I Bet Most Folklore Doesn’t Include a Title
“[…] the nature, indeed the existence, of American folklore was open to real question” (362).
As I read Bauman, Abrahams, and Kalcik’s “American Folklore and American Studies,” I wasn’t quite sure what I should be expecting to find. I suppose we all look for definitions, something to make what we are studying concrete; but, what I found wasn’t concrete at all. The authors say it themselves: Folklore cannot be defined or delineated.
I found it particularly interesting that early studies of folklore were conducted in order to perhaps “define American culture” (361). But, American culture seems to be a mishmash of other cultures. So, the view that American folklore is an “aggregate of the diverse bodies of folk tradition imported to America by the various groups that constitute the American populace” makes sense to me (362). Everything in America has always seemed to come from somewhere else. For instance, as Americans, we must put ethnic or national names before our food, categorizing what it is.
But this notion that everything must be categorized could be the problem with looking at exactly what folklore is. The word “folk” signifies “common people”, or if you take it from the German volk, it simply means “people.” Does this not then mean that American folklore is the lore of any people? If students of folklore think about it in this way, many instances of popular culture could then be deemed as folklore. For example, could the gossip or stories that TMZ produces be considered folklore. I think most certainly they can. Bauman and Abrahams point out at one point that folklore is meant to entertain. Most who read TMZ derive some sort of entertainment from it. The same can be said for most of modern art forms.
But, I think it’s important to identify that when looking at folklore, it is most often not viewed on an national scale. The concept of regionalism is important to our studies as it can provide a backbone to analyzing the folklore itself. For instance, one would not expect to find myths about revolutionary soldiers in California. It’s important not only to know the history of the area to which the lore is accredited, but also to know about the “agriculture and domestic material culture” of the area (366).
Collections of folklore tend to be based on regionalism or occupational groups; however, these collections seem to leave out women. Not much is said in the way of folklore attributed to women, and this leaves room for question and discovery. Is there any lore that is attributed to women? I know from my literature studies that the Cult of Domesticity is one movement that could be looked to for some sort of feminine lore. But, that is literature, and I’m not sure that anyone should get into the business of trying to classify folklore as literature.
Literature yet again is not something that can be completely delineated. In the past literature has been canonized, defined by a bunch of men sitting in a room deciding that a group of men has the best writings. Literature also implies a refined nature. Can the same be said about what might be considered common? It’s not likely.
And, I think this is why it is hard to distinguish what exactly American folklore is. There is not one specific link between all lore.
Paper Paradoxes:
Ethnographical Differences
To most readers, books are just words on a page: little scribbles that some author somewhere in the world worked out. Most readers don’t think about the art of writing. There is a careful, painstaking process behind the words on the page. Deconstructionists, critics who dissect the language of a certain poetic piece, might tell you that the author had no control over what he or she wrote and that ultimately there are paradoxes within the writing that just cannot be resolved. But a New Critic would tell you that there is always a resolution. That resolution can be found in the jointedness of the poetics as a whole. Anthropologists also attempt to find a resolution in that their ethnographies attempt to capture the whole landscape of a piece of folklore through words. And, folklore, at its core, showcases the poetics of ritual, the ugliness of what the lore is wrapped up in, and the beauty of the ritual that emerges. Anthropological attempts to harness folklore consistently differ in methodology and efficacy.
Most rituals and folklore are a type of response, as are many other art forms. Historical experiences heavily influence the composition of folklore and its uses. However, the contrary can be said as well; in some instances, the composition of folklore can influence history itself. For instance, in many pagan communities, reclaiming a historical ritual and transforming it into something more modern affects the history of the given community. As seen in Oss Tales, modern pagans have reclaimed the historical May Day ritual of a dancing Oss and transformed it to meet modern needs. For example, participants substituted marking females that had been under the Oss with a crayon, as this was done with soot in the past. Those who are marked experience certain fertility benefits. As explained by practitioners in the film, the modern transformation of the ritual benefits modern practitioners, and thus they are able to continue to practice these rituals, creating a modern history. But May Day cannot be reduced to just a mere response. Neo-pagan rituals are emergent; they construct the world in which the Neo-pagans live. And, the construction of this world is significantly wrapped up in notions of history and what it is.
Reclaiming history and creating history seem to be symbiotic; past history and history that is being created right now—in the moment— are tied together; thus, folklore is also the melding of the past and the present. For the pagans discussed in Sabina Magliocco’s article “Ritual is My Chosen Art Form,” folklore is the past ritual and the present meaning of that ritual. The paradox, or duality, of this history suggests a poetics specific to the Neo-Pagan community. Magliocco writes, “We know less about the actual theology, beliefs, or doctrine of ancient pagan people than we do about their rituals. Ritual thus becomes a primary way of enacting and maintaining the presumed historical link between contemporary and ancient paganism, which is at the root of Neo-pagan theology” (Magliocco 129). It’s through her description of events that the reader sees poetics in action, yet there is something lacking. Magliocco writes:
As we chanted, we began to march solemnly towards the ritual fire; the facilitators were carrying the fagot composed of everyone’s sticks and tied with a red cord. We assembled in a circle around the fire and joined hand. At this point a spontaneous element occurred: two participants solemnly lit a pair of large sparklers and placed them in the ground on each side of the fire pit. A facilitator offered a brief prayer in which were asked to mediate on the persecution of gays and lesbians through hate crimes, to visualize a more tolerant future and to focus our thoughts on people afflicted with the HIV virus and those who had gone before the into the Summerland (137).
She describes exactly what is done, not felt. Although she uses descriptive words such as “solemnly,” a reader may not get a true sense of the ritual because the ritual itself is poetic, yet Magliocco does not employ the use of poetics in her description. Ultimately, although Magliocco can describe what happens, she is likely unsuccessful at describing what the ritual itself does for the participants. Of course, what she aims to show here is the reclamation process. It is the transformation of the circle for honoring the gods to a circle that honors those of the LGBT community that have passed on. But, without any description of feeling, the reader is left without a true sense of the ritual. There is no magic in Magliocco’s description of the magic that is taking place for these neo-pagan practitioners.
In contrast to Magliocco, Julie Taylor writes Paper Tangos. Her book showcases the Argentine tango and attempts to capture its drama and poetics. Paper Tangos is about more than just the tango; Taylor writes about what the tango is wrapped up in for the Argentineans as well as herself. She tries ruthlessly to grab at what she and other dancers feel about the tango and feel while they are dancing. Because of this, Taylor’s writing often jumps from topic to topic seemingly without rhyme or reason. It can make for a difficult reading. Yet, there is structure in the disjointedness. Taylor has a purpose.
Since all aspects of culture are learned, each art form is enveloped in its own language and history. Julie Taylor’s Paper Tangos speaks to her process of learning the tango. Much of what she writes seems to mirror the tango itself, or at least the poetics of the tango. Taylor shows the reader that the push and pull between dancers’ hands seems to be a framework narrative, a careful push and pull between Argentineans and a succession of dictators. It is the narrative, or the history of Argentina, that is most effectively shown by the way in which Taylor chooses to write about the Argentinean tango. In attempting to show the magic, or feeling, behind the tango, she adopts a style in which one can feel the tension of the tango, the tension of a history riddled by war. Taylor shows readers that the tango is more than movement and music; it is haunted by something much more poetic.
If I wrote on a particular dance, such as the tango, I would imagine my anthropology of the dance to look much like Taylor’s. There is something that cannot merely be seen in dance. Much of dance is about feeling. When watching dance programming on television, judges will often say something to the effect of, “you’re doing the steps, but I’m not feeling it because there’s no feeling in what you are doing.” But how does one take the feeling of a dance and write it in such a way that the reader might feel it? In order to communicate the anthropology of a feeling, we must be able to show it through literary devices. For example, from Taylor’s use of disjuncture in her writing, the reader can feel how she must have felt as she was pushed around the floor, flicking and kicking, and spinning. As discussed in the seminar, most of the readers were confused at times. As readers, we often think that there is a choice involved in what was put to the page, but in Taylor’s case, it doesn’t seem that way.
Taylor cannot ignore what the tango is wrapped up in; for her, there is no choice. Taylor writes, “Argentines recognize the danger or self-indulgent reelection as inherent in the tango form and in its related responses. But it is the form and its responses … that I am exploring, not by analysis of the form but through an enactment of a response” (Taylor 44). The tango is a poetic response to something deeply rooted in one's sense of being. For the Argentineans, the ritual of the tango is a direct response to internal conflict caused by the external conflict of war. For Taylor, the tango is a response to violence in general. One might even say that the Argentineans are attempting to reclaim their violent history.
The reclamation of a ritual for modern purposes seems to be unique to the Neo-pagan community. At first glance, one might objectively say that the tango cannot be reclaimed. By the end of Paper Tangos, the reader clearly sees that Taylor’s experience of the tango is not simply about grappling with a history of brutality experienced by Argentineans; for Taylor, it is about grappling with her own violent history. In a way, she is able to reclaim that moment of her personal history. Taylor is able to feel “safe” through the bodily movements of the tango as well as feel a shift in her consciousness.
Comparatively, Magliocco cites Selena, who explains that rituals are “vehicles for changing our consciousness” (Magliocco 130). The shift in consciousness is magic as is any state of altered consciousness, a mental state in which the participant has a different mindset than what is normal for that participant. Perhaps this is the goal of all ritualistic practices. A reader could interpret what we learn about Taylor’s journey as well as Magliocco’s neo-pagans through the lens of altered consciousness. While Taylor learns the tango, she ultimately is able to cope with her rape through the dance. Neo-pagans’ reclamation of what may have been a tortured past for the participants is also a form of healing. The ritual that is performed informs the feelings of participants; thus, the end result is that the feeling perpetuates the need for the ritual.
But feeling and healing are learned. All ritual practitioners must learn how to enact the ritual. For some folk groups, learning takes place over a long period of time, much like in Taylor’s and Magliocco’s experiences. There were often times when Taylor, who holds a background in dance, had difficulty mastering tango-specific gestures. For her, there is a poetic nature to the dance, one that leaves her body confused, which is what she is communicating through her writing. Tangueros must learn when and how to place their bodies in order to convey meaning (eg. The nod). Likewise, neo-pagan practitioners must delve into the folkloric world and learn how to make ancient rituals their own. Contorting the lore of yesteryear is akin to contorting the body in dance. The reader starts to feel as if there is a choice involved in these rituals.
Much of what Magliocco writes about seems to be a choice for neo-pagans. These groups of people seem to make conscious choices about the lore that is employed in their rituals. They can choose to ignore different aspects of ancient rituals to meet the needs of modern people. Magliocco writes that, at times, if rituals are ineffective for a large group, modifications may be made in order to encourage participation, which is highly important to neo-pagan practitioners. Choice is less apparent in the tango, but the choice Tangueros make is related to style and improvisation. Although there are prescribed steps dancers follow, once dancers have learned the language of the tango, they may improvise to suit their needs. I think this is what Taylor is aiming for through her writing. The art form of both the tango and neo-pagan ritual stems from the refinement of orchestrated steps. Sure, modifications are made to the ritual, but the fact still remains that the participants had no choice to do what they did; they had no choice to feel what they felt.
Magic, overwhelmingly, is this feeling. No one can put words on a page and say, “now you feel what I felt.” Poetics do not function in that way, although they do elicit feeling. And, magic is directly linked to the art and poetics of any given ritual. Magliocco seems to point out that the success of any folklore or ritual is the magical feeling derived from the ritual itself. In the cases of both authors, the magic seems to be a physical manifestation affected by the alteration of consciousness. Magliocco plainly says that her hair stood on end, and her subject, Steven, explained that this was how to gauge the success of a ritual. A ritual should physiologically move participants in some way. Yet, a reading of Magliocco does not yield this feeling.
But, while Taylor is moved physically, she uses her work in a much different way than Magliocco. Taylor chooses to use her words, phrases, stanzas, paragraphs, and chapters so that the movement of the tango, not only its physical movement but its emotional movement. This yields a more emotive reading.
At times, Taylor’s writing seems to directly reflect the paradoxical nature of the tango. She touches on the many different dualities contained in the Argentine tango: man versus woman, state versus individual, happiness versus sadness, and violence versus beauty, feeling versus apathy, and magic versus logic. Taylor is very effective in showing the push and pull between these paradoxes, which is truly the magic of the tango. As she adopts a modern ethnographic, creative nonfiction approach to her anthropology of dance, she frames her own personal narrative in the narrative of the tango. Her scattered approach at defining the tango speaks directly to the fact that she doesn’t know exactly what to say, so she has a hard time putting it into words. But Taylor wants the reader to feel that. She wants the reader to have a difficult time putting it all together because the tango isn’t an easy thing to put together, to learn, to dance.
Toward the end of Paper Tangos, readers learn of Taylor’s rap and realize she has internalized the tango, realizing that the ritual was always a push-pull. And, by using her words to show this, she shows her reader the true magic of the tango, unlike Magliocco. One cannot feel the magic from reading Magliocco’s piece because she adopted such a clinical tone in discussing the rituals of neo-pagans. Reading about a ritual in such a dull way only allows the reader to learn facts, and this is not what ritual is about. Rituals are magic to be felt.
Works Cited
Magliocco, Sabina
1996 Ritual is My Chosen Art Form: The Creation of Ritual as Folk Art among Contemporary Pagans in Magical Religion and Modern Witchcraft
Taylor, Julie
1998 Paper Tangos Durham: Duke University Press