Dick, I think there are a few issues here, without (I hope) dredging up all the old AL Lloyd arguments again. Firstly, there is a differce between a body of songs changing organically over a period of time, and one person, with access to mass-market publishing and broadcast media, stepping in and deliberately and substantially changing a number of them in a much shorter period of time.

Secondly, there is the issue of what his responsibility is to the music, given his position. As a fairly unknown singer in a pub, or even as a well-known singer with a recording contract, he would have been free do what he liked to the songs. But as someone who has set themselves up as a researcher, an expert, even a semi-academic, to re-write songs and make up false sources for the new versions is pretty much indefensible. Thirdly, there is the question of motivation. A number of AL Lloyd's "re-writes" were created to serve his own political leanings - where songs did not exist to support his politics, or where he felt their sentiments were not expressed sufficiently strongly, he changed them, and then pretended that these songs, as they stood, were part of the fabric of social history. I can't help seeing this as a betrayal.


I hope you understand my point: anyone who wants to can do anything they like to any song. Just please be honest about it.