well, one major difficulty in all this is that 'folks' simply dont use the word 'folk' in the same way. One group means old & traditional songs which have survived for some ill-defined number of years......others mean any songs being happily sung by common people. They REALLY are not speaking the same language. And if by chance they realize this, then the discussion turns to WHICH of their usages should be employed..

If the common term were 'traditional', the definition would be a 'bit' easier---though even that gets mangled as some want to claim that Dylan has now become 'trad' and others want to reserve 'trad' for stuff that is "X" numbers of years old, or that has no known author...etc...

Despite all the thousands of words written, we all know there ARE differences in songs...in the feel, in the type of tunes, in the subject matter, in the manner of dissemination, in the age, in the degree of anononymity of the author...and a few other things!

I, personally, **LIKE** having categories, so that I can easily find the music I prefer and not buy a CD which purports to be 'folk', but ends up being trite little songs by some "young girl singing her diary" in breathy chanting. (what?, ME? narrowminded?...naawwwww!)

Others, more eclectic than I in their tastes, avoid much to do with categories, and just like 'music'...and simply don't CARE if a concert is 75% songs written in the last 10 years. I do care! It's not that those are bad songs, it's just that I want to know what to expect, so that I can decide. I simply would like to have a word or phrase to describe the kinds of music I prefer, and not have it co-opted and watered down by those seeking to homogenize everything.

(ok...go on with what you were doing..*grin*...I do this now & then...it purges my mind temporarily and helps ME think about the issue)