For what it's worth... I define "blues" differently than Joseph Scott. Unlike him, I don't think my definition is the only possible one. Unlike him, I recognize the validity and usefulness of his definition, though it is not the one I generally use.

I distinguish between singing about "having the blues" and singing a music called "blues." There is no evidence whatsoever of anyone calling a style of music "blues" before about 1908. I take it for granted that there was similar music played before that, possibly even two or three decades before that. I understand the logic of calling that music "blues"--but also understand the logic of differentiating it from the emergence of blues as a distinct genre.

Incidentally, if Joseph is going to keep quoting Lynn Abbott against me, he's going to have to accept that Lynn and I agree that we don't disagree about this.

Best,
Elijah