that I wonder if one of us has extraterrestrial status. You're from Leeds way, right? There is a high space cadet quotient and many ET-looking types from that area, so I'm nominating you as an alien being, or possibly you're from another dimension.”
… not sure if that’s some kind of joke but even if it is, it sounds a bit harsh if you ask me because don’t we all have our eccentricities no matter where we come from and expressing differences in opinion is enriching as long as there’s an environment of respect and appreciation rather than righteousness.
Re use of ornamentation – as a relative beginner (I’m learning to play the flute) I’m learning tunes in ‘bare-bones’ style so to speak without ornamentation, and although I don’t have the skill yet to integrate or use ornamentation and on top of that I can only play slowly which means jigs and reels are much reduced in speed compared to what they sound like at sessions or recordings, I actually don’t seemed to mind because there is an indescribable beauty in each tune. To give you and example: Over the past three weeks I’ve been learning the two Copperplate reels and wow do they sound beautiful played very very slowly and when one lingers – to me the tunes are very soulful and have the feel of an air when you slow them down – well, that’s how I perceive them as a beginner…
I know a lot of people use the word ‘diddley music’ when describing ITM but to me it never felt ‘diddley’ but I hear beautiful melodies with dips and high points, surprising turns and depth of colour all of which trigger a myriad of emotional response in the listener and player. A tune played slowly has a different impact than a tune sped up and the same counts for an ornamented tune or a ‘bare-bones’ tune, yet what remains the same is the essence of a tune – no matter how a tune is played you can change some characteristics but you cannot alter the essence because each tune has a voice which speaks for itself – that is what endures. What I love when listening to good players is when they follow the voice of a tune ie when they work with the essence of a tune and highlight it - this can either be done with or without ornamentation. If ornamentation is used and the player executes it effortlessly ie ornamentation lightly trickles and flows throughout and with a tune and it is used purposefully to highlight the essence and the integral voice of a tune then that’s a brilliant player in my eyes. So, perhaps it’s less about how much ornamentation or how little is used but it’s more about the player and how he communicates with the tune itself, and a skilled and sensitive player can do this both with or without ornamentation…. well, that’s my humble opinion which isn’t worth much coming from a beginner with clumsy fingers who can’t even use ornamentation yet…
De gustibus non est disputandum. Some styles need ornamentation, to others it's anathema. What do you mean by "the" tune anyway?
To me, a tune is a wire matrix, a framework, a recipe in the same way that DNA is a recipe for an organism.
And (ordinary) dancers don't care how you ornament a tune, they don't even care much what the tune is, because they are only listening for the rhythm. That's one reason I don't like playing for (ordinary) dancers.
Is the objection to ornamentation, or to "cleverness" whatever that is meant to imply? Do some musicians prefer stupid?
Vanessa, are you familiar with Matt Molloy's Heathery Breeze album. If not, You must purchase a copy right away. Listen to his Out on the Ocean. Then please please, before you learn to do anything else at all on your flute, get that slow B roll nailed. It's not difficult. And it's not an ornament. It is part of the tune.
Hi llig leahcim, thanks for the tip and yes I've got Matt Molloy's Heathery Breeze album... and I love the tune 'out on the ocean'... learnt it a few weeks back but sadly my fingers are not nimble enough to excecute any kind of roll... I'm at the moment trying to loosen my fingers enough to do cuts and taps but I don't have the dexterity to do that either yet... sounds awful when I practice... and yesterday got the bad news that I got bad bout of tendonitis of my fingers in both hands and a trapped nerve... so I'm typing one finger style here... hahaha... and doctor says I have to give it a little while until I can pick up the flute again:(... oh, what a nightmare:(... but of course I'm looking forward to learning to use ornamentation appropriately so it becomes an integral part of a tune and flows with it rather than sticking out like a sore thumb but I need to get those fingers loosened up first and get that coordination right (sigh)...
Is the opening B roll part of the tune, Michael? Disregarding the position momentarily that tunes oft have little connection with their titles, have you ever spent any time in a kayak or currach or other small craft on the open sea?? For me at any rate, Out on the Ocean as a tune represents very well the rise of fall of the sea - the troughs and peaks of waves passing under you. That opening long D represents a trough!!! of a wave.
Play the tune with this in mind and see how it rhythmically rises and falls. You can even play around with the tempo and have a lazy rolling sea or a choppy kind of water that keep slapping you in the face.
Given that it is likely an old tune and connected to a rural Ireland of days past, it is quite possible that this is where it derives from.
"For me at any rate, Out on the Ocean as a tune represents very well the rise of fall of the sea - the troughs and peaks of waves passing under you..."
Wounded hussar, I feel exactly the same thing when listening and playing... in this case the title seems to reflect the essence of the tune... wonder who wrote it?
Yes, quite possible. And I might play it D4AG to really linger on that trough, though this, I believe, would be a variation. The lazy rolling of certain notes though are integral, would you not agree?
Perhaps, but not to labour the point: for me, I do kinda feel that the low D is an important and integral part of the tune - the way you return to it and back up again. Dispensing with it and putting in a B roll changes the character, does it not? Who's to say who is right & wrong, not I certainly, but reflecting on Diavlo's point above, perhaps the basic melody of the rise and fall is more appropriate here.
Yes, to start on the low D is indeed an important and integral part of the tune. But to roll the B is also, even if you do it just once in the 12 times that bit will come up (if you play the tune the usual thrice)
But 12 times is qiuite alot. But one the beauties of this music is that you could easily think of maybe fifty or sixty different ways of playing just that one bit, so narrowing it down to 12 (or less if you want to repeat the low D a few times and keep the slow B roll) means that you have to narrow down your choices to what fits the mood of the moment
Ah! but I respectfully quote you from above......
"I'm merely pointing out that without, at the very least, playing the slow b roll in the first bar of out on the ocean, you are not playing the tune."
That's what caught my attention!!
I'm fuzzy on what exactly the original question was that Diavlo was asking. Was it this:
"How little decoration is too little for you?"
I'm much like Vanessa in that I too am learning and can't play ornaments yet (and good for you for finding a teacher, Vanessa!), but I do sing and have listened to this music for 20 years, and I think that some ornamentation is essential, at least a grace note here and there. Other than that, it seems to depend on the tune---some have melodies that jump all over the scale and strong rhythms that sound fine with less ornamentation, and other tunes really benefit from a few rolls or triplets to accentuate the notes.
I can't wait until I can actually play this stuff properly!
Gee, I always played a tune that I thought was Out on the Ocean, but it starts out bDb, and sometimes for a change of pace I just slide up into the b. No roll at the beginning. So I guess that, whatever my favorite tune is, it is not Out on the Ocean, just some similar imposter.
And some people play it with a first and second ending on the B part. In fact, on the seminal Malloy Peoples and Brady album, Malloy plays the B part one way each time through, and People plays it the other way. But oddly enough, that works.
Maybe these tunes are more durable than we think--despite a lot of different approaches, the tune is still recognizable, and we all seem to be able to adapt to each other well enough when we bring our different variants to the local session.
Not an impostor, just a little bit wrong that's all. No great crime.
And Hussar, when I said "playing the slow b roll in the first bar", I meant when ever that bit of the tune comes up. Not necessarily the first time through
Now I understand, Michael. Sure, I'm always thinking 'this way and that' about things. Anway, where is Diavlo? He seems to have some sort of axe to grind - maybe he was just s... stirring.
"Not an imposter, just a little bit wrong that's all" Unless you know who wrote a tune and exactly what they wrote ('wrote' here includes played without writing down) how can you know whether a particular variant is 'right' or 'wrong'. Tunes transmitted orally will change - and how do you know which was the original? And even if you know who wrote the tune, can you be sure they played it the same every time? Need there be only one 'right' version?
Meantime, since I live near Leeds, I must just check in the mirror to see if I look a bit ET. That could explain a lot.
And then I'm going to spend a while learning two versions of the English hornpipe 'Stoney Steps', in which out of 16 bars of music only about 4 1/2 are the same. Obviously a very space cadet thing to do.
I would be very, very wary of ever claiming to be able to know the "right" way to play a tune. Unless you composed it, but even then, I doubt the composer would sit and think "that's not my tune, he played it differently from how I would play it". Besides, consider the types of ornamentation available on various instruments - many advanced scottish fiddlers look at pipe ornamentation style to enable them to play tunes in a different way....who's playing the right version of the tune in that case? So, Michael, we (and many other people) must agree to disagree. The only time where playing the same ornaments is essential seems to me to be when playing for listening, hence the distinction between playing at a session or to be listened to.
Personally I find playing for dancing to be the most rewarding type of playing, and regard it as the most important part of being a good trad musician. But again, just my opinion, I've no more of a valid opinion than anyone else.
Er - I could be wrong on this, but I think that Out on the Ocean might be Scottish - perhaps someone knows for certain? If so then the 'right' way to play it is . . .
It isn't about any spacific ornament and where you put it in a tune, but rather the style and how you use ornamentation that defines the genre. These tunes can be decorated differently on each pass, and by different players on different instruments, but whether or not it sounds like ITM will depend on your understanding of how ITM is decorated. I've heard players who can play the melodies and without bothering to study the style have invented their own way of decorating the music, but to my ear they weren't playing ITM.
Thanks Phantom, I think you are the only one who understands what I'm saying. I've never said there is only one right way to play a tune. There are many right ways. But for every right way, there are even more wrong ways. Sure you can play a tune anyway you like, it doesn't even matter where the tune came from, but the Irish style, though vast in it's scope, is very very specific. All I'm saying is, learn those specifics. Listen to and learn those specifics.
I appreciate Larsheen's comments and maybe Mick O'Connor and Mary McNamara don't play it wrong. But I don't believe in the assumption that there is any substantial difference between what is described as a traditional musician and what is described as a musician who plays traditional music.
I think what Larsheen means is that there are some musicians who grow up knowing the specifics I mentioned above, and that others have to make conscious decisions to learn them. This is not a specific difference, just a difference of degrees. Correct me if I asumed wrong Larshen
Just to add another data point (terminology chosen to push a button or two), I was just listening to Kitty Hayes' A Touch of Clare. I noticed that she doesn't vary the tune at all (at least not that I could tell) from one time through to the next. Also, the ornamentation is almost exclusively doubling the melody line an octave below. There are a handful of cuts on the album and almost no rolls. I've heard that she's the only player who does the octave doubling thing as a major component of their style. I don't know if it's something she learned from players she knew in her youth or something she made up on her own. But nowadays it's unique. Is it not ITM because it doesn't fit the very very specific style?
Also, ornamentation will vary by instrument and context. When I had my first concertina class with Edel Fox last month, she asked me to start by playing a tune. Her first comment was that I was using accordion ornaments. And in Billy McComiskey's accordion class, he said that certain ornaments that are quite natural on the accordion should be avoided when playing with fiddlers because they'll clash with what the fiddlers are doing.
Since ornamentation depends on so many different factors (regional style, instrument, combination of instruments, players' personal influences, players' personal taste and inventiveness, etc.), there are, many right ways. Once a player has developed their personal approach to ornamentation (however authentic or inauthentic it may be), they can look (provided they read music) at a bare-bones version of a tune, learn the basic melody, and fill in the ornamentation according to their approach. A bare-bones version of the tune isn't the enemy as long as you are aware that it is what it is and not the last word. (Kind of like the Bible.)
Kitty Hayes' playing is unique, but the same is the case with most concertina players. Kitty's playing comes from an older style that is less common among the contemporary players of today.
Decorating Irish tunes can be done in many ways, and there are many innovative players, particularly on concertina. These innovators have grown up in the tradition and their exposure to the music is such that any innovations would likely be in context with ITM. But if you haven't grown up in the tradition and you've only discovered it for yourself as an adult, your personal innovations are less likely to sound like anything relating to ITM. If you're just learning the music and you're collecting your tunes from sheet music on Internet websites the odds that your results would sound like ITM are low. If you've already spent years studying the genre and you've honed the style and understand it's inner workings -- then you might have a chance.
Being here in the outback of ITM I've encountered players who basically taught themselves to play in just this manner, and even though they've become proficient at the mechanics, and even have fans (who aren't familiar with ITM,) their music still sounds odd to me.
Anyone with musical abilities can learn melodies from sheet music and come up with pleasant sounding music, but not everyone has the patience and is willing to also learn the subtleties of the style that defines ITM and separates it from other genres.
In truth what phantom buttom says confirms what I feared all my life and what prevented me from learning an instrument to play ITM... then at the ripe old age of 37 I recklessly threw my doubts to one side and reached for the impossible dream... to learn to play Irish traditional music on the Irish flute but from reading this thread I realise that my doubts were instinctively correct and that what I'm doing is simply kidding myself because no matter how hard I try I will always suffer from an ITM musical disability since I was not born into the tradition and trad was not laid into my cradle... and I'm a bit too old to get those years of study under my belt needed to adequately compensate... unless passive listening counts which I doubt... so no hope for me so... (sigh)
Sometimes it seems to me that people on this site want to hear about how easy and quickly they can learn ITM, and any discussion about the time and discipline needed quickly becomes nothing more than discouragement. If there’s any mention about the advantages of being born or raised in the tradition people jump to fatalistic conclusions and read elitism into it. The fact is that in my comments I never implied one had to be born or raised before they could play it correctly or be innovative with ornamentation. I said one simply needed to put in the time necessary to understand the style if they want the results to sound like ITM. One of the most valuable aspects of this music is that it can't be learned over night. I realize that's not what you want to hear -- but it's the truth.
Phantom Button, sorry if I said the wrong thing... perhaps it helps if I explain that I actually wrote what I did without the slightest intent to sound sarcastic or disrespectul but I was in fact feeling what I was writing if that makes sense... and I actually agree with you and others... and what came to my mind - as it often does since I first started out - is that ITM is a bit like a language... so in the same way as I cannot speak English without a foreign accent (I'm a foreigner) even though I've lived in Ireland a long time now, and in much the same way I will always have a foreign accent playing ITM... it's just the way it is... and it is something I will always need to remember... so the reason why I sighed at the end of my above post is simply because sometimes I wish things were different... that's all... so I'm sorry if it came across the wrong way, it was not my intent... it was not how I was feeling when I was writing nor do I want to narrow what you said because to me it holds much value as do many of the comments of other people on this board... I'm learning a lot here not only factual stuff but I also enjoy catching glimpses of people's perceptions and thoughts on what ITM really is... people who breathe and live it...
"One of the most valuable aspects of this music is that it can't be learnt overnight. I realise that is not what you want to hear - but it's the truth."
I myself would actually even take it a step further in the way I perceive my learning process... as I expressed in my above post I believe not only that aspects of this music can't be learnt overnight but that there are aspects of this music which I will never learn no matter what I do... and that is the truth as I see it... I'm not ruling out that there are people who can but unfortunately I'm not one of those people... I have too many musical limitations...so not even a liftime would get me there... to me a large part of ITM will always remain unattainable and that's just the way it is... come to think of it now, maybe it's not such a bad thing for it will always hold an element of enchantment and mystery ie that magical component which got me hooked on ITM when I was a girl still living in Germany
OK, Vanessa... I guess I was the one reading things into what you were saying... sorry. But don't be discouraged. Patrick Orceau plays like a clareman, but he still has a french accent. There are countless other examples too, but the thing they all have in common is they all took the time to learn the style. You can too.
That is very kind of you to say so, Phantom Button, but it's not you, it's me.... as you can see I can't even express myself properly in English... i have obviously transmitted the wrong tone despite feeling something different... and in a sense the same thing is going to happen to me when playing ITM because it's not intuitive with me... and really the last thing I want to do with ITM is to destroy that which I love... so to tell you the truth, I am still at a point where I am not sure if this is not exactly what I will end up doing in my attempt to learn the play the flute... I fear there is a good chance that I'll end up butchering the tunes because I'm certainly no Patrick Orceau... well, it goes without saying that I'm already butchering the tunes but at this stage I can still hide behind the tag of being a beginner...
oh, just in case... re 'butchering tunes' I was only talking about myself very subjectively ie it is a very self-absorbed statement, so I'm not trying to suggest that other people 'butcher' tunes... so no sarcasm or negative generalisation intended...
I tend to learn tunes pretty much how I hear them. This is usually close to how they are actually played, but my brain fills bits in and misses other bits. I think this is called the oral tradition. So if I like a tune enough to learn it, I start by basing how I play that tune on what I think I heard. If it has ornaments I probably play most of them straightaway unless they are getting in the way of me playing the tune, then I may change some or leave them out. Over time, I may hear other versions of the tune and borrow bits to add on, or once in awhile alter the way I play the tune entirely.
I admit to being acedemically inclined when it comes to music, and can deconstruct a jig or reel with the best of them, but there is always something more to learn about tunes, and even the altering of melodic notes is a form of ornamentation. Out on the Ocean will always be a work in progress, as will all the other tunes.
I like my music with a generous helping of heart and soul. For most Irish musicians this is partly expressed through ornaments.
Diavlo - what was the question again? If you want to hear the words "it's okay to play without ornaments if that's what you like" well there they are. Probably a bit of an anticlimax though, eh?
Yep, I don't mid at all laying out where we stand on this, for clarity sake:
Yes, unless you use the odd roll, cut, tap, you are not playing the tune. But don't let this look like we are on opposite sides of a divide. You like to be "spartan with decoration". so do I sometimes. And you admired one musician who "practically didn't use decoration". Does that mean they did, but just a little bit? And I agree whole heatedly that "You can dispense with the ornaments and still have a great tune to play, but you can’t reverse that proposition." And of course it's OK to do that, if that's what you want. However, the tune might still be great, but it's just not all of it. And it won't sound Irish anymore.
Though we need to clarify the "basic versions of tunes" bit. My stance is that there are certain ways that a tune goes. If you don't play it one of these ways, you've simply got it a bit wrong, that's all (though under duress, I may, under certain circumstances bow to a little pressure and concede that it's a different version).
There are two reasons why I'm quite adamant about this:
The first is many peoples lazy reliance on a written down version, which, by definition cannot be all of it. I have no problem with having tunes written down as catalogues and memory aids, but it is when someone prefers to learn a tune off a piece of paper that they already have a recording of. This is not just lazy, but will almost bound to mean you will get it a little wrong.
The second is another gripe at laziness that is often hidden behind the phrase "oral tradition". It is people who are quite happy to fill in the gaps of their inability to learn a tune properly and end up calling it "their version". I can never understand why people can't hold their hands up and say, even years later, "Oh that's how it goes, crickey, I've been playing it wrong all these years".
It's funny that Phantom brought up Patrick Ourceau because that's exactly who I thought of when Vanessa fretted about never getting past her German background.
Vanessa, it's true, Ourceau is French and didn't even start learning to play Irish music until he was an adult. He just loved it so well and hung around Irish musicians so much that he caught the right feel for it. You can do that too, with enough time and effort, and maybe a bit of luck. It's not like you're trying to learn this from somewhere in Berlin---although I should note that Ourceau started his journey in Paris. You don't have a "German music gene" that only lets you play polkas on a piano accordian and a tuba. If that were the way music worked I would have to dye my hair platinum blonde and learn to lip-sync some insipid sleazy pop tune like every American pop star you see on tv (man, I'm SO embarrassed by American commercial music, but that's another thread)...
Anyway, my point is, you don't have to be born into a musical tradition to understand it. But I agree with everyone else that you have to work very hard to play it well!
Oh, and another thing, your English is better than that of most native speakers I meet. And I say that as a professional technical writer who knows a thing or two about the language.
Boys! I think I do understand your positions pretty well. However it's all subjective, as usual.
Micheal, I'm sure you would agree that somewhere in between really getting a tune wrong and the best aspects of variation within the oral tradition there lies a gray area. Yes? I freely admit to having spent time in that gray area as well as both sides of it, but I do try to buck up my ideas when I realise I've been a silly girl and got it wrong! I also admit that there have been times when I have been wrong too long and prefer my "own version" and make a choice to stick to it. If I happen to pass it on I do try to warn folk that it is "my own wierd version".
Yes it's a grey area. And that's one of the big problems with this music and it has such far reaching effects. It's the chinese whispers thing. The grey area comes from people attempting variations on a tune that they have not learned properly. And the outcome is a great big globular mass of tunes that all sound the bloody same. Lovely, but elusive, turns in tunes dissapear into the quagmire simply because people didn't quite get it right to start with and ended up substituting a phrase they already knew from another tune.
For the avoidance of confusion (and there seems to be quite enough of it already), I think the simplest thing (Occam's razor) is to learn the tune sans ornaments, and then, when it's in one's head, to put in ornaments during playing as the spirit moves, having due regard to what sounds right and reasonable within the tradition.
BTW, I am not the canine referred to in the title of this thread.
no they're not ... yes they are ... no they're not ... yes they are ... no they're not ... yes they are ... no they're not ... yes they are ... no they're not ... yes they are ... no they're not ... yes they are ... no they're not ... yes they are ... no they're not ... yes they are ... no they're not ... yes they are ... no they're not ... yes they are ... no they're not ... yes they are ...
As much fun as it is to beat up straw men...the resolution to this "controversy" seems to me to be: simply acknowledge that there is a wide range of preferences and choices about style and ornamentation that can all coexist under the umbrella of ITM.
So slide, cran, cut, treble, and roll if you please. Or don't if you please. Peace and love and all that.
Now step away from your computers and go play some tunes.
Or -- part of the style. The tune is the melody, but the ornaments depict the style of the music. Without the ornaments there is far less to indicate style. Sure there's plenty there without the ornaments, but the decorations are the connective tissue as well as adding the necessary energy in the way of momentum and inertia to the tune. In this way, the ornaments are just as important in defining the genre and become, as Michael points out, part of the tune.
I'm still not convinced that "the rolls are part of the tune". Different instruments lend to different ornaments, so would a piper (who would ornament differently from a fiddler) not be playing the tune in the traditional way? Unless you mean "the ornaments (in the generic sense - not specific notes for specific durations) are part of the tune"? In which case I'd quite agree.
With regard to the elitist thing about people brought up in Ireland, they are no more capable to play ITM than anyone. But they start learning at an earlier age, they hear the music constantly, there is a greater availability of role models etc. But someone not brought up in Ireland, who started playing at age 4, only ever listened to ITM, had access to plenty of role model musicians who encouraged them would be able to play as well as an Irishman. Ever heard of Cape Breton??
Andy makes 2 points. On the first, yes, that's what I mean; the ornaments are part of the tune, but they aren't always the same ornaments. One's choice and execution will determine style. On the second point; being born in Ireland and growing up within the tradition is an obvious advantage. If you're not Irish born but are raised within the tradition the advantage doesn't change.
People say that one's ability to learn language is at it's peak around age 7. For this reason learning a musical language, such as ITM, would have added benefits at an early age. Those of us who are adults, not having grown up in Ireland, have those two strikes against us at the start, and we need to work extra hard to overcome the disadvantages.
Phantom has summed up exactly what I meant, except with alot less faffing around the point My point about children learning from a young age and becoming excellent musicians applies to classical musicians as well as trad musicians. Possibly more so, given the relative competition in classical music, and that some pieces require extreme technical ability.
The point I didn't make very well above, is that someone who is 20, Irish and has been playing for 15 years should have no advantage over a 50 year old who was brought up in Hull, but has been playing for 15 years doing the same amount of practice (plus a bit more to compensate for the change in learning speed) and listening to exactly the same music. Nor does the person from Ireland have any more valid an opinion than the person from Hull (no offence to people from Hull, by the way!!), at least in my opinion. But again, I make no claim to be right anywhere other than in my head....
Thanks, Larsheen! Finally an unequivocal position from an insider rather than a guess from the hinterlands. That's about what my guess was, but it was just that, and from afar.
So for some, the music is complete without the ornaments, and we pretty much agree that there are multiple ways to decorate the tunes if one chooses to. But I'd like to ask the members of this board at large: what was it about ITM that grabbed your head in the first place?
One thing I've learned from this thread is if you fire up an Irishman, there's a lot of passion underneath the friendly easygoing exterior!
Phantom, what grabbed me was the melodies. They're gorgeous and wild and delicate and I can still listen to them for days and weeks at a time. Recently I've been studying the theory behind them, and I wonder if the modes are what the real attraction is for me---I like baroque music as well and most music in minor keys.
I can't say that just one aspect of the style first grabbed me. I liked one tune because of the cool modality, another because it was played with nice spicy ornaments, another because the melody was plaintive and soulful. That whole package hooked me and I wouldn't want to give up any part of it.
I don't take a doctrinary position on ornaments. Some tunes can be all they need to be without ornaments. Others are bland without them. An apple doesn't need seasoning; a potato does. Or vice versa, if that's your taste.
it may just be my opinion... but as a dancer i like to listen to the ornamentations when im dancing because it takes away the constant concentration and makes the tune that bit more fun to listen to... however, when there's overornamentation (if that's even a word) then it becomes hard to follow the rhythm and even listening and enjoying the tune becomes a trial due to the 'flowery' effects.
this question had me well confused, because I like ornamentation to be spare too. But a tune isn't a tune unless it is interpreted in some way - otherwise it's just a collection of notes. And ornamentation is part of interpretation. You can play a tune with no ornamentation and it's stlll the tune, but if it had no interpretation whatsoever (no slurring or rubato or emphasis of any sort) it wouldn't come to life as a tune; it would just be a collection of notes played in order (an android version maybe). The way you choose to interpret it then is just a matter of taste.
I found this quote on google - a bit flowery but obviously people have been wrestling with this question a long time!
(Not that it's necessarily true for our music)
CPE Bach: It is not likely that anybody could question the necessity of ornaments. They are found everywhere in music, and are not only useful, but indispensable. They connect the notes; they give them life. They emphasise them, and besides giving accent and meaning they render them grateful; they illustrate the sentiments, be they sad or merry, and take an important part in the general effect. They give to the player an opportunity to show off his technical skill and powers of expression. A mediocre composition can be made attractive by their aid, and the best melody without them may seem obscure and meaningless.
Phantom Button - what attracted me to Irish music was that it represented something wild and other.When I discovered it at around 20 I had no experience of playing any kind of music, but was with friends who did, and I badly wanted to do so; I didn't care for rock, and I thought classical music would be too long a haul. So I benighted folk clubs and Irish sessions in Oxford with my tin whistle, which eventually I learned to play properly. I think I discovered the places first, then the albums.
I discovered Northumbrian music at the same time. My home being in the North-East, although my parents are Londoners, I was excited to find that an equivalent local music came from areas just up the road (and of course Irish people and music have been in and around Tyneside for a long time). The High Level Ranters were Tyneside's answer to The Dubliners or The Corries at the time.
I spent much of my spare time as a teenager and student going fishing and walking in the hills and dales of the north of England, and my musical taste was for pieces that chimed in with this experience: as a boy, Gilbert & Sullivan; as a teenager, some Beethoven, Schubert and Sibelius (His lesser-known piece "En Saga" is always linked in my mind with ridge-walking in the Pennines through hailstorms on a late autumn half-term holiday...) - and others, not all classical. Scottish, Irish and Northumbrian traditional music all chimed in with this. They seemed to fit the landscape. My attempts to play them were a personal response to it, a lot of the time.I learned from (book) tutors, albums and sheet music, but not much from other people - my progress, if any, has been rather hermetic.
My first trip to Ireland was with my public school cadet camp, to the Sperrin Mountains of Ulster, in summer '68 just before the Troubles began. We barely met a soul round where we were encamped, though some lads managed to find a pub and one was carried in roaring drunk. I don't know what punishment he incurred, or for that matter how many local flute styles might have been lurking in the heather. At a slightly riper age I made a couple of trips to the Republic, had a very pleasant time and heard some great music. But I don't know if or when I'll go back.
The only point I want to take up from all of this is Larsheen's ridiculous suggestion that "Irishness" has anything to do with the music, otherwise people from Shetland, Cape Breton, Northumbria, Scotland, or indeed all over the world might as well give up now. Which would be a shame, as I suspect there are many people not from Ireland who can play Irish music better than many people from the "pure drop" culture. THAT makes me angry, and slightly sad....I wish you all the best in preserving and maintaining your culture of seperatism and elitism, if that's what you wish for, certainly I won't be helping you.
Michael's comments would be regarded as unusual in any area with traditional music, the idea that the opinion of Irish people is worth more than that of a Yorkshireman or a Scotsman is preposterous, and shows the degree of narrowmindedness that seems to clash with your intent to maintain the traditions. I hope I misinterpreted your point, if I understood you clearly I fear the effects for traditional music.
Andy, no disrespect but I do believe that you didn't quite understand the point Larsheen was making because Larsheen is one of least separatist and elitist people I know - and I can vouch for that personally as a foreigner who is trying to learn Irish traditional music.
And just a little thought of my own which is unrelated to anyone's comments nor is it a derrogatory response to anything anyone has said in particular - it's just a thought which comes from my heart, the heart of a foreigner who is living in this beautiful country, Ireland, amidst a most generous people:
... well, it's just that I believe it is common sense courtesy for foreigners like me to have the respect not to dictate to an Irish person what it means to be Irish musically ie what contitutes the right way or wrong way to play ITM - after all Irish traditional music is called 'Irish' traditional music and not for example 'German' traditional music because it was borne from the beating heart of the Irish... in essence it tells their story... in the wild throws of enthusiasm and passion it's something that's so easily taken for granted as ITM becomes a global entity and as foreigners we try to carve out our own little place in it... yet as with all traditional music from all countries around the world, it is a music that has distinctly cultural roots or we would be calling it 'Pop Music'
Lots to think about and digest. Lots to think about definitions, which in them selves' are meaningless. And lots to think about ownership, which at best is petty. Lots to think about motivation which is paramount. And lots to think about art and culture, which in this instance, seem to be at loggerheads.
I loved that quote above: "It is not likely that anybody could question the necessity of ornaments. They are found everywhere in music, and are not only useful, but indispensable ..... etc", it really made me feel better. But more that that, it allowed me to re-define what we here refer to as ornaments. I've always hated the connotation with mere decoration, baubles, jewellery, etc. The real word for what I refer to when I speak of rolls, cuts, taps etc is:
Articulation.
So much for semantics. But what about articulation. I had not heard some of the musicians Larsheen was referring to so I looked them up. Mary McNamara makes lovely music which is full of brilliantly subtle articulation. No rolls that I could find, but that's not a problem because you can't play rolls on a concertina, but the subtle delays, taps and passing note triplets are lovely, just the articulation I refer to as "part of the tune". I couldn't find any Mick O'Connor, but I've no reason to think that the above doesn't apply to him also.
Micho Russell though presents me with a problem. I'm familiar with his music and know that he often played rolls (though not very well). But, I'm afraid I have a dreadful sense of the "emperor's new clothes" with his music. I'm sorry to say that I've just never thought he was as good a player as his reputation purports. And herein, I fear is Larsheen's critique. I hold my hands up. I'm from Manchester. England. I'm not Irish.
Larsheen said, "I think of these tunes which whether you like it or not are for the large part, part and parcel of my culture and read your comments from across the sea telling anyone who will listen how they should be played and my blood boils. How dare you? Where did you learn your music..not in Ireland..I can tell that."
That scared me.
How dare I? I'm sorry Larsheen, but though you consider these tunes part and parcel of your culture, they have grown, by virtue of their brilliance, to be much more than that. I'm sorry, but I just can't say that these tunes belong to the Irish. They are an essence unto themselves.
So, as a musician from a another country, am I allowed to criticise an Irishman for not playing Irish music "properly"? On the face of it, it's such a can of worms that I seem to be digging myself deeper and deeper into it. What more can I say? it's your music, play it how you want. I'm sorry I had the audacity. I'm sorry I ever had the audacity to "believe of myself as I wished".
I had to find a hat. But I also take it off to Michael, I've read very few opinions here I actually believe in.
Vanessa, I'm sure Larsheen isn't seperatist or elitist, but as I don't know him I can only comment on the words he chose to post here, I found them seperatist and elitist.
However, while I agree the traditions shoud be respected, it's more complicated than ITM being a standalone type of trad music. It's intertwined with Scottish music to a great extent, the melody for Mrs McLeod's Reel exist in both cultures, except in different keys (usually A in Scotland, G in Ireland) and with the A and B parts swapped around. But ITM also links into Northumbrian music, and (to an extent) the Morris tradition, the Scandinavian tradition, the Breton tradition and the Galician tradition. Or, to look at it another way, regions that were "celtic" at one point or another.
To take one musican instrument, the melodeon (button accordion if you're an American) or a "bisoronic, diatonic, button operated free reed instrument". Think of any of the UK and Irish traditions. They all use it (traditionally) - yet (in terms of patents) it originates in Germany and Austria around 1800. The "distictly cultural roots" of ITM tend to blur the harder you look at them. I hope this isn't regarded as disrespectful to some people (no doubt it will be), but I find treating ITM as an Irish-people-only thing as disrespectful to all the other traditions, and lacking an understanding of the traditions we are trying to preserve.
To quote Micheal: ”Lots to think about and digest. Lots to think about definitions, which in them selves' are meaningless.”
Yes, in my opinion definitions are meaningless also – it's a bit like learning music from the dots, something you strongly object to, Micheal,... so just to give you an example: pick up a dictionary and look up the word 'love'… in my little dictionary it says: warm affection, wholehearted liking for someone… but does that definition really capture, what love truly is? No, it can’t, the same way there is no dictionary and no definition that will truly reflect the essence of Irish traditional music… there are just some things that cannot be put into neat little boxes....
I know it’s easier to base one’s thinking on a myriad of little boxes because as human beings we are trying to make sense of the world we live in and of whatever it is we are trying to grasp with our intellect and our heart, so boxes can create the illusion we know what we are at and what we are talking about; yet what we often forget is that what we keep in our boxes is a reflection of ourselves rather than that which we wish to categorize with our mind, and that is why we wholeheartedly agree and feel a little buzz when we read definitions which reflect our internal reality, the same way we feel that same little buzz when we meet someone who thinks as we do – someone who is on the same wave-length so to speak – because it makes us feel safe and understood and akin to that person – it gives us the feeling we belong and that the world makes sense...
All this is part of human nature since our thinking, perceptions and actions are coloured by our culture, upbringing, personal experiences etc etc, hence any opinion we express has to be taken in that context ie that it is in its essence subjective – it is a reflection of who we are as people and a reflection of our conditioning. Much in the same way we perceive other people’s opinions – we interpret them and weigh them up subjectively based on how we perceive the world and that is why there are so many misunderstandings because we often unwittingly misinterpret the words and actions of others. It’s all about our internal filtering system which we apply to the world – our looking glasses so to speak and this is something important to remember when interacting with others.
Unfortunately, discussions on a website lend themselves more readily to a breeding ground for misunderstandings because we lack the necessary clues to gauge another person’s emotional intent because we don’t hear the person’s voice or see their facial expressions while they talk. As I’m sure everyone knows as human beings we rely more heavily on voice intonation and body language to give us an idea what lies behind a person’s words and gain an insight into the other person’s emotional reality in relation to ours, yet as we communicate here merely through the written word it is by an large a one-dimensional form of interaction, and we miss many of the pointers needed to successfully communicate. Also, in website discussions people feel less inhibited to express themselves and adhere more strongly and categorically to their points of view whereas in real life much more courtesy would be used to express different points of views. Also, in real life as we observe the subtle reactions of the other we are much more likely to be more respectful not to overstep someone’s limits. Well, that’s the downside of internet communication and discussion forums which, although they are a great source of information, cannot by means of its format be a true reflection of the multi-dimensional way we interact with each other in daily life (so for example no wonder that the pictorial language of emoticons has been invented as replacement for some of the facial cues we depend on)
Well, you are probably wondering what has all this got to do with this discussion – well, the reason why I’m saying this is that I’m sure had this discussion taken place in the ‘real’ world it would have progressed differently and perhaps it’s something we should keep in mind when engaging with each other on this website because it is can so easily turn into a breeding ground for misconceptions, misunderstandings and misinterpretations.
Just to give you an example: In one of my posts up above I kinda vented my own frustrations with my personal limitations in agreement with something Phantom Button said, yet although I was in fact crying and emotionally very raw when I wrote my post ie I wrote it without any hint of cynism but surrendered to a moment of intense-self-doubt… well, still, although I wrote it without any feelings of negativity towards the statement of Phantom Button, he and I’m sure many others reading my post perceived my comment as sarcastic even though it was not my intent… so even though I had no idea at that time when I wrote my post, my words obviously lent themselves to someone who doesn’t know me and someone who didn’t see my face to the conclusion that I was being a cynic who might re ITM even be a lazy ‘smart a*&s’…
I think the same way Micheal’s comments have much the same effect based on his choice of words ie the use of the words ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ in conjunction with playing Irish music can be interpreted rather negatively by a reader including myself. I think the difficulty with the written word comes in when we try to claim that we are ‘right’ and that we are the one’s who know it all – it lends itself to misinterpretations of potential righteousness and arrogance. I’m sure most people would agree that there is nothing wrong with expressing our personal opinions and to put them up for debate or to respond to the opinions of others as long as we don’t turn our own beliefs and personal truths into a set of doctrines which are used to overwrite the many other beliefs and truths that are out there and co-exist with ours.
This brings me to a question Micheal asks: “As a musician from another country, am I allowed to criticize an Irishman for not playing Irish music “properly”?”
Well, in my opinion the answer is ‘no’ because how do you truly know what ‘proper’ Irish music is? I’m saying this not as derogatory statement towards foreigners who have fallen in love with this music but I come from a different angle – from the perspective of a foreigner who has lived all her adult life here in Ireland and was exposed to Irish music for almost two decades. Well, what I can tell you is that I have heard my neighbour’s kids pick up the whistle and although their fingering is clumsy, they squeak and they cannot execute rolls, cranns or what have you, they sound by far more ‘Irish’ than I do ie someone who on the flute and whistle has greater dexterity, better tone and knows to play more tunes than those children. The same counts for a friend of mine who was raised in the ‘tradition’ and was a champion Irish dancer yet never had the chance to learn an instrument – well, she picked up the whistle in view of learning to play the flute after hearing me tinker with both instruments – so since she is very shy and I haven’t convinced her yet to take proper lessons from an Irish musician, I have given her a few lessons as a friend and what amazed me was that although I do not have an ‘Irish accent’ when playing Irish traditional music and hence I’m teaching her my ‘unirish’ way of playing - well, when my friend interprets what I teach her, she unwittingly makes it sound very Irish despite of playing slowly without any ornamention – quite extraordinary, isn’t it? Yet, to contrast this, on this website and other websites where people from varying countries post samples of their playing, I have always been amazed of the many different foreign accents I can hear in the music even of those people who claim to have mastered ‘Irishness’ and the skill of ornamentation. Well, so to me that means that there is just an element of Irish traditional music that cannot be confined to a few rolls here and there for authenticity’s sake, and it also tells me that there is something more to this music which indeed is rooted deeply within Irish culture – hence even the worst player has unwittingly that ‘Irish’ sound most of us are after. Hence, I feel as foreigners we cannot judge an Irish person and tell them what sounds Irish and what does not. Of course we have the right to have preferences re someone’s playing for whatever personal reasons or we can even form personal opinions about how proficient a player is in terms of how he/she masters his/her instrument(s) from a basic skill level – yes we can form those opinions and I believe it’s human nature to do so, yet we cannot stand in judgment over an Irish person and tell them what it means to be or sound ‘Irish’… even that thought sounds a little bit ludicrous as I write it...
...well, this brings me to a funny story: 17 years ago good friends of mine came to visit me here in Ireland and as we left Dublin airport they suddenly stopped and stared at the passing traffic outside with an expression which spoke of nothing but devastating disappointment. “What’s wrong?” I asked thinking that they were tired and dreaded the long car journey home, but their answer was not what I had expected, for my friends frowned and said, “But Ireland isn’t at all Irish because they should be driving horse’s and carts and not cars and buses.” Well, of course this is an extreme case but it reflects my sentiments because anyone who comes to Ireland, travels the country and listens to sessions or perhaps even joins them will hear that the Irish sound is unique, multi-faceted and multi-dimensional which reminds me of something Larsheen told me ie that Irish music is ‘heart’ music – and it’s the heart of Irish music that I feel gets lost in a debate on the use of ornamentation.
And now to my last point and here I would like to respectfully quote Micheal again:
“Larsheen said, "I think of these tunes which whether you like it or not are for the large part, part and parcel of my culture and read your comments from across the sea telling anyone who will listen how they should be played and my blood boils. How dare you? Where did you learn your music..not in Ireland..I can tell that."
That scared me.
How dare I? I'm sorry Larsheen, but though you consider these tunes part and parcel of your culture, they have grown, by virtue of their brilliance, to be much more than that. I'm sorry, but I just can't say that these tunes belong to the Irish. They are an essence unto themselves.”
Well, if I’m completely honest, Micheal, your last statement is actually what got me a little scared because it sounds as if you are trying to hi-jack someone else’s culture. Why not value and appreciate the roots of Irish music rather than forcefully detaching it from its life-source and origins? What’s the point of closing ourselves by wanting to grab Irish music onto ourselves – wouldn’t it be better to keep our ears, eyes and hearts open and to keep listening? Yes, of course it is up to each individual how they interpret Irish music and an interpretation of Irish music has its own value – it’s tells you about that person and that person’s cultural background – and I myself feel ITM speaks to me like no other music does – I’m drawn to its call – its voice – and the reason I feel drawn to it must be because it articulates something that my heart responds to – so emotionally I feel an inexplicable connection which supersedes any form of intellectual reasoning. Yet, as we journey along that road to connect with this music that captivates so many foreigners around the world because of its ‘brilliance’ as Micheal says and soulfulness I believe it helps to remember to be respectful of its roots and the people who gave birth to it because denying ITM its roots diminishes it and limits us as players.
Well, to finish of what has turned into a ‘novel’ is that Irish people like Larsheen are very generous of heart and most encouraging when it comes down to foreigners learning ITM; and since I first arrived here in Ireland (and I have moved around quite a bit before I ended up in Cork) I have seen foreigners and Irish people play alongside each other without anyone casting judgments and what you see is that everyone is enjoying themselves because they are united by their love for the same music: ITM…
… so, I, as a foreigner, have not come across pure-drop elitism but have only received words of encouragement from Irish musicians in the ‘real’ world and in this ‘cyperspace’ session community. So I can tell you that Irish people are glad to share their cultural musical heritage with foreigners – the only thing Irish don’t like is when someone comes along and claims they are ‘right’ and tells others they are ‘wrong’. So, to summarize: Irish people don’t mind expressions of opinions – in fact they welcome them – yet what they dislike (and this is independent of a person’s nationality) is righteousness and arrogance and people who claim they know it all… people who believe they have ladled wisdom with a spoon…
So, now with this huge post I hope I will have managed to confuse everyone so completely and utterly or perhaps even better - everyone got so bored they nodded off into a comfortable sleep which means all is well again on the mustard board
Vanessa - You may be a "foreigner" but it's interesting to read your scripts - you know Ireland at first hand in a way the vast majority of us English don't.
Andy Newcastle - I doubt if Northumbria's a "Celtic nation" except insofar as industrialisation brought Irish, Scots, Welsh and Cornish people into County Durham, Tyne/Wear/Tees-side, and the coalfield of SE Northumberland in recent centuries. The great part of Northumberland stayed rural, and people there may well have roots going back to the dark ages; but the Anglo-Saxon conquest of the area may not have left many if any of the ex-Roman Celtic population living there. It is easy to believe from the literature and other evidence that the Anglo-Saxons generally killed or drove out the Romano-Celts before them; it seems much harder to prove that an appreciable Celtic population stayed on under AS rule. But it would be interesting to see evidence that it might have done.
Nicholas - I meant "celtic" in the sense of the popular usage, not in the sense of a strict socio-historical definition. In context, I meant that Northumbrian music has more of a connection to Boarders-style-Scottish (which in turn links to Ireland) than it does to the Morris based traditions from the South West of England. Rapper dancing (a venerable NE tradition) doesn't use the traditional English tunes, it uses jigs, reels, hornpipes, 3:2s etc. Also, compare compositions of James Scott Skinner and James Hill - very similar arpeggio heavy style of composition. Yet JSS lived in Abredeen, Hill lived in Gateshead. NTM, STM & ETM have little standing on this site though. Nontheless, the phrasing and lift that are so essential in Morris traditions can be heard clearly in NTM, there is an academic debate as to where the Morris tradition cuts off.
Vanessa, with regard to the "hi-jack someone elses culture", if you re-read my previous post you will see I don't believe these traditional musics belong to an area that is currently defined as one place by international politics. But we may have to agree to disagree on this. Nontheless, it's an interesting subject and, for anyone wanting a true grasp of the traditions, in my opinion more relavent than where a person was born.
andy_newcastle wrote: "Vanessa, I'm sure Larsheen isn't seperatist or elitist, but as I don't know him I can only comment on the words he chose to post here, I found them seperatist and elitist.
"
"Him"... "he"? You're right... you don't know her?
I agree with Vanessa -- the music belongs to the Irish and, as outsiders, all we can hope is that we might get it right someday. Personally, I'm taking all my cues regarding ITM from Irish people. That doesn't mean that all Irish people are right... but the ones that are have good reason to be.
This is another one of those points that we can talk around and sort of understand and sort of agree on and sort of disagree on, but we can never write down a a statute that settles the issue. I think I agree pretty much with the Phantom, except that I would probably never say that the music belongs to any particular people. I wouldn't say it, but my feeling about it is somewhere in that direction. Sort of... The center of gravity for The Music is among the Irish people, but a lot of its mass is outside Ireland.
Larsheen, although your "the cost of everything and the value of nothing" although a nice soundbite, doesn't actually make any sense in this context.
But more importantly the view that learning your chops "across the sea" would make you less of an ITM player is to say the least
interesting. I wonder what Kevin Burke or Kevin Crawford would say about that.
Clearly, if you believe that trad music belongs to the Irish, I have no right to express my opinions. And if you agree with me, I don't need to make them known I was under the impression that, although it's supposed to be an Irish music site, this site loosely encompasses Irish, Scottish, Northumbrian and to a lesser extent English traditional dance music. Certainly the tunes in the Tunes section would appear to suggest this.
I live in Northumbria (Newcastle, to be specific). But Dow (or whatever name he's using now) knows more about Northumbrian music than I do, even though he lives in Austrialia. And this doesn't make me insecure, angry, or feel like he's trying to hi-jack it. I'm actually rather glad someone cares enough to learn about a tradition that's not native to them.
I think, every now and then, "Andy has no right to express his opinions" would probably do me good
And maybe "Andy needs to improve his punctuation" would come in useful occasionally. And they say the British university system is the best in the world.........I think not!!
The tail does not wag the dog
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Obviously, I shouldn't speak for Llig, but I'm sure he is perfectly aware that ornamentation can't stand up on its own. Furthering my forward way of speaking for my betters, I think he might answer that ornamentation is any of the ways that you attract attention to the melody - and if you don't do it (be it in form of twiddly bits, phrasing, melody variations or rhythmic variation), well you're just left with melody which, by the third time round is as repetitive as most other types of music (*cough* sorry, drifting).
On a more personal point, as a dancer (more breton than irish) I don't mind a stripped down tune and I'll likely dance to it and enjoy it. But what makes for a special night is when I get to hear something extra-special - something "clever" as you say, Diavlo. The best music is something I can both dance to and really enjoy listening to at the same time. (On the other hand, there is such a thing as too clever - I really dislike the over-the-top ornamentation of the breton biniou and bombard competitions - it showcases talent more than the beauty of the piece).
I realise now why I feel like speaking for Llig: It seems you're misrepresenting his opinion and setting up the strawman "Llig thinks ornamentation can stand on its own". If all I know of him is what I read on this board, how come I see his position of "the tunes need good melody AND rhythm AND ornamentation" as quite similar to your position of "the tunes need good melody AND rhythm but I can live without the ornamentation" as quite similar, but you see it as worlds apart?
# Posted on August 24th 2006 by Tirno
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Is Rolling in the Rye Grass over doing it?
# Posted on August 24th 2006 by Feargal French
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
thank you, I am of the less ornamentation more skill school. I have had the dubious pleasure of playing with fiddlers who have the most incredible ornamentation but no actual ability in basic playing. That is, not actually knowing where for example b c c# and d are on the a string. Dont get me wrong ornamentation has a place, but not where you need to learn to play first.
# Posted on August 24th 2006 by Joze
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
I just put this on the other discussion, but it's better here:
Let's take a straight forward tune, Out on the Ocean. In fact, let's just look at the first bar:
Does it begin with a slow B roll then BAG?
Does it begin with D2B BAG, as posted here?
The answer of course is both. And that belies the nature of the music. This is how it goes. And it goes the other way also. Not, and this is important, "This is how it goes" and "This is another way it can go"
Though there are many other ways it can go:
Snappy B roll then B BAG
Snappy D cran then B BAG
DBB BAG
Slow B roll snappy B roll AG
etc etc
And we could argue whether certain bits are "how it goes", or are variations, and that's a good thing. (though the arguments wouldn't be verbal, they'd be in the form of give and take when actually playing and listening). But the important point is that "how it goes" is not open to interpretation. The interpretation comes in only after you know how it goes. And you cannot CANNOT learn how it goes from the dots.
# Posted on August 24th 2006 by llig leahcim
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
And onther thing I've said often enough here is "the tune is king".
I'm merely pointing out that without, at the very least, playing the slow b roll in the first bar of out on the ocean, you are not playing the tune.
# Posted on August 24th 2006 by llig leahcim
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
“Anyway, I have such an opposing view to you Llig, and we obviously listen to tunes in a completely different way, that I wonder if one of us has extraterrestrial status. You're from Leeds way, right? There is a high space cadet quotient and many ET-looking types from that area, so I'm nominating you as an alien being, or possibly you're from another dimension.”
… not sure if that’s some kind of joke but even if it is, it sounds a bit harsh if you ask me because don’t we all have our eccentricities no matter where we come from and expressing differences in opinion is enriching as long as there’s an environment of respect and appreciation rather than righteousness.
Re use of ornamentation – as a relative beginner (I’m learning to play the flute) I’m learning tunes in ‘bare-bones’ style so to speak without ornamentation, and although I don’t have the skill yet to integrate or use ornamentation and on top of that I can only play slowly which means jigs and reels are much reduced in speed compared to what they sound like at sessions or recordings, I actually don’t seemed to mind because there is an indescribable beauty in each tune. To give you and example: Over the past three weeks I’ve been learning the two Copperplate reels and wow do they sound beautiful played very very slowly and when one lingers – to me the tunes are very soulful and have the feel of an air when you slow them down – well, that’s how I perceive them as a beginner…
I know a lot of people use the word ‘diddley music’ when describing ITM but to me it never felt ‘diddley’ but I hear beautiful melodies with dips and high points, surprising turns and depth of colour all of which trigger a myriad of emotional response in the listener and player. A tune played slowly has a different impact than a tune sped up and the same counts for an ornamented tune or a ‘bare-bones’ tune, yet what remains the same is the essence of a tune – no matter how a tune is played you can change some characteristics but you cannot alter the essence because each tune has a voice which speaks for itself – that is what endures. What I love when listening to good players is when they follow the voice of a tune ie when they work with the essence of a tune and highlight it - this can either be done with or without ornamentation. If ornamentation is used and the player executes it effortlessly ie ornamentation lightly trickles and flows throughout and with a tune and it is used purposefully to highlight the essence and the integral voice of a tune then that’s a brilliant player in my eyes. So, perhaps it’s less about how much ornamentation or how little is used but it’s more about the player and how he communicates with the tune itself, and a skilled and sensitive player can do this both with or without ornamentation…. well, that’s my humble opinion which isn’t worth much coming from a beginner with clumsy fingers who can’t even use ornamentation yet…
# Posted on August 24th 2006 by vanessa
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
De gustibus non est disputandum. Some styles need ornamentation, to others it's anathema. What do you mean by "the" tune anyway?
To me, a tune is a wire matrix, a framework, a recipe in the same way that DNA is a recipe for an organism.
And (ordinary) dancers don't care how you ornament a tune, they don't even care much what the tune is, because they are only listening for the rhythm. That's one reason I don't like playing for (ordinary) dancers.
Is the objection to ornamentation, or to "cleverness" whatever that is meant to imply? Do some musicians prefer stupid?
# Posted on August 24th 2006 by LastToFinish
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Vanessa, are you familiar with Matt Molloy's Heathery Breeze album. If not, You must purchase a copy right away. Listen to his Out on the Ocean. Then please please, before you learn to do anything else at all on your flute, get that slow B roll nailed. It's not difficult. And it's not an ornament. It is part of the tune.
# Posted on August 24th 2006 by llig leahcim
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Hi llig leahcim, thanks for the tip and yes I've got Matt Molloy's Heathery Breeze album
... and I love the tune 'out on the ocean'... learnt it a few weeks back but sadly my fingers are not nimble enough to excecute any kind of roll
... I'm at the moment trying to loosen my fingers enough to do cuts and taps but I don't have the dexterity to do that either yet... sounds awful when I practice... and yesterday got the bad news that I got bad bout of tendonitis of my fingers in both hands and a trapped nerve... so I'm typing one finger style here... hahaha... and doctor says I have to give it a little while until I can pick up the flute again:(... oh, what a nightmare:(... but of course I'm looking forward to learning to use ornamentation appropriately so it becomes an integral part of a tune and flows with it rather than sticking out like a sore thumb but I need to get those fingers loosened up first and get that coordination right (sigh)...
# Posted on August 24th 2006 by vanessa
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Is the opening B roll part of the tune, Michael? Disregarding the position momentarily that tunes oft have little connection with their titles, have you ever spent any time in a kayak or currach or other small craft on the open sea?? For me at any rate, Out on the Ocean as a tune represents very well the rise of fall of the sea - the troughs and peaks of waves passing under you. That opening long D represents a trough!!! of a wave.
Play the tune with this in mind and see how it rhythmically rises and falls. You can even play around with the tempo and have a lazy rolling sea or a choppy kind of water that keep slapping you in the face.
Given that it is likely an old tune and connected to a rural Ireland of days past, it is quite possible that this is where it derives from.
# Posted on August 24th 2006 by the wounded hussar
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
"For me at any rate, Out on the Ocean as a tune represents very well the rise of fall of the sea - the troughs and peaks of waves passing under you..."
Wounded hussar, I feel exactly the same thing when listening and playing... in this case the title seems to reflect the essence of the tune... wonder who wrote it?
# Posted on August 24th 2006 by vanessa
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Yes, quite possible. And I might play it D4AG to really linger on that trough, though this, I believe, would be a variation. The lazy rolling of certain notes though are integral, would you not agree?
# Posted on August 24th 2006 by llig leahcim
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
I saw somewhere that the original title of the tune was "The wind is out on the ocean".
# Posted on August 24th 2006 by lazyhound
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Perhaps, but not to labour the point: for me, I do kinda feel that the low D is an important and integral part of the tune - the way you return to it and back up again. Dispensing with it and putting in a B roll changes the character, does it not? Who's to say who is right & wrong, not I certainly, but reflecting on Diavlo's point above, perhaps the basic melody of the rise and fall is more appropriate here.
# Posted on August 24th 2006 by the wounded hussar
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Yes, to start on the low D is indeed an important and integral part of the tune. But to roll the B is also, even if you do it just once in the 12 times that bit will come up (if you play the tune the usual thrice)
But 12 times is qiuite alot. But one the beauties of this music is that you could easily think of maybe fifty or sixty different ways of playing just that one bit, so narrowing it down to 12 (or less if you want to repeat the low D a few times and keep the slow B roll) means that you have to narrow down your choices to what fits the mood of the moment
# Posted on August 24th 2006 by llig leahcim
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Ah! but I respectfully quote you from above......
"I'm merely pointing out that without, at the very least, playing the slow b roll in the first bar of out on the ocean, you are not playing the tune."
That's what caught my attention!!
# Posted on August 24th 2006 by the wounded hussar
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
I'm fuzzy on what exactly the original question was that Diavlo was asking. Was it this:
"How little decoration is too little for you?"
I'm much like Vanessa in that I too am learning and can't play ornaments yet (and good for you for finding a teacher, Vanessa!), but I do sing and have listened to this music for 20 years, and I think that some ornamentation is essential, at least a grace note here and there. Other than that, it seems to depend on the tune---some have melodies that jump all over the scale and strong rhythms that sound fine with less ornamentation, and other tunes really benefit from a few rolls or triplets to accentuate the notes.
I can't wait until I can actually play this stuff properly!
# Posted on August 24th 2006 by kennedy
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Gee, I always played a tune that I thought was Out on the Ocean, but it starts out bDb, and sometimes for a change of pace I just slide up into the b. No roll at the beginning. So I guess that, whatever my favorite tune is, it is not Out on the Ocean, just some similar imposter.
And some people play it with a first and second ending on the B part. In fact, on the seminal Malloy Peoples and Brady album, Malloy plays the B part one way each time through, and People plays it the other way. But oddly enough, that works.
Maybe these tunes are more durable than we think--despite a lot of different approaches, the tune is still recognizable, and we all seem to be able to adapt to each other well enough when we bring our different variants to the local session.
# Posted on August 24th 2006 by AlBrown
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Not an impostor, just a little bit wrong that's all. No great crime.
And Hussar, when I said "playing the slow b roll in the first bar", I meant when ever that bit of the tune comes up. Not necessarily the first time through
# Posted on August 24th 2006 by llig leahcim
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Now I understand, Michael. Sure, I'm always thinking 'this way and that' about things. Anway, where is Diavlo? He seems to have some sort of axe to grind - maybe he was just s... stirring.
# Posted on August 24th 2006 by the wounded hussar
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
"Not an imposter, just a little bit wrong that's all" Unless you know who wrote a tune and exactly what they wrote ('wrote' here includes played without writing down) how can you know whether a particular variant is 'right' or 'wrong'. Tunes transmitted orally will change - and how do you know which was the original? And even if you know who wrote the tune, can you be sure they played it the same every time? Need there be only one 'right' version?
Meantime, since I live near Leeds, I must just check in the mirror to see if I look a bit ET. That could explain a lot.
And then I'm going to spend a while learning two versions of the English hornpipe 'Stoney Steps', in which out of 16 bars of music only about 4 1/2 are the same. Obviously a very space cadet thing to do.
# Posted on August 24th 2006 by c.g.
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Well said Larsheen.
# Posted on August 24th 2006 by Martin Milner
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Agree absolutely!
# Posted on August 24th 2006 by c.g.
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Yes, Larsheen has put it far better what I was trying to say on another thread.
# Posted on August 24th 2006 by lazyhound
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
yes, Larsheen's words have the ring of wisdom...
# Posted on August 24th 2006 by vanessa
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
I would be very, very wary of ever claiming to be able to know the "right" way to play a tune. Unless you composed it, but even then, I doubt the composer would sit and think "that's not my tune, he played it differently from how I would play it". Besides, consider the types of ornamentation available on various instruments - many advanced scottish fiddlers look at pipe ornamentation style to enable them to play tunes in a different way....who's playing the right version of the tune in that case? So, Michael, we (and many other people) must agree to disagree. The only time where playing the same ornaments is essential seems to me to be when playing for listening, hence the distinction between playing at a session or to be listened to.
Personally I find playing for dancing to be the most rewarding type of playing, and regard it as the most important part of being a good trad musician. But again, just my opinion, I've no more of a valid opinion than anyone else.
# Posted on August 24th 2006 by Andy V
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Er - I could be wrong on this, but I think that Out on the Ocean might be Scottish - perhaps someone knows for certain? If so then the 'right' way to play it is . . .
# Posted on August 24th 2006 by c.g.
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
It isn't about any spacific ornament and where you put it in a tune, but rather the style and how you use ornamentation that defines the genre. These tunes can be decorated differently on each pass, and by different players on different instruments, but whether or not it sounds like ITM will depend on your understanding of how ITM is decorated. I've heard players who can play the melodies and without bothering to study the style have invented their own way of decorating the music, but to my ear they weren't playing ITM.
# Posted on August 24th 2006 by Phantom Button
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Thanks Phantom, I think you are the only one who understands what I'm saying. I've never said there is only one right way to play a tune. There are many right ways. But for every right way, there are even more wrong ways. Sure you can play a tune anyway you like, it doesn't even matter where the tune came from, but the Irish style, though vast in it's scope, is very very specific. All I'm saying is, learn those specifics. Listen to and learn those specifics.
I appreciate Larsheen's comments and maybe Mick O'Connor and Mary McNamara don't play it wrong. But I don't believe in the assumption that there is any substantial difference between what is described as a traditional musician and what is described as a musician who plays traditional music.
I think what Larsheen means is that there are some musicians who grow up knowing the specifics I mentioned above, and that others have to make conscious decisions to learn them. This is not a specific difference, just a difference of degrees. Correct me if I asumed wrong Larshen
# Posted on August 24th 2006 by llig leahcim
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Just to add another data point (terminology chosen to push a button or two), I was just listening to Kitty Hayes' A Touch of Clare. I noticed that she doesn't vary the tune at all (at least not that I could tell) from one time through to the next. Also, the ornamentation is almost exclusively doubling the melody line an octave below. There are a handful of cuts on the album and almost no rolls. I've heard that she's the only player who does the octave doubling thing as a major component of their style. I don't know if it's something she learned from players she knew in her youth or something she made up on her own. But nowadays it's unique. Is it not ITM because it doesn't fit the very very specific style?
Also, ornamentation will vary by instrument and context. When I had my first concertina class with Edel Fox last month, she asked me to start by playing a tune. Her first comment was that I was using accordion ornaments. And in Billy McComiskey's accordion class, he said that certain ornaments that are quite natural on the accordion should be avoided when playing with fiddlers because they'll clash with what the fiddlers are doing.
Since ornamentation depends on so many different factors (regional style, instrument, combination of instruments, players' personal influences, players' personal taste and inventiveness, etc.), there are, many right ways. Once a player has developed their personal approach to ornamentation (however authentic or inauthentic it may be), they can look (provided they read music) at a bare-bones version of a tune, learn the basic melody, and fill in the ornamentation according to their approach. A bare-bones version of the tune isn't the enemy as long as you are aware that it is what it is and not the last word. (Kind of like the Bible.)
# Posted on August 25th 2006 by GaryAMartin
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Kitty Hayes' playing is unique, but the same is the case with most concertina players. Kitty's playing comes from an older style that is less common among the contemporary players of today.
Decorating Irish tunes can be done in many ways, and there are many innovative players, particularly on concertina. These innovators have grown up in the tradition and their exposure to the music is such that any innovations would likely be in context with ITM. But if you haven't grown up in the tradition and you've only discovered it for yourself as an adult, your personal innovations are less likely to sound like anything relating to ITM. If you're just learning the music and you're collecting your tunes from sheet music on Internet websites the odds that your results would sound like ITM are low. If you've already spent years studying the genre and you've honed the style and understand it's inner workings -- then you might have a chance.
Being here in the outback of ITM I've encountered players who basically taught themselves to play in just this manner, and even though they've become proficient at the mechanics, and even have fans (who aren't familiar with ITM,) their music still sounds odd to me.
Anyone with musical abilities can learn melodies from sheet music and come up with pleasant sounding music, but not everyone has the patience and is willing to also learn the subtleties of the style that defines ITM and separates it from other genres.
# Posted on August 25th 2006 by Phantom Button
Uh... I meant...
"Being here in the outback of ITM I've encountered players who basically taught themselves to play in just this manner"
I'm referring to the manner I described where people teach themselves as they learn away from the tradition and invent their own techniques.
# Posted on August 25th 2006 by Phantom Button
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
In truth what phantom buttom says confirms what I feared all my life and what prevented me from learning an instrument to play ITM... then at the ripe old age of 37 I recklessly threw my doubts to one side and reached for the impossible dream... to learn to play Irish traditional music on the Irish flute but from reading this thread I realise that my doubts were instinctively correct and that what I'm doing is simply kidding myself because no matter how hard I try I will always suffer from an ITM musical disability since I was not born into the tradition and trad was not laid into my cradle... and I'm a bit too old to get those years of study under my belt needed to adequately compensate... unless passive listening counts which I doubt... so no hope for me so... (sigh)
# Posted on August 25th 2006 by vanessa
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Right, Vanessa... that's exactly what I meant. (rolling eyes emoticon)
# Posted on August 25th 2006 by Phantom Button
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Sometimes it seems to me that people on this site want to hear about how easy and quickly they can learn ITM, and any discussion about the time and discipline needed quickly becomes nothing more than discouragement. If there’s any mention about the advantages of being born or raised in the tradition people jump to fatalistic conclusions and read elitism into it. The fact is that in my comments I never implied one had to be born or raised before they could play it correctly or be innovative with ornamentation. I said one simply needed to put in the time necessary to understand the style if they want the results to sound like ITM. One of the most valuable aspects of this music is that it can't be learned over night. I realize that's not what you want to hear -- but it's the truth.
# Posted on August 25th 2006 by Phantom Button
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Born or raised in the tradition that is.
# Posted on August 25th 2006 by Phantom Button
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Phantom Button, sorry if I said the wrong thing... perhaps it helps if I explain that I actually wrote what I did without the slightest intent to sound sarcastic or disrespectul but I was in fact feeling what I was writing if that makes sense... and I actually agree with you and others... and what came to my mind - as it often does since I first started out - is that ITM is a bit like a language... so in the same way as I cannot speak English without a foreign accent (I'm a foreigner) even though I've lived in Ireland a long time now, and in much the same way I will always have a foreign accent playing ITM... it's just the way it is... and it is something I will always need to remember... so the reason why I sighed at the end of my above post is simply because sometimes I wish things were different... that's all... so I'm sorry if it came across the wrong way, it was not my intent... it was not how I was feeling when I was writing nor do I want to narrow what you said because to me it holds much value as do many of the comments of other people on this board... I'm learning a lot here not only factual stuff but I also enjoy catching glimpses of people's perceptions and thoughts on what ITM really is... people who breathe and live it
...
# Posted on August 25th 2006 by vanessa
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
"One of the most valuable aspects of this music is that it can't be learnt overnight. I realise that is not what you want to hear - but it's the truth."
I myself would actually even take it a step further in the way I perceive my learning process... as I expressed in my above post I believe not only that aspects of this music can't be learnt overnight but that there are aspects of this music which I will never learn no matter what I do... and that is the truth as I see it... I'm not ruling out that there are people who can but unfortunately I'm not one of those people... I have too many musical limitations...so not even a liftime would get me there... to me a large part of ITM will always remain unattainable and that's just the way it is... come to think of it now, maybe it's not such a bad thing for it will always hold an element of enchantment and mystery ie that magical component which got me hooked on ITM when I was a girl still living in Germany
# Posted on August 25th 2006 by vanessa
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
OK, Vanessa... I guess I was the one reading things into what you were saying... sorry. But don't be discouraged. Patrick Orceau plays like a clareman, but he still has a french accent. There are countless other examples too, but the thing they all have in common is they all took the time to learn the style. You can too.
# Posted on August 25th 2006 by Phantom Button
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
That is very kind of you to say so, Phantom Button, but it's not you, it's me.... as you can see I can't even express myself properly in English... i have obviously transmitted the wrong tone despite feeling something different... and in a sense the same thing is going to happen to me when playing ITM because it's not intuitive with me... and really the last thing I want to do with ITM is to destroy that which I love... so to tell you the truth, I am still at a point where I am not sure if this is not exactly what I will end up doing in my attempt to learn the play the flute... I fear there is a good chance that I'll end up butchering the tunes because I'm certainly no Patrick Orceau... well, it goes without saying that I'm already butchering the tunes but at this stage I can still hide behind the tag of being a beginner...
# Posted on August 25th 2006 by vanessa
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
oh, just in case... re 'butchering tunes' I was only talking about myself very subjectively ie it is a very self-absorbed statement, so I'm not trying to suggest that other people 'butcher' tunes... so no sarcasm or negative generalisation intended...
# Posted on August 25th 2006 by vanessa
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
I tend to learn tunes pretty much how I hear them. This is usually close to how they are actually played, but my brain fills bits in and misses other bits. I think this is called the oral tradition. So if I like a tune enough to learn it, I start by basing how I play that tune on what I think I heard. If it has ornaments I probably play most of them straightaway unless they are getting in the way of me playing the tune, then I may change some or leave them out. Over time, I may hear other versions of the tune and borrow bits to add on, or once in awhile alter the way I play the tune entirely.
I admit to being acedemically inclined when it comes to music, and can deconstruct a jig or reel with the best of them, but there is always something more to learn about tunes, and even the altering of melodic notes is a form of ornamentation. Out on the Ocean will always be a work in progress, as will all the other tunes.
I like my music with a generous helping of heart and soul. For most Irish musicians this is partly expressed through ornaments.
Diavlo - what was the question again? If you want to hear the words "it's okay to play without ornaments if that's what you like" well there they are. Probably a bit of an anticlimax though, eh?
# Posted on August 25th 2006 by kris
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Yep, I don't mid at all laying out where we stand on this, for clarity sake:
Yes, unless you use the odd roll, cut, tap, you are not playing the tune. But don't let this look like we are on opposite sides of a divide. You like to be "spartan with decoration". so do I sometimes. And you admired one musician who "practically didn't use decoration". Does that mean they did, but just a little bit? And I agree whole heatedly that "You can dispense with the ornaments and still have a great tune to play, but you can’t reverse that proposition." And of course it's OK to do that, if that's what you want. However, the tune might still be great, but it's just not all of it. And it won't sound Irish anymore.
Though we need to clarify the "basic versions of tunes" bit. My stance is that there are certain ways that a tune goes. If you don't play it one of these ways, you've simply got it a bit wrong, that's all (though under duress, I may, under certain circumstances bow to a little pressure and concede that it's a different version).
There are two reasons why I'm quite adamant about this:
The first is many peoples lazy reliance on a written down version, which, by definition cannot be all of it. I have no problem with having tunes written down as catalogues and memory aids, but it is when someone prefers to learn a tune off a piece of paper that they already have a recording of. This is not just lazy, but will almost bound to mean you will get it a little wrong.
The second is another gripe at laziness that is often hidden behind the phrase "oral tradition". It is people who are quite happy to fill in the gaps of their inability to learn a tune properly and end up calling it "their version". I can never understand why people can't hold their hands up and say, even years later, "Oh that's how it goes, crickey, I've been playing it wrong all these years".
# Posted on August 25th 2006 by llig leahcim
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
It's funny that Phantom brought up Patrick Ourceau because that's exactly who I thought of when Vanessa fretted about never getting past her German background.
Vanessa, it's true, Ourceau is French and didn't even start learning to play Irish music until he was an adult. He just loved it so well and hung around Irish musicians so much that he caught the right feel for it. You can do that too, with enough time and effort, and maybe a bit of luck. It's not like you're trying to learn this from somewhere in Berlin---although I should note that Ourceau started his journey in Paris. You don't have a "German music gene" that only lets you play polkas on a piano accordian and a tuba. If that were the way music worked I would have to dye my hair platinum blonde and learn to lip-sync some insipid sleazy pop tune like every American pop star you see on tv (man, I'm SO embarrassed by American commercial music, but that's another thread)...
Anyway, my point is, you don't have to be born into a musical tradition to understand it. But I agree with everyone else that you have to work very hard to play it well!
# Posted on August 25th 2006 by kennedy
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Oh, and another thing, your English is better than that of most native speakers I meet. And I say that as a professional technical writer who knows a thing or two about the language.
# Posted on August 25th 2006 by kennedy
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Boys! I think I do understand your positions pretty well. However it's all subjective, as usual.
Micheal, I'm sure you would agree that somewhere in between really getting a tune wrong and the best aspects of variation within the oral tradition there lies a gray area. Yes? I freely admit to having spent time in that gray area as well as both sides of it, but I do try to buck up my ideas when I realise I've been a silly girl and got it wrong! I also admit that there have been times when I have been wrong too long and prefer my "own version" and make a choice to stick to it. If I happen to pass it on I do try to warn folk that it is "my own wierd version".
# Posted on August 25th 2006 by kris
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Yes it's a grey area. And that's one of the big problems with this music and it has such far reaching effects. It's the chinese whispers thing. The grey area comes from people attempting variations on a tune that they have not learned properly. And the outcome is a great big globular mass of tunes that all sound the bloody same. Lovely, but elusive, turns in tunes dissapear into the quagmire simply because people didn't quite get it right to start with and ended up substituting a phrase they already knew from another tune.
# Posted on August 25th 2006 by llig leahcim
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
For the avoidance of confusion (and there seems to be quite enough of it already), I think the simplest thing (Occam's razor) is to learn the tune sans ornaments, and then, when it's in one's head, to put in ornaments during playing as the spirit moves, having due regard to what sounds right and reasonable within the tradition.
BTW, I am not the canine referred to in the title of this thread.
# Posted on August 25th 2006 by lazyhound
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
AAARRRGH
Trev, I'm tearing my hair out.
The rolls etc ARE PART OF THE TUNE ...
# Posted on August 25th 2006 by llig leahcim
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
no they're not ... yes they are ... no they're not ... yes they are ... no they're not ... yes they are ... no they're not ... yes they are ... no they're not ... yes they are ... no they're not ... yes they are ... no they're not ... yes they are ... no they're not ... yes they are ... no they're not ... yes they are ... no they're not ... yes they are ... no they're not ... yes they are ...
# Posted on August 25th 2006 by llig leahcim
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
As much fun as it is to beat up straw men...the resolution to this "controversy" seems to me to be: simply acknowledge that there is a wide range of preferences and choices about style and ornamentation that can all coexist under the umbrella of ITM.
So slide, cran, cut, treble, and roll if you please. Or don't if you please. Peace and love and all that.
Now step away from your computers and go play some tunes.
# Posted on August 25th 2006 by crazy_fingerz
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
MG wrote: "The rolls etc ARE PART OF THE TUNE"
Or -- part of the style. The tune is the melody, but the ornaments depict the style of the music. Without the ornaments there is far less to indicate style. Sure there's plenty there without the ornaments, but the decorations are the connective tissue as well as adding the necessary energy in the way of momentum and inertia to the tune. In this way, the ornaments are just as important in defining the genre and become, as Michael points out, part of the tune.
# Posted on August 25th 2006 by Phantom Button
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
I'm still not convinced that "the rolls are part of the tune". Different instruments lend to different ornaments, so would a piper (who would ornament differently from a fiddler) not be playing the tune in the traditional way? Unless you mean "the ornaments (in the generic sense - not specific notes for specific durations) are part of the tune"? In which case I'd quite agree.
With regard to the elitist thing about people brought up in Ireland, they are no more capable to play ITM than anyone. But they start learning at an earlier age, they hear the music constantly, there is a greater availability of role models etc. But someone not brought up in Ireland, who started playing at age 4, only ever listened to ITM, had access to plenty of role model musicians who encouraged them would be able to play as well as an Irishman. Ever heard of Cape Breton??
# Posted on August 25th 2006 by Andy V
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Andy makes 2 points. On the first, yes, that's what I mean; the ornaments are part of the tune, but they aren't always the same ornaments. One's choice and execution will determine style. On the second point; being born in Ireland and growing up within the tradition is an obvious advantage. If you're not Irish born but are raised within the tradition the advantage doesn't change.
People say that one's ability to learn language is at it's peak around age 7. For this reason learning a musical language, such as ITM, would have added benefits at an early age. Those of us who are adults, not having grown up in Ireland, have those two strikes against us at the start, and we need to work extra hard to overcome the disadvantages.
# Posted on August 25th 2006 by Phantom Button
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Phantom has summed up exactly what I meant, except with alot less faffing around the point
My point about children learning from a young age and becoming excellent musicians applies to classical musicians as well as trad musicians. Possibly more so, given the relative competition in classical music, and that some pieces require extreme technical ability.
The point I didn't make very well above, is that someone who is 20, Irish and has been playing for 15 years should have no advantage over a 50 year old who was brought up in Hull, but has been playing for 15 years doing the same amount of practice (plus a bit more to compensate for the change in learning speed) and listening to exactly the same music. Nor does the person from Ireland have any more valid an opinion than the person from Hull (no offence to people from Hull, by the way!!), at least in my opinion. But again, I make no claim to be right anywhere other than in my head....
# Posted on August 25th 2006 by Andy V
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Thanks, Larsheen! Finally an unequivocal position from an insider rather than a guess from the hinterlands. That's about what my guess was, but it was just that, and from afar.
# Posted on August 25th 2006 by GaryAMartin
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Crikey, please allow me to think on this for a bit and not to react without consideration
# Posted on August 25th 2006 by llig leahcim
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
So for some, the music is complete without the ornaments, and we pretty much agree that there are multiple ways to decorate the tunes if one chooses to. But I'd like to ask the members of this board at large: what was it about ITM that grabbed your head in the first place?
# Posted on August 26th 2006 by Phantom Button
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
One thing I've learned from this thread is if you fire up an Irishman, there's a lot of passion underneath the friendly easygoing exterior!
Phantom, what grabbed me was the melodies. They're gorgeous and wild and delicate and I can still listen to them for days and weeks at a time. Recently I've been studying the theory behind them, and I wonder if the modes are what the real attraction is for me---I like baroque music as well and most music in minor keys.
# Posted on August 26th 2006 by kennedy
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
I can't say that just one aspect of the style first grabbed me. I liked one tune because of the cool modality, another because it was played with nice spicy ornaments, another because the melody was plaintive and soulful. That whole package hooked me and I wouldn't want to give up any part of it.
I don't take a doctrinary position on ornaments. Some tunes can be all they need to be without ornaments. Others are bland without them. An apple doesn't need seasoning; a potato does. Or vice versa, if that's your taste.
# Posted on August 26th 2006 by Bob himself
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
it may just be my opinion... but as a dancer i like to listen to the ornamentations when im dancing because it takes away the constant concentration and makes the tune that bit more fun to listen to... however, when there's overornamentation (if that's even a word) then it becomes hard to follow the rhythm and even listening and enjoying the tune becomes a trial due to the 'flowery' effects.
# Posted on August 26th 2006 by highland_dancer
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
this question had me well confused, because I like ornamentation to be spare too. But a tune isn't a tune unless it is interpreted in some way - otherwise it's just a collection of notes. And ornamentation is part of interpretation. You can play a tune with no ornamentation and it's stlll the tune, but if it had no interpretation whatsoever (no slurring or rubato or emphasis of any sort) it wouldn't come to life as a tune; it would just be a collection of notes played in order (an android version maybe). The way you choose to interpret it then is just a matter of taste.
I found this quote on google - a bit flowery but obviously people have been wrestling with this question a long time!
(Not that it's necessarily true for our music)
CPE Bach: It is not likely that anybody could question the necessity of ornaments. They are found everywhere in music, and are not only useful, but indispensable. They connect the notes; they give them life. They emphasise them, and besides giving accent and meaning they render them grateful; they illustrate the sentiments, be they sad or merry, and take an important part in the general effect. They give to the player an opportunity to show off his technical skill and powers of expression. A mediocre composition can be made attractive by their aid, and the best melody without them may seem obscure and meaningless.
# Posted on August 26th 2006 by S1obhan
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Michael's defence now rests
# Posted on August 26th 2006 by lazyhound
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Phantom Button - what attracted me to Irish music was that it represented something wild and other.When I discovered it at around 20 I had no experience of playing any kind of music, but was with friends who did, and I badly wanted to do so; I didn't care for rock, and I thought classical music would be too long a haul. So I benighted folk clubs and Irish sessions in Oxford with my tin whistle, which eventually I learned to play properly. I think I discovered the places first, then the albums.
I discovered Northumbrian music at the same time. My home being in the North-East, although my parents are Londoners, I was excited to find that an equivalent local music came from areas just up the road (and of course Irish people and music have been in and around Tyneside for a long time). The High Level Ranters were Tyneside's answer to The Dubliners or The Corries at the time.
I spent much of my spare time as a teenager and student going fishing and walking in the hills and dales of the north of England, and my musical taste was for pieces that chimed in with this experience: as a boy, Gilbert & Sullivan; as a teenager, some Beethoven, Schubert and Sibelius (His lesser-known piece "En Saga" is always linked in my mind with ridge-walking in the Pennines through hailstorms on a late autumn half-term holiday...) - and others, not all classical. Scottish, Irish and Northumbrian traditional music all chimed in with this. They seemed to fit the landscape. My attempts to play them were a personal response to it, a lot of the time.I learned from (book) tutors, albums and sheet music, but not much from other people - my progress, if any, has been rather hermetic.
My first trip to Ireland was with my public school cadet camp, to the Sperrin Mountains of Ulster, in summer '68 just before the Troubles began. We barely met a soul round where we were encamped, though some lads managed to find a pub and one was carried in roaring drunk. I don't know what punishment he incurred, or for that matter how many local flute styles might have been lurking in the heather. At a slightly riper age I made a couple of trips to the Republic, had a very pleasant time and heard some great music. But I don't know if or when I'll go back.
# Posted on August 26th 2006 by nicholas
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
The only point I want to take up from all of this is Larsheen's ridiculous suggestion that "Irishness" has anything to do with the music, otherwise people from Shetland, Cape Breton, Northumbria, Scotland, or indeed all over the world might as well give up now. Which would be a shame, as I suspect there are many people not from Ireland who can play Irish music better than many people from the "pure drop" culture. THAT makes me angry, and slightly sad....I wish you all the best in preserving and maintaining your culture of seperatism and elitism, if that's what you wish for, certainly I won't be helping you.
Michael's comments would be regarded as unusual in any area with traditional music, the idea that the opinion of Irish people is worth more than that of a Yorkshireman or a Scotsman is preposterous, and shows the degree of narrowmindedness that seems to clash with your intent to maintain the traditions. I hope I misinterpreted your point, if I understood you clearly I fear the effects for traditional music.
# Posted on August 26th 2006 by Andy V
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Andy, no disrespect but I do believe that you didn't quite understand the point Larsheen was making because Larsheen is one of least separatist and elitist people I know - and I can vouch for that personally as a foreigner who is trying to learn Irish traditional music.
And just a little thought of my own which is unrelated to anyone's comments nor is it a derrogatory response to anything anyone has said in particular - it's just a thought which comes from my heart, the heart of a foreigner who is living in this beautiful country, Ireland, amidst a most generous people:
... well, it's just that I believe it is common sense courtesy for foreigners like me to have the respect not to dictate to an Irish person what it means to be Irish musically ie what contitutes the right way or wrong way to play ITM - after all Irish traditional music is called 'Irish' traditional music and not for example 'German' traditional music because it was borne from the beating heart of the Irish... in essence it tells their story... in the wild throws of enthusiasm and passion it's something that's so easily taken for granted as ITM becomes a global entity and as foreigners we try to carve out our own little place in it... yet as with all traditional music from all countries around the world, it is a music that has distinctly cultural roots
or we would be calling it 'Pop Music'
# Posted on August 26th 2006 by vanessa
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Well then ...
Lots to think about and digest. Lots to think about definitions, which in them selves' are meaningless. And lots to think about ownership, which at best is petty. Lots to think about motivation which is paramount. And lots to think about art and culture, which in this instance, seem to be at loggerheads.
I loved that quote above: "It is not likely that anybody could question the necessity of ornaments. They are found everywhere in music, and are not only useful, but indispensable ..... etc", it really made me feel better. But more that that, it allowed me to re-define what we here refer to as ornaments. I've always hated the connotation with mere decoration, baubles, jewellery, etc. The real word for what I refer to when I speak of rolls, cuts, taps etc is:
Articulation.
So much for semantics. But what about articulation. I had not heard some of the musicians Larsheen was referring to so I looked them up. Mary McNamara makes lovely music which is full of brilliantly subtle articulation. No rolls that I could find, but that's not a problem because you can't play rolls on a concertina, but the subtle delays, taps and passing note triplets are lovely, just the articulation I refer to as "part of the tune". I couldn't find any Mick O'Connor, but I've no reason to think that the above doesn't apply to him also.
Micho Russell though presents me with a problem. I'm familiar with his music and know that he often played rolls (though not very well). But, I'm afraid I have a dreadful sense of the "emperor's new clothes" with his music. I'm sorry to say that I've just never thought he was as good a player as his reputation purports. And herein, I fear is Larsheen's critique. I hold my hands up. I'm from Manchester. England. I'm not Irish.
Larsheen said, "I think of these tunes which whether you like it or not are for the large part, part and parcel of my culture and read your comments from across the sea telling anyone who will listen how they should be played and my blood boils. How dare you? Where did you learn your music..not in Ireland..I can tell that."
That scared me.
How dare I? I'm sorry Larsheen, but though you consider these tunes part and parcel of your culture, they have grown, by virtue of their brilliance, to be much more than that. I'm sorry, but I just can't say that these tunes belong to the Irish. They are an essence unto themselves.
So, as a musician from a another country, am I allowed to criticise an Irishman for not playing Irish music "properly"? On the face of it, it's such a can of worms that I seem to be digging myself deeper and deeper into it. What more can I say? it's your music, play it how you want. I'm sorry I had the audacity. I'm sorry I ever had the audacity to "believe of myself as I wished".
# Posted on August 27th 2006 by llig leahcim
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
I can only take off my hat to Michael. I've rarely read anything better here.
# Posted on August 27th 2006 by lazyhound
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
MG wrote: "you can't play rolls on a concertina"
*Ahem*
# Posted on August 27th 2006 by Phantom Button
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
I had to find a hat. But I also take it off to Michael, I've read very few opinions here I actually believe in.
Vanessa, I'm sure Larsheen isn't seperatist or elitist, but as I don't know him I can only comment on the words he chose to post here, I found them seperatist and elitist.
However, while I agree the traditions shoud be respected, it's more complicated than ITM being a standalone type of trad music. It's intertwined with Scottish music to a great extent, the melody for Mrs McLeod's Reel exist in both cultures, except in different keys (usually A in Scotland, G in Ireland) and with the A and B parts swapped around. But ITM also links into Northumbrian music, and (to an extent) the Morris tradition, the Scandinavian tradition, the Breton tradition and the Galician tradition. Or, to look at it another way, regions that were "celtic" at one point or another.
To take one musican instrument, the melodeon (button accordion if you're an American) or a "bisoronic, diatonic, button operated free reed instrument". Think of any of the UK and Irish traditions. They all use it (traditionally) - yet (in terms of patents) it originates in Germany and Austria around 1800. The "distictly cultural roots" of ITM tend to blur the harder you look at them. I hope this isn't regarded as disrespectful to some people (no doubt it will be), but I find treating ITM as an Irish-people-only thing as disrespectful to all the other traditions, and lacking an understanding of the traditions we are trying to preserve.
# Posted on August 27th 2006 by Andy V
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
To quote Micheal: ”Lots to think about and digest. Lots to think about definitions, which in them selves' are meaningless.”
Yes, in my opinion definitions are meaningless also – it's a bit like learning music from the dots, something you strongly object to, Micheal,... so just to give you an example: pick up a dictionary and look up the word 'love'… in my little dictionary it says: warm affection, wholehearted liking for someone… but does that definition really capture, what love truly is? No, it can’t, the same way there is no dictionary and no definition that will truly reflect the essence of Irish traditional music… there are just some things that cannot be put into neat little boxes....
I know it’s easier to base one’s thinking on a myriad of little boxes because as human beings we are trying to make sense of the world we live in and of whatever it is we are trying to grasp with our intellect and our heart, so boxes can create the illusion we know what we are at and what we are talking about; yet what we often forget is that what we keep in our boxes is a reflection of ourselves rather than that which we wish to categorize with our mind, and that is why we wholeheartedly agree and feel a little buzz when we read definitions which reflect our internal reality, the same way we feel that same little buzz when we meet someone who thinks as we do – someone who is on the same wave-length so to speak – because it makes us feel safe and understood and akin to that person – it gives us the feeling we belong and that the world makes sense...
All this is part of human nature since our thinking, perceptions and actions are coloured by our culture, upbringing, personal experiences etc etc, hence any opinion we express has to be taken in that context ie that it is in its essence subjective – it is a reflection of who we are as people and a reflection of our conditioning. Much in the same way we perceive other people’s opinions – we interpret them and weigh them up subjectively based on how we perceive the world and that is why there are so many misunderstandings because we often unwittingly misinterpret the words and actions of others. It’s all about our internal filtering system which we apply to the world – our looking glasses so to speak and this is something important to remember when interacting with others.
Unfortunately, discussions on a website lend themselves more readily to a breeding ground for misunderstandings because we lack the necessary clues to gauge another person’s emotional intent because we don’t hear the person’s voice or see their facial expressions while they talk. As I’m sure everyone knows as human beings we rely more heavily on voice intonation and body language to give us an idea what lies behind a person’s words and gain an insight into the other person’s emotional reality in relation to ours, yet as we communicate here merely through the written word it is by an large a one-dimensional form of interaction, and we miss many of the pointers needed to successfully communicate. Also, in website discussions people feel less inhibited to express themselves and adhere more strongly and categorically to their points of view whereas in real life much more courtesy would be used to express different points of views. Also, in real life as we observe the subtle reactions of the other we are much more likely to be more respectful not to overstep someone’s limits. Well, that’s the downside of internet communication and discussion forums which, although they are a great source of information, cannot by means of its format be a true reflection of the multi-dimensional way we interact with each other in daily life (so for example no wonder that the pictorial language of emoticons has been invented as replacement for some of the facial cues we depend on)
Well, you are probably wondering what has all this got to do with this discussion – well, the reason why I’m saying this is that I’m sure had this discussion taken place in the ‘real’ world it would have progressed differently and perhaps it’s something we should keep in mind when engaging with each other on this website because it is can so easily turn into a breeding ground for misconceptions, misunderstandings and misinterpretations.
Just to give you an example: In one of my posts up above I kinda vented my own frustrations with my personal limitations in agreement with something Phantom Button said, yet although I was in fact crying and emotionally very raw when I wrote my post ie I wrote it without any hint of cynism but surrendered to a moment of intense-self-doubt… well, still, although I wrote it without any feelings of negativity towards the statement of Phantom Button, he and I’m sure many others reading my post perceived my comment as sarcastic even though it was not my intent… so even though I had no idea at that time when I wrote my post, my words obviously lent themselves to someone who doesn’t know me and someone who didn’t see my face to the conclusion that I was being a cynic who might re ITM even be a lazy ‘smart a*&s’…
I think the same way Micheal’s comments have much the same effect based on his choice of words ie the use of the words ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ in conjunction with playing Irish music can be interpreted rather negatively by a reader including myself. I think the difficulty with the written word comes in when we try to claim that we are ‘right’ and that we are the one’s who know it all – it lends itself to misinterpretations of potential righteousness and arrogance. I’m sure most people would agree that there is nothing wrong with expressing our personal opinions and to put them up for debate or to respond to the opinions of others as long as we don’t turn our own beliefs and personal truths into a set of doctrines which are used to overwrite the many other beliefs and truths that are out there and co-exist with ours.
This brings me to a question Micheal asks: “As a musician from another country, am I allowed to criticize an Irishman for not playing Irish music “properly”?”
Well, in my opinion the answer is ‘no’ because how do you truly know what ‘proper’ Irish music is? I’m saying this not as derogatory statement towards foreigners who have fallen in love with this music but I come from a different angle – from the perspective of a foreigner who has lived all her adult life here in Ireland and was exposed to Irish music for almost two decades. Well, what I can tell you is that I have heard my neighbour’s kids pick up the whistle and although their fingering is clumsy, they squeak and they cannot execute rolls, cranns or what have you, they sound by far more ‘Irish’ than I do ie someone who on the flute and whistle has greater dexterity, better tone and knows to play more tunes than those children. The same counts for a friend of mine who was raised in the ‘tradition’ and was a champion Irish dancer yet never had the chance to learn an instrument – well, she picked up the whistle in view of learning to play the flute after hearing me tinker with both instruments – so since she is very shy and I haven’t convinced her yet to take proper lessons from an Irish musician, I have given her a few lessons as a friend and what amazed me was that although I do not have an ‘Irish accent’ when playing Irish traditional music and hence I’m teaching her my ‘unirish’ way of playing - well, when my friend interprets what I teach her, she unwittingly makes it sound very Irish despite of playing slowly without any ornamention – quite extraordinary, isn’t it? Yet, to contrast this, on this website and other websites where people from varying countries post samples of their playing, I have always been amazed of the many different foreign accents I can hear in the music even of those people who claim to have mastered ‘Irishness’ and the skill of ornamentation. Well, so to me that means that there is just an element of Irish traditional music that cannot be confined to a few rolls here and there for authenticity’s sake, and it also tells me that there is something more to this music which indeed is rooted deeply within Irish culture – hence even the worst player has unwittingly that ‘Irish’ sound most of us are after. Hence, I feel as foreigners we cannot judge an Irish person and tell them what sounds Irish and what does not. Of course we have the right to have preferences re someone’s playing for whatever personal reasons or we can even form personal opinions about how proficient a player is in terms of how he/she masters his/her instrument(s) from a basic skill level – yes we can form those opinions and I believe it’s human nature to do so, yet we cannot stand in judgment over an Irish person and tell them what it means to be or sound ‘Irish’… even that thought sounds a little bit ludicrous as I write it...
...well, this brings me to a funny story: 17 years ago good friends of mine came to visit me here in Ireland and as we left Dublin airport they suddenly stopped and stared at the passing traffic outside with an expression which spoke of nothing but devastating disappointment. “What’s wrong?” I asked thinking that they were tired and dreaded the long car journey home, but their answer was not what I had expected, for my friends frowned and said, “But Ireland isn’t at all Irish because they should be driving horse’s and carts and not cars and buses.” Well, of course this is an extreme case but it reflects my sentiments because anyone who comes to Ireland, travels the country and listens to sessions or perhaps even joins them will hear that the Irish sound is unique, multi-faceted and multi-dimensional which reminds me of something Larsheen told me ie that Irish music is ‘heart’ music – and it’s the heart of Irish music that I feel gets lost in a debate on the use of ornamentation.
And now to my last point and here I would like to respectfully quote Micheal again:
“Larsheen said, "I think of these tunes which whether you like it or not are for the large part, part and parcel of my culture and read your comments from across the sea telling anyone who will listen how they should be played and my blood boils. How dare you? Where did you learn your music..not in Ireland..I can tell that."
That scared me.
How dare I? I'm sorry Larsheen, but though you consider these tunes part and parcel of your culture, they have grown, by virtue of their brilliance, to be much more than that. I'm sorry, but I just can't say that these tunes belong to the Irish. They are an essence unto themselves.”
Well, if I’m completely honest, Micheal, your last statement is actually what got me a little scared because it sounds as if you are trying to hi-jack someone else’s culture. Why not value and appreciate the roots of Irish music rather than forcefully detaching it from its life-source and origins? What’s the point of closing ourselves by wanting to grab Irish music onto ourselves – wouldn’t it be better to keep our ears, eyes and hearts open and to keep listening? Yes, of course it is up to each individual how they interpret Irish music and an interpretation of Irish music has its own value – it’s tells you about that person and that person’s cultural background – and I myself feel ITM speaks to me like no other music does – I’m drawn to its call – its voice – and the reason I feel drawn to it must be because it articulates something that my heart responds to – so emotionally I feel an inexplicable connection which supersedes any form of intellectual reasoning. Yet, as we journey along that road to connect with this music that captivates so many foreigners around the world because of its ‘brilliance’ as Micheal says and soulfulness I believe it helps to remember to be respectful of its roots and the people who gave birth to it because denying ITM its roots diminishes it and limits us as players.
Well, to finish of what has turned into a ‘novel’ is that Irish people like Larsheen are very generous of heart and most encouraging when it comes down to foreigners learning ITM; and since I first arrived here in Ireland (and I have moved around quite a bit before I ended up in Cork) I have seen foreigners and Irish people play alongside each other without anyone casting judgments and what you see is that everyone is enjoying themselves because they are united by their love for the same music: ITM…
… so, I, as a foreigner, have not come across pure-drop elitism but have only received words of encouragement from Irish musicians in the ‘real’ world and in this ‘cyperspace’ session community. So I can tell you that Irish people are glad to share their cultural musical heritage with foreigners – the only thing Irish don’t like is when someone comes along and claims they are ‘right’ and tells others they are ‘wrong’. So, to summarize: Irish people don’t mind expressions of opinions – in fact they welcome them – yet what they dislike (and this is independent of a person’s nationality) is righteousness and arrogance and people who claim they know it all… people who believe they have ladled wisdom with a spoon…
So, now with this huge post I hope I will have managed to confuse everyone so completely and utterly or perhaps even better - everyone got so bored they nodded off into a comfortable sleep which means all is well again on the mustard board
# Posted on August 27th 2006 by vanessa
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Vanessa - You may be a "foreigner" but it's interesting to read your scripts - you know Ireland at first hand in a way the vast majority of us English don't.
Andy Newcastle - I doubt if Northumbria's a "Celtic nation" except insofar as industrialisation brought Irish, Scots, Welsh and Cornish people into County Durham, Tyne/Wear/Tees-side, and the coalfield of SE Northumberland in recent centuries. The great part of Northumberland stayed rural, and people there may well have roots going back to the dark ages; but the Anglo-Saxon conquest of the area may not have left many if any of the ex-Roman Celtic population living there. It is easy to believe from the literature and other evidence that the Anglo-Saxons generally killed or drove out the Romano-Celts before them; it seems much harder to prove that an appreciable Celtic population stayed on under AS rule. But it would be interesting to see evidence that it might have done.
# Posted on August 27th 2006 by nicholas
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Nicholas - I meant "celtic" in the sense of the popular usage, not in the sense of a strict socio-historical definition. In context, I meant that Northumbrian music has more of a connection to Boarders-style-Scottish (which in turn links to Ireland) than it does to the Morris based traditions from the South West of England. Rapper dancing (a venerable NE tradition) doesn't use the traditional English tunes, it uses jigs, reels, hornpipes, 3:2s etc. Also, compare compositions of James Scott Skinner and James Hill - very similar arpeggio heavy style of composition. Yet JSS lived in Abredeen, Hill lived in Gateshead. NTM, STM & ETM have little standing on this site though. Nontheless, the phrasing and lift that are so essential in Morris traditions can be heard clearly in NTM, there is an academic debate as to where the Morris tradition cuts off.
Vanessa, with regard to the "hi-jack someone elses culture", if you re-read my previous post you will see I don't believe these traditional musics belong to an area that is currently defined as one place by international politics. But we may have to agree to disagree on this. Nontheless, it's an interesting subject and, for anyone wanting a true grasp of the traditions, in my opinion more relavent than where a person was born.
# Posted on August 27th 2006 by Andy V
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
andy_newcastle wrote: "Vanessa, I'm sure Larsheen isn't seperatist or elitist, but as I don't know him I can only comment on the words he chose to post here, I found them seperatist and elitist.
"
"Him"... "he"? You're right... you don't know her?
# Posted on August 27th 2006 by Phantom Button
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
I agree with Vanessa -- the music belongs to the Irish and, as outsiders, all we can hope is that we might get it right someday. Personally, I'm taking all my cues regarding ITM from Irish people. That doesn't mean that all Irish people are right... but the ones that are have good reason to be.
# Posted on August 27th 2006 by Phantom Button
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Andy - Thanks, I take your point. One could ramble away about these topics for ever!
# Posted on August 27th 2006 by nicholas
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
This is another one of those points that we can talk around and sort of understand and sort of agree on and sort of disagree on, but we can never write down a a statute that settles the issue. I think I agree pretty much with the Phantom, except that I would probably never say that the music belongs to any particular people. I wouldn't say it, but my feeling about it is somewhere in that direction. Sort of... The center of gravity for The Music is among the Irish people, but a lot of its mass is outside Ireland.
# Posted on August 27th 2006 by Bob himself
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
For the record Larsheen, I have never thought you elitist or separatist
# Posted on August 28th 2006 by llig leahcim
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Larsheen, although your "the cost of everything and the value of nothing" although a nice soundbite, doesn't actually make any sense in this context.
But more importantly the view that learning your chops "across the sea" would make you less of an ITM player is to say the least
interesting. I wonder what Kevin Burke or Kevin Crawford would say about that.
# Posted on August 28th 2006 by BegF
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Clearly, if you believe that trad music belongs to the Irish, I have no right to express my opinions. And if you agree with me, I don't need to make them known I was under the impression that, although it's supposed to be an Irish music site, this site loosely encompasses Irish, Scottish, Northumbrian and to a lesser extent English traditional dance music. Certainly the tunes in the Tunes section would appear to suggest this.
I live in Northumbria (Newcastle, to be specific). But Dow (or whatever name he's using now) knows more about Northumbrian music than I do, even though he lives in Austrialia. And this doesn't make me insecure, angry, or feel like he's trying to hi-jack it. I'm actually rather glad someone cares enough to learn about a tradition that's not native to them.
# Posted on August 29th 2006 by Andy V
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
Hahahahaha don't be silly... I said ITM "belongs to the Irish" not "andy_newcastle has no right to express his opinions."
# Posted on August 29th 2006 by Phantom Button
Re: The tail does not wag the dog
I think, every now and then, "Andy has no right to express his opinions" would probably do me good
And maybe "Andy needs to improve his punctuation" would come in useful occasionally. And they say the British university system is the best in the world.........I think not!!
# Posted on August 29th 2006 by Andy V