Thinking about some issues raised during the well mannered debates we have here (1 or 2 exceptions apart) it occurred to me that we all seem to play more or less the same music, so the question is;
Where’s all the NEW music with developing styles? Or is that a “No go” and politically incorrect and risking the improvisation banner?
After all, and with exception to the “Hollywood Movie Songs” (Making the U. Pipes and Low D’s as popular as sliced bread) where are all the new Songs our Great-grandsons will be playing?
One of the qualities of this music that makes it so enduring is that the"new songs" are very rare. Sure there's plenty of new stuff churned out by the hour, but 99.9999999999999% (aprox) is pure s h i t e. But it doesn't matter, 'cause what we have already is more than enough
Yes, Charlie Lennon amongst many, many others. I'm certainly glad past generations didn't have the closed attitude expressed above. On the contrary, one of the great qualities of this music, and one of the reasons it is such a vibrant living tradition, is because newly composed tunes slowly (and sometimes quickly) become part of the standard session repertoire. The best ones tend to make it and the mediocre ones do not, tunes and songs alike. To blithely state that they are all 'sh*te' is extreme to the point of nonsense.
Well, I reckon Charlie Lennon and his ilk are the exceptions..the mature and respected musicians.
However, Michael's probably referring to many of these younger musicians ..Irish and Scottish... who are continually churning out all these "Eurocelt tunes" and I'm inclined to a agree with him.
OK, there are a few good younger players too but the number of their new tunes which get "picked up" and become popular in sessions is still only a very small proportion of their output. Of these, even fewer will last beyond the current generation of musicians.
Having said all that, does it matter? We live in a "throw away" society after all.
There was a time when a mere simple (common to nowadays)reel or jig would have sounded like the weirdest chite on the planet.
To assume that any changes in music were immediately acceptable to listners and musicians alike is absurd.
Yes,the best compositions will usually stand the test of time(depending on their playability),
but even the finest composers will write a whole lot of dogdy material or go through periods of transition which might not sound so good in order to reach another level in the process of refining their art form.
Time capsules are for historians.
You learn from the past so you can play/compose in the present,
It's an ongoing process that cannot be escaped,
(did anyone notice that we use the same scales that classical music is built up on?And that uilleann pipes were originally used for chamber music of a sort,not reels and jigs etc.(that might induce some critique))
unless you never go out again and blow up your stereo/radio,
Bliss "concerto" - sorry Bliss, but it's already been done . The composer Sir Arthur Bliss (any relation ?) composed a piano concerto and a cello concerto.
It is pretty hard to do sessions unless there are a very large number of tunes that all the players know. New tunes, whatever their value (and I am in favor of them) are not the focus of the mustard board because this is about sessions. Personally, if I felt good about any of the tunes I have tried to write I would seek critical evaluation from some members here.
On another, much more idiosyncratic, note the phrase "politically correct" was initially applied pejoratively to people who sought social change and applied to them by people who were opposed to any form of social change; and that it still its primary usage as far as I can tell. Thus, it seems to me odd to ask whether innovation is politically incorrect.
OK this is the session, but the primary focus is on the tunes,the music, not sessions.A lot of great music is played is sessions,but a lot is played by bands and solo players .For example,i write and play my own tunes. Sure its nice when other people like and learn them, but not at all essential.I enjoy playing in some sessions, but they are not at all the be all and end all of Irish music. I would much rather listen to a good fiddler or piper unaccompanied than some old session full of drunks and newbies.
I see most have picked up on the "new tunes" and not the "developing styles" which really where I was looking to take the discussion but perhaps most DO think the develpoment of the ITM style is POLITICALLY INCORRECT ( Eddie I fail to see your line of thought).
With global telco, transatlantic travel and mass imigration into Europe especially, is it not natural for OUR music to be influenced by our surroundings?
I remember the days in Ireland when to buy a pepper or garlic was an almost impossible task and yet now we take them for granted.
Where's the garlic and peppers in our Music ? Or as Mickey Finn states(See previous thread Those who scorn....) this intrusion is at minimum bad manners and considered NO GO and therefore "Politically Incorrect"
Interesting.I too remember when, for eg; Galtee was the only cheese generally available, and am delighted to be able to find such a range nowadays!
As far as i can tell, it has been traditional to incorporate foreign influences into Irish music, see 'the gallowglass'. and the wide range of European instruments played nowadays, along with the wide range of 'foreign' dance forms.
So those of us who incorporate 'other' influences in our music, yet retaining the distinctive forms of ITM are simply following on the tradition.
The point may be ; What is 'traditional'? Something may be considered trad with only one or two generations behind it.
IT seems to be a human trait to create rigid forms, within the context of which we can be happy. Likewise, some people will become bored with these boundaries and stretch them.
The point is that first we must work within the boundaries of the form.Become 'experts', only then can we genuinely claim to be innovating. A superficial understanding of a form/style is simply not enough..
Some people will, however continue to create mash ups of styles with no understanding whatsoever. These , i feel, will simply fade away with time. The less attention given ,will hasten this day. Conversely the more attention,the longer we will have to put up with this.
I think P. Browne raised a good point, which is that the "tradition" has never been wholly static. First of all, you can't separate music from its cultural, social, and historical contexts. It's a dodgy argument to assume that Irish music existed in some a priori state of purism, unaffected by society, and then was corrupted by modern values and influences. Irish music in 1890 or 1920 was surely under the influence of the values and norms of 1890 or 1920 as it is now. I also question the argument that the values and norms of 1890 and 1920 created an environment for "better" music - that presupposes that music was good then and isn't now and that it's a wholly bad thing that the music has become more palatable to modern Western ears. Something like music, which is a completely social phenomenon, will always be shaped by the norms of whatever culture it's in. You can't escape that.
But, that doesn't mean that we as trad musicians will be allowing in everything from Riverdance to bongoes and not maintaining any standards. Irish musicians are a social collective that have established and enforce standards of normativity. The fancy word some sociologists have come up for this is "self-referring," which means that a community's standards and designations are what that community says they are. For example, no one here is questioning whether or not "The Rambling Pitchfork" is a proper traditional tune. But how do we KNOW it's a proper traditional tune? Because it follows certain rules that have been established by the collective for being a jig and mostly because we say that if something follows those rules, it's a jig, and we say that that particular one is "traditional."
You could presumably have a not traditional tune that follows the same rules in terms of tuning and rhythm as the "Rambling Pitchfork." But the community would designate it differently -- maybe because it was written last week or is in the key of Bb or whatever rule people come up with that the tune has in some way transgressed. But these things are constantly changing and something could later become accepted as traditonal by the majority of the community. The bouzouki is a good example of that. Donal Lunny started playing Irish music on the zouk and over the following thirty years, the collective has come to designate it to be an acceptable traditional instrument. On the other hand, it hasn't accepted the saxophone and the five string banjo.
So what is traditional? No such thing as "traditional" exists outside of the collective social reality of the people who play it. Riverdance isn't traditional, even though it has fiddles and whistles and uilleann pipes and is in vaguely modal keys, because the social collective of Irish trad musicians have designated it as not traditional. Charlie Lennon tunes ARE traditional because we say they are.
I think threads like this come up frequently because, like any self-referring community, we haven't (and probably won't ever) agreed on boundaries. We can pretty much agree that "The Rambling Pitchfork" is traditional and Riverdance is not.
While some boundaries are clear -- and indeed, the fact that we agree on a lot of these boundaries means that we can have a "stable institution" of Irish music and play together in the same session -- others remain ephemeral. Like any self-referring community, we are perpetually setting and redefining boundaries, which is why these threads pop up frequently.
God, I hope that made some sense.
P.S. These are ideas which people have applied to the sociology of math and science, but they seem rather salient to music. More so even, since you can argue (I don't) that nature exists independently of social reality. But music doesn't.
The Politics of it all….
The Politics of it all….
Thinking about some issues raised during the well mannered debates we have here (1 or 2 exceptions apart) it occurred to me that we all seem to play more or less the same music, so the question is;
Where’s all the NEW music with developing styles? Or is that a “No go” and politically incorrect and risking the improvisation banner?
After all, and with exception to the “Hollywood Movie Songs” (Making the U. Pipes and Low D’s as popular as sliced bread) where are all the new Songs our Great-grandsons will be playing?
Slán
# Posted on October 20th 2007 by Enigma
Re: The Politics of it all….
It shouldn't appear new. Developing styles will be apparent by comparison over the years.
# Posted on October 20th 2007 by oldstrings
Re: The Politics of it all….
One of the qualities of this music that makes it so enduring is that the"new songs" are very rare. Sure there's plenty of new stuff churned out by the hour, but 99.9999999999999% (aprox) is pure s h i t e. But it doesn't matter, 'cause what we have already is more than enough
# Posted on October 20th 2007 by llig leahcim
Re: The Politics of it all….
check out charlie lennons tunes. new and not ,i think pure s h i t e .
# Posted on October 20th 2007 by jig
Re: The Politics of it all….
Yes, Charlie Lennon amongst many, many others. I'm certainly glad past generations didn't have the closed attitude expressed above. On the contrary, one of the great qualities of this music, and one of the reasons it is such a vibrant living tradition, is because newly composed tunes slowly (and sometimes quickly) become part of the standard session repertoire. The best ones tend to make it and the mediocre ones do not, tunes and songs alike. To blithely state that they are all 'sh*te' is extreme to the point of nonsense.
# Posted on October 20th 2007 by Doodle
Re: The Politics of it all….
Well, I reckon Charlie Lennon and his ilk are the exceptions..the mature and respected musicians.
However, Michael's probably referring to many of these younger musicians ..Irish and Scottish... who are continually churning out all these "Eurocelt tunes" and I'm inclined to a agree with him.
OK, there are a few good younger players too but the number of their new tunes which get "picked up" and become popular in sessions is still only a very small proportion of their output. Of these, even fewer will last beyond the current generation of musicians.
Having said all that, does it matter? We live in a "throw away" society after all.
# Posted on October 20th 2007 by Johannes J
Re: The Politics of it all….
Paddy Fahy tunes are pure genus, maybe not session tunes, but genus, never the less.
Lots of current Scots fiddlers are writing some brilliant tunes as well.
I'm not saying every new tune to come down the pike is brilliant, but music is or should be alive and living.
# Posted on October 20th 2007 by Anew
Re: The Politics of it all….
There was a time when a mere simple (common to nowadays)reel or jig would have sounded like the weirdest chite on the planet.
To assume that any changes in music were immediately acceptable to listners and musicians alike is absurd.
Yes,the best compositions will usually stand the test of time(depending on their playability),
but even the finest composers will write a whole lot of dogdy material or go through periods of transition which might not sound so good in order to reach another level in the process of refining their art form.
Time capsules are for historians.
You learn from the past so you can play/compose in the present,
It's an ongoing process that cannot be escaped,
(did anyone notice that we use the same scales that classical music is built up on?And that uilleann pipes were originally used for chamber music of a sort,not reels and jigs etc.(that might induce some critique))
unless you never go out again and blow up your stereo/radio,
P
# Posted on October 20th 2007 by P.browne
Re: The Politics of it all….
sorry,that's listeners
# Posted on October 20th 2007 by P.browne
Re: The Politics of it all….
My own songs. Maybe I will write a few jigs or reels. Or the Bliss "concerto", I like the sound of that.
# Posted on October 20th 2007 by bodhran bliss
Re: The Politics of it all….
Bliss "concerto" - sorry Bliss, but it's already been done
. The composer Sir Arthur Bliss (any relation 
?) composed a piano concerto and a cello concerto.
# Posted on October 20th 2007 by lazyhound
Re: The Politics of it all….
Sir Arthur was a grand uncle I believe.
# Posted on October 21st 2007 by bodhran bliss
Re: The Politics of it all….
More a carb-uncle, I'd say.
# Posted on October 21st 2007 by strayaway
Re: The Politics of it all….
It is pretty hard to do sessions unless there are a very large number of tunes that all the players know. New tunes, whatever their value (and I am in favor of them) are not the focus of the mustard board because this is about sessions. Personally, if I felt good about any of the tunes I have tried to write I would seek critical evaluation from some members here.
On another, much more idiosyncratic, note the phrase "politically correct" was initially applied pejoratively to people who sought social change and applied to them by people who were opposed to any form of social change; and that it still its primary usage as far as I can tell. Thus, it seems to me odd to ask whether innovation is politically incorrect.
# Posted on October 21st 2007 by eddieedwards
Re: The Politics of it all….
OK this is the session, but the primary focus is on the tunes,the music, not sessions.A lot of great music is played is sessions,but a lot is played by bands and solo players .For example,i write and play my own tunes. Sure its nice when other people like and learn them, but not at all essential.I enjoy playing in some sessions, but they are not at all the be all and end all of Irish music. I would much rather listen to a good fiddler or piper unaccompanied than some old session full of drunks and newbies.
# Posted on October 21st 2007 by jig
Re: The Politics of it all….
I see most have picked up on the "new tunes" and not the "developing styles" which really where I was looking to take the discussion but perhaps most DO think the develpoment of the ITM style is POLITICALLY INCORRECT ( Eddie I fail to see your line of thought).
With global telco, transatlantic travel and mass imigration into Europe especially, is it not natural for OUR music to be influenced by our surroundings?
I remember the days in Ireland when to buy a pepper or garlic was an almost impossible task and yet now we take them for granted.
Where's the garlic and peppers in our Music ? Or as Mickey Finn states(See previous thread Those who scorn....) this intrusion is at minimum bad manners and considered NO GO and therefore "Politically Incorrect"
# Posted on October 21st 2007 by Enigma
Re: The Politics of it all….
Interesting.I too remember when, for eg; Galtee was the only cheese generally available, and am delighted to be able to find such a range nowadays!
As far as i can tell, it has been traditional to incorporate foreign influences into Irish music, see 'the gallowglass'. and the wide range of European instruments played nowadays, along with the wide range of 'foreign' dance forms.
So those of us who incorporate 'other' influences in our music, yet retaining the distinctive forms of ITM are simply following on the tradition.
The point may be ; What is 'traditional'? Something may be considered trad with only one or two generations behind it.
IT seems to be a human trait to create rigid forms, within the context of which we can be happy. Likewise, some people will become bored with these boundaries and stretch them.
The point is that first we must work within the boundaries of the form.Become 'experts', only then can we genuinely claim to be innovating. A superficial understanding of a form/style is simply not enough..
Some people will, however continue to create mash ups of styles with no understanding whatsoever. These , i feel, will simply fade away with time. The less attention given ,will hasten this day. Conversely the more attention,the longer we will have to put up with this.
# Posted on October 21st 2007 by jig
Re: The Politics of it all….
I think P. Browne raised a good point, which is that the "tradition" has never been wholly static. First of all, you can't separate music from its cultural, social, and historical contexts. It's a dodgy argument to assume that Irish music existed in some a priori state of purism, unaffected by society, and then was corrupted by modern values and influences. Irish music in 1890 or 1920 was surely under the influence of the values and norms of 1890 or 1920 as it is now. I also question the argument that the values and norms of 1890 and 1920 created an environment for "better" music - that presupposes that music was good then and isn't now and that it's a wholly bad thing that the music has become more palatable to modern Western ears. Something like music, which is a completely social phenomenon, will always be shaped by the norms of whatever culture it's in. You can't escape that.
But, that doesn't mean that we as trad musicians will be allowing in everything from Riverdance to bongoes and not maintaining any standards. Irish musicians are a social collective that have established and enforce standards of normativity. The fancy word some sociologists have come up for this is "self-referring," which means that a community's standards and designations are what that community says they are. For example, no one here is questioning whether or not "The Rambling Pitchfork" is a proper traditional tune. But how do we KNOW it's a proper traditional tune? Because it follows certain rules that have been established by the collective for being a jig and mostly because we say that if something follows those rules, it's a jig, and we say that that particular one is "traditional."
You could presumably have a not traditional tune that follows the same rules in terms of tuning and rhythm as the "Rambling Pitchfork." But the community would designate it differently -- maybe because it was written last week or is in the key of Bb or whatever rule people come up with that the tune has in some way transgressed. But these things are constantly changing and something could later become accepted as traditonal by the majority of the community. The bouzouki is a good example of that. Donal Lunny started playing Irish music on the zouk and over the following thirty years, the collective has come to designate it to be an acceptable traditional instrument. On the other hand, it hasn't accepted the saxophone and the five string banjo.
So what is traditional? No such thing as "traditional" exists outside of the collective social reality of the people who play it. Riverdance isn't traditional, even though it has fiddles and whistles and uilleann pipes and is in vaguely modal keys, because the social collective of Irish trad musicians have designated it as not traditional. Charlie Lennon tunes ARE traditional because we say they are.
I think threads like this come up frequently because, like any self-referring community, we haven't (and probably won't ever) agreed on boundaries. We can pretty much agree that "The Rambling Pitchfork" is traditional and Riverdance is not.
While some boundaries are clear -- and indeed, the fact that we agree on a lot of these boundaries means that we can have a "stable institution" of Irish music and play together in the same session -- others remain ephemeral. Like any self-referring community, we are perpetually setting and redefining boundaries, which is why these threads pop up frequently.
God, I hope that made some sense.
P.S. These are ideas which people have applied to the sociology of math and science, but they seem rather salient to music. More so even, since you can argue (I don't) that nature exists independently of social reality. But music doesn't.
# Posted on October 21st 2007 by TheSilverSpear
Re: The Politics of it all….
LOL. I really didn't see Jig's post first, even though mine seems to be in part answering him.
# Posted on October 21st 2007 by TheSilverSpear
Re: The Politics of it all….
great post spear.
# Posted on October 21st 2007 by jig
Re: The Politics of it all….
Spear I had to read that 3 times.......LOL and I'm still thinking about it, must be the hangover from last nights session :
# Posted on October 21st 2007 by Enigma
Re: The Politics of it all….
I think you should go to university Emily
# Posted on October 21st 2007 by bazouki dave and the real tooty flutey
Re: The Politics of it all….
GB Shaw said that in Ireland it was practicaly impossible to stop a tradition from happening
# Posted on October 22nd 2007 by Alancorsini