Salient Features of Different Schools of Thought in Folklore Studies
Get IGNOU MFC-007 Solved Assignment Pdf of all answers for 2024-25 session by clicking on above button.
Folklore studies encompass a variety of theoretical approaches that analyze and interpret folk traditions, narratives, customs, and practices. Over the years, scholars have developed various schools of thought that bring distinct perspectives to the study of folklore. These schools are deeply rooted in the broader cultural, social, and historical contexts in which they emerged and have contributed to shaping the field of folklore studies as we know it today. Below, we highlight the salient features of different schools of thought in folklore studies.
1. Historical-Geographical School (Late 19th – Early 20th Century)
- Founder: The Historical-Geographical School is primarily associated with scholars such as Finnish scholar Kaarle Krohn and Theodor Benfey.
- Key Features:
- Origins and Transmission of Folklore: This school emphasizes the historical and geographical analysis of folklore, focusing on tracing the origins and the movement of folklore across time and space.
- Focus on Epic Narratives: It is particularly concerned with epic narratives, ballads, and legends, and seeks to identify their geographical origin and migration patterns.
- Comparative Method: Scholars in this tradition employed the comparative method, where they compared similar folktales, songs, and customs across different cultures and regions to trace their common roots.
- Cultural Evolution: The school posits that folklore undergoes a process of evolution, transforming as it travels from one community to another.
- Criticism:
- Overemphasis on Origins: Critics argue that the focus on finding the “pure” or original form of a folk tale or custom often overlooks the local variations and social contexts in which folklore is practiced.
2. Comparative Method School
- Key Figures: Vladimir Propp, Aarne-Thompson, and Stith Thompson are major proponents of the comparative method in folklore studies.
- Key Features:
- Focus on Structure: This school focuses on identifying and analyzing the structural components of folk narratives, especially folktales. Propp’s work on the morphology of the folk tale categorized common narrative elements and functions, such as the hero’s journey, the villain, and the donor.
- Folklore as a System: The comparative method sees folklore as a system of recurrent motifs, functions, and structures that appear across different cultural contexts.
- Typology of Folktales: The Aarne-Thompson system, for example, categorizes folktales into types based on their motifs and themes, offering a classification system that allows scholars to compare and contrast different folktales.
- Criticism:
- Overemphasis on Formalism: The method has been criticized for focusing too much on the formal structure and not enough on the social, cultural, and historical contexts of folklore. Critics argue that it fails to account for the diversity of meaning and function that folklore can have in different societies.
3. Functionalism
- Key Figures: Bronislaw Malinowski, Radcliffe-Brown, and Viktor Shklovsky.
- Key Features:
- Focus on Social Function: Functionalism approaches folklore as a tool for understanding social structures and functions within a community. It emphasizes the role that folklore plays in maintaining social cohesion and promoting cultural values.
- Folklore as a Social Phenomenon: Rather than focusing solely on the content of folklore, functionalists investigate how folklore helps regulate behavior and resolve social conflicts, thereby contributing to the maintenance of social order.
- Rituals and Myths: Much of the focus in functionalism is on myths, rituals, and cultural symbols that serve specific purposes within the community, such as rites of passage or social integration.
- Criticism:
- Overemphasis on Function: Critics argue that functionalism’s focus on the functionality of folklore can lead to a reductionist view, which neglects the artistic, aesthetic, and expressive dimensions of folklore.
4. Cultural Materialism (Marxist Approach)
- Key Figures: Richard Dorson, Jack Goody, and Claude Lévi-Strauss.
- Key Features:
- Economic and Material Context: Cultural materialism examines folklore through the lens of material conditions, including economic structures, technology, and environment. It posits that cultural practices, including folklore, are influenced by economic and material conditions in society.
- Class Struggle and Ideology: In the Marxist tradition, folklore is seen as a reflection of the class struggles, power dynamics, and the ideological battles that shape society. Folklore, especially stories and songs, may serve as vehicles for resistance to dominant ideologies or express the concerns of oppressed classes.
- Material Conditions and Symbolism: The materialist approach often links folklore with the ideological messages of a society, seeking to understand how folklore reflects and shapes the dominant ideologies or social divisions of the time.
- Criticism:
- Overemphasis on Material Conditions: Critics argue that cultural materialism often overlooks the emotional, aesthetic, and symbolic aspects of folklore, which may not always be directly tied to economic or class structures.
5. Structuralism
- Key Figures: Claude Lévi-Strauss, Vladimir Propp, and Tzvetan Todorov.
- Key Features:
- Focus on Binary Oppositions: Structuralism in folklore focuses on binary oppositions, such as life/death, nature/culture, good/evil, and hero/villain, which are fundamental to human cognition and the structure of narratives.
- Deep Structures of Folklore: Structuralists aim to uncover the universal structures underlying folklore, suggesting that all folktales share common narrative structures that are governed by the collective unconscious.
- Symbolic Meaning: Structuralism examines the symbolic meanings embedded in folklore and the way cultural symbols communicate social and psychological meanings to the audience.
- Criticism:
- Overemphasis on Universal Structures: Critics of structuralism argue that it tends to overlook the cultural specificity of folklore, which may differ significantly from one society to another.
6. Postmodernism
- Key Figures: Michel Foucault, Jacques Derrida, and Roland Barthes.
- Key Features:
- Deconstruction of Folklore: Postmodernism challenges traditional ideas about authorial intent, historicity, and truth in folklore. It focuses on deconstructing the dominant narratives in folklore to expose hidden power structures and multiple interpretations.
- Intertextuality: Postmodernist scholars emphasize the intertextual nature of folklore, suggesting that folk narratives are never static but are instead influenced by and intermingle with other texts and cultural products.
- Focus on Marginalized Voices: Postmodern approaches often focus on the marginalized, subaltern, and resistant voices within folklore, questioning hegemonic interpretations of folklore and highlighting alternative perspectives.
- Criticism:
- Relativism: Critics argue that postmodernism’s focus on relativism and the absence of universal truths can lead to the erosion of meaningful interpretations of folklore and culture.
7. Performance Theory
- Key Figures: Richard Bauman, Victor Turner, and Emmanuel Levinas.
- Key Features:
- Folklore as Performance: Performance theory views folklore as an active process that occurs in specific social and ritual contexts, emphasizing the performative nature of folklore practices.
- Emphasis on Context: This approach stresses the situational context of folklore, analyzing how performances of folk traditions such as storytelling, music, and dance vary according to time, place, and the social roles of participants.
- Cultural Expressions in Action: It also explores how folklore is embodied in actions and performances, offering insights into the ritualistic and communal dimensions of folklore.
- Criticism:
- Focus on Performance: Critics argue that performance theory can sometimes overlook the material, textual, and symbolic aspects of folklore, reducing it to a performance devoid of deeper meaning or content.
Conclusion
Each of the schools of thought in folklore studies brings unique perspectives that enhance our understanding of folk traditions. From the early efforts of the Historical-Geographical School to the structural and functional approaches of later scholars, the field has evolved to incorporate diverse methodologies and theoretical frameworks. The comparative method and structuralism continue to shape studies of narrative patterns, while postmodernism and performance theory have introduced more nuanced, context-driven interpretations. Each approach, whether materialist, functional, or post-structural, offers valuable insights into how folklore functions in society and how it can be interpreted across different historical and cultural contexts.