Lisa, you haven't a bleedin' clue what Sharp did because all you know is what you've read in a couple of paragraphs on some dodgy website. But heck - don't let the truth get in the way of a good story. The truth "as you see it" is based on no in-depth knowledge or - god forbid - research, it is simply your bonkers ideas pulled out of the air. As conjecture, it is worthless.

But I love how you're on first-name terms with Cecil Sharp, regardless of the paucity of your knowledge.

My opinions on the uselessnes of the word "folk" are ones I've shared before and am happy to do again. EFDSS' name has strong historical roots. Again, you know nothing about EFDSS and have no experience of its work - name-checking people and organisations doesn't make you big, or clever. In fact, usually it just gives you the opportunity to wave your underlying ignorance like a flag.

There isn't really a good word, IMHO, to replace folk, but I think that these days it causes more problems than it solves.



Gene: I was basing my comments about your singer-songwriter background quite simply on the definition you gave for folk music. It is, as Nerd said, a definition that would be accepted by many revivalists or singer-songwriters, but not by many whose main frame of reference is the body of traditional music. That's all. It was not meant to undermine your music or your credentials.