 sj |
||
|
||
Internet resources versus 'real life'
|
|
|
|||||||
|
Internet resources versus 'real life' |
Share Thread
|
||||||
|
Subject: Internet resources versus 'real life' From: MegW Date: 20 Apr 08 - 01:28 PM Hi again, all! I'm wondering what types of resources you all use to find/research songs and traditions. What are the benefits of discussing and researching things online? In person with physical resources? Which online sources do you prefer? Which books and collections do you find most useful? Is it easier/better to discuss music and history with others online or in person? What is the availability of sources like in real life versus the Internet? |
|
Subject: RE: Internet resources versus 'real life' From: Geoff the Duck Date: 21 Apr 08 - 04:26 AM I suspect a of of it depends on your agenda. I don't do a great deal of research into songs or tunes. Partly lack of time, partly because the stuff that interests me isn't necessarily in print and the "source material" people who played original Old Time American music are dead in America and I live in England. Also there is the question of buying books and recordings, they may not be available and if tey are there might not be cash to buy or space to store them. Ask nicely on Mudcat, and the folk scholars, book/record collectors and internet trawlers will often be able to quote source documents at you, transcribe lyrics from garbled scratched recordings and link you to web resources which have already done your research. It doesn't always work, it may not actually be what you require, but I have seen a lot of happy customers since joining the 'cat. I would say that if you are into serious research, or trying to find obscure stuff for your own purposes, do so. If you then want to discuss your findings, there are plenty peope here who are interested in such discussions. If you just need a quick answer to a simple question, opinions on misheard words or background to a song, Mudcat is difficult to beat. Quack! GtD. |
|
Subject: RE: Internet resources versus 'real life' From: Saro Date: 21 Apr 08 - 04:46 AM Hi MegW, a little while ago I asked a question about people's favourite internet resources for finding material. I can't seem to find the thread, but here are some of the sites people pointed me towards, plus some of my own favourites - hope this is useful. Sorry about the lack of blue clickies! Saro http://www.mustrad.org.uk/songbook/s_index.htm Interesting versions of songs http://library.efdss.org/cgi-bin/home.cgi Numerous collections http://www.sacred-texts.com/neu/eng/child/index.htmm Child Ballads http://www.hymnsandcarolsofchristmas.com/Hymns_and_Carols/Images/Pickard-Cambridge/table_of_contents.htm http://www.traditionalmusic.co.uk/index.html http://www.bodley.ox.ac.uk/ballads/ballads.htm Bodleian Library http://www.contemplator.com/intro.html Lesley Burns Folk Music site - very comprehensive http://maxhunter.missouristate.edu/ Max Hunter collection. www.folkinfo.org www.yorkshirefolksong.net Yorkshire Garland |
|
Subject: RE: Internet resources versus 'real life' From: Azizi Date: 21 Apr 08 - 07:55 AM Saro, here's those blue clickies for the Interenet resources that you posted-though I didn't check each one of them to make sure that they work: http://www.mustrad.org.uk/songbook/s_index.h http://library.efdss.org/cgi-bin/home.cgi http://www.sacred-texts.com/neu/eng/child/index.htm http://www.hymnsandcarolsofchristmas.com/Hymns_and_Carols/Images/Pickard-Cambridge/table_of_contents.htm http://www.bodley.ox.ac.uk/ballads/ballads.htm http://www.contemplator.com/intro.html http://maxhunter.missouristate.edu/ www.folkinfo.org www.yorkshirefolksong.net |
|
Subject: RE: Internet resources versus 'real life' From: Azizi Date: 21 Apr 08 - 09:31 AM MegW, I'd like to respond to two of your questions "What are the benefits of discussing and researching things online? In person with physical resources?" and "Is it easier/better to discuss music and history with others online or in person?" My comments are shared as a community folklorist {meaning a person interested in folklore who is "from the community" and who is unaffiliated with a university}. I also am sharing these comments-in a stream of consciousness manner-as a person whose focus is the collection and analysis of contemporary English language children's rhymes, game songs, and cheers. For what it's worth, I have found that the Internet excels as a way of gathering multiple versions of children's rhymes {"rhymes" being the catch-all name for the categories I mentioned above}. However, the Internet usually falls far short of real life folkloric collection in that posters usually don't discuss the meaning of the examples that they share, and they are unlikely to provide demographical information unless they are constantly reminded to do so, and even then receiving demographical information from posters is a hit & miss occurance. Consequently, usually all you have are rhyme examples and the date that those examples were posted. Since Mudcat members and regular guests are much more aware than many others of the importance of demographics to folkloric research, its members are much more likely than posters on most other web forums to include demographics without prompting and with prompting/reminders.By "demographics" I mean geographical location {city/state/nation}; the year or decade of that they remember reciting or hearing the rhyme; and gender}. However, it appears to me that there's still a great deal more reluctance even on Mudcat to provide race/ethnic demographical information. And often-though this is true on Mudcat less than most other websites-posters rarely include information about how the rhymes are performed {including what category of rhyme it is-such as jump rope, handclap, circle game, etc}. Also, for various reasons, Internet material can't be trusted on "face value". It's difficult to verify the demographical information and performance information that one receives via the Internet. For instance, a poster can say that she is relating a childhood remembrance when she is actually making the whole {or part of} the example up. For whatever reasons, posters can and do lie about their age, race/ethnicity, nationality, geographical location, gender etc. It's true that field collectors can also be mislead by their sources. However, it seems to me that just by virtue of the fact that they are seeing their sources face to face, field collectors are much less likely to be misled about certain demographical information {such as the present age of their sources, and those sources gender, race/ethinicity}. And because those collectors are observing the performances, they can document how these rhymes are performed. Of course, if websites had audio and video capabilities, that would solve a host of problems that I've noted. However, I believe that insisting that all examples shared online must be presented in text, audio, video formats, would negatively effect the number of children, youth, and adults who are presently sharing examples of rhymes and songs online. Also, when a person is collecting in the community, she or he is usually able to re-contact sources to ask follow-up questions and to more fully explore with them the meaning of the material that they shared {"meaning" as I use it here includes etymological meanings of certain words & phrases as well as psycho-social meaning of the material for the individual and/or for the group/community at large}. It's far more difficult to explore those kinds of questions online, even on community websites such as Mudcat where there are regular posters as well as guests who may post one time and are never "seen" again. However, with community websites such as Mudcat, there are opportunities to explore these kinds of questions with members via the private electronic message {pm} feature. I believe that online websites provide wonderful opportunities to collect, share, discuss, and help preserve children's rhymes and other folkloric examples with folks who it's likely you would never otherwise met. Because people choose to post online, it's possible that collecting examples online might remove the reluctance that some folks might have to share face to face "with outsiders". Also, there might be less editing of "bad words" or "politically incorrect words or phrases. Furthermore, it seems to me that it also is important to examine which examples posters choose on their own to share as opposed to people being asked by persons coming into their communities to share specific examples from a particular genre. It seems to me that it would be best to have both online collection and direct collection experiences. I believe that having direct experiences observing and collecting children's rhymes has helped me improve my ability to discern which online examples are real and which are not so real. Also, overtime, you become aware of certain patterns that are found in specific types of rhymes, certain standard verses in specific "families of rhymes", as well as certain floating verses in specific rhymes that you've collected "in the field" and online... In summation, I don't think that collection through interenet resources or real life efforts should be an either/or proposition. I think that there are pluses and minuses to both, and I look forward to continuing to do both for a number of years to come. ** For those who may be interested, here's a link to my website, which I think {and I admit I'm bias in this regard} can also be considered an online resource for contemporary children's rhymes, and other chants & songs, including African American freedom songs: http://cocojams.com/ |
|
Subject: RE: Internet resources versus 'real life' From: Geoff the Duck Date: 21 Apr 08 - 10:23 AM Very well put Azizi. It's in part because there are people such as yourself on Mudcat, who distinguish between information which can be backed up as opposed to just rumour and hearsay, that I rate the discussions of songs and folklore that we have here. Quack! GtD. |
|
Subject: RE: Internet resources versus 'real life' From: Azizi Date: 21 Apr 08 - 10:38 AM Thanks, Geoff the Duck. I've learned a lot about all kinds of subjects from folks on Mudcat. And sometimes reading others' posts and posting on this forum can also be a lot of fun! |
|
Subject: RE: Internet resources versus 'real life' From: M.Ted Date: 21 Apr 08 - 02:27 PM There are a lot of folk related mail lists, of varying degrees of activity, where academic discussions do take place, though it is hard to cull the ones that are really active from the ones that are only nominal--even still, the internet in all its forms is the primary means of interaction between folkies. Even academics with offices in the same building often communicate via email--and some of that has been replaced by text messaging- As far as" researching" songs goes, the internet can find you lyrics, but many times, it is impossible to tell if the lyrics are real variants or simply sloppy transcriptions from other sources--you have to develop a whole system for comparing and evaluating the material you find on the internet, which is really secondary, meaning data that has already been collected and compiled, that is comparable to what you would use as a primary collector. What interests me a lot is what Azizi has done, which is to use the internet for primary collecting --that opens up a whole new door to research--- |
|
Subject: RE: Internet resources versus 'real life' From: Geoff the Duck Date: 22 Apr 08 - 04:13 AM And the other thing with lyrics (or any information on the internet) is tha frequently one person puts something on their web site, which may or may not be accurate, and then EVERY other place you find it has been copied from that one source, usually uncredited or even attributed to a different name. If the original got it wrong (or even "made it all up", there is often no simple way to check back and correct or discuss it. For example, there are a heck of a lot of song lyrics out there which have been copied verbatim from the Digital Tradition on Mudcat. Although Digitrad is a very large resource, it is ALWAYS a work in progress, and as such contains inaccuracies, mis-attributions and in some cases, lyrics completely mangled by whoever submitted them. In time, one by one, they will be found and corrected, but that will not correct all the web sites which have "borrowed" prior to that happening. Quack! GtD. |
|
Subject: RE: Internet resources versus 'real life' From: Geoff the Duck Date: 22 Apr 08 - 04:33 AM Then again, let's look at Real Life. There are currently a couple of different treads discussing A.L.(Bert) Lloyd. His works have been used as "source" by a big chunk of the British folk revival. He collected songs and published them. Other people then learned them and quoted his notes on their Traditional Source (and still do). The threads contain discussions of the fact that other collectors have been unable to find the people who Bert claimed to have collected the songs from. The discussions put forward an argument that maybe Bert wrote material to suit his own agenda, changing a ploughboy into a miner, or inventing a complete song, including the person he "heard it from". I don't know anything much about Bert Lloyd, so cannot comment, but it highlights that you have always to question the accuracy of whatever sources or resources you use. Walter Scott is often cited as having written songs mixed in with his Scottish balladry collections. There are also examples of American folklorists who have since been proven to have invented complete collections of songs. Quack! GtD. |
|
Subject: RE: Internet resources versus 'real life' From: pavane Date: 22 Apr 08 - 05:00 AM I have found Google Books a wonderful resource, though it is sometimes tricky to get full text from it. It has taken some months to perfect the search techniques though. Microsoft have started a similar project too. It must be said that although the OCR is pretty good, there are still lots of errors in the scanned text. Searching for Chappuzeau (an ancestor) has turned up mis-scans like Ghappuzeau Cliappuzeau Chappunzean Happuzeau Ohappuzeau puzeau and a wealth of others! |
|
Subject: RE: Internet resources versus 'real life' From: M.Ted Date: 22 Apr 08 - 08:30 AM Here's an example of the problem that Geoff has put forward-- The lyrics to song "I've Never Been to Me", recorded by Charlena, and written by Ron Miller, can be found in many places on the internet, but it is always showing Charlena, rather than Ron Miller, as the writer--even though he has always been properly credited on recordings, and there has never been any dispute as to authorship. INBM is not a folk song, was written in living memory, is still in copyright, and can easily be traced to a single source, and all the other recordings of the song have been documented as well--imagine the difficulties with a song with an unknown source! |
|
Subject: RE: Internet resources versus 'real life' From: pavane Date: 22 Apr 08 - 10:51 AM There is just no way of correcting all the false information out there, even if you could find it I have been researching for a biography, and for nearly three hundred years, biographical notes for the same person have included obviously false and contradictory statements which have been copied time and again by subsequent authors (even up to the last few years). The writer in one case says that Samuel was born in Geneva, (though it was well documented as Paris) and then was received into citizenship with his 4 sons 40 years later! Why, if he was born there? So the problem of incorrect information is nothing new, it just gets spread faster and more widely now. |
|
Subject: RE: Internet resources versus 'real life' From: PoppaGator Date: 22 Apr 08 - 03:39 PM I've found that almost EVERY non-scholarly source for lyrics on the internet refers to the song as being "by" the recording artist, not the actual songwriter. This really bugs me, especially when the artist being credited is some contemporary lightweight covering a definitive recording made years ago by another artist ~ one who deserves to share some credit with the songwriter, for recording a performance that would endure long enough for younger generations to copy. Example: "When A Man Loves a Woman" by Michael Bolton. |
|
Subject: RE: Internet resources versus 'real life' From: Marje Date: 22 Apr 08 - 04:11 PM Oh I know just what you mean, Poppagator. I remember seeing a contestant on X-factor sing Richard Thomson's "Dimming of the Day" (which the judges had clearly never heard before). The singer referred to it as a "Bonnie Rait song" which really irritated me, as Thomson not only wrote it but has recorded what many would regard as a definitive version. I hope this tendency is not too prevalent yet in the folk world, but it's something we need to be aware of and watch out for. |
|
Subject: RE: Internet resources versus 'real life' From: MegW Date: 23 Apr 08 - 07:31 PM Out of curiosity, what about collections of music that are typically taken as standard? (The Child Ballad books come to mind.) Is it helpful to have many variations of a song together in one book? |
|
Subject: RE: Internet resources versus 'real life' From: M.Ted Date: 23 Apr 08 - 09:55 PM I think that people tend to have their favorite sources for things--more often than not, these are recordings of other artists--and many, if not most, tend simply to learn the songs that they like the best, without worrying much about the origins or variants of the song. The exception would be when one is doing and educational program, or a historical re-creation, or something of that type. Given that, there are people around, some of us, at least, are completely fascinated by any information that we can get about the origins, derivations, and evolution of the songs we know. However, it is really kind of a problem to have access to more than one version of a song, simply because you have to chose-- My inclination is to learn the version that people are most likely to know, but to gather up all the variants. Some of the songs that I like have families of variants, and in many cases, there is no way to decide which one to do, and I end up not doing them-- |
|
Subject: RE: Internet resources versus 'real life' From: katlaughing Date: 23 Apr 08 - 10:45 PM Saro, you can click on your user name in any of your post headings and it will take you to a list of all of the threads to which you have posted. I am guessing THIS ONE may be the one you were looking for? Looks as though you garnered some great links there. |
| Share Thread: |