oh, ethnographers
22 Feb 2011 09:07 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
kaigouTalking just now with CP on a paper idea of his, and (as we frequently do) we ended up tangenting along until we ended up on a discussion of whether there are/were significant non-named/generic non-human critters in folklore from any of the African countries.
When I was researching for stories of my own, one thing that bothered me to no end was the overwhelming amount of material available on European (especially British and North European) folklore creatures... and the absolute dearth on just about anywhere else other than maybe Japan and Russia (and a smattering from India). Elsewhere, sure, you could find plenty of stories about named characters -- i.e. Anansi, Coyote, Baba Yaga -- where there's an entire body of legends about the character's exploits. But those legends also presuppose that there's only one, even if that one shows up everywhere at any time. What I was looking for was generics or categories, like the Indian naga, or the Korean gumiho, or the Welsh redcap, and having no luck.
A few times, in articles from/about -- I think it was Mozambique, South Africa, and... I want to say one of the western coastal countries, but I don't think it was Cote D'Ivoire proper -- there would be random passing reference. Then the interveiwee (or translating author/ethnographer) would keep going, into some story of another named legend. No, no, back up, I wanted to say, but it was clear that someone -- whether the interviewee, or the interviewer -- didn't consider these incidental unnamed category-creatures to be worth more explanation.
This is entirely my speculation, but it's possible that it's the ethnographer only wanting a 'body' of stories, instead of snippets here and there -- little stories, if you will. And it's also possible that it's the interviewee (as CP suggested) not wanting to seem too backwards, so preferring to tell legend-type stories, where there's a running narrative. Instead of, y'know, talking about the bogeyman.
But I wonder if it's also possible that in telling the little stories, that there's a self-censorship at play because of the self-consciousness of the telling. Like, for instance, choosing not to repeat the stories of Santa Claus, because you stopped being fooled by that story when you were eight -- even if ten minutes after the interviewer leaves, you're reprimanding your own children about the fact that if they don't behave, Santa will leave coals in their stockings.
Besides, it's my firm belief that if there's one universal aspect to parenting, it's that all parents have a bogeyman at their command. And if you don't behave, that bogeyman -- whatever his or her name, age, rank, appearance, or living quarters -- will come get you.
Or maybe it's just that bogeymen are universal.
ETA: If you do know of beastiary [yokaiography, demonography, list-of-nonhumans, etc] books that recount the folklore of 'generic' (unnamed) non-human types, from cultures other than EU/CEE (which I already have in spades), please do tell.
When I was researching for stories of my own, one thing that bothered me to no end was the overwhelming amount of material available on European (especially British and North European) folklore creatures... and the absolute dearth on just about anywhere else other than maybe Japan and Russia (and a smattering from India). Elsewhere, sure, you could find plenty of stories about named characters -- i.e. Anansi, Coyote, Baba Yaga -- where there's an entire body of legends about the character's exploits. But those legends also presuppose that there's only one, even if that one shows up everywhere at any time. What I was looking for was generics or categories, like the Indian naga, or the Korean gumiho, or the Welsh redcap, and having no luck.
A few times, in articles from/about -- I think it was Mozambique, South Africa, and... I want to say one of the western coastal countries, but I don't think it was Cote D'Ivoire proper -- there would be random passing reference. Then the interveiwee (or translating author/ethnographer) would keep going, into some story of another named legend. No, no, back up, I wanted to say, but it was clear that someone -- whether the interviewee, or the interviewer -- didn't consider these incidental unnamed category-creatures to be worth more explanation.
This is entirely my speculation, but it's possible that it's the ethnographer only wanting a 'body' of stories, instead of snippets here and there -- little stories, if you will. And it's also possible that it's the interviewee (as CP suggested) not wanting to seem too backwards, so preferring to tell legend-type stories, where there's a running narrative. Instead of, y'know, talking about the bogeyman.
But I wonder if it's also possible that in telling the little stories, that there's a self-censorship at play because of the self-consciousness of the telling. Like, for instance, choosing not to repeat the stories of Santa Claus, because you stopped being fooled by that story when you were eight -- even if ten minutes after the interviewer leaves, you're reprimanding your own children about the fact that if they don't behave, Santa will leave coals in their stockings.
Besides, it's my firm belief that if there's one universal aspect to parenting, it's that all parents have a bogeyman at their command. And if you don't behave, that bogeyman -- whatever his or her name, age, rank, appearance, or living quarters -- will come get you.
Or maybe it's just that bogeymen are universal.
ETA: If you do know of beastiary [yokaiography, demonography, list-of-nonhumans, etc] books that recount the folklore of 'generic' (unnamed) non-human types, from cultures other than EU/CEE (which I already have in spades), please do tell.
no subject
Date: 23 Feb 2011 09:24 am (UTC)Are you after any non-human creatures, or just non-existing creatures, though? It's not clear to me whether things like Japanese foxes count for you, or whether the creature has to be non-real, like a unicorn.
If you're OK with actual animals, then, for example, 'Maori Bird Lore' isn't bad on this front (by Murdoch Riley). It's not looking just at the roles of the native birds (New Zealand has native frogs, arthropods, molluscs, lizards, birds, and bats, but no other native land animals) in stories, but also in other types of folk lore, but it definitely gives their roles in stories, and they're frequently not Fantail and Kereru but are rather 'a fantail' and 'a kereru'.
Stuart Gordon: An Encyclopedia of Mythology. This might have some starting places for you, at least.
Here are a bunch of quotes to give you some idea. There's very little detail, unlike the Maori birds book, but it's got some entries that suggest places to start digging for more info. (Stuff in quotes is quotes from this book. The rest is mine.)
'the Masai say the souls of the dead may reincarnate in certain snakes, which must not be killed.' p12
'the angatch of Madagascar' -- a evil spirit p12
'in some trees, like the Kenyan baobab, whole families of spirits are thought to live' p12
'Spirits also inhabit asuman, talismen of beads or horn' p12
'The Hottentots of the southern deserts speak of odd man-eating monsters, the Aiamuxa, who with eyes on their instep have to get down on hands and knees and hold up one foot to see.' p12
'Sacred pythons were fed on milk in a special temple.' by the Bunyoro of Uganda p75
Copper Woman was lonely, 'But one day several magic women came and taught her how to improve her life.' (I have no idea what 'magic women' are, but they seem to be a particular type of spirit in Native American culture of the Pacific Northwest from this story. p104
'The Tupi believed in many spirits and demons: Yurupari, haunting empty houses, burial sites, and the Amazon jungle; Kurupira, a jungle imp who protected game but disliked men; the man-killing Igpupiara; the Apoiaueue who brought rain when it was needed and who like angels told God what happens on earth.' South American, p437.
I did think of some of the Australian stuff I've read, but all the Dreamtime stories have named animals acting as representatives of their species. The other ones are just kinda freaky. I've never quite gotten over the story about the old-woman-demon who steals the girls to make bread.
no subject
Date: 23 Feb 2011 04:30 pm (UTC)That's exactly what I mean by paltry -- which snakes? Is it a particular marking only on some snakes, or where the snakes are found, or a specific species of snake, or do you know because of certain behaviors the snakes display? These are questions I don't find ethnographers asking (or, if the questions were answered, a lot of what I've read just doesn't mention it, so I can't tell whether it was left out, or never discussed in the first place).
Those books are definitely going on my to-get list. Thank you!
no subject
Date: 24 Feb 2011 01:57 am (UTC)I'd go for getting it from a library rather than buying it, if that's possible. It's a pretty generic encyclopedia, but with a few 'odd' entries (modern urban legends) as well as the usual Greco-Roman/Viking ones.
The Maori book looks to me to be likely to have rather more of the sort of thing you're after.
Maori / Polynesian entities of similar types to unicorns and boggarts that I can think of off-hand are:
* tuna (pronounced 'toona', not 'tyoona' (means eels) -- generally human-intelligent and often marrying women) (Maori and other Polynesian)
* taniwha (Maori only -- although other Polynesian cultures seem to use sharks for similar stories)
* the Patu Paiarehe (red-haired fairies from the Urewera area).
Named or unique entities:
* the woman in the moon (Rona)
* the bird woman from 'Hatupatu and the Bird Woman'