Who defines folk? 1954. Full stop. It's actually quite arbitrary, and 1954 works as well as any of them, so why not stick with it? We need no further definition, if we need definition at all.

Why define folk? The wannabe star musicians working in record/CD/MP3/Streaming outlets (the musicians who don't deliver pizzas), because they need to know what bin to put the merchandise in.

Why fight about it? Well, people get bored at times, and want to make pronouncements about what's important or not important to talk about at Mudcat while we're diverting ourselves from the political diatribes.

---

Dick Miles posted the 1954 definition in 2007. It still sounds pretty good to me.

Thread #104945   Message #2154089
Posted By: The Sandman
21-Sep-07 - 03:51 AM
Thread Name: Is the 1954 definition, open to improvement?
Subject: Isthe1954defining,improvable

Definition of Folk Music, decided by the International Folk Music Council in 1954.

Folk music is the product of a musical tradition that has been evolved through the process of oral transmission. The factors that shape the tradition are: (i) continuity which links the present with the past; (ii) variation which springs from the creative impulse of the individual or the group; and (iii) selection by the community, which determines the form or forms in which the music survives.
The term can be applied to music that has been evolved from rudimentary beginnings by a community uninfluenced by popular and art music and it can likewise be applied to music which has originated with an individual composer and has subsequently been absorbed into the unwritten living tradition of a community.
The term does not cover composed popular music that has been taken over ready-made by a community and remains unchanged, for it is the re-fashioning and re-creation of the music by the community that gives it its folk character.

Is this definition open to improvement, and do you have any suggestions as to how it can be improved. Dick Miles