I'm on the scrounge here. I hope I'll be forgiven for using this forum like this.
As part of a dissertation on Irish traditional music I am trying to find out what various musicians’ attitudes are to changes which have affected this music over the years. I am asking people to give brief answers to the two questions below. The answers can be in either English or Irish. I don’t want people to spend too much of their time on them; a few lines would do. I’ll refer to the answers I get in the conclusions section of the dissertation.
If you are willing to write a couple of lines please email them to me (iflute@googlemail.com) or post them as comment on this post.
Many thanks,
Michael.
Here are the questions:
English version
“From 150 until 50 years ago Irish Traditional Music did undergo change and evolution but it is likely that a musician from the beginning of that period would have found little difficulty in playing with a musician from its end. The changes in the music over the last 50 years, however, mean that in some cases, that would not be the case for many musicians over the span of the last 5 decades.”
1) Do you agree with this statement?
2) Do you think that Irish Traditional music is in a better state than it was 50 or 150 years ago?
Leagan Gaeilge
“Ó Chéad bliain go leith ó shin go dtí caoga bliain ó shin, d’imir athruithe agus forbairt tionchar ar Cheol Traidisiúnta na hÉireann ach is dócha nach mbeadh deacrachtaí ró-mhór ag ceoltóirí ó thús na tréimhse sin ag iarraidh ceol a sheinm le ceoltóirí óna deireadh. De thoradh na n-athruithe a tharla maidir leis an cheol le caoga bliain anuas, áfach, ní bheadh sin fíor idir ceoltóirí ó thús agus ó dheireadh na linne seo a chuaigh thart”.
1) An aontaíonn tú leis an ráiteas seo thuas?
2) An gcreideann tú go bhfuil dóigh níos fearr ar Cheol Traidisiúnta na hÉireann inniu ná a bhíodh caoga bliain nó céad bliain is caoga ó shin?
(I have also put these questions in an entry on my site http://irishflute.podbean.com/ where answers could be posted as comments if that would be easier. Thanks again.)
I'm shocked this thread doesn't have a million posts yet. Hang in there Michael, I'm sure it will eventually. Good on you too, that's some serious academia.
Here's my two cents: Very few of us were alive and actively playing tunes fifty years ago. Any of our responses will be colored by that fact. None of us can really say it was better or worse, because that's subjective. None of us can really say that musicians from then couldn't play now, or with us now. There's no possible way to verify or validate anyone's answers.
Which is why it's an opinion question, I suppose. (DUH!)
So then, here goes:
1. No, I don't agree. How can the score Chief O'Neill wrote down 100+ years ago be any different from the notes I am playing for the exact same tune? It's the same. The only difference would be that instead of a Vaudeville piano player mucking up Chief O'Neill's sessions, we have guitarists and bodhran players mucking up ours. No no no, I'm just teasing. What's a session.org post without a good backer-slag in it? No offense fellas, commence with the fiddler jokes.
2. I think it's better all the time! Every single moment it's a 'live' tradition means it's better than being a dead tradition.
On the first question, a guarded yes, especially as you qualified it with the words "in some cases". For instance what I call the Gerry O'Connor "cajun" style, there was none of that when I first started. That might throw a few from the olden days, until they adjusted.
The answer to the second question, I would say yes. A strange number of influences, The Dubliners, McPeake's, Clancy's, Horslips, The Pogues, Riverdance, and even the Corrs helped to popularise the music, which provided more players on a global basis. The fact that every "Hollywood" movie, and loads of TV series in Britain and elsewhere, have Irish music scores, adds to the popularity, and breeds more converts and players.
Sixty years ago Irish music in Ireland was ridiculed as music for those who belonged to the past, still clinging to a romantic, old fashioned, out dated notion of Ireland as the land of saints and scholars.
he didn't ask whether the music was better, he asked if it was in a better state.
1. I disagree that it's likely that a musician from 150 years ago would be comfortable playing with a musician from 50 years ago, or vice versa. The plain fact is that we really haven't a clue what the music sounded like 150 years ago. There are transcripts, but as we know, they, at best, only contain a very very small proportion of the music. I don't understand where you get your assumption. You never heard of chinese whispers?
Plus: We have many recordings from 50 years ago that are studied in depth by many many modern players.
2. Yes, It has to be. For no other reason than the sheer amount of people across the world playing it now. (Unless of course you take the obtuse stance that all these people water it down. Suer, a lot of them do water it down, maybe even most of them, but that still leaves a heck of a lot of people playing it well)
I would guess, based on my knowledge of musicians in general, that 150 years ago there were musicians in Ireland arguing about the influx of impure influences on their music. Just as 100 years ago, people were very concerned about those damned banjo players from American minstrel shows changing the sound of Irish music. Just like when Ceili bands were considered a destructive element to Irish music in the 1920's. Just like when Sean O'Raida claimed accordions were too clumsy for the subtle melodies of Irish music in the 1960's. And so on, and so on. Somehow, however, these marvelous melodies continue to survive through immigration and emmigration, and through new instruments and modern recording productions values. So I would say yes - a fiddle player from 1880 could very well have a nice time playing a few tunes with folks from 2007.
"A better state" is a relative term. Certainly no one can deny it's global attraction and it's use and abuse in current western pop medias as Bliss pointed out. It seems to be healthy, wealthy and steadily growing. I'm sure there are those that will always argue that it was better "back when..." But I think folks 150 years ago were probably saying the same thing.
How can we begin to even imagine what it sounded like 150 years ago (that's 1850, right?). Last time I checked Claddagh were all out of Now 1850. The only thing you could say is that the oldest musicians recorded in the early 1900s MIGHT have sounded like the ones in the 1850s.
What kind of 'state' was trad music in in the 1850s? You're hardly comparing like with like here. 100 years would be acceptable here, but 150...in many ways there is so much difference between the music of 1850 and 2000 that you're hardly talking about the same thing at all.
I was discussing this thread with someone on my way home from work when I said "...of course, I'm 36 now. When I'm 71 won't I say it was better 35 years ago?"
Banjos, accordions and Ceili bands? Head for the hills!
The music does seem to absorb influences and move on; transforming while still just being itself. No reason to think it will ever stop. I suppose that's what a rich, live, musical tradition does.
Thanks for the responses so far. Even debating whether the questions are valid at all is giving me more to think about. I find it fascinating to see what people have to say about the way traditional music has changed and evolved over the years; be that 2, 50, 100, or 150 of them. Thanks again and I look forward to reading more.
We know what the music sounded like in 1912, because we all saw it in "The Titanic", and the music in 1850 was quite good, as heard in that awful Tom Cruise film, "Far and Away". Sounded much like today, minus the "cajun" strain.
But how can you find it "fascinating" to see what people have to say about the way traditional music has changed and evolved over 150 years? When it's all conjecture? Unless, of course, all you are interested in really is how people "imagine" it has changed. Mr Bliss's posting is as close to the reality of anyone's opinions about it
1) Don't know - I'd be interested to see from your dissertation what you conclude and what sources you use to argue that one.
2) I think from a technical standpoint, skills levels are probably higher these days. And, across the world, there are probably more participants. However, percentages of population involved are invariably lower. Music is less used for dancing, and less people can dance so the music has less of an social function to communities. This is compared to 150 years ago - so I'd have to say things are worse.
Yes it is all conjecture Llig - but there is quite a bit of it written during the development of this music over the years. Sean O'Riada, Brendan Breathnach, Francis O'Neill, to name just a few, have all documented changes and influences over the years.
1. Probably the biggest change is the session setting itself with multiple instrumentalists playing together. From what I've read, prior to 30 or 40 years ago, solo or duets were more common than larger groups such as at a session. Considering all the discussion about "session ettiquette" we see now, I'd think that that would be a bit of an adjustment for a 150 year old ITM player. I know myself that playing with others is quite a different experience than playing solo. It's different now probably, but not alien.
2. I agree with those who say it's better off that the music is alive and kicking rather than a corpse that still whistles a tune once in awhile.
PS: I'm no great musician, so take my opinion with a grain of salt.
#1: The statement is very subjective and leads me to more questions than answers. I think the music has always evolved. Should we separate the music played in sessions with that of the performanced-based bands? I think looking at the tunes played in a session provides more of an apples-vs-apples comparison. But as already mentioned, who can really say what happened 100 years ago in an art-form mostly taught by ear, O'Neill's and other books put aside.
The idea of a player from 150 years ago playing with someone 50 years ago is an interesting thought, but only theories could be made as to whether it would go over flawlessly. I'm not sure there's anyway to prove anything. For that matter, could a current player from Donegal fit in comfortably at a session in Kerry?
#2: I'm a recent convert, so I can only respect the thoughts of those that have been involved for much longer than I to say if ITM is in better shape today. I sure hope so. I love it.
From my own point of view there was very little ITM played prior to the fifties. Not in urban areas anyway. I went to school in Ireland in the 1940s. Although we sang what could be termed as nationalistic type songs I have no recollection of anyone playing a musical instrument. In the town that I came from there was a guy who used to play a few waltzes on a PA. I was in the Boy Scouts and we had a mouth organ band. We learnt two jigs - Larry O'Gaffe and The Young May Moon. Then in the fifties things started picking up and lots of us teenagers bought accordions on HP. None of us could read music, and knew nothing about keys. Any tunes we knew were picked up by ear (wrongly in many cases) Thankfully it was all uphill from there. Incidentally, although our town became well known for the Sunday night ceili and old time dance, it only seemed to be country people who could play ITM. I never came across a fiddle player in my town at that time.
The answer to the second question is a definite 'Yes'
Since this is for a dissertation than I hope you'll forgive me writing my own dissertation on the subject!
150 years ago the regulators were added to the pipes, this would have had an enormous change on the music regarding the development of harmonic accompaniment. It was a change that not all people agreed with.
One of the first academic studies of Irish music was done in the 1900's by a guy called Richard Henebry and in it he gives out about he introduction of the regulators and how the music doesn't need any harmonic accompaniment. Think of how horrified Henebry would be now with the proliferation of guitars, bouzouksi, pianos, accordions, concertinas and so on!
I would put the definition at players from the 1800's would have difficulty playing with people from the 1900's and later.
I guess there are a few things that happened in the last 100 years that players from the past might have trouble adjusting to, the accompaniment being one (although some still have problems adjusting to it, even if it's done well!)
The other thing I think that would be a big adjustment would be the tuning. By all accounts, before piano, concertina, accordion, banjo and other such instruments were introduced many musicians played certain notes either slightly sharper or slightly flatter than the notes now considered 'in tune', some players still do this but in general with the growth of more formal training, particularly classically trained fiddlers, these pitches have been 'corrected', they've also been 'corrected' to fit in with accordion, concertina, banjo, piano etc. So in that respect a musician from 150 years ago might have HUGE difficulties blending with a musician from today because they'd have different concepts of what is in tune!
Is the music in a healthier state? That's very hard to say, if in terms of the amount of people playing it and the general 'technical' ability of players out there, then there is no question that it is in a healthier state.
However it is questionable whether there are as many players playing the music with the same kind of feeling that is noticable from old recordings. A lot of this music is linked to the hardship that the Irish people encountered in the past and there's no doubt that people had it tough around 1850 what with the famine and British rule and everything.
So on average the people who play Irish music nowadays are generally much happier and better off (I know some of you are probably miserable and poor!, but the general healthy financial state in the country may have a very strong effect on how the music is played and the context it is played in.
There certainly weren't any pub sessions in 1850 and there weren't a load of german and american tourists over here looking to hear some nice Irish music, so there was no commercial Irish music really. The music mainly had a social rather than professional function, now it seems to me it is a mix of social and professional.
Overall I think that back in 1850 the average player probably played with a whole deeper depth of emotion than the average player does today, and by emotion I don't mean the Classical Romantic way of expressing emotion, I mean the expression of deep feelings without going over the top!
So in that sense the music may not be in a healthier state, it is probably in a happier state though!
Hope that helps and if it doesn't, well I've wasted my time haven't I?!
1. no, i don't agree. music is universal. i've jammed with players from various genres of music. while fad tunes change and the way they are played change, I don't think this would be debilitating for a truly competent or profound musician. did musicians just not play before the concept of A=440?
2. Yes, I do believe its better. andy@newcastle said its worse because of its dissociation with dance. i think that this too is positive, because now trad is free to develop unhindered.
it wasn't just the concept of A=440 that affects the tuning issue. Even if a player from 1850 tuned their A exactly to A=440 they would have a different concept of what pitches certain notes should sound like in certain tunes, particularly B, Bb, C, Csharp, F and F sharp.
They would almost certainly play these notes flatter or sharper than most people would today and it's not a case of them not being able to adjust the pitch technically, they just probably wouldn't want to adjust the pitch because to them their pitch would be 100% right. There are some players who still play in that old style, but not many. There are a number of books and theses which discuss this issue.
There is no straight answer. 150 years ago is not that long ago in terms of music Padraig O Keeffe was born in 1887 and I hope most of us here are familiar with his music and he was taught by his uncle Cal which probably takes us back and gives us a good idea of what music was like 150 years ago.I still see and hear young musicians playing music as he did and trying to copy his style and learn his tunes I also see the same young musicians playing the music of some of the fancy or modern Trad. musicians we see today . But thanks to the Great work that Comhaltas has done in keeping it pure and keeping it the same not better not worse. So people can explore the changes without the danger of too much change.
"But thanks to the Great work that Comhaltas has done in keeping it pure and keeping it the same not better not worse. So people can explore the changes without the danger of too much change."
so you're saying that change is a threat to music? I guess we better stop playing tunes and start banging rocks together.
LL wondered: "But how can you find it "fascinating" to see what people have to say about the way traditional music has changed and evolved over 150 years? When it's all conjecture?"
If Michael c (or his supervisor) has any sense he has not asked these questions in order to find out about changes in the music over the last 150 years. There would be much better ways of trying to do that.
He has presumably come here to study "us" and to find out something about attitudes and assumptions related to that history that are prevalent amongst players in 2007. Who knows, he might be trying to see how many people think they know things that plainly nobody does.
I think the more modern, recent recorded music meets our more modern, recent standards of excellence. I don't know if that qualifies as being in a "better state" than the past, or that the more modern recent standards of excellence mean that you could plunk down somebody from 50-150 years ago down and have them be able to play along. Certainly those folks could play as fast but would they play the same way?
To explain, I recently downloaded some music from a site that had mp3 files of old 78s records. Some of this music is absolutely terrible to my modern ears. I mean, the piano player just plays the same honky-tonk chords over and over even though the music really needs some different chord changes throughout the piece to my ears. Such noise would never be accepted these days.
"so you're saying that change is a threat to music? I guess we better stop playing tunes and start banging rocks together"
No thats not what im saying what Im saying is Comhaltas has done a great job in keeping the music the same over a long period . But if you want to experiment with music and let it develope in different ways thats great go ahead and do that but if you would like to understand what music was like 150 years ago and what it will be like in 150 years time Comhaltas is probably your best option.
What I'm also saying is that there are young musicians today experimenting with different trends and they are also holding on to the music of years gone by. People are not stupid they can do both.
Banging rocks together rob you could be onto something there .Original musical rocks for sale from the beaches of Ireland, available in any key €30 a set p and p extra.
my problem with Comhaltas in that capacity is that, as far as i knew, ITM is an oral tradition. there are numerous discussions out there that discuss how different styles have been developed, how we shouldn't use dots or abc, how so and so plays a tune this way, and she plays it that way.
while i don't necessarily agree with all of these ideas, i do know that itm's roots lie in oral tradition, and this allows it to develop constantly, unlike classical, which is written and played one way.
while i think the music should be documented, it should be played the same way over a long period of time.
“From 150 until 50 years ago Irish Traditional Music did undergo change and evolution but it is likely that a musician from the beginning of that period would have found little difficulty in playing with a musician from its end. The changes in the music over the last 50 years, however, mean that in some cases, that would not be the case for many musicians over the span of the last 5 decades.”
1) Do you agree with this statement?
From 150 until 50 years ago Irish Traditional Music did undergo change and evolution but it is likely that a musician from the beginning of that period would have found little difficulty in playing with a musician from its end.
--No, there would be great difficulty. One would be well over 100 years old and the other would be just a kid.
Just joking. I agree, there would have been no great difficulty.
I assume you're talking about your average competent player or what we'd now call your average session player. I imagine they'd be fine with each other after some initial adjustment. But I was under the impression that players of old not only "liked" to play solo but jealously guarded their repertoire, and their individual interpretations. And they played at the behest of the dancing master - the guy with the stick. Maybe these are just the itinerant players you read about in crossroads dances in texts like Breathnacht. And did they not tend to be pipers and fiddle players? As flutes were very popular instruments then, maybe there were many more flute players, and whistle players, and lesser fiddlers and pipers in the villages and towns playing in between times of the arrival of the itinerant Big Boys. If you look at old pictures of Irish, or even British rural life, you’ll see that peasants lived outdoors for the most part – mainly because they lived in tiny hovels. So life was lived on the street. I read somewhere that in Ireland, in those days, crossroads dances were an almost daily occurrence. People were generally underemployed and had nothing much else to do (and needless to say impoverished and starving). Much to the consternation of the British authorities. As you all know the population of Ireland around then (1857) was possibly about 6-7 million and falling (after a high point pre-famine of 8 million), soon to erode down to 2.9 million in the 1950’s (in the 26 counties). Anyway, the upshot of all this is that dancing to and playing the music would have been extremely popular, and to most people there would have been no other music.
The changes in the music over the last 50 years, however, mean that in some cases, that would not be the case for many musicians over the span of the last 5 decades.
There have of course been changes, but core of the music is still the same. I don’t think “your average” players would find any difficulty in playing with someone who fell out of a Tardus, or vice versa. Jigs and reels have been played for a very long time, and this has been recorded (written about) since the 16th Century.
2) Do you think that Irish Traditional music is in a better state than it was 50 or 150 years ago?
Referring to what I noted above, wrt the crossroads dances etc, it was at a much lower point 50 years ago than what it was 150 years ago.
All of this is of course purely conjectural and off the top of my head. But that’s what you asked for.
The over ornamentation of irish music ,a direct result of Comhaltas competitions,in which ornamentation is given high marks.
The music has to some extent [even in ireland] has lost its purpose ,which is it is supposed to be dance music,this is a result of many people taking up the music and playing in sessions but never playing for dancing.
The dancers have speeded up the music [search for interviews on RTE radio Peter Browne Interviewing JohnnyOLeary],he said something along the lines you need six fingers on each hand and three hands to play it,and if Denis Murphy was alive today he wouldnt be playing the music at all as it would be too fast.
Saint,Comhaltas have actually changed the music with their competition rules,and high marks for ornamentation,competitors give too much thought to ornamentation,it should be and was an unconcious happening
.now some/many competitors think the more ornamentation the better.
comhaltas have encouraged the music but they have unintentionally changed it.
The original question does raise many more questions, it seems to me.
For instance:
How do you mean, 'playing'? Does this mean playing together in a session context? On stage at a paid gig? Swapping a few tunes in the kitchen? Musicians of 150 years ago may find it difficult to adjust to the modern session context, but may be able to adapt to playing with one other musician (as the question implies) in either of the other two contexts.
Then, there is a big assumption (or two) about the standard of the musicians concerned, how many tunes they may have in their repertoire (actually, come to think about it, would anyone else agree with me that repertoires have increased dramatically in terms of number of tunes over recent years?), normal considerations about compatability of style (do regional variations sometimes make as much difference as temporal ones? and did they do so more in the past?).
Having said all that, it seems to me that if you took one excellent player from 150 years ago and one excellent current player, they would have a ball and make adjustments in their playing to fit and/complement each other's playing, swap tunes, moan about how porter isn't what it used to be etc etc
To answer the second question, you'd have to set down some criteria in order to judge what was a 'better state'.
hello dickens great point but this is just a slight change or developement over a long period of time ,whereas e.g. flook have put dramatic changes in a short time(I'm not saying flook are wrong).....................For e.g. the music that pipers play today probably has had less of a change over the last 150 years comparing to other instruments and Comhatlas are always trying to get more people playing the pipes.
Yes, they'd have a ball, ben, but not many people would have been playing in kitchens. Those who could afford that luxury would have played chamber music or something. My view.
'Yes, they'd have a ball, ben, but not many people would have been playing in kitchens. Those who could afford that luxury would have played chamber music or something. My view'
I wonder on what that assumption is based.
Within one or two miles from where I am writing there are several houses for example where Garret Barry was put up. Where do you think he played while staying at these houses?
I have heard many first hand accounts from older musicians who in their childhood listened to their parents and friends playing music. By the fire, in their kitchens, where else would they play?
Then there's the big entertainment of rural ireland: the house dances, where do you think those took place? And to address that strange pre-occupation with 'performance' here: the musicians at house dances sitting on chairs on tables and settlebeds as makeshift stages, what where they at? Out of touch with the spirit of the music, is that what you really think?
OK, I stand corrected. It was, as you say, an assumption. The assumption is based on another assumption I made earlier, that being that most of life in 1857 was carried on outdoors and dances were at crossroads. I don't mind at all being put right here.
My father's Grandmother, Helen Mitchell, came from County Tyrone and settled in West Philadelphia with her husband, my Great Grandfather.
My father and his older sister both recall being small children and listening to Grandma playing tunes on her concertina in the kitchen of their Philadelphia row house with friends from the neighborhood. My father was born in 1944 so obviously this is the late 1940's, early 1950's where I personally have first hand accounts from relatives of Irish music being played in kitchen sessions in Philly.
Where the heck else are a bunch of Irish immigrants in an urban American setting going to play their music in the 1940's & 1950's but the kitchen? Hard to have a barn dance on 69th Street.
I meant as a serious suggestion, btw, that you'd have to set criteria in order to be able to answer that second question. So, here are some questions you might like to ask yourself ... or write down as part of the dissertation, I suppose ... not that these are necessarily the right questions, but *something* needs to be asked ...
What does 'a better state' mean? What's better? Is it better to have more musicians playing the music? More people around the world listening to it? More people around the world actively participating in it?
Does it only apply to what's happening in Ireland? In other words, is the 'state of Irish music' only relevant to the stateof music in Ireland today? If so, does it matter how many *Irish* people are involved/listening/participating/whatever?
What about the application of the music? If, as some have suggested, the music has, to some extent, lost its direct link with dancing (assuming it ever had that), is this to its benefit? Or to its detriment?
Does politics come into it? Irish music, along with many other forms of music around the world, has been used in a political way over centuries, but the *particular* political use to which it has been put has changed. In my opinion, it has changed a lot. Does that matter?
... oh, and I think I've only just begun to prepare to attempt to scratch the surface here of the areas for possible enquiry arising just from that second question alone ...
'150 years ago is not that long ago in terms of music Padraig O Keeffe was born in 1887 and I hope most of us here are familiar with his music and he was taught by his uncle Cal which probably takes us back and gives us a good idea of what music was like 150 years ago.
That's a very good point regarding Sliabh Luachra music.
'I still see and hear young musicians playing music as he (Padraic O'Keeffe) did",
Please point them out to me, the only player today that I've heard that comes close to O'Keeffe, Clifford, Murphy et al is Caoimhín O'Raghallaigh. Sure there are others that try but they just don't have O'Keeffe's sense of phrasing, pitch, rhythm etc.
' But thanks to the Great work that Comhaltas has done in keeping it pure and keeping it the same not better not worse. So people can explore the changes without the danger of too much change.'
Oh dear, this is completely twisted version of things, whilst Comhaltas has undoubtedly increased the amount of people playing and the general technical standards, before Comhaltas there wasn't the competition culture, there wasn't the obsession with technique and ornamentation and there certainly wasn't one domineering (Sligo) way of playing the music. I love Sligo music but it is only one of many styles, try telling that to some Comhaltas people though.
Before Comhaltas it was mainly about playing music for social function be it work, celebration (dancing), lamentation or entertainment, the music was also played for the entertainment of rich landlords, there are many accounts of pipers and harpists playing for such people.
Dickens says - 'The music has to some extent [even in ireland] has lost its purpose ,which is it is supposed to be dance music'
In a previous thread I demonstrated how the original purpose of much of the music was not necessarily as dance music, slow airs being the main example and some of these airs were adapted for the dance.
Many of the tunes were written for dancers of course but anyone who thinks a musician's only purpose 100 years ago was to play for dancers is deluded. I heard Danny Meehan talking recently about how 60 years ago in his area musicians used to get together in private without any dancers or audience and just play for and with each other. Chances are this is a long standing phenomenon, I can't imagine many musicians would be happy to just be tools for the dancers.
Padraic O'Keeffe and John Doherty used to travel around from place to place playing and their repertoires had a large amount of non-dance pieces, so it is clear that people listened to them.
The demands of the dancers have changed this music considerably, the popularity of accordions has a lot to do with dancers needing instruments with more volume, ceili bands were created just for dancers, the speed of the music has been manipulated to suit the dancers and so on.
FInally the comments regarding kitchens, almost EVERY household in Ireland 150 years ago had some kind of kitchen or lounge, they weren't the sophisticated rooms we have today but they were places where people gathered to play, listen to and dance to music, crossroads were used but they weren't the only venues for the dancing, barns were very popular too (barndances).
Does your dissertation have any geographic constraints?
Something about you post (& certain responses) suggests that the hypothetical musicians, from 150 years ago up to today, might all be in Ireland.
Also, are you including solo music as a part of Irish traditional music; or do you restrict the question to playing within a group of musicians?
But where did Chief O'Neill and his cronies play in Chicago? Kitchens? Pubs? I looked, not many answers. That'd give us some idea of the locale preferred in that area around 110 or so years ago...which is way off-topic from where we started, right? Ah, such is life.
...[Chief O'Neill] He retained strong memories of his childhood in Ireland where he learned to play the flute and listen to the musicians at Crossroad Dances near his home. In later years, he wrote, "traditional Irish music could have survived even the famine if it had not been capriciously and arbitrarily prescribed and suppressed" by the English and some elements of the Church. O'Neill went to great lengths to unearth the music -- and musicians who could play it. Siobhan McKinney, a native-born Irish musician and co-owner with her husband Brendan of Chief O'Neill's Pub in Chicago, explains, "As soon as he heard of pipers coming to America, he would bring them all to Chicago. And immediately he would snap 'em up, put 'em on the police force, and write down their music." Historian Richard Lindberg adds, "He would travel the streetcars of Chicago in civilian clothing, listening to people on the street cars humming and whistling little tunes. He really collected these songs in much the same way an archeologists digs for things in tombs." [...]
I agree that the initial statement is more that a little subjective and open to interpretation as is the notion of music being in a "better state" at any given time. I frequently hear musicians using terms like "state", be that better or worse, when describing how traditional (another term open to debate, maybe) music is played today. I am trying to find out what a range of musicians' views are on these questions. I wasn't thinking of geographical constraints or differentiating between solo and group playing. I'm happy for people to apply or disregard these considerations as they see fit.
Thanks again for all your contributions. I look forward to reading on.
Here are some free form thoughts:
To some degree, I think that musicians from all ages could play some basic tunes together, I know songs and tunes that are decades if not centuries old. I have seen dance instruction books from the 1700s with sheet music in them that describe dances I have danced, and tunes like Haste to the Wedding that were transcribed in a form similar to how I hear them played today. There might be some microtonal or tuning differences, but not a lot. The 1800s had a lot of new instruments entering the musical world, notably accordions and free reed instruments, and also banjos. But there are also new instruments, or old instruments played in new ways, entering the music today. There is always something new coming in, but there is much that stays the same.
I would not say that musicians today are more skilled, play faster, or are more accomplished than in the past. More apt to be schooled formally in music perhaps, but not more skilled. There were less distractions in the old days, no TV or movies, so folks had a lot more incentive to play music and time and opportunities to hone their skills. I remember when I was young that many houses had pianos in them, and people gathered around them to sing. And I can't believe that in the past, there were not young adventurous musicians that enjoyed ripping through tunes at a lightning pace when they were not playing for the dancers.
I think people of every age think that they have it right, do it best, are more 'advanced' than their ancestors. But the older I get, the more I see that things are different, but not necessarily better. And fortunately much that is valuable endures.
I am pleased to see that all the recorded media sources and other entertainments that distract us today have not killed the folk music tradition. We still gather, with our various instruments and abilities, to share what we love.
Michael C, I strongly recommend that you have a look at Reg Hall's paper delivered to the 1996 Crossroads Conference (if you haven't already done so) - 'Heydays are short lived: change in music-making practice in rural Ireland, 1850-1950'.
There were less distractions like TV in the old days, to be sure, but more distractions like work, survival, etc., no? There's probably more leisure time today than ever before, and isn't music basically a leisure-time activity?
I've got to believe there's more virtuosity now than ever before. Just as each generation of athlete sets their records on the backs of their forefathers, musicians of each generation learn what's possible from the previous generation and then try to surpass it, at least on a technical level. Technology has allowed all of us to hear the best and gives us something to strive for, whereas generations ago, musicians' listening experience was much more limited.
That's just virtuosity, of course, which perhaps has little or nothing to do with what's actually good. And you could argue that the technology, though teaching us excellence in technique, also has the effect of blanding out all the interesting differences, etc.
So I'm not claiming good state or bad -- just disagreeing with part of Al's point.
frisbee i meet a young man recently about 13/14 johnny learys grand son lashing out tunes he is just one oh and he follows Man U.
not every Comhaltas branch is the same
cuchulain54, Good points, but here are some counterpoints: Song and music were more a part of the work place in times gone by--not just a leisure activity. Sea chanteys sung while stamping around the capstan, for example, and on land, work songs for a wide range of activities. I have even seen pictures of a fortunate musician perched on that capstan, playing for the seamen that get to do the work. And I don't buy the increase in virtuosity thing, newer styles perhaps, but not an increase in skills.
Frisbee, you can't seriously claim to have "demonstrated" your argument. Apart from anything, its main citation was Wikipedia, which is an offence punishable by flaying around here! Anyway, the "demonstration" (and a classic example of how threads here never keep to the point) lurk on this here, for anyone interested: http://www.thesession.org/discussions/display/14906
Would it be a fair comment to agree that (if I might use the f-word) folk music has one thing in common: that it provided a use to the people and communities that engaged in it. And the degree to which it is used, and the number of communities that use it, is dropping. No? Didn't think so.
i only quoted wikipedia for one thing and cross checked it with other sites. My general argument was generated through knowledge I've gained in recent years from so many sources that it would be pointless to list them all, so don't go twisting my argument around just because I took a quotation from wikipedia!
If you can't believe that the origins of this music are not in music for dancing then I suggest you do some research into the relationship between slow airs and set dances, there is plenty of evidence to show that many set dances were originally songs or slow airs. The same is true of many jigs and reels. There is also a tradition of 'pieces' liike 'the foxhunt' and 'the battle of aughrim' which were showpieces for pipers rather than music for dancing.
A lot of my knowledge of this comes from talking to older musicians rather than from books or internet sites, but there are a whole load of books and theses which discuss issues like this.
frisbee
nothing wrong with quoting wik. I 'll give you a fact If you want it . all I can ever do is speak for myself I'm a republician and a nationalist and a nice man also (alot of people don't know this is possible). I grew up fighting and learning how to get better at fighting on a daily basis(as a sport and a living ) ( I'm not talking about fighting for a cause)I Fnished with all that but I still wanted to be irish so I started playing a simple drum"an Irish drum " At sport I fought i n front of three thousand people but the greatest buzz or feeling for life was when last Sunday night Seamus Tansey asked me to play with him at a gig(thank you Irish music for this feeling) in front of 40 people..............so my point is frisbee keep asking the questions you ask because you do it in a decent way .......and I can see the passion and the feeling you have for the tunes even on this site .....drive on and long live the trad. in what ever form
Michael C if you leave the questions so broad then I can only answer the 1st question thusly;
Yes
~ There are Irish traditional musicians from 150 years ago who would have little difficulty playing with Irish traditional musicians from 50 years ago.
Also ~ there would be Irish traditional musicians from 150 years ago who would have great difficulty playing with other Irish traditional musicians from that same time . . . as well as Irish traditional musicians from fifty years ago who would have not great but some difficulty in playing with other musicians from the same period. Irish traditional musicians in the vicinity of Chicago between the 1870's & about 1912 would have no difficulty whatsoever playing with other Irish traditional musicians anywhere in the world anytime between 1857 & about 1973.
The answer to question(s) #2;
Irish traditional music is in a better state than it was 150 years ago because I did not listen to it at that time.
Irish traditional music is in the same state now as it was fifty years ago. In my humble opinion, had I been living in Chicago at the time, Irish traditional music was in its best state (Illinois) from the late 19th c. - early 20th c.
Good luck with the dissertation.
Looking for opinions
Looking for opinions
Hello,
I'm on the scrounge here. I hope I'll be forgiven for using this forum like this.
As part of a dissertation on Irish traditional music I am trying to find out what various musicians’ attitudes are to changes which have affected this music over the years. I am asking people to give brief answers to the two questions below. The answers can be in either English or Irish. I don’t want people to spend too much of their time on them; a few lines would do. I’ll refer to the answers I get in the conclusions section of the dissertation.
If you are willing to write a couple of lines please email them to me (iflute@googlemail.com) or post them as comment on this post.
Many thanks,
Michael.
Here are the questions:
English version
“From 150 until 50 years ago Irish Traditional Music did undergo change and evolution but it is likely that a musician from the beginning of that period would have found little difficulty in playing with a musician from its end. The changes in the music over the last 50 years, however, mean that in some cases, that would not be the case for many musicians over the span of the last 5 decades.”
1) Do you agree with this statement?
2) Do you think that Irish Traditional music is in a better state than it was 50 or 150 years ago?
Leagan Gaeilge
“Ó Chéad bliain go leith ó shin go dtí caoga bliain ó shin, d’imir athruithe agus forbairt tionchar ar Cheol Traidisiúnta na hÉireann ach is dócha nach mbeadh deacrachtaí ró-mhór ag ceoltóirí ó thús na tréimhse sin ag iarraidh ceol a sheinm le ceoltóirí óna deireadh. De thoradh na n-athruithe a tharla maidir leis an cheol le caoga bliain anuas, áfach, ní bheadh sin fíor idir ceoltóirí ó thús agus ó dheireadh na linne seo a chuaigh thart”.
1) An aontaíonn tú leis an ráiteas seo thuas?
2) An gcreideann tú go bhfuil dóigh níos fearr ar Cheol Traidisiúnta na hÉireann inniu ná a bhíodh caoga bliain nó céad bliain is caoga ó shin?
# Posted on September 4th 2007 by michael c
Re: Looking for opinions
(I have also put these questions in an entry on my site http://irishflute.podbean.com/ where answers could be posted as comments if that would be easier. Thanks again.)
# Posted on September 4th 2007 by michael c
Re: Looking for opinions
I'm shocked this thread doesn't have a million posts yet. Hang in there Michael, I'm sure it will eventually. Good on you too, that's some serious academia.
Here's my two cents: Very few of us were alive and actively playing tunes fifty years ago. Any of our responses will be colored by that fact. None of us can really say it was better or worse, because that's subjective. None of us can really say that musicians from then couldn't play now, or with us now. There's no possible way to verify or validate anyone's answers.
Which is why it's an opinion question, I suppose. (DUH!)
So then, here goes:
1. No, I don't agree. How can the score Chief O'Neill wrote down 100+ years ago be any different from the notes I am playing for the exact same tune? It's the same. The only difference would be that instead of a Vaudeville piano player mucking up Chief O'Neill's sessions, we have guitarists and bodhran players mucking up ours. No no no, I'm just teasing. What's a session.org post without a good backer-slag in it? No offense fellas, commence with the fiddler jokes.
2. I think it's better all the time! Every single moment it's a 'live' tradition means it's better than being a dead tradition.
# Posted on September 4th 2007 by SWFL Fiddler
Re: Looking for opinions
On the first question, a guarded yes, especially as you qualified it with the words "in some cases". For instance what I call the Gerry O'Connor "cajun" style, there was none of that when I first started. That might throw a few from the olden days, until they adjusted.
The answer to the second question, I would say yes. A strange number of influences, The Dubliners, McPeake's, Clancy's, Horslips, The Pogues, Riverdance, and even the Corrs helped to popularise the music, which provided more players on a global basis. The fact that every "Hollywood" movie, and loads of TV series in Britain and elsewhere, have Irish music scores, adds to the popularity, and breeds more converts and players.
Sixty years ago Irish music in Ireland was ridiculed as music for those who belonged to the past, still clinging to a romantic, old fashioned, out dated notion of Ireland as the land of saints and scholars.
Today, Irish music is trendy.
I hope this was short enough.
# Posted on September 4th 2007 by bodhran bliss
Re: Looking for opinions
he didn't ask whether the music was better, he asked if it was in a better state.
1. I disagree that it's likely that a musician from 150 years ago would be comfortable playing with a musician from 50 years ago, or vice versa. The plain fact is that we really haven't a clue what the music sounded like 150 years ago. There are transcripts, but as we know, they, at best, only contain a very very small proportion of the music. I don't understand where you get your assumption. You never heard of chinese whispers?
Plus: We have many recordings from 50 years ago that are studied in depth by many many modern players.
2. Yes, It has to be. For no other reason than the sheer amount of people across the world playing it now. (Unless of course you take the obtuse stance that all these people water it down. Suer, a lot of them do water it down, maybe even most of them, but that still leaves a heck of a lot of people playing it well)
# Posted on September 4th 2007 by ...
Re: Looking for opinions
I would guess, based on my knowledge of musicians in general, that 150 years ago there were musicians in Ireland arguing about the influx of impure influences on their music. Just as 100 years ago, people were very concerned about those damned banjo players from American minstrel shows changing the sound of Irish music. Just like when Ceili bands were considered a destructive element to Irish music in the 1920's. Just like when Sean O'Raida claimed accordions were too clumsy for the subtle melodies of Irish music in the 1960's. And so on, and so on. Somehow, however, these marvelous melodies continue to survive through immigration and emmigration, and through new instruments and modern recording productions values. So I would say yes - a fiddle player from 1880 could very well have a nice time playing a few tunes with folks from 2007.
"A better state" is a relative term. Certainly no one can deny it's global attraction and it's use and abuse in current western pop medias as Bliss pointed out. It seems to be healthy, wealthy and steadily growing. I'm sure there are those that will always argue that it was better "back when..." But I think folks 150 years ago were probably saying the same thing.
# Posted on September 4th 2007 by Jusa Nutter Eejit
Re: Looking for opinions
?
How can we begin to even imagine what it sounded like 150 years ago (that's 1850, right?). Last time I checked Claddagh were all out of Now 1850. The only thing you could say is that the oldest musicians recorded in the early 1900s MIGHT have sounded like the ones in the 1850s.
What kind of 'state' was trad music in in the 1850s? You're hardly comparing like with like here. 100 years would be acceptable here, but 150...in many ways there is so much difference between the music of 1850 and 2000 that you're hardly talking about the same thing at all.
I'd rethink the questions.
# Posted on September 4th 2007 by continuo
Re: Looking for opinions
I was discussing this thread with someone on my way home from work when I said "...of course, I'm 36 now. When I'm 71 won't I say it was better 35 years ago?"
Banjos, accordions and Ceili bands? Head for the hills!
The music does seem to absorb influences and move on; transforming while still just being itself. No reason to think it will ever stop. I suppose that's what a rich, live, musical tradition does.
# Posted on September 4th 2007 by SWFL Fiddler
Re: Looking for opinions
Thanks for the responses so far. Even debating whether the questions are valid at all is giving me more to think about. I find it fascinating to see what people have to say about the way traditional music has changed and evolved over the years; be that 2, 50, 100, or 150 of them. Thanks again and I look forward to reading more.
# Posted on September 4th 2007 by michael c
Re: Looking for opinions
We know what the music sounded like in 1912, because we all saw it in "The Titanic", and the music in 1850 was quite good, as heard in that awful Tom Cruise film, "Far and Away". Sounded much like today, minus the "cajun" strain.
# Posted on September 4th 2007 by bodhran bliss
Re: Looking for opinions
Yeah, but the music in that god awful tom cruise film was the music as it was in america. It probably sounded very different in Ireland
# Posted on September 4th 2007 by ...
Re: Looking for opinions
But how can you find it "fascinating" to see what people have to say about the way traditional music has changed and evolved over 150 years? When it's all conjecture? Unless, of course, all you are interested in really is how people "imagine" it has changed. Mr Bliss's posting is as close to the reality of anyone's opinions about it
# Posted on September 4th 2007 by ...
Re: Looking for opinions
1) Don't know - I'd be interested to see from your dissertation what you conclude and what sources you use to argue that one.
2) I think from a technical standpoint, skills levels are probably higher these days. And, across the world, there are probably more participants. However, percentages of population involved are invariably lower. Music is less used for dancing, and less people can dance so the music has less of an social function to communities. This is compared to 150 years ago - so I'd have to say things are worse.
# Posted on September 4th 2007 by Andy V
Re: Looking for opinions
Yes it is all conjecture Llig - but there is quite a bit of it written during the development of this music over the years. Sean O'Riada, Brendan Breathnach, Francis O'Neill, to name just a few, have all documented changes and influences over the years.
# Posted on September 4th 2007 by Jusa Nutter Eejit
Re: Looking for opinions
i'll answer the questions after some thought, but just a little widget here. the statement's a little wordy.
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by rob_handel
Re: Looking for opinions
1. Probably the biggest change is the session setting itself with multiple instrumentalists playing together. From what I've read, prior to 30 or 40 years ago, solo or duets were more common than larger groups such as at a session. Considering all the discussion about "session ettiquette" we see now, I'd think that that would be a bit of an adjustment for a 150 year old ITM player. I know myself that playing with others is quite a different experience than playing solo. It's different now probably, but not alien.
2. I agree with those who say it's better off that the music is alive and kicking rather than a corpse that still whistles a tune once in awhile.
PS: I'm no great musician, so take my opinion with a grain of salt.
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by PatrickJWK
Re: Looking for opinions
#1: The statement is very subjective and leads me to more questions than answers. I think the music has always evolved. Should we separate the music played in sessions with that of the performanced-based bands? I think looking at the tunes played in a session provides more of an apples-vs-apples comparison. But as already mentioned, who can really say what happened 100 years ago in an art-form mostly taught by ear, O'Neill's and other books put aside.
The idea of a player from 150 years ago playing with someone 50 years ago is an interesting thought, but only theories could be made as to whether it would go over flawlessly. I'm not sure there's anyway to prove anything. For that matter, could a current player from Donegal fit in comfortably at a session in Kerry?
#2: I'm a recent convert, so I can only respect the thoughts of those that have been involved for much longer than I to say if ITM is in better shape today. I sure hope so. I love it.
Good luck on your paper.
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by nofrets
Re: Looking for opinions
From my own point of view there was very little ITM played prior to the fifties. Not in urban areas anyway. I went to school in Ireland in the 1940s. Although we sang what could be termed as nationalistic type songs I have no recollection of anyone playing a musical instrument. In the town that I came from there was a guy who used to play a few waltzes on a PA. I was in the Boy Scouts and we had a mouth organ band. We learnt two jigs - Larry O'Gaffe and The Young May Moon. Then in the fifties things started picking up and lots of us teenagers bought accordions on HP. None of us could read music, and knew nothing about keys. Any tunes we knew were picked up by ear (wrongly in many cases) Thankfully it was all uphill from there. Incidentally, although our town became well known for the Sunday night ceili and old time dance, it only seemed to be country people who could play ITM. I never came across a fiddle player in my town at that time.
The answer to the second question is a definite 'Yes'
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by Free Reed
Re: Looking for opinions
Hmph. I've played this music for 157 years now, and the only difference I see is that all my old music mates are dead....
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by Will Harmon
Re: Looking for opinions
And that's only the Rock stars
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by bodhran bliss
Re: Looking for opinions
Since this is for a dissertation than I hope you'll forgive me writing my own dissertation on the subject!
150 years ago the regulators were added to the pipes, this would have had an enormous change on the music regarding the development of harmonic accompaniment. It was a change that not all people agreed with.
One of the first academic studies of Irish music was done in the 1900's by a guy called Richard Henebry and in it he gives out about he introduction of the regulators and how the music doesn't need any harmonic accompaniment. Think of how horrified Henebry would be now with the proliferation of guitars, bouzouksi, pianos, accordions, concertinas and so on!
I would put the definition at players from the 1800's would have difficulty playing with people from the 1900's and later.
I guess there are a few things that happened in the last 100 years that players from the past might have trouble adjusting to, the accompaniment being one (although some still have problems adjusting to it, even if it's done well!)
The other thing I think that would be a big adjustment would be the tuning. By all accounts, before piano, concertina, accordion, banjo and other such instruments were introduced many musicians played certain notes either slightly sharper or slightly flatter than the notes now considered 'in tune', some players still do this but in general with the growth of more formal training, particularly classically trained fiddlers, these pitches have been 'corrected', they've also been 'corrected' to fit in with accordion, concertina, banjo, piano etc. So in that respect a musician from 150 years ago might have HUGE difficulties blending with a musician from today because they'd have different concepts of what is in tune!
Is the music in a healthier state? That's very hard to say, if in terms of the amount of people playing it and the general 'technical' ability of players out there, then there is no question that it is in a healthier state.
However it is questionable whether there are as many players playing the music with the same kind of feeling that is noticable from old recordings. A lot of this music is linked to the hardship that the Irish people encountered in the past and there's no doubt that people had it tough around 1850 what with the famine and British rule and everything.
So on average the people who play Irish music nowadays are generally much happier and better off (I know some of you are probably miserable and poor!, but the general healthy financial state in the country may have a very strong effect on how the music is played and the context it is played in.
There certainly weren't any pub sessions in 1850 and there weren't a load of german and american tourists over here looking to hear some nice Irish music, so there was no commercial Irish music really. The music mainly had a social rather than professional function, now it seems to me it is a mix of social and professional.
Overall I think that back in 1850 the average player probably played with a whole deeper depth of emotion than the average player does today, and by emotion I don't mean the Classical Romantic way of expressing emotion, I mean the expression of deep feelings without going over the top!
So in that sense the music may not be in a healthier state, it is probably in a happier state though!
Hope that helps and if it doesn't, well I've wasted my time haven't I?!
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by The Tune Composer
Re: Looking for opinions
before anyone gets on my case, I know there's spelling errors there, but really, so what!
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by The Tune Composer
Re: Looking for opinions
for my reply:
1. no, i don't agree. music is universal. i've jammed with players from various genres of music. while fad tunes change and the way they are played change, I don't think this would be debilitating for a truly competent or profound musician. did musicians just not play before the concept of A=440?
2. Yes, I do believe its better. andy@newcastle said its worse because of its dissociation with dance. i think that this too is positive, because now trad is free to develop unhindered.
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by rob_handel
Re: Looking for opinions
it wasn't just the concept of A=440 that affects the tuning issue. Even if a player from 1850 tuned their A exactly to A=440 they would have a different concept of what pitches certain notes should sound like in certain tunes, particularly B, Bb, C, Csharp, F and F sharp.
They would almost certainly play these notes flatter or sharper than most people would today and it's not a case of them not being able to adjust the pitch technically, they just probably wouldn't want to adjust the pitch because to them their pitch would be 100% right. There are some players who still play in that old style, but not many. There are a number of books and theses which discuss this issue.
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by The Tune Composer
Re: Looking for opinions
There is no straight answer. 150 years ago is not that long ago in terms of music Padraig O Keeffe was born in 1887 and I hope most of us here are familiar with his music and he was taught by his uncle Cal which probably takes us back and gives us a good idea of what music was like 150 years ago.I still see and hear young musicians playing music as he did and trying to copy his style and learn his tunes I also see the same young musicians playing the music of some of the fancy or modern Trad. musicians we see today . But thanks to the Great work that Comhaltas has done in keeping it pure and keeping it the same not better not worse. So people can explore the changes without the danger of too much change.
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by Saint
Re: Looking for opinions
"But thanks to the Great work that Comhaltas has done in keeping it pure and keeping it the same not better not worse. So people can explore the changes without the danger of too much change."
so you're saying that change is a threat to music? I guess we better stop playing tunes and start banging rocks together.
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by rob_handel
Re: Looking for opinions
LL wondered: "But how can you find it "fascinating" to see what people have to say about the way traditional music has changed and evolved over 150 years? When it's all conjecture?"
If Michael c (or his supervisor) has any sense he has not asked these questions in order to find out about changes in the music over the last 150 years. There would be much better ways of trying to do that.
He has presumably come here to study "us" and to find out something about attitudes and assumptions related to that history that are prevalent amongst players in 2007. Who knows, he might be trying to see how many people think they know things that plainly nobody does.
Me, I know next to nothing.
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by Alex Wilding
Re: Looking for opinions
I think the more modern, recent recorded music meets our more modern, recent standards of excellence. I don't know if that qualifies as being in a "better state" than the past, or that the more modern recent standards of excellence mean that you could plunk down somebody from 50-150 years ago down and have them be able to play along. Certainly those folks could play as fast but would they play the same way?
To explain, I recently downloaded some music from a site that had mp3 files of old 78s records. Some of this music is absolutely terrible to my modern ears. I mean, the piano player just plays the same honky-tonk chords over and over even though the music really needs some different chord changes throughout the piece to my ears. Such noise would never be accepted these days.
Does that make anything "better" or "worse"?
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by sbhikes
Re: Looking for opinions
"so you're saying that change is a threat to music? I guess we better stop playing tunes and start banging rocks together"
No thats not what im saying what Im saying is Comhaltas has done a great job in keeping the music the same over a long period . But if you want to experiment with music and let it develope in different ways thats great go ahead and do that but if you would like to understand what music was like 150 years ago and what it will be like in 150 years time Comhaltas is probably your best option.
What I'm also saying is that there are young musicians today experimenting with different trends and they are also holding on to the music of years gone by. People are not stupid they can do both.
back to you rob
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by Saint
Re: Looking for opinions
Banging rocks together rob you could be onto something there .Original musical rocks for sale from the beaches of Ireland, available in any key €30 a set p and p extra.
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by Saint
Re: Looking for opinions
my problem with Comhaltas in that capacity is that, as far as i knew, ITM is an oral tradition. there are numerous discussions out there that discuss how different styles have been developed, how we shouldn't use dots or abc, how so and so plays a tune this way, and she plays it that way.
while i don't necessarily agree with all of these ideas, i do know that itm's roots lie in oral tradition, and this allows it to develop constantly, unlike classical, which is written and played one way.
while i think the music should be documented, it should be played the same way over a long period of time.
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by rob_handel
Re: Looking for opinions
do you ship to the US, Saint? Also, from which beach do you harvest your rocks? Are any animals hurt in the process?
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by rob_handel
Re: Looking for opinions
should not, that should say
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by rob_handel
Re: Looking for opinions
I could sell you some *lovely* rocks from the Forest of Dean, Rob.
... and, for a nominal additional fee, I could promise to hurt some animals in the process, if that's what you require ...
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by ethical blend
Re: Looking for opinions
they are only a stones throw away
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by Saint
Re: Looking for opinions
Saint, haven't you already got a nice line going in those shells with the image of the virgin on them?
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by ethical blend
Re: Looking for opinions
Just to add to what has been said already:
“From 150 until 50 years ago Irish Traditional Music did undergo change and evolution but it is likely that a musician from the beginning of that period would have found little difficulty in playing with a musician from its end. The changes in the music over the last 50 years, however, mean that in some cases, that would not be the case for many musicians over the span of the last 5 decades.”
1) Do you agree with this statement?
From 150 until 50 years ago Irish Traditional Music did undergo change and evolution but it is likely that a musician from the beginning of that period would have found little difficulty in playing with a musician from its end.
--No, there would be great difficulty. One would be well over 100 years old and the other would be just a kid.
Just joking. I agree, there would have been no great difficulty.
I assume you're talking about your average competent player or what we'd now call your average session player. I imagine they'd be fine with each other after some initial adjustment. But I was under the impression that players of old not only "liked" to play solo but jealously guarded their repertoire, and their individual interpretations. And they played at the behest of the dancing master - the guy with the stick. Maybe these are just the itinerant players you read about in crossroads dances in texts like Breathnacht. And did they not tend to be pipers and fiddle players? As flutes were very popular instruments then, maybe there were many more flute players, and whistle players, and lesser fiddlers and pipers in the villages and towns playing in between times of the arrival of the itinerant Big Boys. If you look at old pictures of Irish, or even British rural life, you’ll see that peasants lived outdoors for the most part – mainly because they lived in tiny hovels. So life was lived on the street. I read somewhere that in Ireland, in those days, crossroads dances were an almost daily occurrence. People were generally underemployed and had nothing much else to do (and needless to say impoverished and starving). Much to the consternation of the British authorities. As you all know the population of Ireland around then (1857) was possibly about 6-7 million and falling (after a high point pre-famine of 8 million), soon to erode down to 2.9 million in the 1950’s (in the 26 counties). Anyway, the upshot of all this is that dancing to and playing the music would have been extremely popular, and to most people there would have been no other music.
The changes in the music over the last 50 years, however, mean that in some cases, that would not be the case for many musicians over the span of the last 5 decades.
There have of course been changes, but core of the music is still the same. I don’t think “your average” players would find any difficulty in playing with someone who fell out of a Tardus, or vice versa. Jigs and reels have been played for a very long time, and this has been recorded (written about) since the 16th Century.
2) Do you think that Irish Traditional music is in a better state than it was 50 or 150 years ago?
Referring to what I noted above, wrt the crossroads dances etc, it was at a much lower point 50 years ago than what it was 150 years ago.
All of this is of course purely conjectural and off the top of my head. But that’s what you asked for.
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by Rudall the time
Re: Looking for opinions
The over ornamentation of irish music ,a direct result of Comhaltas competitions,in which ornamentation is given high marks.
The music has to some extent [even in ireland] has lost its purpose ,which is it is supposed to be dance music,this is a result of many people taking up the music and playing in sessions but never playing for dancing.
The dancers have speeded up the music [search for interviews on RTE radio Peter Browne Interviewing JohnnyOLeary],he said something along the lines you need six fingers on each hand and three hands to play it,and if Denis Murphy was alive today he wouldnt be playing the music at all as it would be too fast.
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by Dick Miles
Re: Looking for opinions
Saint,Comhaltas have actually changed the music with their competition rules,and high marks for ornamentation,competitors give too much thought to ornamentation,it should be and was an unconcious happening
.now some/many competitors think the more ornamentation the better.
comhaltas have encouraged the music but they have unintentionally changed it.
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by Dick Miles
Re: Looking for opinions
The original question does raise many more questions, it seems to me.
For instance:
How do you mean, 'playing'? Does this mean playing together in a session context? On stage at a paid gig? Swapping a few tunes in the kitchen? Musicians of 150 years ago may find it difficult to adjust to the modern session context, but may be able to adapt to playing with one other musician (as the question implies) in either of the other two contexts.
Then, there is a big assumption (or two) about the standard of the musicians concerned, how many tunes they may have in their repertoire (actually, come to think about it, would anyone else agree with me that repertoires have increased dramatically in terms of number of tunes over recent years?), normal considerations about compatability of style (do regional variations sometimes make as much difference as temporal ones? and did they do so more in the past?).
Having said all that, it seems to me that if you took one excellent player from 150 years ago and one excellent current player, they would have a ball and make adjustments in their playing to fit and/complement each other's playing, swap tunes, moan about how porter isn't what it used to be etc etc
To answer the second question, you'd have to set down some criteria in order to judge what was a 'better state'.
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by ethical blend
Re: Looking for opinions
hello dickens great point but this is just a slight change or developement over a long period of time ,whereas e.g. flook have put dramatic changes in a short time(I'm not saying flook are wrong).....................For e.g. the music that pipers play today probably has had less of a change over the last 150 years comparing to other instruments and Comhatlas are always trying to get more people playing the pipes.
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by Saint
Re: Looking for opinions
Just a thought ...........the bodhran has developed and changed more than anything over the last 50 years....................for the better I hope
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by Saint
Re: Looking for opinions
Yes, they'd have a ball, ben, but not many people would have been playing in kitchens. Those who could afford that luxury would have played chamber music or something. My view.
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by Rudall the time
Re: Looking for opinions
'Yes, they'd have a ball, ben, but not many people would have been playing in kitchens. Those who could afford that luxury would have played chamber music or something. My view'
I wonder on what that assumption is based.
Within one or two miles from where I am writing there are several houses for example where Garret Barry was put up. Where do you think he played while staying at these houses?
I have heard many first hand accounts from older musicians who in their childhood listened to their parents and friends playing music. By the fire, in their kitchens, where else would they play?
Then there's the big entertainment of rural ireland: the house dances, where do you think those took place? And to address that strange pre-occupation with 'performance' here: the musicians at house dances sitting on chairs on tables and settlebeds as makeshift stages, what where they at? Out of touch with the spirit of the music, is that what you really think?
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by Prof. Prlwytzkofski
Re: Looking for opinions
OK, I stand corrected. It was, as you say, an assumption. The assumption is based on another assumption I made earlier, that being that most of life in 1857 was carried on outdoors and dances were at crossroads. I don't mind at all being put right here.
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by Rudall the time
Re: Looking for opinions
My father's Grandmother, Helen Mitchell, came from County Tyrone and settled in West Philadelphia with her husband, my Great Grandfather.
My father and his older sister both recall being small children and listening to Grandma playing tunes on her concertina in the kitchen of their Philadelphia row house with friends from the neighborhood. My father was born in 1944 so obviously this is the late 1940's, early 1950's where I personally have first hand accounts from relatives of Irish music being played in kitchen sessions in Philly.
Where the heck else are a bunch of Irish immigrants in an urban American setting going to play their music in the 1940's & 1950's but the kitchen? Hard to have a barn dance on 69th Street.
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by SWFL Fiddler
Re: Looking for opinions
Oops, sorry to pile on KML, we cross-posted.
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by SWFL Fiddler
Re: Looking for opinions
No worries, but I meant 150 years ago. But I'm prob still wrong anyway.
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by Rudall the time
Re: Looking for opinions
I meant as a serious suggestion, btw, that you'd have to set criteria in order to be able to answer that second question. So, here are some questions you might like to ask yourself ... or write down as part of the dissertation, I suppose ... not that these are necessarily the right questions, but *something* needs to be asked ...
What does 'a better state' mean? What's better? Is it better to have more musicians playing the music? More people around the world listening to it? More people around the world actively participating in it?
Does it only apply to what's happening in Ireland? In other words, is the 'state of Irish music' only relevant to the stateof music in Ireland today? If so, does it matter how many *Irish* people are involved/listening/participating/whatever?
What about the application of the music? If, as some have suggested, the music has, to some extent, lost its direct link with dancing (assuming it ever had that), is this to its benefit? Or to its detriment?
Does politics come into it? Irish music, along with many other forms of music around the world, has been used in a political way over centuries, but the *particular* political use to which it has been put has changed. In my opinion, it has changed a lot. Does that matter?
... oh, and I think I've only just begun to prepare to attempt to scratch the surface here of the areas for possible enquiry arising just from that second question alone ...
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by ethical blend
Re: Looking for opinions
Then there's the most obvious question of all arising from that second question: What is 'Irish Traditional Music'?
... do you have to keep the dissertation to below 100,000 words?
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by ethical blend
Re: Looking for opinions
Saint says
'150 years ago is not that long ago in terms of music Padraig O Keeffe was born in 1887 and I hope most of us here are familiar with his music and he was taught by his uncle Cal which probably takes us back and gives us a good idea of what music was like 150 years ago.
That's a very good point regarding Sliabh Luachra music.
'I still see and hear young musicians playing music as he (Padraic O'Keeffe) did",
Please point them out to me, the only player today that I've heard that comes close to O'Keeffe, Clifford, Murphy et al is Caoimhín O'Raghallaigh. Sure there are others that try but they just don't have O'Keeffe's sense of phrasing, pitch, rhythm etc.
' But thanks to the Great work that Comhaltas has done in keeping it pure and keeping it the same not better not worse. So people can explore the changes without the danger of too much change.'
Oh dear, this is completely twisted version of things, whilst Comhaltas has undoubtedly increased the amount of people playing and the general technical standards, before Comhaltas there wasn't the competition culture, there wasn't the obsession with technique and ornamentation and there certainly wasn't one domineering (Sligo) way of playing the music. I love Sligo music but it is only one of many styles, try telling that to some Comhaltas people though.
Before Comhaltas it was mainly about playing music for social function be it work, celebration (dancing), lamentation or entertainment, the music was also played for the entertainment of rich landlords, there are many accounts of pipers and harpists playing for such people.
Dickens says - 'The music has to some extent [even in ireland] has lost its purpose ,which is it is supposed to be dance music'
In a previous thread I demonstrated how the original purpose of much of the music was not necessarily as dance music, slow airs being the main example and some of these airs were adapted for the dance.
Many of the tunes were written for dancers of course but anyone who thinks a musician's only purpose 100 years ago was to play for dancers is deluded. I heard Danny Meehan talking recently about how 60 years ago in his area musicians used to get together in private without any dancers or audience and just play for and with each other. Chances are this is a long standing phenomenon, I can't imagine many musicians would be happy to just be tools for the dancers.
Padraic O'Keeffe and John Doherty used to travel around from place to place playing and their repertoires had a large amount of non-dance pieces, so it is clear that people listened to them.
The demands of the dancers have changed this music considerably, the popularity of accordions has a lot to do with dancers needing instruments with more volume, ceili bands were created just for dancers, the speed of the music has been manipulated to suit the dancers and so on.
FInally the comments regarding kitchens, almost EVERY household in Ireland 150 years ago had some kind of kitchen or lounge, they weren't the sophisticated rooms we have today but they were places where people gathered to play, listen to and dance to music, crossroads were used but they weren't the only venues for the dancing, barns were very popular too (barndances).
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by The Tune Composer
Re: Looking for opinions
It might well be "better" now, as *we* observe it
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by Rudall the time
Re: Looking for opinions
Does your dissertation have any geographic constraints?
Something about you post (& certain responses) suggests that the hypothetical musicians, from 150 years ago up to today, might all be in Ireland.
Also, are you including solo music as a part of Irish traditional music; or do you restrict the question to playing within a group of musicians?
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by Ben Steen
Re: Looking for opinions
But where did Chief O'Neill and his cronies play in Chicago? Kitchens? Pubs? I looked, not many answers. That'd give us some idea of the locale preferred in that area around 110 or so years ago...which is way off-topic from where we started, right? Ah, such is life.
(From: http://www.wttw.com/main.taf?p=1,7,1,1,34)
...[Chief O'Neill] He retained strong memories of his childhood in Ireland where he learned to play the flute and listen to the musicians at Crossroad Dances near his home. In later years, he wrote, "traditional Irish music could have survived even the famine if it had not been capriciously and arbitrarily prescribed and suppressed" by the English and some elements of the Church. O'Neill went to great lengths to unearth the music -- and musicians who could play it. Siobhan McKinney, a native-born Irish musician and co-owner with her husband Brendan of Chief O'Neill's Pub in Chicago, explains, "As soon as he heard of pipers coming to America, he would bring them all to Chicago. And immediately he would snap 'em up, put 'em on the police force, and write down their music." Historian Richard Lindberg adds, "He would travel the streetcars of Chicago in civilian clothing, listening to people on the street cars humming and whistling little tunes. He really collected these songs in much the same way an archeologists digs for things in tombs." [...]
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by SWFL Fiddler
Re: Looking for opinions
Thanks for all your contributions so far.
I agree that the initial statement is more that a little subjective and open to interpretation as is the notion of music being in a "better state" at any given time. I frequently hear musicians using terms like "state", be that better or worse, when describing how traditional (another term open to debate, maybe) music is played today. I am trying to find out what a range of musicians' views are on these questions. I wasn't thinking of geographical constraints or differentiating between solo and group playing. I'm happy for people to apply or disregard these considerations as they see fit.
Thanks again for all your contributions. I look forward to reading on.
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by michael c
Re: Looking for opinions
Here are some free form thoughts:
To some degree, I think that musicians from all ages could play some basic tunes together, I know songs and tunes that are decades if not centuries old. I have seen dance instruction books from the 1700s with sheet music in them that describe dances I have danced, and tunes like Haste to the Wedding that were transcribed in a form similar to how I hear them played today. There might be some microtonal or tuning differences, but not a lot. The 1800s had a lot of new instruments entering the musical world, notably accordions and free reed instruments, and also banjos. But there are also new instruments, or old instruments played in new ways, entering the music today. There is always something new coming in, but there is much that stays the same.
I would not say that musicians today are more skilled, play faster, or are more accomplished than in the past. More apt to be schooled formally in music perhaps, but not more skilled. There were less distractions in the old days, no TV or movies, so folks had a lot more incentive to play music and time and opportunities to hone their skills. I remember when I was young that many houses had pianos in them, and people gathered around them to sing. And I can't believe that in the past, there were not young adventurous musicians that enjoyed ripping through tunes at a lightning pace when they were not playing for the dancers.
I think people of every age think that they have it right, do it best, are more 'advanced' than their ancestors. But the older I get, the more I see that things are different, but not necessarily better. And fortunately much that is valuable endures.
I am pleased to see that all the recorded media sources and other entertainments that distract us today have not killed the folk music tradition. We still gather, with our various instruments and abilities, to share what we love.
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by AlBrown
Re: Looking for opinions
Michael C, I strongly recommend that you have a look at Reg Hall's paper delivered to the 1996 Crossroads Conference (if you haven't already done so) - 'Heydays are short lived: change in music-making practice in rural Ireland, 1850-1950'.
Geoff
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by MacCruiskeen
Re: Looking for opinions
There were less distractions like TV in the old days, to be sure, but more distractions like work, survival, etc., no? There's probably more leisure time today than ever before, and isn't music basically a leisure-time activity?
I've got to believe there's more virtuosity now than ever before. Just as each generation of athlete sets their records on the backs of their forefathers, musicians of each generation learn what's possible from the previous generation and then try to surpass it, at least on a technical level. Technology has allowed all of us to hear the best and gives us something to strive for, whereas generations ago, musicians' listening experience was much more limited.
That's just virtuosity, of course, which perhaps has little or nothing to do with what's actually good. And you could argue that the technology, though teaching us excellence in technique, also has the effect of blanding out all the interesting differences, etc.
So I'm not claiming good state or bad -- just disagreeing with part of Al's point.
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by cuchulain54
Re: Looking for opinions
frisbee i meet a young man recently about 13/14 johnny learys grand son lashing out tunes he is just one oh and he follows Man U.
not every Comhaltas branch is the same
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by Saint
Re: Looking for opinions
cuchulain54, Good points, but here are some counterpoints: Song and music were more a part of the work place in times gone by--not just a leisure activity. Sea chanteys sung while stamping around the capstan, for example, and on land, work songs for a wide range of activities. I have even seen pictures of a fortunate musician perched on that capstan, playing for the seamen that get to do the work. And I don't buy the increase in virtuosity thing, newer styles perhaps, but not an increase in skills.
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by AlBrown
Re: Looking for opinions
Frisbee, you can't seriously claim to have "demonstrated" your argument. Apart from anything, its main citation was Wikipedia, which is an offence punishable by flaying around here! Anyway, the "demonstration" (and a classic example of how threads here never keep to the point) lurk on this here, for anyone interested: http://www.thesession.org/discussions/display/14906
Would it be a fair comment to agree that (if I might use the f-word) folk music has one thing in common: that it provided a use to the people and communities that engaged in it. And the degree to which it is used, and the number of communities that use it, is dropping. No? Didn't think so.
# Posted on September 5th 2007 by Andy V
Re: Looking for opinions
i only quoted wikipedia for one thing and cross checked it with other sites. My general argument was generated through knowledge I've gained in recent years from so many sources that it would be pointless to list them all, so don't go twisting my argument around just because I took a quotation from wikipedia!
If you can't believe that the origins of this music are not in music for dancing then I suggest you do some research into the relationship between slow airs and set dances, there is plenty of evidence to show that many set dances were originally songs or slow airs. The same is true of many jigs and reels. There is also a tradition of 'pieces' liike 'the foxhunt' and 'the battle of aughrim' which were showpieces for pipers rather than music for dancing.
A lot of my knowledge of this comes from talking to older musicians rather than from books or internet sites, but there are a whole load of books and theses which discuss issues like this.
# Posted on September 6th 2007 by The Tune Composer
Re: Looking for opinions
frisbee
nothing wrong with quoting wik. I 'll give you a fact If you want it . all I can ever do is speak for myself I'm a republician and a nationalist and a nice man also (alot of people don't know this is possible). I grew up fighting and learning how to get better at fighting on a daily basis(as a sport and a living ) ( I'm not talking about fighting for a cause)I Fnished with all that but I still wanted to be irish so I started playing a simple drum"an Irish drum " At sport I fought i n front of three thousand people but the greatest buzz or feeling for life was when last Sunday night Seamus Tansey asked me to play with him at a gig(thank you Irish music for this feeling) in front of 40 people..............so my point is frisbee keep asking the questions you ask because you do it in a decent way .......and I can see the passion and the feeling you have for the tunes even on this site .....drive on and long live the trad. in what ever form
# Posted on September 6th 2007 by Saint
Re: Looking for opinions
Michael C if you leave the questions so broad then I can only answer the 1st question thusly;
Yes
~ There are Irish traditional musicians from 150 years ago who would have little difficulty playing with Irish traditional musicians from 50 years ago.
Also ~ there would be Irish traditional musicians from 150 years ago who would have great difficulty playing with other Irish traditional musicians from that same time . . . as well as Irish traditional musicians from fifty years ago who would have not great but some difficulty in playing with other musicians from the same period. Irish traditional musicians in the vicinity of Chicago between the 1870's & about 1912 would have no difficulty whatsoever playing with other Irish traditional musicians anywhere in the world anytime between 1857 & about 1973.
The answer to question(s) #2;
Irish traditional music is in a better state than it was 150 years ago because I did not listen to it at that time.
Irish traditional music is in the same state now as it was fifty years ago. In my humble opinion, had I been living in Chicago at the time, Irish traditional music was in its best state (Illinois) from the late 19th c. - early 20th c.
Good luck with the dissertation.
# Posted on September 6th 2007 by Ben Steen