I really like Stringsinger's post from 2 or 3 posts above. It encapsulates most of what I feel about folk music also.

In particular, Stringsinger said:

> The struggle is not whether folk music sells or creates an audience. The struggle is one of value. Do we value our musical heritage or accept the trash the media and the industry gives us? The answer lies in how much we want to be a part of the music. And not just on a professional level.

"The struggle is one of value". To me there are 2 different values - the social, "feel good" value of participating at a given time, either as a performer (professional/semi-pro/amateur/living-room) and listener, or as a "cultural object" i.e. persistent record captured of such a performance (think your favourite artist captured in performance, either now or in days gone by) - sometimes that is turned into a marketable product (the business end of the music business, or just to enable the creator to survive another day i.e. provide an income), sometimes not (think field recordings, audience tapes, etc.). "Value" is in the ear/eye of the beholder but I think it can be intrinsic as well as extrinsic - in other words, independent of whether or not a large number, small number, or almost zero people appreciate it at any one time (of course there is rubbish as well, that probably has no value, but who makes that decision??). Think Van Gogh's paintings that could not sell in his lifetime, and now go for millions. I would contend that their intrinsic value as a cultural/artistic object has not changed, even if their monetary value has...

That is why (among other things) I attempt to preserve my documentation (photographs and audio/video recordings) of the folk scene(s) that I have been involved with - cultural value to future listeners and viewers, plus of course those of us around today as well. If I put up a recording on youtube or donate a photo to wikimedia commons, it is there (in my intention) for the "long haul" as an item of either present or likely future cultural value... of course there is a cutoff point (again someone has to act as gatekeeper to avoid swamping the world with rubbish) but in general more is possibly better than less. E.g. I have a book of "complete works of Van Gogh" that includes early works (preliminary sketches and juvenilia) he would probably have consigned to the wastebasket in other circumstances, but are a dream to future scholars... again of questionable monetary value at the time. I guess I am just saying that artistic (and social/feel good) value and commercial value may occasionally coincide, but may also have no connection whatsoever, and we should not confuse them.


Cheers Tony