Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/19/2019 Scapegoating Folklore
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/scapegoating-folklore 1/5
On Scapegoating Public FolkloreAuthor(s): Steve SiporinReviewed work(s):Source: The Journal of American Folklore, Vol. 113, No. 447 (Winter, 2000), pp. 86-89Published by: American Folklore SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/541268 .
Accessed: 02/11/2012 22:31
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
.
American Folklore Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal
of American Folklore.
http://www.jstor.org
8/19/2019 Scapegoating Folklore
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/scapegoating-folklore 2/5
86
Journalof
AmericanFolklore113
(2000)
the
school
year
1996-97
Maryland
olleges
and
universities
raduated
,591
teachereducation
students.At the sametime, Maryland's ublic
school
systems
hired
4,588
teachers,
a
27%
n-
creaseover 1995-96.
State
and national
rends
indicate
a
continuing
need
for
more new teach-
ersfor
a
couple
of
reasons.
One
is
that he echo
baby
boom is
increasing
he
school-agedpopu-
lation,
and the
second
is that
many
teachers
hired
in
the last
baby
boom
(late
1960s/early
1970s)
are
retiring.
The
1996
National
Com-
mission
on
Teaching
andAmerica'sFuture
es-
timatesa need for two million new teachersby
2006--a
figurerepeatedby
numerous
ources,
including
the
president
and
Congress
n their
recentlypassed
ducation
egislation.2
If
two million new
teachers
are indeed
needed
in
the next
eight
years,
folklorists
should
attempt
to influence some of them.
Here s
a
great
opportunity
o
get away
rom
he
"folklorist
as
performer"
mage
and to show
students
he
importance
of folklorefor serious
academic
nquiry.
How can
thisbe
done? t will
not be
easy,
but
folklorists
r
those
with some
folklore
training
n
universities
with education
programs
hould
attempt
to
implement
folk-
lore
into the
curriculum.
At
my
university
he
World Folklore
course
s one
that
can be used
by English
majors
n
the area
hat
s
called
"the-
matic
approaches,
iversity,
Western
heritage,
global
perspectives."
World
Folklore,
as
a
lower-division
course,
can
be used
by
students
fulfilling
their
"general
university
require-
ments,"
and education
majors
can
use
this
course
to fill
an
elective referred
o
as
"one
course
in
non-Western
culture."As
a
result,
this course is
in
high
demand,
and
my
course
enrollments
re
imited
only
by
the absenceof
large
ecture halls
available o
the
English
de-
partment.
Perhaps
now
is
the time
for
those
interested
in the future of
folklore as
an
academicdisci-
pline
to make
a
concerted
effort to introduce
thisdisciplinento the curriculum.t is encour-
aging
to
see
that
the AFS
Long-Range
Plan-
ning
Committee's
plan recognizes
he need to
create
inkages
between
professional
olklorists
and K-12 folklore
projects
n variouscommu-
nities.The healthof
the
discipline
depends
not
only
on
the kind of
rigorous cholarship
xhib-
ited
in a
varietyoffolklore ournals,
n
graduate
programs
n
folklore,
and in the
specific
and
theoretical
approaches
o
folkloreat folklore
conferences,
but also on the
ways
in which
the
discipline
is
introduced to those who
have the
opportunity to influence students at all levels of
our educational
system.
Notes
1When
printed
he
questionnaire,
hewords
mass
and
communications
nadvertently
ere on
separate
lines.
Five
tudents,
ssuming
hat
masseferredo re-
ligion, ave
t a
5
2All
of
these
igures
ere
provided y
Dr.Dennis
Hinkle,
deanof the
College
of
Education,
owson
University personal
ommunication,
ecember
1998).
References
Cited
Ben-Amos,
Dan.
1998. The Name Is the
Thing.
Journal
fAmerican
olklore
11:257-280.
Bendix,
Regina.
1998. Of Names.
Journal f
American
olklore
11:235-246.
Brunvand,
an
Harold. 979.
Readings
n
American
Folklore.ew
York:W. W.
Norton.
. 1998. The
Study fAmerican
olklore.
New
York:W. W.
Norton.
Cole,
Joanna,
d.
1982.
Best-Lovedolktales
f
the
World.
arden
City,
N.Y.:
Doubleday.
Hurston,
ZoraNeale.
1990.Mules ndMen.New
York:
Perennial
ibrary.
Kirshenblatt-Gimblett,
arbara. 998.
Folklore's
Crisis.]ournalfAmerican
olklore11:281-327.
Oring,
Elliot.
1998.Anti
Anti-"Folklore."Journal
ofAmericanolklore11:328-338.
Zipes, ack,
d. 1991.Arabian
ights.
New
York:
Signet
Classic.
On
Scapegoating
Public Folklore
STEVE SIPORIN
UtahState
University
The call to
abandon
the word
folklore
s
the
name for our
discipline
has
apparently
been
abandoned itself-rather
like the
stories
in
which the
villain
meets
the
fate
he
thought
had
been
prepared
or his enemies.The
discussion
was
fruitful,
ven
reinvigorating,
nd
although
there were
no
villainsor
enemies,
there were
several
heroes.
Among
those
heroes,
I would
count
Dan
Ben-Amos,
with his
fine
essay
"The
Name Is
the
Thing"
(1998).
In this
essay,
Ben-
Amos
argues ogically
and
poetically
for the
8/19/2019 Scapegoating Folklore
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/scapegoating-folklore 3/5
Notes
87
term
folklore
as
meaningful
and central to
a
field
of
inquiry.
I learned from
this
essay,
but I
was
completely surprised by the scapegoating of
public
(or
applied)
folklore as a
major
cause
of
folklore's
current academic
troubles.
In
spite
of
all the
good
in
"The Name Is
the
Thing,"
there are
misconceptions, unsup-
ported
assertions,
illogical
conclusions,
and
an
apparent
lack of awareness.
I
believe it would
be
a
disservice
to the entire field of folklore
to
let Ben-Amos's
commentary
on
public
folk-
lore's
history
go
by
without a
response.
Thus,
in this brief note, I want to identify several er-
rors and criticize them one at
a
time.
First,
Ben-Amos
refers to the
emergence
of
public
folklore as
"an
opportunistic
defection
from
the
university" by
"professional
folklorists
who have
made
it
[public folklore]
their
choice"
(1998:264-265).
This assertion
glosses
over the
desperate
straits new
folklore Ph.D.s
found
themselves
in
during
the
mid-1970s-a
fact that
Ben-Amos is
well
aware of
and
com-
passionate
about. But the fact
remains
that
many
of these
students who were
just
finishing
their
graduate
degrees
had
to choose
between
public
folklore and no
folklore.
It
was not
a
"defection"
(which
would
require
leaving
something),
nor
was
it
"opportunistic"
(which
has
negative,
self-serving
connotations).
This is
not to
say
that,
for
many,
public
folklore
was
al-
ways
their
worthy
aspiration.
But
for
many
others,
public
folklore was in
fact
a
way
to
stay
in the
game
and
not defect.
I
remember
one
post-Ph.D.
folklore col-
league
with
sterling
academic
credentials and
ambitious
dreams
who had
begun
selling
insur-
ance
before
he
was convinced to
take
ajob
as
a
temporary
fieldworker for
a
public
folklore
project.
That
project
led
to other
short-term
fieldwork
stints,
and
eventually
he
became
a
permanent
folk
arts director in
his
home state.
Reduced to
selling
insurance-not
exactly
the
career
for which
he had
spent years
completing
his Ph.D.-he had despaired of ever working
in
folklore and
had to be
convinced
to take an-
other
chance,
leaving
his
insurance
job
and
signing
on for a
few
weeks
of
fieldwork
in the
West.
"This
could lead to
something
else,"
his
friends
said to him. "At
least
you'll
be
doing
folklore. At
least for
a
little while."
It
is
inaccurate
and,
it
seems to
me,
unjust
to
describe this
experience
in
Ben-Amos's terms:
"leaving
the
academy may
be
a
personal
choice
for
individual
folklorists"
(1998:271).
Nothing
could be farther from the truth.
This is only one example of many similar
cases;
they
were
hardly "opportunistic
defec-
tion[s]."
If
any
abandonment
was
involved,
it
would
be more accurate to
say
that
the
academy
abandoned
its
vulnerable,
new Ph.D.s
and
not
vice versa.
But
to
criticize
folklorists for
taking
public jobs
when there
were no academic
jobs
and then to
say
that
in
taking
those
jobs they
un-
dermined
the
academy
is,
at the
very
least,
to
add insult
to
injury.
Would the academic dimension of folklore
somehow
have been better
served if
my
friend
had
kept
selling
insurance?
Would folklore
be
in a
better
position
in
the
academy
if
these
doz-
ens of
young
folklorists
achieving
their
degrees
in the 1970s
and 1980s had taken a solemn
oath
not to
practice
folklore
except
in
academic
po-
sitions-and
then,
of
course,
had
quietly
disap-
peared?
Second,
according
to
Ben-Amos,
"the
crea-
tive
operations
of
professional
folklorists
in
re-
gional
or ethnic
communities do
not
contribute
to the academic
strengthening
of
folklore"
(1998:271).
Surely
Ben-Amos is
not
referring
to
establishing
academic
positions,
occupying
department
chairs
and
deanships,
or
other
examples
of the
institutional
"academic
strengthening
of folklore."
He
could not
mean
that because it
would
be too
obvious
a
state-
ment and
not worth
making;
clearly, public
folklorists cannot fulfill
these
roles
because
they
do
not work
at
universities or
colleges.
What I take this statement
to mean
is
that
public
folklorists do
not
strengthen
academic
folklore
because
they
do not
add to the
aca-
demic
discourse
by
producing
new
knowledge
about
folklore. This
statement
might
be
con-
strued
by
some as
generally
true
only
if
field-
work
is
unimportant.
But
fieldwork
is
important;
it
is
essential.
Fieldwork
produces
new
knowledge,
and
what
we learn in
the
field
and
through
the
experience
of fieldwork con-
tributes to our
discourse
and,
thus,
strengthens
folklore
academically.
A
simplified
truism
of
the
field
(one
that I think
is
a
good
counter
to
the
fashions
oftheory)
is that
theories come
and
go,
but
meticulous fieldwork
maintains
its
value-perhaps
even
increases its
value-over
time.
(I
also think
it is a little
too
soon to
dismiss
the
direct theoretical
contributions of
public
folklore;
see
Baron and
Spitzer 1992.)
The
8/19/2019 Scapegoating Folklore
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/scapegoating-folklore 4/5
88
Journal
of
AmericanFolklore
113
(2000)
enormousamountof fieldwork
done
by public
folklorists
n the 1970s and 1980s
provides
a
magnificent esourceortheacademy, swell as
for
"regional
and ethnic
communities."
Be-
cause so
much of this
fieldworkwas
done
by
professional
olklorists,
he
standards
remuch
higher
than those of earlier
public
folklore
ef-
forts
like
the Works
Progress
Administration
(WPA)
projects
of
the
1930s.
I
think,
though
I
have
no hardevidence
o cite
here,
that
he
sub-
field of American
olk
art-which
was almost
entirelyneglected
by
academic
olklorists
ntil
the1960s-will rely or decadeso comeon the
exhibition
catalogs
and
even
more
on the ar-
chived
fieldwork behind
those
exhibitions)
thatare
available
hanks o
public
olklorists
nd
the Folk
Arts
Program
t the
NationalEndow-
ment
for
the Arts.
This is
an
enduring
esource
for
theoretical,
which is
not
synonymous
with
academic,
discourse-and
theoretical
iscourse
does
"contribute
o the academic
trengthen-
ing
offolklore."
Beforeleavingthisissue,I want to
mention
Ben-Amos's
dismissal
fpublic
folklore'sGreat
Depression
precedent,
the
programs
of
the
WPA
(1998:264-265).
Ben-Amos
fails to
mention
the Slave
Narrative
Collection,
which
is
perhaps
the
outstanding
American
folklore
achievement
of
the
era,
in
or out of
the
acad-
emy.
This
protopublic
olklore
work has
been
cited
and used
by
other
disciplines,
one of
the
apparent
itmus
ests
ofacademic
prestige.
Third,
one ofBen-Amos's
major
oncerns
s
thatother
disciplines
do
not
cite
folklore
works
regularly.
As Elliott
Oring
points
out
in the
same
pecial
ssue
ofthejournal
fAmerican
olk-
lore,
his
feeling
is
just
that-a
feeling,
an
im-
pression
(1998:329).
Nevertheless,
even
if we
grant
hat
the
impression
may
be
accurate,
t
is
hard
to see
how
public
folklorists'
activities
have
prevented
practitioners
of
other
disci-
plines
rom
reading
and
citing
folklore
cholar-
ship.
Is it because
public
folklorists
ave
spent
theirtime
putting
on festivals ndcurating x-
hibitions
rather
than
writing
scholarly
books
and
articles?
Remember
that
the choice
for
many
(I
believe
most)
new folklore
Ph.D.s
of
the
1970s
and1980s
was
not academic
r
public
folklore;
t
was
public
olklore
or
no
folklore,
at
least or
thosewho
had o earn
a
iving.
The failure
of
learned
academicians
n other
fields o
read
olklore
eems o
meto
be
largely
function
of
their
narrow-mindedness-not
a
by-product
of the existence of folk
festivals.
The
examples
Ben-Amoscites-Smith
(1978),
aliteraryheorist,onproverbs ndPratt 1977),
an
anthropologist,
on
what
sounds
like
per-
formance
heory-really
reveal
a
lack
ofaware-
ness
on their
part.
His characterizationf some
historiansas
"problematic"
eems more like
"ignorant
nd
arrogant"
o me. That
some
his-
torians eel free to characterize
whole
era
of
folklore
scholarship
n the basis
of their
biases
and limited
knowledge
(Ben-Amos
1998:273)
speaks
poorly
or
them,
not
forus.
What would Ben-Amos have us do? In-
crease
our
advocacy
fforts
n the
academy?
Do
better
public
relations
with our books?
That
sounds
oddly
ike
public
olklore--and,
thus,
s
surely
distasteful.
do not meanto be
sarcastic;
realize
hatBen-Amoswants o see
the
writing
of serious
scholarship y
folklorists--scholar-
ship
that other fields
will not be able
to
ig-
nore-as
the real solution.
But
his
very
examples
how
thatother ields
have
repeatedly
ignored
folklore's
pathbreaking
scholarship
only
to reinvent
t
themselves
nd
then declare
the
discovery
ofnew worlds.
Is
that
really
a
fail-
ure of
the
quality
offolklore
cholarship?
Fourth,
I
assume
hatBen-Amos
has
been
to
folk
festivals
produced
by
folklorists-but
his
brief characterization
f
today's
festivals
is
stereotyped
nd naccurate:
Folklore
estivals
ave
replaced
he
country
hows
that xhibited
reaks
f nature.
ow the estivals
ut
ondisplayheodditiesfmodernocieties,hestory-
teller,
he
craftsperson,
nd
hemusician.
uch
esti-
vals
nd
presentations
o
ndeed
marginalize
olklore,
making
ta
quaint
uriosity....
The
urge
o
preserve
nd
isplay
he
past
uels om-
munity
ction,
ot heactivities
f
the olklorist
ho
records
n
order
o
analyze
nd
nterpret.
1998:268,
2741
On
the
contrary,
f
one
is
ooking
for
the
exotic,
one
might
well
be
disappointed
y
the folk
fes-
tivals
produced
by today's public folklor-
ists-festivals
that celebrate
the local
and
display
the
present,
not
only
the
past.
One's
neighbor
s
among
he
folk artists
ne is
ikely
o
meetat
today's
olkfestivals.
Nor
is it so clear
to methat
"the
urge
to
pre-
serve
and
display
the
past"
isn't
part
of"the
ac-
tivities
of the
folklorist,"
academic
as
well as
public.
Didn't
earlier eading
academic
folklor-
ists,
like
Franz
Boas,
have
a
strong urge
to
8/19/2019 Scapegoating Folklore
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/scapegoating-folklore 5/5
Notes
89
preserve
the
past,
and isn't
the content of
Boas's
ethnographies
one
of
his
major
contri-
butions? Doesn't he display the pastin his pub-
lications? Isn't folklore
always displayed
when
it
appears
in
books,
where
it's
also
analyzed
and
interpreted
(as
it often
is
in
public
folklore
projects)?
Isn't "the
urge
to
preserve
and
dis-
play"
as fundamental
to
folklore
as
the
urge
to
analyze
and
interpret?
I'm not sure
I
can
appre-
ciate what's
wrong
with that.
Ben-Amos ends his article with a
favorite
parable
from
Hasidic
tradition:
Rabbi
Zusya
said,
"In
the
coming
world,
they
will
not
askme:
'Why
were
you
not Moses?'
They
will
ask
me:
Why
were
you
not
Zusya?'
"
[1998:247]
In
the context of
his
essay,
I
understand Ben-
Amos
to
be
applying
the
parable
to mean that
folklorists should
be
folklorists
and
should
pur-
sue
the
discipline
their
own tradition
defines
rather than
giving up
their name
in
order to
try
to
be
something they
are not.
They
will
be
judged
as
folklorists,
not as
historians,
literary
critics,
cultural studies
scholars,
or
whatever
may
be concocted next.
But can't
this same
parable
be understood to
apply
within
the field
offolklore?
Might
it then
be seen
to
ask
if an
academician is the
only
valid
kindoffolklorist?
s here
nly
one
way
o
con-
tribute?
How
does
Zusya
being Zusya
detract
from Moses being Moses, or vice versa?To cite
another Hasidic
parable:
The
rabbi
of Zans
used
to
say:
"All
zaddikim
saints]
serve,
each
in his
own
way,
each
according
o his
rung,
andwhoever
says:
Only my
rabbi s
righteous,'
losesbothworlds."
Buber
1948]
References
Cited
Baron,
Robert,
and
Nicholas
R.
Spitzer,
eds.
1992.
Public Folklore.
Washington,
D.C.:
Smithsonian
InstitutionPress.
Ben-Amos,
Dan.
1998. The Name
Is
the
Thing.
Journal fAmerican
olklore
11:257-280.
Buber,
Martin.
1948.
Tales
of
the
Hasidim: The
LaterMasters.
ew
York:
Schocken.
Oring,
Elliott.
1998. Anti Anti-"Folklore."
Jour-
nal
ofAmerican
olklore
11:328-338.
Pratt,
Mary
Louise. 1977. Toward
Speech
Act The-
ory of Literary
Discourse.
Bloomington:
Indiana
University
Press.
Smith,
Barbara
Hermstein. 1978.
On the
Margins f
Discourse:The Relation
of
Literatureo
Language.
Chicago: University
ofChicago
Press.
