I think the word entertainment gets a bad press sometimes. Everyone likes to be entertained, one way or another. Some people, for instance, might find only find dour and po-faced stuff entertaining. Me, I generally like my entertainment to be a bit of a challenge.

That said, it's still a pertinent distinction with regard to folk music. Sometimes (note the sometimes) you'll attend a folk night where a performer feels a need to apologize for the lack of singalong choruses, often as not when their performing their own material – you sometimes sense that an audience is really looking forward to an evening of songs to sing along to, songs to accompany drinking and sometimes eating.

Nothing wrong with that of course, only there can sometimes be a bit of a mismatch.

(Recently been reading Dazzling Stranger, the book about Bert Jansch and the Brit folk scene of the 60s, and it's something that came up a couple of times in anecdote there: that some folk audiences occasionally felt a bit nonplussed, disgruntled or in rare cases even cheated by Jansch not providing what they were after from a night out to the folk club.)

I have a sort of "Love/Irked" attitude to this . (Love/Hate would be too strong.) On the one hand, I love the informality and inclusive, everyone-takes-part aspect of traditional folk club music-making. It's genuinely warming and participative and ego-free, and it distinguishes it completely from other forms of live music experiences (eg most classical music concerts). It dispenses with all those ideals of stars and celebrities, such a turn-off in pop music.

On the other hand, sometimes I feel it can be a little conservative, a little too cosy, like glorified karaoke. Too much of it and musicians end up forgetting that music is an art form, neglecting to push themselves.

But it's on a case-by-case basis – not really something it's possible to generalize about. There's really good art and there are really fun nights out, and sometimes they are one and the same thing.