I generally agree with nerd, fogie, and much of what Malcolm says. Now, I'm only talking about my perceptions here, so please everyone understand I'm not claiming my percerptions to be facts. Having said that...

Malcolm, in light of your post here, I'm curious to hear your take on the situation described at Whitby that spawned both this and the other eltitist thread. Because it is exactly that sort of situation (as described by Mike of Northumbria) that I find elitist and off-putting, as a long time American Folkie. Again, I'm speaking strictly for myself here--these are my perceptions only. But based upon Mike's description of the events at said pub, I'd say it was a textbook case of the sort of elitism in sessions I increasingly hear both insiders and outsiders complaining about these days.

Let me just add, I agree with Malcolm that the sort of session I am describing is one that is common in Britain and Ireland. Irish sessions in North America are conducted pretty much the same as they are over there in my experience. However, I view the British/Irish session as we know it today to be a newer tradition which was created out of the Anglo and Irish folk revivals (again, both sides the pond). I don't view contemporary sessions as an extension of historic traditional music gatherings of homogenous folk communities from which much of the music now performed in public music sessions are derived. I view the contemporary session scene as a very modern (ie post-1950) phenomenon of the revivals themselves, both sides the pond.

I would include both tourist sessions and non-tourist sessions in the discussion, rather than distinguish between the two, as you are. The reason I would do that is because the tourist session is often the first encounter many non-Irish and British attendees first encounter. So IMO, raising the issue of the tourist session is an important dimension of how the non-tourist session is perceived by outsiders with little knowledge of the beast.

It is hard for outsiders to distinguish, at least initially, between a tourist session and a non-tourist session. In my personal experience, the wrath one can at times encounter from the non-tourist session players can be out of all proportion to the alleged "offense" by the outsider. If newcomers/outsiders are to adhere to basic social rules of engagement regarding joining in a group as a newcomer (which Malcolm suggests, if I'm interpreting his post correctly, that newcomers/outsiders do), then musicians in the public sessions need be held accountable to thosee same standards when performing in public spaces. They too must take it upon themselves to behave decently towards outsiders who can't distinguish between the two types of sessions, or who have little experience of any kind with sessions, rather than treat the outsider rudely.

I personally have witnessed some pretty rude behaviour by musicians towards newcomers/outsiders, and in every instance my feeble mind allows me to recall at the moment, those instances were of experienced, advanced players behaving rudely, and not the other way around. Now, I know that goes against the widely held current beliefs among Irish and British session musicians that is the newcomer/outsider who is the problem, and not themselves, that are the problem. But that has been my experience. It is the regulars who I have witnessed behaving badly, not the newcomers.

So, as I said, I'd like to hear Malcolm's take on the situation described in the other thread concerning the pub session at Whitby. I agree with Mike of Northumbria. I don't think that nailing what in essence was a "KEEP OUT" sign on the door of a pub session which has been open and on-going during the festival for years, was a very wise move. I too would hope the group in question would seriously consider not repeating this year's behavior at future festivals.

It seems to me that this sort of behavior among the regulars is on increase nowadays, and I don't understand why that is. It also seems to me that those who most dare to criticize the regulars are people with roots in the revival and with experience playing in sessions for many years--not just whiny, rude newcomers and outsiders who have been treated "fairly" (but rudely) by the session regulars. This attitude that newcomers and outsiders "have it coming" disturbs me.

For those of us with roots in the revivals who consciously made a choice to make the performance of this music more (rather than less) accessible to all, in order to see it live beyond the deaths of those traditional musicians who were the last living vestiges of the traditions in their local areas, I don't think it is out of line to sugggest that sessions should be much more open and inclusive than many currently are. It seems to me the revivalists did intend that the session be democratic and open, and that it has been, in certain areas, largely co-opted as a forum for public performance and private entertainment for ever smaller, elite groups of predominately male musicians who have the best chops. That sort of competitiveness and elitism is the antithesis the revivals' leaders. And I agree again with those above, who said if you want to keep people out of your session, play in a private space, not a public one. If what you want to do is spend a regular number of hours performing exclusively with a small group of fellow musicians on a regular basis, don't meet in pubs, and the whole question of elitism in sessions will cease to be an issue.