Been away over the weekend, and come back to all this. I've just ploughed through it all, and, finding that I was losing the will to survive, I had to go away and cheer myself up singing a few songs about drowned sailors and stuff. But since this is a topic I'm concerned about, here goes....
It's reassuring to find some people - punters especially - backing up what I've said elsewhere (most recently on the 'Earning a Living in Folk' thread). But while I agree with quite a few comments, I would like to respond to some.
The 'F Word': I suspect that this is dreaded more by some of us than by Joe Public. If you want to run a folk club, you should have the strength of your convictions and call it a folk club. If you start by apologising for folk, then how can you expect anybody to believe in it? And if you call it something else, then you're likely to end up with something that isn't a folk club, and that's likely to discourage the folk fans. And there now seems to be a plethora of alternative names; how is this helping? I think that if you want to encourage more 'non-folkies' to give us a hearing, you need to do it by example; be positive, stop being ashamed of folk music, and let them see that they are missing something.
Maintaining standards: (Sounds of man mounting hobby-horse...) I've already wittered on about proper resident groups, rather than lists of regulars doing one or two songs each, with the nights being run on a rota basis: a competent semi-pro resident doing a proper 'turn' fulfils this function.
Style of music the punters can expect: see above comment. In the olden days, the resident group was the basis of the club, and gave the club its style. That didn't stop other elements from being represented, but it did tend to keep things within certain boundaries, and give the club an identity.
Getting the 'yoof' in: this problem seems to be specific to the clubs, rather than concerts/ceilidhs/festivals. I mentioned on the 'earning a living' thread, and it's been touched on here, that part of this problem is that there seem to be very few young folkies running clubs. If we knew why, then perhaps we could do something about it. (Any young folkies reading this? Got any suggestions?). But I think that any ideas about making folk 'trendy' or 'cool' are seriously misguided; shades of Trendy Vicars thinking they can get the young people in if they introduce the guitar into church services. If you want to interest the young, don't start by patronising them. Folk was never an age-related music; personally, I don't believe any music should be, but then I'm bonkers; well documented fact. The trouble is, there is a generation missing, which means that young people venturing into the clubs are immediately conscious of that gap, and feel as if they don't belong. If enough of them do come in, then the effect will be diminished. It's a problem, but one that will pass with time, if we can just keep things going long enough. One thing I find reassuring: we've already acknowleged that there are plenty of talented young performers, but surely this implies that they are expecting there to be an audience. In other words, their expectations are much the same as ours were forty or fifty years ago. And they are having those expectations fulfilled in the shape of concerts/festivals/ceilidhs and CD sales. We just need to encourage more of them (they are not entirely absent) to try the more intimate experience of the folk clubs. And as I said, we need to lead by example. Stop dithering about and be positive.
Oh, and Betsy, trying not to upset people: this is Mudcat. It's the only pleasure some of these poor sods get.
Getting me coat on as we speak...   John Kelly.