The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #99963   Message #2002844
Posted By: GUEST,Someone else
21-Mar-07 - 03:43 AM
Thread Name: It isn't 'Folk', but what is it we do?
Subject: RE: It isn't 'Folk', but what is it we do?
See? There's another point of view, which is quite different to the other definitions, but has validity.

And another from another thread: A "folk song" or "folk tune" is defined by its source, and is still a folk song or tune if performed in a another style. But it is not "folk music" if it is performed in a non-participatory context".

None of the disputes about 'folk' matter, in the greater scheme of things, because that word has lost it's old precise meaning - and its new uses do not lead to any confusion or damage. The word works in all the contaxted mentioned above and on the other thread.

But the dispute about 'traditional' is a very different matter, because the confusion affects artists rights and damages our ability to track and so learn from the history of music.

The 1954 defintion of 'folk,' and others of a similar purpose, are all attempting to define what we now call Trad. Let's try to fix that before Trad looses its focus too - because we ain't got no more!