TalkAwhile - The Folk Corporation Forum

---

Please use this thread to talk about the Hancock Awards in general.

Cheers!

The question has come up again as to what is a traditional song.

Is it simply that a song is listed as 'trad. arr.' and has no named author?
How about if it is out of copyright (75 years after the authors death).

Both of these would rule out the current Rudyard Kipling proposal.
Any better ideas?
So what do we go with?

Both of these criteria would have eliminated White Hare a couple of years ago, which many would have probably considered to be a good thing.

I'm leaning toward the adoption of both criteria: if a song is in the public domain, it should qualify.

I hope this isn't a transgression but I thought this to be a broader topic that would get better discussion here.
We run into this every year, and Colin has never bent on this, even faced with the same argument you've just presented. I'm somewhat in agreement with you Bridgwit, but the reality is that nominations that are backed up well will probably be more likely to be accepted than those that aren't.
I would like to propose a compromise: instead of simply rejecting a concise nomination*, add the criterion that if someone else seconds it and provides adequate support it, that it be considered. Simply a reverse of the current flowery-nomination-followed-by-terse-seconding process.
What do you think?

* which is what happened last year when several terse nominations were abruptly deleted from the threads

Sorry I think I probably posted in haste.  ::)  :-[

I accept that it's not enough to just give the name of the Artist and the song/album etc, everyone expects a bit more than that. What seems to happen now is that someone puts forward a reasonable argument and others second/third it etc, adding their own bit if they wish. I see no reason for this to alter. I was just a bit concerned that someone who wasn't very good at getting their point across (which is looking increasing to be me!) wouldn't have their nomination considered.

I'm sure all the right nominations will go forward and I understand there has to be a restriction in the numbers too.

Maybe you could open a few premium rate phone lines for the voting......  ;)

It's really all about effort. The writing doesn't have to be flowery or precise, it just has to suggest that the writer has thought about their choice and believes in it - that they have not simply handed out a flippant "yeah, me too".

And it's not just for the proposers and seconders to say why they are nominating someone. Everyone should try to give a reason! It might help to think of things from the judges' point of view: Suppose you end up with two candidates, both have 5 posts in their favour. One candidate has 5 people who've said nothing more than "yeah, vote for them", the other candidate has 5 people who've each given a good, valid and thoughtful reason why the decision should go their way. Which would you pick?

There is a chance for everyone to make their "me too" posts later on. After all, votes are simply a tick in a box that says "my choice". So, while we're picking who to vote for, it's only right that we should be prepared to talk about our choices and to say why.

Cheers

Nick

It would also be really, really helpful if proposers, seconders or Metoo'ers supplied the Youtube, Myspace or website linking to the artist or song.

In that way, voters can have direct and timely access to the nominees.  

Personally speaking,  I'm more inclined to give the nominee due cosideration and attention if I can just click on a link, rather than having to seek out the beggar myself.  

Not that I have a problem with this but the nominations so far don't appear to be a million miles away from the BBC Folk Awards 2009 or am I wrong?

Brian

I think you might need to read this bit Brian

http://www.talkawhile.co.uk/yabbse/index.php?topic=29839.0

It explains how the Hancocks work and how they are sort of linked to the BBC ones :D

Thanks for pointing me to that Jude.

I guess I was expecting them to be different giving the generally hostile reception the announcement of the BBC nominations received here.

Brian

May I say, it would greatly help retain the validity and worth of the Hancocks, if we can somehow encourage members of this community to avoid the almost zenophobic habit of proposing on an annual basis, various members of the extended Fairport family for an award.
If we fail to avoid this scenario, we may as well present a trophy cabinet whilst we are at it, then those multi award recipients will have a ready made place to display the full set.
I too am a fan of all things FC but recognise there are many other excellent musicians out there, playing the music we like.

So my humble request is for folks to expand their horizons, this will in my view, keep a treasured Hancock award a thing of beauty, that all musicians will be proud and honoured to win.

That's part of the idea, Brian,

You are free to propose alternatives to the BBC nominations and we encourage it. We always guarentee space for at least one alternative, by having at one more nomination in each category. Then, if people are persausive enough, other BBC nominations can be rejected in favour of our own choices.

All you've got to do is make your nominations and say why you nominate them.

Cheers

Nick

Well said, Martin.  

I happen to think that the Radio 2 nominees, in all the categories, are the right ones.  

I'd nominate Mr Martin Driver if there was an appropriate category, well said, Sir.

I've got a nomination brewing, it's a wee bit contentious given that the person has been away from the scene for a bit. I've not got it nailed yet, I've a big day to get out of the way first, but I shall be back.

I'm thinking of a good egg. I'm thinking of influence and what legacy this person has left to those who are active now, I'm thinking of a very stylised performance, one which lead a leading light to describe this person as the best of their generation.

No names, no pack drill.  

If it's the person that I think you're going to nominate, go ahead, cos they definately deserve an award for the massive influence they've had on so many, after being off the scene for so many years.

Ok, I've put a quick summary into each of the topics to show who's been nominated and seconded so far and what sort of volume of comments have been made.

There's still time for more nominations and still some proposals to be seconded. There's also time for more comments for and against each of the proposals.

Remember though, in the end it will be the quality of the comments that will sway the decisions: a well thought out and reasoned response will be worth more than any number of "me too!" posts ...

Cheers

Nick

I was just thinking about the arguments for and against my nomination of a 38 year odl Fotheringay track for best trad song of the year.

It occured to me that it might be an idea to start a new category next year for best reissue/archival release.  Any thoughts?

Jules

I've found the summaries very useful Nick - I'm going to do a personal one so I can keep track of what I've nominated/seconded/supported!



Edit: At this point the nominations closed and voting began

I often wonder what Carey would vote for.
Apart from some fiddle botherer. ::)
I know that he loved music, and was passionate about it, but, who would he vote for?

I didn't know him  :( but from what I've read of his humour and warmth, I reckon he'd love 3 Daft Monkeys - a pretty lady also a great fiddle player, some fine gentlemen and a good time to be had by all.

 :)

I often imagine him sitting up there reading TAW and having a good laugh.

Knowing how cussed he could be he would probably have argued for the most obscure or unusual (unless of course Swarb was involved). ;D ;D ;D

We'd have had rappers .... and I don't mean the morris dancing type!

I seem to remember he was a fan of Goldie Lookin' Chain!!! ;D

He loved the Mahones too!!

Our last IMs were about his/my appreciation of the White Stripes!

I'm pretty sure that there would be a vote for Oysterband. :)

Undoubtedly!

But I wonder what he would have made of current circuit favourites Bellowhead?

Hard to say.
I think they're a bit like Marmite. ::)

He was a big fan of Spiers and Boden. I remember him pushing Colin to open up a Talkawhile section for them, before they had their own forum.

Perhaps an award for the "best" shirt worn on stage any any of the other award nominees would have tickled his fancy  ;)

I like Phil Beer's work very much, but the above statement is rather far fetched and indicative of many nominations here. If your arguments are to be taken seriously, then they have to be made seriously.


edit; this post may read in a harsher tone than was intended.

Rory.

I think Geetee knows what he's talking about.   ;)  

is it open to anyone to vote Nick? meself included?

Of course you can vote Ady.

i've never voted in this before and wasn't sure if you had to have had so many stars or something....my simple mind you see shelly  ;)    cheers though........right lets have a look then  :)

You need 10 posts in music topics and you have plenty - and if you can see the polls you can vote!

Okay Sir Robert, I read into that that you know who Geetee is and that they have kudos, fair enough, I can only reply to the comment, not the person. To be honest strong drink had been taken and I was frustrated at what I perceive to be lack of imagination in the voting, Bellowbleedinghead this MaddybleedingPrior that. Although my aim was very far off, I was merely trying to make the point that saying Phil Beer was beyond compare was stretching it a bit, but in the sober light of day, perhaps he is. I was going to hold up those chappies who performed at the Obama inauguration the other day as possible equals, but it turns out they were miming because they didn't want to break a string in the cold  :-\

Word on the street is that Mr Beer is a Top Man in every sense and I wouldn't want anyone to think I was gainsaying that opinion.  


(BTW I really like Bellowhead, and I hold nothing aginst Ms Prior, so to speak)

Since he has said he was not trying to keep it secret or be coy, there is no reason not to let you know that geetee is Gareth Turner's nickname in real life.  :)

(http://www.itisyou.co.uk/hancocks2009.gif)
Well actually there's just over a week, but close enough.

A lot of the votes are very close this year, so make sure you have voted.

These awards are very important to TAW and the artists who receive them. So please vote, even if you need to do a bit of research first.
If you want to convince others to vote for your favourite, I suggest posting YouTube links in the topics.

Everybody (with more than ten posts in a music topic) gets two votes in each category and you can change them at any time.

Best dressed band, perfomer or act award perhaps? ;)

I still think a "Best Archival Release/Reissue" category would be a welcome addition.

Jules

Voting closes at lunch to next Monday (2nd Feb)

I'm delighted to see that the number of votes and people viewing the awards is well up on last year.  ;D
Also there are some very close votes, with quite a few new contenders in with a good chance. So even if you think your favorite will lose out to more famous competition, your vote might well make all the difference.

Bob, I think I missed this post because of the cool "Vote, Vote Vote", picture in Colin's post, so my apologies for not replying sooner. Yes I've since learned the identity of GeeTee, and I hope I didn't rub him up the wrong way, so to speak, I stand by what I said, but I fully admit my post was unfairly directed at him.

I remain concerned that the votes (or at least the ones being posted about) are not exactly following the ideals in the tag line "not the R2 folk awards". Now I'm sure the Hancocks mean different things to different people. It can be a way to say "Thankyou" to artists who have given much musical pleasure over a number of years, to tell then how much we appreciate their work, and that is a laudable aim. OR, it could be a way to say, look R2/Cambridge audiences, there is a lot more out there than you are being shown. This involves all of us doing the detective work and reporting back here in the form of gig reviews, youtube links and general "bigging up" of acts that are not well known in the folk/trad/roots scene. It's about being a participant, not just a consumer, the folk scene is unique in that the audience is as big a part of the scene as the artists, even more so with the advent of places like TAW.

I know you do your bit, Bob, with the podcast thingummyjigger and I salute you for that.

I, for one, will be looking beyond the familiar for next year's Hancocks.

I second all that Rory has said.

While I consider myself a huge fan of anything involving Spiers and Boden and Fairport and the Oysterband and anybody vaguely connected with them, I'm disappointed to see that our combined wealth and breadth of taste and experience salutes such a shrinking range of artists.  It wasn't what we envisaged when we embarked on 'Not the Radio 2 Folk Awards'.  Back then, we highlighted 'the people's choice', rather than the vested interests of the appointees on the Radio Two Folk Award panel.  It caused quite a stir at the time.

I urge you to look again at your votes.  Consider, if you will, removing your vote from your favourite artist and The Usual Suspects if:
- you only voted for them because you've always been a fan and
- you don't know or haven't seen or heard the other artists/albums in the category

In that way, we might be able to kick some life into this contest and salute newer acts.

It's a little late for that isn't it? The "conditions of contest" pretty much ensure that only those artists we feel passionate enough about to produce paragraphs of eloquent support are the ones that appear in the selection lists. Is it really surprising that only those artists with passionate fans are among the selections? And the lesser known artists, the ones about whom no one can be eloquent, are the ones left aside ...

I was thinking about this earlier and I think the only way round it would be to ignore the BBC lists altogether and only nominate acts who weren't on the BBC's lists.  Just an idea.

Personally I think we should have an intitial nomination vote from a 'longlist', and I think the 2 votes is some sections is entirely misguided...as is the ability to recast your vote.  Just imho of course...

A simple approach would be to extend the time (currently two years) where an artist is disqualified if they have previously won a Hancock in that category. This includes nominations from the BBC list.

This would have to vary with category, for example 'Good Egg' can only be won once, but 'Best Album' may be allowed if people put a really strong case that it is better than their previous winner.

If we didn't use the BBC list at all, I suspect all categories would be 'the usual suspects'.
Having a 'long list' vote would again just bring the bigger fan bases to the top. I think the current system is fair, but could be expanded. The short list was selected using a new set of rules, mostly devised by Bob Barrows and Sandra. It will be a good basis for next year.
(Basically 2 points for or against for a reasoned nomination, one point for a 'me to'. Only one post counted per person, per nomination and it had to be on topic for the award.)

I have to say to you, Sir Bob, good points, well made.

As you say, when we first introduced the awards they were (briefly) known as the 'Not The Radio 2 Folk Awards'. We called them that because we were fed up with the same narrow group of favoured people being nominated and winning each year, and did not think that they reflected the broader aspects of the folk world, and yet here we are, a few years down the line, being in exactly the same boat.

Colin has made some good suggestions and I would agree with them. Lets ditch the BBC list and have all of the nominations our own, based on what we have experienced rather than heresay and propaganda publicity blurbs.

The Hancocks would then genuinely be the voice of Talkawhile and the BBC awards left behind forever.

I would also encourage people to think outside the box and not just vote for the same people over and over again. For example, much as I love Bellowhead they have not been the strongest performers I have seen/heard this year in some categories, and therefore I have not voted for them.

If you have not seen (even if it's on YouTube) or heard at least all of the artists in each catgory you have voted for then I urge you to do so. You might find some unexpected surprises.

I agree wholeheartedly with that.  In fact, I can't believe it's not already the case.

Jules

I disagree strongly.  Arguably, the BBC shortlist is spot on.

For instance - let's take the example of Mawkin-Causley in the Best Group category.  We, at Talkawhile, have been reporting on the emergence of this fine band for some time.  We, at Talkawhile, were the first reviewers of that band's collaboration with the esteemed Jim Causley.  Their fan base isn't as big as some of the other bands on the shortlist and they don't have a record company, publicists and pluggers to support - so they probably only have an outside chance of winning the coveted Radio Two title.

If the Talkawhile nominees hadn't featured, then Mawcausley would have been strong contenders as the People's Choice.  

The Oysterband (or Bellowhead) are strong favourites to win this section, as far as Talkawhile members are concerned.  What does that say about the Hancocks?  Does it not suggest that we tend to favour an old favourite rather than an upcoming band working hard to build a following?    

This year the Radio Two panel has come up with a wide range of artists, new names and younger faces.  Unfortunately, the same cannot be said of our list. There has been a complete reversal is what the Hancocks are about.     

I agree Sir Bob,

To follow on from your example,  Oysterband have been my favourite band for over 10 years.

But last year, Mawkin:Causley were absolutely excellent, and every time I saw them they were better than the time before. They have worked their socks off and are such nice guys too.

I shall be disappointed if the Oysterband win the Hancock award, for all the reasons being put forward.

I wasn't suggesting ditching the BBC list and not allowing any of their nominees on our list, just that we don't use their list as a starting  point.

I agree that we will probably end up with some, if not many, of the same nominees for each award, but with possibly a bit wider spread than we have now. I am sure Mawkin Causley would have been on the Hancocks list, whereas other BBC nominees might not have been. It is apparent in the discussion of who the TAW nominee in each category should be that we have a broad appreciation of music on this board, and I just feel this should be reflected in the nominations.

As you yourself say, Sir Bob, we at TAW are good at spotting a good thing very early on. Perhaps the BBC are onto us;D ;D ;D

Long mat be champion up and coming bands, but lets not fall into the trap of becoming predictable. Colin's suggestion of extending the exclusion of an act in any given category to two years would, I think, help achieve that aim.

This is a fascinating debate and I certainly don't have any answers. I am one of those who is not familiar with a lot of the music nominated this year and some of what I am familiar with I don't particularly like but two thoughts do occur to me, arising from the comments of others:



I'm not so sure. For example. This board is very Fairport centric but how often do the Fairporters actually get nominated even from the floor? Yes, I know Simon won last year, and for good reason but they clearly don't get the nod by default and that means to me that we are clearly not just falling back on old favourites.



Not necessarily. I am one of those who nominated the Oysters this year in a very specific category (not across the board) because I thought their achievements in their anniversary year, alongside some of the strongest live shows of their career, deserved recognition. Like many of the acts that we discuss here, we may regard the Oysters as perennials but they are largely unknown in the wider world and people mostly look mystified when I talk about them. Even here I wonder whether familiarity actually breeds contempt? The Oysters are familiar to us but have they ever actually won an award? The same applies to other acts. It seems churlish to complain about the inclusion of our favourite artists if we do not actually ever recognise them.

Incidentally, is there a Roll of Honour anywhere so we can see who has won the awards in the past?

Dear me, what have I started - it was only a thought!



That, I would love to see.

OK, only a newbie, but am following these awards with interest, and have voted.......but only voted in the categories where I have either seen the bands nominated, or know their music.  The others I am keeping away from!  Having said that, why today can I see the percentage of votes for each nominee in each category, whereas I couldn't before?  Seems daft to me to show them now? Anyone explain that to me please?



Edit:  ::)

 ??? Errmm?  Why the rolley eyes??

I think that was Nick. I suspect that you could see the results because of an incorrect 'permission'.

 :) Thanks Colin!!!!  Can't see them this morning!

Nick's not about, so I'll dive in and do a voting roundup.   ;D (Look in the polls)

On the subject of how the Hancocks can move on, may I make a further suggestion?

That in order to vote you have to be a member of Talkawhile and have made at least 10 posts in valid threads, and that the posts in the Hancocks category votes do not count towards you post count.

I have just realised that by posting just posting in every category available saying no more than the name of the nominee you support, plus say one more post in here, makes you eligible to vote, even though you may never have taken any interest in TAW before or may not after.

Don't get me wrong. I welcome new members and if the Hancocks attracts them then all to the good, but I think the votes need to come from members of the forum who have taken an active part in it.

I fully agree with that Sandra...  it will be much fairer.

As I said above, I have only voted in categories where I have either seen the bands, or know their music. I'm not in a position to know any of the people nominated personally, so can only go on what I see/hear.

With regard to the voting, would it not be possible to do the exact same thing as is done with the newbies thread. Once a certain number of posts have been made, it just isn't available for me to see any more.  So why not just hide this from anyone who doesn't qualify to vote?

For the first time, I haven't voted at all: I'm just not qualified to. Haven't been to a folk gig for ages, or bought a new bit of music. I really should  :(

The votes are now closed and the results have been announced!

I shall tidy up these boards as time permits and then we can work on the presentations.

Congratulations to each of the winners!  [;-)    {:-)

Here's quick reference round up:

Musician:  Phil Beer
Live Act:  Demon Barber Roadshow
Horizon:  Leslie and Miller
Trad Song:  Eppie Moray by Fotheringay
Original Song: Cottager's Reply sung by Chris Wood
Good Egg:  Maddy Prior
Ensemble:  Bellowhead
Album:  Trespasser by Chris Wood


Thank you to Nick, Bob B and Sandra -  and everyone who nominated, discussed the merits (and otherwise) of the long and short-listed artists, and who voted.  

Here's the list of BBC winners

FOLK SINGER OF THE YEAR - Chris Wood
BEST DUO - Chris While & Julie Matthews
BEST GROUP - Lau
ALBUM OF THE YEAR - Trespasser – Chris Wood
BEST ORIGINAL SONG - All You Pretty Girls – Andy Partridge (performed by Jim Moray)
BEST TRADITIONAL TRACK - The Lark in the Morning – Jackie Oates
HORIZON AWARD - Jackie Oates
MUSICIAN OF THE YEAR - Tom McConville
BEST LIVE ACT - The Demon Barbers
LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT AWARD - James Taylor
LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT AWARD - Judy Collins
FOLK CLUB OF THE YEAR - The Black Swan Folk Club, York


Not many duplications, which is good, in fact just one, and I think that the band in question deserve it :)

Good. That's a nice spread of awards then ;D ;D ;D

Just a thought:
Perhaps in future, it might help people get to know some of the nominations if there were links next to their names to their websites etc.
 :-\
I certainly haven't heard of many of the previous nominations.
[Yes, I have heard of Google ::)]

Good idea Kermit. I know that in some of the threads there were links given but only for some of the acts (maybe lots but I wasn't paying attention all the time :o)

More work for the mods (sorry-honest  :'() but maybe it worth asking the nominees once you decide the acts being taken forward for a link.

Yes the logistics could be difficult, but only if you ask everyone. Every act is only sponsored by a few (seconded by many) so just ask the few.  8)





Now thinking about it we could open this up to vids as well. So we could vote for best live group on their vid.......

Or maybe not. says he seeing large nichola and smaller yabb bearing down  ;) :-*

I think this is a very good idea...

...with one caveat:

It takes a long time to put together the nominations and polls topics - and I reckon the time would double if the onus were on Colin and/or myself to find the various music or video clips for every artist. Then there is a risk that we will not pick the best footage for a given artist and thus inadvertently influence the ballot.(If someone didn't know two acts, might they be swayed towards the one with the professional looking youtube clip over the one filmed on a mobile phone?)

However, if it fell to the nominator to find the clip that best represented their nomination then they would be encouraged to find the best possible clip.

You have the problem that the BBC R2 nominations would not have clips. However if the rules changed slightly so that BBC candidates had to have a nomination from a Talkawhile member to stay in the poll, then that too would allow someone to gather an appropriate clip for the nomination.

This is thinking-out-loud at the moment and nothing is confirmed. I suggest that we hold the thought until the end of this year and discuss it more when setting up the polls for next year's Hancocks.

Cheers

Nick

I think the clips idea is excellent.  It'll make a big difference to the votes I'm sure.

Jules

I'm pretty sure I included some YouTube links in my nominaton for the Ukulele Orchestra of Great Britain for "Best Live Act" award. :D

They didn't move forward from there but hey - that's showbiz. ;)