Chieftain Whistle Name

On 2002-11-05 14:31, Wandering_Whistler wrote:

On 2002-11-05 13:46, Bloomfield wrote:
E-flat: good point.

You other guys just crack me up. Did any of you read that article in the NYTimes Mag about a year back about his 13-year old kid giving free legal advice on the internet? He got the highest confidence & competence ratings (even AFTER he was outed) from the other surfers who wondered if Phil Hardy could shut them down if they started a band called “Kerry Pro”.

Don’t believe I’ve heard that one, Bloomy. Got a link? A google search failed to turn anything up.

However interesting, I don’t really see how the actions of someone’s 13 year old kid have to do with the current discussion, though.

They didn’t really ask about Phil and bandnames, of course. But lots of other stuff. I think it was an article about the internet and people’s online personae. The kid was just a case study in it.

What does it have to do with the present discussion? Perhaps only that I am amazed at how this thread seems to go on and on with half-baked legal stuff that does very little to illuminate the ethical question (if there is an ethical question here). And no, I am not telling anyone to stop posting whatever they like to post.

Way before my C&F days and real familiarity with IRTRAD, I saw Chieftains whistles in Lark in the Morning catalog.

I could swear that it said they were made for the Chieftains and I thot “Wow, they must be in tune and really nice” having been disappointed with the cheapos.

I’m sure that it didn’t say that but my mind made the connection and reinforced the idea..

On purpose or not, its what I thought.

This thread brings up the nagging reality that in terms of consumer purchasing, most people are not that well informed when they buy things, so the power of suggestion and incorrect inference can be very profitable.

What does it have to do with the present discussion? Perhaps only that I am amazed at how this thread seems to go on and on with half-baked legal stuff that does very little to illuminate the ethical question (if there is an ethical question here). And no, I am not telling anyone to stop posting whatever they like to post.

Bloomfield,

Thanks for the illumination you provided.

John Mac

On 2002-11-05 14:48, goesto11 wrote:
I find it surprising that you didn’t make that connection. It jumped out at me. I’m not saying that you didn’t, I’m just surprised that you didn’t. And I can’t believe it surprised you that someone else made that connection. A whistle making having the same name as a worldwide Irish band? Who’d have thunk it?
John Mac

Actually, my experience is the same as Greg’s…I first learned about whistle makes/brands about a year ago, exhaustively reading Chiff & Fipple for the first time, and it never once occurred to me to associate Chieftain whistles with the band, The Chieftains. I was also surprised that someone thought they were connected–it had just never even occurred to me.

I’ll have to agree with Cees and Wandering Whistler on this. I did’nt make an association as I always associated “CHIEFTAIN” whistles with Low whistles, something I would’nt associate “THE CHIEFTAINS” with. That’s just my perception. No-one can be faulted for making a connection between the two, what they can be accused of is failing to research the subject. I’ve never seen it stated or implied that Chieftain whistles are or were in any way connected to The Chieftains. If you check Phil Hardy’s site kerrywhistles.com its quite clear who plays his instruments.

Cheers Mac

I never associated Chieftan whistles with the band. I figured it was named as in “the chieftan of a clan”. This gives it an Irish sound, and implys that it’s the best, or preeminent in its class.
Take care, Johnz

On 2002-11-05 14:48, goesto11 wrote:
And I can’t believe it surprised you that someone else made that connection.

Didn’t suprise me..just didn’t occur to me til someone mentioned it. Though, I suppose that’d be the definition of surprise :wink:

Are you sure you’re not a lawyer? You are using some pretty lawyerly words. Are you just trying to hide something from us to avoid abuse?

Nah, not a lawyer. Just one of those nasty tech guys with patents. I’ve spent a lot of time around lawyers and spend a lot of time reading legal paperwork as a result. The doctors say I’ll be better one day, though. :wink:

I too am one of those who did not make any connection between Chieftan whistles and the band The Chieftans. Primarily since I don’t associate the band with low whistles in the first place.

Just wanted to let you know that. :slight_smile:

I didn’t think there was a connection between the Chieftains (I’d heard of them - who hasn’t? - before I was into or knew anything about whistles) and the Chieftain whistles. Like someone else posting in this thread, I looked at the word “Chieftain” in the context of clans, tribes, etc; you know, stuff related to the history of the Celts.

It’s not the same as using someone’s name. The word chieftain is a standard English word. So while it’s not surprising if one makes a connection betwn the group and the whistles, I don’t think it’s surprising if one does not.

OT but related: What’s interesting currently on the English football scene is Victoria Beckham (Posh Spice) objecting to a lower-division club Petersborough trying to register their long-standing nickname “Posh” as a trademark. She says people currently link only her with the word (which I think cannot be true), so such registration would confuse the public. On the other hand, the club is cash-strapped. Why would they suddenly register the name if not as a way to force Mrs Beckham to pay them off? My gut feel though is that her objections will fail. Their motives should be irrelevant because the fact is they were known as the Posh long before she came on the scene. I’ve seen lots of sports headlines referring to them as such.

I emailed Phil Hardy asking him how he came up with the name Chieftain. Here is my email:

Phil,

I posted a thread on the C&F whistle board, and after much controversy, thought
I should just contact you directly. I was wondering about where the name
”Chieftain” came from. My original assumption is that these whistles had some
association with the band the Chieftains, but it now seems that there is no
association.

So could you tell me how you came up with the name “Chieftain” for your whistle?
Also, is there, or has there ever been, any association between you and the
group “The Chieftains”?

Thanks in advance!

John MacIntyre
(goesto11)

Phil promptly responded, and so as not to ruffle any feathers, I will post an excerpt from his response:

As you have seen through your own post, the simple name “Chieftain” has caused so much controversy … there is maybe a very beautiful reasons how and why such things as the naming of the “Chieftain” whistle came about. Their loss. Because of these reasons, many wonderful things will not now be disclosed to anyone outside of the people who partisipated in them. So … I’m very sorry, my lips are sealed. Thank you for your email.
Enjoy your music.
All the very best
Phil.

There you have it. Looks like the origin of the name “Cheiftain” as it relates to whistles will remain forever unsolved.

As an aside, on thinking back on my posts, I may have come off as sounded as if I was judging Phil prior to obtaining information. My original post was an attempt to quickly determine if there was any asscoaiation between the band and the whistle. I have been surprised that most responders have not seen any relation, and in fact they have been surprised that anyone could make the association.

Also, I hear (especially of late) good things about Phil’s whistles. I have even considered making a bid on Loren’s Low F that is currently on eBay. But now is not a great time for me to be buying any more whistles, so I’ll probably have to pass, unfortunately.

It seems as if there has been some animosity between Phil and others on this board. That’s too bad. I wonder if this, and other misunderstandings, are caused mainly by the inability to determine the context and manner in which words are communicated when they are communicated via text. But that’s a subject for another day.

Best to all.

John Mac

Phil promptly responded, and so as not to ruffle any feathers, I will post an excerpt from his response:

As you have seen through your own post, the simple name “Chieftain” has caused so much controversy … there is maybe a very beautiful reasons how and why such things as the naming of the “Chieftain” whistle came about. Their loss. Because of these reasons, many wonderful things will not now be disclosed to anyone outside of the people who partisipated in them. So … I’m very sorry, my lips are sealed. Thank you for your email.
Enjoy your music.
All the very best
Phil.

There you have it. Looks like the origin of the name “Cheiftain” as it relates to whistles will remain forever unsolved.

As one of many people who were expressing the view that we had no trouble with Phil’s choice of name, and since what was really at issue here was a matter of ethical principle and neither the related legal matter or the (boring) question of whether it was time to do some more Hardy-bashing, I find this response rather disappointing. Actually, I find it seriously wierd. 'nuff said.

I have even considered making a bid on Loren’s Low F that is currently on eBay. But now is not a great time for me to be buying any more whistles, so I’ll probably have to pass, unfortunately.

I was intending to buy Loren’s low F (since I desperately need one for my band) the first time he listed it..but unfortunately am still going around with a company about getting paid for some contract work I did for them. sigh. If it ever gets resolved before his whistle’s sold, I’ll be buyin it in a heartbeat.

Wombat wrote:
I find this response rather disappointing. Actually, I find it seriously wierd. 'nuff said.

Wombat, my response or Phil’s?

John Mac

On 2002-11-05 10:56, serpent wrote:
In Ecclesiastes, it is written: “What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done; there is nothing new under the sun.” … been true for a long time, huh, podners? > :smiley:
Cheers,
Bill Whedon

Sorry, but I do not believe that. Its true that history tends to repeat itself but I think that is due to people not reading up on history. This strays into philosophy but I could not help myself > :smiley: >
If you want to respond start a new thread…I will never find this post again.

On 2002-11-07 14:06, goesto11 wrote:

Wombat wrote:
I find this response rather disappointing. Actually, I find it seriously wierd. 'nuff said.

Wombat, my response or Phil’s?

John Mac

Phil’s of course, John. Sorry; I hadn’t noticed that it could be taken the other way. Yours seemed fine, but I thought it was a good idea for someone who had been defending him (on the general matter of principle) to make the point. I wasn’t even posting when the earlier stuff was going on and probably neither were a lot of the current readers. I wanted to remind him that, however hurtful past remarks might have been, he’s not addressing exactly the same audience.

No problem, Wombat. I’m not too aware of the history of the Phil v. some on this board (which is okay with me), but I was here when Phil left his sign-off message. (He’s seems to be truer to his word about leaving than Kelhorn Mike :wink: )

I got the impression from his response to my request that Phil is, for lack of a better term (and no offense meant here) one of those “artsy” types. Kind of out there, totally right-brained, etc.

No big deal to me one way or the other. Due to my work in Intellectual Property, I was just curious about a name.

John Mac

Well, apparently Phil, who I’ve never had any problem with, doesn’t like me now. :astonished: After starting this thread, and being reminded that I should be fair, I contacted Phil directly via email to ask about the name “Chieftain”. He responded to me, and I posted a portion of his response. The reason I posted it was so that I would not be charged with taking his words out of context. He did not mention in his response to me that it was to be kept private, so I thought that it might provide some light on this matter. I even left out the inflammatory language that he used so as not to bias him.

Well, rumors of Phil’s leaving this board have been greatly exagerated. I received a second email from him this morning, and thought I would share with the rest of the class. Pull up a chair, grab a cup of hot cocoa, put away the kids, lock up the pets, and enjoy. Below is the entire text of BOTH of his emails.


Hi John,you have proberbly noticed that I no longer contribute to C&F as I find many of the contributors behaving like fanatics and have nothing better to do than to knock others work and reputations.I would say that a good 75% of contributors are from the US and have never travelled outside the US,this gives them a very blinkered view of the rest of the world as they sit in there little US bubble.As you have seen through your own post ,the simple name “Chieftain” has caused so much controversy and those who are out to discredit anyone cannot but sink thier pathetic little teeth into something they know absolutly nothing about, because they have niether the inteligence or the wit to think that there is maybe a very beautiful reasons how and why such things as the naming of the “Chieftain” whistle came about.Their loss.Because of these reasons,many wonderful things will not now be disclosed to anyone outside of the people who partisipated in them.So , I assume that you are not one of these sad people who are only out for self grandisment,I’m very sorry, my lips are sealed. Thank you for your email.
Enjoy your music.
All the very best
Phil.

PS,Ive just read that you put my personal answer to you up on the C&F board and this just goes to show that I cannot keep anything personal,even on personal emails,this is very sad.To think that everytime I answer somebodys questions I run the risk of being misjudged and possibly misquoted.As far as I know ,I have never corresponded with you before or even talked to you by phone and as far as I know you may not even play any of my whistles,so useing the terms right brained and arty just goes to show that your judgment of my characture is way,way off.Whistlemaking and running a large company takes very little of my time ,I am happily married with 2 teenage daughter a dog a house that I built myself with my wife in Ireland (in Kerry). I spend alot of time with my hands in the soil and even more time writing and recording CD’s for myself and others.I run a succesful studio and work with some of the finnest musicians on the planet,so when you go making rash remarks on some tuppenny board about something you know nothing about ,you just add youself to the people I was talking about in my answer to you first question and this just gives me more reason to stay away from people who have nothing better to do than DIS others publicly.
I fully expect this email to be made pubic,but I think it makes my point clear.
Phil.

John “The Reputation-knocking, Blinkered, Pathetic-little-teethed, No-inteligence-or-wit, Sad-Person, Self-Grandismenting (sip), Misjudging, Misquoting, Tuppenny-board-posting, publicly-DISsing” Mac

A quick ethical question: is it wrong to be amused by all this? If not, is it wrong to tell others of one’s amusement?

I can’t help finding a lot of the interactions between people horribly sad and hilarious at the same time. Everybody’s so upset!

Ever see a couple start fighting in a restaurant or something? If it’s heated enough of course people can’t help noticing. Everyone not involved feels like they ought to be embarassed and perhaps are. Do they have to be? Can they be entertained? How does it all change if they get pulled into the fight?

Of course it’s different around here because people in a restaurant don’t go there meaning to be heard by everyone; whereas if you post something it’s common. Arguing is more like WWF wrestlers heatedly bellowing prepared statements into the microphone. That’s definitely done for entertainment but presumably the sweaty spandexclad men aren’t really mad at each other, so it’s not the same there either.

Hmm . . . I’m not sure what I’m saying anymore. Maybe that these kinds of public conversations are wierd. And I’m glad to be around for them.

Yeah, Michael. Sad–true–and entertaining in a way, too. Thanks for reminding it–to me as well.
Pub music, pub brawls.
But virtual and anonymous, thusly even more acute. No physical risk involved in getting rawdy. 21st century cowardice.
Finally, the only who take real chances here are those whose business is directly implied.


Paul Salvaire, phot-hog

Zubivka,

I’m not quite sure what you’re saying. That people who post are cowards? That I am a coward for posting Phil’s responses? That the only non-cowards on the board are the whistle-makers?

And as regards to taking chances, nothing ventured, nothing gained. It seems like Sandy Jasper of Elfsong fame has gone on the board, thereby taking chances. Has this damaged her business? I doubt it, because her whistles look nice, play nice, she gives great customer service, and she is a very nice person. Now if any of the above are not true for other whistle makers, maybe it’s not this board but the maker themselves who is to blame.

John Mac