No, I'm having a grand day, Ian. It's not from our email correspondence. It's a thought which came to me, I assumed out of the blue; which is why I haven't developed it any further. My apologies if I subliminally inferred anything, Ian. I've enjoyed the offline conversations.
No thoughts regarding my OP it seems. Fair enough.
I agree with Ian. The OP brought my mind straight to that Liz Carroll business, and llig's comment about Martin Hayes' phrasing. Helped probably by the nearby 'acquired taste' thread.
I'm sure I will, Jim. Once I start something, I don't like to put it down until I've finished. Trouble with this is, I never will have...
Just been having an interesting discussion here about the nature of mastery - i.e. when you no longer have to think about the technicalities - you just 'do'.
When you're learning from scratch, you only have a general idea where you're heading. When you already know, it's a complicating factor - i.e. it's odd to be able to play a tune at full lick on mandolin, put it down and then *not* be able to do the same thing on the fiddle. Plus I know what I 'want' to sound like on the fiddle - I just don't! A bit like speaking fluent Italian but being rubbish at Spanish...
No idea what that has to do with the OP I must admit...
David my "Aquired Taste" thread came from the idea that i some things take time to get use to. It was inspired by the recent "joy" and "entertainment" i get outof the Eavesdropper, when it was at first, an album that i was disappointed about buying. How it took some getting use to. But my post wasn't about a specific Artist, but the genre as a whole. There were a lot of things i didn't like about this music when i first heard it, but now i appreciate the music because of them.
However, it is also not sensible to assume that people, or the world, behave in a sensible manner. So pipe down, learn The Rolling Waves the way Kevin Burke plays it, and get with the program!
Whiddler, that is a good question. In the context of the OP it concerns the reasoning (or lack of reasoning) by which some trad players accept other players. Or, conversely, reject certain players; or their perceptions about traditional Irish music ... a tune ... a player ...
That's a mouthful. I hope it helps.
OK, Ben has inspired me to try a more serious answer.
Whether it is explicit or not, I suppose every segment of every art has its "academy," whether it be official or unofficial, organized or ad hoc, that forms to establish what is "good, bad, acceptable, unacceptable." A general consensus builds among those who practice that 'school' of the art. In the world of The Music, who you like/dislike/emulate/reject has a fair amount to do with how you are accepted. Although, I would suggest that the ultimate test is the skill and ability you bring to the table yourself, or at least the determination you display as you attempt to develop that skill and ability.
every segment of every art has its "academy,"
...is another way of saying that some people just can't help telling other people what they should be doing and how they should be doing it. Watch out for them.
Yes Al, how you play is the ultimate test. Though how you teach
is important too. You can do a lot of damage that way. The saying
is "do what I say, not what I do" but quite often the opposite is better
in music -- "do what I do, not what I say". I certainly took lots of bad
advice as a young clarinet player -- made me cynical about music teachers.
I think it's wider than that - all undertakings seem to acquire a centre of gravity, which is the mid-point of those who participate in it. It is also likely that the majority of participants will cluster fairly closely round that mid-point. It seems true of pretty much any grouping of people.
By doing so, they effectively establish a consensus that then goes on to define the activity of the group. There is then the risk that those who lie further from that centre of gravity are either marginalised, or at least *feel* marginalised. The stronger the centre becomes, the more marginalised the rest feel.
The other risk is that the core, speaking mostly unto itself, goes on to reinforce its own 'truths' to the exclusion of anything that is seen not to fit. There may be nothing wrong with this, and maybe those on the margins would be better redefining themselves as an entirely separate core, but it can still marginalise those who might have useful alternative perspectives to contribute.
I am actually writing this mostly mindful of my workplace, so it's *not* primarily a comment on recent threads - but it nonetheless seems true that this behaviour has been at least as evident in the hobby fields I have known, as more formal situations - the more so where there is no official definition of the core activity in the first place.
So, on the one hand, it's important to recognise that ITM has defining characteristics without which it would not be what it is, but on the other, to recognise that there will be very many different takes on what those are, which need not threaten the music itself.
And finally, I think it's important to recognise the issue within the group itself - while the views expressed on here are often very knowledgeable, AFAIK they only constitute one part of the trad world, not its entirety, and there is benefit to be had from accepting diversity even where the instinct is to do the opposite.
Fiddlearner - I felt a connection between this thread, the "Martin Hayes vs Liz Carroll" part of the earlier thread and "acquired taste". They had got me thinking about why I am not particularly enthusiastic about some players and tunes that others regard very highly - so I was not surprised when Ben started this thread. I think part of my developing preferences ("acquisition of taste") is about familiarity with the music making me "ready for more" of things that some players do with a tune and are renowned for amongst supposed validators. But there are some things that I don't think I will ever like much and have an idea why; I don't care about "invalidation" because of those preferences - but it is nice when an experienced player expresses a similar attitude ...
I haven't learnt much on these pages. All things considered there isn't a consensus. Countless proclamations, though. Amongst all the chatter there is a wee bit of good advice. Sometimes it pops up serendipitously, almost always steeped in banter & sundry idiosyncrasies. And when it happens, I enjoy the "Humours of Mustard"
All of you are grand. Most Mustardkins are climbing on the shoulders of those who started the ball rolling. I take a little time to look deeper. It doesn't help my playing ... but how much do you expect from a website?
There is a centre of gravity, or at least a centre of attention. It's the bowl of popcorn. Reading through the discussions inevitably leads to munching.
"I haven't learnt much on these pages." Haven't you? I find that having to constantly look things up because someone says the opposite of what seems common sense, just to check that I'm not going mad, has made me learn huge amounts of stuff. Not much about trad, admittedly ...
Ben Hall, "haven't learnt much" is relative to what I learn outside of the discussions (& the extra time filtering misinformation). Potentially every time I play I can learn something. So, that's where I focus my learning; not here. There simply isn't enough consistency. Some discussions help me conceptualize, consider specifics, & yes, rethink my playing. But they are abstractions.
I do learn from listening. That's why I always mention that I miss SoundLantern.
I miss SoundLantern too. It had a certain something ...
Have you checked out that other thing that someone linked to yet?
[Oh, and I was being serious - I really do learn a lot from being around here. My own preconceptions are constantly being challenged, just as I'm challenging other peoples'. I don't find the inconsistency a problem at all. I always find that it's possible to weed out the useless stuff and glean the nuggets (mixing several metaphors).]
I've learned lots of things, then unlearned some of them -
usually regarding fiddle technique. Advice that starts out with
"never ...." or "always ...." has to be watered down or ignored after
a while, regardless of the source. There's one exception though -
Relax ... it's great advice, never gets stale, can be hard to do.
Practicing and listening are great teachers but they don't teach you
who's worth listening to, what kind of strings / flutes / whistles / accordions / concertinas people like to use, what tunes do most people know --- you're
lucky if you can pick that up locally - you've gotta be in some place like
Clare, Belfast, New York, London - etc.
I agree this isn't sensible ~
I agree this isn't sensible ~
To say that someone must inevitably like a particular player or tune in order to be considered valid, just isn’t sensible.
# Posted on May 29th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
And....?
# Posted on May 29th 2011 by minijackpot
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
And ...?
I don't think this thread will reach 500 posts
And ... ?
# Posted on May 29th 2011 by Theirlandais
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
But...
# Posted on May 29th 2011 by gam
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
If ...
# Posted on May 29th 2011 by ethical blend
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
Perhaps
# Posted on May 29th 2011 by MorganYYZ
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
Eh...?
# Posted on May 29th 2011 by DrSilverSpear
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
This seems to have sprung from an off-list conversation between Ben and me, a follow-on from the Liz Carroll thread. Not sure why it appeared here.
Are you having a bad day, Ben?
# Posted on May 29th 2011 by ian stock
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
No, I'm having a grand day, Ian. It's not from our email correspondence. It's a thought which came to me, I assumed out of the blue; which is why I haven't developed it any further. My apologies if I subliminally inferred anything, Ian. I've enjoyed the offline conversations.
No thoughts regarding my OP it seems. Fair enough.
# Posted on May 29th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
I'll take your word for it that you agree it isn't sensible.
# Posted on May 29th 2011 by Weejie
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
To say that someone must inevitably like a particular player or tune in order to be considered valid, just isn’t sensible.
Yup, agree with that. You might give serious cause for doubt however if you don't like any of them!
Mr Stock, nice to hear from you again. Was yours an enforced absence?
# Posted on May 29th 2011 by ormepipes
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
Hello Ormepipes, no I can safely say that I've never had an enforced absence here - at least not in the way you're thinking
Just a lot of work in the past weeks plus far too many hours being spent playing that darned addictive fiddle!
# Posted on May 29th 2011 by ian stock
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
< far too many hours being spent playing that darned addictive fiddle!>
lol,, learn to live with it Ian - jim,,,
: )
# Posted on May 29th 2011 by FIDDLE4
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
I agree with Ian. The OP brought my mind straight to that Liz Carroll business, and llig's comment about Martin Hayes' phrasing. Helped probably by the nearby 'acquired taste' thread.
# Posted on May 29th 2011 by David50
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
I'm sure I will, Jim. Once I start something, I don't like to put it down until I've finished. Trouble with this is, I never will have...
Just been having an interesting discussion here about the nature of mastery - i.e. when you no longer have to think about the technicalities - you just 'do'.
When you're learning from scratch, you only have a general idea where you're heading. When you already know, it's a complicating factor - i.e. it's odd to be able to play a tune at full lick on mandolin, put it down and then *not* be able to do the same thing on the fiddle. Plus I know what I 'want' to sound like on the fiddle - I just don't! A bit like speaking fluent Italian but being rubbish at Spanish...
No idea what that has to do with the OP I must admit...
# Posted on May 29th 2011 by ian stock
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
Interesting though Ian,
As for mastery, its that degree of competence that is always just on the far side of the hill. Glasshopper
# Posted on May 29th 2011 by ormepipes
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
David my "Aquired Taste" thread came from the idea that i some things take time to get use to. It was inspired by the recent "joy" and "entertainment" i get outof the Eavesdropper, when it was at first, an album that i was disappointed about buying. How it took some getting use to. But my post wasn't about a specific Artist, but the genre as a whole. There were a lot of things i didn't like about this music when i first heard it, but now i appreciate the music because of them.
# Posted on May 29th 2011 by fiddlelearner
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
However, it is also not sensible to assume that people, or the world, behave in a sensible manner. So pipe down, learn The Rolling Waves the way Kevin Burke plays it, and get with the program!
# Posted on May 29th 2011 by AlBrown
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
What does it mean for a person to be valid?
# Posted on May 30th 2011 by Whiddler
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
What does it mean for a person to be a person?
# Posted on May 30th 2011 by AlBrown
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
Whiddler, that is a good question. In the context of the OP it concerns the reasoning (or lack of reasoning) by which some trad players accept other players. Or, conversely, reject certain players; or their perceptions about traditional Irish music ... a tune ... a player ...
That's a mouthful. I hope it helps.
# Posted on May 30th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
OK, Ben has inspired me to try a more serious answer.
Whether it is explicit or not, I suppose every segment of every art has its "academy," whether it be official or unofficial, organized or ad hoc, that forms to establish what is "good, bad, acceptable, unacceptable." A general consensus builds among those who practice that 'school' of the art. In the world of The Music, who you like/dislike/emulate/reject has a fair amount to do with how you are accepted. Although, I would suggest that the ultimate test is the skill and ability you bring to the table yourself, or at least the determination you display as you attempt to develop that skill and ability.
# Posted on May 30th 2011 by AlBrown
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
bollards!
# Posted on May 30th 2011 by mcknowall
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
every segment of every art has its "academy,"
...is another way of saying that some people just can't help telling other people what they should be doing and how they should be doing it. Watch out for them.
# Posted on May 30th 2011 by gam
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
Yes Al, how you play is the ultimate test. Though how you teach
is important too. You can do a lot of damage that way. The saying
is "do what I say, not what I do" but quite often the opposite is better
in music -- "do what I do, not what I say". I certainly took lots of bad
advice as a young clarinet player -- made me cynical about music teachers.
# Posted on May 30th 2011 by Hup
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
I think it's wider than that - all undertakings seem to acquire a centre of gravity, which is the mid-point of those who participate in it. It is also likely that the majority of participants will cluster fairly closely round that mid-point. It seems true of pretty much any grouping of people.
By doing so, they effectively establish a consensus that then goes on to define the activity of the group. There is then the risk that those who lie further from that centre of gravity are either marginalised, or at least *feel* marginalised. The stronger the centre becomes, the more marginalised the rest feel.
The other risk is that the core, speaking mostly unto itself, goes on to reinforce its own 'truths' to the exclusion of anything that is seen not to fit. There may be nothing wrong with this, and maybe those on the margins would be better redefining themselves as an entirely separate core, but it can still marginalise those who might have useful alternative perspectives to contribute.
I am actually writing this mostly mindful of my workplace, so it's *not* primarily a comment on recent threads - but it nonetheless seems true that this behaviour has been at least as evident in the hobby fields I have known, as more formal situations - the more so where there is no official definition of the core activity in the first place.
So, on the one hand, it's important to recognise that ITM has defining characteristics without which it would not be what it is, but on the other, to recognise that there will be very many different takes on what those are, which need not threaten the music itself.
And finally, I think it's important to recognise the issue within the group itself - while the views expressed on here are often very knowledgeable, AFAIK they only constitute one part of the trad world, not its entirety, and there is benefit to be had from accepting diversity even where the instinct is to do the opposite.
Or to put it simply: Mavericks have their uses!
# Posted on May 30th 2011 by ian stock
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
Fiddlearner - I felt a connection between this thread, the "Martin Hayes vs Liz Carroll" part of the earlier thread and "acquired taste". They had got me thinking about why I am not particularly enthusiastic about some players and tunes that others regard very highly - so I was not surprised when Ben started this thread. I think part of my developing preferences ("acquisition of taste") is about familiarity with the music making me "ready for more" of things that some players do with a tune and are renowned for amongst supposed validators. But there are some things that I don't think I will ever like much and have an idea why; I don't care about "invalidation" because of those preferences - but it is nice when an experienced player expresses a similar attitude ...
# Posted on May 30th 2011 by David50
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
I haven't learnt much on these pages. All things considered there isn't a consensus. Countless proclamations, though. Amongst all the chatter there is a wee bit of good advice. Sometimes it pops up serendipitously, almost always steeped in banter & sundry idiosyncrasies. And when it happens, I enjoy the "Humours of Mustard"
All of you are grand. Most Mustardkins are climbing on the shoulders of those who started the ball rolling. I take a little time to look deeper. It doesn't help my playing ... but how much do you expect from a website?
http://www.thesession.org/discussions/display/7902#comment169809
... "Which is one of the reasons why politics and planning weddings are often like trying to herd cats."
October 3rd 2005 by Zina Lee
# Posted on May 30th 2011 by Ben Steen
There is a centre of gravity, or at least a centre of attention. It's the bowl of popcorn. Reading through the discussions inevitably leads to munching.
# Posted on May 30th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
"I haven't learnt much on these pages." Haven't you? I find that having to constantly look things up because someone says the opposite of what seems common sense, just to check that I'm not going mad, has made me learn huge amounts of stuff. Not much about trad, admittedly ...
# Posted on May 30th 2011 by ethical blend
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
Ben Hall, "haven't learnt much" is relative to what I learn outside of the discussions (& the extra time filtering misinformation). Potentially every time I play I can learn something. So, that's where I focus my learning; not here. There simply isn't enough consistency. Some discussions help me conceptualize, consider specifics, & yes, rethink my playing. But they are abstractions.
I do learn from listening. That's why I always mention that I miss SoundLantern.
# Posted on May 30th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
I miss SoundLantern too. It had a certain something ...
I don't find the inconsistency a problem at all. I always find that it's possible to weed out the useless stuff and glean the nuggets (mixing several metaphors).]
Have you checked out that other thing that someone linked to yet?
[Oh, and I was being serious - I really do learn a lot from being around here. My own preconceptions are constantly being challenged, just as I'm challenging other peoples'.
# Posted on May 30th 2011 by ethical blend
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
I've learned lots of things, then unlearned some of them -
usually regarding fiddle technique. Advice that starts out with
"never ...." or "always ...." has to be watered down or ignored after
a while, regardless of the source. There's one exception though -
Relax ... it's great advice, never gets stale, can be hard to do.
Practicing and listening are great teachers but they don't teach you
who's worth listening to, what kind of strings / flutes / whistles / accordions / concertinas people like to use, what tunes do most people know --- you're
lucky if you can pick that up locally - you've gotta be in some place like
Clare, Belfast, New York, London - etc.
# Posted on May 31st 2011 by Hup
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
Ok David, i get it now
One thing i know that i don't like in this music, is Syncopation.
# Posted on May 31st 2011 by fiddlelearner
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
EB, I think it's time for me to accept that SoundLantern is not coming back. That was then, & now I need to use the sources which are available. ;)
# Posted on May 31st 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
To say that someone must inevitably dislike a particular player or tune in order to be considered valid, just isn’t sensible.
# Posted on May 31st 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
Your last but one there, Ben. Yes, of course. Move on and all. Just agreeing with you that it's missed.
# Posted on May 31st 2011 by ethical blend
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
No, I understand. It's just that when it closed there was a glimmer of hope it would start up; once there was funding. Of course, though, I miss it.
# Posted on May 31st 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: I agree this isn't sensible ~
If you want to know how demotivators tackle the OP, they use *disconfirmation*
~
http://video.despair.com/
# Posted on May 31st 2011 by Ben Steen