![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Who Really Killed Cock Robin - Normal Iles - review
This book really annoyed me. Like the writer, I believe that many nursery rhymes have older origins, but Iles goes way too far into conjecture. His 'research' never goes back to original sources; his reconstructions are mostly conjecture and his only real aim appears to make a book that will sell well.
Knowing the habits of modern day filkers, and having rewritten many songs myself, I know that songs can be altered dramatically with no intent to suppress the original version. I also know that songs that start clean can acquire extra verses that are decidedly unclean.
As Iles's entire approach is based on the premise that the songs were all originally sexual/pagan in content and that this was edited out and changed by clergy or song collectors, I have to disagree with most of his book.
I could easily believe that many traditional songs started clean, acquired extra smutty verses that were sung in the apropriate places and that these verses (sadly) were often not passed onto collectors. This does not, however, invalidate the collected song.
(Iles's approach is a bit like assuming that "While shepherds washed their socks by night" must be the original version because the church would clearly want to suppress it.)
The whole book is even more frustrating because now and then he makes a case that does stand up to inspection. It's just that you have to wade through too much supposition and conjecture to get to the useful bits.
Rarely do I shout out loud in protest while reading a book - this one had my family getting inundated by irate comments.
I had to go away and read some Ronald Hutton to remind myself what research into folk traditions really means.
If anyone wants this book, just ask (but you'll have to remove Hutton from my cold, dead hands)...
Knowing the habits of modern day filkers, and having rewritten many songs myself, I know that songs can be altered dramatically with no intent to suppress the original version. I also know that songs that start clean can acquire extra verses that are decidedly unclean.
As Iles's entire approach is based on the premise that the songs were all originally sexual/pagan in content and that this was edited out and changed by clergy or song collectors, I have to disagree with most of his book.
I could easily believe that many traditional songs started clean, acquired extra smutty verses that were sung in the apropriate places and that these verses (sadly) were often not passed onto collectors. This does not, however, invalidate the collected song.
(Iles's approach is a bit like assuming that "While shepherds washed their socks by night" must be the original version because the church would clearly want to suppress it.)
The whole book is even more frustrating because now and then he makes a case that does stand up to inspection. It's just that you have to wade through too much supposition and conjecture to get to the useful bits.
Rarely do I shout out loud in protest while reading a book - this one had my family getting inundated by irate comments.
I had to go away and read some Ronald Hutton to remind myself what research into folk traditions really means.
If anyone wants this book, just ask (but you'll have to remove Hutton from my cold, dead hands)...
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
If you tell me where to mail the 'throw it at the wall' book, then I will mail it to you and you can throw it at your wall...
no subject
no subject
And yea to Prof Hutton. Heard him at a conference this Sunday past - funnily enough on a Real Pagan Poet, Doreen Valiente. Prof. R.H., as usual, added to my knowledge and appreciation.
no subject
10 Hill St, Chapel of Ease, Abercarn, Caerphilly, NP11 5JL. I'm more likely to throw it at a charity shop if it infuriates me. I'm a librarian by nature as well as profession doing any thing to a book that might damage it gives me the screaming hebies.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
I did see him briefly (though not to speak to) at the Battle of Tewkesbury re-enactment last year: he was one of the commentators. I didn't try to approach him there as I was sure that he would not know me, at least not by sight; we didn't get more that a few seconds to speak at the convention and I didn't even get the chance to attend his lecture. But that's the way it goes for organisers at conventions. :-(
no subject
Why, in the evening, do stars brightly shine?
Why does the ivy around the oak twine?
Then you must tell me why is the sky blue,
And finally tell me, why do I love you?
Well it's nuclear fusion that makes the stars shine,
The process of tropism makes ivy twine,
Upper atmosphere Rayleigh fluctuation scattering makes the sky appear blue...
And hormone injections will make me love you!
no subject
Conventions
(Anonymous) 2009-09-18 08:32 am (UTC)(link)I know exactly what you mean about convention organising - you sit with the programme book a week after and think "Ah -we did *that*. Yep, sounds great. wish I could have got to it... " :-)...
no subject
no subject
no subject
Pencil him in for 2012... ;-)
Re: Conventions
Um, sorry to be picky, I'd quite like to know who you are.
Re: Conventions