Jim,
(Taking deep breath!)

      'From what I know of your work and from your arguments here, you are 'paper-based' and there is no indication that you have drawn your conclusions from other aspects of the tradition – the importance and identification, use of vernacular, knowledge of folklore, intimacy with area and work, access and attitude to literacy.... all part of the making of and the inspiration for the songs in the first place.'

>>My work over the last 10 years has been largely, but not exclusively 'paper-based' as you call it, but all of the items you mention I have studied in earlier years. I once had a large library of folklore items before I decided to specialise in song study, and as an English teacher for 30-odd years I studied and taught many aspects of language and literature - particularly vernacular. As for 'intimacy with area', you can't get much more intimate than with one's own family.

      'facts that don't fit into pet theories'

>>I could just as easily turn this back on you. I only attack daft romantic theories without any substance. When I said 'Guilty as charged' I was referring to some of the dafter romantic theories like some of these on this thread, not our argument over the origins of 'folk song'. Believe it or not I do respect your stance. I just happen to stand at the opposite end of the spectrum.

       'I am aware of, but not particularly familiar with your collecting work, which, as far as I can see, shows no great attempt to obtain information on the whys and wherefores of singing from your sources, which I believe to be the important features of the tradition, (certainly no attempt to pass it on); if I am wrong about this, accept my apologies and show me where I am mistaken.
Very few collectors have recorded such information other than the basics, the folk song equivalent of 'name, rank and serial number!'

>>Surely both methods have their pluses. We would have lost a great deal of songs recorded by the likes of Sharp had they stopped to record the life histories of every singer they came across. In the 60s and 70s I was holding down a full-time job as a teacher, had to rely on public transport and had no backing whatsoever. Add to that the belief you mention yourself that we were collecting the last remnants. Despite that at least 2 singers we visited on numerous occasions and recorded their life histories along with the sources of their songs and what they thought about them. When I retired and went out recording again I spent a great deal of time recording this sort of material. It does not appear on the BL site because these were later recordings.

    'I have read 'son of Marrowbones' – I was touched to receive it as a gift from Malcolm Douglas shortly before he died, and I enjoyed it immensely, particularly the extended 'notes to the songs', but I couldn't help but notice it does not contain a corresponding 'notes on the singers' chapter – no context again.'

>>The new edition of Marrow Bones was meant to be the start of the publication of all 4 volumes. The Wanton Seed was finished some years ago but EFDSS haven't published it yet. EFDSS wanted to include the singers' bios in the third volume. Not my decision.

      'True, but you asked "does anybody take Lord Lovel seriously" (will dig out the exact quote if you wish) which suggests to me that you were unaware.....'

>>If you read my postings carefully I stated clearly that many of the burlesques have reverted back to being serious songs. Some burlesque versions of LL were only burlesque in the delivery not in the text so that those printed on a broadside would show no sign of the comic element. Only the sheet music called them 'Comic'.

>>Hindley was specialist in cheap print. I have not seen anything of his that even pretends to know anything about the 'country' songs themselves, but he did know a lot about the hacks who made them and the social history behind the town songs. (See his 'Life and Times of James Catnach')

>>'Communal composition'. I have sent you examples of this from my own collection. The problem with Gummere was he was trying to convince people that even ballads were composed in this way, and quite rightly he was soon shot down well over a century ago. Of course the method exists but very very few examples exist in the corpus we're discussing.   

    'A good long bath in traditional songs from traditional singers would do you the world of good.'

>>I'd say my CD collection is about 80% traditional singers, then add to that my own recordings and I bathe in them regularly. Just off to have a bath now.
Cheerio, Jim!