Kyle Gerber: 20439874
ENGL 700: Rhetorical Theory and Criticism
Dr. N. Randall
4 November 2011
An Ethos of Authenticity: Exploring the Rhetoric of the American Folk Revival
A search for material on the topic reveals a surprising lack of discussion or articulation of the rhetoric of the early 1960s’ folk boom. Like most sub- and counterculture movements, the 60s’ folk revival was not an isolated event, nor did it evolve out of nothing. This project looks at the revival through the lens of rhetorical theory in order to gain an understanding of what prompted it, and what can be understood as the rhetoric of the movement itself. This investigation will be twofold, first looking at the era to understand it as a particular rhetorical situation, and then looking at select components of the rhetorical response to that situation. Examining both of these components will help to understand that the 1960s folk revival was a continuing response to increasing modernization and a superficial hegemonic impulse across North America, and will uncover how a rhetoric of ethos and authenticity functions as the cornerstone of the response to the social situation.
Considering 1960s North America as a particular rhetorical situation allows one to understand the folk revival itself as a rhetorical thing. That is, looking at the era through theories like Bitzer’s helps to ground the analysis of the movement, and clarifies the revival as rhetorical because it is a particular “discourse” prompted and called forward by the historical and cultural context in which it existed (Bitzer 3). Bitzer understands rhetorical discourse to be invoked by an exigence, or problem, with which the prompted discourse then engages to the end that the exigence is partially or completely resolved; his definition involves greater complexity than I have revealed here, as he discusses how audience and constraints (such as pre-existing belief systems) act with an exigence as sub-characteristics of a rhetorical situation (Bitzer 6). I will let these two rest for now, as they work so closely with “exigence” that it is easier to understand them as being a part of the problem itself. (In other words, it is unnecessary to separate the character of the audience from the “problem,” since if that component plays a role in challenging the potential of the rhetorical discourse to resolve the situation, then it is as much a part of the problem as anything else.) The point remains that Bitzer’s idea of a rhetorical situation provides a frame in which the following discussion can be located.
Those purveyors of the movement (both in its early – 1930s-40s – stages and its later one) understood that they were part of a unique sub-cultural shift. This awareness is demonstrated through many of the publications that came out of the era, such as song collections like Carl Sandburg’s The American Songbag, Ruth Crawford-Seeger’s Our Singing Country (1941), and Animal Folk Songs for Children (1950), or periodicals such as Sing Out!, Western Folklore, or the Journal of American Folk Music Council. The interest and growth of the folk movement was also promoted by, and is manifested in, the hundreds of hours of transcriptions and audio field recordings by folk musicologists like John and Alan Lomax; their early twentieth-century efforts to record authentic American folk songs in the often-ignored rural American countryside added to similar efforts dating into the late nineteenth-century, and helped compile a formidable Library of Congress collection that became the backbone of translators and transcribers like Crawford-Seeger (Allen 289-90). I digress, however, if only to demonstrate that those within the movement were conscious of their participation in a unique cultural moment.
Those purveyors of the movement (both in its early – 1930s-40s – stages and its later one) understood that they were part of a unique sub-cultural shift. This awareness is demonstrated through many of the publications that came out of the era, such as song collections like Carl Sandburg’s The American Songbag, Ruth Crawford-Seeger’s Our Singing Country (1941), and Animal Folk Songs for Children (1950), or periodicals such as Sing Out!, Western Folklore, or the Journal of American Folk Music Council. The interest and growth of the folk movement was also promoted by, and is manifested in, the hundreds of hours of transcriptions and audio field recordings by folk musicologists like John and Alan Lomax; their early twentieth-century efforts to record authentic American folk songs in the often-ignored rural American countryside added to similar efforts dating into the late nineteenth-century, and helped compile a formidable Library of Congress collection that became the backbone of translators and transcribers like Crawford-Seeger (Allen 289-90). I digress, however, if only to demonstrate that those within the movement were conscious of their participation in a unique cultural moment.
Although they did not admit a particular consciousness that the folk movement was a rhetorical response, many of those involved in it demonstrate a keen awareness that it was, in fact, a response to a socio-cultural situation. Folk music legend and scholar Pete Seeger presents several possible situations that may have given rise to the 60s folk boom, but only three are particularly relevant to this discussion: a post Second World War desire among Americans to rediscover their roots and determine the quintessential heritage of America(ns); a “general increase in a variety of do-it-yourself activities” that resisted passive observance and encouraged active participation; the discovery of American youth that they could use songs to comment on the state of the country and society in a way that granted them unprecedented agency (11). Of these, only the desire to uncover a quintessential American essence or heritage, and the desire to make comments about current political and social state really fit the mold in terms of being an exigence. But, as other writers in the field point out, it is exactly these thematic exigences that can be found at the root of the folk movement.
Similar to Seeger, Irwin Silber demonstrates an awareness that the mid-twentieth century increase in interest around traditional music styles and content was based on a desire among Americans, particularly the youth, to gain a greater sense of the essence of America’s heritage. Silber goes one step further in defining the situation, arguing that the interest “was rooted in a concern for the very real problems of survival and emotional fulfillment confronting the masses of people on the planet” (18). He notes that many within the movement were actively resisting “the artfully-contrived diversion” that was mass popular culture; he refers to the folk movement as a conscious awareness and shift from mass-produced and mechanized culture and music, with the nuanced elements of traditional music providing a “meaningful alternative” to the popular stream (18). His argument then, like Seegers, places the folk revival within a particular cultural situation, allowing for a framework within which the actual rhetoric of the situation may be analyzed.
This concept of a particular social consciousness and shift away from the mass produced and automated mainstream is further developed by contemporary theorists and scholars. Like Silber and Seeger, Mitchell argues that the early folk revival grew out of an American bent to gain a greater understanding of the country’s heritage. She writes that the movement shifted from this earliest interest into a form by which activists could articulate and demonstrate their “sociopolitical conscience;” this conscience was marked by a deep resistance to mass commercialism, and a nearly religious zeal to locate that which was an essentially “pure” and “authentic” quality in American culture (595-596). While the point here is to demonstrate the awareness of the sociopolitical situation that called for a specific response, Mitchell’s work hints at the eventual culmination of this discussion, considering the rhetoric of authenticity as an ethos-based discursive upshot to the particular rhetorical situation.
Continuing with grounding the historical situation, Livingston notes that folk revivalists established themselves “in opposition to aspects of the contemporary cultural mainstream,” and that these revivalists identified with and promoted “a particular historical lineage, and offer a cultural alternative in which legitimacy is grounded in reference to authenticity and historical fidelity” (qtd. in Allen 278). Livingston speaks here to both aspects of this argument, pointing to the situation – the cultural mainstream – that invited a particular response, and hinting at the type of rhetorical appeals that were a part of that response. This response can be understood as what Bitzer identifies as a natural participant in the situation (5), but the purpose here is primarily to solidify the understanding of the some of the situational components that called for that natural response.
Continuing with grounding the historical situation, Livingston notes that folk revivalists established themselves “in opposition to aspects of the contemporary cultural mainstream,” and that these revivalists identified with and promoted “a particular historical lineage, and offer a cultural alternative in which legitimacy is grounded in reference to authenticity and historical fidelity” (qtd. in Allen 278). Livingston speaks here to both aspects of this argument, pointing to the situation – the cultural mainstream – that invited a particular response, and hinting at the type of rhetorical appeals that were a part of that response. This response can be understood as what Bitzer identifies as a natural participant in the situation (5), but the purpose here is primarily to solidify the understanding of the some of the situational components that called for that natural response.
This is not to say that either the situation or the response was straightforward or simple. On the contrary, Allen points to cultural historian Robert Cantwell’s interpretation of the folk revival as a “complex social and political response” by young people who were doing what they could to resist the “stifling conformity of middle-class suburban life” (278). (This articulation of the later movement helps to understand it as based on, yet distinctive from, the earlier movement’s bent towards strictly re-connecting with a quintessential American heritage. Such a bent was a part of the later movement, but the socio-cultural landscape had changed after the second world war; for example, consider the Great Depression in comparison to post-war prosperity, while understanding that both eras saw populist movements that took a great interest in the “folk.”) Mitchell also argues for the complexity of the situation, noting that in the wake of the original folk revival, the variety of styles collected by folklorists and ethnomusicologists mandated a “pluralist character” that remains a definitive feature of the folk movement (596). A brief look at a specific artist will help explain this complexity in action, as well as conclude the establishment of understanding the situation in which the folk revival was produced.
Bob Dylan, although a controversial member of the folk scene, was heralded as the champion of the movement in the early 1960s. While much could be said about his own rhetoric, his relevance to this discussion is based on how he was understood by those within the folk movement as a response and answer to the social/rhetorical situation. The most concise example of how the era may be understood as inviting discourse (as Bitzer refers to it) is how one master of ceremonies introduced Dylan at the 1964 Newport Folk Festival: “He came to be who he is because things needed saying, and the young people are the ones who wanted to say them. He somehow had an ear on his generation” (No Direction Home disc 2). The Bitzer-esque quality of this statement is clear, as though the existence of one element (Dylan) was called forward by a direct need, or exigence. Before shrugging off the purist folk mantle and moving on to an electric sound, Dylan was held on the shoulders of the activist front of the folk movement. A photograph taken of him standing alongside a promotional poster reading “Protest Against The Rising Tide of Conformity” reveals just how the folk front saw itself in relation to the rest of society (No Direction Home). In addition, Dylan’s fame as a topical song writer hints at how the classic treatment of topoi comes into the discussion of the folk movement as a particular rhetorical response to a particular situation.
It is not necessary to go into every detail of the folk revival. Based on the research mentioned above, along with a formidable body of similar literature on the topic, the folk revival may be understood as a movement that came out of a situation in which people were dissatisfied with the mass conformity push of modernizing America. This situation has many nuances and political contexts, as the union push of the 1930s Woody Guthrie era was a considerably different landscape than McCarthy’s Second Red Square inquisition that Pete Seeger faced in the 1950s. (Seeger was blacklisted, accused, and condemned for contempt of Congress by the House of Un-American Activities Committee.) What is important is that it is understood within the lens of Bitzer’s theory; that is, the folk movement may be considered a rhetorical “utterance” that was used in an attempt to bring resolution to a “complex of persons, events, objects and relations presenting an actual or potential exigence” (Bitzer 6). Using “the folk revival” as the “utterance” in Bitzer’s paradigm demonstrates how it is understood to work rhetorically. The discussion now shifts to a look at how a rhetorical appeal to ethos underlies the search for, and the production and promotion of, “authenticity” that is at the root of the folk revival.
The folk movement that swept through America beginning in the 1930s can be understood as movement towards uncovering, reproducing, and even reverting to a more authentic and “real” time. This move was a direct response to the situation(s) established above: a push against commercialism, conformity, and the desire of the youth and “folk” of a nation to exercise a voice in the social sphere. While the earliest folklorists did not manifest such an agenda, those who picked up the folk mantle in the midst of The Great Depression did so with a conscious appeal to authenticity as an ethical response to the current state of affairs. Silber admits such an agenda on the heels of the 1960s revival, noting that he hopes his efforts in compiling a collection of folk songs will “provide materials for those particular consciousness-changers who will be able to fashion and hone tools that may be used in the process of fundamental social change” (18). Folk musicians Peter Yarrow and John Cohen both make similar admissions, noting that they were a part of a very conscious effort to turn society from a destructive and superficial commerce-based modernism by demonstrating and appealing to something more authentic and real within traditional music (No Direction Home disc 2). Not only does this appeal to authenticity reveal how the rhetoric of ethos became the backbone of the movement, but it is demonstrated through some of the actual discourse of the era, as well as specific features that identify folk music forms from others.
The folk movement that swept through America beginning in the 1930s can be understood as movement towards uncovering, reproducing, and even reverting to a more authentic and “real” time. This move was a direct response to the situation(s) established above: a push against commercialism, conformity, and the desire of the youth and “folk” of a nation to exercise a voice in the social sphere. While the earliest folklorists did not manifest such an agenda, those who picked up the folk mantle in the midst of The Great Depression did so with a conscious appeal to authenticity as an ethical response to the current state of affairs. Silber admits such an agenda on the heels of the 1960s revival, noting that he hopes his efforts in compiling a collection of folk songs will “provide materials for those particular consciousness-changers who will be able to fashion and hone tools that may be used in the process of fundamental social change” (18). Folk musicians Peter Yarrow and John Cohen both make similar admissions, noting that they were a part of a very conscious effort to turn society from a destructive and superficial commerce-based modernism by demonstrating and appealing to something more authentic and real within traditional music (No Direction Home disc 2). Not only does this appeal to authenticity reveal how the rhetoric of ethos became the backbone of the movement, but it is demonstrated through some of the actual discourse of the era, as well as specific features that identify folk music forms from others.
Aristotle defines ethos as an appeal to an orator’s character (Book II.I). He notes that that “good sense, good moral character, and goodwill” are all factors in an orator’s attempt to establish his/her character as credible (Book II.I). This appeal to character, I must argue, is the defining rhetorical move of the folk revival. While most of the writing on the topic has referred to the movement’s zeal for authenticity, there is not an obvious discussion of that zeal as an ethical appeal. Perhaps it is because it is self-evident, though I am compelled to say that it is seldom thought of in such a manner.
One way to understand this appeal to ethos/authenticity is by understanding it as an appeal to basic human nature; of course, those most aware of the movement’s agenda would say that increasing mechanization and commercialization had separated humanity from its basic nature, hence the need to channel that nature through traditional songs that spoke of heartache, hardship, workaday life, and the family and community units (Mitchell 603-605). Singer Dave Van Ronk appeals to this ideal, noting that he thought folksongs like the ones Bob Dylan wrote appealed to Jungian type of collective unconscious (No Direction Home disc 1). John Cohen also discusses traditional music this way. When he describes hearing rural musician Roscoe Holcomb play traditional music Cohen notes that there was a “timeless” quality to the music that “went right to [his] inner being, speaking directly to [him]” as though they shared a collective sensitivity (qtd. in Jones 403). One way to look at this appeal to the collective as a rhetorical one is to think of it through Kennedy’s “A Hoot in the Dark.” His claim that “[w]e all share a ‘deep’ universal rhetoric” speaks to this collective unconscious (7). This sense of, and appeal to, a fundamental shared human unconscious is one way of theorizing the folk appeal to authenticity, though it is hard to get beyond the theorizing. The idea that the answer to society’s problems was to be found by moving backwards in time to a more collective identity and tribe-based unconscious essentially grounds the appeal to authenticity, as though that authenticity is more human than modernity allows.
Allen’s “In Pursuit of Authenticity: The New Lost City Ramblers and the Postwar Music Revival” describes particular features of the folk movement’s appeal to credibility. While he focuses on the New Lost City Ramblers (NLCR), his discussion may be applied to the wider folk scene at the time, especially the urban one. There are actually two rhetorical appeals going on within the folk quest for authenticity: one is to the purist folk community, in an appeal for legitimacy (Allen 296-7); the second is a political appeal to society at large, as established earlier. Allen outlines how the NLCR worked to authenticate themselves: by engaging in intense fieldwork and musicology, learning traditional tunes and lyrics through steeping themselves in the cultural music and communities that produced those tunes, and by adopting the instruments and singing styles of the traditional communities they were emulating. While Allen does not point it out, the struggle for authentication can be read as various rhetorical moves. These moves are not unique to the NLCR, but rather, can be found throughout the gamut of the folk revival. Illustrating these moves will prove more interesting that simply continuing on with this discussion, and so the focus will now look to some examples.
"New Lost City Ramblers - Man of Constant Sorrow." YouTube. YouTube, 30 Apr. 2011. Web. 4 Nov. 2011.
"Pete Seeger and the New Lost City Ramblers - Ragtime Annie Medley." YouTube. YouTube, 1 Jun. 2011. Web. 4 Nov. 2011.
In the videos above, the NLCR and Pete Seeger employ several rhetorical devices in their appeal to authenticity and ethos. One of the fundamental appeals may be understood as a manifestation of the idea of topics, which in its most basic definition is understood as a recurring theme or location of discussion within argumentation. In these videos, the first might be topically defined as covering the hard work and sorrow category, while the second would fit into a dance tune topoi made up of certain recurring rhythms or steps. Such topical arrangement can be seen in the hundreds of folk music collections in which the material is organized into themes that recur within the tradition. For example, the Silbers’ Folksinger’s Wordbook arranges songs into categories of topics such as “Hoedowns, jigs and reels,” “Songs of chain gangs, jails and prisoners,” “Songs of true-love. . .and not-so true,” “Hard working people,” and many others. Also, as mentioned above, Bob Dylan was known as a topical songwriter and singer, as his repertoire consisted of songs that fit a recognizable thematic category. While the format of the “arguments” may not have been the same, the topics of folk music can be thought of in the same way as those of classic orator. In drawing from the traditional topical index and singing songs that fit within a familiar and identifiable category, folk musicians like the NLCR made a case for their authenticity. Their use of the topical categories was to establish their credibility and ethos, while also presenting that ethos as a remedy for social issues.
Both scenes can also be read as an ethical appeal, as the informal and seemingly spontaneous action is to represent a traditional folk gathering. The cups on the table, the fact that the participants sit facing each other, and the kitchen setting are all set up to look like an authentic informal get-together. Seeger outlines this rhetorical move (though he does not call it that) in The Incomplete Folksinger, as he articulates what makes a good and effective folk music gathering. He posits that not only is it traditional for a group to sit facing each other at a communal gathering – he points to tribal fires and early-American church architecture – but that it is also more democratic (325-326). Such an arrangement resists any one person having too much authority, as everyone is able to see everyone else and participate equally in the situation (326). The attempt to replicate the traditional setting is to authenticate the current one, and is as much a rhetorical move towards credibility as anything. The arrangement of the set in the videos can be seen as a clear reproduction of Seeger’s own folk philosophy in an attempt to establish authenticity and credibility.
There is a style to the scene and to the music that can be thought of in terms of rhetorical theory as well. While the NLCR paid more attention to style than many other folk musicians, the use of acoustic instruments and the way they were played was a direct appeal to authenticity, as the musicians sought credibility by performing in the manner of the tradition. Allen notes that the NLCR, as well as others, even adopted a singing style that was to emulate whatever tradition was being used at the moment (289-90). These stylistic features within the music are no less significant than stylistic features within argumentation, as both of them work to affect the listener in a certain way. Whether or not the stylistics of the folk movement helped with the transmission of the messages the music bore, there is no doubt the stylistic appropriations were used to establish a sense of ethos, or more specifically, authenticity.
While there is more that could be discussed, I will wrap up this discussion by considering the role of memory and how it relates to the ethos of authenticity. In the videos, the songs are performed by memory, which is a particularly rhetorical move, and may be thought of in terms of rhetorical theory. It is rhetorical in that performing a song from memory presents it as one that is familiar and deeply ingrained in the artist’s mind. In the case of the folk revival, this memory was used to authenticate the performer and establish his/her character. Allen points out that the NLCR made a concerted effort to learn everything by ear, so that they would remain as true to the original source as possible (286). This was all a part of their “preoccupation with questions of authenticity” (287), as the use of memory ties into the idea of cultural memory as an element of rhetorical theory. By performing traditional songs by memory, folk artists attempted to both place themselves within the culture they were performing, and bring that culture to life. This placement, of course, was a part of the pursuit of authentication, while the recreation of the culture took on socio-political undertones.
In order to add a more bare-bones creative element to this project, I have written and video-recorded my own version of a folk song/video that appropriates and applies the types of rhetoric that have been discussed here. A list of the intentional rhetorical moves can be found below, as well as the lyrics to the song. (I posted the lyrics because the audio quality may not do justice to the content; I apologize for the sound.)
Gerber, Kyle. "John Miller: A Folk Rhetoric." YouTube. YouTube, 5 Nov. 2011. Web. 5 Nov. 2011.
Tune: Traditional
Lyrics: Kyle Gerber
When John Miller was a little baby
Sittin on the buggy seat
He took a firm grip of his daddy’s calloused hands and said
Milkin’s gonna be the death of me, Lord Lord
Milkin’s gonna be the death of me.
Well his daddy said to John Miller
Go and bring me the milkin stool
Gonna teach you how to milk, gonna teach you how to work
Gonna make sure that my boy here ain’t no fool. . .
Well John Miller, on every Sunday morning
Sittin there, on that old wooden pew
He’d sneak a look around, and he’d think to himself
Mary Lou I’m gonna make a wife of you. . .
John and Mary a-workin with the cattle
John and Mary, a-workin with the land
John and Mary workin hard, just to keep themselves afloat
Johnny Miller said, you see these calloused hands. . .
Well the salesman said to John Miller
I’m gonna show you this milkin’ machine
I’m gonna show you how it spins I’m gonna show you how it pumps
I’m gonna run it off of steam and gasoline . . .
Well John Miller said to the salesman,
Sir, my cows ain’t a part of no machine
No my cows and I ain’t no steel and rubber parts
Skin and bones don’t run on gasoline. . .
Yes John Miller said to the salesman,
I ain’t never been a modernizing man,
For it’s ashes into ashes and it’s dust back into dust
They’re gonna bury me with these calloused hands. . .
John and Mary had some little babies
John and Mary had some little boys and girls
And they all worked very hard, and the loved and laughed and prayed
And they worked the land with sweaty tired brows. . .
Well John Miller called his Mary to him
And said Mary dear, we’ve grown so very old
And I’m broken and bent and my soul is weary tired
But I wouldn’t trade it now for piles of gold . . .
Yes John Miller called his family round him
And said I’ve run my race and now have reached the end
No I wouldn’t trade my family and I wouldn’t trade these cows
For I’m goin’ where there are no calloused hands . . .
Well John Junior was a little baby
Cryin on his mother’s knee
And he took one look at his mother’s calloused hands and said
Milkin’s gonna be the death of me . . . . There are several elements of what I will call “folk rhetoric” within the video:
- Appeals to authenticity/ethos
o The appropriation of a traditional tune, in this case, one called “John Henry.” This appeals to the tradition, tying my own work in with the original, I attempt to establish my own credibility.
o The use of acoustic and “old tyme” instruments, played acoustically and using traditional picking methods and patterns.
o The use of a traditional stylistics, with the verse/refrain format of the song, and the appropriation of traditional vocal stylistics.
o The arrangement of the scene, which is set up to look like an informal gathering in which a few musicians engage with the rest of the audience who is free to sing along and participate in the scene.
o Specific non-commercial/non-conformist elements.
§ The obvious placement of the scene in a home, as opposed to a recording studio.
§ The fact that the song is over five minutes long, as opposed to the general three minute commercial industry standard.
§ The anti-modernizing agenda, with the resistance of agricultural technology and mass farming methods.
- Other rhetorical moves:
o The use of topical subject matter: the song is about a man who works hard in an agricultural setting, has a family, resists technological modernization, and dies feeling that his life is worthy of reward.
§ There is a specific cultural appeal here as well, as the name John Miller would be recognized as common Mennonite name, and song is written to deal with a historical theme familiar to, and identified with, Mennonites. (I am Mennonite, so the stretch for authenticity is not quite as intense here.)
o The appeal to memory, especially the idea of public memory, in both the thematic content, and in the use of Biblical phrases such as “ashes to ashes and dust to dust” (Gen. 3.19), and “running the race” (2 Tim. 4.7, Heb. 12.1). This appeal has as much to do with authenticity and ethos as it does memory, but that is how memory can be understood to function rhetorically.
This list is just to demonstrate how within my own production I sought to reproduce the rhetorical moves I have identified as being prevalent in the folk movement. Much debate remains as to whether or not the folk revival has had a positive effect, though most scholars agree that the quest for authenticity was a generally either a failed one, or dismissed as nothing better than a really good imitation. The point is not moot, however, as the twenty-first century has seen its own independent recording industry boom into a movement rife with appeals to what is authentic and true (Newman). As such, this analysis of the rhetoric of the folk movement provides a paradigm of sorts through which the rhetoric of these contemporary movements can be examined, and even understood.
*special thanks to the band for playing along: Roger Martin - banjo, Dallas Roth - bass, Kaitlyn Gerber - guitar.
Works Cited
Allen, Ray. “In Pursuit of Authenticity: The New Lost City Ramblers and the Postwar Folk Music Revival.” Journal of the Society for American Music. 4.3 (2010): 277-305. Print.
Aristotle. Rhetoric. Trans. W. Rhys Roberts. Comp. Ed. Lee Honeycutt. Rhetoric and Composition. Web. 4 November 2011.
Bitzer, Lloyd F,. “The Rhetorical Situation.” Philosophy and Rhetoric. 1.1 (1968): 1-14. Print.
Jones, Brian. “Finding the Avant-Garde in the Old-Time: John Cohen in the American Folk Revival.” American Music. 28.4 (2010): 402-435. Print.
Kennedy, George A,. “A Hoot in the Dark: The Evolution of General Rhetoric.” Philosophy and Rhetoric. 25.1 (1992): 1-21. Print.
Mitchell, Gillian A.M,. “Visions of Diversity: Cultural Pluralism and the Nation in the Folk Music Revival Movement of the United States and Canada, 1958–65.” Journal of American Studies. 40.3 (2006): 593-614. Print.
Newman, Michael Z,. “Indie Culture: In Pursuit of the Authentic Autonomous Alternative.” Cinema Journal. 48.3 (2009): 16-34. Print.
No Direction Home. Dir. Martin Scorsese. Spitfire, 2005. DVD.
Seeger, Pete. The Incompleat Folksinger. Ed. Jo Metcalf Schwartz. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1972. Print.
Silber, Irwin and Fred Silber. “Foreword.” Folksinger’s Workbook. New York: Oak Publications, 1973. Print.
Works Consulted
Dettmar, Kevin J.H, Ed. The Cambridge Companion to Bob Dylan. New York: Cambridge U P, 2009. Print.
Greenway, John. American Folksongs of Protest. New York: Octagon, 1971. Print.
