But I do not believe that is what kills of the traditional clubs. I think it is far more to do with image. When folk aficionados, such as many on hear, are happy to tell anyone who asks that folk is an invention of the Victorian upper classes or that it is performed only by well meaning enthusiasts in dingy back rooms than, as I said a couple of posts back, is it any wonder people are put off?

I would say, Dave, that what might kill off folk clubs and put people off the music is not the "dingy back room" syndrome, or the descriptions of the music as this or that invention. What puts people off is the shitty quality of the preparation - and thus shitty performance - of some of the people doing it. Good on Dave Weatherall - and people like the late Ms. Easby - for being critical of the GEFF (Good Enough For Folk) trope. There are plenty of folk venues in my area, but I avoid some of them like the plague because it's obvious that the people who perform at these places think that "doing" folk music is a doddle - with concomitant crap singing, crap attention to the material, crap presentation, crap attention to the audience, etc.

What we do in our own front rooms is our business, but presenting the music to people out there in a live situation demands engagement, attention, rehearsal, self-criticism and self-awareness. I'm very aware of the welcoming and tolerant attitude that traditionally pertains in clubs - for which I have had cause to be grateful for very many years - but I just wish that some of the people who take advantage of that tolerance and welcome would make the effort to reciprocate with dedication and hard work. I'm not saying that all performers have to be wonderful and top class - that's not the nature of this particular beast - but you sometimes get a level of laziness and ineptness in folk venues that just wouldn't be tolerated in other musical genres.

End of rant.