Dirty-South Blues Harp Forum: For blues harmonica players, students, and fans

Dirty-South Blues Harp forum: wail on! > why the "Real Blues Forum" is laughable

why the "Real Blues Forum" is laughable

Page: 1 2

kudzurunner 4859 posts Aug 12, 2014 7:44 PM	In general, I think it's a great thing when people of like mind get together to share their passion(s). Over the years I've participated in a range of subcultures--distance running, table tennis, classic cars, and of course blues harmonica--and the knowledge I've acquired, the experiences I've had, and the friends I've made in such contexts have greatly enriched my life. On the other hand, sometimes when people gather together to declare their affinities and their passions, they become.....fundamentalists. All fundamentalisms are essentially reactions against the confusions and uncertainties of the modern moment. They stipulate a groundless and unjustified coherence in the face of what feels like destabilizing confusion about what, and who, counts. Recently I've become aware of a Facebook group entitled the "Real Blues Forum." The mission statement of the group is very clear, and--in philosophical terms--wackily confused. "The Real Blues Forum," begins the mission statement, "is about blues as played and sung by African Americans." There's nothing intrinsically wrong with the idea of an affinity group focusing solely on black blues. Call it the "Black Blues Forum" or the "African American blues forum." What's not to like? The problems arise with the insistence--a profoundly fundamentalist insistence, one characteristic of our postmodern age--that there's a seamless conjunction between "African American" and "real" where blues are concerned, and, even more profoundly, with the three texts, all authored by pairs of white blues scholars, in which the authority of the category is anchored. Here's how the Forum creed describes that anchoring: "If in doubt about what this [the opening statement about "blues as played and sung by African Americans"] means, please consult the standard discographies (see Note 1 below). If still in doubt, please ask before posting. We’re friendly, but we will delete posts and associated comments that are not relevant to the Forum. "Note 1: the discographies referred to above are: ‘Blues & Gospel Records 1890-1943’, by Robert M.W. Dixon, John Godrich and Howard Rye; ‘The Blues Discography, 1943-1970’, by Les Fancourt and Bob McGrath; and ‘The Blues Discography, 1971-2000’, by Robert Ford and Bob McGrath. African American blues artists who have recorded since 2000 are also included." This is a joke propagated on the rest of us by a racially clueless, self-appointed white elite. If the founders of the Real Blues Forum... Last Edited by kudzurunner on Aug 13, 2014 4:27 AM
kudzurunner 4860 posts Aug 12, 2014 7:44 PM	...had the slightest bit of self-awareness, they'd realize that they stand in relation to their Pure Black Subjects as the (elite) white authenticators of the fugitive slave narratives stood to Fredrick Douglass, Henry "Box" Brown, and all the other escaped slaves who were useful to the white abolitionists. They're patrons, and patronizing. You're going to start a forum called the "Real Blues Forum," dedicate it to "African American Blues," and then make the sole criterion for inclusion (at least of pre-2000 blues artists) be that some white men decided to put you in thier books? That is unbelievably funny--and sad. And thus very bluesy indeed. White people have been singing and playing the blues, and influencing African American blues artists, since at least 1918: almost one hundred years now. (Ask Honeyboy Edwards about Harmonica Frank Floyd. Heck, ask B. B. King why he modeled his stage patter on Arthur Godfrey.) This doesn't mean that fundamentalists won't keep trying to turn back the hands of time and pretending that all that history doesn't exist. If you believe Joe Gioia and a number of recent Native American scholars, American Indians have been a huge and unacknowledged shaping influence on the American blues tradition since the beginning. http://www.amazon.com/The-Guitar-New-World-Fugitive/dp/1438446179 Needless to say, the "Real Blues Forum" has, by its founding statement, defined Native blues artists like Indigenous as "not real blues." And please, PLEASE don't mention Bonnie Raitt. She's not "real" blues. Because the white blues scholars who had clout several decades ago don't include those artists in their big old books. Jimmie Rodgers and his blue yodel? Pffft. I urge all members of this forum to resist fundamentalism, especially with reference to the majestic, endlessly self-transforming art known as the blues. Also, be very, very afraid when anybody tells you that they know what a real Jew, a real southerner, or real blues is. They've always got an ulterior motive; it's always more about them than about what they're pronouncing on; and they're always leaving out the really interesting, complicated, counter-intuitive part of the story. African American blueswoman Deborah Coleman told Living Blues magazine many years ago that she had been inspired to take up the guitar when she saw "The Monkees" on TV. That's not something I want to know--since I, too, want my blues pure--but it's entirely consistent with what I know about the blues. You can't tell a book. [Very lightly tweaked in a few places to bring it into line with what I posted on Facebook.] Last Edited by kudzurunner on Aug 13, 2014 4:30 AM
jnorem 528 posts Aug 12, 2014 8:15 PM	So you don't like the Real Blues Forum. That's fine, that's your right. But to use your own forum to rubbish it is really uncalled for. There's always great blues music on RBF, old stuff that I'd never hear if not for that forum. You can't argue with that, and that's what matters. Do you not agree? ---------- Call me J
slackwater 72 posts Aug 12, 2014 9:11 PM	I'm with you on this one kudzurunner. J, I'm guessing that if he tried to rubbish them on their own forum ( maybe he did?), as was pointed out they'd probably have just deleted any disagreeing comments anyway. Fundamentalists do that sort of thing.
BronzeWailer 1389 posts Aug 12, 2014 9:13 PM	I'm with kudzurunner. Imagine someone started a "real classical music" forum because music only played by white people, as they did in Europe in the good old days is "real" classical music. Edited for clarity BronzeWailer's YouTube Last Edited by BronzeWailer on Aug 12, 2014 9:20 PM
nacoran 7927 posts Aug 12, 2014 10:10 PM	jnorem, I think you are missing the point. They may well have interesting material, but Adam doesn't make it a habit of calling out other forums. Adam is, along with a blues performer, a blues historian, and he's calling them out for taking a distorted view of the blues. It would be one thing to say, 'Hey look, I think sometimes black people get marginalized in music history, so I'm going to start a site that focuses on addressing that wrong by cataloging black music'. It's quite another to say, 'Hey you, everyone over there, you are doing it wrong. Not yours. You can't haz.' I always find it interesting how we choose to identify ourselves. I'm white, born the son of reasonably affluent parents (they were both teachers before they retired). They got divorced, and I ate a lot of macaroni and cheese and went from upper to lower middle class. I went to college (several, with varying degrees of success) and spent some time really poor. I'm still poor, but I've got a roof over my head and can pay my bills, and even have a new car for the first time ever (hopefully I'll never have to sleep in this one.) I've got (fairly well) controlled mental health problems. I could identify myself as any one of those things, or a whole bunch of other things. Nothing is that absolute. I grew up in a house that talked about tests a lot. My mom helped write the NYS Regents exams. I met a young lady there who happened to be black, and we were discussing SAT scores. She had the second best SAT scores of anyone I'd met there, and I promptly said something to the effect of 'Wow, and considering the cultural bias built into those tests that's even more impressive!" She looked at me and called me out for my (unintentional) casual racism by answering, "My parents listened to classical music and my dad was a professor. I didn't really grow up black". Cultural experience is relative. Still, college was culturally not a great mixing pot. The black kids hung out with the black kids, and the white kids hung out with the white kids. Back home, I had a friend. A smart guy who grew up in a very poor family with abuse and neglect and very low expectations. He was white. I remember talking to him once and suggesting he go to college. "Eh, people in my family don't go to college." Smart guy, smart girl, different races, different expectations. I'd argue for all intents other than the actual color of their skin that they fit the stereotypes opposite of what you'd expect. We all have our worlds we are trapped in, and somehow we all get influenced by the other worlds around us just the same. I'm fine with defining those differences and exploring them, but as soon as you start using that as a claim to some sort of cultural superiority or trying to say that someone else can't respectfully have a place, I'm out the door. And remember, taken to it's logical extreme, any harmonica music that isn't played by real genuine German Oompah bands is just a form of cultural appropriation. If you are going to exclude music because it's appropriating someone else's culture, you have to be consistent... unless I'm missing the point of their argument and they are saying that MUSICALLY the only blues worth listening to is black, in which case I'll respectfully disagree and point them to whole catalogues of musically great blues by all sorts of different people. (That's certainly not to say that there isn't lots of great black blues, just that there is other blues out there.)
nacoran 7928 posts Aug 12, 2014 10:27 PM	J, I'm gonna call you out on this one, not as a moderator, but as a forum member who is getting a little grumpy with all the sarcasm. Different opinions drive this forum, but it seems a lot of the time you are disagreeing either because you just like be contrary or because you've got some sort of axe to grind. Whichever it is, could you dial it back a bit? ---------- Nate Facebook Thread Organizer (A list of all sorts of useful threads) First Post- May 8, 2009
jnorem 530 posts Aug 12, 2014 10:30 PM	Understood. Nacoran, have you read the mission statement on the Real Blues Forum page? If so, please tell me what part of it is so offensive. ---------- Call me J
Ted Burke 112 posts Aug 13, 2014 12:05 AM	It's a little ridiculous; there is a forum on FB called "Real Caucasian Blues Forum", which, as a compliment to the African- centric focus on RBF, highlights posts about what white musicians who do occasionally inspired, sometimes slavish, sometimes rote renditions of a music that is , like it or not, created by African Americans and whose architecture is designed by black pioneers. It's not even ironic, it's just absurd.I do believe that blues is an black American art form and feel that needs to be acknowledged and honored constantly, but it's foolish for anyone to dismiss a generation of white or Hispanic or Asian musicians who fell in love with the music while they were growing up and decided they wanted to be blues musicians. Art forms remain vital only if there are younger musicians taking up the practice who, in turn, bring their own musical ideas into the fold. A resilient art, I think, one that remains relevant to changing times is one that absorbs new musical ideas and expands what a music is capable of doing. For me it's a situation that requires a balance of respecting, learning and at times playing the older,more traditional styles of blues and striving to make music that is truly one's own, contemporary, authentic , with its own integrity. Traditional blues styles didn't begin as "old school" , but were , in their time, fresh musical innovations created by a generation of geniuses who were making art with what little they had; what was invented back then was a durable, pliable frame work for others , no matter what region they come from, no matter their race, no matter the native musical styles, could build on, expand. One can, of course, prefer blues made by African Americans , something I well understand; I look at the line ups for many blues festivals and make note that the bands and solo acts, who may be terrific, are too often disproportionately white. Beyond that , though, I think the point is for generations of musician to learn their lesson well enough to where they loose interest in the academic replication of old licks and tunings and instead sing and play riffs and joys and sorrows that are legitimately theirs. Butterfield was inspired by Little Walter above all other old school harmonica players, and yet didn't play LW licks , the reason being , by his own admission, because he couldn't. I suspect that PB was less interested in imitation than he was intrigued by making his own noise with the harmonica. LW showed the world the harmonia can be played with single notes; Butterfield took it further and had an influence that rivals LW himself. Butter, in turn , influences later players like Billy Branch and Sugar Blue. That is the way it works in the world as its lived, in my view. As it should. Music knows no color line; it may start in one neighborhood,but it's anyone's guess where it will to, or who will be moved by it. Last Edited by Ted Burke on Aug 13, 2014 12:36 AM
Frank 5111 posts Aug 13, 2014 4:52 AM	Confining ones self to a box - sometimes can help make life less confusing? By narrowing a subject into exclusivity may help some folk stay better focused? What is "real" to some...is "fantasy" to others. To find and concentrate on commonality among both (blues parties) would be wise, but rarely a solution for adults who have unbendable agendas they passionately believe in.
kudzurunner 4861 posts Aug 13, 2014 4:53 AM	jnorem: Right after I started this thread, I posted a slightly revised version on Facebook. I'm certainly not hiding my opinions on this lil' ol' forum. In any case, the issues raised by the existence of such a forum are significant for what we do here, which is why I raised the issue here. As I make clear, I'm in favor of affinity groups. But I'm also in favor, whenever possible and where the blues are concerned, of philosophical consistency, critical thinking (rather than mythic thinking), and the unearthing of true histories. I very much understand why some blues fans might desperately want to marshall the word "real" in a way that draws strict racial lines, but the drawing of strict racial lines, in any context, has a tortured history in America. So even though, speaking broadly, blues was for a long time primarily a black music, an ethnic music, it never was JUST that; it became MORE that, as Karl Hagstrom Miller makes clear in his study SEGREGATING SOUND, once racist white A&R guys started sorting performers, sounds, and songs into "race" and "hillbilly" categories back in the 1920s. The founders of the Real Blues Forum are part of that invidious trend, and the books in which they anchor their worldview contributed in no small way to that trend. The last 50 years, in any case, has produced a lot of history on top of that early history. I'm more inclined than many to speak publicly about the failings of white blues players and singers--I've beaten the minstrelsy thing and the derivative/imitative thing to death on this forum--but I also see absolutely no grounds, philosophical or aesthetic, on which to call the blues played by Bonnie Raitt, Mark "Muleman" Massey, Lightnin' Malcolm, or Tab Benoit UNreal in comparison with the blues played by Keb' Mo', Billy Branch, Annika Chambers, or Castro "Mr. Sipp" Coleman. I love all eight performers. Each brings something different to the blues table. To say that the latter four performers play "real" blues (and thus deserve discussion and inclusion) in a way that implicitly but strongly casts aspersions on the lives and art of the first four performers demands a contorted logic that just doesn't work for me. Last Edited by kudzurunner on Aug 13, 2014 4:59 AM
Frank 5112 posts Aug 13, 2014 5:25 AM	I know it is more complicated then this - but this song by RUSH has a message? :) "The Trees" There is unrest in the forest There is trouble with the trees For the maples want more sunlight And the oaks ignore their pleas The trouble with the maples (And they're quite convinced they're right) They say the oaks are just too lofty And they grab up all the light But the oaks can't help their feelings If they like the way they're made And they wonder why the maples Can't be happy in their shade There is trouble in the forest And the creatures all have fled As the maples scream 'Oppression!' And the oaks just shake their heads So the maples formed a union And demanded equal rights 'The oaks are just too greedy We will make them give us light' Now there's no more oak oppression For they passed a noble law And the trees are all kept equal By hatchet, axe and saw
atty1chgo 1060 posts Aug 13, 2014 6:43 AM	I agree with kudzurunner - but I have a suggestion. Contact the hosts of the forum and suggest (strongly) for inclusion, other anthologies which are more akin to what you think are already seeing listed, and any other suggestions which might, if not cure, at least alleviate your concerns. If they refuse, then you know for sure that your theories as to their motives and/or origins are justified, or at least correct. They may just be well-meaning but ill-informed.
Goldbrick 604 posts Aug 13, 2014 8:03 AM	Real Blues too
1847 2056 posts Aug 13, 2014 8:26 AM	---------- i get a lot of request when i play my harmonica "but i play it anyway"
Frank 5113 posts Aug 13, 2014 9:18 AM	Here is an original and a few covers? Rufus Thomas Jr. - Tiger Man Kim Wilson & The Tigermen Elvis breaks into tiger man...after a little train, train... Fabulous Kim Wilson-Tigerman ACOUSTIC
KillerJoe 93 posts Aug 13, 2014 10:35 AM	If their forum is "laughable", why give it so much attention here and elsewhere? What is it about that "Real Blues Forum" that bothers you so much? Isn't that what Facebook is really all about anyway? People posting whatever they want to, proclaiming whatever they want to? Don't those folks have every right to post whatever they want to promote on their site, in the same way as you promote what you like here on your site? Last Edited by KillerJoe on Aug 13, 2014 10:38 AM
nacoran 7930 posts Aug 13, 2014 1:17 PM	J, I guess it may partially be what the word "Real" modifies. If it's modifying "Blues" it seems awfully exclusionary. If it's just puffery, saying, yeah, we are a better forum than those guys over there, well, that's pretty blues I guess. "The Real Blues Forum is about blues as played and sung by African Americans. If in doubt about what this means, please consult the standard discographies (see Note 1 below). If still in doubt, please ask before posting. " This sounds, at least in their mission statement, like they are leaning towards saying white boys can't play the blues. It gets even more culturally confusing when you look at the list of admins and Facebook displays all those white faces. It's a weird fact of blues that it seems to be curated by us white guys, and weirder still when we curate it in a way that doesn't recognize the very crossover involved in that curation. Strange and weird. That said, they do make a nod towards at least being allowed to enjoy other music, just not there, which is fine, and like I said above, and like Adam said, it's important not to say, well, we are a bunch of white guys and we are taking this, but how weird is a blues club that starts off with a sign that says, 'No Whites Allowed'? Like I said in my first post, I find any discussion about just race reductivist because there are so many other ways to look at things. There are certainly parts of the black experience I will never get. I guess maybe I'm injecting a little politics into the discussion unintentionally. I've always seen it as more of a struggle between the haves and have nots, with the antipathy between the different groups of have nots, perhaps even fomented as a control strategy by the some of the haves. Of course, everything is reflected through the lens of your own life. You can take being inclusive to extremes where you dilute the original to the point where there is no memory left of the original substance. It's easier to say, 'Black blues' or 'Hair Metal" or "Boy Band" than examine the music underneath. I'm only now just aware of The Real Blues Forum, so I don't know if they discuss the issues underneath the music. If they do, well, maybe it leads to some understanding. If it's just ticking off boxes to see what qualifies then it seems sort of superficial. And from a more epistemological point of view, I like a little meandering in the conversation. It keeps things fresh and you never know when it will add some fresh insight to the situation. -Passing comments with J, I was just posting when I had a captcha hiccup and I noticed your comment J. I guess, after rereading it a few times I wouldn't call it offensive so much as a bit myopic. ---------- Nate Facebook Thread Organizer (A list of all sorts of useful threads) First Post- May 8, 2009
jnorem 532 posts Aug 13, 2014 1:54 PM	So it sounds to you like they are saying white boys can't play the blues. But note 2 of their mission statement clearly states: "everyone here listens to and loves artists who don’t fit these criteria, so we share those enthusiasms in other places. Facebook is full of them." Nothing about this forum has anything to do with the "black experience." It says right there in the mission statement that RBF is based upon discographies put together by and for collectors of pre-war African American music. You're aware of such collectors, of course. And just because a group of old record collectors and enthusiasts look upon their music of choice as "real blues" doesn't call for their being demonized by vague accusations of elitism/racism, or being labeled as "laughable" from the bully pulpit of another forum. But let's say that you're right. What does that say, do you think, about the many members of the Real Blues Forum? ---------- Call me J
KillerJoe 94 posts Aug 13, 2014 2:04 PM	@jnorem I'm quite certain that the response to your post above is going to be laughable at best. If it's anything like the last response, it may also be unintelligible.
slackwater 75 posts Aug 13, 2014 5:34 PM	I agreed with the original post up front, the one which said that the forum in question was a "joke", under a heading which indicated it was "laughable". Did anyone say it was "offensive"? To proclaim someone or something laughable is hardly demonizing. Facebook, as someone indicated, is full of all sorts of stuff. Some of that shit is laughable, some is just shit. I still agree with the original post.
jnorem 533 posts Aug 13, 2014 5:41 PM	@slackwater: Have you visited the Real Blues Forum? ---------- Call me J
Frank 5118 posts Aug 13, 2014 5:59 PM	Exclusive Interview with Craig Ruskey - The Real Blues Forume
slackwater 76 posts Aug 13, 2014 6:03 PM	I looked at it. I read the mission statement. I still agree with the original post.
kudzurunner 4863 posts Aug 13, 2014 7:00 PM	@jnorem: You need to read more carefully. If you take a look at my first post, I've copied and pasted the portion of the Real Blues Forum mission statement that I find objectionable, and I've made quite clear why it's silly and self-deconstructing. Please read more carefully, and please stop repeating yourself. Just to make it easier for you--hey, I'm a nice, indulgent guy--I'll repost precisely the same portion of the mission statement that I post above. I won't repost my analysis, though. I'll ask that you return to my OP and take a look at what I said. Here's how the Real Blues Forum creed describes the grounds on which it stands: "If in doubt about what this [the opening statement about "blues as played and sung by African Americans"] means, please consult the standard discographies (see Note 1 below). If still in doubt, please ask before posting. We’re friendly, but we will delete posts and associated comments that are not relevant to the Forum. "Note 1: the discographies referred to above are: ‘Blues & Gospel Records 1890-1943’, by Robert M.W. Dixon, John Godrich and Howard Rye; ‘The Blues Discography, 1943-1970’, by Les Fancourt and Bob McGrath; and ‘The Blues Discography, 1971-2000’, by Robert Ford and Bob McGrath. African American blues artists who have recorded since 2000 are also included." The key point here: what YOU play, buddy, ain't real blues. (I've seen your photo; you're a white guy.) That is the inescapable implication of the Real Blues Forum's name and mission statement. You're a white guy. Now, speaking personally, you may NOT be much of a blues player. I don't know. Please post clips that give us a chance to judge. But my strong feeling is that judgment should be out on that--the question of whether you play "real blues" or not--until we've actually heard what you're about. Unfortunately, that's not what the Real Blues Forum is about. The Real Blues Forum is all about restricting discussion of "real blues" (as they call it) to African American blues artists. I've been told that the majordomo of the forum is Scott Dirks--a self-hating white "blues" (fake blues) player, apparently, since his own replications of Little Walter's famous solos are, I gather, completely off limits on the Real Blues Forum. In fact, if anybody dared to discuss his playing on the forum, he would ban them. Or so I gather. Let's take a step back from all that. Take a deep breath. Doesn't it seem just a wee bit....I don't know. Weird? Needless? Unjustified? Unwise? Doesn't it seem as though a white blues mafia (so to speak) is taking its purism just a tad too far? It does to me. Which is why I'm speaking out. But I'm surprised, frankly, that you're arguing with me. I'm arguing on YOUR behalf. I think that you should be granted a fighting chance, a priori, of living long enough to play something that can be called "real blues." For all I know, you're playing real blues right now--although you haven't actually posted any clips, as far as I know, that would give us all a chance of slapping you on the back for that. I'm on your side, my friend. Take a deep breath and you'll realize that. Last Edited by kudzurunner on Aug 13, 2014 8:02 PM
kudzurunner 4864 posts Aug 13, 2014 7:15 PM	By calling itself the Real Blues Forum, and by insisting that the only music within its pre-2000 purview is the music made by those African American musicians pre-certified by white blues scholars in a set of three large discographies, the Real Blues Forum is promulgating a Big Lie: that "real" blues is strictly, and always, a matter of racial background AS ADJUDICATED BY THE WHITE BOSSES IN CHARGE. Whoa nelly! This is not a good idea. This is history repeating itself as farce. This is the opposite of blues as liberation. This is the opposite of the charge brother Larry Neal delivered in "Any Day Now: Black Art and Black Liberation." This is not "the destruction of the white thing--white ways of seeing," by which Neal meant: sorting human beings into racial categories and subordinating one group to another. This is white blues purism--perhaps with the assistance of black nationalist allies, or imputed allies, or merely the furtive hope that one's white folkoric purity is somehow imbued with a black nationalist aura--taken to its logical, and fundamentalist, conclusion: they're real, you're not. In Spike Lee's terms: they're Magical Blues-playing Negroes; you're just a white dude. Sorry! But that's the way it is. I say the hell with that. It's inhumane, it's bearing false witness to who we, as a multiracial blues people, actually are, and it leads in a direction that is the opposite of liberating, the opposite of libertarian..... Last Edited by kudzurunner on Aug 13, 2014 7:19 PM
kudzurunner 4865 posts Aug 13, 2014 7:15 PM	I'll be honest: This issue hits very close to home. I'm starting to teach my 8-year-old son how to play blues on the trumpet. According to America's troubled racial schema, my son might be variously described as black, biracial, black/biracial, or African American. He's the product of my mixed marriage. He's also just my kid. He loves music, he's singing melodies out loud, and he can rip off a C-to-high-G scale like Buddy Bolden. If I do my job right, as Dad and teacher, he'll actually be playing some blues on the thing. If he does so by next April, I'll bring him out onto the street with me during a local festival. He's a Mississippi boy with blues in his future. If the Real Blues Forum has its way, he'll be worth talking about, somewhere down the line--he meets the criterion--but I won't. That seems insane to me. It's a reductio ad aburdum, I know, but still: as such, it helps reveal the absurdity at work when guardians of culture (and society) draw race-lines in the sand. The whole tenor of contemporary musicology, as evoked by KH Miller, Ronald Radano, Scott Saul, Christopher Waterman, and others is anti-essentialist: it's helping us see past those ill-advised and badly drawn lines. Stanley Crouch makes his own version of this point in THE ALL-AMERICAN SKIN GAME. I welcome any and all conversations about the problematics of contemporary blues performance, and about the political economy of what I'm fond of calling the "administered" blues scene. Sure. Let's have that honest conversation. I'm even okay with versions of strategic essentialism: "Taken as a whole, what characterizes contemporary black blues performance, and does it differ in significant ways from contemporary white blues performance?" Those are serious questions, and deserve thoughtful--rather than knee-jerk--responses. The word "real" is a problem, though, and tells us absolutely nothing except that somebody is trying to close down honest inquiry.
kudzurunner 4866 posts Aug 13, 2014 7:21 PM	Please post video/audio and I'll let you know if I really mean it. :)
wolfkristiansen 310 posts Aug 13, 2014 7:44 PM	Long time forum members know my taste in blues music, so I won't repeat myself here. I read the interview with Craig Ruskey, an administrator in the Real Blues Forum. (Frank posted the link a few posts earlier). This administrator is actually a thoughtful guy and loves black blues as I do and always have. Have a read. I'm almost tempted to join the Real Blues Forum, just to tell them to change their name. Their name is problematic and takes away from the interesting discussions that could be had about black blues. I won't join, because it's on Facebook. I agree with kudzurunner, "Call it the Black Blues Forum or the African American blues forum. What's not to like?" About Facebook-- I've resisted joining all these years because, as far as I tell, it's the world's biggest privacy raper; all to sell targeted advertising. I don't want to be part of that business plan. Cheers, wolf kristiansen Last Edited by wolfkristiansen on Aug 14, 2014 4:43 PM
JInx 842 posts Aug 13, 2014 8:01 PM	Time to put on your Bush mask again. Better yet, do black face. Comedy is your ticket. ----------
kudzurunner 4867 posts Aug 13, 2014 8:03 PM	Please re-post clips of your best playing, Jinx. I think I'm on your team, but it's possible that I'm wrong about that and I don't want to be a hypocrite. You, too, just might be able to play the Real Blues.
1847 2059 posts Aug 13, 2014 10:01 PM	I welcome any and all conversations about the problematics of contemporary blues performance, ---------- i get a lot of request when i play my harmonica "but i play it anyway"
Joe_L 2502 posts Aug 14, 2014 1:59 AM	I have known Scott Dirks for about 20 years. The person you are describing isn't the guy that I consider to be a friend of mine. I don't know if you know him, but I think you are misrepresenting him. He has helped to get a lot of forgotten artists recorded and gotten them some much needed rewards and recognition in their later years. He spent a great time and money researching Little Walter's career. He documented and shared that information. He isn't the kind of guy that seeks or desires the spotlight. If he was that type of person, he is a multi-instrumentalist and has sufficient skills to be placed in the limelight. Membership in the RBF isn't mandatory. They present music, photos and history of artists who would likely be forgotten with the passing of time. I don't see the problem with that. If the problem is one of semantics or wording of the title/charter, you might want to take it up with them. This may be one of my last posts here. I really don't like to see my friends trashed. Its just not cool. ---------- The Blues Photo Gallery
Komuso 384 posts Aug 14, 2014 2:25 AM	I'm not a member of RBF (sic), and doesn't sound like it interests me given I'm white and have an interest in the full spectrum time, genre & demographic blues...but in the interests of fairness I think you should have posted their whole manifesto. Personally I think they should rename themselves to African American Blues Forum or something, as the Real bit is just silly. But there's nothing stopping them (or anyone) focusing on a genre of music produced purely by a particular ethnic group or demographic, despite who collated it. The appalachian one armed harmonica players with club foot forum? Sure! The guitar players with ego and O face forum? Sure! or even African American Trumpet players from 1920-1931.2 or White Trombone Big Band players from June 1923 - August 1923 or even NotSoModern blues harmonica forum snip from FB Real Blues Forum manifesto The Real Blues Forum is about blues as played and sung by African Americans. If in doubt about what this means, please consult the standard discographies (see Note 1 below). If still in doubt, please ask before posting. We’re friendly, but we will delete posts and associated comments that are not relevant to the Forum. Note 1: the discographies referred to above are: ‘Blues & Gospel Records 1890-1943’, by Robert M.W. Dixon, John Godrich and Howard Rye; ‘The Blues Discography, 1943-1970’, by Les Fancourt and Bob McGrath; and ‘The Blues Discography, 1971-2000’, by Robert Ford and Bob McGrath. African American blues artists who have recorded since 2000 are also included. Note 2: everyone here listens to and loves artists who don’t fit these criteria, so we share those enthusiasms in other places. Facebook is full of them. Note 3: we don’t waste our time and space here debating about what is ‘real’ or isn’t ‘real’ (just see Note 1). No, really – we don’t. Such threads will be curtailed or deleted. Note 4: members of this group are very generous with photos, scanned documents, unissued recordings etc. Please don’t abuse this generosity by sharing such things outside of the Forum without asking permission. Note 5: when posting photos in this group, please observe the basic courtesy of stating the photographer’s name, and the date and place of the photo, or say specifically if these are not known. Note 6: we have sub-groups dedicated to particular aspects of this Forum’s interests. If interested, please ask. ---------- Paul Cohen aka Komuso Tokugawa HarpNinja - Your harmonica Mojo Dojo Bringing the Boogie to the Bitstream Last Edited by Komuso on Aug 14, 2014 2:30 AM
kudzurunner 4868 posts Aug 14, 2014 4:28 AM	@Komuso: Here's the complete creed of the Real Blues Forum, as copied and pasted from the group's homepage: About Closed GroupClosed Group The Real Blues Forum is about blues as played and sung by African Americans. If in doubt about what this means, please consult the standard discographies (see Note 1 below). If still in doubt, please ask before posting. We’re friendly, but we will delete posts and associated comments that are not relevant to the Forum. Note 1: the discographies referred to above are: ‘Blues & Gospel Records 1890-1943’, by Robert M.W. Dixon, John Godrich and Howard Rye; ‘The Blues Discography, 1943-1970’, by Les Fancourt and Bob McGrath; and ‘The Blues Discography, 1971-2000’, by Robert Ford and Bob McGrath. African American blues artists who have recorded since 2000 are also included. Note 2: everyone here listens to and loves artists who don’t fit these criteria, so we share those enthusiasms in other places. Facebook is full of them. Note 3: we don’t waste our time and space here debating about what is ‘real’ or isn’t ‘real’ (just see Note 1). No, really – we don’t. Such threads will be curtailed or deleted. Note 4: members of this group are very generous with photos, scanned documents, unissued recordings etc. Please don’t abuse this generosity by sharing such things outside of the Forum without asking permission. Note 5: when posting photos in this group, please observe the basic courtesy of stating the photographer’s name, and the date and place of the photo, or say specifically if these are not known. Note 6: we have sub-groups dedicated to particular aspects of this Forum’s interests. If interested, please ask.
kudzurunner 4869 posts Aug 14, 2014 4:50 AM	Several people have suggested to me that the RBF is essentially a pre-war blues forum. That's plainly not true. Take a look at Note 1. It is devoted to the full historical scope of blues recorded by African Americans, from 1890 through 2014, as long as the pre-2000 recordings show up in compendiums compiled by careful white scholars. Those blues are, nominally, "real blues." Everything else is, by definition, and with no argument or discussion allowed, not "real blues." @JoeL: I believe that you've taken objection to the following in my earlier post: "I've been told that the majordomo of the forum is Scott Dirks--a self-hating white 'blues' (fake blues) player, apparently, since his own replications of Little Walter's famous solos are, I gather, completely off limits on the Real Blues Forum. In fact, if anybody dared to discuss his playing on the forum, he would ban them. Or so I gather." Please excuse my tone. I've never met or spoken with Scott, but I've read his Little Walter biography several times and I know him to be a careful scholar. I'm willing to stipulate that, in any reasonable everyday situation, he manifests none of the symptoms of somebody who hates himself. I was engaging in a rhetorical flight of fancy. My understanding--and please correct me if I'm wrong--is that what Scott plays, his kind of solid, LW-inspired, idiomatically-correct Chicago blues, is, from the perspective of the forum that he administers, off limits to discussion on that same forum. Aki Kumar's playing, too. Your playing. None of that stuff may be discussed on the Real Blues Forum--even if, for example, Aki was just featured in the current issue of Living Blues. Because none of you are African American. None of you meet the forum's criterion. Speaking personally, I can't imagine presiding over a club that wouldn't, so to speak, have me as a member in good standing--or that would define Aki's playing as off-limits while encouraging discussion of Russ Greene and Omar Coleman. But that is what Scott has chosen to do. Thus my flight of rhetorical excess in calling him "self hating." Obviously he's not self-hating in the way we ordinarily mean that. He's just heavily invested in a Facebook forum that draws a racial line in the sand--a racial line that implicitly casts aspersions on the integrity of his own blues musicianship--and believes that's a good place to be. If you decide that you need to withdraw from the MBH forum because you object to me being clear about that, and passionate about how much I dislike it, that's too bad. You've been an important contributor here for a long time, and you did me a personal favor in loaning me your great amp, both of which I value greatly. I hope you'll reconsider. I should add that I haven't independently verified that Scott does, in fact, preside over the forum. He's listed as one of nine administrators. The others include Mike Gann, Clive Holloway, Paul Vernon, Ray Templeton, and several others. One member of the forum, a friend, told me that Scott was in charge. I have no personal beef whatever with Scott and did not know he was involved with the forum when I began this thread. I call them as I see them. @Komuso: I very much agree with you: the RBF forum is mistitled. Perhaps the title is a joke among friends; perhaps I've simply missed the joke. But I don't think it's intended as a joke. Either way, words have real-world effects. Last Edited by kudzurunner on Aug 14, 2014 5:14 AM
MJ 733 posts Aug 14, 2014 8:01 AM	Strangely enough, I tried to find this Real Blues Forum on Google search to see what you are talking about. It does not appear on my searches. It must not be too real.
The Iceman 1927 posts Aug 14, 2014 8:14 AM	I remember back in the late 80's/early 90's, there was a blues magazine (maybe still is) called Living Blues. A competitor started up another one called Blues Revue because he felt that Living Blues only profiled black blues musicians. Perhaps a parallel situation to the one being discussed here? ---------- The Iceman
Joe_L 2503 posts Aug 14, 2014 1:08 PM	Adam - both forums have the creed. THE RBF guys tend to monitor and enforce their forum creed a little more strictly. The people running that forum learned quite a bit from the old blues-l mailing list. Blues-l used to have a lot of very knowledgeable members with a deep understanding of blues history. One by one knowledgeable people left when topics of discussion would wander off topic. The community was less rich for it. People who wanted to learn were now denied access to the knowledge that the departing members possessed. I personally have no issue with forums that exist to discuss pre-war or post-war blues where most of the creators are Black. It doesn't bother me that my playing, Aki Kumar's playing or your playing isn't discussed there. Our playing tends not to be interesting to the forum members. If your playing, Aki's playing or my playing is of interest, it isn't very difficult to find. I have no issue with forums that have creeds or guidelines that need to be adhered to in order to preserve membership. I've been a member here for a while. There are aspects of your creed that I don't like, but I accept them or I don't participate. There have been times here when I think the moderators exercise a pretty heavy hand and there are times when I am surprised they don't step in more frequently. Regarding the RBF, if you were a member for any time period there, you would know that your assertions are somewhat false. There have been videos posted by artists such as Jimmie Lee Robinson, Big Smokey Smothers, Sunnyland Slim and Snooky Pryor from the 1980's. During that time, all of those guys hired white artists to back them up. Guys like Scott Dirks, Billy Flynn, Steve Freund, Steve Cushing, Dave Specter and a multitude of others appeared on those recordings/videos. I think they don't want their forum turning into yet another forum Joe Bonamassa or Eric Sardinas Admiration Society. There are plenty of those types of forums. Personally, I don't think the world needs another forum like that. If a person wants to learn shit about Blues music played by people who experienced the migration of Blues artists from the South in the middle of the 20th century, it is the best place to go to sit and observe and learn from people who had exposure to those artists. It's also a great place to go and learn about some of the more obscure or forgotten talent. As far as discussion of Omar Coleman or Russ Green goes, I don't believe they would be discussed there as they are: 1. still very alive and in Omar's case very active in the scene. 2. weren't very active before Y2K. The name Real Blues Forum is just a name, much like the name Modern Blues Harmonica. Consider the name of this forum, there is little modern about it. 1. Time is spent discussing Little Walter and Big Walter. (hardly modern) 2. Time is spent discussing Rod, Kim and Rick. (traditional style players) 3. Time is spent discussing harmonica bands at SPAH that are reminiscent of music being played in the middle of the last century. (not blues) 4. Even Blues Traveler was formed in 1987. A child born then would being 27 years old and could have a family and a couple of kids with a house in the suburbs by now. Nothing too modern there. (No blues and not modern) 5. A plethora of off topics threads. (No blues and no harmonica content.) If you find the term "Real Blues Forum" upsetting, there are probably people that take exception to the term, "Modern Blues Harmonica". Finally, people have been calling rock music from the 60's and 70's classic rock for years. Do people who appreciate classical music take offense with the term, classic rock? Last Edited by Joe_L on Aug 14, 2014 1:14 PM
Joe_L 2504 posts Aug 14, 2014 1:10 PM	This is slightly different discussion than people have had in the past in Chicago. Younger artists were not happy with the radio show Blues Before Sunrise which is a Blues Heritage showcase as they got no airplay. I can understand that complaint as radio airplay for the genre is in short supply. On the Internet, anyone can start a forum or a group and call it what they want. Anyone can start one that is entitled the "Really Real Blues Forum" with a creed that says we are inclusive and distribute information on more realer blues artists that we think are more real and worthy than those other guys at the real blues forum.
atty1chgo 1068 posts Aug 14, 2014 3:07 PM	My preference in the blues is music by black artists. I support black artists heavily in the Chicago area. I do enjoy many artists who play the blues and are white. But a club saying that the only "real" blues is by black artists exclusively is not a club I want to be a member of. And to kudzurunner's statement: "I've beaten the minstrelsy thing and the derivative/imitative thing to death on this forum--but I also see absolutely no grounds, philosophical or aesthetic, on which to call the blues played by Bonnie Raitt, Mark "Muleman" Massey, Lightnin' Malcolm, or Tab Benoit UNreal in comparison with the blues played by Keb' Mo', Billy Branch, Annika Chambers, or Castro "Mr. Sipp" Coleman. I love all eight performers. Each brings something different to the blues table. To say that the latter four performers play "real" blues (and thus deserve discussion and inclusion) in a way that implicitly but strongly casts aspersions on the lives and art of the first four performers demands a contorted logic that just doesn't work for me." -- Very, very well stated. That about sums up my opinion on this whole mess.
atty1chgo 1069 posts Aug 14, 2014 3:14 PM	And of course, this can't be "real" blues: We could find examples all day long. The mission statement is ridiculous. How some people cannot see that is beyond my comprehension. Last Edited by atty1chgo on Aug 14, 2014 3:18 PM
nacoran 7931 posts Aug 14, 2014 4:04 PM	MJ, you probably won't be able to find it on Google. A few years back as a power play Facebook basically told Google to stop cataloguing their pages (while at the say time still happily harvesting gmails from anyone who signed up). I'm with Google in the belief that their shouldn't be walled off gardens, but Google's philosophy serves Google (and I think, by dumb luck, the public) and Facebooks philosophy serves Facebook. I'm with Wolf that Facebook is terrible for privacy, although they seem to be reluctantly getting better at it because they are finally seeing some usership declines to sites that are more privacy friendly. I still use it though. To find The Real Blues guys you have to use the Facebook search engine. I could rant for hours on that, but that's neither here nor there. :) I'm going to make an addendum to what I said earlier. After browsing YouTube a bit it seems that naming something 'The Real' whatever is almost a meme. I still think, combined with their mission statement I'm put off by it, but the difference may be more about the language that they used rather than the actual ideology under it. ---------- Nate Facebook Thread Organizer (A list of all sorts of useful threads) First Post- May 8, 2009
wolfkristiansen 312 posts Aug 14, 2014 4:14 PM	About blues discussion groups-- I love them, this one most of all. I will love, play and talk about blues and blues harmonica ("harp", thanks, Tony Glover) till I die. Blues-l, harp-l, Dirty-South Blues Harp forum, Blindman's Blues Forum, I belong to them all. I'm most active in this forum. Having said that, I play more than I talk. There's room on the internet for any kind of group to discuss whatever its members want to discuss. I'd be happy to be in a group devoted to black blues. There's lots to talk about. About Blindman's Blues Forum-- it has no restrictions of any kind. It will deal with anything. Amongst its subforums are Pre-War Blues, Post-War Blues, Rock, Soul and Folk Blues, The Blues Hangout, The Jazz Club and The Chariot (Gospel). There's also a forum for harp, guitar or whatever players-- The Jam Session Forum. I'm most active in The Blues Hangout, because I get to ramble on about this wonderful thing called blues. If I've piqued your curiosity, check it out: http://blindman.fr.yuku.com Contributing members include Scott Dirks (Blues With a Feeling: The Little Walter Story), Dick Shurman (blues writer and record producer extraordinaire) and Chris Albertson (rediscovered Lonnie Johnson in 1959; produced his comeback album). Read about Chris on wikipedia; it's a fascinating story. Chris and I have had interesting email exchanges. He's 82 but still loves to talk about blues. Cheers, wolf kristiansen Last Edited by wolfkristiansen on Aug 14, 2014 4:33 PM
Frank 5127 posts Aug 14, 2014 4:20 PM	Yeah readin through their stuff - seems like semantics, which can upset the apple cart for some...they seem like nice level headed folk though from that one article...
MJ 734 posts Aug 14, 2014 11:37 PM	Thanks nacoran.
1847 2063 posts Aug 15, 2014 10:17 AM	so how does a band with all white players, and a black singer, figure in to the mix? ---------- i get a lot of request when i play my harmonica "but i play it anyway"
Frank 5146 posts Aug 15, 2014 3:47 PM	That would be Howard and the White Boys, Dan Bellini a fine guitarist/harmonica player was in the band at one time, missing from this clip :) edited to close an html tag Last Edited by Guest on Aug 16, 2014 10:51 PM
Joe_L 2505 posts Aug 17, 2014 12:00 AM	1847 - it happens all the time. I think the attitude toward that group is highly exaggerated by people who aren't members. ---------- The Blues Photo Gallery
1847 2066 posts Aug 17, 2014 9:04 AM	I remember a conversation I had at a gig once. It was explained to me that, Africa is the cradle of Civilization. And that God created man, in his image, And that Adam and Eve were, black. So. I don’t know, you do the math. ---------- i get a lot of request when i play my harmonica "but i play it anyway"

Post a Message

Modern Blues Harmonica supports

§The Jazz Foundation of America

and

§The Innocence Project

Follow @AdamGussow

ADAM GUSSOW is an official endorser for HOHNER HARMONICAS