Which came first?

[Austin]

Did stroke style, also known as minstrel style, and classic style come before clawhammer and thumb lead? I'm curious because there are conflicting stories. I don't know which one to believe...

[Ethan Schwartz]

"Stroke," "minstrel," "clawhammer," "thumb lead," etc. are all stylistic labels that are secondary to the basic techniques in question. Looking at extant West African instruments understood to share a common ancestor with the banjo, some are down-picked (meaning, striking with the back of the nail) whereas others are up-picked (plucking with the finger). Some are both up-picked and down-picked, depending on the player and situation. 

Banjo playing that developed in the context of minstrelsy (starting from the 1830s) focused on down-picking, which came to be known as stroke style. But as with anything related to minstrelsy, we should be extremely skeptical as to what extent it actually imitated the musical practice of slaves. And in the earliest banjo method, Briggs' Banjo Instructor of 1855, we see that "guitar style" (i.e., finger picking) technique already existed alongside stroke style even in the context of minstrelsy. The overall trend in the second half of the 19th century was then for guitar style to supplant stroke style, and the changing design of the instrument reflects this. 

Outside of the mainstream, some people continued to play stroke style, learned through contact with African American musicians and/or minstrelsy. Others played in a two-finger or psuedo three-finger way. Some of these more rural or folk styles were then popularized through the country music industry of the 1920s, which led to the folk revival beginning in the 1940s, and ultimately to what we know as old time music today. 

These types of labels tend to give the impression that there have always been distinct "schools" of banjo playing, which is not really the case (until relatively recently, that is). 

[Jody Stecher]

I think what you are asking is which came first: the techniques disseminated through books and the printed page or the same techniques disseminated through oral tradition.  What came first chronologically is not necessarily the source of what occurred later. African-American "folk"  down picking is the source of stroke style. I have not heard a credible disagreement about this. Folk up-picking was in use before the advent of classic banjo technique but I am not at all sure that it is the source.

The techniques of picking down and picking up on the strings of musical instruments existed in Africa and Europe (and elsewhere in the world as well) before the arrival of Africans or Europeans on the American continent. Within  the musically literate segment of the American population of all races the appearance of stroke style under that name came after the same technique was in use amongst African-Americans. 

The appearance of what was called guitar technique within the musically literate segment came at a time when the  use of that technique was already in use amongst those who learned directly from their family, neighbors, or mentors without the use of the printed page.  That does not mean that Converse and others pretended to have invented it. I see no reason to believe  that they were aware of its  existence concurrent with their innovation, or preceding it. 

I know or intuit  this from experience. At age fourteen I independently "invented" the guitar technique of Maybelle Carter several years before hearing her playing or even knowing that she existed. I "introduced it" to my immediate demographic: my extended family heard me play that way. They had never heard Maybelle either.  I heard recordings of her a few years later and later when still in my teens I witnessed her playing in person.  I did not steal or borrow the technique ; I simply stumbled upon it so to speak.  I had no bad intentions. I appropriated nothing and made no claims of originality.

Now back to early banjo history. What then developed was a loop. As soon as there was radio and recordings banjo players who had learned via the page were heard by the non-musically literate, and copied or emulated.  This we know from many verbal accounts. The records of Fred Van Eps were heard by "folk" banjo players. They were copied. What I think happened then was that some classic banjo players heard something they liked in the playing of the folk players who happened to be mirroring Van Eps and they in turn copied *that*. I have no reliable confirmable evidence of this in the banjo world. But there are verifiable stories of the same loop dynamic in other musical cultures.  The literate composer gets inspired by the music of an ear musician who was inspired by the literate music of an earlier composer who was inspired by an earlier generation of local folk musician who was etc.   This is documented in Europe, Turkey, India and China. Why not in Banjoland?

[Jody Stecher]

Yup.

Ethan Schwartz said:

"Stroke," "minstrel," "clawhammer," "thumb lead," etc. are all stylistic labels that are secondary to the basic techniques in question. Looking at extant West African instruments understood to share a common ancestor with the banjo, some are down-picked (meaning, striking with the back of the nail) whereas others are up-picked (plucking with the finger). Some are both up-picked and down-picked, depending on the player and situation. 

Banjo playing that developed in the context of minstrelsy (starting from the 1830s) focused on down-picking, which came to be known as stroke style. But as with anything related to minstrelsy, we should be extremely skeptical as to what extent it actually imitated the musical practice of slaves. And in the earliest banjo method, Briggs' Banjo Instructor of 1855, we see that "guitar style" (i.e., finger picking) technique already existed alongside stroke style even in the context of minstrelsy. The overall trend in the second half of the 19th century was then for guitar style to supplant stroke style, and the changing design of the instrument reflects this. 

Outside of the mainstream, some people continued to play stroke style, learned through contact with African American musicians and/or minstrelsy. Others played in a two-finger or psuedo three-finger way. Some of these more rural or folk styles were then popularized through the country music industry of the 1920s, which led to the folk revival beginning in the 1940s, and ultimately to what we know as old time music today. 

These types of labels tend to give the impression that there have always been distinct "schools" of banjo playing, which is not really the case (until relatively recently, that is). 

[Austin]

I know it's an instrument of the African diaspora. I'm just curious if maybe the Joel Walker Sweeney story is true and that he did learn to play the banjo from enslaved people on his plantation. I'm not sure because other people say that the banjo originated in Appalachia by the enslaved people there, but that doesn't sit right with me because clawhammer is nothing like stroke style and stroke style has more syncopation to it. I also found a blog post by Kristina R Gaddy, author of well of souls, who says that the evidence that it started there just doesn't add up. 

Ethan Schwartz said:

"Stroke," "minstrel," "clawhammer," "thumb lead," etc. are all stylistic labels that are secondary to the basic techniques in question. Looking at extant West African instruments understood to share a common ancestor with the banjo, some are down-picked (meaning, striking with the back of the nail) whereas others are up-picked (plucking with the finger). Some are both up-picked and down-picked, depending on the player and situation. 

Banjo playing that developed in the context of minstrelsy (starting from the 1830s) focused on down-picking, which came to be known as stroke style. But as with anything related to minstrelsy, we should be extremely skeptical as to what extent it actually imitated the musical practice of slaves. And in the earliest banjo method, Briggs' Banjo Instructor of 1855, we see that "guitar style" (i.e., finger picking) technique already existed alongside stroke style even in the context of minstrelsy. The overall trend in the second half of the 19th century was then for guitar style to supplant stroke style, and the changing design of the instrument reflects this. 

Outside of the mainstream, some people continued to play stroke style, learned through contact with African American musicians and/or minstrelsy. Others played in a two-finger or psuedo three-finger way. Some of these more rural or folk styles were then popularized through the country music industry of the 1920s, which led to the folk revival beginning in the 1940s, and ultimately to what we know as old time music today. 

These types of labels tend to give the impression that there have always been distinct "schools" of banjo playing, which is not really the case (until relatively recently, that is). 

[Jody Stecher]

1) The stroke technique is the same as Appalachian clawhammer. The music is different.  Syncopation is a musical characteristic not a technical one. Downstrokes are downstrokes. 

2) If the banjo originated in Appalachia how did it get to the Caribbean more than 100 years before there were black or white people living in Appalachia?  The banjo was everywhere from the Bahamas down to Trinidad.

3)Yes there were black banjo players  living in Appalachia. But at least some of them were up-pickers. Franklin George described to me the black string bands he heard as a youngster in West Virginia in the 1930s and 40s. He said it was similar to bluegrass music. A blues-tinged fiddle played the melody. The guitar played chords and rhythm. The banjo played ripples and arpeggios and counter melodies with thumb and fingers. Up-picking.  20 or 30 years earlier over on the western side of Appalachia in the Cumberland Plateau area on the Kentucky/Tennessee border young Virgil Anderson learned his down picking banjo style for playing music that was primarily melody and rhythm based from local white musicians. From local black musicians he learned up-picking for a repertoire that was primarily based on chord changes and rhythm too of course. 

Austin said:

I know it's an instrument of the African diaspora. I'm just curious if maybe the Joel Walker Sweeney story is true and that he did learn to play the banjo from enslaved people on his plantation. I'm not sure because other people say that the banjo originated in Appalachia by the enslaved people there, but that doesn't sit right with me because clawhammer is nothing like stroke style and stroke style has more syncopation to it. I also found a blog post by Kristina R Gaddy, author of well of souls, who says that the evidence that it started there just doesn't add up. 

Ethan Schwartz said:

"Stroke," "minstrel," "clawhammer," "thumb lead," etc. are all stylistic labels that are secondary to the basic techniques in question. Looking at extant West African instruments understood to share a common ancestor with the banjo, some are down-picked (meaning, striking with the back of the nail) whereas others are up-picked (plucking with the finger). Some are both up-picked and down-picked, depending on the player and situation. 

Banjo playing that developed in the context of minstrelsy (starting from the 1830s) focused on down-picking, which came to be known as stroke style. But as with anything related to minstrelsy, we should be extremely skeptical as to what extent it actually imitated the musical practice of slaves. And in the earliest banjo method, Briggs' Banjo Instructor of 1855, we see that "guitar style" (i.e., finger picking) technique already existed alongside stroke style even in the context of minstrelsy. The overall trend in the second half of the 19th century was then for guitar style to supplant stroke style, and the changing design of the instrument reflects this. 

Outside of the mainstream, some people continued to play stroke style, learned through contact with African American musicians and/or minstrelsy. Others played in a two-finger or psuedo three-finger way. Some of these more rural or folk styles were then popularized through the country music industry of the 1920s, which led to the folk revival beginning in the 1940s, and ultimately to what we know as old time music today. 

These types of labels tend to give the impression that there have always been distinct "schools" of banjo playing, which is not really the case (until relatively recently, that is). 

[Austin]

I heard that Appalachian clawhammer was an imitation of the old stroke style.

Jody Stecher said:

1) The stroke technique is the same as Appalachian clawhammer. The music is different.  Syncopation is a musical characteristic not a technical one. Downstrokes are downstrokes. 

2) If the banjo originated in Appalachia how did it get to the Caribbean more than 100 years before there were black or white people living in Appalachia?  The banjo was everywhere from the Bahamas down to Trinidad.

3)Yes there were black banjo players  living in Appalachia. But at least some of them were up-pickers. Franklin George described to me the black string bands he heard as a youngster in West Virginia in the 1930s and 40s. He said it was similar to bluegrass music. A blues-tinged fiddle played the melody. The guitar played chords and rhythm. The banjo played ripples and arpeggios and counter melodies with thumb and fingers. Up-picking.  20 or 30 years earlier over on the western side of Appalachia in the Cumberland Plateau area on the Kentucky/Tennessee border young Virgil Anderson learned his down picking banjo style for playing music that was primarily melody and rhythm based from local white musicians. From local black musicians he learned up-picking for a repertoire that was primarily based on chord changes and rhythm too of course. 

Austin said:

I know it's an instrument of the African diaspora. I'm just curious if maybe the Joel Walker Sweeney story is true and that he did learn to play the banjo from enslaved people on his plantation. I'm not sure because other people say that the banjo originated in Appalachia by the enslaved people there, but that doesn't sit right with me because clawhammer is nothing like stroke style and stroke style has more syncopation to it. I also found a blog post by Kristina R Gaddy, author of well of souls, who says that the evidence that it started there just doesn't add up. 

Ethan Schwartz said:

"Stroke," "minstrel," "clawhammer," "thumb lead," etc. are all stylistic labels that are secondary to the basic techniques in question. Looking at extant West African instruments understood to share a common ancestor with the banjo, some are down-picked (meaning, striking with the back of the nail) whereas others are up-picked (plucking with the finger). Some are both up-picked and down-picked, depending on the player and situation. 

Banjo playing that developed in the context of minstrelsy (starting from the 1830s) focused on down-picking, which came to be known as stroke style. But as with anything related to minstrelsy, we should be extremely skeptical as to what extent it actually imitated the musical practice of slaves. And in the earliest banjo method, Briggs' Banjo Instructor of 1855, we see that "guitar style" (i.e., finger picking) technique already existed alongside stroke style even in the context of minstrelsy. The overall trend in the second half of the 19th century was then for guitar style to supplant stroke style, and the changing design of the instrument reflects this. 

Outside of the mainstream, some people continued to play stroke style, learned through contact with African American musicians and/or minstrelsy. Others played in a two-finger or psuedo three-finger way. Some of these more rural or folk styles were then popularized through the country music industry of the 1920s, which led to the folk revival beginning in the 1940s, and ultimately to what we know as old time music today. 

These types of labels tend to give the impression that there have always been distinct "schools" of banjo playing, which is not really the case (until relatively recently, that is). 

[Erik]

Im sorry to bring drama into this community. I am genuinely interested in classic style and have been ever since i started playing like 15 years ago.

Maybe on here you'll state what it is you're searching for. You've caused nothing but trouble on the reddit banjo community. You have argued with everyone that has commented on your posts there. It really seems like you have a personal vendetta against old time and bluegrass banjo. You've basically said that clawhammer is a poor imitation of minstrel stroke style that loses the complexity found in stroke style that's in the banjo tutors. You whittled it down to being nothing more than simple fiddle tunes with lots of drone string. People gave you examples and you wouldn't have it. You really hate bluegrass and seemed hyper fixated on the fact that there is not formal end all be all instruction that mirrors what a student of classical music would go through. You said things like every bluegrass banjo player holds their banjo wrong and fingers wrong. You said that this is a problem because Earl Scruggs was self taught and therefore everyone in the bluegrass world is destined for failure since their foundation is off a self taught musician. It doesn't make sense in any way. You've also had the hot takes of Bela Fleck and Noam Pikely aren't that good. You diminished Bela by saying his music composition skills are weak and what he has accomplished on the instrument is not that impressive. You said Noam needs to work on his tone and that he is irresponsible and dangerous for stretching his pinky so far to reach a note. 

What's your end goal? Are you just looking for validation in why you believe classic and minstrel stroke music is the only true way to play banjo? It's okay to have opinions and preferences about music. It's not okay to drag entire communities through the mud because they don't play like you think they should be. 

[Joel Hooks]

Hi Erik, consider the follies of youth. 

Erik said:

Im sorry to bring drama into this community. I am genuinely interested in classic style and have been ever since i started playing like 15 years ago.

Maybe on here you'll state what it is you're searching for. You've caused nothing but trouble on the reddit banjo community. You have argued with everyone that has commented on your posts there. It really seems like you have a personal vendetta against old time and bluegrass banjo. You've basically said that clawhammer is a poor imitation of minstrel stroke style that loses the complexity found in stroke style that's in the banjo tutors. You whittled it down to being nothing more than simple fiddle tunes with lots of drone string. People gave you examples and you wouldn't have it. You really hate bluegrass and seemed hyper fixated on the fact that there is not formal end all be all instruction that mirrors what a student of classical music would go through. You said things like every bluegrass banjo player holds their banjo wrong and fingers wrong. You said that this is a problem because Earl Scruggs was self taught and therefore everyone in the bluegrass world is destined for failure since their foundation is off a self taught musician. It doesn't make sense in any way. You've also had the hot takes of Bela Fleck and Noam Pikely aren't that good. You diminished Bela by saying his music composition skills are weak and what he has accomplished on the instrument is not that impressive. You said Noam needs to work on his tone and that he is irresponsible and dangerous for stretching his pinky so far to reach a note. 

What's your end goal? Are you just looking for validation in why you believe classic and minstrel stroke music is the only true way to play banjo? It's okay to have opinions and preferences about music. It's not okay to drag entire communities through the mud because they don't play like you think they should be. 

[Joel Hooks]

Hey Austin,

Time for some homework that is not random website noise. 

"America's Instrument" Bollman and Gura. Not currently in print, copies are pretty pricy so interlibrary loan might be a good option, though I do recommend trying to get a copy or at least putting it on your radar if a low price example comes up for sale.  This book mostly covers Bollman's collection.  Bollman is focused on Boston area makers and overlooks a good amount of info.  There are also some literal interpretations of things that were obviously good natured publicity stunts.  Leaps and bounds are made to get to Vega WL and Tubaphone models. 

"Roots and Branches" edited Winans.  This is good, though I STONGLY recommend you not read the chapter written by George Gibson, or at least read it with very skeptical eyes. 

"Half Barbaric Twang", Lynn.  Okay, this one needs some introduction.  It is a fleshed out dissertation that was turned into a book.  Lynn seems to have a very strong motive and bias influenced by academia.  She implies anything outside of "folk music" is artificial and essentially plastic.  While covering the classic era in detail, she loses much of the fun and popular aspect.  She mentions that it was largely motivated by working class while focusing on the "wealthy elite" and, more or less, discounting the working class influence.

She covers what we call "classic banjo" while not really understanding the music or culture.  She points out that it was not "classical" music, but I am left with the idea that she does not believe what she writes. 

That said, much of what she writes is factual as far as the data we have, but it is heavily slanted.  A running theme is aggression towards the idea of anyone who made a living and was successful commercially in the classic banjo era. 

Many times she just did not get "the joke" with things.  Her interpretation strips any humor or fun away and focuses on "social constructs" implying that people did not want to play this music or even like it, but were forced to as part of social repression or something.   She also seems to be rushing to get to "folk music" and "old time", you know, the authentic stuff. 

Nevertheless, it is worth reading.

These books will give you a foundation in the footnotes of what to further search.  Since the primary documentation is now available at the click of a mouse, I recommend checking citations as the can often be misquoted or misinterpreted.  One example of this seems to be attribution things to S. S. Stewart which he did not write, or were taking out of context.  Often academics will take SSS' sarcasm at face value and not "get the joke" (this is a running theme-- not getting the joke or fun).

My unsolicited advice.  I am not on Reddit as I find the formant to be clunky, disorganized and hard to follow, so I do not know of your posts there.  But perhaps take a breath and spend some time getting a fuller picture.  I am guilty of being pretty aggressive online myself but I am careful that when I make claims I have something to back it up ready to post (usually in documents).  "Old time" and "bluegrass" are real music with real traditions and strong emotional bonds from those involved.  Banjoists who play those styles devote countless hours of practice. 

What we call "classic banjo" already has a bad reputation as being "uppity" and "arrogant", my guess is because the tradition uses notation to record and transmit music.  We need ambassadors that show how approachable the music is and that notation is not scary. 

We don't need any help running people off. 

[Austin]

I'm sorry Joel. 

Joel Hooks said:

Hey Austin,

Time for some homework that is not random website noise. 

"America's Instrument" Bollman and Gura. Not currently in print, copies are pretty pricy so interlibrary loan might be a good option, though I do recommend trying to get a copy or at least putting it on your radar if a low price example comes up for sale.  This book mostly covers Bollman's collection.  Bollman is focused on Boston area makers and overlooks a good amount of info.  There are also some literal interpretations of things that were obviously good natured publicity stunts.  Leaps and bounds are made to get to Vega WL and Tubaphone models. 

"Roots and Branches" edited Winans.  This is good, though I STONGLY recommend you not read the chapter written by George Gibson, or at least read it with very skeptical eyes. 

"Half Barbaric Twang", Lynn.  Okay, this one needs some introduction.  It is a fleshed out dissertation that was turned into a book.  Lynn seems to have a very strong motive and bias influenced by academia.  She implies anything outside of "folk music" is artificial and essentially plastic.  While covering the classic era in detail, she loses much of the fun and popular aspect.  She mentions that it was largely motivated by working class while focusing on the "wealthy elite" and, more or less, discounting the working class influence.

She covers what we call "classic banjo" while not really understanding the music or culture.  She points out that it was not "classical" music, but I am left with the idea that she does not believe what she writes. 

That said, much of what she writes is factual as far as the data we have, but it is heavily slanted.  A running theme is aggression towards the idea of anyone who made a living and was successful commercially in the classic banjo era. 

Many times she just did not get "the joke" with things.  Her interpretation strips any humor or fun away and focuses on "social constructs" implying that people did not want to play this music or even like it, but were forced to as part of social repression or something.   She also seems to be rushing to get to "folk music" and "old time", you know, the authentic stuff. 

Nevertheless, it is worth reading.

These books will give you a foundation in the footnotes of what to further search.  Since the primary documentation is now available at the click of a mouse, I recommend checking citations as the can often be misquoted or misinterpreted.  One example of this seems to be attribution things to S. S. Stewart which he did not write, or were taking out of context.  Often academics will take SSS' sarcasm at face value and not "get the joke" (this is a running theme-- not getting the joke or fun).

My unsolicited advice.  I am not on Reddit as I find the formant to be clunky, disorganized and hard to follow, so I do not know of your posts there.  But perhaps take a breath and spend some time getting a fuller picture.  I am guilty of being pretty aggressive online myself but I am careful that when I make claims I have something to back it up ready to post (usually in documents).  "Old time" and "bluegrass" are real music with real traditions and strong emotional bonds from those involved.  Banjoists who play those styles devote countless hours of practice. 

What we call "classic banjo" already has a bad reputation as being "uppity" and "arrogant", my guess is because the tradition uses notation to record and transmit music.  We need ambassadors that show how approachable the music is and that notation is not scary. 

We don't need any help running people off. 

[Austin]

Truth is, I have a very limited area of interest right now for reasons I won't go into, I'm trying to Branch out. I just have a hard time not defending what I like. It's not that I like to feel Superior. It's more that I like to know if I'm on the right track for my goals and I express that the wrong way. It just seems like there's so much lost in what could be taught and A bit of strange technique compared to what I was taught and am continuing to be taught. I also just don't want people being taught the wrong things. As far as I know it could lead to injury if they're not careful. I really am sorry that I'm not the best ambassador for promoting this technique to other banjoists. I know I'll have to learn to be if I want to accomplish that goal. 

Joel Hooks said:

Hey Austin,

Time for some homework that is not random website noise. 

"America's Instrument" Bollman and Gura. Not currently in print, copies are pretty pricy so interlibrary loan might be a good option, though I do recommend trying to get a copy or at least putting it on your radar if a low price example comes up for sale.  This book mostly covers Bollman's collection.  Bollman is focused on Boston area makers and overlooks a good amount of info.  There are also some literal interpretations of things that were obviously good natured publicity stunts.  Leaps and bounds are made to get to Vega WL and Tubaphone models. 

"Roots and Branches" edited Winans.  This is good, though I STONGLY recommend you not read the chapter written by George Gibson, or at least read it with very skeptical eyes. 

"Half Barbaric Twang", Lynn.  Okay, this one needs some introduction.  It is a fleshed out dissertation that was turned into a book.  Lynn seems to have a very strong motive and bias influenced by academia.  She implies anything outside of "folk music" is artificial and essentially plastic.  While covering the classic era in detail, she loses much of the fun and popular aspect.  She mentions that it was largely motivated by working class while focusing on the "wealthy elite" and, more or less, discounting the working class influence.

She covers what we call "classic banjo" while not really understanding the music or culture.  She points out that it was not "classical" music, but I am left with the idea that she does not believe what she writes. 

That said, much of what she writes is factual as far as the data we have, but it is heavily slanted.  A running theme is aggression towards the idea of anyone who made a living and was successful commercially in the classic banjo era. 

Many times she just did not get "the joke" with things.  Her interpretation strips any humor or fun away and focuses on "social constructs" implying that people did not want to play this music or even like it, but were forced to as part of social repression or something.   She also seems to be rushing to get to "folk music" and "old time", you know, the authentic stuff. 

Nevertheless, it is worth reading.

These books will give you a foundation in the footnotes of what to further search.  Since the primary documentation is now available at the click of a mouse, I recommend checking citations as the can often be misquoted or misinterpreted.  One example of this seems to be attribution things to S. S. Stewart which he did not write, or were taking out of context.  Often academics will take SSS' sarcasm at face value and not "get the joke" (this is a running theme-- not getting the joke or fun).

My unsolicited advice.  I am not on Reddit as I find the formant to be clunky, disorganized and hard to follow, so I do not know of your posts there.  But perhaps take a breath and spend some time getting a fuller picture.  I am guilty of being pretty aggressive online myself but I am careful that when I make claims I have something to back it up ready to post (usually in documents).  "Old time" and "bluegrass" are real music with real traditions and strong emotional bonds from those involved.  Banjoists who play those styles devote countless hours of practice. 

What we call "classic banjo" already has a bad reputation as being "uppity" and "arrogant", my guess is because the tradition uses notation to record and transmit music.  We need ambassadors that show how approachable the music is and that notation is not scary. 

We don't need any help running people off. 

[Russ Chandler]

Joel, apologies if you've been through this before but what is your objection to the George Gibson chapter in R&B?