Hadju's next investigate report will focus on the rumor that the earth revolves around the sun.

I read the article a few times and I'm still not sure of the point. IF Hadju truly understood folk music he would understand the wide scope of material and audiences that are wrapped in the umbrella of "folk". It's another genre of folk music - sea chanties, anti-war songs, civil rights songs, gospel, Child ballads, and gay folk songs.

Harvey Andrews does make a point about the navel gazing blurring the definition of what is "folk", but I wouldn't but the blame on gay musicians. There are plenty of heterosexual singer-songwhiners that have turned the music into a psychoanalyis session. To say that "gay" singer-songwriters write about "female relationships" certainly misses the fact that Holly Near authored a volume of songs that speaks to all of us.

Why is Hadju making a big deal out of what makes up a "folk" audience? Does anyone really care about the makeup of the audience? Christine Lavin's point about being labeled as part of "women's music" only shows how stupid labeling music styles has become. Ever check out the "Celtic" section at Tower Records? You will find everything from Joe Heaney to Riverdance to Planxty to Bing Crosby.

I'm shocked that in 2002 the New York Times deems this to be a story. Maybe I'm missing the point, but how can you have a story when there is no issue???

At least Hadju wrote an article that once again brings folk music into the spotlight. It could have been worse, he could have written an article on the old showtunes cliche.

Ron