There was a book written recently about the people of Ladakh (by Helena Norbert-Hodge), and in it she talked about the coming of radio to the isolated communities, and how it simultaneously cheered people up, but also made them aware for the first time of famous singers and music that was so much "better" than their own folk tunes -- so they became self conscious and ashamed of their primitivism, and they began losing their own community of song. One thing about Lomax was that he did the opposite, he championed communities of song against the selfconsciousness that someone somewhere else is making "proper, better" music; and that may have been the greatest contribution he ever made -- by showing that there were riches aplently among ordinary folk, he strengthened the idea that anyone could make music, different music, music not beholden to anyone else, and that you didn't need riches to make it, which is surely the fundamental ethos of folk music, the dream that drove everyone during the revival, and since. It is hard to comprehend the extent of what he saved, but surely it is what he and other songcatchers exemplified as the folk ethic that is the most lasting contribution.

yours, Peter T.