When a person is urban born, grows up listening to popular music on the radio (whatever the current fads happen to be), then becomes interested in folk music from going to a concert, hearing a recording, or through a friend—then developes that interest by learning to play a guitar, banjo, or whatever, and learning a bunch of songs from song books and records—I have always taken a dim view of calling such a person a "folk singer." Maybe I'm wrong, but I've always considered a folk singer to be someone who was born and raised in the tradition like, say, Jean Ritchie, Frank Proffitt, or Jeanne Robertson.

This is essentially how my interest developed way back, and I think this is also true for the vast majority if people here on Mudcat. Am I (are we) keeping "the Tradition" alive? And if so, what tradition is that?

Contrary to WAV, I sing songs from a whole variety of "traditions." English, Irish, Scottish, Welsh, songs from all over the United States and Canada, and I manage to wrap my mouth around a bit of French, Serbo-Croatian, and Czech. In fact, the criterion I use for whether I learn a song or not is simply that I like the song and want to sing it. I sing folk songs, but I do not consider myself to be a "folk singer." A "singer of folk songs," perhaps. But not all of the songs I sing are folk songs.

Music—of all kinds—is a universal language. And songs are too, even when we may not understand the language in which a song is sung. It can still convey emotions and communicate. Placing limitations on what people should or should not sing is something I simply refuse to accept, and I will not be bound by any one tradition or culture.

Borders between countries are man-made and artificial. Astronauts have remarked that, from space, you can see no borders.

Don Firth