The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #111189 Message #2354445
Posted By: Jim Carroll
01-Jun-08 - 01:35 PM
Thread Name: Folk vs Folk
Subject: RE: Folk vs Folk
"but it's who sets the definition that matters."
Utter bloody nonsense - what does it matter who defines anything, from folk music to Brussels sprouts. What matters is whether it defines the subject adequately, which it does absolutely.
The definition of the word 'folk' has been in existence and internationally recognised for over a century and a half; it has been applied to music and internationally recognised for over half a century.
If somebody asked me what folk music was I would point to that definition, then to the hundreds of books on the subject (many of them bearing the word 'folk' in their titles), then to the recorded examples - where would you lot point them to?
Tom Bliss has admitted that the music he describes as 'folk' in no way fits the long-established and accepted definition, but follows this up with the somewhat feeble argument that he is justified in using the term because of its constant misuse.
Sorry folks, folk will remain folk as defined until smebody gets off their arse and redefines it.
Misuse is ignorance, deliberate misuse is wilful ignorance.
Despite constant mis-usage genealogy will remain never be an 'ology'.
Jim Carroll