












Return to Table of Contents
What the speakers all have in common is
the writing life. They have all written on issues
from inside their particular cultural identities,
but also from the vantage point of a crosscultural
framework and an academic sense of
detachment.
New York Folklore Society
P.O. Box 764
Schenectady, NY 12301
518/346-7008 Fax 518/346-6617
nyfs@nyfolklore.org
|
|
|
|
PUBLICATIONS | VOICES | BACK ISSUES | FOLKLORE IN ARCHIVES | FOLK ARTISTS SELF-MGT | ORDER PUBLICATIONS | SEARCH

The last issue of Voices included a transcript
of a panel from the New York Folklore
Society’s 2005 Writing Folklore conference.
Titled “Thinking Culturally: An Insider’s
Perspective,” the panel featured Joanne
Mulcahy (Lewis and Clark College) discussing
lessons from her fieldwork in rural Wisconsin
and among the Inuit of Alaska; Kirin Narayan
(University of Wisconsin at Madison)
presenting from her work in India and the
Himalayas; and Kevin White (State University
of New York at Oswego) describing how he
navigates between his Haudenosaunee
Iroquois heritage and the experience of urban
life, military service, and academia. I served as
the moderator to the panel, in the role of the
outsider mediator. As I reflect on the session,
it seems to me that ethnographic writing
opens us all to the dichotomies of insider
and outsider identities.
What the speakers all have in common is
the writing life. They have all written on issues
from inside their particular cultural identities,
but also from the vantage point of a crosscultural
framework and an academic sense of
detachment. The transcript included only the
panelists’ opening statements, so I want to
share the discussion that followed with readers
who may not have been there. In this column,
I will reflect on this dialogue about writing
folklore, rather than reviewing or
recommending a particular text.
The audience for our writing has great
bearing on the insider/outsider identity of
the writing. The reader is either brought inside
or left excluded by the writing. Often that
process is informed by the reader’s own
intention. I am interested in how both writing
and reading texts removes us from the
immediacy of a topic and delivers us to a
voyeuristic perspective from which we collect
information and impressions. This experience
can depend on how much the reader relates
personally to the writer or to his or her subjects.
Each speaker addressed aspects of this
problem. Joanne Mulcahy stressed that all
cultures are equally compelling to their insiders.
Referring to a professor who tried to steer her
away from study among the Inuit, she
commented on the tendency of writers and
teachers of folklore to favor certain cultures
that typify paradigms or symbols of scholarly
interest. Finding significant lessons in folklore
nearer to home she noted that something as
personal as a mourning ritual for children in a
Wisconsin family can speak volumes about
the place of tradition in culture, offering more
depth than an extended analysis of an exotic
(often staged) public event.
Kirin Narayan spoke of the ethical question
that arises in fieldwork when an ethnographer
relies heavily on a particular informant or
subject. A relationship can develop through
interviews in which information shared crosses
the line between public and private, so that
writing can pose a risk to the relationship.
Conversely, members of the community may
ask why the ethnographer privileges a particular
person over others. Kirin spoke of the need
to check back often with one’s sources or
informants to see if they are amenable to how
they are presented in writing.
Kevin White focused on the many versions
of a key text, the Iroquois creation story. Each
retelling is a testament to the reality, setting,
and cultural life of the particular teller. He
emphasized that there is no one correct story.
The subjectivity of each telling and the reality
of the story of each teller is the focus of
White’s work. During later discussion, he
added, “It’s a myth to be objective. . . . An
outsider’s study of another group is not
objective, because you are carrying your own
baggage.” Each retelling of a story is an end
in itself and informs about the reality of each
generation that passes traditions along.
Speaking from the audience, Judd
Newborne, a Holocaust scholar and curator,
talked about how insider accounts are packaged
and objectified, citing what some have called
“Shoah business.” Robert Baron responded
that the commodification of culture is an
inherent part of the writing process, but that
ethnographers of necessity engage in a
collaboration motivated by mutual self-interest
to present themselves or to be presented: in short, to tell their stories.
Storyteller Roz Perry responded in her own
succinct way by asking if any writer, like any
storyteller, really has to overcome her own
insider/outsider dichotomies: “You are
always telling stories to other people.” She
continued, “Why are you in this business? If
you are completely objective, no one is going
to want to read what you write. You have to
shape [the story] in a way that makes it
interesting to audiences.”
Most conference participants, as Roz Perry
said, presented well the perspective of writers
as subjective insiders who are informed by a
larger world view that enables them to reach
out across the page. Coming from the other
side of the insider/outsider dichotomy, I
could not help but take to heart many of the
lessons of these sessions. Entering fields like
folklore and ethnomusicology by the academic
route, we may read widely from a varied
literature, but the intellectual aesthetic is one
of detached objectivity: just the kind of
boring, unengaged narrative that Roz doesn’t
want to hear. Not all of us are born storytellers.
You don’t have to be one, though, to be a
good listener. As I told the audience at the
session, I try to be a good listener and to come
to terms with being an insider to so-called
mainstream society, with deep roots in both
urban and suburban America, whose role is
to envision an inclusive society by helping
people of different backgrounds and
persuasions understand one another a little
better. Sometimes it is hard to mitigate the
contradictory forces in today’s society that tend
to drive people apart and to drown out local
voices. But folklorists are a tenacious lot,
who—against the odds—will keep on trying
to get their story across.
|
 |
Tom van Burens Bookshelf Essentials column was published in Voices Vol. 32, Spring-Summer 2006. Voices is the membership magazine of the New York Folklore Society. To become a subscriber, join the New York Folklore Society now.
HOME | ABOUT NYFS | PROGRAMS & SERVICES | PUBLICATIONS | RESOURCES | CALENDAR | WHATS FOLKLORE? | MEMBERSHIP | GALLERY | SHOP |
SEARCH | CONTACT US
© 2008, 2007-2005 New York Folklore Society
|