"So were the entire works of Nietzsche, when the Nazis tried to make him one of theirs."

I don't see the relevance of this, Jack. We are talking specifically about 'mediation' as described by Dave Harker in the context of folk song. His case was that Sharp et al misrepresented the singers' repertoire when they published their books of songs. He claimed editorial tampering (although he exaggerated both its extent and the degree of subterfuge), that 'unsuitable' songs were selected out, and that the singers were given no voice of their own.

In he case of Walter Pardon, the published material consists of commercially-released recordings covering all of his repertoire (including the music hall and union songs) and presenting it exactly as he sang it. In addition, we have the verbatim interviews we've already discussed. Since Jim Carroll and others who have written about WP invariably refer their readers to the recordings and the interview transcripts, the parallel of the Nazis feeling able to misinterpret Nietzsche because no-one had read him is inappropriate on more than one level.

As Lighter wrote yesterday: 'Everything that goes from one human mind to another is unavoidably "mediated."' But the argument here is over Harker's use of 'mediation', and whether it applies to he case of Walter Pardon. It doesn't.