Since this topic seems to be (d)evolving into a bit of a comparison of BG and OT styles, traditions, vitality etc, I thought I'd toss my nickel into the kitty...To me, the main thing that impacts how a musician will interpret a traditional music is what that player thinks is most important about that tradition or what touches them the most about it. This could be a variety of many things...technique, politics, gender, popular culture, class, religion, ego, need/want to make a living, soul, sound, what is going to attract that nice lookin' boy or girl in the corner, etc etc...Folks will preserve the things most important to them or the things that satisfy their preconceived notion about a music or culture is all about. A few opinions and thoughts... While I highly respect the technique of Bruce Molsky, to me as a listener, technique is the part of old time fiddling that he found to be most important. He's obviously done his homework on the complex bowing involved in some Southern styles. He also has wonderful intonation. I think that his bow technique and great intonation has been inspiring to lots of younger musicians like Alex, Tatiana and others who come to OT music from a classical background. To me, the new tradition being focused on is based on impeccable chops and that is one of the points emphasized in the initial post in this thread. I think contemporary bluegrass has the same priorities. Bluegrass has always been about outstanding picking and singing but recent generations focus more and more on flawless skills. It makes me wonder if bluegrass could go down the same road that jazz did. Jazz began as a vernacular music and became a new form of American classical music. In the beginning you learned jazz on the streets, brothels and speakeasy night clubs. Now you learn it in college. Bluegrass still has some street credibility as hillbilly music (I use that term with the utmost respect) but it too is beginning to show up in college. Topher mentions in his post a workshop leader who mentioned that "Old-time music was primarily music for dancing to and for participating in, and that bluegrass was primarily a musical form that showcased the musicians in a concert setting". I'll agree with portions of that statement and argue for some other perspectives. I think that nowadays OT music is primarily for dancing and participating in but that approach to the music and culture of OT music is dates to the 1960's and '70s rather than the 1860's-'70s. Tom Carter (formerly of the Fuzzy Mountain String Band) has a wonderful essay called "Looking for Henry Reed" that describes the new approach and aesthetic that the Hollow Rock String Band had. They started the "everybody play the melody" approach so common now. Alan Jabbour himself wrote that the focus is on the music and the social integration of the players and dancers as a group and not the musicians as individuals. No individual would take a solo. This "festival style" approach to playing OT music is what dominates the scene today in my opinion. There are few folks out and about playing OT music as you might have heard on a pre-war commercial recording. Those records had lots of variety in instruments and approaches...Wonderful singing instead of the current OT approach of bellowing the tune out in unison. The older bands were also polyrythmic (African influence) in their band styles rather than the current unison (European influence) approach. As to bluegrass, it was definitely an elite-level, performance based music played by professionals at the beginning. Today, any stroll into the campground at the fester will show bluegrass alive as a true folk music with lots of non professional pickers at all levels from rank beginner to powerful.
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Taterbugmando" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/taterbugmando?hl=en.
