Folklore Traditions in Contemporary Everyday Life: Between Continuity and (Re)construction (based on two examples from the Czech Republic)

Rok, strany: 2014, 163 - 181

Nowadays, ethnology can hardly assert that folklore traditions are only a phenomenon that lives independently in villages as a part of the everyday life of the local inhabitants. The role of folklore, even of that documented in different collections largely, has essentially changed alongside the transformation of the society, the approachment between villages and town ways of life and the beginning expressions of mass culture. Some expressions have remained a continual part of everyday culture as a residue, some have been transmitted into new environments and contexts, some have been reconstructed, and others significantly stylized or reduced. They were and are a source of inspirations and modern expressions that in many respects take over the functions similar to the original ones. How should we understand folklore traditions in the 21st century and analyse them? The study based on field research dealing with two distinctive expressions (the male solo dance verbuňk and male folklore choirs in the Slovácko region) tries to answer this question. Contemporary Czech ethnology classifies both expressions as so-called ethno-cultural traditions. The chosen field probes capture the present situation in one of the folklorically most distinct ethnographic areas in the Czech Republic, documenting the wealth and diversity of the folklore tradition that just pretend to be continual in many cases - at least it looks like this on the surface.

ISO 690:

Pavlicová, M., Uhlíková, L. 2014. Folklore Traditions in Contemporary Everyday Life: Between Continuity and (Re)construction (based on two examples from the Czech Republic). In Slovenský národopis / Slovak Ethnology, vol. 62, no.2, pp. 163-181. 1339-9357.

APA:

Pavlicová, M., Uhlíková, L. (2014). Folklore Traditions in Contemporary Everyday Life: Between Continuity and (Re)construction (based on two examples from the Czech Republic). Slovenský národopis / Slovak Ethnology, 62(2), 163-181. 1339-9357.