But that raises the interesting question: who would write a ballad
about a historical event, but deviate drastically from the
generally-known facts? And why?
>
Surely the answer to that is, practically anyone who doesn't have access
to other channels of communication like the classroom or the pulpit. To
put it another way, put 'the intifada' or 'the war in Afghanistan' in
the place of 'a historical event' and you see what I mean.  David Buchan
wrote that 'The Battle of Harlaw' is precisely this, an attempt to set
the 'generally-known facts' straight from the point of view of the
people (most of them, as ever, civilians) caught up in it.  He didn't
suggest that this was necessarily any more 'factual' than the received
version, but it was in dialogue with it.  I don't see why a domestic
drama like the 'Laird o' Warist' would be any different.Gerald Porter

I am informed of the following Call.  I just spoke to Mr Speights
('spites') and the deal seems excellent, legitimate and excellent working
conditions (Good pay plus apartment plus airfare, etc.  I didn't ask they
would pay transportation if you should prove homesick and return early.)He tells me this is an ongoing need; they'll hire someone for 6 months at a
time and then rotate someone else.  BUT, they need someone immediately.
The present singer wants to come home.  The hiring and paying office is the
regular Disney casting office here in Florida.  I questioned the era
mentioned and he is quite reasonable - He's just boning up on sea songs and
is much interested in the whole cycle.  Legit sea-song & chantey singers
preferred.  (It's reasonable to think the crowd will sing along.)Had a good talk. He says absolutely the best way to reach him is e-mail.
Mention my name.  That won't help you get the job.  Or hurt you.  But he'd
like to know how you found out.  The opening has been offered through the
local musician's union and generally.Even Brits would be acceptable.  Or Irish.Good luck.>Please excuse the mass mailing.  I am looking to cast a single guitar player
>/singer (or banjoist) for our new park in Tokyo.  This is to perform
>traditional songs of the sea (sea shanties) circa the late 1700's and early
>1800's.  The material will be provided to the right fit talent.  I believe
>that anyone that performs comfortably in a folk style capacity should be
>able to adapt to this style.
>
>The contract is for six months and includes a decent salary, round trip
>air-fare, a 5 day work week, a per diem and housing.  If, in your travels,
>you should run across anyone that may fit this description please direct
>them to me at the number below.
>
>Thank you,
>Mark
>
>Mark Speights
>Talent Booking Director
>Walt Disney Entertainment
>Office - 407-397-3856
>Fax - 407-397-3740
>Pager - 407-893-1118
>E-mail - [unmask]-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -
                  I am Abby Sale - in Orlando, Florida
                        Boycott South Carolina!
        http://www.naacp.org/news/releases/confederateflag011201.shtml

Hi!        Well here are a few suggestions for holiday gifts for ballad
lovers. This week's list is a mixed bag of things ballad related.        1496031838 - The Viking Book of Folk Ballads 1963
        1494243824 - The Ballad Matrix: Personality, Milieu and the Oral
Tradition by McCarthy 1990
        1494908262 - The Ballad Book: A Selection of the Choicest
British Ballads By Allingham 1860 or 1870 (maybe)
        1495358681 - Beech Mountain Folk-Songs & Ballads 1936 (includes
a reference to a man named Nathan Hicks. Is this a relation to the Hicks
family of singers who were recorded in the 1950's and later?)
        1495659057 - Cowboy Songs by John Lomax 1924
        1495611770 - Folklore of Canada by Fowke 1990 softcover edition
        1496124387 - Treasury of Irish Folklore by Colum        One unusual item that my searches turned up is a Civil War era
broadside in auction 1046881585                        Happy holiday shopping!
                                Dolores--
Dolores Nichols                 |
D&D Data                        | Voice :       (703) 938-4564
Disclaimer: from here - None    | Email:     <[unmask]>
        --- .sig? ----- .what?  Who me?

Nathan Hicks was the father of the great teller of Jack Tales, Ray
Hicks. He is the man Frank Warner went to Beech Mountain to meet in (was
it) 1938 after learning of Nathan's dulcimer making. Nathan introduced
Warner to his son-in-law, Frank Proffitt. The rest is history. The Beech
Mountain book here mentioned was printed prior to the Warner meeting.
This small collection is by Mellinger Edward Henry and "memory fails me"
(my copy of the book is upstairs on the other side of the house, and I'm
too damn lazy to fetch it). Henry's "Folk Songs from the Southern
Highlands" goes for pretty big bucks on ABE ($75 to $176.95).
        SandyDolores Nichols wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
>         Well here are a few suggestions for holiday gifts for ballad
> lovers. This week's list is a mixed bag of things ballad related.
>
>         1496031838 - The Viking Book of Folk Ballads 1963
>         1494243824 - The Ballad Matrix: Personality, Milieu and the Oral
> Tradition by McCarthy 1990
>         1494908262 - The Ballad Book: A Selection of the Choicest
> British Ballads By Allingham 1860 or 1870 (maybe)
>         1495358681 - Beech Mountain Folk-Songs & Ballads 1936 (includes
> a reference to a man named Nathan Hicks. Is this a relation to the Hicks
> family of singers who were recorded in the 1950's and later?)
>         1495659057 - Cowboy Songs by John Lomax 1924
>         1495611770 - Folklore of Canada by Fowke 1990 softcover edition
>         1496124387 - Treasury of Irish Folklore by Colum
>
>         One unusual item that my searches turned up is a Civil War era
> broadside in auction 1046881585
>
>                         Happy holiday shopping!
>                                 Dolores
>
> --
> Dolores Nichols                 |
> D&D Data                        | Voice :       (703) 938-4564
> Disclaimer: from here - None    | Email:     <[unmask]>
>         --- .sig? ----- .what?  Who me?

Folks:For those of us interested in industrial lore/song/etc., and thos whos eek
to place folksong  and folklore in a larger socio-economic picture, this
might be of interest.Ed---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 16:40:16 -0600
From: "Mott, Jim" <[unmask]>
Reply-To: "NEWDEAL: USA, 1929-1952" <[unmask]>
To: [unmask]
Subject: NEW DEAL - Good news on child labor [x EH-Net]Robert McIntosh, _Boys in the Pits: Child Labour in Coal Mines_.
Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2000.
xxviii
+ 305 pp. $34.95 (hardcover), ISBN: 0-7735-2093-7.Reviewed for EH.NET by Carolyn Tuttle, Department of Economics
and
Business, Lake Forest College. <[unmask]>Robert McIntosh (National Archives of Canada) offers a completely
new
and bold perspective on the issue of child labor during the
industrialization period of a country. _Boys in the Pits: Child
Labour in Coal Mines_ examines the socioeconomic and political
conditions of boys employed in the Canadian coal mines during the
nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. This book departs
dramatically from the ongoing debate between the pessimists and
optimists regarding the exploitation of children during the
Industrial Revolution of Great Britain, the industrialization of
the
United States and the development of Latin America. McIntosh puts
forth the interpretation that the boys who worked in the pits
during
Canada's Industrial Revolution were not victims of economic
growth
but instead mature young men who wanted to work and fought for
their
rights as workers. This archival study complete with photographs
and
contemporary testimonies contributes to the current body of
literature by offering a nontraditional approach to child labor,
a
statistical record of the employment of boys in coal mines
located in
Nova Scotia and a chilling account of the conditions of work both
above and below ground in coal pits. McIntosh weaves the use of
primary sources throughout the book in supporting his main
hypothesis
that "despite some individual testimony to the contrary, the
weight
of evidence is that boys entered the mine happily" (p.176). He
uses
industrial publications, union publications and records, the
press
and travelers' accounts of their visits to mines, the
publications of
students of the industry, royal commission inquiries and
provincial
Department of Mines' published annual reports to show that the
pit
boys were not powerless, immature, incompetent children but
instead
courageous, mature, independent workers who wanted to work.McIntosh is extremely successful in accomplishing two of the
three
main objectives of this book. Unfortunately, the research
presented
falls short of obtaining his first and most important
objective -- to
introduce, develop and support an entirely new hypothesis of why
children worked. His examination of all the factors that affected
the
demand and supply of boys for employment in the coalmines is
quite
interesting and well supported with historical facts. His
hypothesis-- that the boys wanted to work -- is clearly stated
and
developed but the evidence provided is insufficient, making his
argument unconvincing. He is extremely successful, however, in
achieving his other two objectives. The photographs, testimonies
of
workers, and commission inquiries provide a detailed description
of
the type of work and conditions of work in the mines as well as
exploring the relationships of the pit boys to their employers
and
their co-workers (chapters 3 and 4). Lastly, he places the pit
boys
in the context of their families and communities to explain their
role in the family, community and local economy (chapters 6, 7,
and
5, respectively).While telling the history of the boys in Canadian coal mines,
McIntosh applies the theory of the labor market to explain the
increase and then eventual decrease in the employment of pit
boys.
The increase in the employment of boys to work above and below
ground
occurred due to primarily economic and social factors. He
attributes
the increase in the demand for pit boys to: (1) the termination
of
the General Mining Association monopoly in 1858 (p. 45); (2)
railway
construction which lead to the development of new coal fields (p.
47); (3) technological advances (the steam engine, extensive
division
of labor and specialization) (pp. 65-68) and (4) the expansion of
surface work (p. 70). He attributes the increase in the supply of
pit
boys to: (1) the tradition of family-based labor (p. 48); (2) the
custom that working as a young boy was training for an adult
occupation (p. 175); (3) the establishment of security for the
family
where the boys' wages provided insurance and pensions (pp. 106,
115)
and (4) the boys' desire to enter the mines over attending school
(p.
175). The identification and discussion of each of these factors
is
succinct and convincing except the last reason for an increase in
supply, the boys' desire to enter the mines. The problem with
this
analysis is discussed at greater length below. It would have been
beneficial to comparative economists, economic historians and
development economists if McIntosh had developed the comparison
with
Great Britain more fully to identify what factors were
country-specific and what factors were shared by Great Britain as
well. This additional analysis would have contributed nicely to
the
current examination of the employment of child labor in
developing
countries today in coal and metal mines.In his concluding chapter, McIntosh briefly touches upon the
reasons
for the disappearance of the pit boys from Canadian coalmines. As
in
Great Britain, the changes in technology and the newly
reconstructed
view of childhood gradually removed boys from the coalmines.
Unlike
Great Britain, a decline in the demand for coal due to
competition
from the United States, the Great Depression and the emergence of
alternatives (natural gas and electricity) caused a decline in
the
mining industry in Canada. The role of mining and schooling
legislation in the employment of boys, however, was not clear. At
one
point McIntosh claims that child labor laws and schooling laws
had
little impact on the decrease in child labor (pp. 89, 90). This
stands in direct conflict with his statement that the legislation
that raised the minimum wage and established compulsory schooling
attendance contributed to the decrease in pit boys (p. 172). The
impact of child labor laws and schooling laws on the use of child
labor should have been developed further with the aim to make a
defendable decisive claim.The controversial stance that McIntosh takes in this book that
the
pit boys were not victims exploited by their parents or
capitalists,
although provocative, is not entirely compelling. McIntosh offers
three main arguments to support his thesis. His first argument
rests
on an in depth examination of wage and income data for the Sydney
Mines from 1871-1901 (chapter 6). Quite convincingly he shows
that
the conventional links between child labor and subsistence did
not
hold in Sydney. In Tables 6.6 and 6.7 the data reveal that boys
in
high-income households were almost as likely to be employed as
boys
in low-income households (pp. 119-121). This is a very important
finding and should be further investigated using wage and income
data
from other cities and provinces. McIntosh then uses this data on
wage
and income from Sydney to conclude that in Canada the pit boys
wanted
to work and were not forced by parents or mine owners (p. 122).
This
seems plausible but certainly not exhaustive of the possible
interpretations of this finding. Furthermore, one should not make
a
generalization for the whole country based on one city in one
province. As he mentioned in earlier chapters, it could be that
boys
worked to help their family achieve a higher standard of living
(p.
125), security in times of crisis such as death or old age (p.
106),
or an occupation for adulthood (p. 123). Consequently, this
argument,
although interesting, is only partially persuasive in revealing
boys
overriding desire to work.In his second argument, McIntosh identifies the inherent
characteristics associated with the pit boys to demonstrate that
they
were valued independent workers whose "experience in the mine is
a
record of achievement" (p. 179). Miners viewed them as valued
co-workers and important contributors to family income. The pit
boys,
moreover, did not define themselves as victims but instead they
were
proud of their role in the family and the economy. They were
productive members of the working-class who opted for work
because in
society it was identified as manly over school, which was
identified
as effeminate. In opposition to the traditional view of child
labor
as one of "a record of blighted childhood" (p. 178), these boys
and
young men had self-respect and fought for their rights as
workers.
McIntosh successfully provides both direct and indirect evidence
to
show that the boys were mature, self-reliant, courageous
individuals
who displayed initiative.The third argument carefully develops how the socially stimulated
"web of solidarity" among the pit boys created a political
response
of action (p. 149). Socially the movement from childhood to
manhood
for boys was marked by their entry into the mines. Fathers had
experienced this and now their sons went through the same
process. As
McIntosh stated, "in the mining family, boys learned not simply
that
certain work was women's; they also learned that men's work
warranted
both women's respect and the lion's share of the available food,
drink, and leisure time" (p. 123). Once in the mines, moreover,
the
evidence undeniably illustrates a collective loyalty among the
pit
boys. They talked back to adults, whether parents or managers,
until
they were organized as a branch of the miners' union. If they
were
not satisfied that their grievances were being heard, they would
strike. McIntosh helps the reader to appreciate the significance
of
their action by pointing out that the entire mine had to shut
down
when the boys walked out because their duties were essential to
the
safe and productive operation of the mine. Therefore, the fact
that
there were 47 strikes in Nova Scotia from 1880 to 1926 makes this
argument convincing (p. 120).In conclusion, _Boys in the Pits_ offers a new view of child
labor
that is sure to create discussion and additional research among
historians and economic historians alike. In sharp contrast to
Great
Britain's fragile young victims of exploitation, young pit boys
in
the mid-nineteenth century were described by Canadian newspapers
as
"cheerful imps" and the older ones as "happy," "bright,"
"animated"
young men whose contributions to the family, the mine and the
economy
were highly valued (pp. 90-91). McIntosh does a superb job of
documenting and describing the employment of child labor in
Canadian
coalmines while developing the hypothesis that the pit boys were
anything but victims.Carolyn Tuttle is author of _Hard at Work in Factories and Mines:
The
Economics of Child Labor during the British Industrial
Revolution_.
Oxford and Boulder: Westview, 1999. In addition, she is the most
recent winner of the Economic History Association's Jonathan
Hughes
Prize for Excellence in Teaching Economic HistoryCopyright (c) 2001 by EH.Net. All rights reserved. This work may
be
copied for non-profit educational uses if proper credit is given
to
the author and the list. For other permission, please contact the
EH.Net Administrator ([unmask]; Telephone:
513-529-2850;
Fax: 513-529-3308). Published by EH.Net (December 2001). All
EH.Net
reviews are archived at http://www.eh.net/BookReview

Dolores:Yes, the Nathan Hicks of Beech Mountain, is the same fellow you bumped
into earlier, elsewhere.  He is related to the large extended family of
Jane Gentry, Council Harmon and descendents who have given us hundreds of
songs, and the great Jack tales.Ed

Delores,The item number 1494243824 - The Ballad Matrix - seems to be wrong.
That number belongs to a book about Plessy vs Ferguson.  I couldn't
find The Ballad Matrix auction by searching its title.  Can you help?Thanks.>Hi!
>
>         Well here are a few suggestions for holiday gifts for ballad
>lovers. This week's list is a mixed bag of things ballad related.
>
>         1496031838 - The Viking Book of Folk Ballads 1963
>         1494243824 - The Ballad Matrix: Personality, Milieu and the Oral
>Tradition by McCarthy 1990
>         1494908262 - The Ballad Book: A Selection of the Choicest
>British Ballads By Allingham 1860 or 1870 (maybe)
>         1495358681 - Beech Mountain Folk-Songs & Ballads 1936 (includes
>a reference to a man named Nathan Hicks. Is this a relation to the Hicks
>family of singers who were recorded in the 1950's and later?)
>         1495659057 - Cowboy Songs by John Lomax 1924
>         1495611770 - Folklore of Canada by Fowke 1990 softcover edition
>         1496124387 - Treasury of Irish Folklore by Colum
>
>         One unusual item that my searches turned up is a Civil War era
>broadside in auction 1046881585
>
>                         Happy holiday shopping!
>                                 Dolores
>
>--
>Dolores Nichols                 |
>D&D Data                        | Voice :       (703) 938-4564
>Disclaimer: from here - None    | Email:     <[unmask]>
>         --- .sig? ----- .what?  Who me?--
john garst    [unmask]

On Thu, Dec 13, 2001 at 11:14:41AM -0500, John Garst wrote:
>
> Delores,
>
> The item number 1494243824 - The Ballad Matrix - seems to be wrong.
> That number belongs to a book about Plessy vs Ferguson.  I couldn't
> find The Ballad Matrix auction by searching its title.  Can you help?
>
> Thanks.        I apologize for the typo. The correct auction is 1494243827
which for some reason the seller has captioned as SCOTTISH BALLAD BOOK
New.        I hope that you can find it now.                                Dolores--
Dolores Nichols                 |
D&D Data                        | Voice :       (703) 938-4564
Disclaimer: from here - None    | Email:     <[unmask]>
        --- .sig? ----- .what?  Who me?

I believe the Beech Mountain Ballads item is the Schirmer 1936 publication
by Maurice Matteson.
Norm Cohen----- Original Message -----
From: "Dolores Nichols" <[unmask]>
To: <[unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 8:46 PM
Subject: More Books on Ebay> Hi!
>
>         Well here are a few suggestions for holiday gifts for ballad
> lovers. This week's list is a mixed bag of things ballad related.
>
>         1496031838 - The Viking Book of Folk Ballads 1963
>         1494243824 - The Ballad Matrix: Personality, Milieu and the Oral
> Tradition by McCarthy 1990
>         1494908262 - The Ballad Book: A Selection of the Choicest
> British Ballads By Allingham 1860 or 1870 (maybe)
>         1495358681 - Beech Mountain Folk-Songs & Ballads 1936 (includes
> a reference to a man named Nathan Hicks. Is this a relation to the Hicks
> family of singers who were recorded in the 1950's and later?)
>         1495659057 - Cowboy Songs by John Lomax 1924
>         1495611770 - Folklore of Canada by Fowke 1990 softcover edition
>         1496124387 - Treasury of Irish Folklore by Colum
>
>         One unusual item that my searches turned up is a Civil War era
> broadside in auction 1046881585
>
>                         Happy holiday shopping!
>                                 Dolores
>
> --
> Dolores Nichols                 |
> D&D Data                        | Voice :       (703) 938-4564
> Disclaimer: from here - None    | Email:     <[unmask]>
>         --- .sig? ----- .what?  Who me?

I'm investigating the following scenario.John Henry Dabney was born a slave to a Dabney family in Mississippi.
Frederick Yeamans Dabney, b 1834-35, was about 20 years older than John
Henry.  After the Civil War, John Henry went to work with Captain
(Confederate military rank) Fred Dabney and learned steel driving from
members of his crew.  Captain Dabney's business, railroad construction,
took him from job to job, but he maintained his family's home in Crystal
Springs, Mississippi, while he traveled.  John Henry, his best steel
driver, and his wife, a cook, went with Captain Dabney.  John Henry also
called Crystal Springs home.In 1887 they came to Alabama to build the C & W line from Goodwater to
Birmingham.  John Henry worked on Oak and Coosa Tunnels.  Slow progress on
Coosa Tunnel threw the project behind.  An New York agent for a company
selling steam drills offered to give one to Captain Dabney if Dabney's man
could fulfill Dabney's boast, that he could beat a steam drill any day.Word got around and a crowd of several hundred showed up at the east
portal of Oak Tunnel, probably on September 20, 1887.In a contest that lasted all day, John Henry beat the steam drill, but at
the end he collapsed, possibly of heat stroke.  He was revived, blind and
dying.  His wife, called from the railroad camp, arrived in time to cradle
John Henry's head.If we accept this scenario, we can see aspects of "John Henry" in new light.(1) Uncle Dave Macon sang this opening verse:People out West heard of John Henry's death,
Couldn' hardly stay in bed,
Monday mornin' caught that East-bound train,
Goin' where John Henry's dead.Why should people "out west" be especially interested in John Henry's death?Because they were his friends and relatives in Mississippi.(2) Numerous versions of "John Henry" detail conversations between John
Henry and a "captain."  The reference could be specifically to Captain
Dabney, Chief Engineer for the C & W.  John Henry and Captain Dabney had
known one another and worked together for some time, so it would be
natural that they should converse in this manner.  This is supported by
the fact that in "John Henry" the reference is never to the "boss,"
"foreman," "overseer," etc.  Under this interpretation, written or printed
versions should capitalize "Captain."(3) Leon Harris sent Guy Johnson verses from Virginia and West Virginia,
heard there in 1909-11.  Repeatedly, these verses refer to "Cap'n Tommy."
"Tommy" is a plausible mutation of "Dabney," both having two syllables,
ending with the same sound, and "Tommy" being the more familiar in general
speech.(4) Harris' fifth verse isJohn Henry's cap'n Tommy, -
V'ginny gave him birth;
Loved John Henry like his only son,
And Cap' Tommy was the whitest man on earth.Captain Fred Dabney was born in Virginia.  Further, he was close to his
uncle Thomas, who was noted for his kindness to his slaves and his
friendship with ex-slaves, making it likely that Fred shared those
attitudes and could have "Loved John Henry like his only son."(5) Harris' version contains the line, "Dinnahs done when Lucy pull the
c'od," where Lucy is John Henry's "woman."  C. C. Spencer told Johnson
that John Henry's wife cooked for some of the men.(6) Burl McPeak's version contains the line, "Is the place where John
Henry went blind" (Chappell 1933: 109).  Spencer said that after John
Henry fainted and was revived, his words were, "send for my wife, I am
blind and dying."(7) Harvey Hicks gave Chappell (1933: 106) the following couplet.John Henry died on a Tuesday,
It looked very much like rainAccording to Spencer, John Henry died on September 20.  The only year in
which the construction of the C & W near Leeds was in progress in
September is 1887.  September 20, 1887, was Tuesday.****************There are probably hundreds of extant versions of "John Henry."  I've
looked at about 75, I guess, trying to find points, like those above, that
can be interpreted as supporting the scenario described above.  I'd like
to examine *all* available versions of the song, but that would be a
monumental job and I don't want to take the time right now to start it.
Hence this request:Do you know of versions of "John Henry" that contain statements, other
than those listed above, that could be construed as support for the
scenario given above?  If so, please cite and describe them for me.Thanks.
--
john garst    [unmask]

On 12/14/01, John Garst wrote:>I'm investigating the following scenario.
>
>John Henry Dabney was born a slave to a Dabney family in Mississippi.
>Frederick Yeamans Dabney, b 1834-35, was about 20 years older than John
>Henry.  After the Civil War, John Henry went to work with Captain
>(Confederate military rank) Fred Dabney and learned steel driving from
>members of his crew.  Captain Dabney's business, railroad construction,
>took him from job to job, but he maintained his family's home in Crystal
>Springs, Mississippi, while he traveled.  John Henry, his best steel
>driver, and his wife, a cook, went with Captain Dabney.  John Henry also
>called Crystal Springs home.This is completely unrelated to your questions, but do you know
of any relationship between this Captain F. W. Dabney and
the Major R. L. Dabney who served on Stonewall Jackson's staff
and his brother Captain C. W. Dabney? These two were, after
all, Virginia Dabneys....--
Robert B. Waltz  - - - - - - - - Ballad Index Editor
1078 Colne Street
Saint Paul, MN 55103-1348
651-489-1930 - - - - - - - - - - e-mail: [unmask]The Ballad Index Web Site:
http://www.csufresno.edu/folklore/BalladIndexTOC.html

I may have information on this.  I'm sure they were related, but off
the top of my head, I don't know just how.  Frederick Yeamans Dabney
was a son of Philip Augustine Lee Dabney and a nephew of Augustine's
brother Thomas Smith Gregory Dabney.  Both families (Thomas and
Augustine) moved from Gloucester, VA, to Hinds County, MS, in late
1835.  I'll check further into this later.  I'm in touch with a half
dozen or so living Dabneys who know "everything.">On 12/14/01, John Garst wrote:
>
>>I'm investigating the following scenario.
>>
>>John Henry Dabney was born a slave to a Dabney family in Mississippi.
>>Frederick Yeamans Dabney, b 1834-35, was about 20 years older than John
>>Henry.  After the Civil War, John Henry went to work with Captain
>>(Confederate military rank) Fred Dabney and learned steel driving from
>>members of his crew.  Captain Dabney's business, railroad construction,
>>took him from job to job, but he maintained his family's home in Crystal
>>Springs, Mississippi, while he traveled.  John Henry, his best steel
>>driver, and his wife, a cook, went with Captain Dabney.  John Henry also
>>called Crystal Springs home.
>
>This is completely unrelated to your questions, but do you know
>of any relationship between this Captain F. W. Dabney and
>the Major R. L. Dabney who served on Stonewall Jackson's staff
>and his brother Captain C. W. Dabney? These two were, after
>all, Virginia Dabneys....
>
>--
>Robert B. Waltz  - - - - - - - - Ballad Index Editor
>1078 Colne Street
>Saint Paul, MN 55103-1348
>651-489-1930 - - - - - - - - - - e-mail: [unmask]
>
>The Ballad Index Web Site:
>http://www.csufresno.edu/folklore/BalladIndexTOC.html--
john garst    [unmask]

Dear FriendTwo HUMBLE apologies.FIRST
You may in the last 30 hours have had from me a puzzling text message, just
a fragment of text, and an attachment.
The one I foolishly opened was an msdos batch file, extension .bat, but
another has since come from the same email source with the extension .com.
Please do not open it, it is of course another idiotic malicious creation.
Seems possibly not to be a 'virus' since antivirus progs do not find or fix
it!! Maybe a trojan or work or some other scum life. But it may be
corrupting the antivirus programme first.
The effect was to slow down the machine, make programmes suddenly quit,
give error messages, etc. And I'm fairly sure it has been replicating and
sending out.
Seems to be a plague of these things about - is this another part of the
global anti-capitalist conspiracy, or a CIA plan gone wrong once more?
Anyway, after taking professional advice I have had to wipe and reformat
the computer. This message is being sent on the backup machine, which was
kept isolated.
If you've got it, grovelling apologies. Life is infuriating at times.SECOND
When re-installing programmes I found that Compuserve 2000 was troublesome,
and in common with others I have found thisservice poor - 'clunky' is I
think the excellent word Sheena Wellington used.
So I am reverting to my old address, attached to this message.Send to [unmask][[BUT NOT TO [unmask]]]Very best regardsEwan McVicar,
84 High Street
Linlithgow,
West Lothian
Scotland
EH49 7AQtel 01506 847935

Dear FriendTwo HUMBLE apologies.FIRST
You may in the last 30 hours have had from me a puzzling text message, just
a fragment of text, and an attachment.
The one I foolishly opened was an msdos batch file, extension .bat, but
another has since come from the same email source with the extension .com.
Please do not open it, it is of course another idiotic malicious creation.
Seems possibly not to be a 'virus' since antivirus progs do not find or fix
it!! Maybe a trojan or work or some other scum life. But it may be
corrupting the antivirus programme first.
The effect was to slow down the machine, make programmes suddenly quit,
give error messages, etc. And I'm fairly sure it has been replicating and
sending out.
Seems to be a plague of these things about - is this another part of the
global anti-capitalist conspiracy, or a CIA plan gone wrong once more?
Anyway, after taking professional advice I have had to wipe and reformat
the computer. This message is being sent on the backup machine, which was
kept isolated.
If you've got it, grovelling apologies. Life is infuriating at times.SECOND
When re-installing programmes I found that Compuserve 2000 was troublesome,
and in common with others I have found thisservice poor - 'clunky' is I
think the excellent word Sheena Wellington used.
So I am reverting to my old address, attached to this message.Send to [unmask][[BUT NOT TO [unmask]]]Very best regards84 High Street
Linlithgow,
West Lothian
Scotland
EH49 7AQtel 01506 847935

Balladeers --I need help, preferably from someone who has access to a copy of
Lomax's _Cowboy Songs_.I just came across a text said to be from that work called
"Jack O' Diamonds." It should be called "The Kitchen Sink."It starts out with a bit of "The Rebel Soldier":O Mollie, O Mollie, it's for your sake alone
That I leave my old parents, my house and my home,
That I leave my old parents, you caused me to roam, --
I am a rabble soldier and Dixie is my home.Then it breaks into what I know as "Jack of Diamonds,"
a subfamily of "Rye Whiskey":Jack o' diamonds, jack o' diamonds,
I know you of old,
You've robbed my poor pockets
Of silver and gold
  [ etc. ]Then come two verses typical of "The Wagoner's Lad," then
some more "Rye Whiskey," and a whole mess of other stuff,
ending,O Baby, O Baby, I've told you, before
Do make me a pallet, I'll lie on the floor.What *is* this mess? Better yet, where did Lomax say he
got it? Can it in any way be verified? It looks to me
almost as if Lomax took all the fragments he hadn't figured
out yet and put them in one entry.--
Robert B. Waltz  - - - - - - - - Ballad Index Editor
1078 Colne Street
Saint Paul, MN 55103-1348
651-489-1930 - - - - - - - - - - e-mail: [unmask]The Ballad Index Web Site:
http://www.csufresno.edu/folklore/BalladIndexTOC.html

>I just came across a text said to be from that work called
>"Jack O' Diamonds." It should be called "The Kitchen Sink."(1) Folks really do put together assorted lines/couplets/stanzas from
different songs.(2) The Lomaxes are famous for helping folks out with this.
--
john garst    [unmask]

Here're a couple of more John Henry subtleties, the first one
courtesy of Pat Conte, more or less (Pat's "Captain Rugel" =
"Chattanooga," I think).(8) John Henry swung that hammer
     An' brought the hammer down.
     A man in Chattanooga, miles away,
     Said, "Listen to that rumblin' sound."     Songs of Man, Norman Luboff, Win Stracke, Bonanza Books, 1965.Mentioning Chattanooga is plausible for an event at Leeds, AL, 135
miles away, but not at all likely if the hammering were done at Big
Bend Tunnel, in southern West Virginia.(9) Before I stand to see my man go down,
     I'll go down 'tween-a them mountains,
     and before I stand to see my man go down,
     say I'll hammer just like a man.          (spoken by JH's woman)               and     When Henry was 'tween them mountains
     the Captain saw him goin' down.               and     When Henry was 'tween them mountains,
     his wife couldn't hear him a-cryin'.
     When she went out 'tween them-a mountains,
     tried to git 'im to lay the irons down.
     He supplied to his wife that day,
     said my knee bones begin to grow cold,
     said the grip of my hands givin' out.
     My eyes begin to leak water.
     Before I lay these hammers down
     I'll die with these hammers in my hand,
     I'm goin' to die with these hammers in my hand.     Rich Amerson, Livingston, AL, 1950.
     Negro Folk Songs of Alabama, Harold Courlander, 1960.Dunnavant, AL, is 4 miles south of Leeds.  Oak and Coosa Mountains
are the only mountains around.  Each is a southwest-to-northeast
oriented ridge.  They are the major landmarks in the area."  The C &
W put a tunnel through each.  Portal-to-portal, they are almost
exactly two miles apart.Local legend says that John Henry raced the steam drill just outside
the east portal of the "Dunnavant tunnel" (Oak).  This spot is
between the tops of the ridges of Oak and Coosa Mountains.  Indeed,
"'Tween them mountains" is a perfect description of Dunnavant.Dunnavant was the site of a railroad camp in 1887.  Presumably this
was along the track or roadbed of the C & W.  This is probably where
John Henry and his wife lived.I suspect that nearly every place around Big Bend was between
mountains.  "'Tween them mountains" would not be a unique description
there.  It is near Leeds.  Essentially, it specifies Dunnavant.--
john garst    [unmask]

On 12/19/01, John Garst wrote:>>I just came across a text said to be from that work called
>>"Jack O' Diamonds." It should be called "The Kitchen Sink."
>
>(1) Folks really do put together assorted lines/couplets/stanzas from
>different songs.
>
>(2) The Lomaxes are famous for helping folks out with this.Of course. The question is, HOW MUCH did John A. Lomax help?
That's why I'm asking the question: Does Lomax, in _Cowboy
Songs_, give any indication of source material which would
allow us to verify the process? Because, while I'm quite
accustomed to seeing conflate materials, I don't often see
materials *this* conflate with this little excuse; they
don't make sense together, and they mix in the oddest of
order, and I don't believe the result is singable to a tune
with only two parts ("verse" and "chorus").
--
Bob Waltz
[unmask]"The one thing we learn from history --
   is that no one ever learns from history."

Bob:This is certainly a Lomax conflation.  He gives no source.  Verses are in
various stanzaic forms: four line, eight line, eight line with two line
chorus, etc.It is, as you say, "The Kitchen Sink" with verses from "Make Me a Pallet
on the Floor,"  "Rebel Soldier," "Rye Whiskey," and "The Wagoner's Lad,"
in addition to "Jack of Diamonds."EdOn Wed, 19 Dec 2001, Robert B. Waltz wrote:> Balladeers --
>
> I need help, preferably from someone who has access to a copy of
> Lomax's _Cowboy Songs_.
>
> I just came across a text said to be from that work called
> "Jack O' Diamonds." It should be called "The Kitchen Sink."
>
> It starts out with a bit of "The Rebel Soldier":
>
> O Mollie, O Mollie, it's for your sake alone
> That I leave my old parents, my house and my home,
> That I leave my old parents, you caused me to roam, --
> I am a rabble soldier and Dixie is my home.
>
> Then it breaks into what I know as "Jack of Diamonds,"
> a subfamily of "Rye Whiskey":
>
> Jack o' diamonds, jack o' diamonds,
> I know you of old,
> You've robbed my poor pockets
> Of silver and gold
>   [ etc. ]
>
> Then come two verses typical of "The Wagoner's Lad," then
> some more "Rye Whiskey," and a whole mess of other stuff,
> ending,
>
> O Baby, O Baby, I've told you, before
> Do make me a pallet, I'll lie on the floor.
>
> What *is* this mess? Better yet, where did Lomax say he
> got it? Can it in any way be verified? It looks to me
> almost as if Lomax took all the fragments he hadn't figured
> out yet and put them in one entry.
>
> --
> Robert B. Waltz  - - - - - - - - Ballad Index Editor
> 1078 Colne Street
> Saint Paul, MN 55103-1348
> 651-489-1930 - - - - - - - - - - e-mail: [unmask]
>
> The Ballad Index Web Site:
> http://www.csufresno.edu/folklore/BalladIndexTOC.html
>

Bob:This is certainly a Lomax conflation.  He gives no source -- a dead
tip-off.  Verses are in various stanzaic forms: four line, eight line,
eight line with two line chorus, etc.It is, as you say, "The Kitchen Sink" with verses from "Make Me a Pallet
on the Floor,"  "Rebel Soldier," "Rye Whiskey," and "The Wagoner's Lad,"
in addition to "Jack of Diamonds."Ed

There are no individual notes to the songs in this book, just the
texts, and an occasional tune. Lomax says in his introduction:"As for the songs in this collection, I have violated the ethics of
ballad-gatherers, in a few instances, by selecting and putting
together what seemed to be the best lines from different versions,
all telling the same story.  Frankly, the volume is meant to be
popular."Good luck,
John Roberts.>Balladeers --
>
>I need help, preferably from someone who has access to a copy of
>Lomax's _Cowboy Songs_.
>
>I just came across a text said to be from that work called
>"Jack O' Diamonds." It should be called "The Kitchen Sink."
>
>It starts out with a bit of "The Rebel Soldier":
>
>O Mollie, O Mollie, it's for your sake alone
>That I leave my old parents, my house and my home,
>That I leave my old parents, you caused me to roam, --
>I am a rabble soldier and Dixie is my home.
>
>Then it breaks into what I know as "Jack of Diamonds,"
>a subfamily of "Rye Whiskey":
>
>Jack o' diamonds, jack o' diamonds,
>I know you of old,
>You've robbed my poor pockets
>Of silver and gold
>  [ etc. ]
>
>Then come two verses typical of "The Wagoner's Lad," then
>some more "Rye Whiskey," and a whole mess of other stuff,
>ending,
>
>O Baby, O Baby, I've told you, before
>Do make me a pallet, I'll lie on the floor.
>
>What *is* this mess? Better yet, where did Lomax say he
>got it? Can it in any way be verified? It looks to me
>almost as if Lomax took all the fragments he hadn't figured
>out yet and put them in one entry.
>
>--
>Robert B. Waltz  - - - - - - - - Ballad Index Editor
>1078 Colne Street
>Saint Paul, MN 55103-1348
>651-489-1930 - - - - - - - - - - e-mail: [unmask]
>
>The Ballad Index Web Site:
>http://www.csufresno.edu/folklore/BalladIndexTOC.html

I don't profess to being an expert on Cowboy Songs, nor do I have any
illusions about John Lomax's editorial scruples - or lack of them - but I
don't think his Jack O' Diamonds can be dismissed out of hand.
It is very similar indeed in both structure and text to a version called O
LILLIE O LILLIE in Hudson's Folksongs of Mississippi (1936, pp.258-9) and
Hudson does name his source.
An even closer  version appears in Jules Verne Allen ('The Singing
Cowboy')'s Cowboy Lore (first pub 1933). Allen gives no sources, and I don't
know enough about him to hazard any guesses about any possible
'relationship'. with Lomax's work.
In this case, it seems, Lomax may be relatively innocent.
Steve Roud----- Original Message -----
From: Ed Cray <[unmask]>
To: <[unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 11:20 PM
Subject: Re: The Rebel Jack of Diamonds Makes A Pallet on the Floor (fwd)> Bob:
>
> This is certainly a Lomax conflation.  He gives no source -- a dead
> tip-off.  Verses are in various stanzaic forms: four line, eight line,
> eight line with two line chorus, etc.
>
> It is, as you say, "The Kitchen Sink" with verses from "Make Me a Pallet
> on the Floor,"  "Rebel Soldier," "Rye Whiskey," and "The Wagoner's Lad,"
> in addition to "Jack of Diamonds."
>
> Ed

Ol' John had a habit of combining versions--and, I suspect, including
verses from anything elst that happened to scan. All went to
establishing copyright claims."Robert B. Waltz" wrote:> Balladeers --
>
> I need help, preferably from someone who has access to a copy of
> Lomax's _Cowboy Songs_.
>
> I just came across a text said to be from that work called
> "Jack O' Diamonds." It should be called "The Kitchen Sink."
>
> It starts out with a bit of "The Rebel Soldier":
>
> O Mollie, O Mollie, it's for your sake alone
> That I leave my old parents, my house and my home,
> That I leave my old parents, you caused me to roam, --
> I am a rabble soldier and Dixie is my home.
>
> Then it breaks into what I know as "Jack of Diamonds,"
> a subfamily of "Rye Whiskey":
>
> Jack o' diamonds, jack o' diamonds,
> I know you of old,
> You've robbed my poor pockets
> Of silver and gold
>   [ etc. ]
>
> Then come two verses typical of "The Wagoner's Lad," then
> some more "Rye Whiskey," and a whole mess of other stuff,
> ending,
>
> O Baby, O Baby, I've told you, before
> Do make me a pallet, I'll lie on the floor.
>
> What *is* this mess? Better yet, where did Lomax say he
> got it? Can it in any way be verified? It looks to me
> almost as if Lomax took all the fragments he hadn't figured
> out yet and put them in one entry.
>
> --
> Robert B. Waltz  - - - - - - - - Ballad Index Editor
> 1078 Colne Street
> Saint Paul, MN 55103-1348
> 651-489-1930 - - - - - - - - - - e-mail: [unmask]
>
> The Ballad Index Web Site:
> http://www.csufresno.edu/folklore/BalladIndexTOC.html

Ewan McVicar wrote:
>
> Dear Friend
>
> Two HUMBLE apologies.
>
> FIRST
> You may in the last 30 hours have had from me a puzzling text message, just
> a fragment of text, and an attachment.
[snip]
> Seems possibly not to be a 'virus' since antivirus progs do not find or fix
> it!! Maybe a trojan or work or some other scum life. But it may be
> corrupting the antivirus programme first.The unfortunate reality of global life on the internet is that various
people mutate and redistribute viruses, worms et. al.  The anti-virus
people have to continually evaluate reports, get samples, establish
identifying characteristics, and modify their software to detect each
one.  Symantec, makers of Norton Anti-Virus, are modifying their
definitions at least weekly and sometimes more; this month they're
averaging about a notification a day to their top corporate customers,
warning of new "malware" (malicious software) or updated virus
definitions for their software.I have my machines set to automatically go to Symantec every morning and
get the latest definitions, and to do daily scans.  Watching the logs of
the web servers shows that there are more or less continuous attempts by
random machines and hackers to breach our security.  As to e-mail, I
have to have a *very* trusted source before I open *any* attachment.  I
feel no more compulsion to check everything out than I have to read all
the junk mail which comes in my snailmailbox.  My mail - e-mail included
- is for *my* convenience, not everyone else's!And I don't trust the amount of information Microsoft software gives me.
 Oddly enough, Netscape on my Mac - where I do personal e-mail - is
almost foolproof at showing me e-mail worms because of the way it
characterizes attachments.  But Outlook, the MS product most often
attacked, makes it almost impossible to find out the things you need to
know to be really thorough.  So into the trash with any suspect e-mail.> Seems to be a plague of these things about - is this another part of the
> global anti-capitalist conspiracy, or a CIA plan gone wrong once more?Some no doubt come from hostile sources, but most of them have the
cachet of that cadre of the uncivilized who trash hotel rooms, kick
mirrors off cars, walk down the street breaking windows, etc.  Most of
them simply aren't professionally made.There are a few which are really clever and thorough about breaching
security in every way possible - e.g. Nimda and Fun-Loving Criminal -
but they typically don't do destructive things like wipe your hard
drive.  My take on them is that they're vaccinations.  Two weeks of
eradicating every trace of Nimda has resulted in our finally setting
real security precautions in place and keeping all our software properly updated...-Don Duncan

Steve, Bob, Uncle Tom Cobbler and all:Just to snarl this a bit more:Hudson does NOT cite in the headnote to "O Lillie, O Lillie" Lomax's "Jack
o' Diamonds or The Rebel Soldier."  Hudson does, however, note the 1911
edition of Lomax's _Cowboy Songs_ in his bibliography.Two hypotheses:1) Belden missed the Lomax analogue to "O Lillie" in the 1911 edition --
which I do NOT have in my library; or2) Lomax did not have "Jack O'Diamonds" in his 1911 edition, nor the 1916
edition, but took his cue from Hudson, who published the Mississippi
volume in 1936, two years before the 1938 edition of _Cowboy Songs_ that
does contain "Jack O'Diamonds or The Rabble Soldier."I would still plump for a Lomax conflation.  Perhaps the old man was
inspired by Hudson's less "kitchen sink" text.EdP.S. Does anyone know what happened to the Lomax Pere collectanea?On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, roud wrote:> I don't profess to being an expert on Cowboy Songs, nor do I have any
> illusions about John Lomax's editorial scruples - or lack of them - but I
> don't think his Jack O' Diamonds can be dismissed out of hand.
> It is very similar indeed in both structure and text to a version called O
> LILLIE O LILLIE in Hudson's Folksongs of Mississippi (1936, pp.258-9) and
> Hudson does name his source.
> An even closer  version appears in Jules Verne Allen ('The Singing
> Cowboy')'s Cowboy Lore (first pub 1933). Allen gives no sources, and I don't
> know enough about him to hazard any guesses about any possible
> 'relationship'. with Lomax's work.
> In this case, it seems, Lomax may be relatively innocent.
> Steve Roud
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Ed Cray <[unmask]>
> To: <[unmask]>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 11:20 PM
> Subject: Re: The Rebel Jack of Diamonds Makes A Pallet on the Floor (fwd)
>
>
> > Bob:
> >
> > This is certainly a Lomax conflation.  He gives no source -- a dead
> > tip-off.  Verses are in various stanzaic forms: four line, eight line,
> > eight line with two line chorus, etc.
> >
> > It is, as you say, "The Kitchen Sink" with verses from "Make Me a Pallet
> > on the Floor,"  "Rebel Soldier," "Rye Whiskey," and "The Wagoner's Lad,"
> > in addition to "Jack of Diamonds."
> >
> > Ed
>

Folks:This is the second time I have gotten a bounce message like this.  Is
anyone else getting similar error messages?First, did anyone get my response to Steve (and Uncle Tom Cobbler...)?Did you get it twice?  (That is, did I screw up?)Ed---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:04:16 -0500
From: "L-Soft list server at Indiana University (1.8d)"
    <[unmask]>
To: [unmask]
Subject: Rejected posting to [unmask]Your message  is being returned to  you unprocessed because it  appears to have
already  been  distributed to  the  BALLAD-L  list.  That  is, a  message  with
identical text  (but possibly with different  mail headers) has been  posted to
the list recently, either by you or by  someone else. If you have a good reason
to resend this message to the list (for instance because you have been notified
of a hardware failure with loss of  data), please alter the text of the message
in some way and  resend it to the list. Note that  altering the "Subject:" line
or adding blank  lines at the top  or bottom of the message  is not sufficient;
you should  instead add a  sentence or  two at the  top explaining why  you are
resending the  message, so that the  other subscribers understand why  they are
getting two copies of the same message.------------------------ Rejected message (86 lines) --------------------------
Received: from mask.uits.indiana.edu (mask.uits.indiana.edu [129.79.6.184])
        by bluetang.uits.indiana.edu (8.12.1/8.12.1/bluetang.uits.indiana.edu) with ESMTP id fBK44Ff5019404
        for <[unmask]>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:04:15 -0500 (EST)
Received: from usc.edu (usc.edu [128.125.253.136])
        by mask.uits.indiana.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1/IUPO) with ESMTP id fBK40bG07602
        for <[unmask]>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:00:37 -0500 (EST)
Received: from almaak.usc.edu ([unmask] [128.125.253.167])
        by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP
        id UAA20710; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 20:04:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (cray@localhost)
        by almaak.usc.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1/usc) with ESMTP
        id fBK44Zq21930; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 20:04:35 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 20:04:35 -0800 (PST)
From: Ed Cray <[unmask]>
To: Forum for ballad scholars <[unmask]>
cc: <[unmask]>
Subject: Re: The Rebel Jack of Diamonds Makes A Pallet on the Floor (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <002301c188e8$83f75820$ba926fd4@oemcomputer>
Message-ID: <[unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCIISteve, Bob, Uncle Tom Cobbler and all:Just to snarl this a bit more:Hudson does NOT cite in the headnote to "O Lillie, O Lillie" Lomax's "Jack
o' Diamonds or The Rebel Soldier."  Hudson does, however, note the 1911
edition of Lomax's _Cowboy Songs_ in his bibliography.Two hypotheses:1) Belden missed the Lomax analogue to "O Lillie" in the 1911 edition --
which I do NOT have in my library; or2) Lomax did not have "Jack O'Diamonds" in his 1911 edition, nor the 1916
edition, but took his cue from Hudson, who published the Mississippi
volume in 1936, two years before the 1938 edition of _Cowboy Songs_ that
does contain "Jack O'Diamonds or The Rabble Soldier."I would still plump for a Lomax conflation.  Perhaps the old man was
inspired by Hudson's less "kitchen sink" text.EdP.S. Does anyone know what happened to the Lomax Pere collectanea?On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, roud wrote:> I don't profess to being an expert on Cowboy Songs, nor do I have any
> illusions about John Lomax's editorial scruples - or lack of them - but I
> don't think his Jack O' Diamonds can be dismissed out of hand.
> It is very similar indeed in both structure and text to a version called O
> LILLIE O LILLIE in Hudson's Folksongs of Mississippi (1936, pp.258-9) and
> Hudson does name his source.
> An even closer  version appears in Jules Verne Allen ('The Singing
> Cowboy')'s Cowboy Lore (first pub 1933). Allen gives no sources, and I don't
> know enough about him to hazard any guesses about any possible
> 'relationship'. with Lomax's work.
> In this case, it seems, Lomax may be relatively innocent.
> Steve Roud
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Ed Cray <[unmask]>
> To: <[unmask]>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 11:20 PM
> Subject: Re: The Rebel Jack of Diamonds Makes A Pallet on the Floor (fwd)
>
>
> > Bob:
> >
> > This is certainly a Lomax conflation.  He gives no source -- a dead
> > tip-off.  Verses are in various stanzaic forms: four line, eight line,
> > eight line with two line chorus, etc.
> >
> > It is, as you say, "The Kitchen Sink" with verses from "Make Me a Pallet
> > on the Floor,"  "Rebel Soldier," "Rye Whiskey," and "The Wagoner's Lad,"
> > in addition to "Jack of Diamonds."
> >
> > Ed
>

Yes, I did get the message twice.        MargeE-mail: [unmask]-----Original Message-----
From: Forum for ballad scholars [mailto:[unmask]]On Behalf
Of Ed Cray
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 11:12 PM
To: [unmask]
Subject: Rejected posting to [unmask] (fwd)Folks:This is the second time I have gotten a bounce message like this.  Is
anyone else getting similar error messages?First, did anyone get my response to Steve (and Uncle Tom Cobbler...)?Did you get it twice?  (That is, did I screw up?)Ed---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:04:16 -0500
From: "L-Soft list server at Indiana University (1.8d)"
    <[unmask]>
To: [unmask]
Subject: Rejected posting to [unmask]Your message  is being returned to  you unprocessed because it  appears to
have
already  been  distributed to  the  BALLAD-L  list.  That  is, a  message
with
identical text  (but possibly with different  mail headers) has been  posted
to
the list recently, either by you or by  someone else. If you have a good
reason
to resend this message to the list (for instance because you have been
notified
of a hardware failure with loss of  data), please alter the text of the
message
in some way and  resend it to the list. Note that  altering the "Subject:"
line
or adding blank  lines at the top  or bottom of the message  is not
sufficient;
you should  instead add a  sentence or  two at the  top explaining why  you
are
resending the  message, so that the  other subscribers understand why  they
are
getting two copies of the same message.------------------------ Rejected message (86
lines) --------------------------
Received: from mask.uits.indiana.edu (mask.uits.indiana.edu [129.79.6.184])
        by bluetang.uits.indiana.edu
(8.12.1/8.12.1/bluetang.uits.indiana.edu) with ESMTP id fBK44Ff5019404
        for <[unmask]>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:04:15 -0500
(EST)
Received: from usc.edu (usc.edu [128.125.253.136])
        by mask.uits.indiana.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1/IUPO) with ESMTP id
fBK40bG07602
        for <[unmask]>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:00:37 -0500 (EST)
Received: from almaak.usc.edu ([unmask] [128.125.253.167])
        by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP
        id UAA20710; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 20:04:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (cray@localhost)
        by almaak.usc.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1/usc) with ESMTP
        id fBK44Zq21930; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 20:04:35 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 20:04:35 -0800 (PST)
From: Ed Cray <[unmask]>
To: Forum for ballad scholars <[unmask]>
cc: <[unmask]>
Subject: Re: The Rebel Jack of Diamonds Makes A Pallet on the Floor (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <002301c188e8$83f75820$ba926fd4@oemcomputer>
Message-ID: <[unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCIISteve, Bob, Uncle Tom Cobbler and all:Just to snarl this a bit more:Hudson does NOT cite in the headnote to "O Lillie, O Lillie" Lomax's "Jack
o' Diamonds or The Rebel Soldier."  Hudson does, however, note the 1911
edition of Lomax's _Cowboy Songs_ in his bibliography.Two hypotheses:1) Belden missed the Lomax analogue to "O Lillie" in the 1911 edition --
which I do NOT have in my library; or2) Lomax did not have "Jack O'Diamonds" in his 1911 edition, nor the 1916
edition, but took his cue from Hudson, who published the Mississippi
volume in 1936, two years before the 1938 edition of _Cowboy Songs_ that
does contain "Jack O'Diamonds or The Rabble Soldier."I would still plump for a Lomax conflation.  Perhaps the old man was
inspired by Hudson's less "kitchen sink" text.EdP.S. Does anyone know what happened to the Lomax Pere collectanea?On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, roud wrote:> I don't profess to being an expert on Cowboy Songs, nor do I have any
> illusions about John Lomax's editorial scruples - or lack of them - but I
> don't think his Jack O' Diamonds can be dismissed out of hand.
> It is very similar indeed in both structure and text to a version called O
> LILLIE O LILLIE in Hudson's Folksongs of Mississippi (1936, pp.258-9) and
> Hudson does name his source.
> An even closer  version appears in Jules Verne Allen ('The Singing
> Cowboy')'s Cowboy Lore (first pub 1933). Allen gives no sources, and I
don't
> know enough about him to hazard any guesses about any possible
> 'relationship'. with Lomax's work.
> In this case, it seems, Lomax may be relatively innocent.
> Steve Roud
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Ed Cray <[unmask]>
> To: <[unmask]>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 11:20 PM
> Subject: Re: The Rebel Jack of Diamonds Makes A Pallet on the Floor (fwd)
>
>
> > Bob:
> >
> > This is certainly a Lomax conflation.  He gives no source -- a dead
> > tip-off.  Verses are in various stanzaic forms: four line, eight line,
> > eight line with two line chorus, etc.
> >
> > It is, as you say, "The Kitchen Sink" with verses from "Make Me a Pallet
> > on the Floor,"  "Rebel Soldier," "Rye Whiskey," and "The Wagoner's Lad,"
> > in addition to "Jack of Diamonds."
> >
> > Ed
>

I have a copy from 1929, which seems to be the same as the 1916
edition "Reissued January, 1927. Reprinted February, 1929." (whatever
that difference is). It does contain "Jack O' Diamonds," with the
four- and eight-line stanzas mentioned below. But the eight lines
essentially scan the same as the four, split into halves - I suspect
these were slightly longer lines and since they required more line
breaks, he just decided to bisect them. But in any event that
eliminates Ed's (2).
John.>Steve, Bob, Uncle Tom Cobbler and all:
>
>Just to snarl this a bit more:
>
>Hudson does NOT cite in the headnote to "O Lillie, O Lillie" Lomax's "Jack
>o' Diamonds or The Rebel Soldier."  Hudson does, however, note the 1911
>edition of Lomax's _Cowboy Songs_ in his bibliography.
>
>Two hypotheses:
>
>1) Belden missed the Lomax analogue to "O Lillie" in the 1911 edition --
>which I do NOT have in my library; or
>
>2) Lomax did not have "Jack O'Diamonds" in his 1911 edition, nor the 1916
>edition, but took his cue from Hudson, who published the Mississippi
>volume in 1936, two years before the 1938 edition of _Cowboy Songs_ that
>does contain "Jack O'Diamonds or The Rabble Soldier."
>
>I would still plump for a Lomax conflation.  Perhaps the old man was
>inspired by Hudson's less "kitchen sink" text.
>
>Ed
>
>P.S. Does anyone know what happened to the Lomax Pere collectanea?
>
>
>
>
>
>On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, roud wrote:
>
>> I don't profess to being an expert on Cowboy Songs, nor do I have any
>> illusions about John Lomax's editorial scruples - or lack of them - but I
>> don't think his Jack O' Diamonds can be dismissed out of hand.
>> It is very similar indeed in both structure and text to a version called O
>> LILLIE O LILLIE in Hudson's Folksongs of Mississippi (1936, pp.258-9) and
>> Hudson does name his source.
>> An even closer  version appears in Jules Verne Allen ('The Singing
>> Cowboy')'s Cowboy Lore (first pub 1933). Allen gives no sources, and I don't
>> know enough about him to hazard any guesses about any possible
>> 'relationship'. with Lomax's work.
>> In this case, it seems, Lomax may be relatively innocent.
>> Steve Roud
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Ed Cray <[unmask]>
>> To: <[unmask]>
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 11:20 PM
>> Subject: Re: The Rebel Jack of Diamonds Makes A Pallet on the Floor (fwd)
>>
>>
>> > Bob:
>> >
>> > This is certainly a Lomax conflation.  He gives no source -- a dead
>> > tip-off.  Verses are in various stanzaic forms: four line, eight line,
>> > eight line with two line chorus, etc.
>> >
>> > It is, as you say, "The Kitchen Sink" with verses from "Make Me a Pallet
>> > on the Floor,"  "Rebel Soldier," "Rye Whiskey," and "The Wagoner's Lad,"
>> > in addition to "Jack of Diamonds."
>> >
>> > Ed
>>

----- Original Message -----
From: Robert B. Waltz <[unmask]><< and I don't believe the result is singable to a tune
with only two parts ("verse" and "chorus").>>With enough of that rye whiskey, anything is singable to anything.Peace,
Paul

It would be really really useful if someone could publish a complete list of
the contents of each of the Cowboy Songs editions. We have surprisingly full
bibliographic details, taken from the backs of the title pages of various
editions, and there seems to be three basic forms of the book - as below:(1) Set up and electrotyped. Published Nov 1910. Reprinted Apr 1911, Jan
1915
(2) New edition with additions: Mar 1916, Apr 1917, Dec 1918, Jul 1919
Reissued: Jan 1927. Reprinted Feb 1929, May 1930, May 1931, Mar 1933, Nov
1934
(3) Completely revised, enlarged, and reset Aug 1938 (Thirteenth printing
1961)The Jack o' Diamonds text appears in exactly the same format in the three
editions of Cowboy Songs that I have - 1919, 1934, 1938 (reprinted 1961).
but I still haven't seen the original 1910 eition.But this still leaves the similarity to the Hudson text unexplained. The
Hudson text is shorter than Lomax's, and the girl's name is Lillie instead
of Mollie, but apart from that it is almost word-for-word the same -
inluding the 'odd' use of three different choruses - 'Jack o' Diamonds',
'Beefsteak', 'Ocean was whisky'. Hudson says his text was 'communicated by'
Mr. A.H. Burnette, who learned it from his father. On Burnette's authority,
Hudson classifies it as a 'Civil War song'.
.
On the evidence of Hudson's book, the song which appears to us as a strange
and suspicious mixture of other songs clearly had some currency in the
tradition, in the form that Lomax printed it.
Most of Hudson's collecting was done in the 1920s, so it is just about
conceivable that Burnette's dad learnt it from Lomax's book, but unlikely.
I reckon Lomax still appears innocent (in this case at least)
Steve Roud----- Original Message -----
From: Ed Cray <[unmask]>
To: <[unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 4:04 AM
Subject: Re: The Rebel Jack of Diamonds Makes A Pallet on the Floor (fwd)> Steve, Bob, Uncle Tom Cobbler and all:
>
> Just to snarl this a bit more:
>
> Hudson does NOT cite in the headnote to "O Lillie, O Lillie" Lomax's "Jack
> o' Diamonds or The Rebel Soldier."  Hudson does, however, note the 1911
> edition of Lomax's _Cowboy Songs_ in his bibliography.
>
> Two hypotheses:
>
> 1) Belden missed the Lomax analogue to "O Lillie" in the 1911 edition --
> which I do NOT have in my library; or
>
> 2) Lomax did not have "Jack O'Diamonds" in his 1911 edition, nor the 1916
> edition, but took his cue from Hudson, who published the Mississippi
> volume in 1936, two years before the 1938 edition of _Cowboy Songs_ that
> does contain "Jack O'Diamonds or The Rabble Soldier."
>
> I would still plump for a Lomax conflation.  Perhaps the old man was
> inspired by Hudson's less "kitchen sink" text.
>
> Ed
>
> P.S. Does anyone know what happened to the Lomax Pere collectanea?
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, roud wrote:
>
> > I don't profess to being an expert on Cowboy Songs, nor do I have any
> > illusions about John Lomax's editorial scruples - or lack of them - but
I
> > don't think his Jack O' Diamonds can be dismissed out of hand.
> > It is very similar indeed in both structure and text to a version called
O
> > LILLIE O LILLIE in Hudson's Folksongs of Mississippi (1936, pp.258-9)
and
> > Hudson does name his source.
> > An even closer  version appears in Jules Verne Allen ('The Singing
> > Cowboy')'s Cowboy Lore (first pub 1933). Allen gives no sources, and I
don't
> > know enough about him to hazard any guesses about any possible
> > 'relationship'. with Lomax's work.
> > In this case, it seems, Lomax may be relatively innocent.
> > Steve Roud
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Ed Cray <[unmask]>
> > To: <[unmask]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 11:20 PM
> > Subject: Re: The Rebel Jack of Diamonds Makes A Pallet on the Floor
(fwd)
> >
> >
> > > Bob:
> > >
> > > This is certainly a Lomax conflation.  He gives no source -- a dead
> > > tip-off.  Verses are in various stanzaic forms: four line, eight line,
> > > eight line with two line chorus, etc.
> > >
> > > It is, as you say, "The Kitchen Sink" with verses from "Make Me a
Pallet
> > > on the Floor,"  "Rebel Soldier," "Rye Whiskey," and "The Wagoner's
Lad,"
> > > in addition to "Jack of Diamonds."
> > >
> > > Ed
> >

I did get the message on a prior occasion when I attempted a posting. As I recall, I got the "bounce" when I hit "Repy to All, Senders and Recipients," but I di not get bounced when I hit "reply to sender."  I am sending this "Reply to Sender" only and if you see it you'll know that there was no "bounce.">>> [unmask] 12/19/01 11:11PM >>>
Folks:This is the second time I have gotten a bounce message like this.  Is
anyone else getting similar error messages?First, did anyone get my response to Steve (and Uncle Tom Cobbler...)?Did you get it twice?  (That is, did I screw up?)Ed---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:04:16 -0500
From: "L-Soft list server at Indiana University (1.8d)"
    <[unmask]>
To: [unmask]
Subject: Rejected posting to [unmask]Your message  is being returned to  you unprocessed because it  appears to have
already  been  distributed to  the  BALLAD-L  list.  That  is, a  message  with
identical text  (but possibly with different  mail headers) has been  posted to
the list recently, either by you or by  someone else. If you have a good reason
to resend this message to the list (for instance because you have been notified
of a hardware failure with loss of  data), please alter the text of the message
in some way and  resend it to the list. Note that  altering the "Subject:" line
or adding blank  lines at the top  or bottom of the message  is not sufficient;
you should  instead add a  sentence or  two at the  top explaining why  you are
resending the  message, so that the  other subscribers understand why  they are
getting two copies of the same message.------------------------ Rejected message (86 lines) --------------------------
Received: from mask.uits.indiana.edu (mask.uits.indiana.edu [129.79.6.184])
        by bluetang.uits.indiana.edu (8.12.1/8.12.1/bluetang.uits.indiana.edu) with ESMTP id fBK44Ff5019404
        for <[unmask]>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:04:15 -0500 (EST)
Received: from usc.edu (usc.edu [128.125.253.136])
        by mask.uits.indiana.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1/IUPO) with ESMTP id fBK40bG07602
        for <[unmask]>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:00:37 -0500 (EST)
Received: from almaak.usc.edu ([unmask] [128.125.253.167])
        by usc.edu (8.9.3.1/8.9.3/usc) with ESMTP
        id UAA20710; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 20:04:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (cray@localhost)
        by almaak.usc.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1/usc) with ESMTP
        id fBK44Zq21930; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 20:04:35 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 20:04:35 -0800 (PST)
From: Ed Cray <[unmask]>
To: Forum for ballad scholars <[unmask]>
cc: <[unmask]>
Subject: Re: The Rebel Jack of Diamonds Makes A Pallet on the Floor (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <002301c188e8$83f75820$ba926fd4@oemcomputer>
Message-ID: <[unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCIISteve, Bob, Uncle Tom Cobbler and all:Just to snarl this a bit more:Hudson does NOT cite in the headnote to "O Lillie, O Lillie" Lomax's "Jack
o' Diamonds or The Rebel Soldier."  Hudson does, however, note the 1911
edition of Lomax's _Cowboy Songs_ in his bibliography.Two hypotheses:1) Belden missed the Lomax analogue to "O Lillie" in the 1911 edition --
which I do NOT have in my library; or2) Lomax did not have "Jack O'Diamonds" in his 1911 edition, nor the 1916
edition, but took his cue from Hudson, who published the Mississippi
volume in 1936, two years before the 1938 edition of _Cowboy Songs_ that
does contain "Jack O'Diamonds or The Rabble Soldier."I would still plump for a Lomax conflation.  Perhaps the old man was
inspired by Hudson's less "kitchen sink" text.EdP.S. Does anyone know what happened to the Lomax Pere collectanea?On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, roud wrote:> I don't profess to being an expert on Cowboy Songs, nor do I have any
> illusions about John Lomax's editorial scruples - or lack of them - but I
> don't think his Jack O' Diamonds can be dismissed out of hand.
> It is very similar indeed in both structure and text to a version called O
> LILLIE O LILLIE in Hudson's Folksongs of Mississippi (1936, pp.258-9) and
> Hudson does name his source.
> An even closer  version appears in Jules Verne Allen ('The Singing
> Cowboy')'s Cowboy Lore (first pub 1933). Allen gives no sources, and I don't
> know enough about him to hazard any guesses about any possible
> 'relationship'. with Lomax's work.
> In this case, it seems, Lomax may be relatively innocent.
> Steve Roud
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Ed Cray <[unmask]>
> To: <[unmask]>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 11:20 PM
> Subject: Re: The Rebel Jack of Diamonds Makes A Pallet on the Floor (fwd)
>
>
> > Bob:
> >
> > This is certainly a Lomax conflation.  He gives no source -- a dead
> > tip-off.  Verses are in various stanzaic forms: four line, eight line,
> > eight line with two line chorus, etc.
> >
> > It is, as you say, "The Kitchen Sink" with verses from "Make Me a Pallet
> > on the Floor,"  "Rebel Soldier," "Rye Whiskey," and "The Wagoner's Lad,"
> > in addition to "Jack of Diamonds."
> >
> > Ed
>

----- Original Message -----
From: roud <[unmask]><<But this still leaves the similarity to the Hudson text unexplained. The
Hudson text is shorter than Lomax's, and the girl's name is Lillie instead
of Mollie, but apart from that it is almost word-for-word the same -
inluding the 'odd' use of three different choruses - 'Jack o' Diamonds',
'Beefsteak', 'Ocean was whisky'. Hudson says his text was 'communicated by'
Mr. A.H. Burnette, who learned it from his father. On Burnette's authority,
Hudson classifies it as a 'Civil War song'.>>The same odd use of three choruses appears, if I recall correctly, on a
field recording of Texas fiddler Elmo Newcomer, made in 1939 by...John
Lomax. The plot thickens.Newcomer's version of the song is very similar to the one recorded by Tommy
Jarrell in the 1960s. Both, I suspect, trace their provenance to the 1928
Jilson Setters (James Day) 78 "Way Up on Clinch Mountain". Unless we
hypothesize that Setters got his lyrics from the Lomax book (not
impossible), that would indicate that a thoroughly mixed-up version of the
song was circulating in tradition. Not as mixed-up as the kitchen-sink
version printed in Lomax (no "Pallet on the Floor", for one), but still
mixed-up.Peace,
Paul

At 4:27 PM -0600 12/19/01, Robert B. Waltz wrote:>...while I'm quite accustomed to seeing conflate materials, I don't
>often see materials *this* conflate with this little excuse; they
>don't make sense together, and they mix in the oddest of
>order, and I don't believe the result is singable to a tune
>with only two parts ("verse" and "chorus").This is exactly Robert W. Gordon's reaction in the 1920s, when he
received "Old Time Gambler's Blues" (or something like that), which
we know today, in gussied-up versions, as "St. James Infirmary."
--
john garst    [unmask]

>The same odd use of three chorusesIt doesn't seem odd at all to me, it seems perfectly "normal."
Perhaps those who think it odd have been listening to too many
British ballads and not enough American grassroots material.>  appears, if I recall correctly, on a
>field recording of Texas fiddler Elmo Newcomer, made in 1939 by...John
>Lomax. The plot thickens.
>
>Newcomer's version of the song is very similar to the one recorded by Tommy
>Jarrell in the 1960s. Both, I suspect, trace their provenance to the 1928
>Jilson Setters (James Day) 78 "Way Up on Clinch Mountain". Unless we
>hypothesize that Setters got his lyrics from the Lomax book (not
>impossible), that would indicate that a thoroughly mixed-up version of the
>song was circulating in tradition. Not as mixed-up as the kitchen-sink
>version printed in Lomax (no "Pallet on the Floor", for one), but still
>mixed-up.--
john garst    [unmask]

On Thu, Dec 20, 2001 at 10:40:28AM -0500, Lewis Becker wrote:> Reply-To: Forum for ballad scholars <[unmask]>
> To: [unmask]> I did get the message on a prior occasion when I attempted a posting.
> As I recall, I got the "bounce" when I hit "Repy to All, Senders and
> Recipients," but I di not get bounced when I hit "reply to sender."  I
> am sending this "Reply to Sender" only and if you see it you'll know
> that there was no "bounce."        Well ... note the two headers which I've left quoted above:  The
"To: " and the "Reply-To: ".  When you select "Reply to All", it extracts
addresses from both of those fields, as well as from the "From: " (which
is the original sender).  Thus, every "Reply to All" sends two copies to
the listserver, thus the listserver (which apparently has recently been
upgraded with some software to detect duplicate text, perhaps as a side
effect of virus scanning), rejects the second one to arrive (probably
just milliseconds apart in time.        So -- the remaining question is *why* hit "Reply to All" when
sending to a mailing list anyway?  It at the minimum assures that
whoever sent the message you are replying to will get two copies, and
that kind of thing gets old fairly quickly.  I approve of the listserver
enforcing the no double-mailings rule.        "Reply to All" is useful when three or four people are
discussing something outside of a mailing list, to keep everyone up to
date on all facets of the conversation.  The rest of the time, it is as
much of a pain as is the habit of some usenet newsreaders to post an
e-mail copy to the originator as well as posting to the newsgroup.        It was also useful when the listserver was (in its previous
configuration) sending messages out with the "Reply-To: " set to the
original author of a given submission.  That problem has thankfully
finally been fixed.        Enjoy,
                DoN.--
 Email:   <[unmask]>   | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
        (too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
           --- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

 Hi,
       My apologies to anyone who tried to reply to my site
(reenchantmentofsex.com) and got "bounced"; I've belated fixed the typo in
my name (a missing "e").Jean Lepley

Hi folks:Does anyone out there in list-land have a copy of the Tony Rose LP that has
the ballad "Young Hunting" on it? The LP may also be titled "Young Hunting";
it was on the Leader/Trailer label. Phil Cooper is looking for the tune that
Rose used.Thanks in advance!Peace,
Paul

I believe there may be a copy in the Boston College library's music collection.
I will check after the holidaysPaul Stamler wrote:> Hi folks:
>
> Does anyone out there in list-land have a copy of the Tony Rose LP that has
> the ballad "Young Hunting" on it? The LP may also be titled "Young Hunting";
> it was on the Leader/Trailer label. Phil Cooper is looking for the tune that
> Rose used.
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> Peace,
> Paul--
George F. Madaus
Boisi Professor of Education and Public Policy
Senior Research Fellow
National Board on Educational Testing and Public Policy
Center for the Study of Testing Evaluation and Educational Policy
Carolyn A. and Peter S. Lynch School of Education
Boston College
Chestnut Hill MA 02467
[unmask]
617. 552.4521
617 552 8419 FAX

I was thinking about this last night as I was falling asleep.Not all folk songs are traditional in origin. Some derive
from popular songs. In which case we can (sometimes) track
their sources.Which brings up the question: Which known composer gave us
the most songs which have become traditional? Robert Burns?
Woody Guthrie? Stephen Foster?Burns was my first thought, but how many of his songs are
really traditional? Not many, it seems. Ditto Guthrie --
there is "This Land Is Your Land," but not much else.My latest thought is Henry Clay Work. My list:
Grandfather's Clock
Marching Through Georgia
Kingdom Coming (Year of Jubilo)
The Ship That Never Returned
  (cf. "The Train that Never Returned," "The Wreck of Old 97," "MTA")
Ring the Bell, Watchman
  (cf. "Click Go the Shears")
Father, Dear, Father, Come Home With Me Now
Lost on the Lady ElginThere are other Work songs recorded from tradition, but these
seem to be the ones that actually took root. That's seven songs.
Which is pretty impressive.Can anyone think of a composer with more?--
Bob Waltz
[unmask]"The one thing we learn from history --
   is that no one ever learns from history."

A tricky question. Although I yield to none in my admiration of  Work's
works,
"Ship that Never Returned" survives only ibn paraphrase (parody?) as does
"Ring the Bell,
Watchman"---I had a hell of a time finding the original words for the
Digital
Tradition. I'm not sure if "Lady Elgin" has been heard since the early
1960s, and
"Year of the Jubilo" seems to survive only as a melody.On t'other hand, Foster's "Swanee River", "Old Black Joe", Hard Times,
Come Again No More",
"Old Kentucky Home", "Jeannie With the Light Brown Hair"," Camptown
Races", "Gentle Annie",
"Glendy Burke" and (possibly the most folk-processed) "Angelina Baker"
are very much with us."Robert B. Waltz" wrote:> I was thinking about this last night as I was falling asleep.
>
> Not all folk songs are traditional in origin. Some derive
> from popular songs. In which case we can (sometimes) track
> their sources.
>
> Which brings up the question: Which known composer gave us
> the most songs which have become traditional? Robert Burns?
> Woody Guthrie? Stephen Foster?
>
> Burns was my first thought, but how many of his songs are
> really traditional? Not many, it seems. Ditto Guthrie --
> there is "This Land Is Your Land," but not much else.
>
> My latest thought is Henry Clay Work. My list:
> Grandfather's Clock
> Marching Through Georgia
> Kingdom Coming (Year of Jubilo)
> The Ship That Never Returned
>   (cf. "The Train that Never Returned," "The Wreck of Old 97," "MTA")
> Ring the Bell, Watchman
>   (cf. "Click Go the Shears")
> Father, Dear, Father, Come Home With Me Now
> Lost on the Lady Elgin
>
> There are other Work songs recorded from tradition, but these
> seem to be the ones that actually took root. That's seven songs.
> Which is pretty impressive.
>
> Can anyone think of a composer with more?
>
> --
> Bob Waltz
> [unmask]
>
> "The one thing we learn from history --
>    is that no one ever learns from history."

On 12/24/01, dick greenhaus wrote:>A tricky question. Although I yield to none in my admiration of  Work's
>works,
>"Ship that Never Returned"On the contrary. It's Laws D27, and he has traditional collections
from Henry, Brown, Randolph, and JAF.>survives only ibn paraphrase (parody?) as does
>"Ring the Bell,
>Watchman"--Conceded, for the most part -- but it's still alive in
Australia, which makes sense since it needed to be around
to give rise to "Click Go the Shears."And I *have* heard it sung, though admittedly by a revival
group. But it sounded folk processed: The refrain had shifted
from "Ring the bell, watchman" to "Strike the bell, second
mate.">I had a hell of a time finding the original words for the
>Digital
>Tradition. I'm not sure if "Lady Elgin" has been heard since the early
>1960s,Possibly not, but not the point. There are traditional versions
in Pound and Randolph.>and
>"Year of the Jubilo" seems to survive only as a melody.Huh? It's been recorded all over the place.I concede that most modern versions are bowdlerized.>On t'other hand, Foster's "Swanee River", "Old Black Joe", Hard Times,
>Come Again No More",Commonly sung. But traditional? I've never met a field collection.>"Old Kentucky Home", "Jeannie With the Light Brown Hair",Again, where are the collections from tradition?>" Camptown
>Races", "Gentle Annie",
>"Glendy Burke" and (possibly the most folk-processed) "Angelina Baker"
>are very much with us.You should see the Australian versions of Glendy Burke. They're
as extreme as "Angelina Baker" or "Gentle Annie."I'm not denying that Foster's work is better known in current
"popular" circles. But I'm interested in what has been found
in tradition. That's defined as *two* collections known to
me (there are quite a few Work songs I didn't mention because
I know of one traditional version but not two).I think the count of seven songs for Work is solid. Can we top
it?
--
Robert B. Waltz  - - - - - - - - Ballad Index Editor
1078 Colne Street
Saint Paul, MN 55103-1348
651-489-1930 - - - - - - - - - - e-mail: [unmask]The Ballad Index Web Site:
http://www.csufresno.edu/folklore/BalladIndexTOC.html

Bob, Everyone:Sandy Ives is probably off in the woods cutting a Yule log.  Otherwise he
might argue for Joe Scott and/or Larry Gorman as the most prolific of
those who composed consungs later coopted by folk tradition.I leave it to him to make the argument.EdOn Mon, 24 Dec 2001, Robert B. Waltz wrote:> On 12/24/01, dick greenhaus wrote:
>
> >A tricky question. Although I yield to none in my admiration of  Work's
> >works,
> >"Ship that Never Returned"
>
> On the contrary. It's Laws D27, and he has traditional collections
> from Henry, Brown, Randolph, and JAF.
>
> >survives only ibn paraphrase (parody?) as does
> >"Ring the Bell,
> >Watchman"--
>
> Conceded, for the most part -- but it's still alive in
> Australia, which makes sense since it needed to be around
> to give rise to "Click Go the Shears."
>
> And I *have* heard it sung, though admittedly by a revival
> group. But it sounded folk processed: The refrain had shifted
> from "Ring the bell, watchman" to "Strike the bell, second
> mate."
>
> >I had a hell of a time finding the original words for the
> >Digital
> >Tradition. I'm not sure if "Lady Elgin" has been heard since the early
> >1960s,
>
> Possibly not, but not the point. There are traditional versions
> in Pound and Randolph.
>
> >and
> >"Year of the Jubilo" seems to survive only as a melody.
>
> Huh? It's been recorded all over the place.
>
> I concede that most modern versions are bowdlerized.
>
> >On t'other hand, Foster's "Swanee River", "Old Black Joe", Hard Times,
> >Come Again No More",
>
> Commonly sung. But traditional? I've never met a field collection.
>
> >"Old Kentucky Home", "Jeannie With the Light Brown Hair",
>
> Again, where are the collections from tradition?
>
> >" Camptown
> >Races", "Gentle Annie",
> >"Glendy Burke" and (possibly the most folk-processed) "Angelina Baker"
> >are very much with us.
>
> You should see the Australian versions of Glendy Burke. They're
> as extreme as "Angelina Baker" or "Gentle Annie."
>
> I'm not denying that Foster's work is better known in current
> "popular" circles. But I'm interested in what has been found
> in tradition. That's defined as *two* collections known to
> me (there are quite a few Work songs I didn't mention because
> I know of one traditional version but not two).
>
> I think the count of seven songs for Work is solid. Can we top
> it?
> --
> Robert B. Waltz  - - - - - - - - Ballad Index Editor
> 1078 Colne Street
> Saint Paul, MN 55103-1348
> 651-489-1930 - - - - - - - - - - e-mail: [unmask]
>
> The Ballad Index Web Site:
> http://www.csufresno.edu/folklore/BalladIndexTOC.html
>

I gave up on Yule logs shortly after I traded in my last Hupmobile.  But thanks, Ed. It's the thought that counts, and you've got a good one in regard to Joe Scott and Larry Gorman.  Too full of bonhommie at the moment to "make the argument," so all
I'll do is wish everyone a Merry Christmas,pour myself another drink, and suggest you  all go do the same.
Sandy Ives

"Robert B. Waltz" wrote:
>
> On 12/24/01, dick greenhaus wrote:
>
> >survives only ibn paraphrase (parody?) as does
> >"Ring the Bell,
> >Watchman"--
>
> Conceded, for the most part -- but it's still alive in
> Australia, which makes sense since it needed to be around
> to give rise to "Click Go the Shears."
>
> And I *have* heard it sung, though admittedly by a revival
> group. But it sounded folk processed: The refrain had shifted
> from "Ring the bell, watchman" to "Strike the bell, second
> mate."I wondered about this.  Where does "Strike the Bell, Second Mate" come
from?  Was it collected?  It's been current in folk circles - and
recorded by sea singers - for at least 30 years, but I couldn't find it
in Hugill.  It's not just the chorus - the whole thing is a sea song,
the melody is true to the original, and the derivation is clear.> >On t'other hand, Foster's "Swanee River", "Old Black Joe", Hard Times,
> >Come Again No More",
>
> Commonly sung. But traditional? I've never met a field collection.> I'm not denying that Foster's work is better known in current
> "popular" circles. But I'm interested in what has been found
> in tradition. That's defined as *two* collections known to
> me (there are quite a few Work songs I didn't mention because
> I know of one traditional version but not two).At the risk of bestirring Pandora - *whose* tradition?  I find it hard
to believe that songs which have been sung continually in college
circles and wherever people get together around a piano or guitar for
150 years are not to be considered "traditional" because they're so
frequently published.  And I'd be hard to convince that they weren't
known by many of the singers from whom other songs were collected.-Don Duncan

Good People:I would like to extend to one and all on this list my best wishes for the
holiday.  You have provided me hours of stimulating discussion, some
amusement, and a great deal of diversion during a heavy, heavy year.God keep you and yours --Ed

Hello, all.  Just want to wish you all a wonderful holiday season!  May you
all enjoy the  warmth of family and friends.  Keep the contributions coming.
I learn a lot from your collective erudition, and I applaude everyone's
willingness to help everyone else.    Cheers!        MargeE-mail: [unmask]

Robert may well be right, but Dick tells the truth when he says its a
"tricky question."First, I think that whither a song in circulation shows up in a field
collection often has more to do with the collector than the collectee.  We
all know the stories of Cecil Sharp ignoring American historical and topical
ballads.  But to this day folk songs collectors have tended to be less
interested in sacred songs or songs with religious subject matter.   And
too, in the 20th Century there were two shifts in recording technology (78s
to LPs in the 1950's and LPs to CDs in the 1980s) and that has created at
least a two or three generation removal from early traditional recordings.
It seems to me that a lot of folk song collectors (call them "purists" or
"old school," perhaps) have tended to ignore forms moving between recordings
and the oral tradition.  Perhaps its because they are familiar with the
original recordings and assume everyone else has heard them too.  The truth
is today's typical 25-year-old American *might* vaguely recall having heard
an LP but has never heard a 78.Now I am sure everyone on this list knows of the foibles of the folk song
collector, but I said that to say this.The most widely sung songs in the US Southeast undoubtedly have their origin
in worship service -- especially in the many churches that adhere to a
cappella, congregational singing styles.  A lot of people who sing those
songs know they heard them in church, but have no idea who wrote them, and
indeed, they are often singing local or family versions and variants.  A
couple of songwriters who come to mind are Albert Brumley ("I'll fly away,"
"Rank stranger," "Camping in Canaan's land," "I'll meet you in the morning")
and James D. Vaughn ("What would you give in exchange," "No depression in
heaven").  One of these guys may be able to top Robert's seven.Another big problem (and more on the topic of ballads) would be sorting out
all the Carter Family stuff.  What did and didn't AP write?  If I were to go
out to Knoxville area dances, singings, and pickings over the next seven
days I am certain I could find at least a couple dozen Carter Family songs
in circulation -- being sung by people who had no idea where most of them
came from, most all of them departing more or less from the Carter Family
version.  That should be no big surprise because AP probably didn't know
they were Carter Family songs either.  Ralph Peer certainly did though.
Anyway, despite that can of worms, AP Carter is definitely a candidate to
top the seven.A couple of others folks with several songs (though not seven) circulating
in the same communities are Dick Burnett and GB Grayson.Finally, I'll give you my favorite "prolific writer of traditional
ballads" -- and because its 5 am Christmas morning and Old Santy is late,
I'll take the lazy way for now and say that his songs just sound right to my
ears --  and that's Blind Alfred Reed.  I really don't know how many of his
topical ballads were picked up and sung around, but I do think of him as a
traditional composer of historical ballads.Merry ChristmasBrent Cantrell
Knoxville: Date:    Mon, 24 Dec 2001 19:19:04 -0600
: From:    "Robert B. Waltz" <[unmask]>
: Subject: Re: Idle Curiosity: Composer of the Most "Folk" Songs
:
: On 12/24/01, dick greenhaus wrote:
:
: >A tricky question. Although I yield to none in my admiration of  Work's
: >works,
: >"Ship that Never Returned"
:
: On the contrary. It's Laws D27, and he has traditional collections
: from Henry, Brown, Randolph, and JAF.
:
: >survives only ibn paraphrase (parody?) as does
: >"Ring the Bell,
: >Watchman"--
:
: Conceded, for the most part -- but it's still alive in
: Australia, which makes sense since it needed to be around
: to give rise to "Click Go the Shears."
:
: And I *have* heard it sung, though admittedly by a revival
: group. But it sounded folk processed: The refrain had shifted
: from "Ring the bell, watchman" to "Strike the bell, second
: mate."
:
: >I had a hell of a time finding the original words for the
: >Digital
: >Tradition. I'm not sure if "Lady Elgin" has been heard since the early
: >1960s,
:
: Possibly not, but not the point. There are traditional versions
: in Pound and Randolph.
:
: >and
: >"Year of the Jubilo" seems to survive only as a melody.
:
: Huh? It's been recorded all over the place.
:
: I concede that most modern versions are bowdlerized.
:
: >On t'other hand, Foster's "Swanee River", "Old Black Joe", Hard Times,
: >Come Again No More",
:
: Commonly sung. But traditional? I've never met a field collection.
:
: >"Old Kentucky Home", "Jeannie With the Light Brown Hair",
:
: Again, where are the collections from tradition?
:
: >" Camptown
: >Races", "Gentle Annie",
: >"Glendy Burke" and (possibly the most folk-processed) "Angelina Baker"
: >are very much with us.
:
: You should see the Australian versions of Glendy Burke. They're
: as extreme as "Angelina Baker" or "Gentle Annie."
:
: I'm not denying that Foster's work is better known in current
: "popular" circles. But I'm interested in what has been found
: in tradition. That's defined as *two* collections known to
: me (there are quite a few Work songs I didn't mention because
: I know of one traditional version but not two).
:
: I think the count of seven songs for Work is solid. Can we top
: it?
: --
: Robert B. Waltz  - - - - - - - - Ballad Index Editor
: 1078 Colne Street
: Saint Paul, MN 55103-1348
: 651-489-1930 - - - - - - - - - - e-mail: [unmask]
:
: The Ballad Index Web Site:
: http://www.csufresno.edu/folklore/BalladIndexTOC.html

I guess I asked this question badly.Chances are that our all-time record holder will be some
folk composer, such as Larry Gorman. (Though, interestingly,
I find only seven Gorman songs in tradition, and several of
them cannot be definitively connected to him. Scott has
even fewer collections.)But Gorman and Scott, especially the latter, weren't popular
songwriters; they were people who sang for the folks around
them. Had they lived a century earlier, we probably couldn't
trace their works at all.Work, Foster, George F. Root, even Burns were working for
*popular* consumption. They're competing against Mozart
or Rogers & Hammerstein or Irving Berlin or Lennon & McCartney.
Of people who wrote for purposes of commercial sales, who
comes out on top?The idea of A. P. Carter is really interesting -- but awfully
tough. If he rewrote "Who Will Shoe Your Pretty Little Foot"
to produce "The Storms Are on the Ocean," for instance, and
people take over the Carter version, does that count as putting
a song in tradition? All of us who are singers know the need
for coherent versions. If we learn a fragment, and Carter
supplied a verse or two to make it complete, the singer may
assimilate to Carter's version -- but it's still a song from
his personal tradition. This is going to be very hard to
prove one way or the other.The problem of "controlling" the tradition is, of course,
beyond solution, especially today. But we can set criteria.
I set mine: Two collections from tradition. At least it
gives us something to argue about. :-)I'm not trying to make a case for Henry Clay Work. (I do think
a noteworthy point about Foster and Work, our two leading
candidates, is that both were really at their best writing
*tunes* -- it appears that a good melody is the best way to
move something into tradition.) If someone can top Work by
this standard, great. I just want to know who it is.Though it isn't worth fighting about. It truly *is* idle
curiosity. I was hoping for an interesting discussion,
not a holiday fight. :-(Peace and happy holidays to all.
--
Robert B. Waltz  - - - - - - - - Ballad Index Editor
1078 Colne Street
Saint Paul, MN 55103-1348
651-489-1930 - - - - - - - - - - e-mail: [unmask]The Ballad Index Web Site:
http://www.csufresno.edu/folklore/BalladIndexTOC.html

Automatic digest processor <[unmask]>, in the person of
Robert B. Waltz, writes:> Conceded, for the most part -- but it's still alive in Australia,
> which makes sense since it needed to be around to give rise to
> "Click Go the Shears."
>
> And I *have* heard it sung, though admittedly by a revival
> group. But it sounded folk processed: The refrain had shifted from
> "Ring the bell, watchman" to "Strike the bell, second mate."Not just processed, but a song in itself, tho to the same tune &
clearly inspired by it.  Don Duncan says:  Traditional.  Hugill lists three shore songs which have the same
  tune as this pumping chantey: the Scottish tune "Ring the Bell
  Watchman", the Australian tune from the shearing sheds, "Click Go
  the Shears", and the Welsh air "Twill Back y Clo".Likewise, when I was in Britain in 1959, a bawdy version was well
known among students:  Ring the bell, verger, ring the bell, ring.
  Perhaps the congregation will condescend to sing.
  Perhaps the village organist, sitting on his stool,
  Will play upon the organ instead of on his tool.
--
---  Joe Fineman    [unmask]||:  The vice of politicians and business executives is to judge  :||
||:  everything by one number.                                    :||

Robert, I am certainly glad you started this thread.  I like seeing what
other folks think about authorship.AP Carter has been on my mind lately.  I am preparing a couple of ballad
CD's for publication now and one of them is a collection of the songs of
Johnny Ray Hicks, from Fentress County in Tennessee. Johnny Ray wrote a few
songs, including a wonderful ballad called "The Crossville Criminal," but
he also adamantly claims to have written a ballad called "The Wild and
Wreckless Motorman."  As you might guess, that song is real close to to AP
Carter's "Reckless Motorman" which HE claimed to have written, or "worked
up."  And that, of course, seems a species of Laws G11 recorded by at least
two folks in the late 20's and early 30's before AP got hold of it.Johnny Ray died last year.  I interviewed him two weeks before his death
and he insisted then that he was there when the motorman died. Johnny Ray
was born about 1935. His family knows the story and especially loves the
songs that he composed.  So, I'm right now walking the edge of a razor
writing up the notes.  Right now I'm thinking Johnny Ray as much wrote it
as AP, and I figure that if AP could copyright it, then Johnny Ray can
too.  I guess I'll also have to include a short essay about ownership and
authorship.  I'd like to write something about the foolishiness of the
current copyright system, but that would tempt the lawyers.One interesting note in all this is that Cliff Carlisle recorded "True and
Trembling Brakeman" in 1931 and then, according to C. Wolfe's notes,
Carlisle was also present at the Peer recording session in Charlotte in
1938 when the Carters recorded "Reckless Motorman."Anyway, I guess I probably really knew what kind of authorship you were
talking about.  I just tossed in AP Carter in a fit of Christmas meaness.Brent Cantrell
Knoxville

>> On t'other hand, Foster's "Swanee River", "Old Black Joe", Hard Times,
>> Come Again No More",
> Commonly sung. But traditional? I've never met a field collection.Could that just be because when something is that familiar, few
collectors will bother collecting it?  "Commonly sung" just means
that it *could* be collected if anybody wanted to, surely?cheers - jack-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jack Campin  *   11 Third Street, Newtongrange, Midlothian EH22 4PU, Scotland
tel 0131 660 4760  *  fax 0870 055 4975  *  http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/jack/
food intolerance data & recipes, freeware Mac logic fonts, and Scottish music

----- Original Message -----
From: Brent Cantrell <[unmask]><<First, I think that whither a song in circulation shows up in a field
collection often has more to do with the collector than the collectee.  We
all know the stories of Cecil Sharp ignoring American historical and topical
ballads.  But to this day folk songs collectors have tended to be less
interested in sacred songs or songs with religious subject matter. >>I'm not certain I agree with that -- many collectors in the USA, most
notably Alan Lomax and his cohorts at the Library of Congress (and Lomax on
his own, in the great collecting trip of 1959), have recorded a great deal
of religious music. Anyone collecting in the African-American community can
scarcely avoid it; religious and secular traditions are tightly intertwined.
But the Anglo community hasn't been neglected.*Some* folk song collectors have neglected religious material -- John Cohen,
for example, comes to mind. But many, many have not. << And
too, in the 20th Century there were two shifts in recording technology (78s
to LPs in the 1950's and LPs to CDs in the 1980s) and that has created at
least a two or three generation removal from early traditional recordings.
It seems to me that a lot of folk song collectors (call them "purists" or
"old school," perhaps) have tended to ignore forms moving between recordings
and the oral tradition.  Perhaps its because they are familiar with the
original recordings and assume everyone else has heard them too.  The truth
is today's typical 25-year-old American *might* vaguely recall having heard
an LP but has never heard a 78.>>I'm not sure I see the connection between this indubitable fact and the
occurrence of particular material in collections. There must be some
connection, or you wouldn't have said it, but could you fill in the gaps for
me? Thanks!<<The most widely sung songs in the US Southeast undoubtedly have their
origin
in worship service -- especially in the many churches that adhere to a
cappella, congregational singing styles.  A lot of people who sing those
songs know they heard them in church, but have no idea who wrote them, and
indeed, they are often singing local or family versions and variants.  A
couple of songwriters who come to mind are Albert Brumley ("I'll fly away,"
"Rank stranger," "Camping in Canaan's land," "I'll meet you in the morning")
and James D. Vaughn ("What would you give in exchange," "No depression in
heaven").  One of these guys may be able to top Robert's seven.>>So might Stamps & Baxter, if they really wrote all the songs that came out
under their names.Peace,
Paul

<<I believe there may be a copy in the Boston College library's music
collection.
I will check after the holidays>>Listmom Marge beat you to the punch by a couple of minutes -- but thanks!Peace,
Paul

On 12/25/01, Jack Campin wrote:> >> On t'other hand, Foster's "Swanee River", "Old Black Joe", Hard Times,
>>> Come Again No More",
>> Commonly sung. But traditional? I've never met a field collection.
>
>Could that just be because when something is that familiar, few
>collectors will bother collecting it?  "Commonly sung" just means
>that it *could* be collected if anybody wanted to, surely?A false argument. "Hard Times" is commonly sung *today*, by
all the revival singers who don't have any money. That indicates
*nothing* about how popular it was before some modern got his
dirty mitts on it. (Can you tell that I think it's been recorded
to death twice over? :-)A number of Foster songs, including some of the best-known
("Swanee River," "My Old Kentucky Home") *do* show up in
field collections. If "Hard Times" doesn't, the presumption
is that it didn't make it into tradition. If it has been
found in tradition, fine -- but we need the evidence. I
collect reports of collections :-) (that's what the Ballad
Index is), and I haven't found one of "Hard Times" yet.On 12/25/01, Brent Cantrell wrote:>Anyway, I guess I probably really knew what kind of authorship you were
>talking about.  I just tossed in AP Carter in a fit of Christmas meaness.Actually, it was a good point. It's just unprovable.I'm not proposing this as a Ph.D. thesis for anyone. :-)
We've pretty well demonstrated that a definitive answer
is impossible. But we can try to think who we think *might*
be the answer. :-)
--
Robert B. Waltz  - - - - - - - - Ballad Index Editor
1078 Colne Street
Saint Paul, MN 55103-1348
651-489-1930 - - - - - - - - - - e-mail: [unmask]The Ballad Index Web Site:
http://www.csufresno.edu/folklore/BalladIndexTOC.html

----- Original Message -----
From: Robert B. Waltz <[unmask]><<A number of Foster songs, including some of the best-known
("Swanee River," "My Old Kentucky Home") *do* show up in
field collections. If "Hard Times" doesn't, the presumption
is that it didn't make it into tradition. If it has been
found in tradition, fine -- but we need the evidence. I
collect reports of collections :-) (that's what the Ballad
Index is), and I haven't found one of "Hard Times" yet.>>It made it into tradition enough to have been parodied by soldiers during
the civil war:It's the song, the sigh of the hungry
Hard tack, hard tack, come again no more
Many days you have lingered upon our stomachs sore
Oh, hard tack, come again no moreThe 'frail forms fainting at the door' line fits into the parody nicely.
Does that count as a collection from tradition?Peace,
Paul

Paul Atmler wrote:>I'm not sure I see the connection between this indubitable fact and the
>occurrence of particular material in collections. There must be some
>connection, or you wouldn't have said it, but could you fill in the gaps
for
>me? Thanks!Please forgive my convoluted prose.  What I meant to do was suggest that
some collectors (and I am one of them) tend to be less interested in forms
that are obviously coming from fairly recently recorded sources.  I think
many of us, as we grow older, forget that there are a couple of generations
out there that never heard some of those recordings, and they may be
singing a song that has already circulated through several singers.Based on fieldworkers I've known and collections and reports I've read, I
think it is far more likely for individual researchers to home in on the
old ballads and local topical and historic songs than on, say, the songs of
Grandpa Jones.  But some of GJ's songs may well be circulating and would
fit most any definition of "traditional" that might be applied to songs and
ballads in general.As for sacred music, I agree that many fieldworkers are recording religious
songs, but I think that those songs are also less likely to be delineated
and categorized.In my experience, fieldworkers tend to be looking for "performance" when
they document sacred music, and they are often looking at "text" when
documenting balladry traditions.  (Please forgive me for using those words,
but I can't seem to come up with any euphemisms.  I am not here talking
folklore theory but rather commenting on behavior.)  The nuances of
performance are a lot harder to codify than variation in text.  So, you can
end up with scads of "folksong" print collections discussing text
variations in ballads, while the end result of the sacred research goes on
disc.  After all, if you want the "text" of the sacred songs just go to the
Stamps-Baxter or Vaughn hymnbook, right? :)  I suspect the ratio of sacred
performances to ballad performances on disc right now may be on the order
of 100:1.So, when the folks on the ballad list start talking about what is and isn't
showing up in the folksong collections, the sacred music gets shorted.
It's mostly showing up on the record catalogs.Brent Cantrell
Knoxville town

Paul, Brent and Coxey's Army:I wonder if my PERSONAL definition of a folk song might help sort the
gospel song tradition(s), the Grandpa Jones proposition, or even good old
Henry C. Work -- who provoked this whole tangled skein in the first place.Do those people who sing the church hymns, the gospel songs of whatever
origin feel free to change them, to add verses?  Or are they bound to a
fixed text/tune because that is the way old A.P. sang it, or the way the
Sacred Harp has it?In my thinking, a song is NOT a folk song until the folk claim it as their
own, that is, the folk feel free to adapt it to their individual
voices/style/needs.If the folk refer to the Vaughan books or the Staples records, as Cantrell
suggests they might, then the songs are not, IN MY OPINION (never humble),
folk songs.If, on the other hand, we the knowledgable can say, "Ah Hah! Grandpa
Jones," the singer (the folk) cannot or do not or don't care, then it is
folk.I recorded some years ago a church service in South Central Los Angeles --
a humbling, moving experience -- during which the good ladies of the
congregation took Thomas Dorsey and "Wade in the Water" as their own.
Clearly both were of the "folk."  One had been there for a century or
more.  The other was about to be anointed.Ed On Wed, 26 Dec 2001, Brent Cantrell wrote:> Paul Atmler wrote:
>
> >I'm not sure I see the connection between this indubitable fact and the
> >occurrence of particular material in collections. There must be some
> >connection, or you wouldn't have said it, but could you fill in the gaps
> for
> >me? Thanks!
>
>
> Please forgive my convoluted prose.  What I meant to do was suggest that
> some collectors (and I am one of them) tend to be less interested in forms
> that are obviously coming from fairly recently recorded sources.  I think
> many of us, as we grow older, forget that there are a couple of generations
> out there that never heard some of those recordings, and they may be
> singing a song that has already circulated through several singers.
>
> Based on fieldworkers I've known and collections and reports I've read, I
> think it is far more likely for individual researchers to home in on the
> old ballads and local topical and historic songs than on, say, the songs of
> Grandpa Jones.  But some of GJ's songs may well be circulating and would
> fit most any definition of "traditional" that might be applied to songs and
> ballads in general.
>
> As for sacred music, I agree that many fieldworkers are recording religious
> songs, but I think that those songs are also less likely to be delineated
> and categorized.
>
> In my experience, fieldworkers tend to be looking for "performance" when
> they document sacred music, and they are often looking at "text" when
> documenting balladry traditions.  (Please forgive me for using those words,
> but I can't seem to come up with any euphemisms.  I am not here talking
> folklore theory but rather commenting on behavior.)  The nuances of
> performance are a lot harder to codify than variation in text.  So, you can
> end up with scads of "folksong" print collections discussing text
> variations in ballads, while the end result of the sacred research goes on
> disc.  After all, if you want the "text" of the sacred songs just go to the
> Stamps-Baxter or Vaughn hymnbook, right? :)  I suspect the ratio of sacred
> performances to ballad performances on disc right now may be on the order
> of 100:1.
>
> So, when the folks on the ballad list start talking about what is and isn't
> showing up in the folksong collections, the sacred music gets shorted.
> It's mostly showing up on the record catalogs.
>
> Brent Cantrell
> Knoxville town
>

Folks:I think this personal reply deserves wider circulation.Ed---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 19:21:07 -0500
From: Brent Cantrell <[unmask]>
To: Ed Cray <[unmask]>
Subject: Re: Idle Curiosity: Composer of the Most "Folk" SongsEd,The two CD's are""May Justus, the Carawan Recordings" being jointly produced by Jubilee
Community Arts and the Tennessee Folklore Society.  May was a children's
book writer and teacher on the Cumberland Plateau.  She also turned out to
be a decent singer.  Guy Carawan recorded her in the early fifties and again
about 1963."Johnny Ray Hick's .... " is being produced by Jubilee Community Arts.
Johnny Ray is also from the Cumberland Plateau and is from the family that
includes Dee, Delta, and Bessford Hicks.  Bobby Fulcher and I have been
recording him for the last fifteen years.  He died of lung cancer while were
trying re-record his repertory on DAT.Both are way behind schedule.I'll let you know when they are finished -- should be first half of 2002.Brent----- Original Message -----
From: "Ed Cray" <[unmask]>
To: "Brent Cantrell" <[unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 25, 2001 8:40 PM
Subject: Re: Idle Curiosity: Composer of the Most "Folk" Songs: Brent:
:
: Keep me (us) posted on your publication of the CDs.
:
: Happy new year,
:
: Ed
:
:
:
:
:

Ed,I pretty much agree with you.  The widespead availability of songbooks
makes standard sacred texts available to even Godless bluegrass bands.But, I would argue that although those songs do often move over into the
oral tradition, they tend to be seen as static texts by field collectors
just because the books are widely available.Brent

Brent:I sniff a disagreement with your second sentence.  If there is anything
those of us who ponder folk song/ballad/gospel/blues/whatever would agree
upon, it is that no folk song text is static.  If it were static, there
would be damn little for us to ponder, or study, or get into disuccsions
like this.EdOn Wed, 26 Dec 2001, Brent Cantrell wrote:> Ed,
>
> I pretty much agree with you.  The widespead availability of songbooks
> makes standard sacred texts available to even Godless bluegrass bands.
>
> But, I would argue that although those songs do often move over into the
> oral tradition, they tend to be seen as static texts by field collectors
> just because the books are widely available.
>
> Brent
>

Ed,Static is perhaps too strong a word.  What I meant was that because
songbooks are so readily available, some people assume everyone in the
community is going back to the text for verification.In reality, people are often singing what they have learned "by ear" from
friends and family even if they are holding the songbook in their hands.
I've been working with a local shape note singing group on an
intro/training CD for public schools and one of the things that became
obvious to everyone was that people are often singing a slightly different
melody and sometimes even different words than are in the book.  This
despite the fact that 1.) This group of singers has been responsible for
keeping the book, The New Harp of Columbia, in print for at least the last
two editions, 2.) everyone owns a book, 3.) everyone holds the book in
front of them when they sing, and 4.) several people claim they can't
participate without the book.Brent

Hi folks:Does anyone out there have issue dates for the original LPs of Peter
Kennedy's "Folk Songs of Britain" series, preferably for both the Topic and
Caedmon issues? I know that they were issued in several batches -- there's a
numbering discontinuity in the Topic series, probably between vols. 5 & 6,
and there are two discontinuities in the Caedmon series, between 5 & 6 and
between 8 & 9.Thanks in advance!Peace,
Paul

----- Original Message -----
From: Ed Cray <[unmask]><<I recorded some years ago a church service in South Central Los Angeles --
a humbling, moving experience -- during which the good ladies of the
congregation took Thomas Dorsey and "Wade in the Water" as their own.
Clearly both were of the "folk."  One had been there for a century or
more.  The other was about to be anointed.>>And both have certainly been circulating in folk tradition for quite some
time; "Wade in the Water" first Ballad Index citation is 1960, but it
includes floating (wading?) verses from four other pieces: "Bear the News,
Mary" (first citation 1934), "Walk in Jerusalem Just Like John" (1951),
"Hand Me Down My Walking Cane" (1926), and "Heaven and Hell" (also 1934,
both Lomax). So it's been around. I'd say Dorsey's gotten the nod too.Peace,
Paul

The Topic Catalogue for 1978 lists on pages 63-65;12T157 Songs of Courtship
12T158 Songs of Seduction
12T159 Jack of All Trades
12T160 Child Ballads 1
12T161 Child Ballads 2
12T194 Sailormen and Servingmaids
12T195 Fair Game and Foul
12T196 A Soldier's Life for Me
12T197 Songs of Ceremony
12T198 Songs of Animals and Other MarvelsThe issue years for the those I've still got are;
Vol 1 1968
Vol 6 1969Hope that might be of some use.Ruairidh Greig----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Stamler" <[unmask]>
To: <[unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2001 6:13 AM
Subject: Folk Songs of Britain> Hi folks:
>
> Does anyone out there have issue dates for the original LPs of Peter
> Kennedy's "Folk Songs of Britain" series, preferably for both the Topic
and
> Caedmon issues? I know that they were issued in several batches -- there's
a
> numbering discontinuity in the Topic series, probably between vols. 5 & 6,
> and there are two discontinuities in the Caedmon series, between 5 & 6 and
> between 8 & 9.
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> Peace,
> Paul
>

The Caedmon LPs appear to be undated except for
TC1142-6 1961 (copyright date of booklet)
The others are numbered 1162-4 and 1224-5Musical Traditions has a Topic and Traditional Song Discography which may
give better dates - www.mustrad.org.uk/John Moulden

According to a Discography I helped Steve Roud with some years ago the dates
and numbers are as follows:
TC1142/12T157 - 1961 - 1968
TC1143/12T158 - 1961 - 1968
TC1144/12T159 - 1961 - 1968
TC1145/12T160 - 1961 - 1969
TC1146/12T161 - 1961 - 1969
TC1162/12T194 - 1961 - 1969
TC1163/12T195 - 1961 - 1970
TC1164/12T196 - 1961 - 1971
TC1224/12T197 - 1961 - 1971
TC1225/12T198 - 1961 - 1971but I doubt the Caedmon dates from TC1162 on.John Moulden

The FSSGB library has the Caedmon Series.  Our index has volumes 1-5
listed as 1961.  Unfortunately, that very section of the collection is
currently behind a table, so it will take a day or two for me to
excavate the full set and see if there are dates on the others.  I
presume you have the Caedmon numbers?-Don DuncanRuairidh Greig wrote:
>
> The Topic Catalogue for 1978 lists on pages 63-65;
>
> 12T157 Songs of Courtship
> 12T158 Songs of Seduction
> 12T159 Jack of All Trades
> 12T160 Child Ballads 1
> 12T161 Child Ballads 2
> 12T194 Sailormen and Servingmaids
> 12T195 Fair Game and Foul
> 12T196 A Soldier's Life for Me
> 12T197 Songs of Ceremony
> 12T198 Songs of Animals and Other Marvels
>
> The issue years for the those I've still got are;
> Vol 1 1968
> Vol 6 1969
>
> Hope that might be of some use.
>
> Ruairidh Greig
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Paul Stamler" <[unmask]>
> To: <[unmask]>
> Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2001 6:13 AM
> Subject: Folk Songs of Britain
>
> > Hi folks:
> >
> > Does anyone out there have issue dates for the original LPs of Peter
> > Kennedy's "Folk Songs of Britain" series, preferably for both the Topic
> and
> > Caedmon issues? I know that they were issued in several batches -- there's
> a
> > numbering discontinuity in the Topic series, probably between vols. 5 & 6,
> > and there are two discontinuities in the Caedmon series, between 5 & 6 and
> > between 8 & 9.
> >
> > Thanks in advance!
> >
> > Peace,
> > Paul
> >

On this "composer of the most" business:  Ed Cray left it for me to "make the argument" for Gorman, Scott and their ilk, and since I've now gotten over most of my Christmas cheer, here goes.  Walz finds only seven of Gorman's songs in tradition (I
could quibble, but the hell with it), and adds that "Scott has even fewer collections." Whoa.  If "two collections from tradition" (again Walz) is sufficient, I count nine of Joe Scott's songs passing that mark, five of them having been collected
dozens of times.  And as for Joe not being a "popular" songwriter like Foster and Root, I don't think he'd agree with you, and he might cite "William McGibbeny," "The Norway Bum," and several other of his works as evidence. He could write in the
"pop" mode as well as in the "traditional" , but how to crack the pop market? That escaped him.
Enough  for now.
Sandy Ives

On 12/27/01, Sandy Ives wrote:>On this "composer of the most" business:  Ed Cray left it for me to "make the argument" for Gorman, Scott and their ilk, and since I've now gotten over most of my Christmas cheer, here goes.  Walz finds only seven of Gorman's songs in tradition (I
>could quibble, but the hell with it),Go ahead, quibble (if I can quibble with the fact that you misspelled
my name, anyway). I find seven. Doesn't make the number absolute. If
you can document more, I'd love to see it. Those were the ones *I've*
been able to document in the Ballad Index. Additional information is
welcome.>and adds that "Scott has even fewer collections." Whoa.  If "two collections from tradition" (again Walz) is sufficient, I count nine of Joe Scott's songs passing that mark, five of them having been collected
>dozens of times.Names?Also, a real problem here is demonstrating authorship. Most of the
Gorman songs I have on file were said by *someone* to be by Gorman,
but with no available proof. At least one such attribution ("Peter
Amberly") was wrong. How do we verify a Joe Scott song?>And as for Joe not being a "popular" songwriter like Foster and Root, I don't think he'd agree with you, and he might cite "William McGibbeny," "The Norway Bum," and several other of his works as evidence. He could write in the
>"pop" mode as well as in the "traditional" , but how to crack the pop market? That escaped him.I think that was my point. He wrote songs, but he wasn't a Tin Pan
Alley songwriter. Maybe he wanted to be; I don't know. But he wasn't.
--
Robert B. Waltz  - - - - - - - - Ballad Index Editor
1078 Colne Street
Saint Paul, MN 55103-1348
651-489-1930 - - - - - - - - - - e-mail: [unmask]The Ballad Index Web Site:
http://www.csufresno.edu/folklore/BalladIndexTOC.html

I can confirm that this is correct according to the information on
the Topic set that I have, (though I'm missing the Topic Vol.6; I
have the Caedmon).The Topic LPs have either "P (circle P) Topic 19xx" or "First
published by Topic 19xx" on the label, and "Text copyright © 1961" on
the sleeves and booklet.Unfortunately I can find no date at all anywhere on the Caedmon
volume. John is right in doubting the issue date as 1961, however. A
reference in the booklet (TC1162) gives "The Grey Silkie" as recorded
in June, 1964. The paper sleeve containing the disc has a Caedmon
catalog on it, which lists recordings up to TC1209. Obviously the
last two in the series were even later.Interestingly, my Caedmon booklet has the music transcribed as well
as the lyrics. One of these years I'll try to dig up a complete
Caedmon set and check out the others.Hope this helps,
John Roberts.>According to a Discography I helped Steve Roud with some years ago the dates
>and numbers are as follows:
>TC1142/12T157 - 1961 - 1968
>TC1143/12T158 - 1961 - 1968
>TC1144/12T159 - 1961 - 1968
>TC1145/12T160 - 1961 - 1969
>TC1146/12T161 - 1961 - 1969
>TC1162/12T194 - 1961 - 1969
>TC1163/12T195 - 1961 - 1970
>TC1164/12T196 - 1961 - 1971
>TC1224/12T197 - 1961 - 1971
>TC1225/12T198 - 1961 - 1971
>
>but I doubt the Caedmon dates from TC1162 on.
>
>John Moulden

Don Duncan wrote:<<The FSSGB library has the Caedmon Series.  Our index has volumes 1-5
listed as 1961.  Unfortunately, that very section of the collection is
currently behind a table, so it will take a day or two for me to
excavate the full set and see if there are dates on the others.  I
presume you have the Caedmon numbers?>>I have the Caedmon numbers (except for the Christmas album) but not their
dates, except for those first five.Peace,
Paul

----- Original Message -----
From: John Roberts <[unmask]><<I can confirm that this is correct according to the information on
the Topic set that I have, (though I'm missing the Topic Vol.6; I
have the Caedmon).The Topic LPs have either "P (circle P) Topic 19xx" or "First
published by Topic 19xx" on the label, and "Text copyright © 1961" on
the sleeves and booklet.>>Hmmm...when did the "circle-P" symbol come into use? I thought it was
introduced after the US copyright revisions of 1975, mirrored in Britain.>but I doubt the Caedmon dates from TC1162 on.
>
>John MouldenSo do I -- the graphics on TC1224 look like about 1966-69 to me.Incidentally, I *do* have the number for "Songs of Christmas" -- it seems to
have been retitled "Songs of Ceremony" for the Topic issue.Peace.
Paul

At 11:24 AM -0600 12/27/01, Paul Stamler wrote:
>----- Original Message -----
>From: John Roberts <[unmask]>
>
>The Topic LPs have either "P (circle P) Topic 19xx" or "First
>published by Topic 19xx" on the label, and "Text copyright © 1961" on
>the sleeves and booklet.>>
>>Hmmm...when did the "circle-P" symbol come into use? I thought it was
>introduced after the US copyright revisions of 1975, mirrored in Britain.
>I can't remember when I bought mine. Not when they were released, but
when I could afford them. I would surmise that they were originally
issued as "First published..." which was changed to a "Circle-P..."
on a later pressing, which is why I have both versions of the text on
different LPs. It's not a function of the series release - my vol.1
and vol.10 are both circle-P's, for example.John.

Paul Stamler wrote:> Incidentally, I *do* have the number for "Songs of Christmas" -- it seems to
> have been retitled "Songs of Ceremony" for the Topic issue.The other discrepancy in our index is that Volume 10 (Caedmon) is listed
as simply "Animal Songs", whereas the Topic version is "Songs of Animals
and Other Marvels".

>
> Static is perhaps too strong a word.  What I meant was that because
> songbooks are so readily available, some people assume everyone in the
> community is going back to the text for verification.
>
> In reality, people are often singing what they have learned "by ear" from
> friends and family even if they are holding the songbook in their hands.
> I've been working with a local shape note singing group on an
> intro/training CD for public schools and one of the things that became
> obvious to everyone was that people are often singing a slightly different
> melody and sometimes even different words than are in the book.  This
> despite the fact that 1.) This group of singers has been responsible for
> keeping the book, The New Harp of Columbia, in print for at least the last
> two editions, 2.) everyone owns a book, 3.) everyone holds the book in
> front of them when they sing, and 4.) several people claim they can't
> participate without the book.
>
> BrentVery interesting observations.  Religious songs do indeed challenge most
definitions of "folksong."  That's why I like the one I've been wont to use:
A folksong is a song the survival of which isn't entirely dependent on
commercial media.
Norm Cohen