Folk Groups

Now, onto official business. What are folk groups and to which do I belong?
Folk groups are creators and performers(folk) of traditions (folklore) that are categorized into several groups. These groups are not designated by political or social factors, rather by their "distinctive folk speech and other traditions," (51). The six groups areas follows: occupational, age, family, gender-differentiated, regional, and ethnic/religious.
It is very likely that everyone will find a place within each of these groups, but I am going to limit mine to those I feel are more specific to me.

On my short list of defining me is "student." This has not changed from day 1; school comes first. But with such an occupation, the age group is also relevant. The reading mentioned some specific folklore for these groups surrounding fraternities and sororities. These institutions are shrouded in folklore, which remains one of the drawing points. One particular that I have heard from sources young and old (I myself did not take the Greek route) is about a tradition known simply, as I understand it, as "The Toaster." I won't repeat the whole thing here, because it is bound to offend someone. Let's just say it involves fraternity and sorority "cooperation."

Another interesting factor about these groups is its heavy reliance on New Media and digital communication. Now, it is common to ask a neighbor a question through Facebook rather than just knocking on the door. Not because we're all lazy, it has just become customary. There is a whole set of lingo and processes that go with this too. On Facebook alone there are many interesting occurrences. There is the "Poke", which refers to a simple notification to a Facebook friend that says nothing more than "You have been poked by..." However, it quickly became custom that guys can poke girls, girls can poke guys, and girls can poke girls, but guys should not be poking other guys (I'm bringing gender-diffentiated groups into this behemouth of a paragraph too). This silly little practice quickly found a way to mirror the host society's (I am familiar with U.S. practices, though it is probably different abroad) ideology on physical contact. Had Facebook referred to this activity as somehting that does not connote physical contact, would this still have been the case? Would if it were to connote aggression; then would it be ok for guys to "Headbutt" other guys, but not girls?
Worth considering nonetheless.

My place in many of the other afforementioned groups is rather unextroadinary. However, there is something mentioned early in the chapter that is not described in detail. The book says that groups can be defined by other factors such as blindness and deafness. I took courses in American Sign Language over several years and became pretty familiar with the ways the culture operates (both big "D" Deaf and little "d" deaf). There are stories and traditions that are learned in Deaf culture, mostly through the experiences in the boarding schools that many deaf* children attend. I can't recall any off the top of my head and I don't have those former materials. However, if I turn them up I will be sure to post them. My place in all this is that by working to learn ASL I am gladly excepted into Deaf culture. I was to invited events and dinners on several occasions. Those who are not a member of the Deaf culture (including those who recieved cochlear implants) or were not learning sign were often not part of these events.

Anyway, that is my place in the grand scheme of things.



*Big "D" and little "d" only referred to when discussing culture, not individuals.

Folklore and Worldview

Toelken claims that worldview, in the case of folklore, "refers to the manner in which a culture sees and expresses its relation to the world around it," (1). These worldviews, or perceptions of reality, are strongly influenced by the culture in which they are cultivated.

In relation to folklore, research has indicated that the line between folk culture and formal culture is extremely blurry (as we have quickly found in our class discussions).

That the author decided to point this out quickly caught my interest and put him up a notch in the legitimacy category in my book. Mainly, this is because how I feel on the subject. And I have debated similar terms in the past. A topic that invigorated me in high school was the line that distinguishes art from everything else. There are many theories on the topic. Some say anything with utilitarian value can't be art; others place value on an item that hinges upon the time it took to produce it. But I was fascinated by modernists. When the modernists first came onto the scene the popular subscription was to a line which had "high art" cherished and left everything else in limbo. Modernists told them to shove it. They would open an art gallery with one of the items being a toilet entitled "The Great Equalizer." They decorated the museums with toilet paper (on the outside AND the inside). They pushed the question of "What it art?" further than anyone had ever done before.

Is folk culture, one that depends so heavily on informality, going to rigidly stand by a definition of folk culture? What is there now has always been and always will be? If the merchants of capitalism capture a folk trend and popularize it for as long as it is profitable (which probably won't be long); will it always fall to the wayside, never to be acknowledged by folk culture again?

Or is folk culture nothing more than the spirit of frontier living and all of its advantages and consequences? Whatever can be done without the need for industry and press; done with the bare hands and the naked brain will be accepted as folk?

I think the latter is an attractive concept. Everyday life for some and guilty escapism for others. It is not looking back at a glorified past. It is the simple need to make the present seem like safe space. Space in which tools that folk culture provides can produce a endless number of frontiers for posterity to enjoy.