Hmmmmmm.. Lots of points of view here. One thing I'd add is that the last song has a special prominence because it's what you leave people with. The song that's most frehly in their heads. The first song of the first set and the final song of the evening are the bookends of a performance and each have their separate and different place. How we chose those songs is a matter of personal preference, even if we think that there is some higher "rule" that must not be broken. Roak and Roll "rules" are different than folk rules, and jazz rules, and gospel rules. And like all rules, they itch to be broken. I've always been told that you start the first set with an upbeat, reasonably high-energy song, and that makes sense to me. It's a way to pull people into the music and get them up to speed. I think that "rule" applies fairly commonly to rock and roll, jazz, folk, bluegrass(if you consider it a separate category from folk) and gospel.

Now, the last song has a different function, depending on the kind of music and audience. A punk rock band and a mosh pit aren't going to finish with a reflective ballad. They want to pump up the volume and the adrenaline and send their audience out on a real high. Same with rock and roll, because they are mostly high-energy forms of music. I'm not a bluegrass musician and don't attend a lot of bluegrass concerts, but my limited experience makes me believe that a knock-out finish is more likely with a bluegrass band than an unaccompanied ballad singer. When I am doing folk, I've fallen into a pattern of doing a more reflective song at the end. For a long time, I did Handful of Songs, because it seemed to sum up, and bring to a closure an evening of songs. Partly, that's laziness on my part, though. An upbeat song or country blues would work fine, too. With my gospel quartet, we go both ways... sometimes ending on the most refelctive song of the evening, and sometimes with the most energetic, rocking song of the night. Both work. Sometimes it depends on the mood of the musician (or musicians) and sometimes it's driven more by the audience. At one time or another, just about anything might be "right."

I don't ever remember a group or performer finishing an evening of music with something uncharacteristic of their repertoire, so I suspect it's not rampant. I ran a concert series for 27 years, so I've head a lot of concerts with a variety of music. Sometimes, I think that folk music audiences need a little shot of adrenaline every once in awhile before they lapse into preciousness or hushed reverence. Echhh!!!! I've felt ornery enough on occasion to slip Blue Monday or Searchin' into a folk festival, just to revive the audience. And, I've always gotten an enthusiastic response. We ain't farmers or mill workers. We grew up in a contemporary world, and even though we all find something of value in older music, that doesn't mean that it is inherently any better than contemporary music. (I gulp, saying that because I can't find a lot that's of value in much of current music, whether it's country, rock and roll, rap, hip hop or even in mass choir gospel music.) It all feels to corporatized, with the only reason for it's existence to be to make money. But then, we are all in danger of slipping in to old fartdom.

Me included.

Jerry