WHEN HE IS GONE, American Folk Song

#amwriting #music

Some say this Appalachian folk song dates from the Civil War, and identify it as the lament of a girl for her beau that’s gone to war and her promise to remain faithful until he returns. The theme, however, seems to be Scottish, as it bears some distinct semblance to Lass of the Roch Royal (also known as Child #76), and I believe it may date from the late 18th century, as the phrase “10,000 miles” is meaningless in terms of the Civil War but does make sense for the British Empire.

You can listen to a brilliant version of it by West Jackson Middle School (Jefferson, GA) girls’ chorus here. Pay special attention to the first sopranos’ note on “kiss” – amazing! This is the way I learned it many, many moons ago.

WHEN HE IS GONE

He’s gone away
For to stay a little while,
But he’s coming back
If he goes 10,000 miles.

Oh who will tie my shoe,
And who will glove my hand?
And who will kiss
My ruby lips when he is gone?

(Refrain)  Look away,
Look away over yondro.

He’s gone away for to stay
A little while,
But he’s coming back
If he goes 10,000 miles.

And it’s papa will tie my shoe,
And it’s mama will glove my hand,
And none will kiss my ruby lips
When he is gone.

(Refrain)  Look away,
Look away over yondro.

I look away down the street
Where he has gone,
And I wonder how I will live
All thru the day, oh.

Will he ever come?
Oh will he ever come?
I always feel I’ll see him come
From far away.

(refrain)  Far away,
Far away, over yondro.

#Quote of the Week

#quotes #Resistance

You can’t wake a person who is pretending to sleep.

-Navajo Proverb

I don’t normally follow my Quote of the Week with a comment. I like people to be able to read the quotes I find important and see if it applies in any way to his or her own experiences. Let everyone interpret them according to their own vision.

I also don’t usually use this blog for statements on public affairs.

But today is different.

Today, I believe that too many of us are pretending to sleep. Pretending that what’s going on in our country has no far-reaching effects. Pretending that since this is America, we can’t possibly lose the rights we fought for in 1776, in 1863, in 1876, in 1965, and in 1973.

Pretending that since what’s being done is done in the name of patriotism and security, it’s all OK. Because we need to be patriotic, right? We need to be secure, right? And that’s what matters most of all… right?

And I find it heartbreakingly appropriate that this particular quote comes from Native Americans.

I’m not trying to make anyone change their minds; I know I can’t persuade anyone to believe something they don’t accept. But I am asking if you would just take a close, honest look at what’s happening right now. Here and all over the world.

See if you think the ends justify the means.

 

Getting back in the swing of things

#amwriting #sabbatical

So, it seems that I managed to take another 8-week sabbatical this holiday season. However, unlike last year, this one was not full of family, friends, and celebrations (although we spent a lovely day at my brother’s house on Christmas). At home, we had only one tree instead of our usual five, and only two of our wreaths made it out of their boxes. While I had managed to get the cookie jars and reindeer distributed, there wasn’t a single Santa, snowman, angel, polar bear or penguin to be seen.

No, at the beginning of December, I managed to wreck my knee. Not quite sure how, as the pain wasn’t there before I stood up. I don’t remember falling, or tripping – though I have to confess I trip so often it wouldn’t register in and of itself. I am definitely not a Tuesday child full of grace, and when they make a Sunday Child, grace is the one positive attribute they just happen to leave out.

At any rate, I’ve spent the last 8 weeks using a walker or wheelchair and in pretty extreme pain. Things are finally getting better, but it’s following that old “two steps forward, one step back” rule. And since painkillers tend to make me less than lucid, I’ve spent my time reading instead of writing or blogging.

But I’ve made some real progress in my reading: my grandmother left me about 600 mystery novels published from the 50s to 70s, and I’ve chewed my way through about half of them. Some are great, some are pretty pitiful, but all of the authors were popular when the books were printed. Many of them would have a very hard time finding an audience now.

Styles have changed so much through the past 30 years or so. Leisurely descriptions are no longer in vogue. Dialogue tags, however fanciful, are frowned upon. And adverbs – heaven help the author who puts an adverb in every paragraph.

No, right now the pros tell use that the use of language must be limited to nouns, verbs and a smattering of adjectives. Description cannot be flowerly, cannot exist for the mere sake of description. Every single word must add to characterization or move the plot along.

Last year, I read several modern books, most of which came highly recommended. One of them stood out from the pack: What Boys Are Made Of by S. Hunter Nisbet. Not because the writing was flowery, or there were leisurely descriptions, or because adverbs abounded. No, because the minimalist style was so beautifully suited to the story. It would be hard for me to imagine that book being so effective if it were written in any other style.

If What Boys Are Made Of had been a romance, I’d have been very disappointed in the style and flavor of it. Yet I’ve read romances that utilize that same style; they’ve left no lasting impression on me.

One of the hardest things for writers right now, I believe, is to decide WHICH style rules to follow, WHAT style best suits our story. With so many people – professional writers and editors, textbook creators, and bloggers like you and me – putting their advice out there for everyone to see, it’s simply not possible to write a book and follow all these rules.

So get out there and be daring! Tell your love story with flowery descriptions, your hero-quest with profligate adverbs, your historical with dauntingly clear details of the scenery. Give it a go!

You’ll never know how good it can be if you don’t try it.

Because the best thing about writing in this day and age is that if you don’t like what you come up with, it’s really easy to revise.

#Quote of the Week

Each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope, and crossing each other from a million different centers of energy and daring, those ripples build a current which can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance.

Robert F. Kennedy (1925-1968)

#Writing: THE RULES vs. STYLE CHOICES

#amwriting #grammar #style #rules

In the past few weeks, I’ve seen too many articles that propound “THE RULES of Writing”. An overabundance, if you will, most of which don’t make any distinction between THE RULES and STYLE CHOICES.

THE RULES are universal. For instance:

– a sentence must have a subject and a verb;
– the subject and verb must agree;
– participles should not dangle;
– a sentence may have only one viewpoint: it cannot start out in first person and end in third;
– Etc., etc., etc.

It’s possible for a good writer to break THE RULES occasionally, but s/he must realize what s/he is doing in order for it to be effective. The universal RULES of writing can be found in any reputable GRAMMAR guide; one I like is Purdue University’s Online Writing Lab (OWL).

Anything above and beyond the universal RULES is a STYLE CHOICE:

– No adverbs? Style choice;
– No compound sentences? Style choice;
– No words over three syllables? Style choice;
– No dialogue tags but “said” and “asked”? Style choice;
– Etc., etc., etc.

STYLE CHOICES are found in “Style Guides” and are not universal rules. I, for one, would be much more apt to appreciate their advice if the guides followed these so-called “rules” in their own publications. But, almost universally, they don’t. More scholarly types than I have proven that even the ubiquitous Elements of Style by Strunk & White has broken most of the “rules” it espouses. Go ahead, try to count the adverbs in any guide that propounds “no adverbs”. Count the passive verbs in a guide that propounds “no passive verbs”. It’s almost impossible to write fiction (or to write about fiction) and follow these strictures at all times.

(Of course, there are many who get around the “no adverbs” stricture by substituting an adverbial phrase — eliminating an adverb like “tremulously” in favor of a phrase like “in a tremulous voice”. To me, that’s worse, as it adds empty words to the story.)

Adding to the confusion is that, in the history of literature, STYLE CHOICES are transitory. No one writes like Chaucer any more; few write like Faulkner or Austen. The current trend toward starkness and simplicity will no doubt be as short-lived.

Now, I’m not saying that STYLE CHOICES are wrong. On the contrary, each writer should make these choices for him- or her-self. If you want to use smaller words and shorter paragraphs, you are perfectly free to do so. But that doesn’t put writers who use longer words or longer paragraphs in the wrong. Or longer words and shorter paragraphs. Or longer paragraphs… or whatever.

Touting your own STYLE CHOICES to the world at large as “rules” is akin to attempting to convert someone to your religion, and my best advice there is “Don’t do it!”

You and your writer friends will both be happier with the outcome.

 

P.S. Can you find which of the RULES stated above is broken rule in this article? How many times has it been broken?

Don’t Let History Repeat

The future is in our hands …

Laura Brown

As a Jewish person. As a disabled person. As a woman. I am scared. I grew up learning about my history—my past—the Holocaust. I thrived on the words: Never Again. I couldn’t fathom how someone like Hitler came into power, how so much hate could prevail.

I still can’t, and I’m watching it happen all over again. Parts of my family tree remain a question mark, and we can safely guess they died in concentration camps. Parts of my family, millions of my people, wiped out for nothing more than being part of our religion.

And now we are attacking different races. Religions. Sexuality. Genders. Disabilities. Now people are being told to go home, when the only ones who deserve to stay are the natives, and they are treated the worst out of all groups. Whites, you don’t own this land. You are immigrants, just like most of us. You…

View original post 344 more words

1998 – Paddy Clancy, Irish folk musician dies.

A great singer with a great song…

Stair na hÉireann/History of Ireland

Paddy Clancy, was an Irish folk singer best known as a member of the Clancy Brothers and Tommy Makem. In addition to singing and storytelling, Clancy played the harmonica with the group, which is widely credited with popularising Irish traditional music in the United States and revitalising it in Ireland. He also started and ran the folk music label Tradition Records, which recorded many of the key figures of the American folk music revival.

Clancy was one of eleven children and the eldest of four boys born to Johanna McGrath and Bob Clancy in Carrick-on-Suir, Co Tipperary.

Clancy died at home of lung cancer at the age of 76. He was buried, wearing his trademark white cap, in the tiny village of Faugheen, near Carrick-on-Suir.

Ar dheis Dé go raibh a anam dilis.

‘The Wild Rover’

I’ve been a wild rover for many’s the year
I’ve spent all me money…

View original post 216 more words