Hi Brian - sorry I missed you at the Topic. Stuff happened.

I don't think my songs will ever be Folk by Jim's definition. They'll never achieve the currency required for the 54 or Jim's slightly looser interpretation. I might expect MacColl, Tawney and Marsden in there, and I'd even propose George's Empty Handed as getting close - because I think to Jim and others of his ilk it's more down to usage and adaptation than age.

I've been regretting writing this:

"My songs are folk songs because a sufficient number of people call them so."

Without also saying this:

People who call my songs Folk are not saying they fit the 54 definition or its variants. They are just saying it fits some idea of Folk that they and their friends understand.

The definition 54 stands. The title of the definition still applies to that definition, but it also applies to some other things too.