Folksongs and Folk Revival: The Cultural Politics of Kenneth Peacock’s Songs of the Newfoundland Outports (review)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Reviewed by: Folksongs and Folk Revival: The Cultural Politics of Kenneth Peacock’s Songs of the Newfoundland Outports Natalie Kononenko Anna Kearney Guigne. Folksongs and Folk Revival: The Cultural Politics of Kenneth Peacock’s Songs of the Newfoundland Outports. St. John’s, NFLD: ISER Books, 2008. 331 pp. Maps. Photographs. Endnotes. Bibliography. Audiography. List of compositions. Index. $29.95 sc. I first ran across Kenneth Peacock’s name when I was reading a collection of Ukrainian Canadian ballads. The collector was Robert Klymasz, a Ukrainian folklorist then employed by the Museum of Civilization (then the Museum of Man), but all of the music was transcribed by a man with a funny name about whom I knew nothing—Kenneth Peacock. I was intrigued. Anna Kearney Guigne was similarly intrigued when she started working with Peacock’s most famous publication, Songs of the Newfoundland Outports, a three-volume study for which Peacock did the fieldwork, the musical transcription, and the transcription of the texts. To her, this had seemed like the Bible of Newfoundland folk music. Then, in graduate school, she heard people criticize some of Peacock’s methods. She set about investigating, and the result is this book. What Guigne concludes is that Peacock was a man of his time. He valued songs that seemed the most ancient, the ones most like the songs brought to Canada from England, something that is just not done today. Furthermore, he gave little performance context. He did not describe when and where the songs he recorded were normally [End Page 245] performed. When publishing the material he collected, he sometimes blended several recordings together to produce a more perfect piece, another practice that goes against current norms. Not surprisingly, what Peacock did was in keeping with the norms of his day. This leads Guigne to investigate the times in which Peacock lived, and the result is a marvelous picture of the folksong revival days of the 1950s and 60s. We learn about the atmosphere of the times and the reasons for interest in things folk in general and song in particular. We learn about collectors, both Canadian and other, and quite a few of the people who recorded songs in the Canadian Maritimes, it turns out, were not Canadian. We learn about the Museum of Man which employed Ken Peacock as a contract worker and sent him to Newfoundland, across the Canadian Prairies, and elsewhere. Information about Peacock’s times is interspersed with the biography of the man himself. He was an only child and began to study music early. He was trained as a pianist and was a very good one, performing in concerts and offering music lessons. He was also a composer of considerable talent and some renown, with some of his compositions performed widely and sold as sheet music. He was also a singer and made several records where he sang the songs that he had collected. Unfortunately, he could not make a living as a musician and, because he was interested in folk music as source material for his compositions, he began taking jobs as a transcriber of material collected by others and as a collector himself. Newfoundland was only one of the places where he worked, but it was the place where he spent most of his collecting energies, and his Songs of the Newfoundland Outports is his major work. Kenneth Peacock was also a very private man. Guigne had access to his papers and was able to interview Peacock himself, both over the telephone and in person. Yet we get little biographical detail and not much sense of this man, other than that he was very generous, letting others use his material. He was cooperative and helpful, perhaps advancing the careers of others at the expense of his own—he never held a regular salaried position at the Museum of Man. He avoided conflicts and managed to steer clear of disputes among others, whether at the Museum or between various collectors and publishers of folksongs. Peacock seems to have thoroughly enjoyed his fieldwork. He may have romanticized the people in the Newfoundland Outports and overlooked the harsh conditions of their life. Yet he lived with them and among...
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».