No, it looks like we're scurrying back behind infantile name calling

Nothing could be further from the truth. In the above comical thread proposals I was reflecting on the tenor of several recent posts from Pip, Yourself & Don Firth respectively, fully aware that the whole thing is founded on subjective idealism anyway. Apologies for any offence caused in so doing.

Again - I'm trying to understand Folk Music according to the human reality of the thing rather the hoary academic ideal so many of you seem to regard as sacrosanct. I personally think it's bollocks, for reasons outlined (but never answered) elsewhere, as I would rather deal with a music defined by the subjective musicians than the objective academics. As with language, the study of a music is not the defining of it, yet pedantry abounds; a similar pedantry, I fear, pervades Folk Music. Pragmatically, however, it's something else entirely.