In todays world you can make good money simply by being famous. You don't actually need to be good at sport, music, acting, dancing or whatever. Simply by appearing on TV in some nonsense like "Big Brother" you can spend the rest of your life opening super markets or appearing at events for a fee.
As for the famous who can do something, are they actually better at it than the non famous?
You know the type of thing. "Oh, he/she is in such and such a group, they are great players, the best of them all" and that type of thing.
One of the discussions about Willie Week centred around Martin Tourish and John someone playing in a pub, and this was described as a highlight.
From my experience there are thousands of unknown musicians all over the world who are every bit as good as, and better, than the "famous" people.
Put it this way. I was at a session last Friday outside Milton, with about 16 players. Now I could easily put together a group from 6 of these, make great CDs and such. And most of these players were very young, and totally unknown.
Now if we formed that group, call it "Lunacy" just for now, would everyone be saying "Oh the fiddler from "Lunacy" is absolutely wonderful" and yet he/she wouldn't have been given a second glance the week before, mainly because there are so many wonderful, unknown, musicians. But once known, are they any better?
In short, are some people influenced by names, rather than by content? Unfortunately, I believe this is quickly creeping in to the tradition.
The vast majority of people who play this music do so as a hobby. There are many great players out there who are just as good as the big names, but who would much rather spend their time enjoying playing at sessions rather than going "pro."
But it's good to have the big names. They represent playing that is enjoyed by large numbers of people in the tradition, and they help to define how the music should be played. Their influence is important to keep the tradition going, but it would be a mistake to assume that they are the "best" players out there.
While I enjoy the majority of your insightful contributions to this discussion board, I'm very much afraid that in this case, you have merely stooped to statin' the bleedin' obvious.
I have always had the impression that you are a famous sleb yourself, bliss...you know, total strangers pointing at you in the supermarket, whispering to their companions "That's that bodhran bliss, don't look now, but he's *famous*..."
I'm curious. Does all the attention ever get wearisome ? I mean, all those cameramen camping on your lawn and journalists rummaging through your refuse bags, must be fun at first, but do you ever long for the old days, when nobody even cared which brand of deodorant bodhran bliss wore at sessions ?
Ok, as far as Martin Tourish is concerned, in trad; because there are no set rules, no one is actually good or bad: only relevance. True, some people are more popular than others but that doesn't mean much in anything but a commercial sence.
I'm just back from a gig and had a good chat with a friend in which we talked about the fame thing - hence I'm writting this. As far as I'm concerned, fame is good... you get a bit of a buzz for a few days but really, it only lasts for about that long unfortunately. Music and art on the other hand lasts a life-time. It's profoundly better.
If "fame" tries to invade the genre, it will never last because as nice as it is, it simply can't last. It's essentially superficial. The beauty of a musical interaction with someone - as with John Blake (who I actually didn't even know was there!) is timeless and the buzz of that is eternal. Despite not knowing everyone who was there in Miltown, I wont forget that beautiful experience in a hurry.
To people who've experienced this thing that you all call "fame", it's a fun but very fleeting moment. We're actually still real musicians. It's the people who focus entirely on the superficiality of fame that you should be concerned about, not the musicians who happened to be highlighted. The Gradam Ceoil wasn't a competition, and I certainly didn't enter.
That's my pennys worth... (in my incapacity as someone who happened through no fault of his own to do a tv show.)
It already exists!
We've all been at sessions when some well known fiddler or worldwide renouned musician has walked in and played. And there's a ripple of whispered happiness at their presence! And a sort of smug feeling of one-up-manship that you were there and this person somehow made your contribution (and general playing) more credible. "Oh! last night I was playing a few sets with Kylie Minogue. coz she turned up at the boozer..."
And anyway, if you're a serious musician, you have to promote yourself in order to interact with others, thus learn more and improve your playing and viability. So unless your a sad loser and only ever want to do music in your bedsit or a quiet corner of a pub once a week, you do want recognition and fame! Of course!!!
As Mr Warhol said...
All I ever want is to play music in a quiet corner of the pub once a week. So I take umbridge at being refered to as a sad loser. And it's errelavant that it's a pub where it's unusual if a "worldwide renouned musician" hasn't walked in and played.
I think the notion of fame needs to be put in perspective here. Take someone right at the very top of this so-called fame ladder, Paddy Maloney say ... is he a famous person? Of course he isn't. The whole notion is pathetic.
As long as you don't get famous the same way that Kate Rusby and Spiers&Boden and Eliza Carthy and Seth Lakeman get famous, by getting on Mike Harding seemingly every bloody week, being put on soddin' pedestals, getting treated with sycophancy and making most sane people heartily sick, it's OK to be famous! In other words, look at English folk and don't do it that way.
I aspire to being good enough to be able to play in a quiet corner of the pub once a week so I must be a complete loser!! However, I think I just might be the only person alive who actually doesn't want to be famous.....(actually come to think of it, there are two of us - me and Van Morrisson )
Isn't anyone else disturbed by the comment about how famous and popular musicians define how the music should be played?
I mean, I don't care how popular it is, I am not wearing one of those whispy see-through Celtic Women dresses down at the pub and trading in my buddy's bouzouki for a synthesizer stuck on the New Age setting.
"Hundreds of years from now, it will not matter what my bank account was, the sort of house I lived in, or the kind of car I drove... But the world may be different because I did something so bafflingly crazy that my ruins become a tourist attraction." http://despair.com/priorities.html
Imagine the headlines that fame could bring... "Famous Irish Traditional Player renowned for his hot sessions runs off with a young fiddle player half his age' ... *TREOIR magazine offers to buy his story*.....I'd never live it down.!!!!
I experienced personal fame, of a sort, for a few years. It was of a more local flavor, and not having anything to do with my banjo playing. I was a radio DJ on a popular commercial station. Similarly to TV sitcom stars, people feel as if they know you after a while when they listen to you on the radio. So I was a celebrity, at least in some people's eyes. And I found it utterly creepy and annoying.
People would come up to me at concerts or events, and they'd be nervous to meet me, which always felt strange to me. But that was "in context", the ones that really used to freak me out were the people that recognized me "out of context", by recognizing my voice. And there were the hushed whispers and people shying away from me, but obviously watching me...
Ugh, put me on the list of people that don't want to be famous!
At a music teaching festival a couple of years ago, the first day of banjo class, the teacher had everyone play a tune, so he could see our skill level. I think every single student from that class went up to the teacher later in the day and apologized, saying that it was the worst playing that they had ever done, because of nervousness. And it got me to thinking how horrible it must be to be so famous for playing music, that nobody else can play when you're around, because they're afraid of being compared to you.
But. llig, Paddy Moloney certainly believes that he's famous and so do the people who work for him. He's the only Irish musician I've ever interviewed in a flash West End hotel (where he was staying) and who was accompanied by his agent's press secretary to make sure that his interview schedule was maintained.
Surely, thinking you are famous and employing people who think you are famous is a different kettle of fish to actually being famous?
Who were you interviewing him for? Rolling Stone? GQ? Vanity Fair?
But the thing about wee Paddy is that he's an incorrigible chatterbox who can't keep his whistle in his pocket for more than 10 mins. Hardly how a famous person behaves, bless him.
I stand corrected Rev! I always forget the Nouveau English spelling. I need to pay attention more in the supermarket check-out lines. Usually I' m not looking at the words...
I can't remember who I'd been commissioned by - one of the broadsheets - but the fact is that Paddy was staying in a very upmarket hotel on Park Lane. The staff there certainly believed that he was famous and undertook all manner of checks before I was allowed to meet the man and his press secretary.
Paddy certainly didn't have a whistle in his pocket (but was still pleased to see me) and gave me a whole hour of devoted attention because his wholehearted aim for the past thirty-odd years has been to keep The Chieftains' name in the public arena.
And some of the other replies, well....some do seem to be obsessed by names.
An example of names and influence, and obviously money making. Jim Corr of the Corrs once won the accolade of "Ireland's best musician" at some e high brow awards. Now, no disrespect to Jim, but even he would admit that this was ridiculous.
I know awards are all about generating money, but some people in their minds "award" famous names a bit too much respect.
PS: Mr Llig, how could you. "Et Tu Brute" and all that.
I suppose those craving attention cannot be deterred.
The hard- core traditionalist will always find backrooms & basements ~ away from the glitteratti.
They will not fade away,.
In the U.S., at least, most people (like about 90 percent of the general population) have maybe heard of the Chieftains (from TV ads hawking their Greatest Hits) and Riverdance. Oh, and Celtic Woman, lately. Some of the kids are into Flogging Molly, etc., but no Irish traditional musician (except the Chieftains, under the group name) is "famous." That "Lunacy" band you joked about? Not even on the map.
Maybe that's a good thing. Or maybe a little more fame would be better, for everybody. I wouldn't mind having a few more good trad players in my neighborhood, that's for sure.
This reminds me of an observation I've had over many years of reading the liner notes for CD's or the description of bands or individuals on websites or publicity sheets.
Often, less-known or unknown bands or individuals will list all the "famous" people or bands they have either shared a stage with or shared a tune with in order to build credibility in their own worthiness of spending time and/or money on.
I've often wondered if I would ever stoop to this if I ever got around to recording something that I wanted to sell.
I know for example that over many years, I've played tunes with a few of these less-famous types, who in turn have apparently collaborated with the superstars of the superstars, even dead ones, at least according to the publicity that I've read over the years. So, I guess I'm just 2 degrees of separation from worldwide fame if I want to look at it that way.
Probably most people reading this can say this perhaps.
On second thought, I think it's best to ignore the fame game, and just simply enjoy playing and listening to music. Yes, that's the point I wanted to make.
I have encountered many musicians -- not "famous" ones -- who are sure to drop the names of any so-called famous musicians they've had the privilege of hanging out with into conversation. My theory is that people have the perception that it makes them look cool or at least more credible. Like, dude, it's like hanging out with the Grateful Dead. Has anyone seen "Almost Famous?"
The reality of it is that you just hang around a lot of musicians. If you play this stuff long enough, sooner or later you will play a session or at least have a conversation with some well known musician. Part of what's nice about this music is that there isn't a massive rift between the people at the top of the game and those of us at the bottom. I can have a conversation with famous musicians who are in world touring bands and have recorded zillions of albums without needing to work for Rolling Stone Magazine.
A biofilm is a structured community of microorganisms encapsulated within a self-developed polymeric matrix and adherent to a living or inert surface. Biofilms are also often characterized by surface attachment, structural heterogeneity, genetic diversity, complex community interactions, and an extracellular matrix of polymeric substances.(wiki)
Actually, I think biofilm is just a fancy word for scum...interesting though...I came across it because it effects the way that water is impacted by UV light...please don't ask how UV light impacts Guiness through the froth, I have enough to worry about already
Oh boy, yes, it's Friday all over isn't it? Perhaps later on tonight I'll do a little investigating myself about the UV-reflecting properties of porter vis-a-vis my digestive tract.
"So unless your (sic) a sad loser and only ever want to do music in your bedsit or a quiet corner of a pub once a week, you do want recognition and fame! Of course!!! "
Count me in. Playing in the house or down the pub with a couple of mates for the sheer enjoyment of it is just as good as it gets. I say this without any criticism of those who try to make a living from the music, but just playing for the enjoyment of it should be what it's all about. Proud to be a sad loser, by the above definition.
Who needs fame? After 30 plus years at it, I am still playing for dancing every weekend and make a point of getting out to a couple of seshs a week. Why?
The biggest thrill of being a musician is to see people you have taught and encouraged going off to form their own bands.
Sod the fame - be a working musician, and make sure you put something back into it. Encourage as many learner players as you can.
Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
In todays world you can make good money simply by being famous. You don't actually need to be good at sport, music, acting, dancing or whatever. Simply by appearing on TV in some nonsense like "Big Brother" you can spend the rest of your life opening super markets or appearing at events for a fee.
As for the famous who can do something, are they actually better at it than the non famous?
You know the type of thing. "Oh, he/she is in such and such a group, they are great players, the best of them all" and that type of thing.
One of the discussions about Willie Week centred around Martin Tourish and John someone playing in a pub, and this was described as a highlight.
From my experience there are thousands of unknown musicians all over the world who are every bit as good as, and better, than the "famous" people.
Put it this way. I was at a session last Friday outside Milton, with about 16 players. Now I could easily put together a group from 6 of these, make great CDs and such. And most of these players were very young, and totally unknown.
Now if we formed that group, call it "Lunacy" just for now, would everyone be saying "Oh the fiddler from "Lunacy" is absolutely wonderful" and yet he/she wouldn't have been given a second glance the week before, mainly because there are so many wonderful, unknown, musicians. But once known, are they any better?
In short, are some people influenced by names, rather than by content? Unfortunately, I believe this is quickly creeping in to the tradition.
Other viewpoints would be welcome.
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by bodhran bliss
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
The vast majority of people who play this music do so as a hobby. There are many great players out there who are just as good as the big names, but who would much rather spend their time enjoying playing at sessions rather than going "pro."
But it's good to have the big names. They represent playing that is enjoyed by large numbers of people in the tradition, and they help to define how the music should be played. Their influence is important to keep the tradition going, but it would be a mistake to assume that they are the "best" players out there.
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by Marklar
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
My dear Mr Bliss,
While I enjoy the majority of your insightful contributions to this discussion board, I'm very much afraid that in this case, you have merely stooped to statin' the bleedin' obvious.
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by llig leahcim
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
I have always had the impression that you are a famous sleb yourself, bliss...you know, total strangers pointing at you in the supermarket, whispering to their companions "That's that bodhran bliss, don't look now, but he's *famous*..."
I'm curious. Does all the attention ever get wearisome ? I mean, all those cameramen camping on your lawn and journalists rummaging through your refuse bags, must be fun at first, but do you ever long for the old days, when nobody even cared which brand of deodorant bodhran bliss wore at sessions ?
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by wolfbird
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
Ok, as far as Martin Tourish is concerned, in trad; because there are no set rules, no one is actually good or bad: only relevance. True, some people are more popular than others but that doesn't mean much in anything but a commercial sence.
I'm just back from a gig and had a good chat with a friend in which we talked about the fame thing - hence I'm writting this. As far as I'm concerned, fame is good... you get a bit of a buzz for a few days but really, it only lasts for about that long unfortunately. Music and art on the other hand lasts a life-time. It's profoundly better.
If "fame" tries to invade the genre, it will never last because as nice as it is, it simply can't last. It's essentially superficial. The beauty of a musical interaction with someone - as with John Blake (who I actually didn't even know was there!) is timeless and the buzz of that is eternal. Despite not knowing everyone who was there in Miltown, I wont forget that beautiful experience in a hurry.
To people who've experienced this thing that you all call "fame", it's a fun but very fleeting moment. We're actually still real musicians. It's the people who focus entirely on the superficiality of fame that you should be concerned about, not the musicians who happened to be highlighted. The Gradam Ceoil wasn't a competition, and I certainly didn't enter.
That's my pennys worth... (in my incapacity as someone who happened through no fault of his own to do a tv show.)
Martin Tourish.
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by martin t
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
- Oh, sorry for the grammatical errors there, being a human, I did have a few pints!
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by martin t
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
I agree with Martin.
"The password here is " " superficial" "
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by Bodhi
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
"in trad; because there are no set rules, no one is actually good or bad"
You wouldn't be saying that if you'd been at the last session I attended. We were definitely bad.
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by awildman2384
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
Ha ha - yes Mr Tourish needs to get out more ...
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by Hup
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
It already exists!
We've all been at sessions when some well known fiddler or worldwide renouned musician has walked in and played. And there's a ripple of whispered happiness at their presence! And a sort of smug feeling of one-up-manship that you were there and this person somehow made your contribution (and general playing) more credible. "Oh! last night I was playing a few sets with Kylie Minogue. coz she turned up at the boozer..."
And anyway, if you're a serious musician, you have to promote yourself in order to interact with others, thus learn more and improve your playing and viability. So unless your a sad loser and only ever want to do music in your bedsit or a quiet corner of a pub once a week, you do want recognition and fame! Of course!!!
As Mr Warhol said...
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by yhaalhouse
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
All I ever want is to play music in a quiet corner of the pub once a week. So I take umbridge at being refered to as a sad loser. And it's errelavant that it's a pub where it's unusual if a "worldwide renouned musician" hasn't walked in and played.
I think the notion of fame needs to be put in perspective here. Take someone right at the very top of this so-called fame ladder, Paddy Maloney say ... is he a famous person? Of course he isn't. The whole notion is pathetic.
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by llig leahcim
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
Good man Mr. Tourish,it's nice to hear the opinion of a person who actually experiences te other side of our awe.Great job in the session with blakey
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by bozoukipukey
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
Queen:
The llig doth protest too much, methinks.
misquoted: Hamlet Act 3, scene 2, 222–230
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by yhaalhouse
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
As long as you don't get famous the same way that Kate Rusby and Spiers&Boden and Eliza Carthy and Seth Lakeman get famous, by getting on Mike Harding seemingly every bloody week, being put on soddin' pedestals, getting treated with sycophancy and making most sane people heartily sick, it's OK to be famous! In other words, look at English folk and don't do it that way.
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by Steve Shaw
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
Get famous the same way as who?
I've heard of Mike Harding. Isn't he a comedian?
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by llig leahcim
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
I aspire to being good enough to be able to play in a quiet corner of the pub once a week so I must be a complete loser!! However, I think I just might be the only person alive who actually doesn't want to be famous.....(actually come to think of it, there are two of us - me and Van Morrisson
)
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by waraf
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
Best remembered that way and not in his current role as a purveyor of mostly mid-Atlantic pseudofolk tripe.
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by Steve Shaw
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
in equals for
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by Steve Shaw
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
Isn't anyone else disturbed by the comment about how famous and popular musicians define how the music should be played?
I mean, I don't care how popular it is, I am not wearing one of those whispy see-through Celtic Women dresses down at the pub and trading in my buddy's bouzouki for a synthesizer stuck on the New Age setting.
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by SWFL Fiddler
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
Re Fame(Priorities):
"Hundreds of years from now, it will not matter what my bank account was, the sort of house I lived in, or the kind of car I drove... But the world may be different because I did something so bafflingly crazy that my ruins become a tourist attraction." http://despair.com/priorities.html
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by Agnes Nutter
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
Imagine the headlines that fame could bring... "Famous Irish Traditional Player renowned for his hot sessions runs off with a young fiddle player half his age' ... *TREOIR magazine offers to buy his story*.....I'd never live it down.!!!!
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by Free Reed
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
I'm trying to imagine "Famous young female fiddle player runs off with overweight bearded harmonica player three times her age..."
Nah. This isn't working.
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by Steve Shaw
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
So, the question was: "are some people influenced by names rather than content?"
I imagine the answer is "yes."
Does it matter, particularly? I don't think so.
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by grego
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
I experienced personal fame, of a sort, for a few years. It was of a more local flavor, and not having anything to do with my banjo playing. I was a radio DJ on a popular commercial station. Similarly to TV sitcom stars, people feel as if they know you after a while when they listen to you on the radio. So I was a celebrity, at least in some people's eyes. And I found it utterly creepy and annoying.
People would come up to me at concerts or events, and they'd be nervous to meet me, which always felt strange to me. But that was "in context", the ones that really used to freak me out were the people that recognized me "out of context", by recognizing my voice. And there were the hushed whispers and people shying away from me, but obviously watching me...
Ugh, put me on the list of people that don't want to be famous!
At a music teaching festival a couple of years ago, the first day of banjo class, the teacher had everyone play a tune, so he could see our skill level. I think every single student from that class went up to the teacher later in the day and apologized, saying that it was the worst playing that they had ever done, because of nervousness. And it got me to thinking how horrible it must be to be so famous for playing music, that nobody else can play when you're around, because they're afraid of being compared to you.
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by Reverend
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
Good perspective Rev. I never understood the cult of personality. Maybe my teenage punk years cured my of all that nonsense.
That's got to twist your brain all up too after a while. Imagine the effect on children? Sort of explains Brittany Spears a bit.
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by SWFL Fiddler
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
come on, SWFL, get your celebrity names right... it's *Britney* Spears! Or should we start calling you SWFL Fidlerr?
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by Reverend
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
oops, forgot the winkey.
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by Reverend
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
But. llig, Paddy Moloney certainly believes that he's famous and so do the people who work for him. He's the only Irish musician I've ever interviewed in a flash West End hotel (where he was staying) and who was accompanied by his agent's press secretary to make sure that his interview schedule was maintained.
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by Floss the Tethers
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
Surely, thinking you are famous and employing people who think you are famous is a different kettle of fish to actually being famous?
Who were you interviewing him for? Rolling Stone? GQ? Vanity Fair?
But the thing about wee Paddy is that he's an incorrigible chatterbox who can't keep his whistle in his pocket for more than 10 mins. Hardly how a famous person behaves, bless him.
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by llig leahcim
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
I stand corrected Rev! I always forget the Nouveau English spelling. I need to pay attention more in the supermarket check-out lines. Usually I' m not looking at the words...
Standing by for more Paddy Moloney anecdotes...
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by SWFL Fiddler
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
Llig, please don't call me Shirley.
I can't remember who I'd been commissioned by - one of the broadsheets - but the fact is that Paddy was staying in a very upmarket hotel on Park Lane. The staff there certainly believed that he was famous and undertook all manner of checks before I was allowed to meet the man and his press secretary.
Paddy certainly didn't have a whistle in his pocket (but was still pleased to see me) and gave me a whole hour of devoted attention because his wholehearted aim for the past thirty-odd years has been to keep The Chieftains' name in the public arena.
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by Floss the Tethers
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
I'm awaiting updates on the Paddy Moloney / Britney Spears scandal. What will the child be named?
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by NEW Pure Drop® Ear Canal Oil
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
Congratulations. Congratulations Spears-Moloney.
Or Well Done? Well Done Moloney?
Not Bad For An Auld One Moloney? A bit wordy, better stick with Congratulations.
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by SWFL Fiddler
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
Thank you Grego for answering the question.
And some of the other replies, well....some do seem to be obsessed by names.
An example of names and influence, and obviously money making. Jim Corr of the Corrs once won the accolade of "Ireland's best musician" at some e high brow awards. Now, no disrespect to Jim, but even he would admit that this was ridiculous.
I know awards are all about generating money, but some people in their minds "award" famous names a bit too much respect.
PS: Mr Llig, how could you. "Et Tu Brute" and all that.
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by bodhran bliss
Talkin' bout our genre
I suppose those craving attention cannot be deterred.
The hard- core traditionalist will always find backrooms & basements ~ away from the glitteratti.
They will not fade away,.
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by Random_notes
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
SWFL—
"Congratulations" would indeed be appropriate! Good for Paddy for maintaining his whistle all these years.
# Posted on July 17th 2008 by NEW Pure Drop® Ear Canal Oil
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
ick - I'm going back to the thread where they're discussing sects and violins
# Posted on July 18th 2008 by airport
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
aaarrrrggghhhhhh.
What is wrong with trying to make money doing something you love?
# Posted on July 18th 2008 by bb
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
Good gracious - what are you accusing Britney of now?
# Posted on July 18th 2008 by airport
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
Nowt wrong from making money from something you love. Problem is, as it becomes work, the love dies.
# Posted on July 18th 2008 by bodhran bliss
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
Fame? Ha! As if.
In the U.S., at least, most people (like about 90 percent of the general population) have maybe heard of the Chieftains (from TV ads hawking their Greatest Hits) and Riverdance. Oh, and Celtic Woman, lately. Some of the kids are into Flogging Molly, etc., but no Irish traditional musician (except the Chieftains, under the group name) is "famous." That "Lunacy" band you joked about? Not even on the map.
Maybe that's a good thing. Or maybe a little more fame would be better, for everybody. I wouldn't mind having a few more good trad players in my neighborhood, that's for sure.
# Posted on July 18th 2008 by mickray
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
This reminds me of an observation I've had over many years of reading the liner notes for CD's or the description of bands or individuals on websites or publicity sheets.
Often, less-known or unknown bands or individuals will list all the "famous" people or bands they have either shared a stage with or shared a tune with in order to build credibility in their own worthiness of spending time and/or money on.
I've often wondered if I would ever stoop to this if I ever got around to recording something that I wanted to sell.
I know for example that over many years, I've played tunes with a few of these less-famous types, who in turn have apparently collaborated with the superstars of the superstars, even dead ones, at least according to the publicity that I've read over the years. So, I guess I'm just 2 degrees of separation from worldwide fame if I want to look at it that way.
Probably most people reading this can say this perhaps.
On second thought, I think it's best to ignore the fame game, and just simply enjoy playing and listening to music. Yes, that's the point I wanted to make.
# Posted on July 18th 2008 by halfwaythere
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
I 've always thought that the Beatles were more "popular" than Jesus.
# Posted on July 18th 2008 by Bodhi
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
Ah there's the question. People making a living off of FAMOUS people.
um, back to work now, have a newspaper to produce. (grin)
# Posted on July 18th 2008 by Bodhi
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
"Good gracious - what are you accusing Britney of now?"
Blowing Paddy Maloney's Whistle.
# Posted on July 18th 2008 by awildman
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
The short answer to Bliss' question is "yes."
I have encountered many musicians -- not "famous" ones -- who are sure to drop the names of any so-called famous musicians they've had the privilege of hanging out with into conversation. My theory is that people have the perception that it makes them look cool or at least more credible. Like, dude, it's like hanging out with the Grateful Dead. Has anyone seen "Almost Famous?"
The reality of it is that you just hang around a lot of musicians. If you play this stuff long enough, sooner or later you will play a session or at least have a conversation with some well known musician. Part of what's nice about this music is that there isn't a massive rift between the people at the top of the game and those of us at the bottom. I can have a conversation with famous musicians who are in world touring bands and have recorded zillions of albums without needing to work for Rolling Stone Magazine.
# Posted on July 18th 2008 by TheSilverSpear
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
Maybe it's "Small fish in Big Pond" versus "Big fish in Small Pond" and some prefer to remain "Newly hatched fry in a puddle somewhere"!
# Posted on July 18th 2008 by yhaalhouse
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
Or maybe that should be "adult guppy in stagnant puddle"!
# Posted on July 18th 2008 by yhaalhouse
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
I consider myself to be more like the algae.
# Posted on July 18th 2008 by TheSilverSpear
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
Does the puddle have a biofilm ?
Do I hear you mumble "Eh, what's that ?"
A biofilm is a structured community of microorganisms encapsulated within a self-developed polymeric matrix and adherent to a living or inert surface. Biofilms are also often characterized by surface attachment, structural heterogeneity, genetic diversity, complex community interactions, and an extracellular matrix of polymeric substances.(wiki)
Just like any typical session, no ?
# Posted on July 18th 2008 by wolfbird
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
"extracellular matrix of polymetric substances"
Wait a second, is this the "Guinness is good for you" thread?
# Posted on July 18th 2008 by SWFL Fiddler
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
Your guess is as good as mine, SWFL, but I took it as an oblique reference to yhaalhouse's desire to be famous..of course, I could be wrong...
# Posted on July 18th 2008 by wolfbird
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
Oh! I gotcha wolfbird, sorry.
That would have caused some confusion at the pub. "I'm sorry, do you have any single malt polymetrics or just this blended stuff?"
# Posted on July 18th 2008 by SWFL Fiddler
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
Actually, I think biofilm is just a fancy word for scum...interesting though...I came across it because it effects the way that water is impacted by UV light...please don't ask how UV light impacts Guiness through the froth, I have enough to worry about already
# Posted on July 18th 2008 by wolfbird
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
Oh boy, yes, it's Friday all over isn't it? Perhaps later on tonight I'll do a little investigating myself about the UV-reflecting properties of porter vis-a-vis my digestive tract.
# Posted on July 18th 2008 by SWFL Fiddler
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
"So unless your (sic) a sad loser and only ever want to do music in your bedsit or a quiet corner of a pub once a week, you do want recognition and fame! Of course!!! "
Count me in. Playing in the house or down the pub with a couple of mates for the sheer enjoyment of it is just as good as it gets. I say this without any criticism of those who try to make a living from the music, but just playing for the enjoyment of it should be what it's all about. Proud to be a sad loser, by the above definition.
# Posted on July 19th 2008 by de Selby
Re: Is the "Fame Syndrome" invading our genre?
Who needs fame? After 30 plus years at it, I am still playing for dancing every weekend and make a point of getting out to a couple of seshs a week. Why?
The biggest thrill of being a musician is to see people you have taught and encouraged going off to form their own bands.
Sod the fame - be a working musician, and make sure you put something back into it. Encourage as many learner players as you can.
# Posted on July 19th 2008 by geoffwright