I thought Sue Allan's post was very measured. It led me to do a little web searching and I am now enjoying reading her thesis (at least I assume it is the same Sue Allan).

I found this thread because I was interested in the book, but my interest is mainly in social history, particularly of the 'ordinary people' who did not write history books about themselves and their forebears. Roud makes a lot of material very accessible.

I am not really a member of the community that comes here. My interaction with the 'second revival' is as a consumer (since about 1960) not a participant. However, I do like to spend my time in environments were people 'make their own amusement' and that includes playing tunes, singing songs, reciting doggerel and if I am lucky people reading out their own made up ditties. If someone wants to contribute some nice Lennon & Mccartney or Rogers & Hammerstein that's just fine by me. It's as social occassion.

What I find in the book is lot of detail about 'people doing what people do'. Draw your lines about 'Folk Song' if you like, keep 'popular music' out of your Folk Clubs, don't let people hold a sheet in their hand to help. But the book suggests that what the 'ordinary folk' were doing wasn't like that. If someone came back from market with a broadside that took their fancy and sung it out before they had learned it, or fancied singing the one pasted to the pub wall, or got a shilling from a printer for their song, were they cast out?