it seems to me the term 'traditional' is being used loosly for 'composer not known' and i was wondering really when we shoudl say 'traditional' or 'unknown' , as on insets of many recordings, both appear. just a thought.
Re: when do we call a tune 'tradtional' or 'unknown'
"Almost always" would be my reply. It's far more unusual to find a tune where the composer is known. The vast majority of tunes don't have a composer (at least not in the same way as we think of one person writing a piece of music).
A lot of people from outside the tradition have quite a problem getting their heads around this and say "well, somebody must have composed the tune". In fact, most of the jigs and reels we play today have evolved, rather than been created.
Perhaps a good analogy would be Darwinism vs. Creationism. (I don't want to start any religious wars, but you know what I mean)
There's been a lot written on just what qualifies as "traditional" by people like Brendan Breathnach. Some believe that tradtional tunes, by their very nature, cannot have an attributable composer. Others think that when a tune is absorbed into the reportoire, then it becomes part of the tradition even if a composer for the tune is known.
Personally, I think of tunes by people like Neilly Boyle, Tommy Peoples and Bobby Casey as being part of the tradition. Generally, composers like these aren't out for royalties or recognition - the ultimate justification of a tune is whether it is absorbed into the tradition or not.
I tend not to think about it too much and I just assume that a tune has no known composer unless I learn otherwise.
Re: when do we call a tune 'tradtional' or 'unknown'
Attributing "traditional" tunes to composers is risky for several reasons. First is that this being an aural tradition, people's names get attached to certain tunes whether or not they wrote them...Altan, for instance, has recorded tunes they call John Doherty's, Tommy Peoples', Fintan McManus', John Mhosey McGinley's...all most likely not composed by these people. Naming the tune for them is more often a way to remember the source of the tune--where you learned it from. The other risk is that many traditional composers are relatively unconcerned about getting name recognition as the composer of any given tune. Their reward, as Jeremy says, is seeing the tune picked up and become part of the tradition. In some cases, people disguise the fact that they wrote a piece, for fear that this will unduly influence whether people play the tune or not. "I learnt this one from my dear departed Uncle Paddy, who knew it for all time" is a safe way to anchor a self-composed tune in the tradition, and to let the tune sink or swim on its own musical merits. Irish music enjoys a great tradition of humility--where most musicians are humble conduits for the music, rather than forcing the music to showcase an individual's virtuosity. Even the All-Ireland competitions are relatively subdued compared to the popularity contests that infect most music competitions. So...the only time I list a composer when posting tunes to this site is when the cd liner notes do so with certainty, or in the few documented cases where the composer is widely known (the O'Carolan compositions, or Strayaway Child, for example).
Re: when do we call a tune 'tradtional' or 'unknown'
I think Will is simply referring to his comments in the previous post. He mentions that most tune composers aren't interested in getting name recognition but would rather see the tune integrated into the tradition, as if it were no different than any other "composer unknown" tune.
I'm reminded of a great story about Ewan McColl. Years ago he wrote many songs for a BBC radio documentary. One song was called "The Shoals Of Herring". Many years after the documentary was aired, he was delighted to hear a version of his song in Ireland called "The Shores Of Erin".
The point is, most composers of tunes in the traditional idiom are delighted when their tunes are incorpoated, uncredited into the general reportoire e.g., Calliope House, Guns Of The Magnificent Seven, etc.
Re: when do we call a tune 'tradtional' or 'unknown'
Arbo--after I read your comment about Kevin Burke recording your tune The Moth in the Lantern "without permission" I wondered if I should recant some of my ramblings about how most composers in the tradition find sufficient reward when their tunes are accepted as part of the trad repertoire. That sounds so noble, yet I would never suggest that a composer who DOES want his or her name associated with his or her tune is somehow less than noble.
That said, I had to wonder what your motives were in tracking down a transcript of Burke's version of your tune. Are you merely curious to see his alterations, or are you after evidence of copyright infringement? (From this great distance--the mountains of Montana, USA--it's often difficult to sense the true tenor of a comment.)
I struggle with these kinds of issues daily because I make my living as a freelance writer. Copyright is important to me, and it should be important to musical composers too, traditional or otherwise. But it's still a matter of personal choice whether to copyright a tune or let it wander unprotected, or even whether to attach one's name to it.
So what's the story behind Moth in the Lantern? Wonderful title--how's the tune go? And what's the risk to Mr. Burke if we find the recording (which cd is this on?) and trancsribe it for you?
Finally, by way of apology for any slight you may have felt from my previous post, let me say that a composer's motives for getting credit for a tune should cast no shadows on his or her motives for creating the tune in the first place, and there's nothing wrong with asking for a little recognition. Perhaps when we praise the Irish tradition for composers donating tunes anonymously, we are doing a great disservice to all the musicians who built the repertoire we enjoy today, yourself included.
Re: when do we call a tune 'tradtional' or 'unknown'
Will- I just wrote you a lengthy response, but I changed pages on the site before I posted it and seemed to have lost the response entirely. Anyway, here's the lowdown on the tune- A friend of mine in the Adirondaks called me up one evening and said, "Hey, they're playing your tune on 'A Prarie Home Companion!' Apparently, Kevin Burke and friends were playing a version of the 'Moth in the Lantern'
that evening. My best guess as to how he got a hold of the tune is through William Coulter, whom I met and played music with in Ithaca, NY. Bill got the tune through Laurie Hart, a fiddle player with whom Bill has recorded. I suppose that Bill introduced the tune to Kevin during one of his musical projects after he moved to the west coast. As far as the copyright issue goes, I'm not so attached to collecting any payment, etc. from the tune, but I do feel it is important to acknowledge the origin of a tune. I am honored that Kevin Burke thought enough of this tune to consider playing it. If I could get some information on his recording of Moth in the Lantern, I would be more than happy to transcribe his version. I am currently looking at ways in which I can upload my version.
Re: when do we call a tune 'tradtional' or 'unknown'
Arbo--
This is a good example of how easily a tune can be assimilated without any consideration given to the composer. And all it takes is a Kevin Burke or Joanie Madden or Seamus Egan to play a tune on the air or a recording, and suddenly people are picking it up in Melbourne and Reykjavik. Did Burke and Friends mention the title of Moth in the Lantern? That would at least count for something....
If you can send me sheet music, I'll send Jeremy the abcs and we can get the tune on The Session, with full credit to you as composer, and that would help clear things up at least amongst us Session devotees.
Methinks that this whole conversation on knowing the name behind the tune is symptomatic of the transition that trad Irish music is in. It used to be that the composer or source player's name was passed down aurally and face-to-face with the tune. But now we use so many other media (sheet music, abcs, recordings), and it's at once easier to be precise about the person and cavalier. People often hand me bootleg or session tapes they want me to transcribe tunes from, and there's hardly ever any written documentation of what's on the tape--sometimes not even who the musicians are. Sometimes this is clearly unethical (pirated tapes of concerts, say), and sometimes it's just a single track from a cd, made so the tune can be slowed down and picked out.
I really enjoy being able to discuss these things with people beyond our small cirlce of players here in Montana. Thanks for responding, and I'll look forward to seeing Moth in the Lantern on the site or in one form or the other....
Will
Re: when do we call a tune 'tradtional' or 'unknown'
I once asked when a tune became "traditional" of Matthew Heaton, and his reply was to shrug and say, "when no one can remember who wrote it anymore".
That of course could be the next day, given some of the sessions I've been to.
But I just read somewhere the comment of someone fairly well-known who was trying to chase down tune provenance for a recording. His comment (I can't remember at the moment who it was!) was that it was actually easier than he thought it would be to figure out where the tunes came from, even at great distances of time.
Jeremy, that's a great story about Ewan McColl! Where did you hear it? Heh. Although I'm rather surprised he didn't call it The Shores of Erin and end up with herring instead!
when do we call a tune 'tradtional' or 'unknown'
when do we call a tune 'tradtional' or 'unknown'
it seems to me the term 'traditional' is being used loosly for 'composer not known' and i was wondering really when we shoudl say 'traditional' or 'unknown' , as on insets of many recordings, both appear. just a thought.
# Posted on July 23rd 2001 by laura nesbit
Re: when do we call a tune 'tradtional' or 'unknown'
"Almost always" would be my reply. It's far more unusual to find a tune where the composer is known. The vast majority of tunes don't have a composer (at least not in the same way as we think of one person writing a piece of music).
A lot of people from outside the tradition have quite a problem getting their heads around this and say "well, somebody must have composed the tune". In fact, most of the jigs and reels we play today have evolved, rather than been created.
Perhaps a good analogy would be Darwinism vs. Creationism. (I don't want to start any religious wars, but you know what I mean)
There's been a lot written on just what qualifies as "traditional" by people like Brendan Breathnach. Some believe that tradtional tunes, by their very nature, cannot have an attributable composer. Others think that when a tune is absorbed into the reportoire, then it becomes part of the tradition even if a composer for the tune is known.
Personally, I think of tunes by people like Neilly Boyle, Tommy Peoples and Bobby Casey as being part of the tradition. Generally, composers like these aren't out for royalties or recognition - the ultimate justification of a tune is whether it is absorbed into the tradition or not.
I tend not to think about it too much and I just assume that a tune has no known composer unless I learn otherwise.
# Posted on July 23rd 2001 by Jeremy
Re: when do we call a tune 'tradtional' or 'unknown'
Attributing "traditional" tunes to composers is risky for several reasons. First is that this being an aural tradition, people's names get attached to certain tunes whether or not they wrote them...Altan, for instance, has recorded tunes they call John Doherty's, Tommy Peoples', Fintan McManus', John Mhosey McGinley's...all most likely not composed by these people. Naming the tune for them is more often a way to remember the source of the tune--where you learned it from. The other risk is that many traditional composers are relatively unconcerned about getting name recognition as the composer of any given tune. Their reward, as Jeremy says, is seeing the tune picked up and become part of the tradition. In some cases, people disguise the fact that they wrote a piece, for fear that this will unduly influence whether people play the tune or not. "I learnt this one from my dear departed Uncle Paddy, who knew it for all time" is a safe way to anchor a self-composed tune in the tradition, and to let the tune sink or swim on its own musical merits. Irish music enjoys a great tradition of humility--where most musicians are humble conduits for the music, rather than forcing the music to showcase an individual's virtuosity. Even the All-Ireland competitions are relatively subdued compared to the popularity contests that infect most music competitions. So...the only time I list a composer when posting tunes to this site is when the cd liner notes do so with certainty, or in the few documented cases where the composer is widely known (the O'Carolan compositions, or Strayaway Child, for example).
# Posted on July 23rd 2001 by Miss Lonelyhearts
Re: when do we call a tune 'tradtional' or 'unknown'
Yikes! See also Arbo Doughty's discussion on the "Moth in the Latern." Perhaps we assume too much about composer's motives and altruism.
# Posted on July 23rd 2001 by Miss Lonelyhearts
Re: when do we call a tune 'tradtional' or 'unknown'
Will-please say a little more about your comment regarding composer's motives and altruism. Thanks, Arbo
# Posted on July 23rd 2001 by Imnotirish
Re: when do we call a tune 'tradtional' or 'unknown'
I think Will is simply referring to his comments in the previous post. He mentions that most tune composers aren't interested in getting name recognition but would rather see the tune integrated into the tradition, as if it were no different than any other "composer unknown" tune.
I'm reminded of a great story about Ewan McColl. Years ago he wrote many songs for a BBC radio documentary. One song was called "The Shoals Of Herring". Many years after the documentary was aired, he was delighted to hear a version of his song in Ireland called "The Shores Of Erin".
The point is, most composers of tunes in the traditional idiom are delighted when their tunes are incorpoated, uncredited into the general reportoire e.g., Calliope House, Guns Of The Magnificent Seven, etc.
# Posted on July 23rd 2001 by Jeremy
Re: when do we call a tune 'tradtional' or 'unknown'
Arbo--after I read your comment about Kevin Burke recording your tune The Moth in the Lantern "without permission" I wondered if I should recant some of my ramblings about how most composers in the tradition find sufficient reward when their tunes are accepted as part of the trad repertoire. That sounds so noble, yet I would never suggest that a composer who DOES want his or her name associated with his or her tune is somehow less than noble.
That said, I had to wonder what your motives were in tracking down a transcript of Burke's version of your tune. Are you merely curious to see his alterations, or are you after evidence of copyright infringement? (From this great distance--the mountains of Montana, USA--it's often difficult to sense the true tenor of a comment.)
I struggle with these kinds of issues daily because I make my living as a freelance writer. Copyright is important to me, and it should be important to musical composers too, traditional or otherwise. But it's still a matter of personal choice whether to copyright a tune or let it wander unprotected, or even whether to attach one's name to it.
So what's the story behind Moth in the Lantern? Wonderful title--how's the tune go? And what's the risk to Mr. Burke if we find the recording (which cd is this on?) and trancsribe it for you?
Finally, by way of apology for any slight you may have felt from my previous post, let me say that a composer's motives for getting credit for a tune should cast no shadows on his or her motives for creating the tune in the first place, and there's nothing wrong with asking for a little recognition. Perhaps when we praise the Irish tradition for composers donating tunes anonymously, we are doing a great disservice to all the musicians who built the repertoire we enjoy today, yourself included.
Will Harmon
# Posted on July 24th 2001 by Miss Lonelyhearts
Re: when do we call a tune 'tradtional' or 'unknown'
Will- I just wrote you a lengthy response, but I changed pages on the site before I posted it and seemed to have lost the response entirely. Anyway, here's the lowdown on the tune- A friend of mine in the Adirondaks called me up one evening and said, "Hey, they're playing your tune on 'A Prarie Home Companion!' Apparently, Kevin Burke and friends were playing a version of the 'Moth in the Lantern'
that evening. My best guess as to how he got a hold of the tune is through William Coulter, whom I met and played music with in Ithaca, NY. Bill got the tune through Laurie Hart, a fiddle player with whom Bill has recorded. I suppose that Bill introduced the tune to Kevin during one of his musical projects after he moved to the west coast. As far as the copyright issue goes, I'm not so attached to collecting any payment, etc. from the tune, but I do feel it is important to acknowledge the origin of a tune. I am honored that Kevin Burke thought enough of this tune to consider playing it. If I could get some information on his recording of Moth in the Lantern, I would be more than happy to transcribe his version. I am currently looking at ways in which I can upload my version.
Arbo
# Posted on July 24th 2001 by Imnotirish
Re: when do we call a tune 'tradtional' or 'unknown'
Arbo--
This is a good example of how easily a tune can be assimilated without any consideration given to the composer. And all it takes is a Kevin Burke or Joanie Madden or Seamus Egan to play a tune on the air or a recording, and suddenly people are picking it up in Melbourne and Reykjavik. Did Burke and Friends mention the title of Moth in the Lantern? That would at least count for something....
If you can send me sheet music, I'll send Jeremy the abcs and we can get the tune on The Session, with full credit to you as composer, and that would help clear things up at least amongst us Session devotees.
Methinks that this whole conversation on knowing the name behind the tune is symptomatic of the transition that trad Irish music is in. It used to be that the composer or source player's name was passed down aurally and face-to-face with the tune. But now we use so many other media (sheet music, abcs, recordings), and it's at once easier to be precise about the person and cavalier. People often hand me bootleg or session tapes they want me to transcribe tunes from, and there's hardly ever any written documentation of what's on the tape--sometimes not even who the musicians are. Sometimes this is clearly unethical (pirated tapes of concerts, say), and sometimes it's just a single track from a cd, made so the tune can be slowed down and picked out.
I really enjoy being able to discuss these things with people beyond our small cirlce of players here in Montana. Thanks for responding, and I'll look forward to seeing Moth in the Lantern on the site or in one form or the other....
Will
# Posted on July 24th 2001 by Miss Lonelyhearts
Re: when do we call a tune 'tradtional' or 'unknown'
I once asked when a tune became "traditional" of Matthew Heaton, and his reply was to shrug and say, "when no one can remember who wrote it anymore".
That of course could be the next day, given some of the sessions I've been to.
But I just read somewhere the comment of someone fairly well-known who was trying to chase down tune provenance for a recording. His comment (I can't remember at the moment who it was!) was that it was actually easier than he thought it would be to figure out where the tunes came from, even at great distances of time.
Jeremy, that's a great story about Ewan McColl! Where did you hear it? Heh. Although I'm rather surprised he didn't call it The Shores of Erin and end up with herring instead!
Zina
# Posted on August 12th 2001 by Zina Lee