Jim Carroll: "It's not really what any club presents that's the problem - it's what it claims to be in the order of things that's the problem and what has caused the damage."

You imply that the exemplary club of which you speak has a constitution or mission statement which closely constrains the type of music it allows. I'm not sure I would want to get involved in such a strait-jacketed organisation and that certainly hasn't been my experience of folk clubs. sessions and sing-arounds (although I know they exist).

A random trawl of the web sites of a few "folk clubs" produced the following descriptions:

• "a live music club, embracing all styles of acoustic and folk music"


• "usually acoustic, covering a wide range of styles"


• "Although we are a folk club, we do not restrict ourselves to purely traditional or contemporary folk music. Blues, Country, Music Hall and sometimes even 60s pop may be heard! Indeed, any good acoustic music."


• "We strive to encourage and showcase young, local and emerging talent, whilst offering the very best in Folk, Roots and Acoustic Music from all around the UK and abroad"

That was from the first few links on a Google search. I didn't censor a single club which said "traditional English music only". You seem to be in the minority in thinking "folk club" has a very restrictive meaning.

Please don't misunderstand, I have nothing against English traditional music. I just embrace other styles. I once coined a phrase something like "Your folk music is someone else's world music". I think that's quite appropriate. While we may each have a slightly different perspective on what is valid folk music, there's no reason we can't all co-exist, be inclusive, maybe even in the same club. :-)