The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #119547   Message #2611660
Posted By: Jack Blandiver
15-Apr-09 - 10:13 AM
Thread Name: 1954 and All That - defining folk music
Subject: RE: 1954 and All That - defining folk music
Not proposing or advocating anything?

No. As I say, just telling it like it is by way of a personal accommodation of the reality of Folk Music as we understand the term here in the UK.

Otherwise:

deliberate misuse of the term by those such as yourself who appear to want to extend it to cover anything.

It does cover anything, Howard - that's the point. Why can't you be happy with the term Traditional Music? Why do you want to repress the celebration of Folk Music as well? Even the IFMC recognised this in changing their name to ICTM.   

Worse, it is gravely damaging to the future of what should properly be termed "folk".

Priceless stuff. But according to The Rules of The Revival (and the 1954 Definition) it is already dead; so how can it possibly have a future? As I asked earlier on: if a song is removed from the natural habitat that defined it as a Folk Song in the first place, is it still a folk song when those criteria (i.e. those of the MCMLIV Shibboleth) are no longer being met?

Meanwhile, some properly defined "folk" music being played by properly defined "folk" musicians:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1uGV38sphU