Regionalised or networked?

Apparently there are two distinct roots to folk music. The first is social commentary (storytelling) on the human condition put to music, and the second is dance music. Both mediums are vehicles for the ‘common man’ to join with other ‘common men’. They came from many regional backgrounds and styles remained distinct.

 The rise of universal music – call it pop if you will, coincided with the move away from regionalisation - listening to live local music; to globalisation - hearing music across the airwaves. As a result, many styles of music became universal, with acceptance measured on audience volume (numbers not amplification) – the majority ruled. Folk on the other hand remained the minority.

Most lovers of folk music recognise they are part of a minority. However, the rise of folk music styles such as folk-rock, psych-folk, jazz-folk (the list is endless), have done little to make folk appeal more universal. Folk has simply become more fragmented, at least in the minds of clubs, promoters and event organisers, with each sub-genre having its own followers. The appeal of folk-rock, psych-folk and others doesn't necessarily translate into greater popularity for other branches of folk-related music.

 That said, many people came to folk music through listening to folk-rock and plenty of other people are into several different folk related genres. And today some festival organisers go out of their way to offer an eclectic mix – then again many don’t. Nevertheless, the impression is the musical world, including folk music, is becoming more ‘tribalised’.

 But hold on a minute. Times are changing (as someone once said).

 We now have a technology that makes it easy for minorities to listen to and exchange musical styles and influences. It’s called the Internet. And with the rise of sites featuring ghastly porn stars, religious extremism, online-pedias full of bizarre facts you’re never going to need and other unspeakable ‘nasties’ comes social networking. So with the fragmentation, there is the growth of social networking sites such as MySpace and Facebook. There’s also the ease with which bands can place their material in the public domain, offers access to treatments and styles that you never knew existed.

 As a listener it is possible to select from a wide variety of traditions and styles and become ever more eclectic, if you have the time. This might be considered superficial, but it’s basically good. It works against anything ever again having universal appeal, since you can pick what you want, and no two people will pick the same.

 However much its proponents would like it to be, folk music will never be mainstream music (if that’s how one defines styles that pour relentlessly out of both radio and television). To prove the point, television companies – national or regional - treat any folk music transmission as niche entertainment for slightly quirky people. The same is not true of pop. To be fair unless you’re in the USA, the same applies to UK television and radio treatment of any music style that’s not pop.

Although the downloading of pop music may keep the Internet flowing, genre and niche music – and that’s what English-language folk is (one of many niche types of music you can access on-line) is finding a growing Internet audience. And dare I say it, an audience that is shedding its tribal boundaries.

 And as the man said: “That ain’t no bad thing.”

Click here to return to the News page