Very interesting discussion Kat, I must admit I err on the side of historical accuracy. Of course we are all agreed that we should not seek to offend, but there are many variables to be considered, for example I suspect that songs and terms that are quite acceptable in the UK and NZ would not be in parts of the US, and vice versa.

From a purely artistic point of view, I don't think anyone has the right not to be offended. I'm not talking about obvious incompatibilities, it may not be prudent to sing "Marching through Georgia" at the local KKK convention, but as someone pointed out in another thread, if you go along to see a performance from a band that advertises themselves as "Irish Republican" you should not be offended if they sing songs supporting the PIRA. Similarly if someone promotes themselves as a Traditional shantyman, then don't be surprised by references to "black sheep", violence against authority, and tales of loose morals. Again it comes down to both tolerance and intelligence on both sides. "Offence" is, in the cases we are discussing (ie not the "vile and hateful" ones that Bill cameron refers to), I believe derived from the attitude of the performer and audience, not the intrinsic content of the song.

Having said all that, even if I am completely wrong, that does not excuse the stupidity that Banjer described of lamenting the loss of part of your cultural heritage in one breath, and then participating in that process the next. In fairness to the gentleman in question, I would suggest that the latter may have been forced on him by his publisher, but again a footnote to that effect and reference to where the original text could be found would have solved the problem.

Pete M