Monday, September 30, 2013

What’s It All About? - A Prescription Bluegrass Editorial

PRESCRIPTION BLUEGRASS CARTOON DESKWhat's it all about when you sort it out, Alfie?
Are we meant to take more than we give?”
                                        -Burt Bacharach
So what is it all about? This old argument of what is and what isn't bluegrass music has resurfaced again, thanks largely due to the IBMA's choice of a keynote speaker at this past weeks annual bluegrass convention.
What is the underlying message that IBMA is trying to communicate? What is it that they've been saying for some time but we're not getting in the message?

The IBMA has openly said they do not see their role as a “Definer of Bluegrass as a music genre.” However, as others have pointed out, by adopting their big, open tent philosophy and embracing any kind of music that someone may choose to call “Bluegrass” regardless of it's true characteristics is actually doing just what they said they didn't intend to do. They have defined
bluegrass to their own tune. 



Whether we choose to accept their definition or not seems to be where the battle is headed.

I say it's green, she says it's blue and you may say it's turquoise. The point is that when it comes to art or artistic output, we all see exactly what we see and we don't see what someone else sees. That doesn't make either wrong. However regardless of the number of  shades of blue some of may declare is the accurate and true color, none of us has the right, or the ignorance to say it's red. But as in the case with the colors, there is room for variation in bluegrass music too but no one should mistake it for Jazz.

Bill Monroe, Lester Flatt, Earl Scruggs, Ralph Stanley and every other bluegrass first generation member didn't or doesn't do everything the same. They have variations. Even the same song isn't played exactly the same way every time. How many DIFFERENT versions of “Blue Moon of Kentucky” did Bill Monroe record? His song “Cheyenne” doesn't sound anything like “Rawhide” and neither of them sound like “Wheel Hoss”. The point is that there is a great deal of variance and difference in just those three or four songs – all from the same source.

Likewise, Tony Rice's “Manzanita” doesn't sound like Flatt & Scruggs “Foggy Mountain Breakdown.” There is a great deal of difference, yet both are considered “Bluegrass Classics.” And both are embraced as “Standard Bearers” in the bluegrass genre.

It seems that the arguments from one side to the next within this issue want to gravitate downward to whatever the debater's personal preferences are and that must be allowed to be “THEIR DEFINITION of Bluegrass.” I think it's bluegrass and I like it so therefore that's good enough. 

In his keynote address to the IBMA assembly, Noam Pikelny said that if music fans think something is bluegrass, that’s good enough for him – and good for the genre. If that logic is upheld and adopted so that the “we all must get along” people can be happy, we'll have a million different definitions and, thereby, while attempting to find a solution for one problem we'll be creating at least one more or maybe a million more problems.


It's not about what music fans THINK is bluegrass and it's not about what they like or what you or I like, or what Noam Pikelny, or the IBMA like.

What's it all about when you sort it out, Alfie?”

It is about protecting something of value. It's about good shepherding over that which we have been charged with. It's about guiding the new shepherds so they don't confuse the sheep with the wolves. It's about keeping our herd intact and allowing the herd to multiply by natural means. It's about tending to the individual members of the flock who need special attention from time to time and it's about allowing the entire herd to move and graze at will where it's safe to do so. But no good shepherd will allow his herd to graze right over the side of the cliff and plunge to it's death while trying to sell tickets to the show. And that is just what it appears IBMA is doing. Poor shepherding of that which they have been charged with while attempting to fatten the purse holdings with outside money has led the flock towards that dangerous cliff.

Along the way, some of those who paid to watch the show seem to think we should allow their buffalo herds to graze with our sheep and still others who see that happening think that their pride of lions should also be allowed in the same pasture … and on and on it goes until the menagerie resembles everything under the big top except that there are no cages and our shepherds are being eaten alive.

Big Tent indeed.

Are we meant to take more than we give?”

What are we taking? What are we taking away from those who are not truly bluegrass but want inside the tent if we do not allow them in. What are we taking away from the genre if we close the doors? On the other side, what are we taking away from those bonafied Bluegrassers inside the tent if we don't close the doors to non-qualified entrants?

What are we giving? What are we giving to the edgy style and what are we giving to the traditionalists? By keeping the doors open or by closing them?
We take away from the purity of the genre with every new radically different note played when it's accepted as if it were not different. We give back to the genre the ability to grow by introducing it to outside influences and allowing those influences to shape and mold it.

However, just as a farmer knows to rotate crops in the field so as not to deplete the soil of all of the nutrients needed to grow healthy plants that will mature and bear fruit, but still knows enough to eradicate the weeds, we must allow our bluegrass fields the opportunity to grow with nurturing and cultivation but we must keep them from becoming overrun with undesirable vegetation.

A good farmer is not one who plants a seed then stays away long enough for any outside element to overrun his crops. A good shepherd is not one who ignores his flock when they're bleating in panic.

Regardless of which side of the debate you favor, I wish you health, happiness and fantastic pickin' or grinnin', whichever you partake of. And I welcome any comments. You may use the comment section here to post your thoughts.

Have a great Bluegrass Day,
Brian

2 comments:

  1. Bravo! It is refreshing to see someone speaking up. There was one band in particuoar that would have been right at home at a hard rock festival. Thankfully I only saw about ten mimutes ot their show while waiting for the next act. If that is the new "bluegrass", Lord have mercy on us.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Bravo! It is good to see someone speaking out. One of the bands on the program would have been right at home at a hard rock festival. I sat through the last ten minutes of their show while waiting for the following act. If this is the new "bluegrass", then the Lord help us.

    ReplyDelete

Please keep all comments professional and courteous. We appreciate feedback and opposite opinions - all are welcome. Any unprofessional, derogatory or hate comments will be deleted without posting. You may post links to other pages if they directly relate to the post. Any non-relating links will be considered as and reported as SPAM!

Subscribe Now: RSS Reader