Thanks, Joe. I am sure we all can but if it looks a little hostile at times don't worry too much - It could well be the boisterous Brits at it again. We don't usualy mean anything by the banter. Well, most of us don't;-)

Crap performances of an undefined music might be a good starting point.

I agree, Jim, as you know. Crap music of ANY genre is a put off to most people but we realy do need to steer away from the 'what is folk' argument. I know there is the 1950-odd definition but we have had Bob Dylan, Steeleye Span and Ziggy Marley with the Chieftans since then. Like Tom says, to most people, Folk IS John Denver. No-one would ever dream of attending a rock concert without knowing something about he band(s), they were going to see. Is it classic ballad rock? Metal? Indie? Goth? Why should it be assumed that Folk is a narrower river than other music genres?

Out of interest, I heard Dougie MacLeans 'Caledonia' again tonight. A contemporary song that defies the 50-whatever definition. But I would put money on the fact that if 100 people listened to it for the first time more than 90 would call it Folk!

I don't like the idea of genres and sub-genres but if it makes people happy to categorise into traditional or contemporary Folk and then still further into traditional by country, region and town or contemporary by Dylanesque, in the traditional idiom or just plain wrist slashers then please feel free to do so. It won't help Folk clubs but it will help people to know what to expect! Or will it?

If anyone feels that Folk clubs will thrive again by going back to what was happening in the 60s then they are more than welcome to open a club in that style. I, for one, don't believe in going backwards and look forward to what comes out of the current Folk revival:-)

Cheers

DeG