"Colin's lengthy discourse, and Berry's, have both almost completely missed the point, although Colin ended up supporting me, I think.
For the purposes of debate, I defined folk music as: 'music made by people for their own amusement'. That music will live on, acquiring, retaining, shedding various influences, wholly or partly, is not in dispute. What is in dispute is whether 'folk music' - as per my definition - will survive.
Will someone actually dispute the tenet which is the subject of the debate i.e "Folk music* has no future"?
*as defined in my proposition (otherwise we could be here until the cows come home).
Perhaps I should have written 'Folk CLUBS have no future', instead."
A chronicle of 'doings' for posterity... and other things of little consequence!
7 comments:
Oh no, I did NOT support your original bowel action! I confess, of course, to having marginalised your definition!
Anyway, what qualifies you to define folk music? This is a concept that has been elusive to many greater minds than ours?
Perhaps you should have written 'clubs', after all.
I happen to think that "Folk" clubs will increasingly give way to "Music" Clubs, or maybe "Acoustic Music" Clubs. These will, and do, embrace some folk music but that genre will not be so central as hitherto has been the case.
I have no problem with that, Berry.
"All music's folk. After all, I ain't heard no horse ...," said Louis Armstrong and Mr. Perry.
As long as it remains 'music made by people for their own amusement' (and, preferably, acoustic), my faith remains unshaken.
Ken will probably be moved to argue that we're still missing his point, which seems to have to do with the ETA of the cows!
I have alwys missed the point of Ken!
Well, after all, Ken has no portfolio!
Now now Ken. I will try and oppose your motion then! Standby while I think. Could be a while. Could be forever!
Oh, look..!
A squirrel...!
Post a Comment