Wow, thanks for all the responses. I am obviously unfamiliar with the Mudcat community, and have been pleasantly surprised to get such a lively discussion going so quickly.

As far as the notion of a canon, I see clearly that it is a term with little value for discussing folk music. It is obviously a word with deep implications (a loaded canon if you will). I wasn't trying to suggest that any one of the collections by Lomax or others could constitute it, but perhaps 8or9or10 of such anthologies could begin to define a good place to start. But I agree that canon implies exclusivity, which leads to snobbery.

Even defining folk music is a fool's task: it's as constantly shifting and evolving as us primates are. One of the so called requirements seems to be producing music without a commercial bent. That would kick out Hank Williams Sr, Bob Dylan, and Pokey LaFarge out of the American folk music pantheon : no thank you! They're as authentically American as it gets. Another definition defines it as music of the people. Guess what Pete Seeger? Your dad went to Harvard, you're no folk musician! (in his defense he described himself as a singer or folk songs and not a folk singer, but still)

As for John Fahey, he was a folk musician responsible for the American Primitivism style of guitar picking. He later studied folklore and issued an anthology of the Mississippi bluesman Charlie Patton, "Screamin' and Hollerin' the Blues". His record label also released the final installment of the Harry Smith anthology.

That's all I got for now and thanks again to all that wrote back. I've gotten in email touch with Mick so I'll update any progress on that front for anyone interested. And I'll be sure to check this thread like a hawk and post new thoughts as they come to me!