Talk:The Unfortunate Rake

[Untitled]

Hello

1 I hope this is in the right place. This article begins by stating that the song has evolved via 'the folk process'. This statement seems to beg the question of what the folk process is. Definitions of 'folk' and ideas about what the processes involved are differ and are contentious. Following a few wiki links shows this to be the case.

For example, Phillips Barry, who seems to have been the first to suggest that this song had Irish origins, held to a 'communal reconstruction theory', which was the subject of debate. A L Lloyd, another writer on the subject, and, probably, the author of one variant, was, broadly speaking, Marxist, and in any case later wrote ideas about folklore which were very broad.

Would it not be better to acknowledge this in the article?

2 After months of following back references, I cannot find any original (ie 19th century lyrics with title ) actually called The Unfortunate Rake. I can find an Irish tune with that title, which somebody surmised might originally have gone with the words of the Unfortunate Lad, but no evidence to support that. The main fuel for current beliefs that such a song existed, appears to be the Folkways LP, though plainly the idea was around (though not referenced/evidenced) earlier than that. Does anybody in the Wiki community have the missing piece of the puzzle, or is this an example of an unverified idea taking root and being passed down via the culture?

Thank you for reading, and looking forward to information/references/sources, and ideally ones that do not simply parrot the liner notes to the FOlkways LP, which so many seem to do.

I am sorry to have made so many alterations: I am still getting used to working within Wiki, and have not learned all the tricks of the trade. Kate Mash 14:34, 7 November 2017 (UTC)Kate Mash — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kate Mash (talk • contribs)

I have no opinion about whether or not the Unfortunate Lad and the Unfortunate Rake articles ought to be merged. My only opinion relates to the St. James Infirmary Blues article. I think that SJI's possible Unfortunate predecessors should be a footnote to one sentence of the SJI article, and not a discussion taking up 60% of the SJI article.

Several Talk comments in the SJI Talk, preceding me, make the same point.

The Unfortunate material in the SJI article looks to be as long or longer that either of the two Unfortunate articles. Sprucegrouse (talk) 21:31, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Merge request

The recently expanded article, The Unfortunate Lad, was recently changed from a redirect to an article. It covers the same topic but has some other references. @Kate Mash: I see you have article authorship on this article and did almost all of the changes on the Unfortunate Lad article, can you please explain why you have them as separate articles? Please keep in mind according to WP:COMMONNAME Ambiguous or inaccurate names for the article subject, as determined in reliable sources, are often avoided even though they may be more frequently used by reliable sources, meaning that this article can be merged to either name so long as consensus is established. Darcyisverycute (talk) 13:07, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi still thinking and checking wiki advice on names. It seems to me best to get the Rake article to contain stuff about airs and songs of that name but to include a redirect, suitably worded, to the Lad article for people seeking info on the antecedents of Loreto, Cowboys Lament, St James. What say you about this?. By the way thank you for getting involved. I have been researching this topic for years and was delighted to read Prof Jenkins literature review, which sets the record straight. But obviously I’m not a wiki expert though I do want to respect its ethos and guidance so your comments and discussion very welcome Kate Mash 15:28, 28 December 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kate Mash (talk • contribs)

In fact a lot of the Rake Article can be deleted. The synopsis is redundant as the actual words are in the public domain.

they are to be seen in digitised copies of the actual Such broadsheets and others on the website of a library within the university of Oxford (Creative Commons licence). Kate Mash 15:20, 28 December 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kate Mash (talk • contribs)

Looking again at your wiki info on wrong or misleading titles: both titles are valid but though there has been some error with a ballad whose real name was lad being called rake, there is some true information as per reliable sources that some valid matter relates to the rake and not the lad. Airs or tunes of that name ie The Unfortunate Rake are historically attested. Therefore both titles are correct; there should be two articles.

Thank you Kate Mash 14:59, 28 December 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kate Mash (talk • contribs)

This is complicated. For much of the twentieth century an incorrect narrative relating to a 19th century broadside ballad was taken as fact. However research by Professor Jenkin has demonstrated that within that the use of the term ‘the unfortunate take’ a title was incorrect. It was a mistake first made by a person called Philips Barry and repeated.

i am slowly amending the article relating to The Unfortunate Rake. There were in fact a number of tunes with this name, which appear to have had nothing to do historically with the ballad about the Lock Hospital though folkloric material sometimes wonders whether they might have been linked.

on that basis, it seems reasonable to keep an entry for the Rake, but to render it more appropriate for Wiki.

Mixing the two at the moment would not be helpful as I am trying to ensure that errors from the Rake article are dealt with.

longer term maybe a merger might be Appropriate.

happy to discuss.

Thanks for your interest Kate Mash 14:53, 28 December 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kate Mash (talk • contribs)