Re-inventing Tradition: Rhenish Carnival and Cultures of Emotion over the Longue Durée

虽然在最近的过去，许多学术研究都研究了传统的发明过程，但对本研究所称的“传统的再发明”的研究却很少——在多代人的过程中，仪式传统的连续形式具有新的意义。该项目通过对狂欢节传统的漫长历史的研究来探讨这个话题。以莱茵兰为例，通过情感历史的视角审视狂欢节，该项目挖掘了从16世纪到19世纪传统意义的彻底重新发明，并探索了其意义变化的途径。在对传统的重新发明进行探索的同时，该项目还将利用狂欢节的历史来研究人们对公共庆祝活动的态度的变化。这样做，它将有助于填补围绕“积极”情绪研究的情感史上一个持续存在的空白。虽然对狂欢节的研究通常着眼于较短的历史时期，以揭示政治和社会秩序，但长期的研究范围揭示了几代人对其意义的深刻重新创造。在整个中世纪晚期，狂欢节被广泛地理解为地狱王国的代表，由世俗的享乐、幸灾乐祸和暴力表演所定义。狂欢节的小丑以折磨基督的人的形象出现，中世纪的传统代表了人类堕落的状态，在圣灰星期三，狂欢节结束，四旬斋斋戒开始。然而，许多证据表明，到19世纪，狂欢节有了新的含义。虽然狂欢节的小丑已经变成了“快乐的胜利者”，但庆祝者们并不把狂欢节的快乐描述为人类堕落状态的代表，而是一种积极的、社会性的、治愈性的和社区形成的情感，它补偿了个人对工业生产的负担。现代狂欢节同时也代表了一个争论的场所，争论的焦点是旺盛的快乐，追求快乐的适当手段，以及这种情感与社会阶级、政治、道德和公共秩序的关系。该项目将解决一系列问题：是什么让嘉年华如此可再造？这对它的生存有何贡献？这些变化是通过代际滑动、遗忘或有意修改其含义而发生的吗？这些变化到底是什么时候发生的，它们告诉我们关于公共庆祝作为一种情感实践的不断发展的想法是什么？狂欢节的庆祝者什么时候开始将狂欢节的情绪描述为治愈，什么时候他们拒绝将幸灾乐祸作为适当的狂欢节情绪？最后，传统的情感历史唤起了对现代性理论的质疑，现代性理论是由对情感控制日益增长的需求所定义的。狂欢节的情感史是支持还是质疑这一理论？该项目的研究结果对最近参与“保护”各种形式非物质文化遗产的公共机构特别有用。虽然嘉年华传统已被列入非物质遗产名录，但该项目呼吁人们更多地关注这种形式的遗产的意义是如何变化的。如果不了解这些转型的历史，就会加大以保护的名义关闭再造之路的风险。该项目的研究成果将通过学术和大众渠道传播，包括通过特别的博物馆展览、专著和期刊文章。在项目框架内，我还将与法兰克福大学的合作伙伴共同组织一个关于狂欢节历史的国际研讨会。研讨会将根据国家背景和时期，弥合狂欢节研究的分歧，并将出版一本书，探讨突破这些障碍所带来的可能性。

While much scholarship has examined processes of invention of tradition in the recent past, less work has been done on what this study refers to as the "re-invention of tradition"- processes by which continuous forms of ritual tradition take on new meanings over the course of multiple generations. The project takes up this topic through a study of the longue durée history of the Carnival tradition. Looking at the case of the Rhineland and examining Carnival through the lens of the history of emotions, the project excavates the radical re-invention of the tradition's perceived meaning from the sixteenth to the nineteenth century and explores the routes through which its meaning changed. While promoting a new line of inquiry into the re-invention of tradition, the project will also use a history of Carnival to examine changing attitudes towards communal celebration as an emotional practice. In doing so, it will help fill a persistent gap in the history of emotions around studies of "positive" emotions.While studies of Carnival have typically looked at shorter periods of its history to shed light on politics and social orders, a longue durée purview reveals the profound re-invention of its meaning over generations. Throughout the Late Middle Ages, Carnival was broadly understood as a representation of the Kingdom of Hell defined by worldly pleasure-seeking, Schadenfreude, and violent displays. The Carnival jester appeared as the torturer of Christ, with the medieval tradition representing the fallen state of man to be overcome on Ash Wednesday when Carnival ends and the fasting of Lent begins. Much evidence, however, suggests that Carnival had taken on very new meanings by the nineteenth century. While the Carnival jester had been transformed into the "happy victor," celebrants described Carnival joy not as representing the fallen state of man, but rather as a positive, social, healing, and community-forming emotion which compensated individuals for the burdens of industrial production. Modern Carnival simultaneously represented a site of debate over exuberant joy, the proper means of its pursuit, and the relationship of the emotion to social class, politics, morality, and public order. The project will address a series of questions: What made Carnival so re-inventable and how did this contribute to its survival? Did these changes occur through intergenerational slippage and forgetting or intentional efforts to revise its meaning? When, exactly, did these changes occur and what do they tell us about evolving ideas about communal celebration as an emotional practice? When did Carnival celebrants begin to describe the emotions of Carnival as healing and when did they reject Schadenfreude as an appropriate Carnival emotion? The emotional history of the tradition, finally, evokes questions about theories of modernity as defined by growing demands for emotional control. Does an emotional history of Carnival support or problematize this theory? The project findings will particularly be useful for public bodies involved in recent efforts to "safeguard" forms of intangible cultural heritage. While Carnival traditions have been included in ICH lists, this project calls for greater attention to how meanings of such forms of heritage have changed. Failure to understand these histories of transformation magnifies the risk of closing off routes of re-invention in the name of preservation. The project findings will be disseminated through academic and popular channels, including through a special museum exhibition, monograph, and journal articles. In the framework of the project, I will also co-organize an international workshop on the history of Carnival with partners at the University of Frankfurt. The workshop will bridge across divisions in the study of Carnival based on national context and time period and will result in an edited volume which explores the possibilities opened up by breaking through these barriers.