The Internet Folklore

In the article, “Electronic Hybridity: The Persistent Processes of the Vernacular Web” by Robert Glenn Howard, he says “When “folk” express meaning though new communication technologies, the distinction between folk and mass is, as Dorst suggested, blurred by the vernacular deployment of institutionally produced commercial technologies.” The “folk” that he mentions are us. He people who sign up for these different blogs and add on to what the internet is. When we participate in things like blogs and online diaries, we become part of the folk. As soon as one posts a comment online it is permanently part of the internet. The “Mass” is the commercial part of it all. These are the creator and controllers. They are usually the owners of the sites like Facebook, or MySpace also law makers. They become the mass in that they make the rules as to what can be freely posted unto these sites and what is revoked. They also can create and image into themselves in that they will be seen in society as they want to be portrayed apart from what may really be the situation. We the folk promote this every time we sign up to use these various sites we keep their myth alive. This caught my attention because this is sort of like what James Scott was talking about When he makes mention of the slaves and what was really going on during slavery. The slave owners make it seem as though they were doing a favor for the Africans in taking them in and exposing them to religion. When what really was going on is that the slaves were being battered and burse and mistreated the whole time. But no would have known this till they studied the negro spirituals and the brer rabbit stories. The slaves where always there however they aren’t really seen as the mass rather as the folk that have to deal with what the mass says or the image that they want to portray of them.
Scott says that “the safest and most public form of political discourse is that which takes as its basis the flattering self- image of elites. Owing rhetorical concessions that self image contains, it offers a surprisingly large arena for political conflict that appeals to these concessions and makes use of the room for interpretation within and ideology.”(Chapter 2 page 18,). This is true as we can see with the Kerry blog website in the Howard article and with slavery. Bloggers saw that they were censoring what was going on to the site. So they made their own. In slavery days there was no such thing as internet but there was such a thing as written language and works. Because they were band from learning to read and write, they made song and told stories. And those who knew how to write taught others.
This leads me to think about us and our society. Even though we all have different vernaculars and we are part of the different folk, aren’t we all somewhat controlled be the “mass” which is dictated those who have the money at the time. In a sense the internet has no folklore because it is constantly censored as to what can be posted. But on the other end of the stick, this censorship is part of the folklore and what keeps it alive. Without this censorship there would not be things as blogs, or they wouldn’t be as popular. People wouldn’t fell a compelled to push the buttons of the elites and express their opinions. This “slavery” makes us, the “folk”, want to strive harder. It gives us a challenge and our rebuttal gives more of an impact. I cannot imagine the internet without censorship. I guess being that out lives are tripped by society cannot see past it. We find was too but in a sense we embrace it

Whiteness of Dance: what is it really trying to say

Leeann Barrett
When I think about the words like “whiteness” and “dance” my mind immediately goes to ballroom dancing. I think this crazy because dance and music are supposed to be universal elements. I think that the idea of white and dancing has been embeded into me over the yrs. When we watch dance competitions on the television, other than the newly made ones, you mostly see white people dancing. Only once in a while will you see a Latino and it is a miracle if a black person is present. I can only remember seeing a Black person once or twice. In the Article “Whiteness and the Performance of Race in the American Ballroom” by Joanna Bosse when talking about ballroom dance says “The social group with whom I worked was predominately white, with East Asian and Asian American dancers constituting approximately one- eighth of the clientele and a very small number of other minorities…. I encountered only six black ballroom dancers and even fewer Latin American and South Asians.” (28).
It is interesting how the North Asians or more present than the South Asians. North Asians are lighter than the ones in the south. So this whole thing is based on color. Not on skill. This actually says something about the larger community Bosse says that “Most of the dancers were members on economic or intellectual elite and both men and woman held positions as entrepreneurs, lawyers, doctors, CEO’s, small business owners…”(28). In our society many minorities do not get the opportunity to get to these positions. So even dance id for a select few in America. The dance comes off as showing that you have some status or a place in society. It shows that you are so accomplished that you have time to learn this dance just to show how much of a great person you are. Minorities in America are trying to get a degree not busy trying to flaunt their wealth in a dance.
When Bosse is describing the woman in the dance she says “woman modern dancers perform in pastel or sherbet- colored ball gowns, tight in the bodice with fuller, flowing skirt and adorned with feathers, sequins, or jewels. The hair is usually swept high in the head in a French twist or bun and is generally dyed to platinum blonde if possible. Make up, like hair color, tends to gravitate towards extremes of either powdery, porcelain white (if coupled with dark hair) or deep, bronze tan (if couples with blonde hair).”(31). This is what the ideal female looks like in America. Woman should have a tight waist, long hair, blonde, and white. The dress, sequins, feathers and jewels can be seen as the thing that females put on from day to day that is consider high fashion or fashionable. One thing I thought about when reading this part are the Disney movie. The only person of color that you find dancing in a ballroom is Pocahontas. Other than that everyone is white with pale whit skin. Cinderella is the best example of this, (she also reintegrates the idea of the American dream). She has blonde hair, pale skin, jewelry, a tiara and a light blue dress that has a corset built into it. And because of this she is the belle of the ball. Everyone stops to look at her come down the steps as the moonlight gleams on her. With Pocahontas, in the second movie, she is taken to England where she is dressed in a puffy shirt and squeezed into the dress. Her hair is also put up into a bun and adorned with beads and jewels and he face is painted white. Just as the article said it is to be done when paired with dark hair. So even if you aren’t white, to perform or take part in activities that go along side the ballroom dancing , like meeting the king/ queen, as a minority you have to conform to their way in appearance too.
To me this is a way to control other people and conquer them in saying that we are better. This ballroom dance symbolizes “civilization” and the Europeans imposing there ways on others. The dance symbolizes wealth and prosperity. It also shows that you are someone in society to have mastered and to have learnt this dance. To me this dance is somewhat like colonization or reason which was given to justify colonization. This dance is taught in the hopes to bring culture and to civilize the people who are watching. Giving them an example of what they are to be and probably what they will never become.

My personal tradition Blog

One family tradition that I have personally taken part in is Sabbath lunch. Sabbath known to be observed by the Jews but I am Seventh - day Adventist and we also observe the Sabbath. Being that my family is West- Indian we have a custom where we have a big lunch in the middle of the day and don’t eat any other meal for the rest of the day other than a snack. This tradition has been practiced every Saturday evening since I can remember. What we do is that after the church service is over and we are finished greeting our fellow brethren we go home, stay at church or go to another’s house for fellowship. Fellowship is what we call Sabbath lunch. In the islands usually this would take place, if not some ones house, on a beach out outside. In the states this happens, or came into being because a lot of people would end up being at church all day. After the service is done church is not. There are things like handing out tracks, pathfindering (sort of like an Adventist Boy Scout and Girl Scouts) and bible study. Then in the afternoon there is Adventist youth where it is like church for the youth. So basically people did not want to go home and come back all the time. After a while when churches got too big then it would spread to people’s homes. People will cook large meals and even when times were hard everyone will pitch in when times are rough there seems to be enough for everyone to be fed.
Some foods that are served are mostly vegetarian food (we are usually grown up eating this food because at church this is mostly what is served). But we also prepare meat occasionally. We also have things like rice and peas, the “special” juice and other cultural foods. When it’s a large setting and for visitors we share out food but people are always allowed for seconds and to share for themselves. During this eating time we catch up on the week, tell stories about our families, talk about the service or things that happened in Sabbath school that we did not finish discussing and basically talk about whatever is on our minds or bothering us.
This custom has gone on for years and I believe it will go on for years to come. It has toned down a little because at church they now do fellowship every second Sabbath, and the times are getting cold so people do not really come back to church for Adventist Youth because of personal reasons but people are still going over each other’s house and sharing fellowship with each other. I have always enjoyed this tradition and I hope to pass this one to my children also.

Blog on Lindquist article

In the “’Locating’ The Nation: Football Game Day and American Dreams in Central Ohio” by Danielle Christensen Lindquist says “In attempting this oddly “American” sport, commentators have read foot ball as a metaphoric expression of territorial, sexual, or economic conquest, thus linking the game to national imperialism and war, gendered dominance, or corporate capitalism.”(448). Before reading the article I really couldn’t see how this could be so. The only thing that was obvious to me is that America is the only country that has Football as a sport, (however other countries have something similar called Rugby). Then as I continued reading I saw that football actually immolates all that America is about.
The first point she makes is that football characterized by an invariant structure and deference to authority. This is much like our government (or the idea of our government). Things are organized according to the constitution and according to what the president and his cabinet says. Just like in Foot ball they have a set of rules that they have to follow or else the game cannot go on. The coach is serves as the president but the referee is his cabinet scolding him when things are wrong. The coach has to obey the grand rule and follow it whether or not he likes it.
Something that I thought was particularly interesting is the point that she made about football linking it war. Wars relationship to football can be viewed in two ways. One way it can be viewed is its relevance to the army. The way that football plays are set up on the field is one way. They are set up so that they can fight anything that the other team is coming with. They are come up with these strategies by studying the other teams’ plays and finding a way to build their defense by breaking down the other teams’ defense and vice versa. Just like America. When going to war we do not just jump into another countries territory with no knowledge. We study the landscape. See what they have done in the past to win wars and we find out what kind of technology they have on hand to them. Any advantage that they may have we prepare ourselves for. No team wants to lose just as no country wants to lose.
The point the link that she made between Football and the Puritans also can be seen this way. When they came to America they came to have their own space and their own land for religious liberty and opportunity. But when they found the Natives when they came to the Americas they made it their duty to convert them and in a sense conquer them. Just like in a football game. Teams travel to other teams’ stadiums in order to conquer them. Lindquist quotes Miller saying that it was the Puritans “errand to the wilderness” (447). Teams travel from long distances to challenge the other team and say that they were the ones who made them humble and they now have stance over them. Before, when there was no one else, they did not have any competition and now that they do it’s like their divine right to go and conqueror. Many football players believe that playing the sport is their God given gift and that this is what they were supposed to do in life.
The other way that one can interpret the link to war in the sport itself. Past both teams studying each other’s past and advantages, during the game they respond to each other’s actions. If they see a certain pattern in their play then they will adjust. Just like in war when one shoot then another is going to come with more force and have to beside whether or not they are going to use the heavy artillery. Coaches don’t send out their best players until when most needed. And don’t throw out randomly.
The last point that I think is interesting is the point about “men raised primarily by women sought out models of public maleness”. This is seen in all forms of Americanism. America is all about being strong and doing things for yourself. Boys trying to be strong and become men is a big thing in America. The man being the head of the household is something that we uphold (even though it does not really workout). We even want our president to be a “family man” and take charge of things. Football is all, in a sense, what a man is supposed to be. A man has to be strong, powerful, ready for war, fearless, proud and ready to take control under any circumstance. That is all football is and what a “man” is.

Response to Oring and Wells articles on Folklorists

Leeann Barrett

English 265

Response to Oring and Wells Article on Folklorists

The Elliott Oring article mainly focuses on what a folklorist is. Meaning what they believe in and the ways they go about doing and justifying their research. One way method that is used is that they go about their research through questions starting from more specific questions to open up broader ones
(page 209, Oring). Another way is to embrace the culture you are analyzing and become a part of them. Oring mentions David Kerr who took students to perform plays for the rural people in order for the people to “understand and meditate the socio- economic changes occurring” (208, Oring).

He also expressed that Folklorists cannot simply go into a community and learn a story and say that it has been in this community for years and that this is their folklore. What Folklorists do is look for historical events to justify what is told or shown through their stories or customs. Also they make sure that the same story is told by many and not just by one.

In Patricia Atkinson Wells article “Public Folklore in the Twenty- first Century: New Challenges for the Discipline”, one point that stood out to me out of all the reading is the point made in the Wells article. The point that is made is that Folklorist has a dichotomous decision of whether to disregard all that they stand by so that they can continue and have the resources to practice their profession or they can stand by what they believe in but not be able to practice and have limited access to the “folk” whose culture they are trying to preserve.

Wells defines the folk to be as a “defining or identifying groups of people.” The Elliott Oring continues on this idea and goes further on saying that folk is “a people of a particular, and often marginalized, social class, occupation, religion, or ethnicity.” And folklorists’ main objective is to take the culture of these people and help preserve it being that many of these cultures are oral cultures. They are also meant to serve as a liaison between the community of focus and the larger community (like Kerr was for Zambia to the Chewa people ( 208, Oring). In this they “must put the welfare of traditional practitioners before considerations of sponsorship or dissemination of results.” However where are these folklorist going to get the money. Many sponsors private or from corporations and organizations usually have a second agenda in mind. Wells states that at least 50 percent of folklorists’ are working with the public. But what happened to the other 50 percent. Not all of the organizations are just giving out money just for the furtherance of a certain society. And Wells recognizes this by saying that “Working with organizations that espouse this philosophy can undermine or invalidate tradition cultures or tradition bearers”. The Philosophy she is talking about is the philosopher of marketing where the consumer is most important. These organizations will taint these societies and try to fashion their ways to fit their own. And this is essentially for their profit and not the communities. Wells say that Folklorist must put the wants of the group before these organizations but what if the folklorist is mistaken and then after the group is taken advantage of because of the information that they produced for the larger public?

My question is do these people sue? And who is going to take care of it for them Folklorists’ leave them vulnerable after documenting their ways. Wells states that they are required to tell the people all of their objectives and what they plan to do before they get there (folklorists should be honest about their qualifications, capabilities, and aims, prior to entering into any commitment) but what if that is not enough? Who are they going to sue? The company? But in suing aren’t they taking on the ways of the popular culture which in return causes more damage to their culture than intended. So what is a folklorist to do in this predicament? I assume this is why Wells calls folklorist the “red-headed step child.”

Another question I have is that where do folklorists get the funds to have these exhibits and to teach these k-12 classes with things like budget cuts and second hand knowledge about that rural people that they are portraying in these exhibits and classes. They many times have no funds to go and study people for themselves unless it is their own people.