Is it possible to encourage the distinct diversity of traditional styles, like we had in the past, and yet not treat the music in a way as if its a static, stagnant, unchanging entity, sacred and to be embalmed in crystal? (eg. like early music?)
Is this a harmonious dichotomy or a paradox?
I’ve thought a bit about it, and I suppose we’ll probably all come to the conclusion to “just play the music”. But for the sake of stirring things up a little… 
It’s possible.
I think that it is possible to get something like this diversity but whether the tradition can, or should, evolve in the old ways is another question. One problem is that we probably don’t really know all that much about how the tradition evolved at the local level before the advent of recordings.
Some people certainly think that it is possible. A couple of years back, I stumbled on a web site dedicated to preserving Donegal-style fiddling. Fiddlers learning the style were being actively discouraged from listening to fiddlers who play in any other style, if I remember correctly. I thought this idea was slightly mad; especially so given that recipients of the advice probably lived in Detroit and had names like Guido Mangione. I also thought, it was quite delightful. In other words, I didn’t really know what to think.
American folk traditions are a good precedent to help us here. One thing is clear: the advent of radio, television and the recording industry certainly had an adverse effect on the separateness of regional styles. Buddy Guy (who emerged in the late 50s) is sometimes said to be the first bluesman to learn from records but there is really no evidence for this and plenty of evidence that bluesmen were copying what they heard on record by the mid '30s.
Although regional distinctiveness suffered, the blues continued to evolve, probably faster than it did before but the lack of recorded evidence for this makes it purely a matter of conjecture based on how much you believe reports by aging musicans of what things were like in their youth. Where recollections can be checked, they have often proved to be way off the mark. The blues has, however, evolved to a point where it is no longer a living tradition. But would this not have happened anyway? The blues hasn’t been around for centuries; it emerged as a distinct form only late in the 19th century.
The music will evolve or it will die. It always has evolved. Pure drop would be nothing but harp playing bards otherwise. Modern day Irish bards are not even considered traditional, let alone pure drop; try whipping up enthusiasm for Sean Tyrrell on this board. But for it to evolve in a way that preserves regional distinctiveness is to suppose that students of the tradition will voluntarily forgo influences that they never would have in the past. Musicians travel and, as they travel, it is hardly surprising that they swap ideas. Now that we can travel by CD anywhere, any time, the relative isolation that served the development of regional styles has broken down. That sort of isolation today would have to be self-imposed. I, for one, doubt that it will be. For all but the most fanatical hard-line musicians, it just goes against the grain not to listen to what is available.
[quote="Wombat]
try whipping up enthusiasm for Sean Tyrrell on this board. [/quote]
I would consider him a ballad/folk singer rather than a traditional singer, that aside I think he’s brilliant. He’s touring at the moment with Ronan Browne and Kevin Glackin if you can catch them DO.
[quote=“Peter Laban”]
I would consider him a ballad/folk singer rather than a traditional singer, that aside I think he’s brilliant. He’s touring at the moment with Ronan Browne and Kevin Glackin if you can catch them DO.[/quote]
On the question of enthusiasm I’m delighted to be proved wrong. Of course you’re right about his not fitting what we now regard as traditional and that was part of my point; the other part was the much more speculative idea that he probably comes as close as anyone today to belong to the largely long lost bardic tradition.
Of course the accuracy of my speculation doesn’t really matter; what is important is that people do recognise his brilliance.
My sarcastic remark about getting people excited about Tyrrell was prompted by a failed attempt to get discussion of his work going on the main board some months back. I thought then that if nobody knew about Tyrrell, general familiarity with contemporary Irish culture must be fairly superfical.
Sean Tyrrell is brilliant.
I just recently became acquainted with Sean Tyrell through his CD, The Orchard. He is great. He has a vocal quality and intensity that create a whole world with each song. I love the title track best of all, but The Ghost of Billy Mulvihill and Tyrell’s reincarnation of The Rising of the Moon are also powerfully affecting. I would love to hear him live. Didn’t see any US tour dates on his site, but Wombat, it looks like he’s shooting for Australia in 2004.
Carol