God preserve us from the assumptions which a phrase like "the young, radical cutting edge of folk music" threatens to unleash, if it is not understood in a context that also values the old radical foundations of folk music. Radical implies roots.

New ways of interpreting music, and new tunes and new songs - they are fine. But they are part of a broader picture, and they grow out of a rich tradition. They need that, and we need it. And that's what I took Eliza as implying.

Imagining that there has to be a choice, as if holding to the old involved rejecting the new, or vice versa, is dangerous nonsense. Yes, individuals will focus their attention on one aspect rather than another, but that's entirely a different thing. I write songs and more often than not I sing them rather than traditional songs - but an evening which is just made up of people singing new songs to each other can be a very dispiriting thing.

I was at an event not that long ago, and in one room there was a session going, with a mixture of traditional music and traditional songs, and new songs - and in the room across the passage there was a dedicated open mike for singer-songwriters. I sang in both - but the session was so much more alive and exhilarating. The old and the new need each other, and the fact that this is understood is what is so precious about folk music, wherever it takes place.