Talk:The Bourgeois Blues

Untitled

I would like to get a date for when the song was writen (and when various recordings were made); if anyone can help me with this it would be much apreciated. Deus Homoni

I think the first recording date might be the best we can get. From [1]. Makemi 16:47, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

complimentary artwork

hello, does anyone know of any pieces of art that could accompany the songs sentiments of washingtons derogatory attitudes to blacks long after slave trade abolition, i'm sure i have seen something somewhere that would go really well but i can't remember what

Lyrics changed to avoid offense

>In all but the earliest recording of the song, the original line "Some white folk in Washington / they know just how, call a colored man a nigger just to see him bow" was altered to "give a colored man a nickel just to see him bow", presumably to avoid causing offense.

Removed content is inaccurate; I have in my possession two distinctly different recordings (one on the CD Absolutely the Best the other on Good Mornin' Blues of the song that both contain the original lyric. Combined with the fact that the premise for the alleged alteration is pointless as the word in question is used elsewhere in the song, I see this as sufficient reason for removing the portion of the article above.

Removals

I am working on this trying to bring it up to GA standards, I have already written 6 GAs and several of them. Can you please give me a week before reverting all of my work? If you would like to collaborate on this, I am willing. What you removed contained a deeper story of the creation of the song than the one that is currently there now. As for Discogs, itisn't a RS. We can discuss the infobox at a later date. Also, looking at your userpage, It looks like we are some of the last people writing audited content in this topic area, we should probably get used to talking to one another rather than at one another. --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 16:26, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Looking at the article history, I see that your last edit February 6, 2014,[2] left the article with two short paragraphs, four empty section, no refs, and an "under construction" note. My expansion a month ago is an improvement. Anyway, let's move on:

• 1) Please leave referenced material until you have something better to replace it with.
• 2) Song articles require an infobox. What appears is supported and can be later added to/changed as needed.
• 3) Yes, the user provided content at Discogs is not RS. However, the photographs of the actual records are all that is being referenced and, regardless of the source, is a RS. The images provide the most accurate info about title, label, serial nos., etc. Again, when better sources are found, these can be substituted.

I'm not sure there is enough material for a GA, but if you have it, fine. Take the lead and I may add some comments along the way. —Ojorojo (talk) 20:44, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

I have three book chapters plus a few articles; it looks possible. --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 21:52, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

@Ojorojo: what do you think of the creation section? --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 02:52, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

The material from Wolf & Lornell and Scalera is probably as close to definitive as you're going to find. A small note about the headings: "Creation" seems awkward for a song article, maybe "Background"? Also, the subheading "Authorship controversy" may not be needed (I'm not sure how much of a controversy this is/was). This material may work better in the "Legacy" section. Lomax seems to have had a prominent role: Wolf p. 332 notes in the copyright acknowledgments "Edited with new additional material by Alan Lomax". BMI also shows Lomax as a cowriter.[3] Some RS suggest that Lead Belly was being overly influenced by leftists, which resulted in his being investigated as a Communist. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:27, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Recordings and infobox: Should the infobox show the LoC or Musicraft single version? (the current recording location and date are incorrect). I think I've only heard the 1939 single. Where does the LoC version first appear? How do the two versions differ? Also, Lead Belly subsequently recorded other versions (live and ?). Also, did Lomax record a version ("Bushwa Blues")? Some info on these would add to the completeness of the article. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:24, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

My personal feeling is that folk songs that were written before 1950 aren't a good fit for infoboxes; there is just too much ambiguity. If we are going to continue to use a box, then I would continue with the April 1939 recording (MUS 227) as the first appearance, because the LoC recording was released by Electra and Rounder but I can't find any indication that it was directly released commercially. Looking over the discography in Wolf & Lornell, the song wasn't rerecorded until May 1944 for Folkways and then again in Feb 1946 and Nov 1948. Both of the last two recordings are bootlegs. It is honestly a miracle that this song wasn't forgotten in the 50s. --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 20:31, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Some details would be of interest: fast or slow, major or minor, 12-bar or pop, etc. Lead Belly was an early player of a 12-string guitar, which he frequently tuned down to C. "TBB" sounds like an open tuning (B♭?) Why was Lomax's name later added to the credits? Also, where can I find the different versions? —Ojorojo (talk) 14:37, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

I've found a couple:

• 1) Moderate tempo notated in ⁴
  ₄ time in the key of B♭. Beginning follows a twelve-bar blues arrangement.[4]
• 2) Copyright renewal 1959 includes Lomax's name. Can't tell if it was on the original.[Ibid]
• 3) the ~2:20 1938 LoC/Smithsonian version was released by Smithsonian Folkways on Bourgeois Blues (Lead Belly Legacy Vol. 2) in 1997.[5][6] Also included on Lead Belly: The Smithsonian Folkways Collection in 2005. These are probably the closest to "official" releases available.
• 4) the ~3:20 1939 Musicraft version appears on Leadbelly released on Archive of Folk & Jazz Music (aka Everest) in 1965.[7]
• 5) There is also a 5+ min. version.[8] A version on an Elektra LoC compilation from 1965 or 1976 is 5+ min.,[9] but it isn't included on the Smithsonian Folkways releases. Is this the 1944 Folkways or 1946 recording?

I think these three versions of the song show an interesting development. —Ojorojo (talk) 18:34, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

@Ojorojo: I turned my thesis in yesterday; I am going to look at these and see what I can add --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 19:03, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Paragraph removed

I've removed this paragraph:

Jeff Todd Titon and several other writers have suggested that Lead Belly had significant help with its authorship and claim it is not a genuine protest song. This theory stems from the idea that Lead Belly did not have a history of protest music before he was discovered by Lomax. Since the music that Lomax recorded was sold to northerners sympathetic to Civil Rights, it has been suggested that Lomax helped him write a song attractive to a white audience. Lead Belly admitted that the term "bourgeois" was unfamiliar to him, and it seems out of place compared to the vocabulary of his past work.

After listening to Episode 177 of the podcast "A History of Rock Music" (Start at around 41'25"), which totally debunks the claim that Ledbetter had help writing the song. The only help he may have had which seems reasonable to claim is that he may have needed help understanding the term "bourgeois", but that likely preceded his authorship of the song. Also the podcast claims that the paragraph here makes more out of the material in the cited source than is reasonable. It is reasonable to say that he started writing songs like this because of the people he was associating with. Many of Ledbetter's songs which he wrote entirely by himself have co-authorship with Lomax, because Lomax's exploitation of Ledbetter. I don't personally know very much about this subject but this paragraph has been publicly challenged in a popular, respected, extremely well-researched podcast, and the claims there seem totally reasonable. -- SamuelWantman 01:53, 24 March 2025 (UTC) SamuelWantman 01:53, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

I fully agree with this, and came here to do it myself before finding it had already been done - I've made the link to the podcast active and put it in a footnote, along with some of the context. I don't think it should take up too much space in the body of the article, because it's barely even a debate from what I can see, just a bit of supposition that's been wrongly amplified.EDRobson (talk) 12:02, 24 March 2025 (UTC)