that's why I tried to set out the scope (which itself is of course open for conversation and debate) in #1. But there is an archive where someone asks about good folk music and recommendations are all over the place from neo-traditionalists to what were disparagingly called WG2s in the oversaturated early 90s Boston scene.

>if we're talking old time folk tunes (This Land is Your Land,
>Home on the Range, etc) I have a nostalgic appreciation for
>those (are those types of songs even considered "folk"
>songs?)

Depends on your definition. This Land is not a 'traditional' folk song as the author is known, but the author came from impeccable traditional music credentials and the song fits somewhat neatly alongside his more traditional work (as do most of his originals).

Home on the Range is I believe a traditional folk song.

There is of course the question of whether a song need be 'traditional' in order to qualify as a folk song. What hat I wear on questions like that kinda depends on the tone of the conversation.

>But what is folk music really?
>
>I mean do we consider Dylan, Crosby,Stills&Nash,
>Simon&Garfunkle folk? or is that folk/rock?

S&G's first (? I think) album had a tagline that said 'exciting new sounds in the folk tradition.'

Obviously fine toothed genre delineations are tough, but in general I consider the post-Dylan singer-songwriter pool to be its own genre, even though their music is an integral part of the modern folk scene.

>I hear a lot of "folky" music these days, but is it really
>folk music?
>is folk music simply the color of a genre (not racial color,
>just color of the sound...ie, acoustic guitars, singers with
>marginal voices, no drum kit) or is it the content of a song
>which makes it a folk song?

Again, depends on the scenario.
In my most basic opinion, a folk song is one with no specific author that is old enough to be considered 'traditional.' In this case the arrangement of the song is completely irrelevant.
In my secondary opinion, a folk song can also be one with a known author but that fits neatly into the same general guidelines as traditional music and can be seen as a logical extension of traditional forms and styles. A great example of a modern folk song is Richard Thompson's 1952 Vincent Black Lightning.

>I have a coworker who listens to nothing but wilco and a bunch
>of singer/songwriter type dudes that go by their first and
>last name and sing mediocre whiny songs with mediocre voices
>about heartbreak and all that...

I'm having flashbacks to the 1990s.

>is that considered folk music?
> people always describe it as "folky"...if that is what folk
>music has become, i'm not a fan...but I love me some old Woody
>Guthrie songs though

To a lot of people, 'folk' is primarily about the sonic aesthetics - meaning quiet, acoustic instrumentation, regardless of whether the songs being presented are in any way folky or not.

the contemporary folk scene as a whole (particularly represented by thhe major folk festivals) basically embraces all of these ideas, though in the case of modern whinesters it's been somewhat reluctant and also a somewhat blatant attempt to get that indie rock cash/audience. The question of what is folk isn't really such a big deal anymore, and imho most folk festivals have moved toward becoming music festivals where the idea of any strict 'folk' standards are passe. Which is fine, really.