Part of the problem is that each individual's experience of 'The Folk Revival' was different - and we then each argue from our own experience.

Where I came from there was no Political imperative to the revival (it existed in some performers, but it did not drive the movement); the extant tradition absorbed and encouraged the revival ('not bad, boy, but down here we used to sing it like this...'); there was no trad/comtemporary split, instead there were (traditional singers [and I don't mean singers who came to the revival and then sang traditional songs] who happliy sang contemporary songs).

I think the book - which is what this thread was about - is a perfectly valid comentary from the experience of those it quotes. And all it is is quotes. We still have the gaps.