"I'm not throwing stones, Jim "
Yes you are SO'P and it seems to be one of your favourite occupations.
In the past you have accused collectors and researchers of lying and distorting the information we have collected in order to 'invent' an oral tradition; here you have toned it down somewhat by suggesting we are stupid by allowing ourselves to be conned by a bunch of lying and distorting traditional singers who have fed us the information they believe we wanted.
You never produce evidence to back up these claims - which collectors work have you researched and what have you uncovered to have reached the somewhat low opinion you appear to have of us? I have to say that reading your postings quite often leaves me with the overwhelming feeling of "Why the **** bother; why don't we just archive it and let the future decide".
Regarding the somewhat bizzare distinction between changing words and tune - sorry; don't understand a word of it.
Listening to your recordings leaves me with the impression that the path you have chosen is that of musical theatre - the difference in your approach and that of a traditional singer lies not in alteration of word and tune, but that of a change in the function of a song - it is no longer the narrative piece that is started out as, but has become something else - nothing wrong with that, it just has lost its traditional objective - that of communicating a story.
Mike,
Agree with what you say about Mrs Hogg - to an extent - I believe that literacy and publishing has had an effect on the songs and singing, but not necessatrily as she believed they would.
Jim Carroll