"Come on now gents, does a light-hearted (and actually rather interesting) remark about Child's horticultural hobby really need to fuel further confrontation?"
Not on its own but in the context of attitude to past scholars and that scholarship being used as ninepins it gives the lighthearted remark' a bit of context

Regarding my comments about Harkerism - I was referring on that occasion to Steve Gardham whose scholarly corpses are piling up by the minute, but if we are to take Roud's re-definition seriously, the same applies to him
The old crowd worked on the basis of perceived truths regarding the origins and uniqueness of folk song - Roud's book turns that on its head, in effect, undermining most of what has been written and acted on over the last century or so
Not as clumsily open as Steve Gardham, but in essence ending up in the same place

It has become apparent that much of Roud's book is based on Steve Gardham's work
Gardam recommends Harker as an excellent scholar
It seems to my that if they wish to be considered seperately, one of them needs a very long spoon

All this stands to throw folk scholarship into the same sort of chaos as the abandoning of folk song identification did the club scene
Some of our best thinkers came from the revival - Bert, Ewan, Bob Thomson, Roy Palmer, Tom Munnelly, Peter Hall, Vic Gammon... the eyes moisten when
I think of the debt I and many others owe to their input into our lives
They helped us drag together the enjoyment as singers and listeners and the understanding of the art form we were involved in
I honestly can't see that continuing to happen for those who follow is - I am seriously beginning to wonder if anybody will
Jim