Tom Bliss,
Thanks for that insight - never thought of it that way. Even when a singer closes his/her eyes to sing, they tend to turn the head towards the listener, giving the impression of eye-contact.
Richard
"What I object to is his claim to be able to tell everyone how to do it better. Not many people have earned that right"
My old mum used to say "Stick your bum out of the window and somebody is sure to come along and paint a face on it".
Perform publicly and you invite comment. On the whole folk criticism and self-criticism is gentle enough to be anodyne almost to the point of non-existence, and therefore useless. Have only ever come across two critics in the folk world who can be described as 'vindictive', both being 'career reviewers' attempting to make up for their own shortcomings by tearing down the work of others, but they are rare enough to be ignored (as they largely are). Don't really think any of us is above criticism and advice, do you? You don't have to agree with it and surely it's better made in the open than behind the back. Having said that, as the Cap'n inferred earlier, criticism needs to be delivered with a modicum of sensitivity (Cap'n?).
Re standards.
How is this for an idea? Why can't clubs organise the occasional unpublicised casual singarounds apart from the set club evenings in order to get new singers used to singing in front of audiences. Should they feel that the new singers are up to it, they might extend it to include advice sessions.
As I see it, the future of folk song depends on drawing new people on to the scene, and that is almost certainly going to have to happen through the clubs (certainly not concerts).
If the standard of singing is so low (or even so varied) as to merit the description 'professional amateurism' (Alex Campbell used to call it 'Near enough for folk music) it will deserve all the derision it attracts and will remain the poor relative of the performing arts.
Jim Carroll