This statement from Georgina Boyes is fairly typical, ‘the cultural products of the rural working class were taken from them and daintily and selectively re-worked for school and drawing room consumption.’ (The Imagined Village. In other words, he bowdlerized some of the songs, removing some of the more explicit sexual references, and, by doing so, antagonized a number of people. In order to preserve the songs, and to encourage people to sing them again, Sharp presented much of his material in arrangements that were suitable for singing by school-children. Some Conclusions.īy the time the second revival began to kick-in, Cecil Sharp was becoming somewhat marginalized. By 1907, Sharp felt that he was ready to produce a work devoted to the study of folkmusic. To begin with, Sharp worked mainly in Somerset, where he noted his first song in 1903, and his early publications included five volumes of songs collected in that county. Most people also know that one man, Cecil James Sharp (1859-1924) was possibly the most important figure to emerge from the first revival, both as a song and dance collector and as a publicist for the material that he was collecting. Today, this is usually referred to as the ‘first revival’, to distinguish it from the ‘second revival’, which started towards the end of the 1950s. We all know that a ‘folk-revival’ occurred at the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th. Mike Yates examines a row that is bubbling away beneath the surface of British folksong scholarship
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |