Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenors:
-
Tina Paphitis
(University of Bergen)
Paul Cowdell (University of Hertfordshire)
Matthew Cheeseman (University of Derby)
Send message to Convenors
- Discussants:
-
Peter Harrop
(University of Chester)
Timothy Thurston (University of Leeds)
Paul Cowdell (University of Hertfordshire)
Tina Paphitis (University of Bergen)
Matthew Cheeseman (University of Derby)
- Format:
- Roundtable
Short Abstract:
This roundtable discusses the paradoxes pertaining to equality, diversity and inclusion in folklore and folkloristics. It is particularly interested in visibility and representation in relation to marginalized folklorists, the risk of their work going unwritten, and its impact on folklore history.
Long Abstract:
This roundtable developed from a UK-based, AHRC-funded network (Folklore Without Borders) that aimed to embed greater diversity within folklore and folkloristics. This roundtable discusses the paradoxes pertaining to visibility and representation that arose from its meetings. We are interested in establishing collaborations in exploring them further.
For example, the network explored a UK equivalent to the American Folklore Society’s ‘Notable Folklorists of Color’ project, broadening its remit to include marginal groups. In preliminary investigations it was difficult to trace these folklorists, especially those of colour. We discuss the difficulties in locating marginal folklorists, the impact on the history of folkloristics, and the potential for folklore that would otherwise be recorded and explored to go unwritten. We query what these absences mean for undertaking folklore work and for the public perception of folklore through the following paradoxes:
Terminology: ‘diversity’ is an inherently problematic and gestural term, but necessary?
Whiteness: UK folklore is overwhelmingly white, both in terms of participants, and in its presumed and imagined scope;
Intersectionality: how to enact change when inequality is itself so diverse (race, class, gender, sexuality, etc);
History: how is an alternative, diverse history of folklore and folkloristics possible? Where are the unwritten marginal folklorists, and how far does their articulation within folklore necessitate a reframing of our understanding of folkloristics?
Folkloristics: what can and should be kept from a colonial inheritance?
We invite discussion on these (and other) paradoxes in relation to folklore and diversity, in the UK and internationally.
Accepted contributions:
Session 1Contribution long abstract:
To the observer of the current UK folk resurgence, it seems like its appeal lies at both ends of the Gutenberg parenthesis, safely equidistant from the mixed mid-nineteenth legacies of early folklore. Yet the movement draws heavily on early folklore theory. It searches out an early modern, pre-imperial, prelapsarian Albion; inclusive, kind, connected to the land through stories, walks, enchantment and hauntings. In our present day, the old rituals, calendars, and ceremonies provide a glimpse of lost Arcadia, portals for activism, art, spirituality and people-power. It is digital, live, and fast moving. The folklorists, with their impenetrable theory, dull historiography, and inaccessible publications, would rather have the ‘mystery die on the autopsy table’ (Southwell 2016). Since discarded scholarly method has itself become both folklore and folkloresque, at least in the UK, how might we unwrite the discipline without unwriting the subject of study?
Contribution long abstract:
The People’s Republic of China was the sixth country to ratify the UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. Effective June 2024, the United Kingdom became the 183rd. China has developed a complex, well-funded eco-system for recognising and managing heritage. The UK is figuring out what the future holds. But in both countries, diverse populations raise the question of whose heritage is recognised or heard. Based on experiences building connections with folklorists in the People’s Republic of China both as a UKRI Future Leaders Fellow, and dating back to a postdoctoral fellowship at the Smithsonian’s Center for Folklife and Cultural Heritage, I will discuss perspectives on building collaborations with folklorists in illiberal countries as part of attempts to reach under-represented communities. In doing so, I seek to highlight questions of representation and voice in an increasingly international discipline of folkloristics, and also the importance (and difficulties) of collaborating across difference.
Contribution long abstract:
I give a brief account of the network, noting its alignment to AHRC research priorities. I discuss how the network approached UK folklore as an assemblage of three loose groups; academics (researchers and teachers), independent stakeholders (artists, writers and practitioners) and cultural industries. Language was a point of contention. I consider one aspect where I think the language was not helpful (diversity), and another where it has, in fact initiated interesting conversations (entrepreneurship). I describe how the network met, and then introduce some of the projects it attempted, and the difficulties it encountered in doing so.
Contribution long abstract:
Some years ago, I attempted to locate ‘diverse’ (e.g. ethnic minority, queer, working class) folklorists in the UK, both historically and currently. I found this endeavour difficult, almost fruitless. Where were these folklorists, and what did this apparent lack of diversity mean for the kind of folklore that was being explored and celebrated in the UK, or how folklore is more broadly perceived? I consider these questions and their potential impact on folklore studies, reflecting on more recent discussions in the Folklore Without Borders network, particularly in the potential development of a UK equivalent to the American Folklore Society’s ‘Notable Folklorists of Color’.
Contribution long abstract:
Perhaps the central paradox confronting UK folklorists today is that the subject has never been more popular, yet its study remains as marginalised as ever and the existing bodies that represent the discipline have proved unable to respond to this renewed interest. It is less a dialogue of the deaf than an absence of dialogue altogether. The result is an entrenchment of retrograde folkloristics on both sides. I discuss the historical problems and legacies encoded in this and how to unpick them so as to preserve what is valuable, ditch what is not, and use this to reestablish folkloristics on a more inclusive and equable basis.