> "New" is not an especial virtue in blues.
> If you want innovation, look elsewhere. The
> virtue of he blues lies depth of feeling and
> technical skill in executing traditional forms
> rather than in creation of new artistic form.
> In this respect blues is not unlike other folk
> musics: bluegrass, traditional folk, Celtic
> musics, you're not supposed to do something
> "new." You're supposed to what other people
> have done, just do it well.
Though I agree essentially with all your informative/well-put comment/analysis in this thread, nonetheless, insofar as bluegrass is concerned (and unless you mean to use the word "new" primarily to qualify "new artistic form"), one who has heard Tony Trischka, Bela Fleck, Dave Grisman, Tony Rice, and Russ Barenberg might at least have quibble re. your "you're not supposed to do something 'new'" characterization including(as distinguished from what/how they play when doing "new" things in other genres) when all/each are doing straight-out bluegrass.
Also, I find very puzzling others' reference to the blues of R.L. Burnside as if he is an exemplar of musical special-ness because he seems to me to little than a rip-off the actually original-while-traditional Furry Lewis.