American Folksong, Seeger and DiFranco: The
Danger of Invisibility in Mainstream Popular Culture
Caitlin Sutton*
Abstract
This paper
examines the relative obscurity of folksong in contemporary
mainstream American culture. I pursue several possible explanations
for this phenomenon, which include the following: influence
and attractiveness of popular music on youth, the dismissal
of folk music by scholars, the controversial nature of folksong
and briefly, the effects of censorship on the music market
economy. This discussion uses the medium of folk music to draw
important conclusions about culture. It must be understood
that many American music genres are interconnected and important;
however, most contemporary popular music lacks any historical
or political significance. Ani DiFranco and Pete Seeger are
critical to the folk tradition; they fight for the rights of
the working class and their contributions to activism (both
in their lyrics and in their lives) are unprecedented. I attempt
to demonstrate their importance to American culture and history.
I suggest that music listeners have opted for less critical,
pre-manufactured music instead of Seeger or DiFranco’s
music because history has made folksong unattractive to them.
Folk music needs to be rediscovered and appreciated; I argue
that an understanding of the complexities that race, sex and
class offer can be better understood through the lens of folk
music. Resources include song lyrics, previously published
scholarly articles, State University of New York at Albany
archival documents, a biography, sound recordings and books.
____________________________________________________
I pity Americans because they have no light,
no song in their lives. They are but children in everything pertaining
to art – Chaliapin, 1908 [1]
American folklore aims to capture
one’s cultural traditions, to collect cultural artifacts
from everyday “folks.” [2]
As with any culture, collections from many individuals should
combine to form an authentic and appropriate cultural history.
First Amendment Rights in the United States’ Constitution
make it an ideal country in which to garner this type of history;
however, the dissemination of folk music is seriously lacking
in the contemporary United States. Academic scholars and musicologists’ skepticism
of folk music revivals has contributed to its unpopularity. Over
the past four decades, folk musicians have increasingly questioned
the American government and American values. These two variables
have contributed to the eradication of folk music from contemporary
mainstream America. In contrast to the late nineteenth and early
twentieth centuries, folk music today has importantly become
less observational and more critical. Support for mainstream
music has left folk musicians unclear about who the “folk” (the
people) they sing for and write about really are.
Music can most profitably yield
clues to the past by being analyzed, not only for aesthetic qualities
and intrinsic worth, but also for its more complex and interesting
social role. [3] Contemporary
mainstream music has devoured all other music types. The inability
to find alternative music types is due to censorship in the media,
as well as the relative obscurity of other genres in the market
economy. Internet searches on such websites as billboard.com,
allmusic.com and top40-charts.com yield no results for folk-rock
musician Ani DiFranco. Folk musician Pete Seeger is almost as
difficult to locate. Not only did billboard.com not include Ani
DiFranco in the top two hundred for sales in 2004. After fifteen
years of performing and four million records sold, she is not
even an entry in the pop culture website. On allmusic.com, mindless
songs devoid of any lyrical significance like “California
Dreamin’” by the Mama’s and the Papa’s
remain on the top ten folk music list, even though it was written
over thirty years ago. In fact, “good music” used
to mean that the station in which the song was played was not
programmed according to a “Top 40” or best-selling
individual song basis. [4] “California
Dreamin’” does not fit the authentic folk category
in which it is represented. Controversial songs, authentic folk
songs that challenge politics and the status quo in general (“the
music of the people”) cannot be found on any of these websites.
By ignoring these musicians and their work, a serious disservice
is being done to the youth and future generations of Americans;
cultural histories are being ignored. Is there a legitimate reason
for this invisibility of the “other”?
Ani DiFranco and Pete Seeger are
critical, authentic activists who work through their music. Although
Seeger and DiFranco are not contemporaries of each other, each
singer’s career coincides ideologically with the other.
As the leader of a grass-roots music bulletin supporting workers’ rights,
Seeger believed that “music, too, is a weapon;” his
work had significant impact, two million went on strike in January
1946 and by the end of the year, 5 million. [5]
DiFranco also feels similarly for the homeless and the working-class
poor. Over the past couple of years, DiFranco has taken swift
action to save a local Buffalo, New York Church from demolition.
She has helped support the local economy by doing business locally
whenever possible. For her deeds, she has received many community
awards, including “Citizen of the Year.” [6]
Both artists attribute blame to the hierarchy of capitalism for
the disparities Americans face; Seeger helped to revise Leadbelly’s “New
York City,” which thereafter read “At the Rainbow
Room, the soup’s on to boil/They’re stirring the
salad with Standard Oil/It’s sixty stories high, they say,
a long way back to the U.S.A.” [7]
Ani claims “capitalism is the devil’s wet dream” [8]
and she warns “whoever’s in charge up there had better
take the elevator down and put more than change in our cup or
else we are coming up.” [9]
DiFranco and Seeger do not stand
alone; criticism of the United States via folk song has been
in existence at least since the Great Depression at the end of
the 1920s with such songs as “80 cent butter.” Some
of the lyrics read as follows: “now when you ask the cause
of it all, they’ll hand you a lie about 6 foot tall. They’ll
cry and scream and tear their hair about the high cost of being
a millionaire. [They’ll] take a full-page ad in the Daily
News to blame it on the Strikers, the Reds and the Jews.” [10]
Songs were also written in the 1940s in order to protest issues
important to Americans while World War II was being fought abroad;
some titles of note are “50 cent butter and 50 cent meat,” “Join
the Picket Line Today” and “Homeless Blues.” Folk
singer Pete Seeger became the executive secretary of The Bulletins
of People’s Songs, which organized to create, promote and
distribute songs of labor and of the American People. [11]
These songs addressed inflation rates, hunger and homelessness,
the formation of workers’ unions and working conditions.
Just as the folk singers of the early to mid 20th century addressed
issues that were important to the majority of middle-class Americans,
contemporary folksingers like Ani DiFranco discuss problems like
male and female equality and equity, gay rights, AIDS, homelessness,
domestic violence, the growing income gap along racist, sexist
and classist lines, the growing intersectionality of church and
state, rape and incest, reproductive rights, housing segregation,
and police brutality. [12]
Although both Pete Seeger and Ani DiFranco’s material is
controversial in nature, it fulfills the guidelines set into
place by the forefathers of American folk music. Alan Lomax echoed, “A
piece of folklore is a living, changing thing.” [13]
The 30s revivalists saw folk music as vital parts of living social
systems; folk forms could fulfill the needs of people. Folk functionalists
like the Seegers, Lomaxes, and Botkin embraced the whole world
around them when they performed or wrote folklore; they desired
folk culture to be recognized as a distinctively American form
of culture after struggling to create art that was fashioned
out of European constructs (specifically British ballads).
A side effect of these beliefs led
folk culture to exist as an “alternate source of strength
in a time of crisis in America – as a counterculture.” [14]
In the 1960s, scholars defined counterculture as a “new
reaction to technical expertise and the embourgeoisment of growing
segments of the American people.” [15]
I believe it is unfortunate that this counterculture exists because
the information is not available to all; instead, most information
is available to some. One scholar believes that the “counterculture” is
derived from intellectual and literary trends from books like
Mark Twain’s Huckleberry Finn. [16]
Historically, the counterculture has been scorned by scholars;
another scholar saw Mark Twain’s book as “inadequate” to
be cited on folklore in American literature because it offers
no supporting evidence. Furthermore, he argues it is a “horrible
example” of American folklore. [17]
His disdain certainly arises from the criticism that Twain offers,
which is disguised in the story of a boy’s adventure along
the Mississippi River. Just like the relative obscurity of Ani
DiFranco’s lyrics, [18]
Mark Twain had to hide his folklore in the guise of a story for
children to read. When the children’s book did reach public
attention in the adult’s eye, it was scorned by contemporary
authors like Louisa May Alcott and Life magazine editors as “trash.” [19]
Ernest Hemingway later laid great claim to Huckleberry Finn as
an “American classic.” If Mark Twain’s story
is any indication, it certainly seems that in order for critical
folk music to survive its contemporaries is for it to exist in
the “counterculture.” Are dissenting views forever
relegated to the status of the “counterculture?” On
the other hand, are messages compromised once they reach the
surface in mainstream?
Mass culture has had a devastating
effect on the arts. Like folk music, it has guidelines that force
it to exist in a particular fashion. According to Ortega y Gasset
(1957: 18):
The mass crushes beneath it
everything that is different, everything that is excellent,
individual, qualified and select. Anybody who is not like
everybody, who does not think like everybody, runs the risk
of being eliminated. And it is clear that…nowadays, “everybody” is
the mass alone. [20]
On a grand scale, music in this
cultural context came to be known as a lower order of art called
kitsch. Kitsch can be defined as products manufactured “solely
for the mass market.” [21]
One of the premier targets of kitsch opponents has been popular
music. [22] Popular
music is instantly accessible to anyone who is culturally inclined
to take part, even the musical novice. Successful pop music,
which is often measured in terms of its commercial success, is
usually performed by charismatic performers who look attractive,
are fashionable and can dance well. [23]
In a related vein, mass art has been identified as having five
critical properties. One is that it is profitable when it has
a high sales volume, the second is the mass art can rarely control
or define its problems. The third definition involves the economics
of the mass market as it determines the content or art and its
form. The fourth part is that it has to capitalize on some “meaningful” aspect
that affects the audience (of course according to the audience).
The final part of the definition includes having an audience
large enough to justify a competitive return on an investment.
The part of this definition that capitalizes on a “meaningful” aspect
in the perspective of the audience has much to do with “youth
market” research with samples of adolescent and young people
to determine attitudes and preferences. The intersections of
capitalism and mass art have portrayed the United States as devoid
of culture, of true folklore. Sex, pornography and commercialism
are what drive the youth market today. Protest, feminism and
activism are not selling points for popular culture in the twenty-first
century. How can we rectify this unfortunate situation and bring
folk music to the forefront?
Historians have responded to protest
music/activism (essentially counterculture materials) with scorn.
The Journal of American Folklore has displayed troubling representations
of American folklore. In 1959, author Richard Dobson typified
seven categories of folklorists: comparative folklorists, cultural
anthropologists, folksong and folk music specialists, special
pleaders, regional collectors, literary historians and populizers.
Dobson sees special pleaders and the literary historians as troubling
categories. Special pleaders refer to those who practice folklore
in opposition to American values, in the name of those involved
with the class struggle (Frazer, Freud and Marx). Pete Seeger
and his involvement with the Communist Party during the McCarthy
era would certainly fall under this category. Dobson leaves no
room for acceptance of this group; he advises the student of
American folk materials to not dally along the “garden
path of the special pleaders even if they appear seductive- which
they don’t.” [24]
Clearly, this author ignores the existence of the early forms
of protest music during both World Wars. He compares special
pleaders to the serpentine evil in the Story of Adam and Eve.
This comparison is a valuable admission; folklore is a powerful
information source and this truth can have serious repercussions.
It is important to uncover the reasons why folk song is not prevalent
today. Have scholars made the possibility of becoming a folk
enthusiast too discouraging or have Americans missed their criticism,
the lyrical content of songs and the point altogether because
of other factors?
Norman Studer (director of a New
York State Folklore Camp from 1940-1961) supported Seeger’s
approach to American Folklore. Since Camp Woodland’s inception
in 1940, Seeger and Studer believed that in order to educate
someone about the realities of the world, one would have to cultivate
one’s feelings to run along with the development of the
mind. An example he provides for this cultivation is those who
have seen the spectacle of millions who know in their minds the
consequences of the nuclear bomb, but in their feelings, they
cannot comprehend the horrible example of Hiroshima and the devastation
it caused. [25] Studer
and Seeger held a high esteem for political activism and he believed
that if speaking out was “un-American” then the world
should be considered “upside-down.” It is in this
same vein that Studer defended Pete Seeger when he was called
to the House Un-American Activities Committee for his involvement
with the Communist Party in the United States, as well as his
activism in the labor movement. Studer and Seeger redefine patriotism;
a patriot is someone who criticizes in order to improve rather
than ignore issues and let them fester. Studer and Seeger were
also concerned with the development with the adolescent mind
at Camp Woodland; they hoped to influence youth so that the content
in the “youth market” might change; the educators
wanted to teach youngsters to value important issues rather than
support the pre-manufactured music of the mainstream today.
Pete Seeger and his father Charles
embarked on a historic journey for Pete’s career when they
traveled to Asheville, North Carolina, where they could attend
an annual Folk Song and Dance festival (Bascom Lamar Lunsford’s).
Pete “discovered there was some good music in my
country which I never heard on the radio…The words of
life had all the meat of life to them. Their humor had a bite,
it was not trivial…In comparison, most of the pop music
of the thirties seemed to me weak and soft, with its endless
variations on ‘Baby, baby I need you.’” [26]
Seeger is not the only one to credit his interest in folk to
the disillusionment of the romanticized rock lyrics of his time;
Ani DiFranco also mimics those who don’t thirst for quality
in life (“we start out sugared up on kool aid and manifest
destiny and we memorize all the president’s names like
little trained monkeys and then we’re spit into the world
so many spinny-eyed t.v. junkies”). [27]
There is an important distinction between the earlier stages
(forties and fifties) of rock and roll and the later stages (sixties
and seventies). Scholars have claimed that in comparison to folk
lyrics and protest music of the sixties, rock and roll lyrics
of the forties and fifties sounded unintelligent and lacked meaning. [28]
I believe that the rock music of
the sixties has importantly influenced folk music. I take issue
with the scholars of the 60s and 70s who have suggested that
rock music has taken over completely the role of folk music. [29]
The authors claim that rock and roll and folk are similar because
they both operate in the present and their art is only for the
moment. However, when DiFranco and Seeger talk about the downfalls
of capitalism and gender relations, they are clearly not creating
art for pure enjoyment. Their lyrics encourage involvement and
an understanding of the troubles that plague our nation over
great periods; history repeats itself. Moreover, unique elements
of rock and roll (electric guitar and back beat) has combined
with folk music in order to create a new genre of folk-rock.
The fusion of rock and folk has produced a tremendously powerful
result, the style of rock and roll is more attractive (especially
to a mainstream fan) than Pete Seeger’s days of playing
the banjo. Pete Seeger himself realized this phenomenon at the
1965 Newport Folk Festival when Bob Dylan played the electric
guitar and forever changed the way folk music was heard. [30]
Although Seeger was initially discouraged by this turn of events,
he realized that “every revival contains within itself
the seed not only of its own destruction… but also new
revivals.” [31]
This idea of “new revivals” is what connects Seeger
and DiFranco even though they are not contemporaries of one another.
Bob Dylan’s entrance into the music world from the folk
arena was important because it began to change the ways folk
listeners (and interested rock and roll fans) could identify
with the important issues he addressed in his music. As a transitory
figure, Dylan introduced thematic rock and roll concepts to folk
music, which Ani was able to glean from for her musical presentation.
Musically, Seeger and DiFranco are similar not because of their
style, but because of their content.
Ani DiFranco’s popularity
in the “counterculture” demonstrates how the folk/rock
phenomenon does not necessarily mean that content quality is
sacrificed. Similar to Alan Lomax’s belief that folk music
is “living and changing,” Ani has said, new arrangements
of songs are “examples of how [they] are living and changing
things; the same song, like the same person, is a very different
thing after 5 years. Or after 5 minutes it seems sometimes.” [32]
More importantly than her integrated history in folk music past,
DiFranco has improved and renovated folk traditions to include
women and issues related to women. The voices of women have been
neglected until recently; this disappointing phenomenon is supported
by the example of Hannah Studer. As Norman Studer’s wife,
Hannah can be credited for documenting her husband’s life
and his work. Hannah Studer was not only instrumental in the
establishment of Camp Woodland but also very active in its operation,
serving as the Camp Registrar for its entire existence. Sadly,
absent from the Norman Studer collection is any substantive documentation
of folklore representing the female perspective. [33]
In the same way that Seeger has
identified with the voice of the people [34]
and upgraded from the music of the 30s, Ani DiFranco is also
a stylist, updating the music of the 60s. Although the Lomaxes’ 1934
book American Ballads and Folksongs claims, “a life of
isolation, without books or newspapers or telephone or radio,
breeds songs and ballads," [35]
DiFranco, Seeger and various protest song writers demonstrate
how this cannot be true. DiFranco’s unperformed poem “the
interview” reads, “how can one talk on the role of
politics in art when art is activism, and anyway both are just
a lifelong light shining through a swinging prism.” [36]
Race, gender, sex, sexual orientation(s), disability, discrimination,
age, creed, religion, national origin, economic status, etc.
present overwhelming complexities that ordinary, contemporary
United States’ citizens must face on an everyday basis.
In today’s age of censorship paired with the promise of
instant gratification, [37]
folk music’s survival depends on its ability to freely
address these problems and work towards solutions.
Today’s folk music and its
relative obscurity illustrates how there is no one kind of “folk”;
people can choose their favorite author if they are not dominated
by censorship. Like Seeger’s argument about Dylan’s
electric conversion, it could be argued that Ani’s hard-edge,
shrill, possibly angry sounding lyrics distract from the meaning
of her words. It could also be argued that these characteristics
are what hold Ani to the counterculture in which she thrives.
Folks who listen to Ani agree with her too much to listen to
mainstream; they feel Ani tells their story better than mass
media. DiFranco has founded her own record company to ensure
production of her labels. [38]
Even if she desired it, this artist will never be released into
mainstream music because the issues she addresses are too volatile
and controversial, they hit too close to home. So too, have Seeger’s
fans supported volatile issues he addressed in his lyrics. In
some ways, the issues Seeger raises in his music were more dangerous
because of the time in which he lived; McCarthyism, the Red Scare
and World War II were events that challenged Seeger’s autonomy
in a way Ani DiFranco’s had not been.
Both Seeger and DiFranco have elaborated
upon the intent behind their lyrics in other written forms. The
People’s Bulletin and Camp Woodland Papers have allowed
Seeger to expand upon his ideas of democracy and freedom. DiFranco
has commented about the positive response from her fans in her
own writing. In the cd booklet of So Much Shouting, So Much Laughter,
she writes, “it’s so affirming for me to realize
how many of us agree on certain things that are not represented
in the media.” In “tis of thee,” DiFranco attacks
the criminal justice system and the formation of white suburbia.
The lyrics read: “they caught the last poor man on a poor
man’s vacation/they cuffed him and they confiscated his
stuff/and they dragged his black ass back to the station and
said, ‘ok the streets are safe now./all your pretty white
children can come out to see spot run’/…and they
looked around but they didn’t see no one.” [39]
Ani DiFranco offers a respectful distant analysis of “the
other,” while chastising her own race for its lewd insensitivity.
Ani’s forceful lyrics are supported by her repetition of
related subjects in other songs of hers. In “subdivision,” Ani
claims, “white people are so scared of black people, they
bulldoze out to the country and put on houses on little loop-dee-loop
streets.” [40]
Since DiFranco has started producing albums in 1990, over fifteen
studio albums and four live albums have been released. [41]
This is not just another superficial trend in the music industry.
Her songs are essentially authentic documents of contemporary
American life.
Ani DiFranco’s devotion to
women’s issues is undeniable while Seeger fails to mention
gender issues at all. In “hello Birmingham”, she
draws a connection between the 1964 church bombing that killed
4 little girls and the attempted bombings of abortion clinics
in Buffalo. [42]
She compares these two events together and analyzes her apathy
associated with voting: “and I am feeling oh so powerless
in this stupid booth with this useless little lever in my hand
and outside my city is bracing for the next killing thing… praying
for the next Doctor Martin Luther King”. In another context
related to women, DiFranco contextualizes domestic violence in
the United States. She writes, “he says he loves her he
says he’s changing and he can keep her warm and so she
sits there like America suffering through slow reform.” [43]
In the end of the song, the speaker tries to tell the victimized
woman that there are “plenty of really great men out there” but
the woman does not hear because she’s fixing her hair for
(presumably) the man. This song uses this woman as part of an
analogy; in the same way the woman isn’t listening to the
speaker, the United States isn’t helping women fight against
abuse. Historically, this type of denial has placed blame upon
women but DiFranco instead finds our culture as the culprit and
supporter of domestic violence. In another song that speaks to
the deletion of women in history, Ani writes, “because
the music [2nd verse- marriage 3rd verse- revolution] business
is still run by men like every business and everything but we
can still sing like a sonofabitch make them twitch around their
eyes girl, make him apologize.” [44]
These words convey a sense of empowerment that have propelled
women into a new place, into recognition.
There are additional similarities
between Ani DiFranco and Peter Seeger that cement them as common
threads in the interwoven history of folk music. Both are college
dropouts; DiFranco took a few classes from the New School but
never graduated and Seeger dropped out of Harvard after his first
year. [45] Both have
made important contributions to introducing and representing “the
other” in a politically correct fashion while Lomax and
other “founders of folk” have failed to do so. [46]
Although Pete and Ani could be considered professionals, they
do not choose this label as revivalists of the 1930s have. Ani
describes an “invigorating synergy of gathering together
with a bunch of other human beings that propels me through my
live performances.” [47]
Similarly, Pete’s favorite part of performing was the sing-along
technique he embraced. [48]
Both musicians fail to let accusations of being “un-American” or “unpatriotic” cloud
their words. In fact, Pete Seeger was brought up on contempt
of Court charges when he appeared as an “unfriendly witness” in
front of HUAC because he claimed the 1st Amendment Rights instead
of 5th. [49]
Lastly, both DiFranco and Seeger contribute positively to local
communities; Ani dedicates her work to the city of Buffalo while
Seeger contributed greatly to the Catskill region.
It is a tragedy that 1960s scholars
could dismiss DiFranco and Seeger as temporary, insignificant
artists. I argue that history, specifically generations of Americans
before us have discouraged artists from bringing important and
inherently controversial issues to the forefront. This paper
attempts to examine what areas of politics and mass culture have
made this so. Are young Americans of the twenty-first century
products of the choices made by their parents and grandparents’ generations
to be patriotic and unquestioning of our government and values
or has the mass media successfully manipulated them into purchasing
a pre-manufactured and pre-selected tastes? Have scholars successfully
squashed the folk “rebellion” that originated in
the 1930s and thrived with the addition of latter rock and roll
themes of the 60s? In order to understand the ways in which young
people today dislike trends in activism, one needs to begin answering
these questions. It seems reasonable to assume that the economic
control of the mass market will be unrelenting unless important
political and social issues once again become “attractive” to
young people of today. It is undeniable that songwriter/singers
like DiFranco and Seeger will continue to speak out today and
in the future. Folk artists seem to be especially geared for
this task. What can we do to make people start listening now?
Notes:
1. Alan
Levy and Barbara Tischler, “Into the Cultural Mainstream:
The Growth of American Music Scholarship,” American
Quarterly v. 42 (1 1990): 62. (Return)
2. Definition of “folk music,” Wikipedia:
The Free Encyclopedia On-line, 2005, <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folk_music> (accessed
March 4, 2005). (Return)
3.Levy and Tischler, 70. (Return)
4. Carl
I. Belz, “Popular Music and the Folk Tradition,” The
Journal of American Folklore v. 80 (316 Apr. –Jun. 1967):
132. (Return)
5. David Dunaway, How
Can I Keep From Singing? (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1981),
118. (Return)
6. Jeffrey Pepper Rodgers. “Ani
DiFranco Saves Hometown Church from Demolition,” Audio
Recording, NPR- "All Things Considered," 9 January 2004, <http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1591626.l> (accessed
March 25, 2005). (Return)
7. Dunaway, 100. (Return)
8. Ani DiFranco, “Serpentine,” Compact
Disc, Evolve (Righteous Babe Records, 2004). (Return)
9. Ani DiFranco, “Coming Up,” Compact
Disc, Imperfectly (Righteous Babe Records, 1992). (Return)
10. Bob Miller and Emma Dermer, People’s
Songs, Inc. Supplement to No. 3, Norman Studer Papers, Albany
State Archives, 1929, Box 34, Folder 13 (accessed March 7, 2005). (Return)
11. Almanacs, Paul Kent, C. Anthony
and J. Trenbke, People’s Songs, Inc. v. 1 (2 1946), Norman
Studer Papers, Albany State Archives, Box 34, Folder 13 (accessed
March 7, 2005). (Return)
12. Danah Boyd, “Ani DiFranco
Lyrics,' Righteous Babe,'" < http://www.danah.org/Ani/> (accessed
March 4, 2005). (Return)
13. John Lomax and Alan Lomax, eds.,
Our Singing Country: A Second Volume of
American Ballads and Folk Songs (Macmillan, 1941), xi. (Return)
14. Benjamin Filene, “O Brother,
What Next? Making Sense of the Folk Fad,” Southern
Cultures v. 10 (2 2004): 55. (Return)
15. Jens Lund and R. Serge Denisoff, “The
Folk Music Revival and the Counter Culture: Contributions and
Contradictions,” The Journal of American
Folklore v. 84
(334 Oct. – Dec. 1971): 394. (Return)
16. Lund and Denisoff, 395. (Return)
17. Richard M. Dorson, “A Theory
for American Folklore,” Journal of
American Folklore (1959):
200, Norman Studer Papers, Albany State Archives, Box 31, Folder
15 (accessed March 7, 2005). (Return)
18. Ani DiFranco, reference to the
non-proliferation of her music, “[I want the FCC] to ban
one of my songs, I guess you have to start playing them before
you can stop playing them,” Track nine, Disc 1, So
Much Shouting, So Much Laughter (Righteous
Babe Records: 2002). (compact disc) (Return)
19. “Introduction to Huckleberry
Finn,” Cliff Notes On-line, 2005, <http://www.cliffsnotes.com/WileyCDA/LitNote/id-20,pageNum-6.html > (accessed
March 10, 2005). (Return)
20. Serge R. Denisoff and Mark H.
Levine, “Youth and Popular Music: A Test of the Taste Culture
Hypothesis,” Youth & Society v. 4 (2 1972): 238. (Return)
21. Denisoff and Levine, 238. (Return)
22.Denisoff, R. Serge, “Massification
and Popular Music: A Review,” Journal
of Popular Culture,
v. 9(4 1976): 887. (Return)
23.
Definition of “pop music,” Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia
On-line, 2005,
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folk_music> (accessed
April 26, 2005). (Return)
24. Richard M. Dorson, “A
Theory for American Folklore,” Journal
of American Folklore (1959): 200, Norman Studer Papers, Albany State Archives, Box
31, Folder 15 (accessed March 7, 2005). (Return
25. David Dunaway, “Interview
with Norman Studer” (Tape 1 Paper Version: 16 April 1976):
2, Norman Studer Papers, Albany State Archives, Box 1, Folder
9 (accessed March 7, 2005). (Return)
26. Benjamin Filene, Romancing
the Folk: Public Memory & American Roots Music (North Carolina:
University Press, 2000): 180. (Return)
27. Ani DiFranco, “Serpentine,” Evolve (Righteous
Babe Records, 2004) (compact disc), (Return)
28. Carl I. Belz, “Popular
Music and the Folk Tradition,” The
Journal of American Folklore, v. 80 (316 Apr. –Jun., 1967): 134. (Return)
29. Ronald D. Cohen, “The
Delinquents: Censorship and Youth Culture in Recent U.S. History,” History
of Education Quarterly, v. 37 (3 Fall 1997): 255. (Return)
30. Filene (2000), Chapter
5. (Return)
31. Lund and Denisoff, 399. (Return)
32. Ani DiFranco, So
Much Shouting, So Much Laughing (Righteous Babe Records,
2002) (compact disc), (Return)
33. Peter Runge, “Finding
Aid for the Norman Studer Papers,” Archives
of Public Affairs and Policy, 1817, 1920-1988 (APAP-116 April 2003) (accessed
March 25, 2005). (Return)
34. R. Serge Denisoff, “Protest
Songs: Those on the Top Forty and Those of the Streets,” American
Quarterly v. 22 (4 Winter 1970): 807. (Return)
35. Filene (2004), 62. (Return)
36. Ani DiFranco,
Evolve (Righteous Babe Records, 2004) (compact disc) (Return)
37. Ronald D. Cohen, “The
Delinquents: Censorship and Youth Culture in Recent U.S. History,” History
of Education Quarterly, v. 37 (3 Fall 1997): 258. (Return)
38. Danah Boyd, “Ani DiFranco
Lyrics,” Righteous Babe, <http://www.danah.org/Ani/ > (accessed
March 4, 2005). (Return)
39. Ani DiFranco, “Tis’ of
thee”, Up, Up, Up, Up, Up, Up (Righteous
Babe Records, 1999) (compact disc), (Return)
40. Ani DiFranco, “Subdivision”,
Reckoning (Righteous Babe Records, 2001) (compact disc) (Return)
41. Danah Boyd, “Ani DiFranco
Lyrics,” Righteous Babe, < http://www.danah.org/Ani/> (accessed
March 4, 2005). (Return)
42. Danah Boyd, “Hello Birmingham,”Ani
DiFranco Lyrics, 1999 < http://www.danah.org/Ani/> (accessed
March 4, 2005). (Return)
43.Danah Boyd, “Fixing her
hair,” Ani DiFranco Lyrics, 1992 <http://www.danah.org/Ani/> (accessed
March 4, 2005). (Return)
44. Danah
Boyd, “Make them apologize,” Ani DiFranco Lyrics,
1992 < http://www.danah.org/Ani/ > (accessed
March 4, 2005). (Return)
45. Filene (2000), Chapter 5. (Return)
46. Filene (2000): Chapter 5. (Return)
47. Ani DiFranco,
So Much Shouting, So Much Laughing, (Return)
48. Filene (2000,: Chapter 5. (Return)
49. Filene (2000), Chapter 5. (Return)
Bibliography
Belz, Carl I. “Popular Music
and the Folk Tradition.” The Journal
of American Folklore v. 80 (316 Apr. - Jun., 1967): 130-142.
Boyd, Danah. “Ani DiFranco
Lyrics,” Righteous Babe, < http://www.danah.org/Ani/ > (accessed
March 4, 2005).
Bromberg, Minna and Fine, Gary Alan. “Resurrecting
the Red: Pete Seeger and the Purification of Difficult Reputations.” Social
Forces v. 80 (4 2002): 1135-1155.
Cliff Notes. “Introduction
to Huckleberry Finn.” Cliff Notes On-line. 2005. <http://www.cliffsnotes.com/WileyCDA/LitNote/id-20,pageNum-6.html > (accessed
March 10, 2005).
Cohen, Ronald D. “The Delinquents:
Censorship and Youth Culture in Recent U.S. History.” History
of Education Quarterly v. 37 (3 Fall 1997): 251-270.
Denisoff, R. Serge and Levine, Mark
H. “Youth and Popular Music: A Test of the Taste Culture
Hypothesis.” Youth & Society v. 4 (2 1972): 237-255.
Denisoff, R. Serge. “Massification
and Popular Music: A Review.” Journal
of Popular Culture v. 9 (4 1976): 886-894.
Denisoff, R. Serge. “Protest
Songs: Those on the Top Forty and Those of the Streets.” American
Quarterly v. 22 (4 Winter, 1970): 807-823.
DiFranco, Ani. Evolve.
(Righteous Babe Records, 2004) (compact disc).
DiFranco, Ani. Imperfectly.
(Righteous Babe Records, 1992) (compact disc).
DiFranco, Ani. Reckoning.
(Righteous Babe Records, 2001) (compact disc).
DiFranco, Ani. So
Much Shouting, So Much Laughter. (Righteous
Babe Records, 2002) (compact disc).
DiFranco, Ani. To
The Teeth. (Righteous Babe Records, 1999) (compact disc).
DiFranco, Ani. Up,
Up, Up, Up, Up, Up. (Righteous Babe Records,
1999) (compact disc).
Dunaway, David K. How
Can I Keep From Singing? New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company,
1964.
Filene, Benjamin. “O Brother,
What Next? Making Sense of the Folk Fad.” Southern
Cultures v. 10 (2 2004): 50-69.
Filene, Benjamin. Public
Memory & American
Roots Music. The University of North Carolina Press, 2000.
Levy, Alan and Tischler, Barbara
L. “Into the Cultural Mainstream: The Growth of American
Music Scholarship.” American Quarterly v. 42 (1 1990):
57-73.
Lomax, John and Alan, eds., Our
Singing Country: A Second Volume of American Ballads and Folk
Songs. New York: Macmillan, 1941.
Lund, Jens and Denisoff, R. Serge. “The
Folk Music Revival and the Counter Culture: Contributions and
Contradictions.” The Journal of American
Folklore v. 84
(334 Oct. – Dec. 1971): 394-405.
National Public Radio (NPR). 2005. <www.npr.org> (accessed
March 25, 2005).
Norman Studer Papers. State University
at Albany Archives. Boxes 1, 31, 34, and Finding Aid.
Wikipedia, The On-line Encyclopedia.
2005. < en.wikipedia.org> (accessed
March 4, 2005).
________________________________________
* Caitlin
Sutton holds a double major in Women's Studies and
Psychology. She expects to graduate in December of
2005. She was enrolled in Professor Vivien Ng's class, "History
of Women and Social Change," in the Spring of 2005. She has an
interest in politics on all levels, particularly women's issues,
law, gender and sexuality. She is considering attending law school
after graduation. (Return)
Back to Top