Folk Loris Tics in the Twenty-First Century

8/6/2019 Folk Loris Tics in the Twenty-First Century

1/25

Folkloristics in the Twenty-First Century (AFS Invited Presidential Plenary Address, 2004)Author(s): Alan DundesSource: The Journal of American Folklore, Vol. 118, No. 470 (Autumn, 2005), pp. 385-408Published by: University of Illinois Press on behalf of American Folklore SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4137664 .

Accessed: 29/06/2011 04:53

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=illinois. .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

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 formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

University of Illinois Press andAmerican Folklore Society are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve

and extend access to The Journal of American Folklore.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=illinoishttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=folkhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/4137664?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=illinoishttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=illinoishttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/4137664?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=folkhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=illinois


2/25

ALAN DUNDES

Folkloristics n the Twenty-FirstCentury(AFSInvitedPresidentialPlenaryAddress,2004)The state of folkloristics at the beginning of the twenty-first century is depressinglyworrisome. Graduateprogramsin folklorearoundthe world havebeen disestablishedor seriously weakened. The once-celebrated program at the University of Copenha-gen no longer exists. Folklore programs in Germany have changed their title in aneffort to become ethnology-centered (Korff 1996). Even in Helsinki, the veritableMecca of folklore research,the name of the graduate program at the University ofHelsinki has been changed. According to the website, "TheDepartment of FolkloreStudies, along with the departments of Ethnology, CulturalAnthropology and Ar-chaeology, belongs administrativelyto the Faculty of Arts and the Institute of Cul-tural Research."The latter title sounds suspiciously like "cultural studies" to me, andcultural studies consists of literary types who would like to be cultural anthropolo-gists. I hate to think of folklorists being grouped with such wannabes! Here in theUnited States,the situation is even worse. UCLA's doctoral program in folklore andmythology hasbeen subsumed under the rubric of World Arts and Cultures,and thefolklore doctorate has been reduced to one of several options in that expansion ofwhat was formerly a department of dance. The doctoral program in folklore andfolklife at the University of Pennsylvania has virtually collapsed and may not re-cover unless there is an infusion of new faculty members. Even Indiana University,the acknowledged bastion and beacon of folklorestudy in the United States,has seenfit to combine folklore with ethnomusicology into one administrative unit. As a result,there is no longer a purely separate, independent doctoral program in folklore per seanywhere in the United States,a sad situation in my view.Some may feel that these administrative shifts arenothing more than a reflectionof the name-changing discussion arising from those among you who have expressedunhappiness with the term "folklore" as the name of our discipline. Regina Bendixwas quite right when she made the astute observation that the very coining of theterm "folklore"by William Thoms was itself a case of name changing (from "popu-larantiquities,"the Latinateconstruction, to the Anglo-Saxon "folklore";1998:235).However,I believe she was sadlymistaken when she claimed thatpartof the disreputeof the field was caused by using the same term "folklore"for both the subject matterand the name of the discipline. This is, in my opinion, a red herring, a nonproblemthat was perfectly well solved by several nineteenth-century folklorists, including

ALANDUNDES as Professorof FolkloreandAnthropology,Universityof California,BerkeleyJournalofAmericanFolklore118(470):385-408

Copyright? 2005 by the Board of Trusteesof the Universityof Illinois


3/25

386 Journal fAmerican olklore 18(2005)

ReinholdK6hler 1887),who distinguished etween"folklore,"he subjectmatter,and"folkldoristics,"hestudyof thatsubjectmatter.Theterm"folkloristics"oesbackto the 1880satthevery east.In 1996,EricMontenyohlnformedus,"Ofcourse heterm'folldoristics's quitemodernin comparison o 'folklore.'Thedistinctionbe-tweenthedisciplineandthesubjectmaterial nd theappropriateermforeachcameinto discussion n the 1980s.Until thattime,folklore eferredo boththesubjectandthedisciplinewhichstudied t-one morereason or confusion"1996:234n2).Mon-tenyohlprobablys referringo BruceJackson'squallyuninformednote in JAFn1985 n whichJackson omplainsabout heterm"folkloristics"ndproposes hat tbebanned,asif anyonecouldpossibly egislate anguageusage.Jackson uotesRog-er Abrahams's laim thatI invented he term as a joke.I certainlydid not.On De-cember7, 1889,American olkloristCharlesG.Leland 1834-1903), in an addressgreeting he newlyformedHungarianFolkloreSociety, pokeof "DieFolkloristik"asone of the mostprofounddevelopmentsn history(Leland1890-1892).So folk-loristics s the studyof folklore ustaslinguistics s the studyof language, nd it hasbeenfor morethan acentury, venif parochialAmericanolklorists renotaware fthe fact.YuriySokolov's extbook RussianFolklore,irstpublished n 1938,recog-nizesthedistinction, ndthe valuable irstchapter f the bookis entitled"TheNatureof Folkloreand the Problemsof Folkloristics." heSokolovusagewaspointedoutbyBarbaraKirshenblatt-Gimblettn her rebuttalnote"Difolkloristik:A GoodYid-dishWord,"also in JAF 1985).Shealso remarkedhat AkeHultkrantz,n his im-portantGeneralEthnological oncepts1960),used "folkloristik"s a synonym or"thescienceof folklore." he distinctionbetween olklore ndfolkloristics,herefore,is hardlya newidea,andI statedor,if you like,"re-stated"t asclearlyasI could nmy prefatory What s Folklore"n the editedvolumeTheStudyofFolklore1965).Iregret hatneitherDanBen-Amosor ElliottOringreiteratedhisimportantdistinc-tion betweenfolkloristics ndfolklore n their otherwiseexcellent, piriteddefenseof the discipline n theirrespective1998essays nJAF.But in contrast, waspleasedthat RobertGeorgesand MichaelOwenJonesentitled heirusefultextbookFolklor-istics:AnIntroduction,ndtheystress hedistinctionbetween"folklore"nd "folk-loristics" nthevery irstpage(1985).JanHaroldBrunvand id not include he termin the firsteditionof his mainstreamextbook,TheStudyofAmerican olklore, hichfirstappearedn 1968,butby the second edition (1978)he decidedto include hetermon the firstpageof the bookand it has remained n latereditions(1986,1998)asreferringo "the tudyof folklore," ut he insistedon placing he term nquotationmarks,whichsuggestshe was not altogether omfortablewith it. I have,however,noted the increasingusageof the term "folkloristics"n recentscholarship, ndIbelieve t bodes well.

I am not suggestinghat we change he name of theAmericanFolkloreSociety oFolkloristics ocietyof America o parallelheLinguistics ocietyof America.Rath-er,the criticalquestionremaining s ratherwhyfolkloristics,he academic tudyoffolklore,a subject hat shouldbe partof everymajoruniversity ndcollegecurricu-larofferings, s in such obvious decline.Anotherrelated adsignis the unfortunatedemiseof thejournalSouthern olklore,he successor o the older Southern olkloreQuarterly. his was oncea major olkloreperiodicaln the UnitedStates,andI keep


4/25

Dundes,Folkloristicsn theTwenty-First entury 387

hopinghatanenterprisingolklorist t one of ourmany reat outhernolleges runiversities illresuscitatehis ournal.think here rereasonsor hedecline,ndI also hink omeoftheresponsibilityor hedeclineies npartwith hemembershipof theAmerican olkloreocietymyselfncluded).suspecthatsomeofyoumaythink hat mayhave ndorsedhescandalouslyiscouragingssayhatappearednLingua rancanOctoberf 1997 hatmade hedirepredictionhat"folkloresanautonomousisciplinetPennmaywellbe doomed"Dorfman 997:8). hisessaythatproclaimedhedisciplineffolkloristicssmoribund,fnotactuallyeceased,wasallthemore nsultingecausetwasentitled That's llFolks!" hich s a bor-rowingrompopularulture, amely,he"Looney unes"nd"MerrieMelodies"BugsBunnyradition. hesewordsuttered ya stutteringorkyPigsignifiedhatthe cartoonwasover. Incidentallyhe use of a stuttering ig,andother nsults oindividuals ithvariouspeechmpedimentsndotherdisabilities,ouldno ongerbe deemed oliticallyorrect.) ut he use of thetag ineas atitleofthe article s-sentiallyquateshefieldof folkloreo an animatedartoon hat s over. am notawarehatany olklorist rotea letterofprotest rrebuttal,lthough tried o doso.(Iamsorryo saymy response,Folkloristicsedivivus,"asnotpublishedyLinguaranca,hought doesappearn the ournal's ebsitewww.temple.edu/isllc/newfolk/dundes2.html).he astparagraphfmyresponseeads, AtamomentnAmericanistorywhenmulti-culturaliversitysbeingcelebrated,his spreciselywhenenlightened niversitydministratorsught o beencouragingractitionersofan nternationaliscipline hich oesback o Herdernd heGrimms,disciplinewhichhasbeenahead f itstime nrecognizingheimportancef folklorenpro-motingethnicprideand n providingnvaluable ata orthediscoveryf nativecognitive ategoriesndpatternsf worldviewndvalues." ingua ranca idpub-lish several hort etters f protest,ncludingne from ndianaUniversityntitled"IsFolklore inished?"utit wassignedbyLizLocke ndeightyothergraduatestudents.Nothing rom heIndianaaculty.No letter rom he IUfaculty nd noletter fprotestromAFS.Notapeep! tseemsomethatbothacademic ndpublicsectorolkloristsavea stakendefendingurdiscipline hen t is attacked.WherewastheAFSeadershipnthis occasion?s it a caseof theproverb Silenceivesconsent"?id,ordoes,AFS hink hat olklore s adisciplines dead? mightaddparenthetically,ndperhaps littlegleefully,hatLingua ranca,whichstartedn1991, ended in 2001; so it turned out that, after all, it was Lingua Franca and notfolklore that died a prematuredeath;and I can happily report that the study of folk-lore successfully defied its gloomy prophecy and lives on.The first, and in my opinion the principal, reason for the decline of folklore pro-grams at universities is the continued lack of innovation in what we might term"grandtheory."In LinguaFrancaparlance,"Folklore is considered undertheorized."Elliott Oring, one of our few folklore theorists, put it equally succinctly as an asidein his article "On the Future of American Folklore Studies:A Response":"Folkloreis liminal preciselybecause it has no theory or methodology that governs its perspec-tive" (1991:80). Any academic discipline worth its salt must have basic theoreticaland methodological concepts. Folkloristics has some, to be sure, but most of themwere devised in the nineteenth or early twentieth century and have been neither


5/25


supersededorsupplemented.nterestinglynough,mostgrandheorynfolklorewasproposed yarmchairrlibraryolklorists,ot fieldworkers.amthinking fSirJames razer'sormulationf theprinciplesfsympatheticagic rMaxMtiller'sspeculationsbout olarmythology.vennthetwentiethentury, hat ittlegrandtheorydoesexistcomes romSigmund reud ndClaudeLevi-Strauss,either fwhomwouldqualifysfieldworkers.ost ieldworkers,n thecontrary,re nvolvedwith ocalcommunitiesndarenotalwaysoncerned ith hetheoreticalmplica-tionsof thedata heygather.Historicallypeaking,herootsof thedisciplineffolkloristicsieinantiquarian-ism,or what might ermas thequest or thequaint rperhapshequest orthecurious.nmytravelso folklore enters verseasnd n thiscountry, seemoreoften hannot what wouldcall"butterflyollecting."temsof folklorere reatedasrare xotica,metaphoricallypeaking,o have pinstuckhroughhem ndmount-edinadisplayrchivalase uch hat t is almostmpossibleoimaginehefolkloreitemswereeveralive that s,performed).ontextstypicallygnored,nd t is thetextonly hat sprized y he ocalcollector. ecauseuchocalcollectors hooughttohave deas f atheoreticalrmethodologicalature onot, he ieldhasbydefaultbeen eft o armchairibrarycholars,hemodern naloguesoFrazer.ntheUnitedStates,heatheoreticaloid sexacerbatedy hepaucityf evenarmchairr ibraryscholars. espiteherichness f our ibraryesourcesndthe infinite apacityfinformationechnologywith tsdazzling rray f databases,mericanolkloristshave ontributedreciousittle o folkloreheory ndmethod.Almost very iabletheoretical ndmethodologicaloncept mployedn folkloristicsas comefromEurope.nonesense, supposet doesn'teallymatter here good dea omesrom.Folkloristicss andalwaysasbeenan nternationaliscipline.owegladly seFrenchfolklorist rnoldVanGennep'sotionof "rites fpassage,"innisholklorist aar-le Krohn's historic-geographicethod,"r SwedisholkloristCarlWilhelm onSydow'sonceptsf"active earer"nd"oicotype."utallthese onceptswere or-mulated t the endof the nineteenthentury rearlywentiethentury.Where rethenewhypothesesndspeculationsbout olklore?

Now, can ust maginehat omeofyoufolklorists,speciallyhose mbuedwithahealthy oseof nationalism ndpride,aresayingoyourselves,Wait minute.Americansavemade ontributionso theoreticalolkloristics. hat bout eministtheory?What boutperformanceheory?What boutoral ormulaicheory?"Well,whatabout heseso-called heories? lthoughMilmanParry ndAlbertLord regiven redit ordevelopingral ormulaicheory,ohnFoley as hownhat herootsof thetheory ame romEuropeancholarswhoprecededhem(1988:7-15). hesituation sanalogous o FrancisChild'scanonical ollectionof Englishand Scottishballads,whichwasincontestablymodeledafter he DanishfolkloristSvendGrundt-vig'smassive reatmentof Danish balladsor StithThompson'srevisionof Finnishfolklorist Antti Aarne'stale type index. American folklorists have, for the most part,been followers,not leaders.I have to admit that I fall into this category myself, havingbeen inspired by RussianfolkloristVladimirPropp's Morphologyof theFolktale 1968)and Austrian Sigmund Freud'spsychoanalytic theory.As for feminist theory, what precisely is the "theory"in feminist theory? Despite


6/25

Dundes,Folkloristicsn theTwenty-Firstentury 389

theexistencef booksandarticles ith"feministheory"ntheir itles,one ooks nvain ora serious rticulationfwhat hat"theory"s. The dea hatwomen'soicesandwomen'solesnsociety avebeenadverselympactedymalechauvinismndbias scertainlyrue,butdoes hat ruism onstituteproper theory"?ndwhatof"performanceheory"? ofolklorist oulddeny hat olkloreivesonlywhen t isperformed,hat olklore erformancesnvolve articipantsndaudiences,nd hatthe ssueofcompetencenperformances a featureo be recordedndanalyzed,utwheres the"theory"nperformanceheory?donotconsiderither o-calledem-inisttheoryorperformanceheoryo be "grandheory." s farasI'mconcerned,theyare imply retentiousays fsayinghatweshouldtudyolkloresperformed,andwe shouldbemore ensitiveothedepictionfwomen nfolkloristicextsandcontexts.Truegrandheoriesallowus to understand ata hatwouldotherwise emainenigmatic,fnotindecipherable.erewemayobservehat omeof the oldergrandtheoriesontinue oyield nsight.ConsiderheJewishuperstitionhatoneshouldneverhavea buttonsewedon or a garment therwiseepairedwhileapersonswearinghatgarment.nformants,f asked, anshed ittle ightonthepossible a-tionale nderlyinghebelief.Butwith hehelpofFrazer'sawofhomeopathic ag-ic,wecanquite asily xplainhe custom.Theonly imeagarmentssewedwhile tis worn swhena corpsesbeingdressedorburial.Hence, ewingona detachedbuttonorrepairing tear n a garments treatinghewearer f thegarment s acorpse nd,neffect,ignifyingrforecastinghat he ndividualmight oondie.Nowondert is consideredo be suchataboo.Inmaritimeolklore, e earnhat t isbad uck owhistlewhileon board hip.canrememberack nmyowndaysnthe UnitedStatesNavybeingchastisedyawarrant fficerorwhistling.Why houldwhistling e forbidden n a ship?Onceagain, randheory anhelpus.Whistling,ivenheprinciplef "like roducesike,"thebasisofFrazer'sawofhomeopathic agic,samodelofawindstorm. heresevena folkmetaphortowhistle pastorm." lthough indwasclearly necessityin daysof sail, oomuchwindwasnota desideratums it mightresultn a ship'scapsizingndsinking.Thepointhere sthatgrandheory, nceformulated, aycontinueoyield nsight.Asmany fyouknow, find hatpsychoanalyticheoryqualifiessgrand heory,allowing s to fathom therwisenexplicableolkloristicata.Forexample,heresaJapaneseuperstitionhat"pregnantomen houldneveropenanovendoor."Informantsould ayonly hat twasbad uck.Butwith heknowledgeainedromthe symbolic equivalence of oven and womb (as attested in the phrase even in Amer-ican folklore that a pregnant woman "has a bun in the oven"), we can understandthat this is once again an application of Frazer'shomeopathic magic. Opening anoven door would be an invitation for a miscarriageto occur. In this case, we have touse both Freud and Frazerto fully explain this superstition. The point is that mostcollections of superstitions,likethe majorityof folklorecollections--be they proverbsor folktales-offer no explanation whatsoever. Let me give one further illustrationof the application of psychoanalytic theory to a puzzling item of folklore.From medieval Spain to modern-day Latin America, one of the most popular


7/25


Spanishballads s known as "Delgadina."More han 500 versionsof this romance-corridohavebeenpublished.FamedSpanishballad cholarRam6nMenendezPidalclaimed hatthisSpanishballad"isfound whereverheSpanish anguages spoken"(Herrera-Sobek986:91) ndexpressed is belief hat"'Delgadina'swithoutadoubtthe mostwidelyknown romancen SpainandAmerica"106n.11).Thesummary fthe ballad:"'Delgadina'ells the storyof a youngwoman who resistsher father'sincestuousadvances.Forthis,she is lockedup and deniedanything o drinkwhileshe is fedonly salty oods"(MariscalHay2002:20;Goldberg 000:148,Motif T411.1Fatherdesiresdaughter exually. herefuses.).The abundant cholarship n the bal-lad tendsto treat t as a literalreflectionof thehorrorsof father-daughterncestand,in particular, f the absolutepowerof the father n the Hispanicfamilystructure(Herrera-Sobek 986),but no one to date hasoffereda convincingexplanation fjust whythis balladhas enjoyedso manycenturiesof popularity.Delgadina s theyoungestof threedaughters f theking,and in some versions he wearsprovocativeclothing, includinga "transparent ress." n manyversionsof the ballad, here issome disputeover who is to blame for the father'sattemptto makeDelgadinahismistress.Oftenit is Delgadinawho is blamedby her sistersor her mother.In oneverse,afterDelgadina egsher mother nvainfor ajugof water,he motherresponds,"GetawayDelgadina, et awayyou evil bitch becauseof youhereI amsevenyearsa wrongedwife."In anotherversion,a Sephardic ne (Aitken1928:46), he motherreplies,"Get heethence,Jewishbeast!Get theedown,cruelbeast:On thyaccountthese sevenyears have ivedunhappyn marriage."t is important o note thatthisballad is typicallysung by women to otherwomen (Egan1996).Thus,it is clearlyverymuch a women'ssong(Aitken1928).Thedaughter antasizes hat her father snothappywithher motherbut wouldpreferher nstead.AsAitkenputs t in her1928article, he girlis jealousof hermother andthinks,"My atherreallyprefersme tomy mother and would like to put me in her place and over my elder sisters"(1928:48).In a parallel cognate)ballad of Silvana),t is arrangedhatthe mother akes hedaughter's lace n bedfortheprearrangedmeetingwith thefather-king Goldberg2000:100,Motif Q260.1).What I believe we have with this version,whatWendyDonigerrefers o as the "bedtrick"2000),is whatI have termed"projectivenver-sion"(Dundes1976,2002).Ifweperceive his celebrated alladas athinlydisguisedElectral tory,wecan see that t representswishful hinkingon thepartof thedaugh-ter.Shelovesherfatherandwants to replaceher motherin the maritalbed. Thistaboowish s transformed iaprojectionnto the father's ttempto seducehisdaugh-ter. The mother's substituting for the daughterin the parentalbed is a perfect inver-sion of the taboo wish. Instead of the daughter substituting for her mother, themother substitutes for the daughter, thereby savingthe daughterfrom a taboo inces-tuous sexual act. The specific referenceto the daughter being fed salt cannot help butremind us of AT923, "Love like Salt" (the basis of the King Learplot), which alsoinvolves a king-father'sattempt to have incestuous relations with his daughter.Thisplot is also reminiscent of AT706, "The Maiden without Hands," which occurs inballad form (Brewster 1972:11-12) and has also been interpretedby me as a strikingcase of projectiveinversion (Dundes 1987). One could also mention the tale of Lot's


8/25


wife,who sturned osalt,afterwhichhisdaughterseduceheirdrunkenather,quite xplicitElectralale.Whetherneagreeswith hese nterpretationsrnot,one cancertainlyee thattheinterpretationsouldnot havebeenpossiblewithout ecourseogrand heory,inthiscase,Freud's edipalheory ndmymodest dditionftheconceptfprojec-tive nversion. s forthe reasonsorthe ong-lived opularityfafather-daughterincestprojectionnHispanicultures,t isworth ememberinghat hecentral lotofCatholicismnvolves virginbeing mpregnatedithoutherconsent yaheav-enly ather,notherElectralantasywithovertones fprojectivenversion.nsum-maryorm,"Iwould ike oseducemyfather utthat sforbidden,o in theprojec-tion it ismyfatherwho seducesme,much o mymother'sonsternation,ith hepsychologicaldvantagef leavingmeguilt-free.t'snotmyfault hatmyfatherdesiresme."Thepopularityf thisplotin Catholic ircles s alsoattested ythelegend f SaintDymphna. fterhermotherdied,herfather, paganrish hieftainnamedDamon, earchedhewholeworld or a woman o replace is wifebutwasunsuccessfulntilhereturned omeand saw hathisdaughterDymphnawas asbeautiful shermother.Hemakes dvances,ut she lees.Hecatches pwithher nBelgium,utwhensherefuseso surrender,ekillsher.Thefact hat hedaughterdiesor hashermasturbatoryands utoff(inAT706) sasign hat tis,inthefinalanalysis,hewho sultimatelyeingpunishedorheroriginalncestuous ish.Now,admittedly,hisparticularypeof grandheorys notwidelyacceptedyconven-

tionalmainstreamolklorists,utmypoint sthat,withouthisorother randheo-ries,olkloreextswill oreveremain smere ollectaneaith ittleorno substantivecontent nalysis. hestereotypef folkloristsssimply ollectors,bsessivelassi-fiers,andarchivistss strengthenedachandevery imeyetanother ollection funanalyzedolklorespublished.And hisbringsmetothe secondmajor eason orthedecline f folkloristicssarespectedndhonored cademiciscipline. nereason, sI havenoted,s the ackofnewgrandheory, utasecond eason, believe,sthatweprofessionalolkloristsarebadly utnumberedyamateurs hogiveour ieldabadname. nthefirstweekof June 2004, Iwas invited to participatein an ambitious conference in Atlanta called"MythicJourneys,"designed to honor the centennial of the birth of Joseph Campbell.The event was organizedbythe Mythic Imagination Institute,supportedby the JosephCampbell Foundation and the JungSociety of Atlanta, and sponsored by a numberof groups and corporations, including BordersBooks and Music,ParabolaMagazine,and the KrispyKreme Foundation. Although there were dozens of panels and pre-sentations that were concerned with folklore (though not necessarily myth), therewereveryfew professionalfolklorists in attendance.The presentersincluded storytell-ers, artists, filmmakers,Jungian analytical psychologists, and a very few individualswho were self-identified as folklorists. Before leaving for Atlanta, out of curiosity Ilooked up a number of my fellow panelists and presenters and was quite startled todiscover that many of them were faculty members at small colleges who were listedas professors of folklore and who obviously taught courses in what they termed"folklore."The coursesweretypicallyconcerned with searchingforJungianarchetypesin literature, including J.R. R. Tolkien, or exploring manifestations of Campbell's


9/25


composite"monomyth" hat has little if anything o do with mythproperbut is,rather,basedon a combinationof legendand folktale.Now there is no wayotherthanestablishing fascistpolicestatefortheAmericanFolkloreSociety o preventsuch"folklorists"romteachingwhattheycall"folklore."RobertGeorgeswroteanessay ndicatinghisdisgustatdiscoveringhattherearemany ndividualswhosimplydeclare hemselveso be folkloristswithoutanyformal rainingorstudyof the sub-ject(1991:3-4).Canonepossibly magineanyoneclaiming o be aphysicist r math-ematician without everhavinghad formaltraining in physicsor mathematics?Georges lsoexpressed isappointmenthatmanywho are rainedasfolklorists on-ceal thatfact,preferringnstead o claim thatthey belongto other academicdisci-plines.HereI cannot forbear emindingyou of one of theworstrecorded nstancesof a folklorist efusingo acknowledge isdisciplinaryffiliation.thappenedn 1992at UCLA.Exiledpresidentof Haiti,Jean-Bertrand ristide,who has an interest nfolklore,wasscheduled o speakon campus.DonaldCosentinowas at thattime thechairof the folkloreandmythologyprogram.As is customaryon suchoccasions,ahigh-ranking fficialwas on the stageto welcome the audiencebeforeturning hegaveloverto Cosentino o introduce he speaker.Rightbefore he eventbegan, heUCLA ice-chancellorwhisperedo Cosentino,"Wehavea headof statehere.Underno circumstanceswill I introduceyou as the chairof folkloreandmythology. willintroduce ouas from heEnglishdepartment. et'snotembarrass urselves." osen-tino did as instructedand introducedAristidewithoutidentifyinghimselfas chairof the folkloreandmythologyprogram.Whatbothersme most about this incidentis not so much the vice-chancellor'sutrageousnsult to ourfield,but the fact thatCosentinodid not fight t, insteadcowardly cquiescing. can assureyouthat hadIbeenin suchaposition,shortof punchingout the vice-chancellor ubliclyon stage,I wouldhaveactually eportedhiswhispered onversation ndproudlyannouncedmypositionas chairof folkloreandmythology. notherwords, would havesoughtto embarrass he vice-chancellor ather hanhave him embarrassme andmy field.A trulydisgracefulncident n our academichistory,one thatwas theveryfirst temmentioned n theLinguaFranca ttack Dorfman1997).

Relatedo the factthat we seem to bebesiegedbypopularizer onfolkloristsmas-querading s folklorescholars,f one walks nto anyof thelargecommercialbook-stores uchasBarnesandNoble orBorders nd checks he "folklore ndmythology"sections,whatdoes onefind?Thereare he inevitablenumerous nthologies f Greekmythsor dictionaries f mythologycontainingmostlyentriesdevoted o GreekandRomanmythology, olumesof folktales romallover he worldretold yeditors-theword"retold" houldbe anathemaoprofessionalolklorists-typicallybowdlerizedand dumbed-down or children,and finally,at least a half dozen booksby JosephCampbell. recallone incidentseveral earsagoin the BarnesandNoblebookstorein Berkeley. lthough muchprefer econdhand ookstores, ccasionally check hecommercial tores ustto seeif there s anewbook thatIshouldknowabout.On thisoccasion, foundmyselfunable o locatethe folkloreandmythology ection.It hadevidentlybeen moved,as bookstoresoften reshuffle helvesand sections.I finallywent to oneof the bookstorepersonnel o be directed o the folkloreandmythologysection.Normallyn suchbookstores, ectionsareclearlyabeled: eligion, ociology,


10/25


self-help,ndsoforth. nthiscase,hefolklore ndmythologyabelwasabsent ndin itsplacewassimply mblazonednlargebold etters: Joseph ampbell."wasshockedo discoverhat heentireolklorendmythologyection adbeen ubsumedunderCampbell'same. remembereingalmost elievedhatatleastnoneof mybookswere o befoundnthat ection.My olepoint nmentioninghisdishearten-ing ncidents tosuggesthat ormanymembers f the iterate ublic,hestudy ffolkloremeansprecisely ampbellndhiswritings. etprofessionalolkloristsavesaidvery ittleabout hehugecorpus f Campbelliana.do notknow f anyofhismanybookswere verevenreviewednJAF.s thisacaseof "silenceivesassent"?Veryikelymorepeoplewerentroducedo thesubjectmatterffolklorey hewrit-ingsof Campbellrthe PBS elevision eriesof lectures yhim thanby anyothersource.Andyetwefolklorists avesaid ittleornothingabouthim andhistheo-ries.

Mythesis s simplyhis: he combinationf a lackof newgrand heoryandthefailureo counterheeffectivefforts fnumerousmateursnddilettantes hohavesuccessfullylaimed ossessionf the fieldof folklore s their iefdomhasunder-standablyed to apublicperceptionf folkloristicsa weakacademiciscipline,perception nfortunatelyoooften hared y college nduniversitydministrators.TheAmerican olklore ociety,ince tsinception, ashadas itsgoaltheprofes-sionalizationf thedisciplinef folkloristics.AF houldbetheprimaryorum ortheexpressionfnew heoreticalndmethodologicaldvancesnd hebookreviewsection f the ournalhould ritiquendrebut mateurishttemptsoanalyzeolk-loristic ata. amnotblaminghepastorpresentditors fJAFor hefailureo doso.Theycanonlypublish rticles ubmittedo thembyusfolkloristsonstitutingthemembershipf AFS. owemustacceptheblameor hestateof ourdiscipline.And,accordingly,t isupto us to fulfillhepromise f ourbeloved ield o demon-strate oall nterestedartieshat olkloristicss aworld-classlobaldiscipline ithits ownvalid heories ndmethods, ndweshouldnot eaveourfieldbydefaultopopularizersndamateurs. akelorend olklorismusbound verywhere,ndwerun heriskofbeingoverwhelmedythe sheerquantityfunscholarlynthologiesofadulteratedolkloremixedwithcreative riting.AttheMythic ourneysonferenceeld n JunenAtlanta,herewasasplendidassociated ebsitewithstunninglyrilliantraphics. nthescreen ppeared mapof theworldandonecouldclickondifferent reaspeoples) ndamyth rom hatarea/peopleould ppear ccompaniedyasonorous arrationfit.Verympressiveindeed!Butat thebottomofthe screen herewerevarious lternativeptions.Oneof the options was "writeyour own myth." I saw at one point that a number of ten-and eleven-year-oldchildren had acceptedthe challengeand had e-mailed "their ownmyths"to the website. Nothing irritates me more than when, afterI give a lecture onfolklore to a group of elementary or secondary school teachers, one enthusiasticteacher comes up afterwardto saythat she very much appreciatesthe importance ofmyth and that is why she encourages her second-grade class to write myths as anexercise. No wonder such children eventually grow up to be confused about whatmyths really are and to become fans of Campbell's contention that all of us can beheroes of our own myths.


11/25


Asapparently o folkloristhashithertomadeanycritiqueof Campbell, shouldlike to take this opportunity o do so.Partof the problemstems from the factthatCampbelldoes not reallyknow what a mythis,and he doesnot reallydistinguishtfrom folktaleandlegend, wo genres hatprovidemostof the illustrative xamplesin his popularHerowitha Thousand aces, irstpublished n 1949.His illustrativeexamplesncludeLittleRedRidingHood and thePorcupine ubtypeof StarHusband,neitherof whichanyfolkloristwould dreamof classifying s myth. Campbell riesto delineateaworldwideheropattern,but he makesno mention of J.G.von Hahn'sinitialpioneering tatement f 1876 n whichhe sought o isolate eatures f whathetermed the AryanExpulsionand Returnhero pattern(Segal1990:vii).Nor doesCampbell efer o OttoRank'spath-breakingMythoftheBirthoftheHero irstpub-lished n 1909or LordRaglan'samouspatternof theherobiographywhichappearedas an articlein Folkloren 1934and shortlythereafter n book form in 1936 (seeDundes1965).Letmesaysomethingmoreabout TheHerowitha Thousand aces, tillCampbell'sbest-knownbook,and his first.Wheredidhe getthat resonantcatchy itle? n 1940,Campbellmet SwamiNikhilanandaLarsenand Larsen1993:283),who was a de-voteddiscipleof Ramakrishna.n TheHerowith a Thousand aces,CampbellcitesSwamiNikhilananda'sranslation f TheGospel fSriRamakrishnaCampbell1949]1956:115n.33).We knowthat Campbellwasveryintriguedby the writingsof SriRamakrishnaLarsenand Larsen1993:283-6).In the secondvolume of TheCul-turalHeritage fIndia,the Sri RamakrisnaCentenaryMemorial,SwamiNikhilan-andacontributeda 176-pageessayentitled"SriRamakrishnandSpiritualRenais-sance"(1936:441-617).Weknow that Campbellread the 1936essaybecausehecitedit in his 1960essay,"PrimitiveMan asMetaphysician."onsider hefollowingquote from Ramakrishna contained in Nikhilananda's essay:"But he who is calledKrishna s also calledShivaand bears henamesShakti, esus, ndAllahaswell-theone Rama with a thousand names... The substance is one under different names"(1936;emphasisadded).Weknow thatCampbellwasa trulyvoracious eaderand amasterof assimilatingmuch of what he read.We shallneverknow forcertain,butthepassagebearsan eerieresemblanceo Campbell'sitle.Wehaveonlyto substitute"hero" or"Rama"nd "faces"or"names"ndweget"theone herowithathousandfaces."Note,I amarguingnspiration ere,notplagiarism.nanycase, heCampbellclassichasbeencalled"asweepingandengrossing tudyof the heromyth" Ellwood1999:143).But the narratives nalyzedby Campbellarenot mythsat all;they arefolktalesandlegends.

In his discussion of "TheMagic Flight,"which is strictlya folktalemotif, Campbellincludes the narrative of Jason's quest for the Golden Fleece ([1949] 1956:203-4),but this has nothing whatever to do with myth proper. Rather it is a hero legend.There is nothing in the narrativereferring o the creation of the world or humankind.In view of Campbell's abiding interest in the "quest"theme, it is not surprising thathe frequentlycitesArthurianmaterial ([1949] 1956:330),a subject he studied for hismaster'sthesis at Columbia University (Larsenand Larsen1991:75), including men-tion of the search for the Holy Grail.But suchArthurianstories aredefinitelylegends,not myths. In CreativeMythology,the fourth volume of Campbell's tetralogy The


12/25

Dundes, olkloristicsn theTwenty-Firstentury 395

Masksof God,he retells Gottfriedvon Strassburg'sTristanand Wolfram von Eschen-bach'sParzifal.Thesearesignificantmajormedieval iterarymasterpieces,utbynostretch of the folkloristic imagination could either one be considered a myth. Camp-bell suggests hat Wolframutilized "analtogether ecularmythology" 1968:476),but mythis sacred,not secular.At best these texts mightbe construedas literarylegends.Yetboth involvequestsspecifically ssociatedwith theHolyGrail.CampbellalsoconsidersThomasMannandJames oyce smythmakers.One canonlyconcludethatCreativeMythology oes not dealwith"myth"n the strict echnical enseat all.Rather,t is avolume of essentiallywide-rangingiterary riticism.ConsideringhatCampbell s not clear about what a myth is, no wonderhis myriadfollowersareequally onfused.This oose definitionof "myth," neunfortunatelyharedby manywriterson the subject,would seem to confirmGregoryHansen'scriticism hat defi-nitions of folklore (and that would include myth) have been stretched so far as toinclude everything. Some writers of books on myths include "B"movies and novelsunder herubricof myth.As Hansenwords t, "Theproblem s thatif everythingsnow 'folklore,' then nothing is 'folklore'" (1997:99).

Campbell's adaptation of folklorist VanGennep's rites of passagepattern, appliedto narratives,was certainly insightful, but the universalist assumption based on anunproven assumption of psychic unity-namely, that all peoples possess the samemythic structure-is not. In CreativeMythology, he fourth volume of the teratologyTheMasksof God,Campbellhimself refersto The Hero as follows: "In The Hero witha Thousand FacesI have shown that myths and wonder tales ... belong to a generaltype which I have called 'The Adventure of the Hero,' that has not changed in es-sential form through the documented history of mankind" (1968:480).Ithas long been apopular fantasy among amateurstudents of myth that allpeoplessharethe same stories. This is clearlyan example of wishful thinking. Campbell re-ferred to the hero pattern as a universal monomyth, borrowing this vacuous port-manteau neologism from Joyce'sFinnegan'sWake(Campbell [1949] 1956:30n.35).On the universality issue, the empirical facts suggest otherwise. There is not onesingle myth that is universal, a statement that runs counter to Campbell's view. Hewas invited to contribute to a special issue of Daedalus devoted to "Mythand Myth-making"in 1959, an issue that also contained contributions by Mircea Eliade,ClydeKluckhohn,and RichardDorson. Campbellbegan his essay,"TheHistoricalDevelop-ment of Mythology,"which was based on his introduction to his then forthcomingMasks of God series with the following statement: "The comparative study of themythologies of the world compels us to view the cultural history of mankind as aunit; for we find that such themes as the Fire-theft,Deluge, Land of the Dead, VirginBirth, and ResurrectedHero have a world-wide distribution, appearing everywherein new combinations, while remaining, like the elements of a kaleidoscope, only afew and always thesame"(1959:232; emphasis added). Even a beginning student offolklore could dispute this kind of argument by assertion. It is easyto make ex cathe-dra pronouncements about universals, but it is quite difficult to document them.Take he virgin birth, for example. If we look in the Motif-Index, we find Motif T547,Birth from Virgin, with just three citations listed for the motif. One refers to Euro-pean saints, another to a classical Greekmyth, and one to a South American Indian


13/25


source.Period. am not awareof anyvirginbirth stories n Africa.None are cited nthe Motif-Index or Siberia,Polynesia,or Melanesia.Wehavedozens of mythsre-portedfrom aboriginalAustraliaand New Guinea,but evidentlyno virginbirthstories here.So can weacceptCampbell's ssertionon faith hatthevirginbirthhasa worldwidedistribution?n TheHerowitha Thousand aces,Campbellhasa wholesection devoted o the virginbirth([1949] 1956:297-314),but the one African extcitedtellsof the firstmanhaving ntercoursewith his wivesanddaughterso producechildrenand animals,hardlya convincingexampleof a virginbirth. In his list ofuniversals,Campbell lso mentions hedeluge. nmyeditedvolume,TheFloodMyth,one caneasilyascertain hatthismyth s essentially bsent romsub-Saharan frica(1988).

Campbellplaysfast and loose with folkloredata to illustratehis so-called heropattern.Forexample,n the sectionentitled"TheBellyof theWhale,"Campbell itesthe storyof Jonah,and I am surethatwesternethnocentric eadersnod theirheadin approvalas this narrativeof the Old Testamentwould seem to be a perfectex-ampleof thistheme(though echnicallyhe creatures notreallydentified sawhale).Campbell hen goes on to cite as a second illustrative xample"The ittle Germangirl,RedRidingHood,was swallowed yawolf' ([1949] 1956:91).Thisnarrative, fcourse, s not a myth,but a folktale,namelyAarne-Thompson aleType333,abouta girl,whichmakes t abouta heroine,not a hero. Does Campbell'spatternapplyequally o the femaleof the speciesor onlyto males(cf.Lefkowitz 990:430)?Andthe allegedswallowers not awhalebut a wolf.But,moreimportant,we knowthat,in the oralversionof thisgirl-centeredolktale asopposed o theliterary ewritingsbymalessuchasCharlesPerrault ndtheBrothersGrimm), hegirl snot swallowedbythewolfat all. Instead heescapes hrougha cleverruseby pretendingo need togo outside to defecate.So because RedRidingHood is a heroine,not a hero,andbecauseshe was not swallowedby the wolf (ortigress n the Korean, apanese, ndChineseversions), t wouldseem,then,thatthis tale is not really he bestpossibleevidencefor the existence of an element of a supposeduniversalmythicpatternentitled"In heBellyof theWhale."

Despite he ackof evidence,Campbell ppearso haveno doubtabout he existenceof folkloreuniversals.nthisrespect,he is a throwback o nineteenth-centuryheo-riesof psychicunity.Mostfolkloristswouldagree hat the occurrence f parallelssdue to monogenesisand diffusionrather hanpolygenesis, ut this is not Campbell'sposition.His method,if we can evenbearto call it such,is largelybasedon AdolfBastian's nsubstantiatedotion of "Elementargedanke,"relementarydeas,aclear-cut intellectualprecursor o CarlJung'sconceptof archetype,both of which areuncritically doptedbyCampbell 1972:44,1968:653;Campbell ndToms1990:68).Inhis "BiosandMythos:Prolegomenao a Scienceof Mythology,"written orGezaRtheim's 1951 estschrift,Campbellmakes hisunequivocal tatement: However,tis of first mportancenot to lose sightof the fact that the mythologicalarchetypes(Bastian'sElementarydeas)cut across heboundaries f... culture pheresandarenot confined to anyone or two,but arevariouslyrepresentedn all"(1951:333).Campbell ventually, yhis ownadmission,cameto preferJung o Freud,althoughhe usedbothin TheHerowitha Thousand aces Campbell ndToms1990:121).And


14/25


he seems to have accepted the idea of Jung's"collectiveunconscious." "Mythology,"according to Campbell, "is the expression of the collective unconscious."In markedcontrast to Jung,however,he does occasionally accept the fact that diffusion can ac-count for the occurrence of cross-cultural correspondences in myths (1990:123).Still, it is Campbell's insistence on the existence of archetypes that I find mostdisturbing. Consider this passage from Myths to LiveBy:"Allmy life, as a student ofmythologies, I have been working with these archetypes, and I can tell you they doexist and are the same all over the world" (1972:216; emphasis in original). Jungclaimed that there were panhuman, precultural autochthonous images that weresupposedly part of a collective, as opposed to a personal unconscious substratumcommon to all humans, and that these manifestations of the instincts were to befound in dreams and folk narratives. There were only a limited number of these ar-chetypes: the great mother, wise old man, the child, fourness, and so forth. Just asprofessional folklorists have tended to ignore Campbell and failed to criticize hisoeuvre, they have similarlyrefrained from criticizing Jung and his notion of arche-types. Yet, n sections of bookstores nominally containing books on folklore,we findalmost asmany Jungianstudies of folkloristicsubjectsas thereare books by Campbell.Why has there been no critique by folklorists of the concept of archetype?I believethere is no single idea promulgated by amateurs that has done more harm to seriousfolklore study than the notion of archetype. I find it invariably cited by ignorantstudents, as well as equallyuninformed members of the generalpublic in the "qanda"period whenever I have occasion to give a public lecture on folklore. The problemwith archetype, aside from the unwarranted assumption of psychic unity and uni-versalism, is a practical one of simple identification of such, as is all too clear in theclassic essayby Jungon the child archetype. Quoting Jung,

Often hechild sformedafter he Christianmodel.... Sometimeshe childappearsinthecupof aflower, rout of agoldenegg,oras the centreof amandala. ndreamsit oftenappearsas a dreamer's on or daughteror as a boy, youth,or younggirl,occasionallyt seems o be of exoticorigin,IndianorChinese,with aduskyskin,orappearingmorecosmically,urroundedby starsor witha starrycoronet,or as theking'sson or thewitch'schild with daemonicattributes. eenasa special nstanceof "the reasurehard o attainmotif"the child motif is extremely ariableand as-sumesall mannersof shapes, uchas thejewel, hepearl, heflower, hechalice, hegoldenegg,the quaternary,he goldenball and so on. It canbe interchangedwiththese and similar magesalmostwithout imit.

The criticalmethodological question is How can one possiblyrecognizethis archetypewhen it appearsin so many guises?How do we know when we come upon a "goldenegg" in a folktale that it is a manifestation of the child archetype? Here one mustrecall Jung'sown methodological dictum: archetypes areby definition unknowable.One can only approachthem asymptoticallyor tangentially.Jungreiterates this pointagain and again. So, if archetypes are unknowable, how can we know them? Oneadditional theoreticaldifficultyis that these supposed archetypesareallegedlypanhu-man and precultural.Becausethey areprecultural,they are only marginally affectedby cultural conditioning. One can easily understand why cultural anthropologists,


15/25


whose primary working definitional and operational concept is "culture,"would notbe much interestedin a theory that postulated preculturalentities,whether stemmingfrom sociobiology or from Jungian dogma. Incidentally,I blame Freud, in part, forJung'spostulation of the existence of archetypes in a collective unconscious. One ofFreud's most grievous errors was his belief that Haeckel's biological discovery that"ontogenyrecapitulatesphylogeny"applied equallyto mental products.In an attemptto explain the multiple existences of certainrecurringfantasies-for example, seduc-tion by an adult,observation of parentalintercourse,and the threatof castration-heoffered the following speculation:

Whencecomesthe need forthesephantasies nd the material or them?Therecanbe no doubtthattheirsources ie in theinstincts;but it has still tobeexplainedwhythesamephantasieswith the samecontentarecreated n everyoccasion. ampre-paredwith an answerwhichI knowwill seemdaring o you. I believethat theseprimalphantasies, s I should ike to callthem,and no doubta few othersas wellare aphylogenetic ndowment. nthem the individual eachesbeyondhis own ex-perience ntoprimeval xperience tpointswherehis ownexperience as been toorudimentary.t seemto mequitepossible hatallthethings hatare old to usto-dayin analysis sphantasy-theseduction fchildren,he nflaming f sexual xcitementby observingparentalntercourse,he threatof castration r rathercastration t-self-were once realoccurrencesn theprimevalimesof the human amilyandthatchildren n theirphantasiesaresimply fillingin thegapsin individual ruth withprehistoricruth.(1916:370-1,1987)

This is an unequivocal, if dubious, statement. If an individual lacks a symbol orfantasy in his or her own life, that symbol or fantasywill be provided through theontogenetic recapitulation of phylogeny. Probably the most famous, or infamous,example of Freud'sapplication of this principle is the conclusion of Totemand Taboo(1946). After acknowledging that the mere thought of killing his father on the partof a son could cause guilt, in the end Freud decided that it was an actual historicalact of patricide arising from the primal horde's band brothers uniting to kill theirfather that accounted for the Oedipus complex and totemism and taboo. This, ac-cording to Freud,is because supposedly primitive man, unlike modern man, is notinhibited and accordingly"thethought is directlyconverted into the deed." The lastlines of Totemand Taboo are a direct result of Freud'sphylogenetic bias: "Forthatreason I think we may well assume in the case we are discussing, though withoutvouching for the absolute certainty of the decision, that 'In the beginning was thedeed'" (1938:930).

Freud'sphylogenetic inheritancefantasyis clearlycomparableto Jung's"collectiveunconscious." The error in part consists of trying to make psychology into history.Freud'swhole theoretical basis for psychoanalysiswas essentially the same as nine-teenth-century folklore theory, specifically,the doctrine of survivals stemming fromunilinear evolutionary theory. Adult neurotic symptoms were in essence survivalsfrom a traumatic situation that had occurred in infancy or early childhood. To un-derstand or explainthe apparently rrationalsymptoms,the analysthad to reconstructthe fuller picture from early childhood by means of free associations and dream


16/25


content.This s clearly arallelo whatAndrewLangdescribeds "themethodofFolklore."ang,ncomparingrchaeologynd olklore,emarks,Heres a formofstudy,Folklore hich ollects ndcompareshe similar ut mmaterialelics f oldraces,hesurvivinguperstitionsndstories,he deaswhichare nour imebutnotof it" [1884] 005:11). he heorywasbased n thenineteenth-centuryhild-savageequation. ssavages assedhrough arbarismn route o civilization,o childrenpassedhroughdolescencen route oadulthood.ounderstanddult olklorethatis,survivalsn civilization),neneeds o find he fuller ormexisting mongpres-ent-day avageorprimitive)ocieties. nLang'swords,"Themethodswhenanapparentlyrrationalndanomalousustom s found n anycountry,o lookfor acountrywhere similar ractices found,andwhere hepracticesnolongerrra-tionalandanomalous,utin harmonywiththemannersnd deasof thepeopleamongwhomtprevails.... Ourmethod,hen,s tocompareheseemingmeaning-lesscustoms ndmanners f civilizedaceswiththe similar ustoms ndmannerswhich xistamongheuncivilizedndstillretainheirmeaning"1884:21). inally,Langoncludes,Folkloreepresents,nthemidstofacivilizedace,hesavagedeasout of which ivilisationasbeenevolved"25).Freud lsosawaparalleletweenontogenyndphylogeny.nhis forewordo theGerman ditionof CaptainohnG.Bourke'scatalogicites fAllNations,whichhe wroteat therequest f Viennesefolklorist riedrichKrauss, reudwrote,"The cienceof folklorehastravellednotherpathsbutnonethelesst hasarrivedt the sameresults spsychoanalyticn-vestigations.t showsus how mperfectlyarious eoples ave ucceedednrepress-ingtheir catalogicendenciesndhow hetreatmentf theexcrementalunctionsonvariousevels fcivilizationpproacheshe nfantiletage fhumanife. tdem-onstratesous theperduranceftheprimitive,rulyneradicableoprophilicnter-ests .. inusagesonnected ithpopularustom,magical ractice,ultactsand hetherapeuticrt"1934:ix). hismayalso lluminate reud'sascinationitharchae-ology,which lsodemonstratedhegoverningntellectualaradigmfthenineteenthcentury, amely,econstructionf thepast.Ashard,ikeasuperstitionraneuroticsymptom, asasurvivalrom hepast, utasurvivalhatcouldaid nthereconstruc-tionof thatpast.Allthis s notto excuse ung'soncept f thecollectivenconscious,utonly oshow hatFreud'shoughtmighthavebeendirectlyrindirectlyneof thesourcesof thismysticaldea.Theresyetanotherheoreticalifficulty ith heJungianr-chetype,nd hisconcernsheunconcealedhristianontent f somearchetypes.havealreadyeferredo Jung'specificmention f the Christianonnectiono thechildarchetype.Muchmoredisturbing,however,s Jung's laimthatJesusChrist san archetype.In his essay"Aion,"Jungasks,"Isthe selfa symbol of Christ,or is Christa symbol of the self?"His answer: "In the present study I have affirmed the latteralternative.I have tried to show how the traditional Christ-image concentrates uponitself the characteristicsof an archetype-the archetype of the self" (1958:36). I amnot putting words in Jung'smouth. He adds in an italicized sentence, "Christexem-plifiesthe archetypeof the self,"and a footnote invitesthe reader"Cf.my observationson Christ as archetype in 'A Psychological Approach or the Dogma of the Trinity'"(1958:36). If we keep in mind that archetypes are assumed to be panhuman, that


17/25

400 Journal fAmerican olklore18(2005)

would constitute a most egregiousexampleof extremeethnocentrism,not to mentionarroganceand hubris or orientalism-namely, to assume that allpeoples have a built-in archetypal Christian part of their consciousness regardlessof their cultural andracialheritage. Jungstates, "Theprimitive mentality does not invent myths, it expe-riences them" (1958:117). Presumablythat would also applyto Christianarchetypes.Actually,it was precisely Jung'sChristian bias that made him so attractive to Freudas a possible successor in order to make psychoanalysis more acceptable to a non-Jewishpublic, but the extension of that bias into myth as a form of folklore is simplynot intellectually defensible or tenable.The Jungian underpinnings of Campbell's approachto folklore put the approachoutside the limits of academic folkloristics. The universalistic premise of psychicunity, coupled with the claim that archetypes are inherited, leaves little room for theinfluence of cultural relativism and the formation of oicotypes. The inheritance issueis a controversial one. Listen to what Jung himself says about it. In the preface toPsycheand Symbol,published in 1958, not long before Jungdied in 1961, he said thefollowing:

Mind is notbornas a tabularasa.Like hebodyit has itspre-establishedndividualdefiniteness, amely ormsof behavior.Theybecomemanifestntheever-recurringpatterns f psychic unctioning. Just]as the weaver irdwillbuild ts nestinfalliblyin its accustomed orm. [Thistype of theoryinvariablymakesreference o well-known natural nstinctualbehavior:birds are not taughthow to make nestsnorbeavers o builddams, herebyarguingbyfalseanalogy.]Thearchetypes rebynomeans uselessarchaic urvivalsor relics.Theyarelivingentitieswhichcause thepraeformationf numinous deasor dominantrepresentations....It is importantto bear n mind thatmyconceptof the"archetypes"as beenfrequentlymisunder-stood as a kind of philosophicalspeculation.[Pleasepayattentionto how Jungclarifieshisapparentmisunderstanding.]nrealityheybelongto the realmof theactivitiesof the instinctsand nthatsensethey representnherited ormsof psychicbehaviour.1958:xv-xvi)

It is hard to believe that anyone could accept such a mystical notion as a viable con-cept in folklore research,but Campbell did. What arewe to make of the coffee-tablebooks full of images of alleged archetypes?Of course, it is possible to produce im-ages of mothers from different cultures, but this does not constitute hard evidenceof the existence of a Great Mother archetype-only that all cultures have mothersand images of them, but hardlythe same image. Even the Christian images of Jesusand the Virgin Mary differ radicallywithin western cultures, typically taking on thephysical racial features of the painters of the images or their patrons. If infantileconditioning is critical with respect to man-God relations as Freud argued in TheFutureofan Illusion (1928), then to the extent that infantile conditioning varies fromculture to culture, so man-God relations will vary accordingly, and thus there aredifferent myths in different cultures. The constants are not archetypes,but humanrelationships.There areparent-child relationships in all cultures,and hence there areparent-child struggles in folklore around the world.When Campbellwrote his 1944 commentary on the Grimm tales for Pantheon,he


18/25


did his homework. He cited tale types, TheMotif-Index,and all the scholarly appa-ratus contained in the writings of folklorists of that time. He even mentioned thehistoric-geographic method, a.k.a. the Finnish method, as the preferredform of thecomparativemethod employed by folklorists to trace the development and diffusionof a particular folk narrative,but he claimed in a footnote that Franz Boas was apractitioner of the method. During his Columbia years, Campbell actually studiedwith Boas and, in any case, should have known that Boas never once used the Finn-ish method. But Campbell's"little bit of knowledge"points to one of our problems.Folkloristshave had some success in publicizing the resultsof our efforts for the pasttwo centuries such that members of other disciplines, after a minimum of reading,believe they arequalifiedto speak authoritativelyabout folkloristic matters. It seemsthat the world is full of self-proclaimed experts in folklore and a few, such as Camp-bell, have been accepted as such by the general public (and public television, in thecase of Campbell). I cannot tell you how many students as well as applicants to thefolklore program at Berkeley include in their statements of interest that they haveread and enjoyed Campbell'swritings. I suppose, in that sense, we owe him a lot forgetting people interested in our discipline. The problem is that so many have readonly Campbell and know little else about folkloristics.There are, in my opinion, two other factors that contribute to the low level offolkloristics in the academy:(1) the loss of previous knowledge and (2) intimidationby informants. The loss of previously known facts is perhaps partly attributable tothe veritable explosion of knowledge in virtually all fields. It has become increas-ingly difficult to keep up with all that is written in folkloristics and the myriad jour-nals and monograph series around the world. Bibliographies, computer databases,and search engines help, to some extent, but there are still too many instances ofreinventingthe wheel. The issue of information retrieval is exacerbatedby the grow-ing number of amateurspurportingto representour field.They areblissfully ignorantof earlier studies of their subjectmatter. I havealreadymentioned Campbell's failureto referenceeitherOtto Rank or LordRaglan'searlierdelineations of the hero pattern,and there are countless other examples.

In the mid-1940s, classicistRhys Carpentergavethe prestigious Sather Lectures atthe Universityof California,Berkeley,published later asFolktale,Fiction and Saga intheHomericEpics(1946). In a book with that title one would think there might havebeen at least a mention of AT1137,The Ogre Blinded (Polyphemos), or the motif inwhich Odysseus put an oar on his shoulder and walked inland in search of a com-munity that did not know what it was (Hansen 1990, 2002:371-8). But no suchreferences are to be found. Instead, we find a poorly argued proposition that theOdyssey contains the framework of the folktale of the bear's son, a hypothesis Car-penter proposed afterreadingthe scholarship (by Friedrich Panzer and others main-taining that Beowulf was derived from that tale type. We have had the Tale TypeIndex since 1910 and TheMotif-Indexsince 1932. Not only could a classicist in 1946get away with not citing such obvious folktale elements in the Odyssey, but, evenworse, a major press could publish a book without having obtained competent pre-publication reviews by folktale specialists. One has only to compare the Carpenterbook with Bill Hansen's recentlypublished magnificent Ariadne'sThread:A Guide to


19/25

402 Journal fAmerican olklore18(2005)

InternationalTalesoundin Classical iterature2002)to see the differencebetweenresearch ya classicistposingas someonewithknowledge f folkloreand aclassicistwho is anauthentic ull-fledged olklorist.Letme cite anotherexampleof "lostknowledge." n 1955,RayWilliam Frantzcompleteda doctoraldissertationat the Universityof Illinois entitled ThePlaceofFolklorentheCreative rtofMarkTwain,ustoneof a considerable umberof stud-ies of Twain's nterest n anduse of folklore n his classicwritings.Frantzpublishedsome of hisfindings nhisarticle,"TheRole of FolklorenHuckleberryinn" 1956).Hisworkwas similar o that of VictorRoyceWest,whowrote"Folklorenthe Worksof MarkTwain"n 1930,drawing rom his 1928master's hesisat the University fNebraska.Theseand othervariousattempts cf.Jones1984)to demonstrateTwain'sdefinite nterest n folklorecouldhavebeenstrongly nhancedbysimplyexaminingthe membership f the AmericanFolkloreSocietyduring ts earlyyears. ntheveryfirst ssue of theJournal fAmerican olklore, e find includedon a list of the"Mem-bersof the AmericanFolk-Lore ociety" ne S.L.Clemensof Hartford,Connecticut.Not onlywasTwaina chartermemberof theAmericanFolkloreSociety,but he re-mainedamember or at least iveyearsaccordingo themembershipists involumesone through ive.Thismeans hathe received AF or its initial iveyearsof publica-tion, andwe may logicallyassume hat he maywellhavereadsome of its contents.In anycase,giventhe fact thatFrantzand none of the manyothercriticswho havebeen concernedwith Twain'spossible nterest n folklorehave ever mentionedhismembershipnAFS,we canpointto thisomissionasaprima acie nstanceof a "lossof knowledge."Thiskindof factual nformation ike taletypessuchas 1137,Poly-phemus,compriseknowledgeavailable o anytruescholar,andpartof our taskasprofessionalolkloristss to remindour studentsand ourcolleagues f theexistenceof suchknowledge. would alsoclassifyas "lostknowledge"Montenyohl's ssertionthat"folkloristics"s a modernterm.But if "lostknowledge"s an impediment o makingadvancesn folkloristics,oalsois whatI wouldcall "intimidation y informants."Twofolklorists, oth majorscholarswhom I personallyadmireverymuchand whosepublicationsconstitutehallmarks f thehighest-qualitycholarship,reboth advocates f apolicy hat nsistson notwritinganythinghatmightpossiblyoffendany nformant.Oneof thesegreatfolkloristsnsists hathis informants rehisfriendsand he wouldn'tdreamof sayinganythingnprint hattheymight ind nsultingoroffensive.Heexpresses is satisfac-tion in a sentence n perhapshismagnumopus:"Oneproblemdown.I had writtenand lost no friends" Glassie1982:33).I understand hat the rapportachieved nsuccessful ieldwork ftenresultsnfirm, f notlifelong,warm riendships. utgivinginformants drafts of articlesand monographs to vet with the right of veto power or,at the very least, the right to exercise censorship, I find unacceptable. Folkloristics,like any branch of learning, should not devolve into a popularity contest. What ifdoctors felt it was morally reprehensibleto ever tell a patient of a serious disease thatrequired mmediate remedialaction?Thiswould surelynot be in the patient'sultimatebest interest.Although there is no need to deliberatelyoffend an informant, there isa need to make the best possible and most enlightening analysisof any data elicitedfrom that informant. If folkloristsareafraid of saying anythingtheir informantsmight


20/25


not like, the field will never become more than mountains of unanalyzed texts ac-cumulating in folklore archives.

Sometimes the issues involve more serious ethical questions as is the casewith oursecond major folklorist. In this instance, the folklorist collected Navaho folklore forseveraldecades, his expertise so extensive that he was invited to be the sole non-Na-vajo speakerin a lecture series for a purely Navajo audience. This was surely a greatcompliment to this folklorist.After lecturing on Coyote stories to this audience, hewas startledby a question posed by an elderlysinger: "Areyou readyto lose a mem-ber of your family?"It turned out that there was a level of meaning of the Coyotestories that the folklorist had not been awareof, a level that had to do with witchcraft,and the questioner was trying to warn the folklorist that he was on the edge of po-tentially dangerous territory with his research. The folklorist took the warning toheart. In an essaywritten on this incident, he remarked,"Justas a folklorist needs toknow where to begin, so one needs to recognize where to stop and I have decided tostop here" (Toelken 1987:400). He continued, "Rather,as far as discussion of theCoyote tales is concerned, I intend to avoid the information myself, as unscientificand as unscholarly as that may seen. Indeed, in that regard,this is an un-scholarlynon-essay, an un-report on what I am not going to be doing with texts recorded overthe past twenty-five years" (400). The story is even worse. It is one thing to volun-tarilydesist from studying one's field data;it is quite another to destroy that data. Inthis case, the folklorist had a problem once his principal informant died. He knewthat the Navajo feel obliged to avoid any interaction with the dead, which includeslisteningto the recordedvoice of someone deceased.In consultation with his deceasedinformant's widow, the folklorist boxed up sixty-plus hours of original field record-ing tapes (as well as copies he had used in classes and lectures) and sent them to thewidow by registered mail, knowing full well she would be obliged to destroy them.In his essay on the subject in JAF,he describes how he came to make this painfuldecision (1998). Myview is that not only has he deprived the academic world of datathat may not be able to be replicated,but also that the Navajo themselves have lost aprecious resource. We know that many Native Americans have been grateful for ear-lier work by folklorists and anthropologists in preserving parts of their culture thathave unfortunately faded awaywith the decimation of their populations and theiracculturation into mainstream American culture. This is no doubt an extreme ex-ample of informant intimidation, but I fear for our field of folkloristics if our verybest scholars are timid about analyzing their data or, worse yet, impelled to destroythat data. The field cannot possibly advance if data is destroyed or if we are afraidtoanalyze it fully for fear of offending someone, either an informant or a colleague.I have had severalpersonalbrushes with would-be intimidation. The firstoccurredin the late 1960s. I had completed a coauthored study of Turkish verbal dueling.Realizingthat some of the data included material that would be considered obsceneby most middle-class Americans, I was uncertain where to submit it. I decided tosubmit it to South FolkloreQuarterlyand I wrote a cover letter to the editor ButlerWaugh, who has a doctorate in folklore from Indiana, explaining that I would un-derstand if he could not accept the paper for publication. I was surprised and de-lighted to hear from him that he liked the paper and accepted it for publication. Six


21/25


or so months after hepaperhadbeenaccepted, received nunexpectedetter romEdwinCapersKirkland.Waughhad movedfrom heUniversity f Florida o FloridaInternationalUniversityn Miami,and Kirklandwasthetemporary ctingeditorofSFQ.The etter nformedme thathewasverysorry,but it turnedout thatSFQwouldnot be ableorwilling o publishmyTurkish erbalduelingpaperafterall.The reasongivenwas not about hecogencyof my argument r theaccuracy f thereportage fthe data,but that the articlemightoffend the regentsof theUniversity f Florida.did not feelthiswas alegitimate eason or thepaper's ejection, speciallywhentheofficial editor of the journalhad previouslyaccepted t. I wrote a strongletter ofprotest o Kirkland,otasking orreconsideration,utcomplaininghatthis wasnota valid reason orrejecting he paper.Someof the older membersof theAmericanFolkloreSocietymayremember his incidentbecausemyrevenge onsistedof send-inga copyof myletter o everymajor olklorist knewon thegrounds hatI wantedto let mycolleaguesknow that anacceptanceromSFQmightbe nullifiedat a laterdate. Needless o say,I bitterlyresented hisgutlessandspinelesseditorialdecision,althoughI was laterpleased hatthepaper n questiondidappearnJAFn 1970.A second encounterwith intimidationorcensorship esulted romthelast timeIhad occasionto address his society.It wasmypresidential ddressdeliveredmorethantwentyyearsagoatthe annualAFSmeetings nPittsburghn 1980.Because uchpresidential ddresses reroutinelypublished n JAF, sent the finalmanuscriptothe editor orconsideration.Because hepresentationwasquite ong,he quiteright-ly sent it on to theAFSpublications ditor.Eventually, receiveda rejection etter.The reason for the rejectionwas not becauseof poor writing, aultyargument,orinsufficientdata,butrather,hat the researchwas an insultto AFSmembersof Ger-man-American escent. foundthisreasoningabsurdandinsulting,as I ammyselfan Americanof partlyGermandescent,but I didrealize hatthe name of thepubli-cationseditorsuggestedhat she herselfwas of German-Americaneritage.Wheth-erthe editoractually ent it out forreview, haveno wayof knowing.Thepointisthat,evenif the workwasinsulting o German-Americans,his is not an intellectu-allyvalid reasonnot to publisha well-researchedaperor monograph.As mostofyou know,the book was published,but not until 1984.TheAFSrejection surelycontributed o thefour-yeardelay n publication.I mightalsomention en passant hatI haveactuallyhadessaysrejected romnotone but two differentestschrifts n thegrounds hatthecontributionswouldoffendreaders n a particularpartof the world.For the Ortutay estschriftn Hungary,submittedmycomparisonof ethnic okesaboutJewsandPolishAmericans.Eventu-ally,I was informedby the editors that there was a pact amongmembersof theEasternbloc not to insult fellow members. Hence, it was against Hungarian law topublish any jokes making fun of Polish people. The editors, however, said that, if Iwanted to revisemy submission, the jokes about Jewscould remain.Consideringthatthe whole point of my essaywas to compare the two sets of stereotypes,there wasnoway I could remove all the Polish jokes. And, of course, I was personally outraged atthe suggestion that it was perfectly all right for the anti-Jewishjokes to be published.I might observe that it is not easyor common to be rejectedfrom festschriftvolumes,but I have managed it twice. The second occasion involved my essay on East Euro-


22/25


pean politicaljokesbeing rejectedfrom the FelixOinas festschriftbecause prospectivereaders in the Soviet Union might be offended by it. This was very similar to whathappened when I submitted an earlieressayon Romanian jokes to the EastEuropeanQuarterly.The editor of that journal rejected the essay afteradmitting that he knewmost of the jokes and knew they were traditional but feared subscriptions to thejournal from EasternEuropewould be cancelled if the essayappearedin the journal.The rejection from the Oinas festschrift made me especially sad because, as a formerstudent of his, I was quite devoted to the late Oinas and I was pretty sure that hepersonally would have been pleased to have my essay included. As a matter of prin-ciple, I decided to decline the invitation to submit a substitute "nonoffensive" essayin its place.

Mylatestencounterwith would-be intimidation occurredin one of my most recentresearchefforts, in which I applied a folkloristic theory, oral-formulaic to be precise,to the Qur'an.I was advised by colleagues both here and abroad not to carryout thestudy. It was not safe to do so, I was told repeatedly. Upon reading my completedapplication of oral formulaic theory to the Qur'an (Dundes 2003), one trusted col-league eventually confessed that, of course, I was absolutely right in my analysisbutit was just not politically correct to have done it. In the Islamic world, applying anytheory previously employed in the analysisof seculardata to the Qur'anwould be anenterprise deemed blasphemous, and in the West scholars could in theory have car-ried out the research but would not dream of doing so for fear of offending theircolleagues in the Arab world. As a result, neither the Arab scholars could make thiseffort nor would the western scholars choose to do so. Censorship is one thing, butself-censorship is in my view a form of academic cowardice.Accordingly,I have spentmuch of my careerresistingattempts at intimidation that might lead to self-censor-ship. In this instance, it was left for a non-Islamic folklorist to carryout this modestproject. In my career,I have never been afraid of offending either informants or col-leagues. Whether the group in question consists of football players, Germans, orOrthodox Jews, t makes no difference. My credo remains: Folklore is to be analyzedas best I am able, and the chips will fall where they may. On the day when I becomeafraid of making an analysisthat some may find distasteful or offensive, I shall knowthat I am on my deathbed.I hope that this survey of "gloom and doom" is not taken by younger folkloristsas discouragement. Yes,the decline of folklore programs is worrisome, the inroadsmade by amateursand popularizersare to be condemned, and the loss of knowledgeand intimidation by informants is to be decried, but all is not lost. There is as muchfolklore in the world as ever,and the challenge of collecting and analyzing has neverbeen more exciting.When my wife Carolynand Ivisited the Balticsthis past summer,I was greatly encouraged to see the tremendous folkloristic energy at Estonia's Uni-versity of Tartu. I believe Estonia is well on the way to rivaling its neighbor Finlandas the prime mover of folklorescholarship in the world today.And Latvia and Lithu-ania are also major playersin contemporary international folkloristic of the twenty-first century.I find the enthusiasm for folklore and the high level of folklore scholar-ship in these countries very encouraging. In my four-volume set Concepts:Folklore,just published (2005), I have not hesitated to drawupon the superior folklore schol-


23/25


arship rom the Balticsaswellas Finland.Folkloristicss certainly ot dead n thoseareasof the globe.RichardDorson ended his classicAmericanFolklorewith the sentence,"The deathatfolklore s dyingout is itself akindof folklore"1959:278).Now,I do not actu-allyapproveof his use, or misuse,of the word "folklore"n the latterpartof thatsentence-it indulges n the alltoo prevalent tereotypemeaningof folkloreasfal-lacyorerror-but I do thinkthe sentimentmaybejustasapplicableo folkloristicsas it continues obeto folklore.BarbaraKirshenblatt-Gimblett,notherof our smallband of folklore heorists, eems to echo Dorson'ssentimentwhen shesays, n an-other of the many essaysconcernedwith questioning he nameof our discipline,"Ours s a disciplinepredicated n avanishing ubject"1996:249).DanBen-Amos,anothermajor heorist, s even morepessimistic n his importantessay,"TowardDefinition of Folklore n Context,"when he asserts,"If the initialassumptionoffolkloreresearchs based on thedisappearancef itssubjectmatter,here s no wayto prevent he sciencefromfollowing he sameroad" 1972:14),n retrospect sadprophecyof whathashappenedat theUniversity f Pennsylvania. utfolklore snotvanishing;on the contrary, olklorecontinuesto be aliveand well in the modernworld,due in partto increased ransmissionvia e-mail and the Internet.And,asIhave ndicated,he ideathatfolkloristics s adisciplinesdyingout is simplynot trueeither.ToparaphraseMarkTwain, hartermemberof the AmericanFolkloreSociety,"Reports f folkloristics' eathhavebeengreatly xaggerated."o asmylasthurrah,

let me concludewith:hurrah orfolklore,hurrah orfolkloristics, nd hurrah ortheAmericanFolkloreSociety.ReferencesCited

Aitken,Barbara.928.Day-Dreamsn theSpanishBallads. syche :44-55.Ben-Amos,Dan. 1972.Toward Definition f Folkloren Context.nToward ewPerspectivesnFolklore,ed.Am~ricoParedes nd RichardBauman,pp.3-15. Austin:University f TexasPress.-. 1998.TheName s theThing.Journal fAmerican olklore11(441):257-80.Bendix,Regina.1998.OfNames,Professionaldentities, ndDisciplinaryFutures.ournal fAmericanFolklore 11(441):235-46.Bourke,JohnGregory. 934.Scatalogic itesofAllNations.New York:AmericanAnthropologicaloci-ety.Brewster, aulG. 1972.The ncestTheme nFolksong. FCommunicationsNo. 212. Helsinki:AcademiaScientiarum ennica.

Brunvand, anHarold. 1968]1998.TheStudyofAmerican olklore: nIntroduction. ew York:W.W.Norton &Company.Campbell, oseph. 1949]1956.TheHerowitha Thousand aces.New York:MeridianBooks.- 1951.BiosandMythos:Prolegomenao a Scienceof Mythology.nPsychoanalysisndCulture:EssaysnHonorofGhzaR^heim, d.GeorgeB.WilburandWarnerMuensterberger,p.329-43.NewYork: nternational niversities ress.

. 1959.TheMasks fGod.New York:VikingPress.-*. 1960.PrimitiveManasMetaphysician.n CulturenHistory,d.StanleyDiamond,pp.380-92.New York:ColumbiaUniversityPress.- *. 968.CreativeMythology. ewYork:TheVikingPress.. 1972.Myths oLiveBy.Foreword yJohnsonE. Fairchild. ew York:VikingPress.Campbell, oseph, nd MichaelToms.1990.AnOpenLife.NewYork:Harper& Row.


24/25


Carpenter, hys.1946.FolkTale, iction ndSaga n theHomericEpics.Berkeley: niversity fCaliforniaPress.Doniger,Wendy.2000. TheBedtrick:Talesof Sexand Masquerade.Chicago:Universityof Chicago

Press.Dorfman,John.1997.That'sAll,Folks!LinguaFranca (8):8-9.Dorson,RichardM. 1959.American olklore. hicago:University f ChicagoPress.Dundes,Alan.1965.TheStudyofFolklore. nglewoodCliffs,N.J.:Prentice-Hall.?.1976.ProjectionnFolklore: Plea orPsychoanalyticemiotics.Modern anguageotes91:1500-33.. 1987.ThePsychoanalytictudyof the Grimms'Taleswith SpecialReferenceo "TheMaidenWithoutHands" AT706).Germanic eview 2:50-65., ed. 1988.TheFloodMyth.Berkeley:University f CaliforniaPress.. 2002.Projectivenversionn theAncientEgyptian"Tale f TwoBrothers."ournal fAmericanFolklore15(457/458):378-94.. 2003.Fables ftheAncients: olkloren theQur'an.Lanham:Rowman& Littlefield., ed. 2005.Folklore:CriticalConceptsn Literary nd CulturalStudies,4 vols. London:Rout-ledge.

Egan,Linda.1996.Patriarcado e mi vida,tu castigoestoysufriendo:Elfondohistrico-ps_quicodelromance-corrido elgadina.Bulletinof Hispanic tudies 3:361-76.Ellwood,Robert.1999.ThePolitics fMyth:A Studyof C. G.Jung,MirceaEliadeandJosephCampbell.Albany: tateUniversity f New YorkPress.Foley,JohnMiles.1988.TheTheory fOralComposition.loomington:ndianaUniversityPress.Frantz,RayWilliam,Jr.1928.TheFuture fanIllusion.London:HogarthPress.. 1934. Foreword. n ScatalogicRitesofAllNationsby JohnG. Bourke,pp.vii-ix. New York:AmericanAnthropologicalociety.-*. 1938.TheBasicWritingsfSigmundFreud.New York:ModernLibrary.

S. 1946.Totem ndTaboo: esemblancesetween hePsychicLivesofSavages nd Neurotics. rans.A. A.Brill.New York:RandomHouse.-~ . 1955.ThePlaceofFolkloren theCreative rtofMarkTwain.Ph.D.diss.,University f Illinois.. 1956.The Roleof Folkloren Huckleberryinn.AmericanLiterature8:314-27.Freud,Sigmund.1916. ntroductoryecturesnPsycho-Analysis,ols.15and 16of TheStandard dition.London:HogarthPress.. 1987.APhylogeneticantasy.Cambridge: elknapPressof HarvardUniversityPress.Georges,RobertA. 1991.Earning,Appropriating, oncealing, ndDenying he Identityof Folklorist.Western olklore0:3-12.Georges,RobertA.,and MichaelOwenJones.1995.Folkloristics:nIntroduction.loomington:ndiana

UniversityPress.Glassie,Henry.1982.PassingheTime nBallymenone. hiladelphia: niversity f Pennsylvaniaress.Goldberg,Harriet. 000.Motif-IndexfFolkNarrativesn thePan-Hispanic omancero.empe:ArizonaCenter or Medieval ndRenaissancetudies.Hansen,Gregory. 997.TheEndof Folklore ndtheTaskof Thinking.Folkloreorum28(2):99-101.Hansen,William.1990.Odysseus nd theOar:A FolkloricApproach.nApproacheso GreekMyth,ed.LowellEdmunds, p.241-72. Baltimore: ohnsHopkinsUniversityPress.Hansen,William.2002.Ariadne'sThread:A Guide oInternationalTalesFound n ClassicalLiterature.Ithaca,N.Y.:CornellUniversityPress.Herrera-Sobek,Maria.1986.LaDelgadina:ncestand Patriarchal tructuren a Spanish/Chicano o-mance-Corrido. tudiesnLatinAmerican opularCulture :90-107.Hultkrantz,Ake.1960.General thnological oncepts. openhagen:Rosenkilde ndBagger.Jackson,Bruce.1985Folkloristics.ournal fAmerican olklore8(387):95-101.Jones,StevenSwann.1984.Folklore ndLiteraturen theUnitedStates:An AnnotatedBibliographyfStudies fFolklorenAmerican iterature. ewYork:GarlandPublishing.Jung,C.G. 1958.Psyche ndSymbol: SelectionromtheWritings fC. G.Jung,ed. Violet S. de Laszlo.GardenCity:DoubledayAnchorBooks.


25/25


Kirshenblatt-Gimblett,arbara 985.Difolkloristik: GoodYiddishWord. ournal fAmerican olklore98(389):331-4.

. 1996.TopicDrift:Negotiating he Gapbetween he Field and Our Name.Journal fFolkloreResearch33:245-54.K6hler,Reinhold.1887.Folk-loreor Folklore. nBrockhaus' onversations-Lexikon,upplement-band,pp.335-6. Leipzig:Brockhaus.Korff,Gottfried.1996.Changeof Name as a Changeof Paradigm: heRenaming f FolkloreStudiesDepartments tGermanUniversities s anAttemptat "Denationalization."uropaea(2):9-32.Lang,Andrew. 1884]2005. The Methodof Folklore. n Folklore: riticalConceptsn LiteraryndCul-turalStudies,Vol.IVFolkloristics:heoriesndMethods,d. AlanDundes,pp.39-49. London:Rout-ledge.Larsen,Stephen,andRobin Larsen.1993.A Fire n the Mind:TheLifeofJosephCampbell.New York:AnchorBooks.

Lefkowitz,MaryR.1990.TheMythof JosephCampbell.American cholar 9:429-34.Leland,CharlesG. 1890-1892. Ausdem Begrtissungschreibenn die Gesellschaft. thnologische it-teilungen usUngarn (1)2-3.Locke,Liz. 1998.IsFolkloreFinished? inguaFranca (10):68.MariscalHay,Beatriz. 002. Incestand the Traditional allad.ActaEthnographica7:19-27.Montenyohl,Eric.1996.DivergentPaths:On the Evolution f "Folklore"nd"Folldoristics."ournal fFolklore esearch3:232-5.Nikhilananda,wami.1936.SriRamakrishnandSpiritualRenaissance.n TheCulturalHeritage flndia,SriRamakrishna entenaryMemorial ol.2, pp.441-617. Calcutta: elurMath.Oring,Elliott.1991.On the Futureof AmericanFolkloreStudies:A Response.Western olklore0:75-81. . 1998.AntiAnti-"Folklore."ournal fAmerican olklore11(441):328-38.Propp,V.1968.MorphologyftheFolktale. rans.Laurence cott, ntro.AlanDundes.Austin:Universityof TexasPress.Segal,Robert.1990. Introduction: n Questof the Hero.InIn Questof theHeroby OttoRank,Lord

Raglan, ndAlanDundes,pp.vii-xli.Princeton,N.J.:PrincetonUniversityPress.Sokolov,Yuriy.1938]1971.Russian olklore. etroit:FolkloreAssociates.Toelken,Barre.1987.LifeandDeath ntheNavajoCoyoteTales. nRecoveringheWord: ssays nNativeAmericanLiterature,d. BrianSwannand ArnoldKrupat, p.388-401.Berkeley: niversity f Cali-forniaPress.-. 1998.TheYellowman apes,1966-1997.Journal fAmerican olklore11(442):381-91.West,VictorRoyce.1930.Folkloren theWorks f MarkTwain.UniversityfNebraskatudiesnLanguage,Literature,ndCriticism 0:1-87.

Folk Loris Tics in the Twenty-First Century

Documents

Transcript of Folk Loris Tics in the Twenty-First Century