When I tell some people how much I dislike "country" music, they're absolutely shocked "What!?, but it is sooo good!" they reply. I know that is their opinion, but they're wrong. It is not good music. Anyways, I ran into country music lover today. I love music, that is the main reason I signed up for this class, (and because the way my schedule worked out). I was excited to learn about our music roots, and then I realized country music was considered our roots. Now remember this is back when I was completely ignorant to what original country music is. I know this is dumb, but I actually thought that this was implying that "Hot Country" (what our book calls modern country) is considered a component of our music roots. However I was greatly relieved when this was not the case at all. As I read the prologue of our counrty book I became more and more appreciative of the book. I had no idea what country music really is. Country music isn't all that bad, I like how all country songs share sincerity and a sense of hardships. Also, listening to it is not all that bad either, some of it sounds a lot like blues, and some sounds closer to rock. (I have some Johnny Cash on iTunes!) I'm glad this class exposed me to good country music, as opposed to the crap that is produced today. It is sad how the modern country has the same name, because it is so different. Like the prologue points out, it is insincere and is made to make money. I couldn't state it better than on page fourteen of 'In the Country of Country'; The songs don't last because they are devoid of passion and authentic feeling." Anyways, I thought I'd make one final post (or maybe I'll keep blogging!) about one of the things I took away from this class. I'm really glad I discovered what country music really is, and to get some reinforcement against those "Hot Country" lovers! We'll Nic, if you read this, thank you for a fun semester! Cya'll around! Peace.

Remember when we listened to that Folkways collection? I thought of it today as I was groaning over war. I remembered the song at the very end of the first episode we listened to (the third episode). I was thinking about those in support of the Iraq war. I thought, 'If you were fighting over there, you might change your mind.' The song at the end of the third episode of the folkways collection would be a good one for them to listen to. It is called "John Brown," an antiwar ballad by Bob Dylan, (recorded in the early 60's under the pseudonym "Blind Boy Grunt"). It is a great song. I will probably end up purchasing it if I can find it anywhere. Anyways, it tells a story about a young man who goes off to war and his mother is extremely proud and she's bragging to everyone. However, she suddenly stops getting letters from her son, and instead one day a letter comes and tells her to greet her son at the train station. She practically runs into him because she doesn't even recognize him. Half of his body is blown off and he can barely speak. He drops his medals in his mom's hands and walks off. It is a tragic story but it is also a valuable one. This song was written in effect of the Vietnam war, so it, and others similar to it were praised by many at that time. The musicality of the song is real good too!

In class on Tuesday the 5th we focused on Jamboree. We watched some riveting footage of our junk band, some elegant line dancing and some chef mastery. (I personally think you guys added the perfect amount of syrup). We were asked what our video revealed about our FYS, and apparently it shows that our FYS is fun. I think every part of the video was there: the ideas to dance, make music and food, the music quality, and the video editing. The only missing ingredient was enthusiasm and emotional expression. Sorry to say, but our lack of gaiety-that's right, gaiety- was the number one thing people took away from our video. Nobody came up to me and said, "Hey you guys are jamming on that junk," or "nice moves."(Not that they should anyways). The first thing people commented on was our accurate portrayal of zombies. But hey! I had fun making the video so what the hell. I thought our booth was very successful. Whenever I came by to visit Jamboree/get some grub, our table had the most visitors. So hopefully some of us got a chance to share some of our American roots music knowledge. I had one person that listened to the music clippings which was cool.
During our discussion it was someone mentioned that jamboree sucks. Yes it may have been on the lame side, but is that the fault of jamboree or the people involved in it. I mean had there been a better overall attitude towards it, it could have been a better experience. Take for example: one booth I walked by was being manned by one person who was preoccupied with their cell, our video isn't exactly uplifting and other booths I visited I had to force the people into talking to me. I think it would have been cooler if people would have been more eager to share their ideas. Some booths were better, the geometry table was inviting, but I didn't come away with much, such as a connection between digitally cutting my face in half, geometry and human diversity. I think the point of having devices such as a camera and a computer, or a projector and speakers was to attract visitors. Then talk to them. However, in some cases it seemed to turn in to the main theme.
We also discussed the unity of FYS. It was interesting to hear about the history of this part of the class, and how it's kind of tapered off. We can see how it is now almost non-existent, we all agreed in class that "Human Diversity" is a poor excuse for unifying the classes. I think some more unity would be good, which is the purpose of jamboree right? All the classes come together and share what they've learned, I don't think too many of us found it (or us) successful in that aspect however. It may also have to do with the fact that, like someone in class said, all the topics are pretty random. In class we also talked about how FYS can be useful by ensuring we meet at least one professor in our first year. Well our discussion from Tuesday is to be continued on Thursday, so see ya all then.

I enjoyed the large variety on the second gospel playlist. Their was some folk/country music, such as the second song, "I'll Have A New Body." There was some blues and jazz sounding tracks, one choral song, some ragtime sounding tracks and then some more traditional sounding gospel songs. The "Black Diamond Express to Hell" was very interesting. It is really cool how it starts out as a regular speech and then the preacher begins to sort of sing it. I especially like his extreme emphasis on some phrases such as, "next station." It was also really interesting to compare the early version of "There Ain't no Grave Gonna Hold My Body Down," to a modern cover of it. I like the energy in the first one, but I prefer the clean precise woman's voice over the scratchy voice of Brother Claude Ely. This brings us to one of the main topics of the preface of the country book; original country music is unique because you can feel the sincerity and the hardships of the singer. What we call country today is far less genuine is often just made to please fans (i.e. make money).
I remember reading in the blues book about how many blues artists host house parties that don't exactly glorify the Lord. Then the next morning (on Sunday) everybody would go to church. Listening to the Charlie Patton reminded me of this. This contradictory lifestyle is kind of resembled by this type of song, and how it's topic is quite different from the topic in many other blues songs. I couldn't really understand a single word he was saying in "Prayer of Death," but I was able to infer that he was singing about the Lord. Thinking about this got me curious: I wonder if any of the Blues artists would preform at a house party, and then preform the next morning at church? Haha that would be interesting!

On the first list of gospel music, I expected to sense a more uplifting feeling from the songs From the first three songs I felt more despair. I'm not sure, but it might have something to do with the low, gritty and not all that musical sound of the voice of Blind Willie Johnson and the voice in the voice in the following song. However in some of the following songs such as "Get Away Jordan" was much more upbeat and the vocals were much more musical, which I like more. The vocals clearly dominate these gospel songs. It is interesting to compare to the blues and country songs we have listened to, because those often include combining elements such as the guitar, the bass, the fiddle, the piano and drums. However in the Gospel songs they will combine a bunch of voices and if they want percussion they can just clap. The harmonization is really fun to listen to, I especially liked it in the song "Mother Bowed." Yes, some of the songs to incorporate a fiddle, or guitar, or piano or drums, but the vocals are still the dominant part. In the song "O Day" the flute adds a peculiar element, it almost resembles jazz flute, how it's not always on pitch and it abruptly skips around. There is definitely lots of energy in these songs, especially in songs such as "You Must Be Born Again" when the leader shouts out. The song "I'll be Rested" sounded a lot like some of the folk music we have listened to. I guess mostly due to the fiddle, it also sounds a lot like some of the songs the fiddle player played when he came and visited us. The vocals are still dominant. Songs like this that borrow from different styles are a huge part of our music roots, because they are a part of the musical evolution.

Yo! That is good stuff on the homepage: under the heading, "Blacks Imitating Whites Imitating Blacks..." That is odd how much the cakewalk had been imitated. It reminds me of the game 'Telephone,' where the end result is never the same as the initial saying. I wonder how much the cakewalk had been altered by the time of Ragtime. I don't know why I come up with these connections to rap, but this imitating notion immediately reminded me of the use of the "N" word. Whites used to (I guess some still do) use it as a derogatory term towards blacks. Now blacks use it quite freely (e.g. in their rap songs). I think this common use has desensitised our(or at least those that listen to rap) ears to this word. Now it is fairly tolerable to hear it from a black. However, I don't see the imitating ever being shifted back to the whites on this one! Anywho, back to topic on hand: I love Ed Ward's quote: "This is what makes artists artists: they take little bits of things from here and there and put them together in unexpected combinations that seem new and original." I never thought about it that way. Before when I was thinking about the diversity of styles on the 'Folkways Collection' I assumed that the artists took a style and transformed it to their own style on purpose. It's more amusing to think that they tried to sound like the previous style and failed, yet by failing they succeeded in creating a new style. It's like they can't sound the same no matter how hard they try because their own personal style will always be revealed. You can take an artist out of a style, but you can't take the style out of an artist? I love that essay too: "When Right Is Wrong," by Ed Ward. It is informative and humorous at the same time. It has some really good quotes, and some really funny ones: "They didn't have to be very good at it to impress the German audiences, who were more interested in getting drunk and chasing women." (This one was about the caliber of the Beatles performances.) I am a big Beatles fan, and I never really knew how their style came about, because it does sound completely original. Yet the essay gives direct examples of artists that influenced Lennon and the Beatles. Like Ward says, "It seems to be an unspoken rule of popular music: everything new comes from someone trying to imitate something and getting it wrong."

Episode 5

In the fifth episode of the folkways collection, there was a lot of talk about how Harry Smith was a very multi-talented man with a colored background. By a colored background I mean a past with a huge variety of experiences. He was born in Oregon, he spent years living with Native American tribes, and then lived in New York. He painted, produced movies and applied himself to countless other artistic hobbies. Micheal Ash said, "I think he is one, if not the only renaissance, truly renaissance man of the latter part of the twentieth century because of the wide range of things he was able to accomplish." This made me think how all of his experiences must have influenced him, and made him a really open person. Which is why he included such a wide range of tracks on his collection. This is also sort of related to music artists, how they are influenced. It makes me think of in the Blues book, how so many of the blues artists are influenced by their peers, and take that style and combine it with experiences in their life and write a song. So I kind of see a relation to how Harry Smith made this music collection, and how the actual music is made.