OK, this is probably a weary old topic in these parts, but I ask as a genuinely interested and genuinely confused Brit.

Having just watched the BBC TV series 'Folk America' (which I thought was mostly excellent) I noticed how the series was a little vague on issues of musical genre. This could be for the very good reason, of course, that there are often very blurred lines between genres and sometimes hardly any lines at all (except when critics and/or historians put them there).

In the early part of the series, there were discussions of artists like The Carter Family and Jimmie Rodgers who I have always thought of as belonging primarily to the history of country music, whereas the series made an excellent case for their important role in the history of American folk.

So: where do those lines get drawn, if indeed they need to exist. How do those of you who relate most to the American folk tradition feel about country music ? Same roots but different histories ? Political differences as much as stylistic ones ? Do (excuse the choice of examples - first ones I thought of) Pete Seeger and Dolly Parton draw from the same sources however differently their careers and images panned out ? Is it a matter of commercialisation and the spangly conservatism of much mainstream country ? I have seen performers like Emmylou Harris and Steve Earle discussed on Mudcat but a lot of country performers don't get mentioned. Isn't (say) Loretta Lynn part of the history of American folk ?

I'd be interested to hear what people think. And please note: I am **not** asking for another 'what is folk' thread!!