While a few years older than Gene, I, too, grew up in the sixties. While most of my friends gravitated from top 40 to the "blues", I found that I was never quite comfortable with the Stones, Zep, Doors - Mayall, on the other hand, had a certain appeal, along with Siegel-Schwall; Koerner, Glover, and Ray, etc. In thinking about it, I agree with Gene's point that technology had a lot to do with making the blues "accessible" to the 60's listener. The clear, loud sounds, sustain, feedback, etc. was a nice mix with the sensory experience of pot, lsd, etc. At the same time, Blind Willie Johnson, Willie McTell, Blind Blake, Charlie Patton, Lemon Jefferson, on up through Robert Johnson, Big Bill Broonzy, Fred McDowell, Petie Wheatstraw, Tampa Red, Robert Wilkins, Furry Lewis, John Hurt, Bessie Smith...and on, and on, and on...were only available on scratchy, noisy, recordings from a time before the technology became sophisticated. It takes a certain amount of work to learn to listen through the noise to reach the soul and emotion of the earlier blues artists. Well woth the effort, by the way.

A second point is, I think, related to the timing of the "Blues revival" (rock n roll, really). The great blues players, as a generalization, represent a societal "fringe" group. The "typical" blues musician was, at least from the standpoint of a sixties rock band, a hard living, itinerate, romantic. The life style fit well with the drug culture of the sixties. The attraction that took place was the same as the reaction to books like On the Road, etc. A certain rogue-mystique was taken from these players and transformed into the general feeling of "anti-establishment" that provided the impetus for the blues rockers to embrace the genre.

Why don't you make your paper avaliable to us as a link from this thread. There are still a few blues cats hanging out here, and I, for one, would love to see the results.