Mudcat Café message #1951255 The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #98509   Message #1951255
Posted By: Scrump
29-Jan-07 - 11:06 AM
Thread Name: Folk Process - is it dead?
Subject: RE: Folk Process - is it dead?
I don't think the fact the the originator of a song has recorded it on CD makes his/her version the "definitive" one; we get cover versions of the most popular songs all the time, and now and then a cover version is more to our liking than the original. Cover versions are part of the folk process too, then.

Why should the original version of a song be any more definitive than the original version of a joke?

I agree - that's why I put 'definitive' in quotes in my posting. I was sort of playing devil's advocate and presenting a counter-argument to help get the thread going (hopefully).

I agree that any recorded version of a song is just a snapshot, and can't be regarded as definitive in any kind of absolute sense (in any other sense, the term is subjective, as was discussed in a fairly recent thread about 'definitive versions').

But, although you can have different versions of a song - different arrangements, for example - is it possible for somebody to change the tune or lyrics from the original words (I'm talking about a new composition here, rather than a traditional song whose author is unknown or Seth Lakeman), without being 'wrong'.

George - as you are a songwriter, how would you feel if someone else took one of your songs and changed the tune and the lyrics? Would you regard that as the 'folk process', or simply that the singer had got it wrong?