Some reflections on filk after Contata 2011, resonding to Aya's postings

[suecochran]

This was originally intended to be a comment to Aya in her "Filking and Frolicking" LJ, but it was too long. Oh my, Sue Cochran has a lot to say? How unusual for her!

Anyway, here are my reflections about the definition of filk and some other responses to what Aya and some other folks wrote in her journal.

Comments

[nancylebov]

There's also music sung at filks which is about real world history, which probably counts as "music filkers like, but not filk".

[cflute]

So is a filk *about* filking a meta-filk?

[suecochran]

I would say so, yes.

[ayaesther]

First off, let me just heart the fact that "aya's research" is a tag. I have some thoughts about what you wrote...something's not quite sitting right with me, but I have a little sleep before I can put words to it.

I'm taking a seminar on critical theory next semester, so maybe I'll be able to add some specific thoughts on the conundrum of using words to describe an aural experience. This is a problem particularly pertinent to the filk community since the term originated after the development of the practice. Correct me if I'm wrong, but filk music developed late 1940s and the term didn't develop until about 1955-ish? Too lazy to check my source right now...

I think it was Elvis Costello (although sometimes attributed to others) who said, "Writing about music is like dancing about architecture." It shouldn't really exist, yet here's me earning my Ph.D. because of it. *grin*

[suecochran]

I look forward to your response to whatever it is that is not sitting right with you about my post(s). Sleep is a darned good idea. I did dishes from around 5:30pm yesterday until around 4:00am today, with a couple of breaks. I was watching Buffy Season 4 while doing the dishes. There are still many left to do, but I knocked out quite a lot of them. Talk to you soon.

[ayaesther]

Been a bit lazy on LJing as of late. Sorry! I think that it is always dangerous to label filk and not-filk at a place like a con or a housefilk. Because subcultural definitions tend to fall apart the closer that you look at something, it's better to keep things broad and make note of the various idiosyncracies. For me, I think I largely agree with Mark's definition (which I will eventually get around to transcribing) because of the logic that he uses to arrive at the statement, "Filk is what filkers do."

I think while the SFF component is integral to filk, I think performance space is equally important. For example, Whedonesque has been featuring a lot of Firefly house music and rap as of late, but I don't think most people here would consider it filk unless these artists showed up in a filk circle, ya know? Oye. Much to wrestle with...perhaps for the rest of my academic career, lol.

[madfilkentist]

Might as well footnote my essay on defining filk here. Trying to define filk as a kind of music always gets people into knots, with good reason. "Filk is what filkers do" is a circular definition, but it hints at an important truth: that the activity of filk and the aims of the people who participate in it, not the characteristics of the songs, are its characteristic features.

[ayaesther]

Gary, do you still hold to your definition? Or maybe the better question: Would you change anything about it, having seen the community slowly change/morph through the years?

[madfilkentist]

The only thing that's really changed is the "increased respect for copyright" which I've mentioned. In the past decade or so, music publishers have become increasingly unwilling to license tunes for parody recordings, so filkers have resorted to going "under the radar," either claiming fair use (legally dubious when used for whole songs) or distributing free recordings over the Internet. They're still at legal risk in principle, but I haven't heard of publishers trying to collect exorbitant amounts of money from people posting their own recordings at no charge.

[suecochran]

Thanks for the link, Gary. I like your essay a lot. I also think that what would be really cool would be to ask as many people as possible what their take on it is. I find myself full of ambivalence. At the same time as I want to define, I also balk at labels, more and more actually, lately. I was careful to state in my post that I wanted to say what -I- consider to be "filk", and what it means to me. I'm fine with expanding upon my definition. I feel like the circular definition isn't satisfying, and I also feel comfortable with leaving "the answer" more as an "open question".

[selki]

This was interesting, and I liked the ZataoMM reminder/analogy. I think I mostly agree with you.