Public folklore dialogism and critical heritage studies
Public folklore dialogism and critical heritage studies
复制标题
公共民俗对话与批判遗产研究
DOI：
10.1080/13527258.2016.1150320
复制
发表时间：
2016
影响因子：
1.8
通讯作者：
R. Baron
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
R. Baron
摘要公共民间文学与社区的对话接触包括分享代表性和解释性权威、协作方案开发、共同构建的呈现模式和利益攸关方参与决策的方法。在认识到遗产干预不可避免地涉及权力不对称的同时，公共民俗寻求缓解和消除这些不平衡，因为它开发了使社区能够以自己的方式展示其文化的方法。本文通过社区自我记录项目、民间艺术节、政府民间艺术资助项目和一个促进具有地方文化意义的地方的项目，探索对话式的公共民俗实践。它提供了公共民俗学家作为学者、行政人员、民俗介绍的制作人和政府遗产官员的多种角色相结合的例子。通过整合这些角色实现的公共民俗实践被视为作为非物质文化遗产(ICH)倡议顾问和研究人员的学者的重要遗产研究实践的潜在模式。参与非物质文化遗产的重要遗产学者可以从公共民俗学家如何与社区接触和促进文化自决中学习。对于公共民俗学家来说，与重要遗产学者的合作和加强对话可以提高对霸权话语的认识，重新定义非物质文化遗产的社会基础，并认识到通过遗产促进经济发展的陷阱。
Abstract Public folklore’s dialogic engagement with communities incorporates methodologies for sharing representational and interpretive authority, collaborative programme development, mutually constructed modes of presentation and stakeholder participation in policy-making. While recognising that heritage interventions inevitably involve power asymmetries, public folklore seeks to mitigate and diminish these imbalances as it develops approaches to enable communities to present their culture on their own terms. This paper explores dialogic public folklore practice through community self-documentation projects, folklife festivals, government folk arts funding programmes and a project promoting places of local cultural significance. It provides examples of the integration of multiple roles of public folklorists as scholars, administrators, producers of folklore presentations and government heritage officers. Public folklore praxis achieved through the integration of these roles is seen as a potential model for critical heritage studies praxis for scholars who are advisors and researchers in intangible cultural heritage (ICH) initiatives. Critical heritage scholars involved with ICH can learn from how public folklorists engage with communities and foster cultural self-determination. For public folklorists, collaboration and increased dialogue with critical heritage scholars could foster greater awareness of hegemonic discourses, reconceptualisation of the social base of ICH and recognition of the pitfalls of fostering economic development through heritage.