I don't think I have seen so much rubbish in a long time.

I am also baffled why people want to call what they do "folk music" when clearly, they don't really want there to be any folk music. Every time I re-read the 1954 definition I feel how obviously sensible it is - and as for the sneers about academics and teachers taking over, I have never ever read so much pretentious twaddle as those here who spend usually about an A4 page replete with polysyllabics, pushing the boundaries of where piles of words slump into meaninglessness, trying to rubbish the eminently sensible definition.

It is also obvious upon a simple reading that the definition of "Folk music" is nation and style free. So the traditional chants of Qwertyuiop (as cited above) would be, if existing, folk music.

Certainly, I have never used the 1954 definition to discredit singer/songwriters. It's not about dismissing what they do. They can do it if they want to, and people can listen to it if they want to. It's about explaining the difference (to, I may add, apparently the ignorant).

There is, in fact, largely, a "do what you wilt" attitude (although I'm not quite clear where the Hell Fire Club comes into it) which is why Lizzie's original point is senseless.