Hi RJM, as per my comments on Lloyd, I'm a big fan of MacColl and his contribution to the movement (I even have songs of his in my own formative repertoire), but as with Lloyd it's important not to overlook the problems and contradictions of their practice.

I'm happy to accept a correction that that approach was more to do with the Singers Club, but I've heard direct testimony from a few who took part about this requirement, and how onerous it was. It hardly seems better to me, that it 'only' happened in one setting but not the other - especially as the club would have reached (and probably affected the practice of) far more participants (performers and audiences) over the years than the smaller, tighter group.

As for the relevance - you don't need me to remind you of the closeness in relationship between MacColl and Lloyd. I'm attempting to reflect upon parallels between key figures of the revival, as part of a broader reflection upon the attitudes and tendencies of these luminaries. I'm not bashing either of them, nor - indeed - Robert Graves, in my earlier post.

Since you seem keen to return to the central point, and since you insisted upon evidence to underpin assertions, it would be great to hear your thoughts on Gibb's tremendously insightful contribution above.