What comes first in a session, the people playing or the quality of the session?
If someone plays badly, or if they persistently play out of tune, or if they doggedly stick to the same hackneyed repertoire week after week, all the while leading the tunes, should they be told, or because they're (he or she) might be a nice person, do we put up and shut up, so we don't hurt their feelings? Then when a really good player does turn up they come just once or twice then never come back again or they return only very occasionally.
If the person is told, should the person be big enough to take criticism and try and act upon it, one way or another?
Just curious about peoples' views.
I know what I do.
The other players should cast their standards aside and consider if the poor playing hinders everyone else's enjoyment. If all the other members of a session really feel that their experience is being damaged, tell the player to shut up. If it's just snobbishness - "this is not the way the music should be played", "sheet music is not acceptable" - then shut up and let them get on with it.
I've been to sessions where everyone has sheet music, everything is played at the wrong speeds, three guitars all playing different chords - but the people have been having a great time, and once I got off my high horse I had an awesome time as well. Don't let "the way it should be done" hinder your enjoyment.
In my experience, the people who are most uptight upholding some sort of ideals of correctness, propriety, artistic purity, etc, in session playing are often mediocre and uninteresting players themselves. Whereas some of the most talented and listenable players I have encountered in sessions have been more relaxed and generous souls. What does it all mean?
If the people you play with "week after week" are not your mates, then there's something wrong with the session. You can always and should always tell the truth to your mates.
Yes, generosity is a core part of this music and tradition. I think what KML may be getting at is when the collective generosity of a session is abused by someone who seems incapable of taking the gentle hints and perhaps even more direct requests to change their behavior (when that behavior threatens to ruin the session for everyone else).
As Danny points out, a session ceases to be fun when someone insists on being the center of attention, repeats the same "hackneyed" noise week in, week out, and can't or won't fit in (plays out of tune, out of time, etc.).
But most of us who play this music were given some sense of that generosity by our mentors, so it can be hard to know when enough is enough. At what point--after how many attempts to help the person fit in better--do you show them the door for the sake of the greater good?
(Obviously we're talking about your own, longstanding session, not a session in which you are the visitor.)
For me, it goes back to participating in good faith. If someone shows a genuine willingness to try to fit in, I'll put up with a fair amount of sturggling to help them do that. But if they repeatedly act clueless or, worse, intentionally continue to co-opt the session to their own (and solely their own) bent, then I I have no qualms explaining what the problem is and telling (not asking) them to leave. It's the only way, in such cases, to keep the craic.
Firstly, if someone starts a session, or gets paid as the anchor, then it really is up to them. If we dont like it , we dont have to go.
That said, if they are not the anchor;
and they play out of tune I have no problem gently alerting them to the fact..
Repertoire....if they are the leader, well ask them politely to include other tunes, or go find another session.
If they play badly, and its their session... find another. its their session. if they are a guest, politely mention it.
Apropos of nothing - origin of the word "hackneyed" (from www.worldwidewords.org)
"The countryside around Hackney was pleasant, open, good-quality grassland, which became famous for the horses bred and pastured there. These were riding horses, “ambling horses”, as opposed to war horses or draught horses. Hence hackney became the standard term for a horse of this type."
"Horses of the hackney type were often worked heavily, in the nature of things that were hired out to all and sundry. So the word evolved in parallel with the previous sense to refer figuratively to something that was overused to the point of drudgery."
Is "hackneyed" hackneyed?
We now return you to your regular program/programme...
Thank You, Mehitabel! "Ya race what ya brung", as some of my motorcycling buddies say.
On the other hand, a bit of guidance and encouragement (God knows, I've heard plenty of that) is not out of order, either. IMHO.
Look at it from the other view point, a group of mediocre students are having a brilliant time playing the tunes they know, out of tune, out of time etc, but they love it. Its their session. If a top flight player sits in and then plays superfast tunes no one knows then should they be asked to leave?
Or there is a situation where a few loud dominating players monopolize the session, the majority have to sit out most of the time and get to play the odd tune but carry on coming back because they want to be part of the scene. iIf the quite ones start a tune they get grief and bad vibes from the loud players.
If someone dares raise their head out of the crowd they get stomped on. Perhaps some of the quiet ones are actually far better than the loud pushy ones, but they are shy. Its really the job of the anchor to keep order, have a word with the loud ones and gently encourage the others to play.
There are many different scenarios that we could play out....
Ultimately its up to the session leader to steer the session in the direction he wishes it to go.
well if someone is doing the first thing that the guy said at the start there and it is an informal session, then maybe you could say something politely. on the other hand you could start tunes of yourself, or even ask someone else to start. If that person is being paid however then its not really someones place to say something, ye know. if ye dont like what they are doing you don have to go, ye know.
the second one about the great player, its totallly up to them. its a free country and if they choose to stay or come back the odd time then thats up to them.
so basically the same answer as jig up there.
I know that the session i regularly go to in the cobblestone that there are a number of regulars that would go, but it chops and changes each week. only the odd time would everyone who would regularly attend be there at once. then you would have the odd drifter.
sure you dont have to like everyone you play with aswell, sure fred finn and peter horan, probably the greatest ever duet, they couldn't stand each other for years but they played together every week without fail. they played great music but when they were'nt playing they would turn away from each other and not talk. lol.
Here is another one; A bunch of folk have a session, another group of musicians come in and slowly take over, playing tunes that are beyond the first group, the music is better, fair enough, but the people who's session it is now cant get to play, when they do play they get disdainful looks from the new group. So now the first group have 2 choices ; ask the new people to leave so they can get back to playing their tunes in their session, or leave themselves.
If there is only one place in town where a session can take place, you have a recipe for territorial disputes. even fights. The poor landlord just wants some music for a friday night, he might end up getting sick of the whole game and cancel the session and get a widescreen tv...
yea thats a tough one. i suppose the easiest solution to avoid conflict would be for the first group to join with the second group and maybe pick up some new tunes and try and take something from the experience. i dunno.
but here is another story, which is true. this happened last year at the frank magann fest in strokestown. there was scheduled session in one of the pubs (can;t remeber name). anyway, the names down were harry bradly, john blake, jesse smith, sean mckeon, and a couple of others, and then there were a couple of us who knew them playing aswell. i wasn't playing cause i hadn;t a fiddle with me so i listened instead, and it was great. the pub was full and there were a good few well known musicians lsitening and havin the craic.
anyway, this guy onj the banjo id say he was no more than 18 and two other girls the same age came in sat in the session, just at the back. around half an hour goes by, and during that half an hour these trio had started a couple of tunes themselves that some of the others had joined in, some sets they just played on their own. it was around a time where some of the scheduled musicians wer having a chats in between tunes with others in the session or at the bar or whatever that the trio started tunes an after a while it just got worse and they gradually took over the session, totally changed the flow, speed, tunes everything. it really was as bad and as loud as you would imagine .they were playing stuff by like the wolfe tones and other cheesy tunes that wouldn't be out of place at a fleadh, like modern ones. when told by some of the scheduled musicians that it was their session (by this time everyone in the pub had gotten sick of them) and if they could stop. they continued playing until people had to shout at them to stop, to which they guy replied something like 'if you can;t keep up we can slow down if you want' and other stupid things like 'we're playin the serious stuf now' and all this sh*te.' he just wouldn't stop and the sad thing was that his parents were in the pub and they were egging him on.
everybody had had enough of the arrogant crap so people like harryb, sean mck all had to pack up and move across the road to the hotel where they couldn't play even though they were scheduled for the other pub. The pub had basically almost emptied after that and the owner was furious, so he asked us to come back the next night and he would give us free beers, so that was grand. its people like that that we should be lookin out for, everybody was so p*ssed off that night. what would other people do in that situation.
Well the three sessions I play in all have either a leader or a couple of them., they are paid to turn up and keep the level high, the craic happening. The 'leader' will give the 'call' to whoever he/she wants to invite. Others who happen by respect this. generally the 'leader will start the sets or invite someone else to start.
Fiddleruari, in the session that you described, I know the pub owner´s job is to sell drinks, but I think he should have stepped in to stop what was happening.
When there´s a verbal contract betweeen the owner and certain musicians that they will play for free drinks, money, whatever, the owner can´t just wash his hands of the situation when that sort of hi-jack happens.
If he didn´t see it or wasn´t aware of it, somebody should have told him.
It makes it even worse for everybody when the musicians are of the standard of Harry Bradley and the others you mentioned.
No I dont pay them. The LL does. Thats ITM as a commodity in Co Clare for you.....They are paid for the music. The craic is a spontaneous reflection of the people enjoying the music.
Jeez, the last session there was a birthday party, they were feckin noisy. plenty o'craic there. At least they were happy. Which was more than you could really say for the muso's
>the people who are most uptight upholding some sort of ideals of correctness, propriety, artistic purity, etc, in session playing are often mediocre and uninteresting players themselves.
...could well be me. In fact it probably is, then. Yep, that's an easy cop out, turn it round and make it the victim's fault. you don't work for the Stasi do you?
>>Whereas some of the most talented and listenable players I have encountered in sessions have been more relaxed and generous souls.
...What is inferred here is simply not true. They may well act generous in letting people play along, and act relaxed about it, but answer me truthfully, would John Carty prefer to play tunes with me or Matt Molloy? Also, I've met some nice players who are nice people but I've also met some nice players who are arrogant dismissive ignorant bastards.
Also, michael, all this idyllic stuff about just going down to the pub and swapping tunes with your mates, really, for a large number of sessions, in my experience, is not exactly a truthful portrayal either. You may share a common bond in the music and like the people, and so on, and form friendships, but you did so *through the music* - if it weren't for the music you most likely wouldn't have those friends - you may have other friends, but the relationship would be different. In other words, are friends through the music your closest friends?
I'm not sure I made my points very well as some have been misconstrued. For example, I never mentioned anything about session leaders. But I don't want to be too specific either, as I'd rather keep this more general, but some people just like a good old online argument rather than make constructive points. If that's the case, work away, I'll just head off to a different thread....
Fair enough key but I think thats the crux of the matter. the folk or person who's session it is. If it was a house session it would be absolutely clear who's sesh it was. All the different scenarios i mention, IMO relate directly to your query. It boils down not to art, but politics.
But as far as art for art's sake goes, I've wrestled with this one before. On one level - may be the hi level, I'm not sure - of course it's hi art. But on another, it's just a bunch of mates.
Another contradiction to be embraced and I think that it's at it's best when these opposing views are polarised to their extremes. In other words, the best music, the most purest hi art of it, the most sublime, comes when it really is just a close bunch of mates. Ego free, leader free, performance free, insular, and just there for each other.
>>the best music, the most purest hi art of it, the most sublime, comes when it really is just a close bunch of mates. Ego free, leader free, performance free, insular, and just there for each other.
maybe, Michael. I did see something like that at a session last Sunday - but that was unique. You tell me where else and I'll go and listen...maybe even try and join in without breaking the spell.
''the best music, the most purest hi art of it'' Ie your sessions no?
As I said, its up to the anchor.... If it IS the anchor ! try another session.
Who are you to take control of another's session and start telling people to shut up or leave etc? MYOFB. IMO. Art is subjective Its a matter of perspective.
There you go again key! thats is uncivil and factually inaccurate. Are you a psychiatrist? qualified in online psycho-analysis? No you are not. good day.
If someone wrecks the session they should be asked to leave. Honestly - why do people expect to have their hand held in a session??
And jig - what about the sessions where people turn up week after week year after year playing the same old tired tunes at the same old beginnerish pace? Why would the person who has bothered to learn new tunes be victimised when clearly they are the ones actually putting effort into the music?
We have a session wrecker aat our session at the moment really, really bad - but we are all to scared to tell said person to bugger off, its poor form really - surely they know they are driving people mad??
Yet most of us have sat at a session that was ruined by in-your-face, egregious behavior. There is a tipping point, beyond which someone needs to escort the offending party to his or her coat and on out the door. Thank goodness this is rare, but it does happen in sessions, just as it happens at football matches, wedding receptions, school assemblies, and any other gathering of hyooman beans.
So, _bc, I'm all for tolerance. That's what makes a community a community. But the odd eejit is also why every community has it's law enforcement system.
I'm sorry KML, I didn't realise I'd walked into a house ('walk' and 'house' obviously being a rather large part of the confusion).
It's just annoying to me, and obviously to not a few others, to read such nonsense as some posts (see above) masquerading as 'sense'. No, actually, I don't give a f**** about the nonsense, it's the conviction that disturbs me more.
But then I've been playing for thirty years (man and boy) and most of those years were spent in C# minor.So I should know.
On another scale all together, I'm reminded of the good people of Billings, Montana, who rose up in a very civil way against hate crimes in their community. You can read the story here: http://www.pbs.org/niot/about/niot1.html
I think the moral to draw from such stories is that perhaps the most powerful way to preserve diversity and civility in any circle of people is for the people as a group to assert their well-reasoned values.
In other words, when someone's behavior disrupts a session, it's better if the corrective message is agreed on and backed up by the group (even if it's delivered by just one person).
well thats what they were playing! when i say modern aswell i mean like tunes that have syncapation composed deliberatly into them, that sort of modern, not modern as in charlie lennon or other more recent composers. i dont know any of the names of the tunes but you would definately recognise them if ye heared them.
KML -- I am not sure how to take your reply. I made what I think is an uncontroversial statement. It is an observation based on my own experiences. It is not an attempt at a categorical proclamation. And maybe there is no correlation whatsoever between skill and social grace. I am not sure how to answer the question scientifically, or even ask it scientifically for that matter.
Here's where I am coming from...if I am at a session and somebody acts as if they are the bearer of the torch of musical purity, artistic-ness, or what have you, I just can't help but think negative things about them. Maybe that's just me leaping to unjustified conclusions. Dunno. But that whole kind purist attitude, in a session setting, just strikes me as comical, pathetic, ridiculous, and annoying, in varying measure depending on my mood at the time.
But yet at other times I am probably guilty of the same thing and likely I end up sounding to other people like I am part of the session police (session Stasi?). I do care passionately about The Music and I too can feel compelled to leap to its defense.
These inconsistencies, contradictions, and hypocrisies are part of the spice of life.
This subject comes up often and I read each line with great attention every time that it does. I struggle with this question all the time.
My weak solution is to have open and closed sessions available in the area.
Almost anything (not everything) goes in the open sessions. They can be fun. Beginners start their tunes at their pace and not worry that they are not good enough. More advanced players, on their tune to begin, play what and how they want without worrying about leaving the slower folks in the dust. Everyone seems fine with that. Those are my favorites. The kind of "leader" one must be changes to meet what is required. A bunch of mates, if that is all that shows up, require no leader. A wider attendance could require, instead, an iron hand (or maybe not ).
We have closed sessions, too. House parties, performances, etc. Those are the ones to which I am not invited so I have no idea what happens there! Those tend to be more predictable (in a good way). A different kind of fun.
A perfect solution? no. There may be no perfect solution. But I appreciate those who contribute to threads like this because I seek enlightenment on this topic.
"when i say modern aswell i mean like tunes that have syncapation composed deliberatly into them, that sort of modern, not modern as in charlie lennon or other more recent composers. "
Umm - yes - thats exactly what I meant too - Flook! Lau, Tabache, Michael McGoldrick.......thats exactly the stuff I like and play (as well as the standards).
I must agree with Jig when he wrote about people sitting in and taking over. At Tullamore last year we had a nice little session going in the corner of a big lounge when a big crowd of youngsters sat right next to us and started their own session completely blowing us 'old gits' away, and I don't mean with admiration. I had to stop our 85 year old fiddle player from throwing a pint of beer over them. If only we could do away with that competitive streak that seems to run many of the sessions I've played in. I don't want to sit in a session and have to listen to individuals being requested to play solo tunes that I could well join in with. Perhaps it me, but I find that ITM around my neck of the woods (which shall be nameless) is played by a small cliche of people who don't or wont mix with each other. On occasions I've overheard someone trying to organise a session. The question always arose 'Who'll be there' followed by a negative reaction if the wrong people were mentioned. Sad really.
And jig - what about the sessions where people turn up week after week year after year playing the same old tired tunes at the same old beginnerish pace? Why would the person who has bothered to learn new tunes be victimised when clearly they are the ones actually putting effort into the music?''
That is their business. I agree with you, but so what? that doesnt give us or anyone bar the host the right to push and shove.
The decision rests firmly with the host. That is that. we dont like it? go else where.
Truth is in 30yrs plus of music I have seen an awful lot of shenanigans like this.
If someone starts a session, it is their session.
It doesnt matter if they play jackanory all night for 20yrs Its their business.
If they are a guest its a completely different matter. Then its up to the host to say what is acceptable and what is not. Political machinations to get someone evicted are nothing more than manipulation , underhand and to be despised. A session is not democracy. If the host is happy, then thats their business, not yours. if you dont like it , leave. That is how most sessions I have encountered are run. Of course there are alternative ways . A group or duo sets up a session, then its a joint decision, Consensus is the operating word. IME.
fair enough you play it. i'm not a big fan of those groups but i dont have a problem with people playing it. but have you ever heard sean mckeon or harry b or jesse smith play that? thats the point im trying to make. what the other guys started to do was in complete contrast to what was being played, thats what i mean.
A session will have broad or narrow concepts of what is right for that session. Depending on the anchor really. Some sessions are strictly ITM , some allow canadian, scots tunes, some breton tunes some eastern european stuff in 10/8 etc.
I'm having a similar experience in our local session in Dundee. Its been going for 30 years via various permutations and pubs. Its a mixed session, some songs, some tunes, some Irish, some Scottish. Its had some great players in the past; members of Ceolbeg, pipers from the Vale of Atholl (inc G Duncan), Mike Ward from the Tannahill weavers, Kenny (who posts on this site), Bev Whelan, Mike Feeley, Kevin Findlay (from Boogaloosa) etc. Its never been a lead or hosted session really.
I started learning fiddle having been directed to the session by Mike Ward (who talked me out of purchasing a guitar in his shop). Almost my entire repertoire was learnt from recording the session, recording Mike, learning from my future wife Mairead (a session regular) and also tapes sent from Kenny. The session was always a little bit noisy in terms of punters, and often suffered a habit of speeding up, but the quality was often quite high and for a number of years very enjoyable. New tunes were not frowned upon; and tunes like Bobby Casey's Porthole of the Kelp were quickly assimilated by players there.
However, for a time I couldn't make it to the session so often as I was working in Aberdeen, and didn't make it to the session til 11ish at night (it stops at 1am ish). Since then Mike W, who was going less and less, stopped coming down at all, and a couple of other players moved further away from the session and didn't come so often. The session changed, as i'm sure its changed many times before, however, its character is quite different now. Recently, a suggestion of one player to have a specific set list of the tunes that should be played every week was made, and also of which tunes should go in which sets. The same few hackneyed common Scottish and Irish tunes now get played almost religiously every week and a few American nursery rhymes have been added into the mix. A couple of extremely loud kick boxes have also been added into the instruments.
None of the above is necessarily a problem in a session that has a variety of music and talent. However a phone call between one player from the session and another, revealed that in reference to me "tunes that people don't know" are not being appreciated. This is quite upsetting as almost all the tunes I play in the pub are tunes I have learnt there. I play very few tunes that haven't been played there before. By tunes that people don't know, the sort of tune I'm playing that I end up playing almost alone are those like the Broken Pledge, Hunters House, Martin Wynne's tunes, Lucy Campbells etc
A couple of great musicians who play Banjo, Bouzouki and Fiddle, have appeared on the scene a couple of years ago, and though they came to the session a fair few times, they don't appear to be motivated to go anymore. My wife Mairead hasn't been going for a while now because she finds it unstimulating, with a lack of new tunes, and a lack of players that are worth listening to and learning from.
I don't want to give up on a session that has such history and that has been so rewarding in the past - indeed my wife and I had the session in mind when we moved house here 6 years ago. I still go, but am finding it less and less fulfilling... ...I've started travelling 70 miles to Edinburgh for tunes, which is a long way, when the local session is only 5 minutes walk, but the sessions are of a superb standard and very welcoming. I'm not really sure what to do, or what can be done, but i'm not sure i'm that enthusiastic about going any more? Any ideas?
I'm with Michael on this one - I don't like 'led' sessions. I don't think leaders are at all necessary in sessions. And, even if there *is* a leader, I don't think it should be up to them to decide how the session should go. Pretty damn boring, for them and everyone else, if that was the case.
Back to the original point, I think they should be told, I think they should take it on the chin, and I think they should be supported in their efforts to improve and stop p*ssing people off. Mind you, when I've been to sessions in the past where someone has been behaving like that, I *haven't* done anything about it - I've just left. I just can't be bothered with the hassle.
I don't like "led" (or "leaden" ) sessions either. But when there is a clear (usually self-appointed) leader, I think it's their job to deal with troublemakers. The whole thing just goes downhill otherwise.
'American nursery rhymes have been added into the mix.''
oh dear oh dear....
Well my suggestion would be to meet up with another musician or 2 , banjo or whistle, say , swap tunes and enjoy a smaller session then perhaps return en masse?. Maybe actually discuss this issue with say mike W.?
I am afraid though that that kind of situation can happen without an anchor, the better players get bored and the 'lesser' players take over... Someone[or two] needs to be paid to keep the level high.
Thats just a few little Ideas, no instant solution from me.
It doers sound like its time to start a new session or reach a critical mass with some like minded musos and storm the place!
Well the issue that Jamie discussed has been talked about in great detail with a lot of folk in that session and on the session's website (http://www.acousticecosse.org) but to no real resolution.
It is certainly a difficult stuation because a session is ultimately a sum of its parts - the people that turn up each week and play and most sessions go in cycles in terms of quality and material and general session style. It is certainly true to say though that this is a session with a great history and whilst it has by all accounts always had a mixture of tunes and songs the balance, at least whilst I was in Dundee was definaltely more tilted to the songs and a few tired tunes. The problem is that is how it has been allowed to go. If those who want to have the session run along particular lines stop turning up then the balance will inevitably shift. There are folk in there who have been playing there for a VERY long time and who are perfectly happy with a guitar-based sing along kind of session and those who aren't happy with that or who are most capable to stop it becoming that are not there regularly enough.
I hate to admit it but jig is right. Not necessarily about there needing to be paid hosts but in terms of a critical mass of tune players returning to the session regularly and for the whole night and redriving it the way it should be.
I play the guitar. I quite like an occasional singing circle set up but that was not why I went down to the Fish. That is not why that session exists. There are other sessions in the area for that type of set up (which I attended) and those who want to turn up and sing all night would be welcome there. The Fish is the only tunes-based session in the immediate Dundee area and that is important and can't be allowed to die!!
I better stop. I am beginning to simmer and I am not even a local any more! Cheers Jamie!
I am actually a big fan of different sessions for different kinds of musicians, so modern tune people dont offend the more pure drop musicians and vice versa. Everything would be much easier if we all stuck to that plan.
Ben, in both cases I was talking more about the session that is the subtext of this thread, and not sessions in meatspace.
My real world sessions are leaderless. We're just a bunch of friends and neighbors getting together over tunes and pints and gossip.
When troublemakers have crahsed our party, different people have dealt with it in their own way. But we all have a pretty clear picture of what our session is (and isn't).
But when our session first started out, I was the go-to person for resolving issues, suggesting new tunes, running a separate tune learning session, and keeping the publican host happy.
Now it's much more a collective effort.
That said, we all had a good laugh when a punter asked me to "introduce the band" the other night....
Yes ... I'm not going to pretend that I totally understood that the first time, Will. I get it now. And, now that I do get it, I realise that my post above still applies - in subtext -world or meatspace ...
Where I play, none of us have (or is it has? I've never been sure on that one, which is it Ben?) a problem dealing with trouble. The responsibility rests with the nearest person. Usually we'll have a quick look round just to make sure we all concur. You don't want to be leaning over people to tell someone to shut up, or shouting it across the table. Best done as quietly and surreptitiously as possible.
Over the years we've developed a zero tolerance and it has work in favour of everyone.
Correctly, it's 'none of us has', though this is one occasion when the idiomatic 'none of us have' is normally considered to be acceptable.
As you know, Michael, the one that really gets to me is when people use the possessive pronoun 'its' and put an apostrophe in it. I just never understand why. I mean, they wouldn't put an apostrophe in 'his', would they?
Others: 'infer' when people mean 'imply', 'misnomer' when people mean 'misapprehension' or 'misunderstanding'. Etc etc It's a tough life being a grammatical pedant.
Moving on ...
Your system sounds absolutely fine, Michael, so long as it is not used to bully, and somehow remains welcoming to the odd blow-in. (I *have* to say that, because, as you know, I'll be coming to your neck of the woods before too long. )
And I hope you give people at least a chance to correct whatever is the problem, unless they're drunk, in which case, there's no hope.
It's (as in, it is) an open session, so one of its (possessive) functions is to be there for the itinerant. Everybody gets a chance to get their instrument out of the case and tune up. Those that can tune their instruments get to play a tune or two. No matter what their level. It's a famous pub and there's been music there for over forty years, since the 60s.
(There's another one ... people often write 60's. But in this case I'm referring to ten years, plural, so no apostrophe. You could say, "music from the 60s". Or the other way round, "60's music", possessive to the decade. Or should you say, "60s' music" possessive plural?)
Someone's been deliberately posting comments (for a while now) with the occasional grammatical error, so he can come along with a post such as the above and 'blow our minds'
Whilst the cat's away (in Alaska) the mice can play.
Thanks for the replies, though not all relevant nor free of judgment. I wonder if I didn't word my initial query very well. Some people seemed to get the idea I was referring to some brainless troll who would batter out a few tunes badly regardless of what anyone else thought. I won't be specific, but just to say I have been more "direct" than perhaps I should have been, to one or two people whom I actually like as people, and even respect to an extent as musicians. And consequently this directness has done me no favors in terms of diplomacy. C'est la vie, I suppose.
But I'm now wondering whether some peoples' musical personalities are different from their, shall we say, perceived 'real-life' personalities. A bit like some drivers. you may meet some guy, as nice as pie, but put him behind the wheel of a car, and he becomes a maniac, revving up and speeding off and taking chances etc. I think some players are like that. Very nice people, but put them in a session and they think they are the next Matt Molloy or Frankie Gavin - without good reason, though. Any views on this? Maybe this point merits a new discussion on its own, but maybe I've done enough whining and moaning about other sessioneers.
you can learn a lot about someone by studying their behaviour in a session - their true personality just shines through once they pick up their instruments.
Actually bc, I was thinking along those lines myself. When you meet someone who's as nice as pie and then they get in a car and turn out to be a maniac, they are not really changing their personallities when they get in the car, really they are letting their guard down.
Yeah, exactly. Or playing (or driving) allows them to express a part of their personality that they, for whatever reason, don't express 'verbally' or in the so-called 'normal' course of events, ie conversation.
And this leads us back to the other question I initially asked:
"If the person is told, should the person be big enough to take criticism and try and act upon it, one way or another?"
If they were a decent person but genuinely didn't know they were playing too slow, too fast, out of tune or whatever, they surely would correct their inappropriate playing. But if they were a real genuine pain in the hole, kind of control freak type person, they wouldn't listen to criticism would they?
Just my thoughts on this.
Which is interesting when you look at your earlier post:
"You may share a common bond in the music and like the people, and so on, and form friendships, but you did so *through the music* - if it weren't for the music you most likely wouldn't have those friends - you may have other friends, but the relationship would be different. In other words, are friends through the music your closest friends?"
I'd say that my diddley chums most certainly are among my closest friends. Because I am communicating with them in an inherently unpretentious way. Free from normal constraints of verbal language. Free from the barriers of the so-called 'normal' course of events, ie conversation.
If the person is told, then if they are your freind, good friend, they'll listen. A measure of them not being as friend will be them not listening. If they are not your friend, don't play with them any more.
It's not really a 'music' problem, is it, KML. It's more about how people relate and communicate. You know, you've just cleaned the floor and someone with muddy boots tramples over it. What do you say ?
I reckon that if you are a passenger in a car and criticise anyone's driving, you're onto dangerous territory and headed for escalating tension and probably a major quarrel.
There might be objective reasons for criticism, if the driver is being reckless and there are children in the vehicle. Or, maybe, you're just in a bad mood looking for an excuse for a bust up.
The car situation is rather different to the joint effort of playing music in a pub, where everyone is making a contribution. It's maybe more like a committee meeting, when the agenda is the purpose and there are rules to follow.
If someone is new to the situation and unsure of the etiquette, they may welcome some constructive feedback and guidance, if it's well meant.
On the other hand, in the committee situation, if someone always turns up late, without the info they'd promised, speaks over others, interrupts with irrelevant remarks, ignores social cues, and so on, the whole purpose of the meeting can be sabotaged, and everyone's time and effort is wasted.
I believe that tolerance, courtesy, patience, self-deprecation, etc, are admirable qualities, to be encouraged. But in the case of risking children having a car crash, or the work and purpose of the committee being undermined, then an assertive response is required. Avoiding the responsibility to act, probably means that things just get worse and the problem becomes even more difficult to deal with.
A measured intervention is always difficult because you're challenging someone's conduct in the way that police or traffic wardens do, so it helps to know exactly what you're doing and why.
I've made the analogy before, where a session is like an office meeting, with a chair person and an agenda etc. A lot of sessions are like this. But thankfully, not where I play.
They are indeed, michael. One I went to a while back: I was chatting to this bloke, who then asked me to start up a tune.No sooner had I played a few bars when the "leader" shouted over to me words to the effect of: "Oi! it's not your turn yet!" I duly apologised saying I didn't know the protocol, etc.
I've spoken to the "leader" since and he's not a bad bloke, really. It's just that this is his method for keeping the session in some sort of order. Wouldn't be mine.
The analogies of a session as a meeting or a player as a manic driver are just that - analogies, they're only illustrating a point in another form we might more easily understand. And that point is that peoples' personalities may have other sides to them when you put a musical instrument in front of them. I suppose it has to do with the fact that it is such a hard-won skill and takes up a lot of our conscious thought. I'm not sure if my 'music mates' are my closest friends, as Michael states. But they occupy an intimate area of how I communicate. Like one of the sides of a 50p piece, the whole 10/- being my personality......assuming I'm the full shilling, that is....
I once went to a session where everyone took turns to start a tune. I would never go again. Sessions should be fun, the idea of some sort of order is my idea of hell. As are the same old tunes, three guitars (or even two) playing different chords, sessions leaders dictating tunes, sheet music at sessions. I'm afraid I don't go to the session for the sessions sake, I go to enjoy myself. Selfish or normal? If selfish is the answer then that's fine with me.
Approved tune lists for the session - that really is a horror story.
I don't entirely agree with the above comment - I do go to an eclectic session where the rule is, go round the circle, but you can always pass, duos, trios etc get 2 or whatever numbers in order.
On the other hand I convene ( not lead ) a couple of sessions and I do think it's a good idea to remind anyone who hasn't lead for a bit to try one, and especially for newcomers to make them feel welcome, especially if they're just starting out.
And I think that builds the community of friends, and the music, and the pleasure.
But music at sessions - GRRRRRRR!
Of course if someone hasn't started a set for a while, they should get badgered into it. But that's just banter. If they can't be arsed, then I'll start one of their faves, but they don't have to play. Sometimes someone might have had a bad day and they just wanna sit and relax. Or you might have had a bad day and want to let rip with loads of tunes to get it out of your system. Flexibility is the key. Do what you want. You are not at work in a dreaded office meeting. You are not performing. Your are not on show, Do whatever the feck you want, and if you are out of order, put faith in the hope that your mates will tell you. Lighten up and feckin enjoy yourself
Ephemeral?
I thought the whole point about so-called session etiquette is that it was supposed to be a long lasting set of ground rules of behaviour, not changing by the minute. I don't really like the concept either, but am using it as it's something like common parlance. I suspect we're agreed on this anyway, just not the words we're each using
No, I'm not so sure you should have a long lasting set of ground rules. Why not adapt them to the curumstance using common sense and normal everyday politeness.
If indeed, the whole point about so-called session etiquette is that it is supposed to be a long lasting set of ground rules of behaviour, not changing by the minute, then there,s another reson for me to dislike the concept.
Worth a discussion itself this one. Put it this way. If you went into someone else's session not knowing anyone, would you just make up your "rules of etiquette" as you felt like it at the moment?
I'm not suggesting you 'd do this but, what if someone was playing some lovely little tunes quietly and you rudely and loudly said "Oh shut the fvck up, here, listen to MY version of The Rakes of Mallow" or something. Just because it suited you. That's why I'm saying some form of rules have to be in place, as much as I detest the concept myself.
Art for Art's Sake?
Art for Art's Sake?
What comes first in a session, the people playing or the quality of the session?
If someone plays badly, or if they persistently play out of tune, or if they doggedly stick to the same hackneyed repertoire week after week, all the while leading the tunes, should they be told, or because they're (he or she) might be a nice person, do we put up and shut up, so we don't hurt their feelings? Then when a really good player does turn up they come just once or twice then never come back again or they return only very occasionally.
If the person is told, should the person be big enough to take criticism and try and act upon it, one way or another?
Just curious about peoples' views.
I know what I do.
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by Key Maniac Lad
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
The other players should cast their standards aside and consider if the poor playing hinders everyone else's enjoyment. If all the other members of a session really feel that their experience is being damaged, tell the player to shut up. If it's just snobbishness - "this is not the way the music should be played", "sheet music is not acceptable" - then shut up and let them get on with it.
I've been to sessions where everyone has sheet music, everything is played at the wrong speeds, three guitars all playing different chords - but the people have been having a great time, and once I got off my high horse I had an awesome time as well. Don't let "the way it should be done" hinder your enjoyment.
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by mehitabel23
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
In my experience, the people who are most uptight upholding some sort of ideals of correctness, propriety, artistic purity, etc, in session playing are often mediocre and uninteresting players themselves. Whereas some of the most talented and listenable players I have encountered in sessions have been more relaxed and generous souls. What does it all mean?
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by crazy_fingerz
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
If the people you play with "week after week" are not your mates, then there's something wrong with the session. You can always and should always tell the truth to your mates.
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by llig leahcim
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Oh, whee, Danny!
Subtext City!
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by Floss the Tethers
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Yeah, Danny. How did you take it
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by TaoCat
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Yes, generosity is a core part of this music and tradition. I think what KML may be getting at is when the collective generosity of a session is abused by someone who seems incapable of taking the gentle hints and perhaps even more direct requests to change their behavior (when that behavior threatens to ruin the session for everyone else).
As Danny points out, a session ceases to be fun when someone insists on being the center of attention, repeats the same "hackneyed" noise week in, week out, and can't or won't fit in (plays out of tune, out of time, etc.).
But most of us who play this music were given some sense of that generosity by our mentors, so it can be hard to know when enough is enough. At what point--after how many attempts to help the person fit in better--do you show them the door for the sake of the greater good?
(Obviously we're talking about your own, longstanding session, not a session in which you are the visitor.)
For me, it goes back to participating in good faith. If someone shows a genuine willingness to try to fit in, I'll put up with a fair amount of sturggling to help them do that. But if they repeatedly act clueless or, worse, intentionally continue to co-opt the session to their own (and solely their own) bent, then I I have no qualms explaining what the problem is and telling (not asking) them to leave. It's the only way, in such cases, to keep the craic.
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by Will CPT
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Firstly, if someone starts a session, or gets paid as the anchor, then it really is up to them. If we dont like it , we dont have to go.
That said, if they are not the anchor;
and they play out of tune I have no problem gently alerting them to the fact..
Repertoire....if they are the leader, well ask them politely to include other tunes, or go find another session.
If they play badly, and its their session... find another. its their session. if they are a guest, politely mention it.
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by jig
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Apropos of nothing - origin of the word "hackneyed" (from www.worldwidewords.org)
"The countryside around Hackney was pleasant, open, good-quality grassland, which became famous for the horses bred and pastured there. These were riding horses, “ambling horses”, as opposed to war horses or draught horses. Hence hackney became the standard term for a horse of this type."
"Horses of the hackney type were often worked heavily, in the nature of things that were hired out to all and sundry. So the word evolved in parallel with the previous sense to refer figuratively to something that was overused to the point of drudgery."
Is "hackneyed" hackneyed?
We now return you to your regular program/programme...
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by grego
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Thank You, Mehitabel! "Ya race what ya brung", as some of my motorcycling buddies say.
On the other hand, a bit of guidance and encouragement (God knows, I've heard plenty of that) is not out of order, either. IMHO.
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by tomw
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Oops! A bit of a cross-post, I'm afraid. Please pardon my tardy uptake. I'll leave it up to you to slug it out. . .
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by tomw
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Look at it from the other view point, a group of mediocre students are having a brilliant time playing the tunes they know, out of tune, out of time etc, but they love it. Its their session. If a top flight player sits in and then plays superfast tunes no one knows then should they be asked to leave?
Or there is a situation where a few loud dominating players monopolize the session, the majority have to sit out most of the time and get to play the odd tune but carry on coming back because they want to be part of the scene. iIf the quite ones start a tune they get grief and bad vibes from the loud players.
If someone dares raise their head out of the crowd they get stomped on. Perhaps some of the quiet ones are actually far better than the loud pushy ones, but they are shy. Its really the job of the anchor to keep order, have a word with the loud ones and gently encourage the others to play.
There are many different scenarios that we could play out....
Ultimately its up to the session leader to steer the session in the direction he wishes it to go.
So Key. can you be more specific?
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by jig
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
"Ultimately its up to the session leader to steer the session in the direction he wishes it to go."
Amen.
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by Will CPT
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
well if someone is doing the first thing that the guy said at the start there and it is an informal session, then maybe you could say something politely. on the other hand you could start tunes of yourself, or even ask someone else to start. If that person is being paid however then its not really someones place to say something, ye know. if ye dont like what they are doing you don have to go, ye know.
the second one about the great player, its totallly up to them. its a free country and if they choose to stay or come back the odd time then thats up to them.
so basically the same answer as jig up there.
I know that the session i regularly go to in the cobblestone that there are a number of regulars that would go, but it chops and changes each week. only the odd time would everyone who would regularly attend be there at once. then you would have the odd drifter.
sure you dont have to like everyone you play with aswell, sure fred finn and peter horan, probably the greatest ever duet, they couldn't stand each other for years but they played together every week without fail. they played great music but when they were'nt playing they would turn away from each other and not talk. lol.
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by fiddleruairi
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Here is another one; A bunch of folk have a session, another group of musicians come in and slowly take over, playing tunes that are beyond the first group, the music is better, fair enough, but the people who's session it is now cant get to play, when they do play they get disdainful looks from the new group. So now the first group have 2 choices ; ask the new people to leave so they can get back to playing their tunes in their session, or leave themselves.
If there is only one place in town where a session can take place, you have a recipe for territorial disputes. even fights. The poor landlord just wants some music for a friday night, he might end up getting sick of the whole game and cancel the session and get a widescreen tv...
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by jig
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Ultimately its up to the session leader to steer the session in the direction he wishes it to go.
oops, my bad.....''or her.''
I suppose its up to the individuals involved to compromise, ask the 'other' to leave or leave themselves....
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by jig
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
yea thats a tough one. i suppose the easiest solution to avoid conflict would be for the first group to join with the second group and maybe pick up some new tunes and try and take something from the experience. i dunno.
but here is another story, which is true. this happened last year at the frank magann fest in strokestown. there was scheduled session in one of the pubs (can;t remeber name). anyway, the names down were harry bradly, john blake, jesse smith, sean mckeon, and a couple of others, and then there were a couple of us who knew them playing aswell. i wasn't playing cause i hadn;t a fiddle with me so i listened instead, and it was great. the pub was full and there were a good few well known musicians lsitening and havin the craic.
anyway, this guy onj the banjo id say he was no more than 18 and two other girls the same age came in sat in the session, just at the back. around half an hour goes by, and during that half an hour these trio had started a couple of tunes themselves that some of the others had joined in, some sets they just played on their own. it was around a time where some of the scheduled musicians wer having a chats in between tunes with others in the session or at the bar or whatever that the trio started tunes an after a while it just got worse and they gradually took over the session, totally changed the flow, speed, tunes everything. it really was as bad and as loud as you would imagine .they were playing stuff by like the wolfe tones and other cheesy tunes that wouldn't be out of place at a fleadh, like modern ones. when told by some of the scheduled musicians that it was their session (by this time everyone in the pub had gotten sick of them) and if they could stop. they continued playing until people had to shout at them to stop, to which they guy replied something like 'if you can;t keep up we can slow down if you want' and other stupid things like 'we're playin the serious stuf now' and all this sh*te.' he just wouldn't stop and the sad thing was that his parents were in the pub and they were egging him on.
everybody had had enough of the arrogant crap so people like harryb, sean mck all had to pack up and move across the road to the hotel where they couldn't play even though they were scheduled for the other pub. The pub had basically almost emptied after that and the owner was furious, so he asked us to come back the next night and he would give us free beers, so that was grand. its people like that that we should be lookin out for, everybody was so p*ssed off that night. what would other people do in that situation.
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by fiddleruairi
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
I dislike sessions with leaders. Since when is there a leader among a bunch of mates?
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by llig leahcim
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Agreed, Michael, but some sessions have benevolent dictators to preserve the craic, eh?
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by Will CPT
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Well the three sessions I play in all have either a leader or a couple of them., they are paid to turn up and keep the level high, the craic happening. The 'leader' will give the 'call' to whoever he/she wants to invite. Others who happen by respect this. generally the 'leader will start the sets or invite someone else to start.
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by jig
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Fiddleruari, in the session that you described, I know the pub owner´s job is to sell drinks, but I think he should have stepped in to stop what was happening.
When there´s a verbal contract betweeen the owner and certain musicians that they will play for free drinks, money, whatever, the owner can´t just wash his hands of the situation when that sort of hi-jack happens.
If he didn´t see it or wasn´t aware of it, somebody should have told him.
It makes it even worse for everybody when the musicians are of the standard of Harry Bradley and the others you mentioned.
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by murfbox
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
You pay someone to keep the craic? Hmm, not my idea of craic. Where I come from, craic is spontaneous.
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by llig leahcim
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
No I dont pay them. The LL does. Thats ITM as a commodity in Co Clare for you.....They are paid for the music. The craic is a spontaneous reflection of the people enjoying the music.
Jeez, the last session there was a birthday party, they were feckin noisy. plenty o'craic there. At least they were happy. Which was more than you could really say for the muso's
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by jig
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
>the people who are most uptight upholding some sort of ideals of correctness, propriety, artistic purity, etc, in session playing are often mediocre and uninteresting players themselves.
...could well be me. In fact it probably is, then. Yep, that's an easy cop out, turn it round and make it the victim's fault. you don't work for the Stasi do you?
>>Whereas some of the most talented and listenable players I have encountered in sessions have been more relaxed and generous souls.
...What is inferred here is simply not true. They may well act generous in letting people play along, and act relaxed about it, but answer me truthfully, would John Carty prefer to play tunes with me or Matt Molloy? Also, I've met some nice players who are nice people but I've also met some nice players who are arrogant dismissive ignorant bastards.
Also, michael, all this idyllic stuff about just going down to the pub and swapping tunes with your mates, really, for a large number of sessions, in my experience, is not exactly a truthful portrayal either. You may share a common bond in the music and like the people, and so on, and form friendships, but you did so *through the music* - if it weren't for the music you most likely wouldn't have those friends - you may have other friends, but the relationship would be different. In other words, are friends through the music your closest friends?
I'm not sure I made my points very well as some have been misconstrued. For example, I never mentioned anything about session leaders. But I don't want to be too specific either, as I'd rather keep this more general, but some people just like a good old online argument rather than make constructive points. If that's the case, work away, I'll just head off to a different thread....
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by Key Maniac Lad
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Fair enough key but I think thats the crux of the matter. the folk or person who's session it is. If it was a house session it would be absolutely clear who's sesh it was. All the different scenarios i mention, IMO relate directly to your query. It boils down not to art, but politics.
or not?
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by jig
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
IMNSHO
The people. because its them that make the music[art].
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by jig
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
But as far as art for art's sake goes, I've wrestled with this one before. On one level - may be the hi level, I'm not sure - of course it's hi art. But on another, it's just a bunch of mates.
Another contradiction to be embraced and I think that it's at it's best when these opposing views are polarised to their extremes. In other words, the best music, the most purest hi art of it, the most sublime, comes when it really is just a close bunch of mates. Ego free, leader free, performance free, insular, and just there for each other.
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by llig leahcim
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Yeahbut jig, what if sometimes someone in the 'group' DOESN'T contribute to the art?
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by Key Maniac Lad
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
>>the best music, the most purest hi art of it, the most sublime, comes when it really is just a close bunch of mates. Ego free, leader free, performance free, insular, and just there for each other.
maybe, Michael. I did see something like that at a session last Sunday - but that was unique. You tell me where else and I'll go and listen...maybe even try and join in without breaking the spell.
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by Key Maniac Lad
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
''the best music, the most purest hi art of it'' Ie your sessions no?
As I said, its up to the anchor.... If it IS the anchor ! try another session.
Who are you to take control of another's session and start telling people to shut up or leave etc? MYOFB. IMO. Art is subjective Its a matter of perspective.
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by jig
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
what?
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by llig leahcim
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
You're insane.
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by Key Maniac Lad
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
There you go again key! thats is uncivil and factually inaccurate. Are you a psychiatrist? qualified in online psycho-analysis? No you are not. good day.
# Posted on May 23rd 2008 by jig
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
I am (qualified), but then I'm quite likely not because those that "can" actually do and those that can't end up bullsh*tting about it.
# Posted on May 24th 2008 by pavlf
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
What, you're insane as well?
# Posted on May 24th 2008 by Key Maniac Lad
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Apparently ... unless I'm actually talking some sense?
# Posted on May 24th 2008 by pavlf
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Sense? Could you run that past me again? Erm...on this site? No sorry we don't DO sense here. Try next door at Mudcat...on second thoughts....
# Posted on May 24th 2008 by Key Maniac Lad
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
It's in the nature of sessions that you'll have to play alongside people whose style, skill, taste or manners (sometimes all four) you don't like.
If you can't handle it, join a band and set your own agenda.
# Posted on May 24th 2008 by millionyears_bc
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
If someone wrecks the session they should be asked to leave. Honestly - why do people expect to have their hand held in a session??
And jig - what about the sessions where people turn up week after week year after year playing the same old tired tunes at the same old beginnerish pace? Why would the person who has bothered to learn new tunes be victimised when clearly they are the ones actually putting effort into the music?
We have a session wrecker aat our session at the moment really, really bad - but we are all to scared to tell said person to bugger off, its poor form really - surely they know they are driving people mad??
# Posted on May 24th 2008 by bb
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Good point, _bc.
Yet most of us have sat at a session that was ruined by in-your-face, egregious behavior. There is a tipping point, beyond which someone needs to escort the offending party to his or her coat and on out the door. Thank goodness this is rare, but it does happen in sessions, just as it happens at football matches, wedding receptions, school assemblies, and any other gathering of hyooman beans.
So, _bc, I'm all for tolerance. That's what makes a community a community. But the odd eejit is also why every community has it's law enforcement system.
# Posted on May 24th 2008 by Will CPT
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
I'm sorry KML, I didn't realise I'd walked into a house ('walk' and 'house' obviously being a rather large part of the confusion).
It's just annoying to me, and obviously to not a few others, to read such nonsense as some posts (see above) masquerading as 'sense'. No, actually, I don't give a f**** about the nonsense, it's the conviction that disturbs me more.
But then I've been playing for thirty years (man and boy) and most of those years were spent in C# minor.So I should know.
# Posted on May 24th 2008 by pavlf
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
"they were playing stuff by like the wolfe tones and other cheesy tunes that wouldn't be out of place at a fleadh, like modern ones." - fiddlerurai
Hmmm- bit of a contradiction - I play modern tunes as well as the old ones and so do alot of my friends and none of us would be playing Wolfetones....
# Posted on May 24th 2008 by bb
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
On another scale all together, I'm reminded of the good people of Billings, Montana, who rose up in a very civil way against hate crimes in their community. You can read the story here: http://www.pbs.org/niot/about/niot1.html
I think the moral to draw from such stories is that perhaps the most powerful way to preserve diversity and civility in any circle of people is for the people as a group to assert their well-reasoned values.
In other words, when someone's behavior disrupts a session, it's better if the corrective message is agreed on and backed up by the group (even if it's delivered by just one person).
# Posted on May 24th 2008 by Will CPT
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
well thats what they were playing! when i say modern aswell i mean like tunes that have syncapation composed deliberatly into them, that sort of modern, not modern as in charlie lennon or other more recent composers. i dont know any of the names of the tunes but you would definately recognise them if ye heared them.
# Posted on May 24th 2008 by fiddleruairi
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
KML -- I am not sure how to take your reply. I made what I think is an uncontroversial statement. It is an observation based on my own experiences. It is not an attempt at a categorical proclamation. And maybe there is no correlation whatsoever between skill and social grace. I am not sure how to answer the question scientifically, or even ask it scientifically for that matter.
Here's where I am coming from...if I am at a session and somebody acts as if they are the bearer of the torch of musical purity, artistic-ness, or what have you, I just can't help but think negative things about them. Maybe that's just me leaping to unjustified conclusions. Dunno. But that whole kind purist attitude, in a session setting, just strikes me as comical, pathetic, ridiculous, and annoying, in varying measure depending on my mood at the time.
But yet at other times I am probably guilty of the same thing and likely I end up sounding to other people like I am part of the session police (session Stasi?). I do care passionately about The Music and I too can feel compelled to leap to its defense.
These inconsistencies, contradictions, and hypocrisies are part of the spice of life.
# Posted on May 24th 2008 by crazy_fingerz
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Yikes, not another "How much wood could a woodchuck chuck..." thread! It's Groundhog Day here at the venerable mustard board...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_yDWQsrajA
# Posted on May 24th 2008 by gw
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
This subject comes up often and I read each line with great attention every time that it does. I struggle with this question all the time.
My weak solution is to have open and closed sessions available in the area.
Almost anything (not everything) goes in the open sessions. They can be fun. Beginners start their tunes at their pace and not worry that they are not good enough. More advanced players, on their tune to begin, play what and how they want without worrying about leaving the slower folks in the dust. Everyone seems fine with that. Those are my favorites. The kind of "leader" one must be changes to meet what is required. A bunch of mates, if that is all that shows up, require no leader. A wider attendance could require, instead, an iron hand (or maybe not ).
We have closed sessions, too. House parties, performances, etc. Those are the ones to which I am not invited so I have no idea what happens there! Those tend to be more predictable (in a good way). A different kind of fun.
A perfect solution? no. There may be no perfect solution. But I appreciate those who contribute to threads like this because I seek enlightenment on this topic.
Welcome back, Jig.
# Posted on May 24th 2008 by feardearg
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
"when i say modern aswell i mean like tunes that have syncapation composed deliberatly into them, that sort of modern, not modern as in charlie lennon or other more recent composers. "
Umm - yes - thats exactly what I meant too - Flook! Lau, Tabache, Michael McGoldrick.......thats exactly the stuff I like and play (as well as the standards).
# Posted on May 24th 2008 by bb
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
I must agree with Jig when he wrote about people sitting in and taking over. At Tullamore last year we had a nice little session going in the corner of a big lounge when a big crowd of youngsters sat right next to us and started their own session completely blowing us 'old gits' away, and I don't mean with admiration. I had to stop our 85 year old fiddle player from throwing a pint of beer over them. If only we could do away with that competitive streak that seems to run many of the sessions I've played in. I don't want to sit in a session and have to listen to individuals being requested to play solo tunes that I could well join in with. Perhaps it me, but I find that ITM around my neck of the woods (which shall be nameless) is played by a small cliche of people who don't or wont mix with each other. On occasions I've overheard someone trying to organise a session. The question always arose 'Who'll be there' followed by a negative reaction if the wrong people were mentioned. Sad really.
# Posted on May 24th 2008 by Free Reed
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
And jig - what about the sessions where people turn up week after week year after year playing the same old tired tunes at the same old beginnerish pace? Why would the person who has bothered to learn new tunes be victimised when clearly they are the ones actually putting effort into the music?''
That is their business. I agree with you, but so what? that doesnt give us or anyone bar the host the right to push and shove.
The decision rests firmly with the host. That is that. we dont like it? go else where.
Truth is in 30yrs plus of music I have seen an awful lot of shenanigans like this.
If someone starts a session, it is their session.
It doesnt matter if they play jackanory all night for 20yrs Its their business.
If they are a guest its a completely different matter. Then its up to the host to say what is acceptable and what is not. Political machinations to get someone evicted are nothing more than manipulation , underhand and to be despised. A session is not democracy. If the host is happy, then thats their business, not yours. if you dont like it , leave. That is how most sessions I have encountered are run. Of course there are alternative ways . A group or duo sets up a session, then its a joint decision, Consensus is the operating word. IME.
# Posted on May 24th 2008 by jig
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
fair enough you play it. i'm not a big fan of those groups but i dont have a problem with people playing it. but have you ever heard sean mckeon or harry b or jesse smith play that? thats the point im trying to make. what the other guys started to do was in complete contrast to what was being played, thats what i mean.
# Posted on May 24th 2008 by fiddleruairi
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
A session will have broad or narrow concepts of what is right for that session. Depending on the anchor really. Some sessions are strictly ITM , some allow canadian, scots tunes, some breton tunes some eastern european stuff in 10/8 etc.
# Posted on May 24th 2008 by jig
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
I'm having a similar experience in our local session in Dundee. Its been going for 30 years via various permutations and pubs. Its a mixed session, some songs, some tunes, some Irish, some Scottish. Its had some great players in the past; members of Ceolbeg, pipers from the Vale of Atholl (inc G Duncan), Mike Ward from the Tannahill weavers, Kenny (who posts on this site), Bev Whelan, Mike Feeley, Kevin Findlay (from Boogaloosa) etc. Its never been a lead or hosted session really.
I started learning fiddle having been directed to the session by Mike Ward (who talked me out of purchasing a guitar in his shop). Almost my entire repertoire was learnt from recording the session, recording Mike, learning from my future wife Mairead (a session regular) and also tapes sent from Kenny. The session was always a little bit noisy in terms of punters, and often suffered a habit of speeding up, but the quality was often quite high and for a number of years very enjoyable. New tunes were not frowned upon; and tunes like Bobby Casey's Porthole of the Kelp were quickly assimilated by players there.
However, for a time I couldn't make it to the session so often as I was working in Aberdeen, and didn't make it to the session til 11ish at night (it stops at 1am ish). Since then Mike W, who was going less and less, stopped coming down at all, and a couple of other players moved further away from the session and didn't come so often. The session changed, as i'm sure its changed many times before, however, its character is quite different now. Recently, a suggestion of one player to have a specific set list of the tunes that should be played every week was made, and also of which tunes should go in which sets. The same few hackneyed common Scottish and Irish tunes now get played almost religiously every week and a few American nursery rhymes have been added into the mix. A couple of extremely loud kick boxes have also been added into the instruments.
None of the above is necessarily a problem in a session that has a variety of music and talent. However a phone call between one player from the session and another, revealed that in reference to me "tunes that people don't know" are not being appreciated. This is quite upsetting as almost all the tunes I play in the pub are tunes I have learnt there. I play very few tunes that haven't been played there before. By tunes that people don't know, the sort of tune I'm playing that I end up playing almost alone are those like the Broken Pledge, Hunters House, Martin Wynne's tunes, Lucy Campbells etc
A couple of great musicians who play Banjo, Bouzouki and Fiddle, have appeared on the scene a couple of years ago, and though they came to the session a fair few times, they don't appear to be motivated to go anymore. My wife Mairead hasn't been going for a while now because she finds it unstimulating, with a lack of new tunes, and a lack of players that are worth listening to and learning from.
I don't want to give up on a session that has such history and that has been so rewarding in the past - indeed my wife and I had the session in mind when we moved house here 6 years ago. I still go, but am finding it less and less fulfilling... ...I've started travelling 70 miles to Edinburgh for tunes, which is a long way, when the local session is only 5 minutes walk, but the sessions are of a superb standard and very welcoming. I'm not really sure what to do, or what can be done, but i'm not sure i'm that enthusiastic about going any more? Any ideas?
# Posted on May 24th 2008 by Jamie
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
I'm with Michael on this one - I don't like 'led' sessions. I don't think leaders are at all necessary in sessions. And, even if there *is* a leader, I don't think it should be up to them to decide how the session should go. Pretty damn boring, for them and everyone else, if that was the case.
Back to the original point, I think they should be told, I think they should take it on the chin, and I think they should be supported in their efforts to improve and stop p*ssing people off. Mind you, when I've been to sessions in the past where someone has been behaving like that, I *haven't* done anything about it - I've just left. I just can't be bothered with the hassle.
# Posted on May 24th 2008 by benhall.1
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
I don't like "led" (or "leaden"
) sessions either. But when there is a clear (usually self-appointed) leader, I think it's their job to deal with troublemakers. The whole thing just goes downhill otherwise.
# Posted on May 24th 2008 by Will CPT
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Tricky...
'American nursery rhymes have been added into the mix.''
oh dear oh dear....
Well my suggestion would be to meet up with another musician or 2 , banjo or whistle, say , swap tunes and enjoy a smaller session then perhaps return en masse?. Maybe actually discuss this issue with say mike W.?
I am afraid though that that kind of situation can happen without an anchor, the better players get bored and the 'lesser' players take over... Someone[or two] needs to be paid to keep the level high.
Thats just a few little Ideas, no instant solution from me.
It doers sound like its time to start a new session or reach a critical mass with some like minded musos and storm the place!
# Posted on May 24th 2008 by jig
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Well the issue that Jamie discussed has been talked about in great detail with a lot of folk in that session and on the session's website (http://www.acousticecosse.org) but to no real resolution.
It is certainly a difficult stuation because a session is ultimately a sum of its parts - the people that turn up each week and play and most sessions go in cycles in terms of quality and material and general session style. It is certainly true to say though that this is a session with a great history and whilst it has by all accounts always had a mixture of tunes and songs the balance, at least whilst I was in Dundee was definaltely more tilted to the songs and a few tired tunes. The problem is that is how it has been allowed to go. If those who want to have the session run along particular lines stop turning up then the balance will inevitably shift. There are folk in there who have been playing there for a VERY long time and who are perfectly happy with a guitar-based sing along kind of session and those who aren't happy with that or who are most capable to stop it becoming that are not there regularly enough.
I hate to admit it but jig is right. Not necessarily about there needing to be paid hosts but in terms of a critical mass of tune players returning to the session regularly and for the whole night and redriving it the way it should be.
I play the guitar. I quite like an occasional singing circle set up but that was not why I went down to the Fish. That is not why that session exists. There are other sessions in the area for that type of set up (which I attended) and those who want to turn up and sing all night would be welcome there. The Fish is the only tunes-based session in the immediate Dundee area and that is important and can't be allowed to die!!
I better stop. I am beginning to simmer and I am not even a local any more! Cheers Jamie!
# Posted on May 25th 2008 by No Cause For Alarm
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Ah, Will, "deal[ing] with troublemakers" is a whole different kettle of ballgames from the following:
"Ultimately its up to the session leader to steer the session in the direction he wishes it to go."
It would be a positive boon to have someon who didn't mind 'dealing with troublemakers'. The other scenario is pure session hell.
# Posted on May 25th 2008 by benhall.1
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
... as well as being ungrammatical. According to a recent survey, 2 out of 3 adults are illiterate, apparently ...
# Posted on May 25th 2008 by benhall.1
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
I am actually a big fan of different sessions for different kinds of musicians, so modern tune people dont offend the more pure drop musicians and vice versa. Everything would be much easier if we all stuck to that plan.
# Posted on May 25th 2008 by bb
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Ben, in both cases I was talking more about the session that is the subtext of this thread, and not sessions in meatspace.
My real world sessions are leaderless. We're just a bunch of friends and neighbors getting together over tunes and pints and gossip.
When troublemakers have crahsed our party, different people have dealt with it in their own way. But we all have a pretty clear picture of what our session is (and isn't).
But when our session first started out, I was the go-to person for resolving issues, suggesting new tunes, running a separate tune learning session, and keeping the publican host happy.
Now it's much more a collective effort.
That said, we all had a good laugh when a punter asked me to "introduce the band" the other night....
# Posted on May 25th 2008 by Will CPT
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Yes ... I'm not going to pretend that I totally understood that the first time, Will. I get it now. And, now that I do get it, I realise that my post above still applies - in subtext -world or meatspace ...
# Posted on May 26th 2008 by benhall.1
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Where I play, none of us have (or is it has? I've never been sure on that one, which is it Ben?) a problem dealing with trouble. The responsibility rests with the nearest person. Usually we'll have a quick look round just to make sure we all concur. You don't want to be leaning over people to tell someone to shut up, or shouting it across the table. Best done as quietly and surreptitiously as possible.
Over the years we've developed a zero tolerance and it has work in favour of everyone.
# Posted on May 26th 2008 by llig leahcim
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Correctly, it's 'none of us has', though this is one occasion when the idiomatic 'none of us have' is normally considered to be acceptable.
As you know, Michael, the one that really gets to me is when people use the possessive pronoun 'its' and put an apostrophe in it. I just never understand why. I mean, they wouldn't put an apostrophe in 'his', would they?
Others: 'infer' when people mean 'imply', 'misnomer' when people mean 'misapprehension' or 'misunderstanding'. Etc etc It's a tough life being a grammatical pedant.
Moving on ...
Your system sounds absolutely fine, Michael, so long as it is not used to bully, and somehow remains welcoming to the odd blow-in. (I *have* to say that, because, as you know, I'll be coming to your neck of the woods before too long.
)
And I hope you give people at least a chance to correct whatever is the problem, unless they're drunk, in which case, there's no hope.
# Posted on May 26th 2008 by benhall.1
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
It's (as in, it is) an open session, so one of its (possessive) functions is to be there for the itinerant. Everybody gets a chance to get their instrument out of the case and tune up. Those that can tune their instruments get to play a tune or two. No matter what their level. It's a famous pub and there's been music there for over forty years, since the 60s.
(There's another one ... people often write 60's. But in this case I'm referring to ten years, plural, so no apostrophe. You could say, "music from the 60s". Or the other way round, "60's music", possessive to the decade. Or should you say, "60s' music" possessive plural?)
# Posted on May 26th 2008 by llig leahcim
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Now that really *is* pedantic. Almost up to my level ...
# Posted on May 26th 2008 by benhall.1
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Someone's been deliberately posting comments (for a while now) with the occasional grammatical error, so he can come along with a post such as the above and 'blow our minds'
Whilst the cat's away (in Alaska) the mice can play.
# Posted on May 26th 2008 by domnull
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Thanks for the replies, though not all relevant nor free of judgment. I wonder if I didn't word my initial query very well. Some people seemed to get the idea I was referring to some brainless troll who would batter out a few tunes badly regardless of what anyone else thought. I won't be specific, but just to say I have been more "direct" than perhaps I should have been, to one or two people whom I actually like as people, and even respect to an extent as musicians. And consequently this directness has done me no favors in terms of diplomacy. C'est la vie, I suppose.
But I'm now wondering whether some peoples' musical personalities are different from their, shall we say, perceived 'real-life' personalities. A bit like some drivers. you may meet some guy, as nice as pie, but put him behind the wheel of a car, and he becomes a maniac, revving up and speeding off and taking chances etc. I think some players are like that. Very nice people, but put them in a session and they think they are the next Matt Molloy or Frankie Gavin - without good reason, though. Any views on this? Maybe this point merits a new discussion on its own, but maybe I've done enough whining and moaning about other sessioneers.
# Posted on May 26th 2008 by Key Maniac Lad
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
you can learn a lot about someone by studying their behaviour in a session - their true personality just shines through once they pick up their instruments.
# Posted on May 27th 2008 by millionyears_bc
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Actually bc, I was thinking along those lines myself. When you meet someone who's as nice as pie and then they get in a car and turn out to be a maniac, they are not really changing their personallities when they get in the car, really they are letting their guard down.
# Posted on May 27th 2008 by llig leahcim
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Yeah, exactly. Or playing (or driving) allows them to express a part of their personality that they, for whatever reason, don't express 'verbally' or in the so-called 'normal' course of events, ie conversation.
# Posted on May 27th 2008 by Key Maniac Lad
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
And this leads us back to the other question I initially asked:
"If the person is told, should the person be big enough to take criticism and try and act upon it, one way or another?"
If they were a decent person but genuinely didn't know they were playing too slow, too fast, out of tune or whatever, they surely would correct their inappropriate playing. But if they were a real genuine pain in the hole, kind of control freak type person, they wouldn't listen to criticism would they?
Just my thoughts on this.
# Posted on May 27th 2008 by Key Maniac Lad
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Which is interesting when you look at your earlier post:
"You may share a common bond in the music and like the people, and so on, and form friendships, but you did so *through the music* - if it weren't for the music you most likely wouldn't have those friends - you may have other friends, but the relationship would be different. In other words, are friends through the music your closest friends?"
I'd say that my diddley chums most certainly are among my closest friends. Because I am communicating with them in an inherently unpretentious way. Free from normal constraints of verbal language. Free from the barriers of the so-called 'normal' course of events, ie conversation.
# Posted on May 27th 2008 by llig leahcim
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
If the person is told, then if they are your freind, good friend, they'll listen. A measure of them not being as friend will be them not listening. If they are not your friend, don't play with them any more.
# Posted on May 27th 2008 by llig leahcim
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
It's not really a 'music' problem, is it, KML. It's more about how people relate and communicate. You know, you've just cleaned the floor and someone with muddy boots tramples over it. What do you say ?
I reckon that if you are a passenger in a car and criticise anyone's driving, you're onto dangerous territory and headed for escalating tension and probably a major quarrel.
There might be objective reasons for criticism, if the driver is being reckless and there are children in the vehicle. Or, maybe, you're just in a bad mood looking for an excuse for a bust up.
The car situation is rather different to the joint effort of playing music in a pub, where everyone is making a contribution. It's maybe more like a committee meeting, when the agenda is the purpose and there are rules to follow.
If someone is new to the situation and unsure of the etiquette, they may welcome some constructive feedback and guidance, if it's well meant.
On the other hand, in the committee situation, if someone always turns up late, without the info they'd promised, speaks over others, interrupts with irrelevant remarks, ignores social cues, and so on, the whole purpose of the meeting can be sabotaged, and everyone's time and effort is wasted.
I believe that tolerance, courtesy, patience, self-deprecation, etc, are admirable qualities, to be encouraged. But in the case of risking children having a car crash, or the work and purpose of the committee being undermined, then an assertive response is required. Avoiding the responsibility to act, probably means that things just get worse and the problem becomes even more difficult to deal with.
A measured intervention is always difficult because you're challenging someone's conduct in the way that police or traffic wardens do, so it helps to know exactly what you're doing and why.
# Posted on May 27th 2008 by wolfbird
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
I've made the analogy before, where a session is like an office meeting, with a chair person and an agenda etc. A lot of sessions are like this. But thankfully, not where I play.
# Posted on May 27th 2008 by llig leahcim
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
They are indeed, michael. One I went to a while back: I was chatting to this bloke, who then asked me to start up a tune.No sooner had I played a few bars when the "leader" shouted over to me words to the effect of: "Oi! it's not your turn yet!" I duly apologised saying I didn't know the protocol, etc.
I've spoken to the "leader" since and he's not a bad bloke, really. It's just that this is his method for keeping the session in some sort of order. Wouldn't be mine.
The analogies of a session as a meeting or a player as a manic driver are just that - analogies, they're only illustrating a point in another form we might more easily understand. And that point is that peoples' personalities may have other sides to them when you put a musical instrument in front of them. I suppose it has to do with the fact that it is such a hard-won skill and takes up a lot of our conscious thought. I'm not sure if my 'music mates' are my closest friends, as Michael states. But they occupy an intimate area of how I communicate. Like one of the sides of a 50p piece, the whole 10/- being my personality......assuming I'm the full shilling, that is....
# Posted on May 27th 2008 by Key Maniac Lad
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
I once went to a session where everyone took turns to start a tune. I would never go again. Sessions should be fun, the idea of some sort of order is my idea of hell. As are the same old tunes, three guitars (or even two) playing different chords, sessions leaders dictating tunes, sheet music at sessions. I'm afraid I don't go to the session for the sessions sake, I go to enjoy myself. Selfish or normal? If selfish is the answer then that's fine with me.
Approved tune lists for the session - that really is a horror story.
# Posted on May 27th 2008 by bogman
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
I don't entirely agree with the above comment - I do go to an eclectic session where the rule is, go round the circle, but you can always pass, duos, trios etc get 2 or whatever numbers in order.
On the other hand I convene ( not lead ) a couple of sessions and I do think it's a good idea to remind anyone who hasn't lead for a bit to try one, and especially for newcomers to make them feel welcome, especially if they're just starting out.
And I think that builds the community of friends, and the music, and the pleasure.
But music at sessions - GRRRRRRR!
# Posted on May 27th 2008 by Guernsey Pete
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Of course if someone hasn't started a set for a while, they should get badgered into it. But that's just banter. If they can't be arsed, then I'll start one of their faves, but they don't have to play. Sometimes someone might have had a bad day and they just wanna sit and relax. Or you might have had a bad day and want to let rip with loads of tunes to get it out of your system. Flexibility is the key. Do what you want. You are not at work in a dreaded office meeting. You are not performing. Your are not on show, Do whatever the feck you want, and if you are out of order, put faith in the hope that your mates will tell you. Lighten up and feckin enjoy yourself
# Posted on May 27th 2008 by llig leahcim
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
>Do whatever the feck you want...
Well, within reason and the confines of session etiquette (however that applies to whatever session) surely?
# Posted on May 27th 2008 by Key Maniac Lad
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
of course within reason. But that reason is defined by normal everyday politeness, not some spurious ephemeral "session etiquette".
# Posted on May 27th 2008 by llig leahcim
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Ephemeral?
I thought the whole point about so-called session etiquette is that it was supposed to be a long lasting set of ground rules of behaviour, not changing by the minute. I don't really like the concept either, but am using it as it's something like common parlance. I suspect we're agreed on this anyway, just not the words we're each using
# Posted on May 28th 2008 by Key Maniac Lad
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
No, I'm not so sure you should have a long lasting set of ground rules. Why not adapt them to the curumstance using common sense and normal everyday politeness.
If indeed, the whole point about so-called session etiquette is that it is supposed to be a long lasting set of ground rules of behaviour, not changing by the minute, then there,s another reson for me to dislike the concept.
# Posted on May 28th 2008 by llig leahcim
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Worth a discussion itself this one. Put it this way. If you went into someone else's session not knowing anyone, would you just make up your "rules of etiquette" as you felt like it at the moment?
I'm not suggesting you 'd do this but, what if someone was playing some lovely little tunes quietly and you rudely and loudly said "Oh shut the fvck up, here, listen to MY version of The Rakes of Mallow" or something. Just because it suited you. That's why I'm saying some form of rules have to be in place, as much as I detest the concept myself.
# Posted on May 28th 2008 by Key Maniac Lad
Re: Art for Art's Sake?
Of course I wouldn't do it, it wouldn't be polite.
# Posted on May 28th 2008 by llig leahcim