"LJW, the core point (I think) is whether folk is the source of the entirety of ones income. How much that income might be is at most a subsidiary point."

I take your point, but maybe didn't make mine properly. Many of us are now retired or semi-retired (those who look back fondly on the folk revival like it was yesterday) and include a number who "make a living" out of paid performance. I suspect it includes a considerable number who supplement their income (be it lump sum redundancy payment/early retirement or whatever) by gigging/tuition/busking etc, and are dependent upon that income and would choose to call it their profession. Suppose someone has an occupational pension that pays around £10,000 but gigs etc for another £6000; by your definition you would not include them? I would - though I accept it wouldn't fulfill the criteria of "primary source of income".


"my theory is that the clubs are failing to supply what the punters want. I don't think your average punter is greatly entertained by a long succession of people doing one song each"

Probably true - though different "clubs" cater for different needs. There are no shortage of places around Sheffield where you get both; venues where "punters" can watch guests and local artists do "a proper turn", and venues where the "punters" are the performers patiently waiting their turn to do their "turn".