"If it was the rules would have required him to go back through 120 years or so of other people's ideas in tedious detail."
THat is what research should be about
The fact that you regard it as "tedious" says what needs to be said
"historical information about what the folk were singing."
Yet h offers nothing what they say about the songs, nor does he present the songs themselves for examination
He doesn't even provide a discography for the reader to check out the songs he is referring to.
A book on folk song with the songs taken out - unique, to say the least
The fact there is no recommended further reading makes his the only voice
I see no evidence to back up his most important claims - just personal pronouncements
The problems with messiahs is that they usually preach to the converted or end up arguing with other messiahs
My greatest influence was MacColl, who I worked with for two years and associated with for twenty - till the end of his life, pretty much
When MacColl was asked to set up classes e refused suggesting that the best way to learn was to set up a working group to work on each others singing
I am now indexing the several hundred recordings of that work and have worked out that MacColl's message was 'find out for yourself'
And yet, the programme on the Critics Group was somewhat spitefully entitled, 'How Folk Songs Should Be Sung'
MacColl always said that he learned as much as the rest of the Group during its existence
Jim Carroll