Spanish sea shanties?
Simon Furey
Hi folks
I need some help with some research I am doing into folk song from the
Iberian peninsula. In spite of the great maritime empires and history of
the Spanish and Portuguese, I cannot find any evidence of any of their
sea shanties.
According to Stan Hugill in "Songs of the Sea", the shanty was born in
the middle of the 19th century, when Britannia ruled the waves. I guess
this was a natural consequence of the Battle of Trafalgar. So one might
expect English shanties to predominate. Yet the ships of Spain and
Portugal wouldn't have just disappeared. Hugill cites French and Italian
shanties, so why not Spanish or Portuguese?
The only songs I have found are the habaneras: the close-harmony songs
brought back from Cuba, still sung by the fishermen at beach barbecues
in Catalonia. There ought to be more than that.
Clues, anyone, please?
Simon
KC King
Simon Furey <Sim...@macatala.demon.co.uk> wrote in article
<345A1F...@macatala.demon.co.uk>...
> Hugill cites French and Italian shanties, so why not Spanish or
Portuguese?
I think this is consistent with Hugill's views and seems to make sense.
The mid 19th century is the golden age of shantying due to a number of
factors stemming from the emergence of steam. Steam-powered or assisted
ships require smaller crews hence better coordination. Sail is inherently
less reliable (schedule-wise) and perceived to be slower and more labor
intensive. In its bid to compete with steam sail builds larger and faster
vessels again manned by smaller crews. More and larger tackle to work more
aggressively again drives the need for the men on any heavy line to be more
efficient and coordinated. It gets to the point where with out the fine
tuned coordination that can ONLY be produced to a rhythmic mechanism, the
ship literally can't be worked. Since all hands are given to the task, the
voice is the only rhythmic mechanism that can be brought to bear - one
verse for tossing a bunt, 2-5 minutes for a halyard and hours on end at the
pumps.
Ships that can only be worked with intricate shantys (different rhythms for
different tasks) are at or near the pinnacle of the blue water goods
hauling. I don't think that Spain of Portugal every were in that trade.
Sail-borne fishery never had a shanty tradition although land-based net
hauling can be found the world round (Japan, etc). My sense is that you
don't find shantying on the smaller vessels of the 18th and early centuries
as well as the small coasters of the 19th century which would have been
where most Spanish and Portuguese trade probably fell.
Anyone have a different view? KC King
Abby Sale
On 1 Nov 1997 00:06:15 GMT, "KC King" <k.c....@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>Simon Furey <Sim...@macatala.demon.co.uk> wrote in article
><345A1F...@macatala.demon.co.uk>...
>> Hugill cites French and Italian shanties, so why not Spanish or
>Portuguese?
>
>hauling can be found the world round (Japan, etc). My sense is that you
There are several fishing shanties & songs of Bimini on _Ethnic Music: LA,
Bahamas, Southwest (Lomax), Lib. of Congress AFS L5, 1934-40
I also seem to recall a Florida net-hauling song called "Johnson Girls"
which was sung by a really off-the-wall obscure group called the Boarding
Party.
There's also a hint of Spanish involvement in Prof. Hugh Williamson's
extensive Sea Chanty FAQ.
I'll post the section since the question of what instruments were on board
is a FAQ in itself.
24. What instruments did the sailors play?
from early photographs and narratives, we know that the a variety of
instruments, usually cheap, found their way to sea. The most commonly seen
were:
Fiddle-often made from a cigar box
Banjo- usually on American ships
Guitar-came along with Spanish crews
Mandolin- played by Italian sailors
Penny whistle
Melodeon- the Button Accordeon-beloved of the French and German sailors.
Concertinas- usually on British ships.
Hurdy Gurdy (vielle in French)- common among French sailors
Harmonica
Spoons
Kazoo
Drum
Bones (knick knacks)
[I'm pleased to see this post from the knowledgable KC I hope to hear more
of his fine shantey before we expire too.]
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ---
I am Abby Sale - abby...@orlinter.com (That's in Orlando)
Greg Bullough
In article <34616181...@snews2.zippo.com> abby...@orlinter.com (Abby Sale) writes:
>
>I also seem to recall a Florida net-hauling song called "Johnson Girls"
>which was sung by a really off-the-wall obscure group called the Boarding
>Party.
'Johnson Girls' is sourced from the Menhaden Chanteymen of Beaufort
North Carolina.
Authentically done, there is a pause for net hauling at the end of each
line (with appropriate jabber): no work takes place during the
singing itself!
When it passed from the MH to 'performers' it rather quickly got
folk-processed in a number of ways. Even though the Menhaden Chanteymen
have recorded it and still tour, some of the versions heard around the
circuit are very, very, different than the original.
It has received very rough treatment from some singers who've heard
it from secondary sources, melded it with their idea of African-American
street-corner doo-wop, and rolled it out into a horrible amalgam.
Bob Walser's version in Polish (yes, really) sounds a lot better
than most of the tertiary singers that I've heard attempt it.
Greg
barry finn
There is a collection of Shanties from the British West Indies &
surrounding islands titled 'Deep The Water Shallow The Shore', by Roger
Abrahams (sp?), alot pertains to fishing & chasing the Blackfish (whale) &
most are rowing shanties (check out the Digital Tradition). Hugill has a
few, Gals Of Chile & Saltpeter Shanty both from the Nitrate trades &
glossed over so as to be fit for print. The sailors at times, says Stan,
would take Spanish phrases & use them in one way or another for choruses. I
first heard the Saltpeter Shanty sung as "Slav Ho" & suspect the refrain to
be bits of Spanish. Hope this helps a little.
Barry Finn
Simon Furey <Sim...@macatala.demon.co.uk> wrote in article
<345A1F...@macatala.demon.co.uk>...
> Hi folks
> I need some help with some research I am doing into folk song from the
> Iberian peninsula. In spite of the great maritime empires and history of
> the Spanish and Portuguese, I cannot find any evidence of any of their
> sea shanties.
> According to Stan Hugill in "Songs of the Sea", the shanty was born in
> the middle of the 19th century, when Britannia ruled the waves. I guess
> this was a natural consequence of the Battle of Trafalgar. So one might
> expect English shanties to predominate. Yet the ships of Spain and
> Portugal wouldn't have just disappeared. Hugill cites French and Italian
> shanties, so why not Spanish or Portuguese?
Andrea M. Aldridge
Greg Bullough wrote:
>
> 'Johnson Girls' is sourced from the Menhaden Chanteymen of Beaufort
> North Carolina.
>
> folk-processed in a number of ways. Even though the Menhaden Chanteymen
> have recorded it and still tour, some of the versions heard around the
> circuit are very, very, different than the original.
>
> It has received very rough treatment from some singers who've heard
> it from secondary sources, melded it with their idea of African-American
> street-corner doo-wop, and rolled it out into a horrible amalgam.
Remember, however, that you can acquire other works from the Menhaden
Chanteymen from Glbal Village Music at
http://www.the-forum.com/globalvillage/afamtrad.htm, item CD/C 220.
--
Andrea Aldridge
Editor, "Lady Love: The Lady Washington Home Page"
http://www.ladywashington.org
Walter Nelson
KC King wrote:
>
> Simon Furey <Sim...@macatala.demon.co.uk> wrote in article
> <345A1F...@macatala.demon.co.uk>...
> Portuguese?
>
> The mid 19th century is the golden age of shantying due to a number of
> factors stemming from the emergence of steam.
While the mid 19th Century can certainly be seen as the golden age of
shantying, there certainly was shantying of some kind well before then.
Call and response working songs can be found in at least one 16th
Century Scottish source (which I first learned about on a Boarding Party
record BTW). There are also African, Irish, Russian and Arabic nautical
working chants, to name but a few. They might lack the sophistication
of "Leave Her Jonnie", but the essense of the Shanty is there (I define
"shanty" as a call and response song used to regulate maritime work).
I would tend to think that if the original poster is not finding Spanish
shanties, it might be because they just weren't collected (no Spanish
Hugills or Colchords), or because they haven't found their way out of
their traditional communities into the larger world folk consciousness.
While it is certainly possible that Spanish speakers just didn't shanty,
I would not take the difficulty in finding their material as positive
evidence of a lack of a shanty tradition.
One also wonders: while the Americans and Northern Europeans certainly
dominated world shipping in the mid-19th Century, they did not enjoy an
absolute monopoly. Spanish and Latin American ships certainly existed
and were subject to the same economic pressures to reduce crews and
increase productivity as American ships. What were those
Spanish-speaking sailors doing when they had to hoist a topsail yard or
tramp around a capstain?
Cheers,
Walter Nelson
Greg Bullough
In article <63ld06$1cc3$3...@watnews2.watson.ibm.com> kes...@alum.mit.edu writes:
>When you take a tool out of the field and set it on a display stand
>in a museum, it's darned hard to resist cleaning and repainting and
>adjusting it... even if that's not what it looked like when in use.
Indeed. Look at the agricultural machines in the Smithsonian!
>That doesn't make the performance versions _bad_ -- they're good
>music, and are worthwhile in their own right. It just means we should
>be aware that they've been folk-processed, and that they probably
>didn't sound exactly this way when they were first collected.
True. What generally seems to happen is that someone picks up the
song from the original (and 'Johnson Girls' is pretty close to
the source, given you can go see 'em on tour!), and does an
approximation of it without embarassing themselves (e.g., the
Boarding Party version of 'Johnson Girls'). Then, someone who
has no clue about the source comes along, hears the latter
version and thinks it needs to be 'gussied up,' or worse
yet, needs to be made 'more authentic.' Problem is, they
haven't heard the authentic singers, while the secondary source
*has*. So 'Johnson Girls' starts to sound like what I called
'Harlem Doo-Wop.'
Doesn't, a priori, make it 'bad,' but you know, nine times out
of 10, when I go back to the primary or secondary source, it
holds up better for me. Oh, I may get enfatuated with the 'new
improved' version for a bit, but the soul of the song was in
the guys who understood it and the guys who learned it from
them.
>But then again, they were probably folk-processed fifteen times
>before a collector ever heard them. I'm sure that the original
>version of Bull Jine -- which some folks claim was adapted from
>a railroad worksong -- sounded different from the version used
>on the docks.
I'd believe it, though there were 'bull engines' on docks as well,
espcially once waterfronts were sort of switching yards in their
own right.
The one that's clear is 'The Old Moke Pickin on a Banjo' where
the chorus makes it clear: at least part of this crew is 'from
the rail-road too ra loo!'
>The only thing that doesn't change ... is change.
True, but when dealing with traditional material there is at least
some duty to understand what came from the primary source and what
came from the group, and what came from the record company...
Greg
KC King
Great response and a lively thread
Walter Nelson <wal...@rand.org> wrote in article
<345E1C...@rand.org>...
>
> While it is certainly possible that Spanish speakers just didn't shanty,
> I would not take the difficulty in finding their material as positive
> evidence of a lack of a shanty tradition.
>
Given that it was bad luck (and poor taste) to sing shanties on shore its
certainly possible that the tradition was lost. On the other hand while
only a few collectors have given us good stuff, a lot of shantys have oozed
into the land cultures that spawned them.
> One also wonders: while the Americans and Northern Europeans certainly
> dominated world shipping in the mid-19th Century, they did not enjoy an
> absolute monopoly. Spanish and Latin American ships certainly existed
> and were subject to the same economic pressures to reduce crews and
> increase productivity as American ships. What were those
> Spanish-speaking sailors doing when they had to hoist a topsail yard or
> tramp around a capstain?
>
Take a look at the Maritime History Virtual Archives
http://pc-78-120.udac.se:8001/WWW/Nautica/Ships/Ships.html
Lars implies that his captured most of the serious sailing vessels that
might require shantying. I have blumbed the depts of this treasure but
very, very few of the 400+ 4 masted barques built and operated between 1801
and 1989 were to be found under a Spanish or Portugese flag (maybe ore or
two). How absolute does the monopoly need to be? I suspect that
Spanish-speaking sailors were singing in English or German or Norwegian or
Friesian
For that matter, why would anyone from a comfortable warm climate sign up
for the cold climes around Cape Horn?
Regards
Jim Lucas
Simon Furey <Sim...@macatala.demon.co.uk> wrote in article
<345A1F...@macatala.demon.co.uk>...
> ... In spite of the great maritime empires and history of
> the Spanish and Portuguese, I cannot find any evidence of any of their
> sea shanties.
Songs weren't the only means of maintaining work rhythms on board ships.
Flutes, fiddles, and drums were used at various times. Probably also just
shouts. As I understand it, chanteys were most common on English and
American ships, but particularly on square riggers. Less likely to be
heard on smaller vessels such as schooners. Less likely to be used on
fishing vessels. Perhaps because members of these crews were less likely
to be temporary, so they developed sets of mutual rhythms? Maybe just
because there were fewer sailors on a line, so coordination was easier?
Like a folk or rock group doesn't usually have a conductor, eh?
So maybe the Iberians don't have a significant history of using them. I'll
admit that I'm not sure, and I hope someone else knows more, but I have
noticed that in books of sea songs I've seen from Finland, Sweden, Denmark,
and Poland, most of the real chanteys are either in English or translations
of English chanteys. It raises suspicions.
/Jim Lucas
Simon Furey
Jim Lucas wrote:
(snip)
> So maybe the Iberians don't have a significant history of using them. I'll
> admit that I'm not sure, and I hope someone else knows more, but I have
> noticed that in books of sea songs I've seen from Finland, Sweden, Denmark,
> and Poland, most of the real chanteys are either in English or translations
> of English chanteys. It raises suspicions.
>
interesting thread. I would still welcome any further thoughts. Let me
just add on the point of foreign shanties that I have a wonderful
recording of a French shanty with the notable chorus of (sic) "Give me
sometime to blow the man down" to an utterly unfamiliar tune (to me). I
will post details if anyone is interested.
Simon
Joe Kesselman, yclept Keshlam
In <34644D...@macatala.demon.co.uk>, Simon Furey <Sim...@macatala.demon.co.uk> writes:
>>recording of a French shanty with the notable chorus of (sic) "Give me
>sometime to blow the man down"
I don't have the example handy, but I've also seen a French shanty with
the phrase "mes bues", apparently borrowed from an English shanty
containing "me boys". Passing songs back and forth, with or without
translation and with or without garbling of the original language, has
gone on for a LONG time...
Walter Nelson
KC King wrote:
> Given that it was bad luck (and poor taste) to sing shanties on shore its
> certainly possible that the tradition was lost. On the other hand while
> only a few collectors have given us good stuff, a lot of shantys have oozed
> into the land cultures that spawned them.
>
Quite so, but still I wonder how much of an effort has been made to
collect the tradition of the maritime classes of Iberia and Latin
America--and of that, how much is available to English speakers. I
honestly have no idea, but I think it is a significant factor in our
perception of the existence or non-existence of a Spanish/Portuguese
shanty tradition.
> > One also wonders: while the Americans and Northern Europeans certainly
> > dominated world shipping in the mid-19th Century, they did not enjoy an
> > absolute monopoly. Spanish and Latin American ships certainly existed
> > and were subject to the same economic pressures to reduce crews and
> > increase productivity as American ships. What were those
> > Spanish-speaking sailors doing when they had to hoist a topsail yard or
> > tramp around a capstain?
> >
> Take a look at the Maritime History Virtual Archives
> http://pc-78-120.udac.se:8001/WWW/Nautica/Ships/Ships.html
> Lars implies that his captured most of the serious sailing vessels that
> might require shantying. I have blumbed the depts of this treasure but
> very, very few of the 400+ 4 masted barques built and operated between 1801
> and 1989 were to be found under a Spanish or Portugese flag (maybe ore or
> two). How absolute does the monopoly need to be?
>
The list is interesting, but does not include three-masted (non-clipper
hulled) ships or barques, brigs or two-masted schooners. In short, it
has all the hot-and-sexy "high-tech" ships (in which the Americans and
Northern Europeans excelled), but does not have the dowdy, slow,
unromatic workhorses that carried most of the world's goods. I would
suspect that Brazillian, Mexican, Spanish, Argentine, Portuguese etc.
ships fell in to the less colorful classes, and are therefore not
reflected on Lars's list.
Again, we are in a position of drawing conclusions from a lack of
evidence, which is always risky. I do not know what sort of merchant
fleets the latin nations had, though I have encountered a fair number of
references to Mexican or Portuguese craft (brigs, schooners and ships)
plying the coastal trade in Latin America, or running up the coast to
California. Did they shanty? I dunno, but I am inclined to think they
did.
>I suspect that
> Spanish-speaking sailors were singing in English or German or Norwegian or
> Friesian
Certainly when serving on a Northern European or American ship (which
they certainly did, along with every other race on the planet), they
would have sung in the designated language of the ship.
> For that matter, why would anyone from a comfortable warm climate sign up
> for the cold climes around Cape Horn?
>
Why would any sane person?
Just a thought though--the coastal trade between Argentina and Chile
*IS* Cape Horn. Cape Horn is in Latin America.
Cheers,
Walter Nelson
Hugh Williamson
Spanish Sea shanties.
There probably are some uniquely Spanish sea
chanties however, I have never seen anything
either recorded or in print.
Two opservations however:
First, everyone, and I mean everyone has sea work songs, but
these are not shanties.
Most of these are fisheries related, either net hauling
or rowing songs. Since fishermen often went to sea on bigger
ships,and often consorted with sailors from bigger ships, some
fishing songs found their way into the shanty repertoire.
Second, forebitter, the recreational songs of the sea,
originate from just about every port where a sailor
could find a place to drink and listen to some local
entertainment. The song then returned to the ship along
with the hangover, to be remembered and passed on.
The shanty however, was a highly specialized musical
form. It was used on the larger european and american
commercial sailing ship during the mid 19th century.
Each shanty was specifically aligned with a specific
task, often technology specific as well, (ie windlass , capstan,
pump). Since most of the new technological designs
originated in North Atlantic shipping, the first crews
to use them would probably be either british or american
hence the shantyman who first decided on the shanty for
that particular task probably chose one from the anglo-american
repertiore, and the habit arose of using that particular shanty ,
with that particular piece of gear, for that particular task.
It's like today and pop music, the majority of it is anglo-american.
More people hear it because it is more popular. It's more popular because
more people hear it.
I've been collecting sea shanties for years now. Anglo-american is
plentiful and fairly easy to come by. It's been extensively collected
anthologised, recorded and distributed.French materials is plentiful
and easy to come by in France (which is all the French really care about)
In the rest of the world it's usually easier to find Anglo-american
than local.
Spain , not being a major shipping power, hasn't had the global presence
to make its mark as a major source of shanties. Many spanish sailors served aboard
the sailing fleet, but they would work and shanty in the language of the flag, which
usually British or American. Anglo-american shanties were more likely to be taken to a
non-english speaking ship than the other way around. Hence it is quite common
to hear German, Norwegian, French etc versions of engish shanties.
If anyone has any references to Spanish sea songs and shanties, I'd appreciate getting them.
Greg Bullough
In article <#6hRON67...@ntawwabp.compuserve.com> Hugh Williamson <71760...@CompuServe.COM> writes:
>
>First, everyone, and I mean everyone has sea work songs,
Ever been to Kansas, Hugh? :-)
Greg
Abby Sale
On Wed, 12 Nov 1997 14:43:51 -0500, Hugh Williamson
<71760...@CompuServe.COM> wrote:
>First, everyone, and I mean everyone has sea work songs, but
>these are not shanties.
>Most of these are fisheries related, either net hauling
> or rowing songs. Since fishermen often went to sea on bigger
> ships,and often consorted with sailors from bigger ships, some
> fishing songs found their way into the shanty repertoire.
>
>The shanty however, was a highly specialized musical
>form. It was used on the larger european and american
> commercial sailing ship during the mid 19th century.
>Each shanty was specifically aligned with a specific
>task
Other than defining according to this specific venue, I'm not at all clear
on the distinction between a chantey and, say, a Canadian canoe paddling
song (perhaps lined out by a "paddle leader.") or an Isle of Lewis Gaelic
sea-going rowing song to lay out the nets or a Sea Island a net-hauling
song.
I've come across this really good FAQ that defines chanties as "the
working songs of the crew of sailing ships. The song is used to improve
the efficiency of the crew in accomplishing their manual labours on board
the ship. Its use is restricted to the working environment"
Which does stipulate "sailing ships" but that same FAQ also cites: "...old
ships' songs sung on board to lighten the labour of working the ship"
without the "sailing" inclusion.
So--- is the requirement of sail a "real" necessity of the type or are the
types of work songs fundamentally different under sail or under oar?
Everyone admits that a few chanties were still used on steam ships for a
while. And Hugill and _Australian Songs_ mention mention personal use of
them on sail in the early years of this century.
And just to be really silly, how about rowing songs sung by sailors
working on the dory of a packet ship?
KC King
What fun!
Part of being a shanty was that you called a it a shanty when you were
doing it. The voyageurs thought they were chanter but probably not
shantying. I should imagine that the fishermen thought of themselves as
fishermen not shantymen. Its hard to imagine the chef of a net calling out
"Who's the nighting gale in this mob?"
I think all this brings us to shanties as a sub-genre of work songs done on
LARGE sailing ships etc, etc.
I don't think that working sail was essential since working the ship as in
pumping or capstan heaving used shanties.
Rowing to tow a boat is probably as close to being on the line between a
song and shanty.
I don't think of stevedores as shantying though they certainly hollered.
Field hollers and track lining "songs" are great work songs but not
shantys.
All work songs are not shantys. All work songs used on or near water
weren't shantys. We could probably even say that those that did shantys
didn't think of them as songs at least not in the sense that they thought
of focsle songs as real songs. You could sing songs on shore but not
shantys - a real jonah! Again this brings us to a tighter more narrow
definition of shanty.
Great's the pitty that Stan Hugill or Eric Illot, each of whom could have
answered this in a twinkling, aren't here to lend a hand. Should we post
'em a blind copy st...@fiddlers.grn or er...@david.jones.loc?
Regards, KC
Abby Sale <abby...@orlinter.com> wrote in article
<346db906...@snews2.zippo.com>...
George Black
>I don't think that working sail was essential since working the ship as in
>pumping or capstan heaving used shanties.
A great number of ships under religiously minded masters never used shanties.
>Rowing to tow a boat is probably as close to being on the line between a
>song and shanty.
Pulling a seaboat certainly requires a certain cadence.
>I don't think of stevedores as shantying though they certainly hollered.
They were 'just working'
>
>All work songs are not shantys. All work songs used on or near water
>weren't shantys. We could probably even say that those that did shantys
>didn't think of them as songs at least not in the sense that they thought
>of focsle songs as real songs. You could sing songs on shore but not
>shantys - a real jonah! Again this brings us to a tighter more narrow
>definition of shanty.
Shanties are one of the facets of the work songs.
As Stan Hugill claimed ' a shanty is another hand on the line'
>Great's the pitty that Stan Hugill or Eric Illot, each of whom could have
>answered this in a twinkling, aren't here to lend a hand. Should we post
>'em a blind copy st...@fiddlers.grn or er...@david.jones.loc?
Nice to see that some-one else remembers Erik.
This sig is a sine of the thymes
Peter Wilton
KC King <k.c....@mindspring.com> writes
>I think all this brings us to shanties as a sub-genre of work songs done on
>LARGE sailing ships etc, etc.
A L Lloyd describes shanties as pertaining to the 19th century new, large
sailing ships: "The modern form of capitalism that gave rise to the great
shipping lines, produced at the same time the striking body of primitive
folk songs that we call: sea shanties". And, "...songs sung for fun were
called 'forebitters'...".
>Field hollers and track lining "songs" are great work songs but not
>shantys.
>All work songs are not shantys. All work songs used on or near water
>weren't shantys. We could probably even say that those that did shantys
>didn't think of them as songs at least not in the sense that they thought
>of focsle songs as real songs. You could sing songs on shore but not
>shantys - a real jonah! Again this brings us to a tighter more narrow
>definition of shanty.
But is there any definable distinction between shanties and work songs
used away from the water. For example, "Roll the woodpile down"
strikes me as being typical of shanty form.
--
Peter Wilton
The Gregorian Association Web Page:
http://www.beaufort.demon.co.uk/chant.htm
KC King
Folks,
For me this stimulating discussion really helps clarify the issue of
"what's a shanty"
Abby <abby...@orlinter.com>
> >
> I guess my only question was "So--- is the requirement of sail a 'real'
> necessity of the type or are the types of work songs fundamentally
> different under sail or under oar?"
I think Peter's <pj...@beaufort.demon.co.uk> citation from Bert Lloyd
describing shanties as pertaining to the 19th century new, large sailing
ships: "The modern form of capitalism that gave rise to the great shipping
lines, produced at the same time the striking body of primitive folk songs
that we call: sea shanties". Starts to zero in on the mark. Increased
sailing ship size and decreased crew size combine to produce this
"striking" body. The central point is not that work is easier or jollier
with shantys but that it couldn't be done at all without the improved
"power" of rhythmically coordinated hands. This is much like the essential
purchase or power that comes from the use of multipart tackles, also found
on large sailing ships. If there is some bold assertion to be rendered its
that without shantys, the crew size for sail couldn't be reduced to compete
with steam.
My point in putting some forms of nautical work songs in the non-shanty
category is that I don't think that economics (or physics) of smaller crews
and bigger boats was the motivator for the rhythms so helpful (but not
essential) to tasks such as rowing, paddling or stevedoring.
If task such as swetting up halyards and tossing bunts are made possible
only with shanties that leaves some decidely grey areas such as capstans
and pumps. My feeble excuse is that once sailor jack was able to do the
hard tasks, it was only natural that he would apply this tool to tasks that
were patently doable but could be made easier. To my mind these shanties,
with their stories and entendres are significantly less primitive than say,
halyard shanties.
> I can't help but think of a paddle-leader-led canoe paddling song as
> musically & functionally identical to a classic chantey, even if they
> never get into books of chanties. (And aren't as romantic.) Shell races
> clearly show the value of pulling together & timing.
>
> I'm comfortable with myself even if I'm the only one in the world that
> thinks of them that way - unless I'm just plain missing something
> fundamental.
>
Regarding George's <g...@hn.planet.co.nz> point -
"A great number of ships under religiously minded masters never used
shanties"
I would only ask how religiously minded masters were able to compete in the
godlessly capitalistic market for hauling goods? George correctly sites
Stan's credo that ' a shanty is another hand on the line'. I contend that
this has a corollary "a shanty is one less hand to pay"
From the offensive lyric perspective, I feel sure that shanties could have
been adapted to whatever sensibilities ship's decorum dictated.
Extemporizing was certainly a hallmark of the good shantyman. Have heard
Stan, I'm convinced that well-articulated lyrics were a distant second in
importance to the coordinating whoops, yelps and vocal hitches that adorned
his shantying. Its these sounds that fit with Burt Lloyd's notion of
"primitive".
Greg Bullough
In article <3474bd32...@snews2.zippo.com> abby...@orlinter.com (Abby Sale) writes:
>
>I guess my only question was "So--- is the requirement of sail a 'real'
>necessity of the type or are the types of work songs fundamentally
>different under sail or under oar?"
Work songs certainly are tuned to the devices being used. I mean,
'Take This Hammer' just wouldn't work on a rotary pump, now would it?
Civilization didn't really have very many people into saving things
of the working man when vessels where powered by oars.
Until things got really heavy and crews got small, work songs of the
form that we think of as a 'chantey' today didn't really have a place.
If you want to see what I mean, try chanteying up the tops'ls on a
50-foot brigantine using 'Blow the Man Down' with just two pulls
per chorus. No go. But the magic combination happened in the last
2/3 of the 19th century.
By the time commercial sail was finishing up (or at least the last of
the guys who remembered it), the species known as the 'folklorist'
had evolved. So you had some songs, and you had someone around to
save them.
New songs arose, but not many work-songs, because in steam the work
is different. Even the forebitter suffered... ...hell, there was
a radio for entertainment!
So of necessity, what we have of 'chanties' today are in the large
part shaped very much like maritime commerce of 1800-1900. They match
the machinery of the time very well.
There are plenty of other sea-songs, and there are plenty of other
songs that got and get sung around. Some of those are even work
songs. That doesn't make them chanteys.
To me, it is how and where it is sung that makes a chantey a chantey.
'South Australia' started life as a chantey. If you sing it in the
pub the way a chanteyman would have on deck, I suppose it still is
one. If you listen to the Pogues version of it, that isn't.
'Louie Louie' didn't start out as a chantey. Yet it has crept into
use on more than a few fore-and-aft rigged training and drinking
vessels, to help the crew time their working together. In such use,
it is a chantey. Sung in the shower, it's not a chantey. It's just
annoying, or embarassing when you get caught.
I don't see a need to label the paddling songs of the Voyageurs
as 'chanteys' unless they choose to do so themselves. They are
what they are called by those who employ them in the culture of
their work. By the way, what is the right word?
Neither, though, do I see the need to find fault with someone who
says 'this is a chantey used by the Voyageurs of Canada when paddling
their cargo canoes.' It conveys the message properly. Now if they
said 'this is a chantey which the Voyageurs sung around the camp-fire'
I might suffer some confusion, since to me 'chantey' means work song.
Then again, a 'camp fire forebitter' sounds silly too. Make you wonder
about that canoe.
I guess what I'm saying is that it's not the folklorists or the authors
(or the authoritative entertainers) who determine what a thing is called.
It is those who use it for its intended purpose.
Greg
--
Greg Bullough | AFM Local 1000 AFL/CIO
g...@eclipse.net | K2GWB
| PP-ASEL (ret)
www.eclipse.net/~gwb for Compass Rogues & NY Chantey Sings
Abby Sale
On 17 Nov 1997 02:59:29 GMT, "KC King" <k.c....@mindspring.com> wrote:
>that we call: sea shanties". Starts to zero in on the mark. Increased
>sailing ship size and decreased crew size combine to produce this
>"striking" body. The central point is not that work is easier or jollier
>with shantys but that it couldn't be done at all without the improved
>"power" of rhythmically coordinated hands.
>and pumps. My feeble excuse is that once sailor jack was able to do the
>hard tasks, it was only natural that he would apply this tool to tasks that
>were patently doable but could be made easier.
OK. And that's what would create the essential or classic chantey. Good
enough.
There's a wonderful description of what might be a different & wider bit
part value of them in _Australian Folk Songs_. The old-timer describes
being in port readying for the tide along with many other chantey-singing
ships. You could hear the chanties from many of them all over the bay.
Often clearly the same song. He could never make out the words - the
different ships certainly weren't singing together - but they were doing
the same tasks together and aware of each other. A comradship in song.
Say Hi to Kathy.
KC King
Abby Sale <abby...@orlinter.com> wrote in article
<34702d9a...@snews2.zippo.com>...
>
> There's a wonderful description of what might be a different & wider bit
> part value of them in _Australian Folk Songs_. The old-timer describes
> being in port readying for the tide along with many other chantey-singing
> ships. You could hear the chanties from many of them all over the bay.
> Often clearly the same song. He could never make out the words - the
> different ships certainly weren't singing together - but they were doing
> the same tasks together and aware of each other. A comradship in song.
>
If the ships were "readying for the tide" the task they would be doing
would be using the capstan to weigh anchor. I can only imagine a fleet,
such as the Australian grain fleets that worked well into the 20th Century,
a whole fleet weighing anchor at the same time. I'd bet that being able to
hear each other might have put a spring in their stamp. Awesome doesn't
quite do it justice. Of course they would be shantying. There a many from
the emigrant trade not the least of which is South Australia.
Continuing on with the thread on capitalism and true shanty's I would wager
that short handed crews would be hard pressed to muster the power needed to
break an anchor lose from the mud and so would need the coordination that a
shanty brings. How that fit in with using shanties for what might be hours
of relatively easier work required to bring the ship over the anchor I
can't rightly say.
KC
Greg Bullough
In article <01bcf49e$decfc620$41050c26@kc> "KC King" <k.c....@mindspring.com> writes:
>>
>If the ships were "readying for the tide" the task they would be doing
>would be using the capstan to weigh anchor.
To give a more precise idea about what would take place...
Prior to the state of tidal flow which was optimum for maneuvering
a ship out of port, the crew would ready the ship to get under way
smartly.
If she were lying to more than one anchor, all but the primary or
'bower' anchor would be taken in. In order to accomplish that, it
might actually be necessary to veer (let out) more cable from the
bower. An anchor doesn't let go until pulled from something like a
vertical angle. You'd hear a capstan chantey as these supplemental
(kedge) anchors where raised. The reasons for multiple anchors range
from foul weather to the need to maintain a more narrow position in
a crowded port.
Anyway, when they were down to just one anchor, they'd then heave
up to that anchor until the chain was 'up and down' or nearly
vertical; there'd be just enough hold left in the anchor to keep
the ship in place while the next task was accomplished.
How much the following overlapped with the activity on the capstan
really depended on the size of the crew. In any case, the last thing
you want is to have a ship drifting, anchorless, with no power to
steer her. So if you had a small crew, you'd take them off the
capstain and deploy them to hoisting and setting a minimal amount
of sail needed for a graceful departure at a controllable speed.
That usually meant the tops'ls for square sails and and fore-and-aft
sails (fore stays'ls and spanker) to aid with helm balance. Tops'ls
give a lot of power, but are fairly much out of the way, unlike
the courses, which are down low and a bit more ungainly.
For hoisting sails, particularly if upper tops'ls with moveable
yards were depoloyed, you'd hear halyard chanteys.
The sails were configured at this point to be pretty much
de-powered.
Then, it was back to the capstan for one strong push to break
out the anchor, after which you really had to be on the ball
because it is rather awkward to be drifting around with an anchor
dangling from the bow. You need to get it smartly up to where it
gets clear of the water and can be safely 'catted' or stowed
so that it doesn't bash something.
Then you were sailing.
In practice, other things could happen. You might have to use one
or more ship's boats to tow the vessel past some hazard or into the
tidal stream. There might be locks between where the ship was moored
up some river, and the open sea. You might even use the capstan to
'warp' the ship through the locks using hawsers.
> I can only imagine a fleet,
>such as the Australian grain fleets that worked well into the 20th Century,
>a whole fleet weighing anchor at the same time. I'd bet that being able to
>hear each other...
Romantic as it might sound, in any kind of a decent wind in Sydney
Harbor (and Sydney Harbor winds are pretty awesome) and with a lot
of work happening on an iron ship, the likelihood of hearing one another
must have been minimal. In San Francisco, you had to get pretty close
to Balclutha before you heard even a fairly loud chantey crew working
the capstan on a blustery summer afternoon.
Anchoring close together was considered rather bad form, and bad for
the premiums over at Lloyds.
Too, the likelihood of a mass departure was minimal. With two fair tides
a day, ships departed when their individual schedules dictated, as soon
as they had transacted their business. The only 'fleet' departures would
have been in the case of warship convoys, where chanteying wasn't
the way.
>Continuing on with the thread on capitalism and true shanty's I would wager
>that short handed crews would be hard pressed to muster the power needed to
>break an anchor lose from the mud and so would need the coordination that a
>shanty brings.
My experience with anchors and mud (they seem to always go hand-in-hand)
suggests that it is more of a steady pressure that does the trick. You're
pulling a piece of metal through a viscous substance and no matter how
hard you pull, that little bit is going to be slow. It does the boat
and its gear no good to rush the 'break out.' Click in a couple of pawls,
wait a bit, repeat. Eventually it comes loose in a rush as it breaks
clear. A sing-out, a couple of pawls, wait for the tension to drag
the anchor closer, and again. Try and rush it and you can easily
break a capstan or even the head off the anchor. The only way around
it is to have a 'trip line' attached to a buoy and made fast to the
shank down by the flukes. On foul ground, that can be used to pull
the anchor out of a crevice in which it is wedged, or loose from a
cable under which it is hooked.
Where the chantey comes in handy is precisely in the long pull up to the
hook. You're lifting chain where each link is a foot long and some fifty
pounds. If there's fifty feet of water, and 15 knots of wind, that's a
long, steady stomp. By the way, the chain does as much to hold the ship
at anchor as the anchor does; its very weight keeps the head of the
anchor down, and also absorbs all of the shock of wind and wave, as
it lies partially (mostly) on the bottom.
KC King
Awesome, Greg, Awesome
A couple of puzzlers? Navy ships wouldn't have shantied? I agree that,
despite the romance of the grain races in the 1920's, there propably
weren't many fleet starts, particularly going home. Just load up, catch a
tide, and go.
You've got just the right picture on breaking lose - though I suspect it
might require a bit more Shaty-driven "steam" to heave the last few pawls.
A ship can look mighty silly with her head down and stern well off her
lines. I also concurr that crowded anchorages are bad form but they
certainly did happen. Anchors fore and aft? Maybe even a raft? Dicey in
any case.
Perhaps Abby's source got creative?
Greg Bullough <gr...@netcom.com> wrote in article
<gregEJw...@netcom.com>...
Greg Bullough
In article <01bcf545$eb25c1c0$41050c26@kc> "KC King" <k.c....@mindspring.com> writes:
>Awesome, Greg, Awesome
>
>A couple of puzzlers? Navy ships wouldn't have shantied?
General agreement of the scholars seems to be that chanteying was
encouraged on commercial vessels and discouraged on naval ones. The
latter for, perhaps, a couple of reasons:
1. Some sense of military decorum caused the drum and fife
to be the cadence-maker of choice. Chantey words only
upset discipline.
2. Naval vessels did not have that critical 'short handed'
situation. They were equipped with lots of hands to fire
the great guns, engage in hand-to-hand combat, and so
on. When it came time to heave and haul, THAT part of
the work was fairly light relative to the number of
hands available.
We do get one popular 'sing out' from the gunners. The old
'Two-six-HEAVE'
comes from members two and six of a gun crew hauling simultaneously
on the gun tackles to run the gun out to firing position.
Abby Sale
On 19 Nov 1997 23:50:40 GMT, "KC King" <k.c....@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>Perhaps Abby's source got creative?
>
experiences of 70 years ago might be less than exact in his reporting?
I couldn't believe that at all. No way!
The informant is Wally Marshall who first shipped out, I think on
square-riggers, in 1915 at age 14; wages 2 pounds per month. He related
"a fund of thrilling stories of the sea and life aboard a sailing ship."
And a number of chanties. For what it's worth, and to me the memory is as
good as the reality, here's the quote:
(He sings "Sally Brown")
'That's what we used to sing -- we had all our own versions of
these, you know', he added at the end of it. 'Rolling Home', he told
us, was a capstan chanty. 'That was the one you usually sang when
you were leaving port. When a ship was leaving and the crew were
singing a capstan chanty, they would be joined by the crews of
other ships until the whole bay was alive with their singing ... A
lot of it came from a distance -- you couldn't hear the words but you
would hear the voices. It was rerally something to hear another ship
in the bay getting ready. I can tell you some of these blokes had
stentorian voices, believe me -- it would echo across the bay, and
some had good voices too.'
_Folk Songs of Australia_, vol two; Copyright: Meredith, Covell, Brown;
NSW University Press, 1987. p94.
And by the way, who's the lead singers on "South Australia" and "Reuben
Ranzo" on the _Clearwater_ web page?
Greg Bullough
In article <3474ab9e...@snews2.zippo.com> abby...@orlinter.com (Abby Sale) writes:
>
>And by the way, who's the lead singers on "South Australia" and "Reuben
>Ranzo" on the _Clearwater_ web page?
'Ranzo' sounds for all the world like Lou Killen, and probably is.
'South Australia' I can't quite figure out. The dates are given as
'1977 Clearwater' so there is probably some story about a bunch of
sea song types getting together and recording some stuff on board.
ham...@atl.mindspring.com
"KC King" <k.c....@mindspring.com> wrote:
I would wager
>that short handed crews would be hard pressed to muster the power needed to
>break an anchor lose from the mud and so would need the coordination that a
>shanty brings. How that fit in with using shanties for what might be hours
>of relatively easier work required to bring the ship over the anchor I
>can't rightly say.
I think that chanteys could be used for a variety of
purposes. I'd like to see them employed in
various methods of strenuous labor. Why must
they be confined to sea-faring? How about any
hauling or pushing job that requires many able-
bodied folks? You could still retain the spirit of
the ship-board songs but just use them in new
ways.
Frank Hamilton
KC King
ham...@atl.mindspring.com wrote in article
<65759m$5...@camel15.mindspring.com>...
> I think that chanteys could be used for a variety of
> purposes. I'd like to see them employed in
> various methods of strenuous labor. Why must
> they be confined to sea-faring? How about any
> hauling or pushing job that requires many able-
> bodied folks? You could still retain the spirit of
> the ship-board songs but just use them in new
> ways.
>
> Frank Hamilton
Chanties certainly could have been used for any number of tasks. They've
certainly been used to generate a powerful thirst! But the interesting
questions is why didn't these other tasks create the rich body of highly
structured motivational tools associated with sea shanties in the mid- to
late-nineteeth centruy?
As a shanty singer, good lord knows I've been asked to and tried to adapt
shanties to any number of tasks from acorn smashing to cloth waulking.
Generally they don't work. Why? IMHO the answer is that they don't work
because rarely do you absolutely need them. It takes engery to shanty so
you had better get a net increase in work out of it. In the case of
hauling shanties, its my speculation that ships could not have been worked
with the small crews needed to make them competitive without the extra
"umph" generated by the shanty.
I'd further speculate that once "liberated" to sing out, sailors employed
shanties for tasks that, strictly speaking, could have been done without
them [but that's real speculation].
Granted, there are a number of situations on the fringe. Roger Abrahms
collects versions of Anglo-originated deep water shanties used to move
houses from one side of a Windward Island to the other. My point is that I
don't thinks elaborate shanties would have been "invented" just to move
houses. Once the seafaring men of West Indies had used shantying in the
deep water trades, the shanties, as with other tools, would have fallen
naturally to hand for similar tasks.
Stevedores [and boatmen] sing up a storm from the Great Lakes to the Volga.
I think the closest thing to the essense of sea shantying is railroad
track 'lining [alignment]. The sound is a mix between a bunting shanty
and a field holler. Without some form of "signal", it would be impossible
to focus the energy to move track. I've tried it both ways.
Could this connection be strengthened by the many of the Navi's and Gandy
dancers were Irish. The fact that a good bit of surviving track lining
lore comes from black track maintenance crews using shanty forms gives
cross cultural conncections a new meaning.
Joe Kesselman, yclept Keshlam
In <01bcf831$f469ed80$bb020b26@kc>, "KC King" <k.c....@mindspring.com> writes:
>As a shanty singer, good lord knows I've been asked to and tried to adapt
>shanties to any number of tasks from acorn smashing to cloth waulking.
I've been told there _are_ a few songs traditionally associated with the latter
task. Are they "shantys"? Maybe not, but they're legitimate work songs. The
energy level invested may be lower since there isn't the same time pressure
(cloth won't founder if you're slow on the pumps, or go into irons if you're
slow coming about), but if it serves to make the work more enjoyable and more
rhythmic it may increase the time between breaks -- leading to the net increase
in output that you suggest is the justification for shantying.
>I don't think elaborate shanties would have been "invented" just to move
>houses.
Why not? Consider the songs invented "just" for hammering spikes into railroad
ties, serving to synchronize alternating swings of two hammers. If the task
needs people to closely coordinate the timing of their actions, shantying is one
good way to do it. Note that the _workers_ need not invest much energy if
a shantyman is leading the task; one classic approach is for the shantyman to
stand back where he can watch progress, and supervise, with the work crew
shouting out only a few words every now and then:
<Shantyman sings:>
Do me, Johnny Boker
Come rock and roll me over
Do me, Johnny Boker...
<and the crew reponds:>
DO!
I submit that this doesn't take a lot of energy investment if someone has to
supervise anyway.
>Could this connection be strengthened by the many of the Navi's and Gandy
>dancers were Irish. The fact that a good bit of surviving track lining
>lore comes from black track maintenance crews using shanty forms gives
>cross cultural conncections a new meaning.
Quoting from a discussion of shanties I attended many years ago:
"For whatever reason, the best shantymen were generally either
black or Irish."
"... Black Irish?"
Joe Kesselman, yclept Keshlam
In <65759m$5...@camel15.mindspring.com>, ham...@atl.mindspring.com writes:
> You could still retain the spirit of
>the ship-board songs but just use them in new
>ways.
Certainly work songs can be, and have been, used in many contexts.
But there's a real art to matching the character of the song, and the
way it's lead, to the task at hand. Depending on what you're trying
to do, only some shanties will work well. And there are undoubtedly
jobs for which shantying just isn't going to be a useful tool since they
require too much individual control over the pace of work.
Visualize someone trying to get a worksong started in the Steuben Glass
Works... I don't think so, somehow.
Greg Bullough
In article <65cbec$15o1$2...@watnews2.watson.ibm.com> kes...@alum.mit.edu writes:
>a shantyman is leading the task; one classic approach is for the shantyman to
>stand back where he can watch progress, and supervise, with the work crew
>shouting out only a few words every now and then:
> <Shantyman sings:>
> Do me, Johnny Boker
> Come rock and roll me over
> Do me, Johnny Boker...
> <and the crew reponds:>
> DO!
Probably not a good idea for the chanteyman to be standing back
and supervising in the above case, as he'd have to be suspended
in mid-air! Generally, on a yard while tossing a bunt, either you're
in the game or not, 'cause when the crew moves, the jack-stay
does as well.
Stan Hugill would position the chanteyman on the falls of a halyard,
with the crew laid out on the line. It was the chanteyman who would
transmit the initial impulse on the pulls and who would snub the
line off when the time came to make fast. He didn't actually add
much force to the process, but being there allowed him to face
the crew. If he were first man on the line, he'd be singing the
wrong direction, and if he were last he might not hear the 'belay!'
or 'high enough!' over his own singing.
On capstan it's mighty tough to both chanty and heave effectively,
though you can lean on a bar. If you have an instrument, you might
ride the capstan 'round.
To have the volume needed on deck, you're pretty much getting an
aerobic work-out. Certainly a chanteyman who is getting 'winded'
due to hard work loses his effectiveness, because your breathing
no longer meets the needs of the song, it meets the needs of the
tired body.
--
Greg Bullough | AFM Local 1000 AFL/CIO
g...@eclipse.net | K2GWB
| PP-ASEL
Greg Bullough
In article <65cboe$15o1$3...@watnews2.watson.ibm.com> kes...@alum.mit.edu writes:
>
>Visualize someone trying to get a worksong started in the Steuben Glass
>Works... I don't think so, somehow.
>
Oh vuz you ever in das Steuben Glass Verks
Blow Boys Blow!... :-)
Just never, absolutely never, end the chantey with the old call
from when the pump finally hit air:
Suck-o!
Greg
Andrea M. Aldridge
ham...@atl.mindspring.com wrote:
>
> "KC King" <k.c....@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> I would wager
> >that short handed crews would be hard pressed to muster the power needed to
> >break an anchor lose from the mud and so would need the coordination that a
> >shanty brings. How that fit in with using shanties for what might be hours
> >of relatively easier work required to bring the ship over the anchor I
> >can't rightly say.
>
> purposes. I'd like to see them employed in
> various methods of strenuous labor. Why must
> they be confined to sea-faring? How about any
> hauling or pushing job that requires many able-
> the ship-board songs but just use them in new
> ways.
In our "get-it-up-and-do-it-now" society, I think a chanteyman might be
hard pressed in any job to get people to slow down to the speed a
chantey should be worked to to conserve energy. I work with a couple of
the tall ships that sail the Puget Sound area, and as chanteyman on one
of them (guess which one), I've been asked more than once to do the same
duty on the other, a schooner. But when that crew hauls the
(gaff-rigged) mainsail up, they want to do it nonstop, hand over hand.
If they hauled, for example, only on the indicated accent points of a
song that Stan Hugill gives, it would take them
ten or fifteen minutes to do it. Granted, they wouldn't be blowed at the
end of it as they are now. But when you've only got two or three hours
to sail, your passengers don't want to spend more of it than necessary
doing what they deem "prep work."
Greg Bullough noted, when he visited the Lady Washington, that the crew
did not follow the pace he set on a chantey; rather, he had to adapt to
their speed. The pace set on a sailing vessel that made long-term
voyages, doing the same work for years at a time, doesn't work for a
vessel dealing with the public and short sails. Or, perhaps, for any
labour more dependent on speed and completion for its commercial success
than energy conservation.
--
Andrea Aldridge
Publisher/Editor, "Lady Love: The Lady Washington Home Page"
http://www.ladywashington.org
remove _ from e-mail for address
Abby Sale
On 23 Nov 1997 17:07:00 GMT, "KC King" <k.c....@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>Chanties certainly could have been used for any number of tasks. They've
>certainly been used to generate a powerful thirst! But the interesting
>questions is why didn't these other tasks create the rich body of highly
>structured motivational tools associated with sea shanties in the mid- to
>late-nineteeth centruy?
>
>shanties to any number of tasks from acorn smashing to cloth waulking.
>because rarely do you absolutely need them. It takes engery to shanty so
This whole post - relating form to function seems well considered &
realistic. I don't like it because I'm really an "arbitraryist." Most of
the time we do things by accident. But I can't disagree with anything
suggested here.
The "function" case is further supported - strongly, I think - by the
shanty boys. Many of the lumbermen were off-season sailors & certainly
knew the chanteys. Some were adapted to the woods, but I think only a few
compared to the huge number of lumbering songs. The lumbering function
was entertainment.
Abby Sale
>
>In our "get-it-up-and-do-it-now" society, I think a chanteyman might be
>hard pressed in any job to get people to slow down to the speed a
>
>Greg Bullough noted, when he visited the Lady Washington, that the crew
>did not follow the pace he set on a chantey; rather, he had to adapt to
>their speed.
Clearly Greg was correct to be flexible - the speed will vary acording to
many variables.
MacColl claimed (right or wrong) that the chanteyman was often paid twice-
by the masters not to sing too slow and by the crew not to sing too fast.
Abby Sale
On Mon, 24 Nov 1997 18:21:03 GMT, gr...@netcom.com (Greg Bullough) wrote:
>
>Stan Hugill would position the chanteyman on the falls of a halyard,
>with the crew laid out on the line. It was the chanteyman who would
>transmit the initial impulse on the pulls and who would snub the
>line off when the time came to make fast. He didn't actually add
>much force to the process, but being there allowed him to face
>the crew. If he were first man on the line, he'd be singing the
>wrong direction, and if he were last he might not hear the 'belay!'
>or 'high enough!' over his own singing.
>
>On capstan it's mighty tough to both chanty and heave effectively,
>though you can lean on a bar.
I had a chat recently with a friend in Philadelphia who's been rowing &
coaching competion rowers since forever. I pass this on as I can, being
totally ignorant of rowing and shells. (Even at Penn, I never saw a race
- to me the social environment was so loathsome I couldn't bring myself to
attend the famous Days.)
She says (to my surprise) the cox'n never calls out the timing - s/he only
steers and occasionally calls for a "power 10" or "power 20." It's the
Stroke (the frontmost rower) that sets the pace. S/he mostly sets it by
example but may call out on rare occasion. Obviously s/he'll want to
conserve breath. Seems contrary to efficiency - the cox'n just sitting
there facing the crew with little strenuous work.
Greg Bullough
In article <348de536...@snews2.zippo.com> abby...@orlinter.com (Abby Sale) writes:
>On Mon, 24 Nov 1997 18:21:03 GMT, gr...@netcom.com (Greg Bullough) wrote:
>
>I had a chat recently with a friend in Philadelphia who's been rowing &
>coaching competion rowers since forever. I pass this on as I can, being
>totally ignorant of rowing and shells. (Even at Penn, I never saw a race
>- to me the social environment was so loathsome I couldn't bring myself to
>attend the famous Days.)
Too bad. A fleet of 'eights' ripping down a smooth waterway is a
sight, indeed.
>She says (to my surprise) the cox'n never calls out the timing - s/he only
>steers and occasionally calls for a "power 10" or "power 20." It's the
>Stroke (the frontmost rower) that sets the pace. S/he mostly sets it by
>example but may call out on rare occasion. Obviously s/he'll want to
>conserve breath. Seems contrary to efficiency - the cox'n just sitting
>there facing the crew with little strenuous work.
I suppose that in the relative silence of the shells, a bunch
of coxes calling 'stroke...stroke...' would just lead to a
soprano confusion. In a close race, you might hear the cox of
the boat coming up to pass louder than your own. Whatta mess.
No, the key thing with multi-oared boats, be they shells or whaleboats,
is to keep it together. And it isn't just all going back and forth at
the same time, you'd like to apply some thrust as well. If you spend
any time at all dithering about getting back in time, well, that's
the loss of that race. Similarly, if an eight team hasn't mastered
keeping absolutely in sync without the help of a cox, then they're
screwed.
Rowing is a task which has many faces. In whaling, you'd stroke
like hell to get near the fish, and then if you did manage to
kill on, you might have to tow it back. It might be from the
latter task (or propelling a ship with sweeps) where we get
the rather slow 'Row <row!> row bullies row, them Liverpool Judies
have got us in tow.'
Roger Gawley
On Wed, 26 Nov 1997, Abby Sale wrote:
>
> I had a chat recently with a friend in Philadelphia who's been rowing &
> coaching competion rowers since forever. I pass this on as I can, being
> totally ignorant of rowing and shells. (Even at Penn, I never saw a race
> - to me the social environment was so loathsome I couldn't bring myself to
> attend the famous Days.)
>
> She says (to my surprise) the cox'n never calls out the timing - s/he only
> steers and occasionally calls for a "power 10" or "power 20." It's the
> Stroke (the frontmost rower) that sets the pace. S/he mostly sets it by
> example but may call out on rare occasion. Obviously s/he'll want to
> conserve breath. Seems contrary to efficiency - the cox'n just sitting
> there facing the crew with little strenuous work.
Not true in my (dated) experience. The relationship between the cox and
the stroke is subtle when you want the best result over the race as a
whole but it is the cox who calls the time. If the relationship is bad,
you may find the stroke and the other rowers lagging the call. In general
the cox is trying to make the crew pull a little harder than they want to
(but that's back to shanty singing isn't it?)
Walter Nelson
> On 23 Nov 1997 17:07:00 GMT, "KC King" <k.c....@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >
> >Chanties certainly could have been used for any number of tasks. They've
> >certainly been used to generate a powerful thirst! But the interesting
> >questions is why didn't these other tasks create the rich body of highly
> >structured motivational tools associated with sea shanties in the mid- to
> >late-nineteeth centruy?
> >
associated with non-nautical tasks. Some of them help coordinate
hauling, others keep rhythm in a repetetive group task, and others more
or less just pass the time for a group or just an individual (weavers
songs come to mind)
> >As a shanty singer, good lord knows I've been asked to and tried to adapt
> >shanties to any number of tasks from acorn smashing to cloth waulking.
> >Generally they don't work. Why? IMHO the answer is that they don't work
> >because rarely do you absolutely need them. It takes engery to shanty so
>
I don't disagree that they are generally not absolutely essential, and
sometimes they can actually detract from the task at hand. Navies
certainly actively suppressed the shanty tradition on their ships, and
kept time with petty officers just shouting "Haul" or something
similar. While part of this is probably a function of a military
distrust of something as raucous as a shanty; on a man o'war with a huge
crew, you generally had plenty of hands to perform any task, and you
generally also had several tasks going on at once: "Run out the guns!
Reef the Fore, Main and Mizzen Topsails! Get me my lunch!" Having four
or five different gangs, doing entirely different things, all shantying
at the top of their lungs, while the officers are trying to be heard,
would not be conducive to optimum military effiency.
Nevertheless, shanties, while they are a distinctive sort of song,
should not be viewed as an isolated phenomenon, but rather a sub-species
of a massive, world wide, trans-cultural tradition of rhythmic working
song. Perhaps "Haul Away Joe" wouldn't work for acorn smashing, but
there might be a Matabili acorn smashing song that would fit the bill
nicely.
Cheers,
Walter Nelson
KC King
One of life's rare pleasures is violently agreeing. Yeh, shanties are a
sous-genre of work songs. But what makes them distinctive and unique other
than the non-naval nautical thread? Are there ANY other tasks that
absolutely, positively can't be performed without this type of intricate
singing? In a previous note I posited that manual track lining might be
one. Any others? Any distinctively Spanish tasks? [that's where we
started this voyage]
Oh boy this is fun, KC
Walter Nelson <wal...@rand.org> wrote in article
<3482F8...@rand.org>...
> > On 23 Nov 1997 17:07:00 GMT, "KC King" <k.c....@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > >
>
don't disagree that they are generally not absolutely essential, and
sometimes they can actually detract from the task at hand.
Nevertheless, shanties, while they are a distinctive sort of song,
Greg Bullough
In article <01bcfeca$627c6660$d0050c26@kc> "KC King" <k.c....@mindspring.com> writes:
>One of life's rare pleasures is violently agreeing.
And one of life's greatest pleasures is the singing of a really
fine work song, where the greatest task to be accomplished
is the lifting of one's pint from bar to lips and back again!
Abby Sale
On 2 Dec 1997 02:33:39 GMT, "KC King" <k.c....@mindspring.com> wrote:
>Are there ANY other tasks that
>absolutely, positively can't be performed without this type of intricate
>singing? In a previous note I posited that manual track lining might be
>one. Any others?
I don't know if it's "can't be performed without" or just ex-post facto
descriptive of the work, but a song sprongs itself into my skull here. (I
guess it _can't_ be "can't be performed without" since so many didn't use
songs, nevertheless...) It was sung for me and described by Kathleen
MacDonald of the singing MacDonald sisters as a work song. A one-man work
song. It's for running a spinning wheel & she demonstrated for me. Seems
there are two separate tasks - a slow part for spreading and tying on a
new end of wool to the bobbin and then a sweeping, rolling fast part for
the actual spinning of the wheel until that thread in used up & you need a
new one. Obviously, it's for one person only and the slow part (I think)
is more emotional timing than work timing - you have to slow down & get
careful & do it right. Then you whomph up the wheel and the timing there
is important - too slow and the thread will tangle - too fast and it
breaks.
KC King
I guess the challenge is just that -- "can't be done" without the worksong
genre in question. There are plenty that make it easier, such as your
great two speed spinning citation. Any three-speed work songs?
Hydramatic? Double clutching?
Speaking of double dutching, there are some great rhythmic patterns in jump
rope play songs which are really kids (and boxers) work songs. They seeem
to catch the foot hop followed by the rope slap pretty well.
If there is an ladder of work song merit with "can't be done without" at
the top, I would suspect that lullabies are just one rung down.
Abby Sale <abby...@orlinter.com> wrote in article
<348e0021...@snews2.zippo.com>...