The Dubliners... your opinion

Thomaston · Post by **Thomaston** » Tue Oct 23, 2007 10:10 pm

So, I was at session tonight, when one of the guys spoke dismissively of The Dubliners. I'm not one to get offended by differing opinions, but the guy spoke of it as if it wasn't "real" Irish music. Granted, it's not "traditional" music like what we do at sessions (usually), but I think it's legitimate Irish folk music. His tone almost seemed to suggest they were nothing more than Posers.
What do you think? Agree? Disagree?
The very nature of the question made me unsure of the correct forum for this...
I can only guess what the reaction might have been had I mentioned my fondness for Flogging Molly.

alurker · Post by **alurker** » Tue Oct 23, 2007 11:46 pm

Let me be the first to disagree.

Words like 'influential' and 'ground-breaking' spring to mind. These guys were at the forefront of the 60's folk revival and brought Irish folk and ITM to a new audience. Their music has stood the test of time for 45 years. They were (and are) excellent musicians: Luke Kelly, John Sheahan, Barney McKenna, Ronnie Drew to name a few ......Legendary musicians.

Whether you like their music or not, nobody can question the extent of their influence.

Innocent Bystander · Post by **Innocent Bystander** » Wed Oct 24, 2007 7:35 am

I hear this kind of thing too. Partly it's because they have popular appeal and so are not "select" enough. (Too influential.) Partly because they've been around so long that people regard them as the "establishment". (Too influential!)

Some folk will never be happy with popularisers.

SteveB · Post by **SteveB** » Wed Oct 24, 2007 8:57 am

Bands like the Dubliners clearly cannot be classed as traditional because:

1)a good portion of their repetoire is of non-irish origin or of known authorship,
2)the songs that are traditional often only date from around the mid 19th century, and
3)The instrumentation (e.g. guitars) and arrangements are heavily influenced by the American 60’s folk revival.

But wait a minute…. how does this differ from 90% of what one hears played by instrumental ITM groups or in sessions these days?

Perhaps the real distinguishing feature between the ballad and instrumental traditions is that songs tend to have a greater appeal amongst the general (non-musician) population. This causes some snobby “tune purists” to look down their noses at ballads, as well as spawning a lot of cheesy second-rate imitators of good legitimate balladeers such as the Dubliners.

djm · Post by **djm** » Wed Oct 24, 2007 9:05 am

The Dubliners picked up when the Irish learned that the Clancy Bros were getting famous in the US playing all this old stuff; riding their coattails, as it were. They played what was popular. They were rough and dirty and famous for their drunkeness. The Irish loved them.

I think it's an acquired taste. Some people even like the Pogues.

djm

mukade · Post by **mukade** » Wed Oct 24, 2007 9:10 am

I think their choice of singers after Luke Kelly and Ronny Drew has been awful.

Paddy Reilly and Patsy Watchorn et al are too Foster and Allen.
They kick the life out of songs that Luke Kelly breathed so much into.

Then again, who could replace Luke Kelly?

Mukade

SteveB · Post by **SteveB** » Wed Oct 24, 2007 2:31 pm

They played what was popular. They were rough and dirty and famous for their drunkeness. The Irish loved them.

I think it's an acquired taste. Some people even like the Pogues.

Sadly, they are not widely considered a real Irish folk band as they made the mistake of becoming widely popular amongst real Irish folk.

A while back, I saw on YouTube excerpts from a documentary on the Dubliners which I think originally aired on Irish TV. It had interviews with a number of respected figures in Irish trad/folk music who praised the Dubliners and acknowledged their influence on Irish music. To each his own of course. One may not care for their style of music. But to cast them as "posers" or to lump them in with some later "celtic-rock" bands is not really fair IMHO.

regards,

SteveB

robbie · Post by **robbie** » Wed Oct 24, 2007 2:52 pm

folk music changes and evolves, thats the nature of it. thats why I think the term ITM is kinda funny, what is considered ITM now was considered new and not traditional a couple decades ago. why would you want to play the same songs over and over whithout ever doing anything original anyway? someone made up the songs in the first place. original music in the irish-folk vein is great. it preseves irish roots and brings it to a new generation. I love the dubliners, the pogues, and the tosesers and such like. (although I do despise celtic "world" music, but I think that has more to do with the crappyness and the bourgeoisness of it. and the meaninglessness of it)

alurker · Post by **alurker** » Wed Oct 24, 2007 5:44 pm

djm wrote:The Dubliners picked up when the Irish learned that the Clancy Bros were getting famous in the US playing all this old stuff; riding their coattails...

It is a travesty to suggest that the Clancys ever wore coattails or any garment other than the aran sweaters in which they were born.

But yeah I see where you are going: Luke Kelly singing 'Scorn Not His Simplicity'; Shane McGowan singing 'A Pair Of Brown Eyes'. Acquired tastes indeed. Not music for the pop fan.

SteveShaw · Post by **SteveShaw** » Wed Oct 24, 2007 6:11 pm

I love the Dubliners. But I tend to copy only the tracks that Luke sings on, except for two or three with Ronnie Drew. Luke was (is) my favourite Irish singer by a long chalk and I think the Dubs, on their day, were the best vehicle for his wonderful voice. Opinions, opinions!

Killain · Post by **Killain** » Wed Oct 24, 2007 6:56 pm

Well I got to say I love them dearly, they may not be traditional as some may have it, but I can't help but grin at most of there songs. Here in the states though I guess it can be complicated as to what people consider to be real Irish music. You turn on any folk band that sings a Irish tune and many people will feel it is as Irish as it gets. To others more involved in the music they consider it just a attempt to ride the coatail of a music style...

In the end we all see things diffrent, but my vote is they are Irish music and they are not half bad at all...

s1m0n · Post by **s1m0n** » Wed Oct 24, 2007 8:13 pm

Thomaston wrote:So, I was at session tonight, when one of the guys spoke dismissively of The Dubliners. I'm not one to get offended by differing opinions, but the guy spoke of it as if it wasn't "real" Irish music.

Any one of them could play him under the table, as traditional as you please.

dwinterfield · Post by **dwinterfield** » Thu Oct 25, 2007 6:07 am

As it happens I've been listening to the "Dubliners at Their Best" cd lately. It's wonderful stuff, all early I suspect. There are at least 5 or 6 instrumental that sound remarkably like traditional jigs and reels. Being in the US in the 60s, I only knew the Clancys and liked them well enough. A few years back, I heard someone say that the Clancys cleaned up their act, put on white sweaters and became tv stars in America - the Dubliners stayed in the pubs.

Thomaston · Post by **Thomaston** » Thu Oct 25, 2007 7:40 am

Thanks for the responses everyone. I'm glad to know I'm not in the minority on this one.

Daleth · Post by **Daleth** » Thu Oct 25, 2007 10:31 am

I like when people pretend they're the trad police. Personally, I look at it this way. In 100 years, people will probably still remember the Dubliners and their music will still be played. Will anybody remember that guy who thinks they're not traditional, or play music because he played it? Traditions aren't made by stodgy traditionalists who thinks tradition is something that doesn't ever change and shouldn't ever be allowed to.

Chiff and Fipple Forums

The Dubliners... your opinion

The Dubliners... your opinion

Re: The Dubliners... your opinion