Cristian, I hope now you're getting a better idea of what those of us 'in the know' understand by "traditional" as opposed to "revival". 'Revival' singers sing traditional songs that they have learned consciously because they have developed an interest in that kind of material. 'Traditional' singers are generally understood to be those who learned the songs as a natural part of everyday life, from parents or relatives, from fellow workers or possibly in old-style pub singing sessions. Today's professional singers of traditional songs would all be considered 'revivalists', and whether we are part of an ongoing tradition, or part of a separate, self-perpetuating tradition based around folk clubs and other performance venues, or part of nothing at all, is a matter for debate. All of this is quite apart from the (sometimes overlapping) element that prefers to write songs or cover modern material.

There aren't too many traditional singers still around these days - many of the greats I heard, like Walter Pardon and the aforementioned Fred Jordan, are gone now, although collectors like John and Katie Howson are still finding singers in East Anglia and I guess there is still singing going on in some traveller communities. Incidentally, as Howard said, some of the more recent traditional singers have indeed fed on the folk revival for new material, and even going back to the days of Baring-Gould I've heard of one singer who sang a song for the Rev. B-G, was presented with a copy of "Songs of the West" by way of thank-you, and proceeded to add to his repertoire from the book. A feedback loop!

I sing traditional songs mainly because I love them and find them exciting for a whole raft of reasons too long to explain here. I also hope that by continuing to sing them I may occasionally pique the interest of younger musicians, either to want to sing the old songs themselves, or to do what you are suggesting and incorporate some of the musical or lyrical language into their own new songs. What happens beyond my generation is enirely up to the next generation, and no amount of Mudcat punditry is going to determine that.

As to whether 'traditional' and 'revival' singers could sit side by side in a folk club, well, until it lost its venue a couple of years ago we had a festival - The National Folk Festival - which encouraged precisely that - in mostly informal performance spaces. Other festivals have also booked performers from the tradition, and there are various pub sessions where tradition and revival mix. I'd be pretty confident in saying that most revival performers regard it as a privilege to be sharing songs with traditional singers (two of my most precious compliments came from Bob Copper and Fred Jordan), and certainly people like Fred - although he was a discerning listener and couldn't stand the long intros favoured by modern pros - often found plenty to enjoy in the revivalists' performances.

What goes on in folk clubs is another thing again. As Marje says, they are often very eclectic in the range of music they present. Although my own repertoire is very much based in the tradition (give or take the odd bit of blues or music hall or pop or made-up stuff), the folk club I enjoyed most was that run by Harry Boardman in Manchester where, in addition to top-notch unaccompanied singing, you would regularly hear modern political songs, Lancashire dialect material, blues, eccentric poetry, punk rock covers and God knows what else.

Now back to that tax return......