The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #136607   Message #3123131
Posted By: GUEST,999
28-Mar-11 - 05:08 AM
Thread Name: Folklore: Folk, 1954 definition?
Subject: RE: Folklore: Folk, 1954 definition?
I used to disparage the definition until I understood it functions as an anchor when the winds of newer music get forceful and strange. Mr Carroll was a pain in the arse for three years to me . His posts regarding the definition were unreasonable and antiquated. I couldn't appreciate why someone could be so bloody dense! Three years later I'm surprised at how much he's affected my thinking about it all.

Jim, you are a researcher and keeper of the tradition and you rank with the Cecils and Malcolms of folk. I am sorry for being so un-understanding. What you do is very important, and I apologize for my past attitudes, decisions and assholedoms of what I hope is my yesteryears.

If we forget or ignore our collective past, we will have to start over. On that journey we will rewrite "A Canticle for Leibowitz", something we don't have to do thanks to the keepers, one of whom Jim Carroll is, imo.

Anyway, Jim, thank you.

Bruce M.