As an American who has been fascinated by all things British for several years now... (Jim Dixon)

As someone who has been away from the folk scene for a while, and has only just signed up to this forum, I'm aware of the absurdity of responding to a question that was asked ten years ago; but I've just read through all of the above (I should get a life) and if Jim Dixon is still out there, I'm not convinced anyone has really answered his question. Yes, Ewan McColl et al used a technique that became the butt of tedious anti-folk jokes for decades- but the real issue is, why did the British feel the need to denigrate their cultural heritage in this way, while at the same time embracing American folk-roots culture, especially the blues. And today it's still generally considered cool to sing the blues but not to sing English traditional music, even in many "folk" clubs, where "anything goes" as long as it's not English. I suspect that this is the puzzle behind Jim's question. There is an analogy with bluegrass being rejected in the States as "Hillbilly" or yokel music so perhaps it is normal for a culture to reject its past traditions. The blues was rejected by white audiences in the States until the Brits revived it- but that was a racial issue. Perhaps these issues have been discussed on other threads?