I’m enjoying Maud Karpeles’s biography of Cecil Sharp. It’s interesting reading about his folk song collecting, and how he was determined to get folk song back into the school curriculum so that children would get acquainted with their heritage. He also got involved with Morris and folk dancing, and got quite hot under the collar about well-meaning people who were happy to get the dances DANCED, without being too concerned about the niceties of accuracy. By all accounts he was an astonishingly dedicated and hard-working individual.
His definition of ‘folk’? Something passed through the oral tradition, perhaps modified as it was transmitted, but certainly not a “national song” published in a book and henceforth preserved in aspic. Something more fluid in form, then.
I began thinking about Miss Milligan, who did similar work with Scottish dancing for what became the Royal Scottish Dancing Society. She, too, decided ‘how it should be’, and tried to set standards and codify steps and dance-movements. (My mother-in-law was her first pianist at Jordanhill Teacher Training College, as it happens.)
Does it not seem that both Cecil Sharp and Miss Milligan, having collected something that they feared would perish if it weren’t revived, then proceeded to try to pin down and ‘fix’ the very traditions that they were saving? It’s as though each was saying, ‘this is what I consider the purest form of THIS song, THIS dance, and THIS is how it should be from henceforth.’ Indeed, my mother-in-law, a longstanding and loyal member of the RSCDS, later earned a scroll of recognition of her ‘outstanding service and loyalty … maintaining the aims of preserving the standards and traditions of Scottish Country Dancing …’ There it is again – preserving standards and traditions.
But! This laudable attempt to keep something pure and unchanged is at the same time at variance to the idea of a fluid folk tradition. Saying, ‘we do it this way, this is the best way, and this is how it must be done’, is a rather risky way of encouraging the next generation to adopt traditions and make them their own. (We could say the same about churches clinging to metrical psalms, I guess, but I’m not blogging about that just now!)
My thesis touched on some of these arguments in earlier times. Sharp and Miss Milligan were positively modernists compared to my research into Scottish song collecting from 1760-1888, and I really want to read more before I leap into old arguments with my size three wellies on and upset everyone who knows more about the early 20th century collectors. More anon, then. Until then, I must be restrained and willing to be corrected!