Moving From Place to Place One Is Likely to Observe Folk Art

Folk and traditional arts are rooted in and cogitating of the cultural life of a community

Folk and traditional arts are rooted in and reflective of the cultural life of a community. They embrace the body of expressive civilisation associated with the fields of folklore and cultural heritage. Tangible folk art includes historic objects which are crafted and used within a traditional community. Intangible folk arts include forms such every bit music, dance and narrative structures. Tangible and intangible folk arts were developed to address a need, and are shaped by generational values derived from family and community, through demonstration, chat and practice.

Tangible and intangible artefacts are used past historians to understand the significance of cultural forms in the historical customs. This is done through studying their cosmos, transmission and performance which display the community's values and construction.

Terminology [edit]

The combination of "folk" and "art" have been discussed extensively in literature to articulate meaning and delineate from other art genres.

Defining 'Folk' [edit]

The social identity of 'folk' emerged in the belatedly 19th century in rural populaces that were subject to greater poverty and lower literacy rates. This social identity somewhen broadened to correspond the underclass of modern society due to the rising in popularity of Marxist theory in the academic world, which began to identify both the rural and urban poor as allied subjects of economic inequality.^[1]

In the 20th century the growth of the social sciences contributed to an expanded definition of 'folk'. By the 1960's, 'folk' groups grew to encompass multiple cultural subgroups, where whatsoever individual could vest to multiple 'folk' groups. The first of these groups is 1's family, which has its own unique family unit folklore. Eventually, various forms of identity such equally age, language, ethnicity and occupation developed separate 'Folk' groups. Thus, information technology is understood that folklore develops from shared identity in whatever social group.^[2] As pointed out by Alan Dundes, "decades of fieldwork have demonstrated that these groups exercise accept their ain sociology."^[i]

'Sociology' can include jokes, sayings and sure behaviors, e'er transmitted in an informal mode. It is primarily learned by observation, imitation, repetition or correction past other grouping members. This informal knowledge is used to ostend and re-enforce the identity of the group. It can be used both internally within the group to limited their common identity, for instance in an initiation anniversary for new members, or information technology can be used externally to differentiate the group from outsiders, like a folkdance demonstration at a community festival. Significant to folklorists here is that there are two opposing but equally valid ways to utilise this in the study of a group: you can start with an identified grouping in social club to explore its folklore, or y'all can identify folklore items and utilize them to identify the social grouping.^{[iii] [note 1]}

Even as the identification of folk groups spreads to all areas of our lives, the grouping most unremarkably associated with folk art involves the geographic location of a community. The fine art and artifacts from unlike communities and different regions are dissimilar; the origin of an individual pieces tin can frequently be recognized by its shape, patterns, and decorations. The "representative art of such societies is not created by its deviants and misfits… but by normal, intelligent, well-adapted citizens who care deeply about their history and identity. Folk art comes mostly from the central values of a society rather than its fringe elements…"^[4] All of these objects are office of the commonage identity of a customs, who claim them every bit their own.

Defining 'Art' [edit]

During the Heart Ages in Europe, a high proportion of surviving objects, including statues, paintings, drawings, and edifice arts were directly tied to the messaging and stories of the Roman Catholic church and individual conservancy; they were created to the celebrity of God.

"People did non consider things that were created as ways of individual expression; creators simply worked with words or physical materials to construct products that reflected the divine lodge inherent in all worldly things. … All objects had practical aims; all that was made moved humans toward their quest for salvation. Artisans, by definition, were those who skillfully produced cultural products. The original meaning of the give-and-take fine art, so, was quite clear: it practical to any kind of skill."^{[5] [vi]}

Prior to1500 AD, all material artifacts were created by hand by individual artisans, each of whom was more or less skilled in his or her craft.

With the beginning of the early modernistic period in the 16th century, a new concept and vocabulary of art and fine art were invented inside the western intellectual tradition. During the centuries spanning the tardily 15th to the tardily 18th century the emerging center class in Europe came into their ain and sought ways to brandish their newly minted wealth and power. They began to collect paintings and statues, and to commission new works such as personal portraits. In tandem with these new consumers of fine art, some few individual artisans were recognized equally being infrequent, going on to go the corking artists in the flow of Renaissance fine art. In the parlance of this new age, these artisans were said to display private personal inspiration in their work instead of an exceptional mastery of the age-old practices of their craft. Their works became known every bit works of art as opposed to the multitude of beautifully crafted objects created during the Heart ages. Fine art became sectional, created by gifted individuals for the limited few.^[5]

As function of this new market of art for European monied elites, another stardom was introduced between objects which were functional and objects whose simply purpose was to create pleasure, i.eastward. to be artful. The ideas of the Middle Ages were abandoned, in which no distinction was fabricated betwixt the practical and the beautiful in the evaluation of crafted products by either the artisan or the consumer. Replacing them were the ideals of the Renaissance, in which the idea of art as purely artful, lacking any practical purpose, gained credence. This distinction gave rise to the dichotomy of art vs. craft: art was reserved for the elites, everything utilitarian was consigned to the much larger group of functional objects, which were not considered art.^[seven]

This same early modern period also marked an increasing awareness in Europe that there were other lands and other peoples whose traditions were not European. Christopher Columbus ready canvass, every bit ane of the outset during the historic period of discovery and the concomitant globalization of earth history. In the words of Gerald Pocius, Europeans discovered the "other" at this fourth dimension. These "others" lived somewhere else, in cultures that appeared more than cohesive than the contemporary cultures of Europe; their lifestyles seemed integrated and meaningful.^[vii] Their textile culture was also very dissimilar than the artifacts mutual in Europe. These foreign objects were intriguing to the Europeans, even so they did not fit in the newly divers genres of "art" and "fine art", which were for the most office confined to painting and sculpture. To go around this, the artifacts of the "other" were labeled equally "folk art" or "primitive art", differentiated from the European aristocracy creations, which were "genuine fine art".^[viii] These new labels connoted a qualitatively inferior object, the supposition was that they were of a lesser quality than the newly defined European fine arts.

With these new labels introduced during the early on modern historic period, the European ideas of "fine art" and "fine fine art" became entrenched, specifically by exclusion of most of the material culture that surrounds usa. The truly inspired work of an "artist", for the nearly part working in the media of either painting or sculpture, was qualitatively different and more than than the exceptional objects produced in Europe by a main craftsman. All utilitarian objects were no longer counted equally art; they were of an inferior nature, produced by craftsmen and artisans for the customs every bit a whole. "Folk" or "primitive artifacts" produced in other lands by other cultures, every bit defined by the European Renaissance, were too qualitatively different and less than the works of art produced by European masters. Henry Glassie, a distinguished folklorist studying technology in cultural context, notes that in Turkish one word, sanat, refers to all objects, not distinguishing between art and arts and crafts. The latter stardom, Glassie emphasizes, is not based on medium but on social form.^[9] Simon Bronner takes this further. "… if the folk art object in the artful view is not social and cultural, then what is it? Information technology is a thinly veiled commodity… It is a cultural statement by its owners rather than by its makers… Folk art hither is a thing of economic science, of education, and of social status."^[10] By 1800, the concept of art for the upper classes only, confined to painting and sculpture, limited to the powerful and wealthy, became the agreement in the European mindset.

The subsequent question becomes how to escape the ethnocentricity of this European concept of art. In his essay on "Art", Gerald Pocius concludes with a definition of art specifically as information technology applies to material cultural heritage for communities across the globe.

"One of the central defining characteristics, so, of the concept of art must be the criterion of skill… Skills are developed gradually past individuals; they are not caused automatically, and they are often a matter of degree … Skill manifests itself in a serial of operations that produce the cultural behaviors we consider every bit art. In succinct terms, and so, we can define art as the manifestation of a skill that involves the cosmos of a qualitative experience (oft categorized equally artful) through the manipulation of whatever forms that are public categories recognized past a item group. These bring u.s., so, to the key components of good beliefs: tradition, group, and emotion."^{[11] [note 2]}

The art of the folk is not most solitary individuals and unique items, it is almost skilled artisans living in community, who demonstrate in ane or more pieces an exceptional skill, honed over years of exercise working in their chosen medium.

Labeling [edit]

The term folk art is a category label, created inside the western intellectual tradition to draw objects outside of that tradition. The category is not derived from the object itself like the labeling of a dirt pot, which is made of clay and is functionally used as a pot. Instead it is imposed from without, by art critics and consumers who are working out of a different cultural context. In discussing "The Thought of Folk Art", Henry Glassie states the problem succinctly: "Distinctions arise when we view the art of one tradition from the perspective of another…. It's all a matter of where you stand and where you look."^[12] A set of characteristics to define the category of folk fine art has been listed above; some of these characteristics are more specific, others less so. Information technology is important to think that this is a category label that has little or no connection with the object itself; instead the connection is to the outsider'south perception of the object. Through the procedure of categorization, the effort has been fabricated "to systemize and club in an artificial and simplistic fashion that which is extremely complex, sometimes contradictory, and maybe even chaotic."^[13] Despite all attempts at categorization by fine art critics, consumers, marketeers and folklorists, the object itself remains an authentic cultural antiquity that some individual somewhere created to address a (real or perceived) demand.

Craftsmen, Artisans, and Artists [edit]

Armed with this definition, it becomes easier to clarify the related terms of craftsman, artisan, and artist. Primary craftsmen and artisans, using skills acquired over an extended period of grooming, can and do create works of art in their called medium. This would brand these craftsmen and artisans as well artists, challenging the current exclusive definition of an artist. Once this conventional aesthetic hierarchy has been eliminated^[xiv] and the component of exclusivity is removed, there is no more and no less in these three labels; craftsman, artisan, and creative person all include a high level of skill in their given media. Professionals in their respective fields, they recognize and embrace the familiar styles with which they are surrounded. While the shared grade and motifs indicates a shared culture, the artisan is costless to tease out individual elements and manipulate them to form a new permutation within the tradition. "For art to progress, its unity must exist dismantled so that certain of its aspects can exist freed for exploration, while others shrink from attention."^[15] Innovation allows the individual artisan to represent his own vision, making the creative tension between the traditional object and the craftsman visible in these exceptional objects. George Kubler addresses this issue by re-labeling them all, craftsman, artisan, creative person every bit homo faber, homo who creates.^[16]

Colloquial (mis)understanding in America [edit]

An earlier, more general agreement of folk art had been developed in America during the Colonial Revival catamenia at the get-go of the 20th century. Between the decades 1880 and 1940 as the country became an urban industrial society, Americans looked back nostalgically to their rural agricultural ancestry. All things antiquated, hand-made, quondam-fashioned came into faddy, specially by the upper classes of the East Coast. Removed from their original context of production and utility inside the local community, these objects were valued equally standalone curiosities from an earlier time in American history. Originally labeled antiques, they became re-labeled as folk art during the first decades of the 20th century by both museum professionals and art marketeers. "Folk was a market term to carve up a commodity from the fine arts above and the antiques below."^[17] This shift in terminology opened up folk art to designate anything that was other, outsider, isolate, visionary.^[eighteen]

Despite single voices disputing this inclusive labeling throughout the commencement half of the terminal century, it remained entrenched in the vocabulary of the museums and gallery owners, for all items which might more correctly be labeled as Americana. It was at the mid-point of the century, at the same time that folklore as performance began to dominate the discussions, and professionals of folkloristics and cultural history became more than selective in what they wanted to label as folk fine art. When we circumscribe the folk in folk community, then nosotros will automatically circumscribe folk art. There is still variance in the understanding of the folk arts, but for students of cultural history it becomes clear that the folk in folk art are active, committed members within a community, they are not the outliers, isolates, or visionaries on the edges.

[edit]

Listed below are a wide-ranging assortment of labels for an eclectic group of art works. All of these genres are created outside of the institutional structures of the art earth, they are not considered "fine art". There is undoubtedly overlap between these labeled collections, such that an object might be listed under two or more labels.^[xix] Many of these groupings and individual objects might also resemble "folk art" in one aspect or some other, without however meeting the defining characteristics listed to a higher place. Equally our understanding of art expands beyond the confines of the "fine arts", each of these types needs to be included in the discussion.

• Americana
• Art brut
• Folk Environments
• Genre paintings
• Naïve art
• Outlier art
• Outsider art
• Primitive art
• Tramp art
• Tribal art
• Vanguard fine art
• Vernacular art
• Visionary art

American folk artists [edit]

When folk fine art first became recognized as distinctive and valuable in its own right during the 19th century, it was the object itself that was valued. Its creation was attributed to communal processes in which the identity of the individual artist was of no consequence, lost in some nebulous collective anonymity.^[twenty] This mapped into the ideas of romantic nationalism spreading beyond the western world at the time. That said, a few early folklorists did stress the significance of the private skill and intentions of the artist. 1 of these was the Austrian Alois Riegl in his study of Volkskunst, Hausfleiss, und Hausindustrie, published 1894. Riegl recognized that the individual creative person was crucial in the process of creativity and transmission of folk art objects.^[20] Despite this early on appreciation of their work, information technology took another fifty years for folk artists to acquire the recognition they merit, no longer eclipsed past the constricted spotlight on the individual object.

By the heart of the 20th century, the shifting focus beyond all areas of the folklore studies moved toward an appreciation of sociology as homo behavior and communication; it was no longer isolated in the individual artifacts. The new vocabulary of performance and context transformed sociology into actions and redefined the task of folklorists.^[21] This dramatic shift in focus can be seen in multiple studies. Henry Glassie exhorts his readers to "Begin not with the artifacts that are precious because we covet them, but with a human beingness in the example of creation."^[22] He wants them to showtime at the beginning of the creative process, not just "nitpick" at the end result. John Vlach asks his students to consider folk fine art inside its original generative contexts, in the folk creative person and his environs, where the "cultural significance of folk art can be found".^[23]

In 1975 Michael Owen Jones published 1 of the first studies on an individual folk creative person, a chair maker of rural Kentucky. He maintains that "an object cannot be fully understood or appreciated without knowledge of the man who made it".^[24] By delving into production techniques and expressive behavior, Jones attempts to gain insight into the creative thinking of this individual. He does this by exploring a multitude of dissimilar facets involved in the chair product, including tools, materials, construction techniques, customer preference, mistakes made, the beliefs and aspirations of the chair maker, and more.^[25] Other studies of individual folk artists followed.

By the offset of the 21st century, the full depth of the creative process of the folk artist is highlighted by Wertkin in his introduction to the "Encyclopedia of American Folk Fine art"

"In fact, when the surface is scratched, the full complexity of each artist and his or her piece of work becomes apparent. Facile and narrow labels that reduce the creative spirit to a single dimension are of little significance in the long run, peculiarly when they obscure the multiplicity of intentions, ideas, meanings, influences, connections, and references inherent in every work of art. Whatsoever classification (labeling) is used, the art and artists … are essential to an agreement of the American experience in its fullness."^[19]

Individual studies [edit]

• Burrison, John; Glassie, Henry (2010). From Mud to Jug: The Folk Potters and Pottery of Northeast Georgia. Wormsloe Foundation Publication.
• Glassie, Henry (1976). Folk Housing in Centre Virginia: Structural Analysis of Historic Artifacts. Univ of Tennessee Press. ISBN9780870491733.
• Jones, Michael Owen (1975). The Handmade Object and its Maker. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California.
• Upton, Dell (1997). Holy Things and Profane: Anglican Parish Churches in Colonial Virginia. Yale University.
• Vlach, John Michael (1992). Charleston Blacksmith: The Work of Philip Simmons. Academy of Southward Carolina.

Detail of 17th century calendar stick carved with national coat of arms, a common motif in Norwegian folk art.

Workshops and Apprentices [edit]

Nineteenth century [edit]

In 1801, the villages and country sides of Due north America were littered with skilled craftsmen serving the local populace. The chief economy was rural, most people lived and worked on farms to provide shelter and food for themselves and their families. Local artisans were an exception; they had the means to make specialized products that were not easily produced on the private farmsteads. Using unproblematic, often handmade tools, manual techniques, and local materials, these craftsmen devoted more fourth dimension to their craft than they did to any patch of land they were cultivating.^[twenty] The products they made for other households became their main source of income, although the payment was oftentimes in goods instead of currency.^[26] The workshops of these craftsmen were incorporated into the family homestead. Information technology ofttimes became a social center in the village, a coming together place to hear and exchange news.^[27]

Folk artisans were trained in their trade in one of several ways, including through family lines where a parent would pass knowledge and tools onto their children to go on working in the skilled craft. This training would occur in a natural setting; children would be pulled into tasks in the workshop as they grew into them. Growing children were considered an economic resources for any family. Another way to learn a specialized skill was in an apprenticeship. A young person would become a trainee in a workshop of a local artisan to learn the trade and have a profession with which to earn a living. This was an selection for young people who did non want to farm, or for children in large families where the arable land was not enough to feed a new generation of family members.

Towns in 1801 offered a larger diversity of options for residents to learn goods. Alongside the artisans, there were also shops which sold imported products. These were for the almost part handcrafted objects, considering industrial manufacturing had only reached a few industries in 1801: weaving and textiles, iron founding, and steam ability. Some few artisans whose customers were the economically elite were only located in the towns and cities; these were the goldsmiths, silversmiths and glassblowers.

Twentieth century [edit]

In 1901, the Industrial Revolution created mass migration to cities for people to work in factories. People began going to work at a location exterior of the dwelling house, or stayed at dwelling house and did piece work for later associates by someone else. Rural populations involved in agriculture decreased as the numbers of urban working poor grew.

The continued influx of immigrants into Northward America included many skilled artisans, who brought the tools and traditions of their handicrafts with them. These master craftsmen looked for opportunities in their new country to use these skills, train apprentices and banner their new communities with folk objects from their European heritage. In 1932 Allen H. Eaton, published a book "Immigrant Gifts to American Life" which showcased the arts and skills of foreigners at the Buffalo Exhibition.^[28] Eaton pays tribute to the gifts of the new Americans in his frontward. "[The immigrant] has brought to his newly chosen country, … treasures in the form of beautiful skills and crafts. By this approach his gifts were gladly received and cherished in the promise that their roots might strike deeply into the new soil to which they were beingness transplanted."^[29]

For the skilled craftsmen, a powerful competitor had entered the field. By 1901, the mail order itemize of Sears & Roebuck was running a very successful mail order business across the U.s.a.. As roads became better and canal systems were expanded, the toll of these manufactured products continued to drop. Their catalog of over 500 pages of products reached into all corners of rural America offering manufactured items of identical quality and set cost; more and more people bought manufactured goods delivered through the mail instead of 1-offs from the local artisan.^[30] Consumers learned to value identical products, manufactured by machines without the private postage stamp of the local workshop. The rural artisan making single orders on demand, and the local general shop could no longer compete. Many of the handicrafts began to die out with a failing demand, and the workshops that were left "ceased existence a maker and became a repairer of manufactured objects."^[27]

Information technology was during the decades around the turn into the 20th century in households that had moved into the cities that the roles of men and women became more sharply delineated. As the men went off to work, the women were left to tend to the home and the children.^[31] The girls stayed closer; it was easier to school them in domestic handicrafts. The boys were expected to follow their fathers into the manufacturing plant or the mine. The women that did get to piece of work in the factories were valued for their power to do "delicate" precision work with their smaller hands and attention to detail.^[32]

The only place where the traditional role of the local artisan and workshop of the previous century continued was in airtight social religious communities which do non use 20th century technology, such as the Amish and Mennonites. The artisans in these communities keep to make the manus tools needed to maintain their rural lifestyle, and too to find or invent acceptable technical ways to bridge the gap between themselves and the modern world which surrounds them.

Twenty-start century [edit]

By 2001 a significant cultural shift had occurred in Western culture with increasing emphasis on individuality and originality, not tradition. For example, Sears & Roebuck had been replaced by shopping malls, then replaced with Amazon. The learning and didactics of many crafts has moved out of the hamlet and into contemporary systems of formalized preparation. Some European countries go along to incorporate apprenticeship positions in their schooling while others have abased this arroyo for extended schooling in technical and applied arts schools with specialized equipment.

Folk objects are equanimous of natural materials, crafting them will e'er be a hands-on result. The students, under direction of master craftsmen, larn the divergence in touch and feel of the raw substance. "The conversion from natural object to artifact is accomplished with skill and time. … We can study the procedure of cosmos in distinctive stages considering the process is deliberate ….the maker commonly controls the steps of product from start to terminate."^[33] The goal is to learn what has worked before for the materials, the artisan, and the consumer. In the workshop, students have the opportunity to practice and perfect the skills necessary for their craft. These skills are not learned in isolation, in that location must be an experienced craftsman involved in the learning process. Along with the manual and pattern skills taught and learned in the school, the students also acquire to run a successful pocket-sized business organization.^[34] In the transmission of these skills in technical schools, one could argue that the folk community has been lost, or that the community has re-divers itself for the 21st century.

Further, in 1901 consumers preferred products mass-manufactured in new factories, that all looked and worked the aforementioned. By 2001, the unique, manus crafted item had become more desirable due to the pervasiveness of mill-made utensils and items of daily apply. Whereas hand-crafted utensils used to be more prevalent, the products of an artisan are at present more desireable, in less supply and therefore more than expensive. 21st century demands may be summarised past the following- the "hand-fabricated item has, for many purchasers, a prestige or glamour that factory-produced items cannot friction match."^[35]

A third major shift in the folk crafts in the 21st century is that many traditional crafts have get dwelling hobbies for many, regardless of their community of origin. As the century progresses farther into electronics and mind work, the value of handicrafts, i.e. working with your easily, comes to the forefront in discussions on health and well-beingness. In this activity the artisan moves into a dissimilar mental zone, absorbed in something outside of himself, separate and singled-out from the rational mindset of most of our waking hours. A quilter in Ohio says "If I desire to unwind, I option upward my quilt. It's pleasance, it's leisure. It's something I do for me…"^[36] These skills tin can be learned in a classroom, but more commonly they are taught and learned on-line, where the pool of engaged students extends globe-wide. These new novice students need tools and materials which master craftsmen can now package and supply, opening an of import new market place for their expertise.

This presents a meaning trouble for the written report of folk art objects. The crafts are age-onetime and traditional, the tools and methods are also pre-industrial, however the community is new, and is rapidly becoming a global community. The valuation of these new folk hobbyists by professionals of cultural heritage varies. Warren Roberts says they lack tradition. "While crafts pursued equally hobbies testify to the vitality of the crafts and to the important social office…the chemical element of tradition is largely defective when designs and techniques are learned mainly from books, so that we would not be justified in considering hobbies as folk crafts."^[37] In his essay on "Folk Objects", Bronner describes much of this handicraft "as a commentary on contemporary industrial society. The [objects] speak for handwrought, personal, and rural values equally against the auto-wrought uniformities of factory product."^[38] In the introduction to "Folk Art and Art Worlds", the cultural values embedded in folk art are highlighted. Many regional exhibitions "typically focus on living traditions and present folk art every bit a creative expression that signifies ethnic, regional, religious, familial or occupational identity."^[39] Perhaps the problem does non prevarication in the objects themselves but rather in our definitions of folk, tradition and customs.

Materials, forms, and crafts [edit]

The list below includes a sampling of different materials, forms, and artisans involved in the production of everyday and folk art objects.^[40]

• Alebrije
• Armourer
• Basketry
• Bellmaker
• Blacksmith
• Gunkhole building
• Brickmaker
• Broommaker
• Cabinetry
• Carpentry
• Carpentry
• Ceramics
• Chillum
• Clockmaker
• Cooper
• Coppersmith
• Cutler
• Drystone Stonemason
• Ex-voto
• Farrier
• Foodways
• Fraktur
• Furniture
• Gunsmith
• Harness maker
• Ironwork
• Jewelry
• Kuthiyottam
• Latin American Retablos
• Leather crafting
• Lei (garland)
• Ljuskrona
• Locksmith
• Lubok
• Madhubani painting
• Masonry
• Metalworking
• Millwright
• Miniatures or Models
• Nakshi Kantha
• Needlework
• Painting
• Pakistani vehicle art
• Pewterer
• Phad painting
• Quilting
• Recycled materials
• Ropemaker
• Saddler
• Sawsmith
• Sculpture
• Shoemaker
• Spooner
• Stonemason
• Tanner
• Textiles
• Thatcher
• Tile maker
• Tinker
• Tinsmith
• Tools
• Toys
• Treenware
• Turning
• Vernacular architecture
• Wainwright
• Weaver
• Wheelwright
• Whirligig
• Wood carving

[edit]

Simon Bronner'south essay "Folk Objects" discusses the assortment of objects created within traditional cultures, of which folk art objects are a subset of. There is a lack of consensus around what makes individual objects stand up out as 'art'.^[41]

Considering of their standard form, folk objects are recognized as familiar inside the community. Like objects can be constitute either in the gimmicky or the historical surroundings; the main features that accept fabricated it a 'useful' object remain stable. Individual pieces of folk art will ever reference other works in the culture, even every bit they display variations in some attribute of the form or design. To express this in the negative, if antecedents for this object cannot exist constitute in the community, it might all the same be a piece of fine art, simply it is not folk art. Replication is besides the goal of the folk artist. He or she does not strive for innovation, just instead wants to create an object that resembles an existing object, to indistinguishable the known 'proficient' style of the customs.^[42] Existence part of the community, the craftsman is well aware of the community aesthetics, and how members of the local culture will answer to the piece of work. They strive to create an object which matches community expectations, working within (mostly) unspoken cultural biases to confirm and strengthen the existing model.^{[43] [note iii]}

With a defined form and measurable standards, these objects can so exist sorted in a series through time and space. "An object'due south power to exist measured allows for the expression of repetition and variation in exact and comparable units. Measurement helps us describe standards of form within a civilization."^[44] How did the usage and shape change over generations? Tin these same forms exist found in other regions?^{[annotation 4]} This enables the study of these forms using the Historical-Geographical method of folklore studies. The progressive transformations of the known class can be tracked every bit the grade is simplified, enriched, improved in its utility.^{[45] [46]}

A series of folk objects in a given class also tracks changes in the pattern, symmetry and ornamentation introduced by dissimilar artisans working with this form. No two hand-crafted items are identical. While the shared form indicates a shared culture, deviations in the course give voice to an individual artisan. The craftsmen creating these folk objects are not unknown; even without their names, they have frequently left an private postage stamp on their work. Sometimes these deviations in the product are unintentional, just role of the procedure. But sometimes these deviations are intentional; the artisan wants to play with the boundaries of expectation and add their own creative bear on. They perform inside the tension of conserving the recognized grade and adding innovation. The folklorist Barre Toelken identifies this tension as "... a combination of both irresolute ("dynamic") and static ("conservative") elements that evolve and change through sharing, advice and functioning."^[47] Over time, the cultural context within the customs shifts and morphs: new leaders, new technologies, new values, new awareness. Gerald Pocius uses different words to articulate this miracle. "Fine art manipulates traditions rather than existence constrained past them. Art involves cosmos. And all creation is partly culturally based. Artists live in a item time period and in a particular place. Thus creation never occurs completely in a vacuum; it must involve choice of techniques, every bit well as content, that are all culturally influenced and learned…. Art involves the relation between "individual inventiveness and the commonage guild,"^[48] In its most basic class, creativity is memories reconfigured. For folk fine art objects, the coaction between tradition and individual innovation is much more visible than in other forms of folklore performance.

Utility of the object [edit]

A book on the history of art was published in 1962: The Shape of Time: Remarks on the History of Things. Written by George Kubler, a scholar of pre-Columbian fine art and architecture of middle and South America, the book abandons the concepts of "artistic fashion" to identify all fine art, and in fact all homo artifacts, on a continuum of physical modifications of shape. Kubler starts out with the premise that originally "every man-made matter arises from a problem as a purposeful solution." He goes on to explain how, throughout human history, the primary reason to brand something, i.e. an artifact, was in response to a recognized need by an individual or a community.^[49] With this, Kubler offers the theoretical foundation for the utilitarian foundation of folk art objects in general.

One of the primary characteristics of folk art objects is the connexion, either immediate or historical, to a recognized part within its community. The identification of a commonsensical epitome is much easier with some objects than with others. Household items, tools, houses all take a very clear purpose and utilise; they must exist functional as well as aesthetically pleasing. If the decorated pitcher drips every time it is used to pour, if the ornate cupboard door does not shut all the way, if the roof leaks, if the object does not work as intended then its value and assessment is immediately reduced.^[l] This explains the consistency of its grade over time, for even the nearly ornate object is shaped for a specific usage. But what is the utility of a painting hung on the wall, or a small etching of an animal on the shelf? How do these representations of a familiar scene in the life of the community, either as a graphic image or a sculpture, serve any purpose other than to decorate? Here we come to the historic purpose of representational objects of folk fine art, now perhaps obsolete, but originally the function of these art forms. Kubler formulated this succinctly: "Sculpture and painting convey singled-out letters… These communications or iconographic themes brand the utilitarian and rational substructure of any aesthetic achievement. Thus structure, technique, and iconography all vest to the not-artistic underpinnings" of these objects.^[51]

Since the advent of public education for all children a basic literacy both in words and numbers is assumed; this is relatively new. Public schooling in western countries was introduced during the 19th century, less than 200 years ago.^[52] Before that time, pictures and illustrations were used to tell a story, to certificate knowledge, to pass on information. This can be most clearly seen in the iconography of the church. Each saint was assigned an attribute as an identification marker. With this attribute, the saints and their stories were immediately recognizable to the populace, regardless of the workmanship of the piece. Graphic representations of customs knowledge was the lingua franca of the world before public schooling and general literacy was introduced.^{[note v]} These graphic images of community life and knowledge were used for documenting, training, didactics, innovating both within the community and without. The painter Pieter Bruegel the Elder and his relatives illustrated this in many of their paintings and drawings. They rendered both landscapes and scenes of rural life to portray the life and linguistic communication of the common human. The details in these graphics take long been studied past folklorists to gain insight into contemporary life of those times.^{[note vi]} These illustrated representations of community life have now get more decorative; the original functions have been replaced by the rise in literacy and the explosion of easily accessible printed materials. Yet, they notwithstanding tell the story of the customs to both insiders and to outsiders.

Another blazon of folk art is seen in the many models institute in communities; for the well-nigh part these now sit on shelves in a abode as decorations. Nonetheless these small reproductions were created for a purpose. I reason to create a model is to gain proficiency in woodworking, or any other chosen medium. Skill involves practice, and the creation of miniatures involves more than manual dexterity than making the full-scale object. Models were made by craftsmen to practice the skills needed for their work. "Learning to carve…was a playful way to learn the properties of wood, to employ tools, and to solve technical bug."^[53] A model might also be created to test out a new design before investing in the full-scale model. "Model building is fundamental in science, and that models must be reviewed frequently to test their viability, information technology is as well clear that model building is a practical attempt".^[54] Models can also be toys, but equally any parent knows, toys are first and foremost tools to acquaint a child with the varied components of their home and community: the doll house, the play tool prepare, etc. All of these enable a kid to acquire and practice skills needed as adults in their community. And in contemporary times, the marketing of models has become a lucrative small business, catering to outside visitors to the customs. Models make very handy souvenirs for the tourist to take abode, as they are modest, handy and easily packed.

Attributing a utilitarian function to all folk fine art objects direct contradicts the idea that art is that which is not practical; instead its only purpose is to generate an artful response in others.^[55] The contradiction has been problematic every bit folklorists try to clasp folk art, with its overriding utilitarian nature, into the framework divers by the European idea of fine arts. Gerald Pocius states that "Historically, the result of whether items were useful or artistic was fundamental to the concept of what constituted art. What was considered art was limited to those things with elaboration across the point of utility."^{[56] [55]} Henry Glassie, referencing his extensive work on Folk Housing in Centre Virginia,^[57] argues that there are few textile objects in the folk tradition that tin be legitimately separated from their contexts every bit objects of fine art. The only common one, according to Glassie, is the dooryard garden, a production of the aesthetic application of the farmer's tools, techniques, and expertise. This costless patch of beauty co-exists in the same landscaping program as the woodpile, dungheap, and outhouse.^[58] Folk art objects exercise not come out of the academy, and it might be considered inappropriate to evaluate them according to the fine arts criteria for art. For folk art, the utility of the item is an integral part of its aesthetics.

Aesthetics of the genre [edit]

Henry Glassie highlights that "the platonic in complicated Western folk designs was to course a symmetrical whole through the repetition of individually symmetrical units."^[59] It is this repetition that "proves the absenteeism of error and presence of command," providing "the traditional repetitive-symmetrical aesthetic" of Western folk fine art.^[59]

Further perspectives on the ideal aesthetics of Western folk are outlined below:

Artisans [edit]

Artisans are skilled smart competent craftsmen, men and women who spend a lifetime honing the skills needed to produce objects of annotation. In the process of creating multiple objects, they develop their own fashion and an individual taste for what they like and don't similar. In talking with them,^[60] it becomes articulate that the top priority is ever to make an object that works well; if it is not very functional, then it fails the first test of the artist. Only after the assessment of actual utility, volition they venture on to evaluate, and value, the aesthetic pattern of the object. "The modern designer … recognizes the simultaneity of the artefact'south aesthetic and practical functioning….frequently denies his aesthetic, defending his choices and actions solely on the basis of utility."^[61] As part of the (secondary) aesthetic evaluation of the object, an artist might consider innovation of either the form or the decorative elements, withal that will subordinate to the object'south functionality. Innovation will also mainly occur in dialogue with their customers, with understanding on the balance between tradition and innovation. At the same fourth dimension, these master craftsmen maintain a level of excellence within their peer group. They are "scornful of shoddy work. Near of the old makers were careful, skilled weavers. … neat love for that tradition of excellence…. "^[62] At the same fourth dimension, there is piddling financial reward for the long hours involved in crafting an exceptional object.

[edit]

For consumers inside the community of the artisan, their first priority is too that the object works well. They larn it to use, in their household or on their properties, in the traditional tasks of home and community. Secondarily, the local consumer is looking for something familiar, the recognized 'skilful' style of the community.^[42] They want something that fits in with other tools and utensils that they own; they desire something known and familiar, comparable to comfort food in the traditions of foodways. The local consumer is non looking for innovation. In more than bookish linguistic communication, Vlach maintains that "folk art resonate[south] with the richness of cultural profundity… they are good because they are familiar."^[63] As local customers, they also want a pricing which is reasonable inside the local market, whether that be in currency or in barter.

For visitors and tourists [edit]

The outsider to the community, the company or tourist, is looking for something unique and engaging every bit a reminder of their trip; this folk art memento has to exist something that the visitor cannot discover in his abode community. These mementos are for the near part not purchased to be used, only rather to take and brandish. The object becomes "a cultural statement by its owners rather than by its makers... shaped by consumers more than past producers".^[x] Information technology defines the consumer, who is both well-traveled and well-heeled, as well as the artisan. In highlighting and framing a single item outside of its cultural context, all of the stories and traditions embodied in that object are stripped away.^[64] It becomes only an isolated object, an artifact of the heritage industry.

For curators, collectors and art marketeers [edit]

Art marketeers, including gallery owners, museum curators, and collectors of traditional art, have a very different and somewhat controversial agenda in their interest in folk art. For them, the object itself is central, while the history and context become secondary.^[65] These consumers have been trained in the culture of the western European fine arts, and they employ these (external) criteria to evaluate traditional folk art objects. This was also common exercise for folklorists earlier World State of war 2, when artifacts were considered to be remnants from before societies. This changed in the 1950s equally students of cultural heritage began to sympathise these artifacts in the wider context of their nowadays-day communities. While professional folklorists inverse their arroyo mid-century to encompass this new, expanded understanding of folk artifacts inside their communities, professionals in the fine arts retained their focus on the isolated object, every bit a museum display (curators), as an addition to their individual collection, or as a piece to offer for sale (art marketeers).

It likewise go axiomatic in the second half of the 20th century that the label 'folk' was itself a value-add to any onetime object. "Because of enthusiasm for these….past antique collectors, many handmade objects that had been chosen antiquarian were now called folk."^[65] Bronner notes that "folk represented an highly-seasoned romantic, nativist qualifier used in the market place. For those stressing the folk, it represented a sense of customs and informal learning…" He goes on to note that this "categorization [in the western marketplace] established folk art equally a tradable commodity," with an uptick in advertisements beyond magazines marketing antiques.^[66] It was during these decades that a divide betwixt the professionals in folklore studies and art collectors became evident, with both groups claiming say-so and expertise in the now diverging field of "folk art".^{[notation 7]} It became evident that "Not insignificantly, the politics of the marketplace take had an impact on the development of terminology…"^[67] The new field of museum folklore now assumes a position of intermediary between the interested parties.

Marketing works better when you lot have a star performer, and and so the art market went out to notice them. This is in direct contradiction to the bones values of folk art objects, which take always been recognized as community goods. For i group of Mennonites, a painter is valued inside the community for her fine art. "Information technology serves her community in a traditional, symbolic manner, and it maintains continuity with … tradition."^[68] In contrast, western culture favors individual heroes, those men and women who stand autonomously from and above the rest of the states. And and then the National Endowment for the Arts has recognized over 400 national heritage fellows since 1982, heroes in the preservation of traditional crafts. These include folk artists working in quilting, ironwork, woodcarving, pottery, embroidery, basketry, weaving, and other related traditional arts. According to NEA guidelines, they must display "actuality, excellence, and significance within a particular tradition." This designation comes with grants, a national platform for functioning, and a profoundly expanded market for their art work.

The designation also comes at a cost. Artisans now focus their attention across the home community; that which they did more or less not-reflectively within their communities, they now evaluate in an expanded perspective. Fame becomes a growing factor in their businesses and their lives. The market is interested in their product; it becomes a commodity, bringing with it a sense of entitlement on the part of the consumer.^[10] A "modest change here and another in that location, that they take slowly but surely undermined and finally replaced this rich tradition…. The customer's demand for small and thus cheap items has taken over, tilting production toward wall hangings, pillows, and the ubiquitous potholder."^[69] As the reputation of these master craftsmen grows, "individual purchasers, pocket-size store owners and their sales reps, crafts fair and bazaar managers, big section store and mail society catalog buyers, philanthropic organizations... actively engaged in tailoring the products…" to sell.^[70]

In time, the individual artisan becomes aware of the potential for exploitation. It is nice to earn skilful money, it represents the value society places on their artistry, and a personal recognition of their work.^[71] And yet for many folk artists, the price paid for their hand-crafted product does not even match the minimum wage requirement for the hours they spend on crafting each detail.^{[62] [annotation viii]} It is the art marketeers who effect the translation from the folk economic system to the mainstream art economy, a procedure in which a single item is removed from its context, and the artist is portrayed as a single individual instead of i link in a long concatenation of traditional artisans in the community. "Identifying names of makers builds a organisation of [mod] consumption… a social agreement of dealers and collectors for marking services."^[72] With name recognition of the traditional artist, their craft and their product is removed from the customs to be marketed in the western consumer economy, and becomes a commodity reflective more of the person who buys it than of the master craftsman.

For scholars [edit]

It is the scholars who choice up on this concern of exploitation, where the "matters of marketing and exhibiting folk art, and the ethical handling of folk artists and their communities…".^[73] are studied. For folklorists personally know these men and women, these folk artists, and some of them might fifty-fifty be counted as friends. In interactions with the artisans, the folklorist is looking to clarify the authenticity of the objects likewise as their context inside the customs in evaluating a piece of art. Both Henry Glassie and Michael Jones accept advocated for the cultural heritage scholar to go further in actually helping individual folk artists locate advisable markets and pricing their work for the upscale market.^[74]

This moves into a further intrusion of the researcher in a process, in which the presence of an outsider (read folklore fieldworker) changes the behavior of the individuals involved in the enquiry; this is known as the Hawthorne result. Jones muses over this in his work with the Cumberland chairmaker. "[N]ot all researchers admit the extent to which they may have been responsible for the condition; frequently the researcher … offered new tools… asked personal questions… objects for a museum… in comparisons presented a new model … provided an audience… questions about objects raised the value of them for the owner. …Many things that occurred might not have been had I not been present…"^[75] Equally our communities change and develop, these traditional crafts need to exist documented and supported, but in doing so, scholars need to be cautious not to destroy or misconstrue the very thing which they value.

Associations [edit]

• Folk Art Lodge of America
• UNESCO Organization of Folk Art
• National Endowment for the Arts
• CIOFF: International Council of Organizations of Folklore Festivals and Folk Arts
• Pennsylvania Folklore: Woven Together TV Program on cloth arts

Notes [edit]

1. ^ The terms emic and etic refer to two unlike perspectives used in field research by folklorists and other cultural heritage professionals. The give-and-take emic applies to the perspective from inside the social group; the word etic refers to the perspective from exterior the grouping.
2. ^ Pocius calls out other sources who have advocated for this definition of art, including Richard Anderson, Raymond Firth, Henry Glassie, Michael Owen Jones, George Mills, and Barre Toelken.
3. ^ In his piece of work at the terminate of the 19th century, Riegl identified 2 characteristics which are essential in recognizing folk objects: "1) individual forms must be known, understood and used by all members of a culture regardless of course distinctions and two) the forms of folk art must be associated with tradition, i.e. a do which has continued and not changed over a long menstruum of time".(Rahmen 2007, p. 2) That statement of 150 years ago withal stands.
4. ^ Bronner uses the example of the rock homes dotting the landscape of Utah. These were built by European stone masons who had emigrated to American and converted to Mormonism. Using local materials, they applied the skills brought from Europe to build homes in this new land. (Bronner 1986, p. 210)
5. ^ Nosotros are moving back to that with the explosion of icons used in electronic discourse. See Icon (computing)
6. ^ In one Mennonite community of the 21st century, this remains an of import function. Where the members do not apply photographs, the Mennonite painter "Anna serves as community documentarian and creative person, functions which contribute to group identity".(Bronner 1986a, p. 137)
7. ^ Gallerists go along to acquaintance folk art objects to styles in the fine arts. "We have since learned to beware… that visual similarities between modern [fine] art and folk art tin can exist accounted for by assuming identical artful values." (Vlach & Bronner 1992, p. xviii)
8. ^ For a more extensive discussion of the economical exploitation of folk artists see Robert Teske, Crafts Assistance Programs' and Traditional Crafts, (Teske 1986)

Citations [edit]

1. ^ ^{a b} (Dundes 1980, p. 8)
2. ^ (Bauman 1971)
3. ^ (Bauman 1971, p. 41)
4. ^ (Vlach 1992, p. xvi)
5. ^ ^{a b} (Pocius 1995, p. 415)
6. ^ (Williams 1985, p. 41)
7. ^ ^{a b} (Pocius 1995, p. 416)
8. ^ (Pocius 1995, p. 417)
9. ^ (Glassie 1999, p. affiliate three)
10. ^ ^{a b c} (Bronner 1986a, p. 196)
11. ^ (Pocius 1995, pp. 423–424)
12. ^ (Glassie 1992, pp. 271–272)
13. ^ (Jones 1975, p. 213)
14. ^ (Rahmen 2007, p. one)
15. ^ (Glassie 1992, p. 271)
16. ^ (Kubler 1962, p. 10)
17. ^ (Bronner 1986a, p. 191)
18. ^ (Vlach & Bronner 1992, p. xviii)
19. ^ ^{a b} (Wertkin 2004, p. xxxii)
20. ^ ^{a b c} (Wertkin 2004, p. xxviii)
21. ^ (Gabbert 1999, pp. 119–128)
22. ^ (Glassie 1992, p. 269)
23. ^ (Vlach 1992, p. 22)
24. ^ (Jones 1975, p. ???)
25. ^ (Jones 1975, pp. vii–ix)
26. ^ (Roberts 1972, pp. 235–240)
27. ^ ^{a b} (Roberts 1972, p. 236)
28. ^ "Immigrant Gifts to American Life | RSF".
29. ^ (Eaton 1932, p. 10)
30. ^ (Roberts 1972, p. 237)
31. ^ "Making of a Homemaker".
32. ^ (Bronner 1986a, p. 141)
33. ^ (Bronner 1986, p. 210)
34. ^ (Bronner 1986a, p. 138)
35. ^ (Roberts 1972, p. 238)
36. ^ (Joyce 1992, p. 231)
37. ^ (Roberts 1972, p. 238–240)
38. ^ (Bronner 1986, p. 213)
39. ^ (Vlach & Bronner 1992, p. xvi)
40. ^ (Roberts 1972, p. 240 ff)
41. ^ (Bronner 1986)
42. ^ ^{a b} (Glassie 1972, p. 259)
43. ^ (Toelken 1996, pp. 221–222)
44. ^ (Bronner 1986, p. 200)
45. ^ (Kubler 1980, p. 238)
46. ^ (Kubler 1962, p. 2)
47. ^ (Sims & Stephens 2005, p. 10)
48. ^ (Pocius 1995, p. 424)
49. ^ (Kubler 1962, p. 8)
50. ^ (Jones 1975, p. vii)
51. ^ (Kubler 1962, p. xvi)
52. ^ (Schenda 1970)
53. ^ (Bronner 1986, p. 209)
54. ^ (Jones 1975, p. 207)
55. ^ ^{a b} (Pocius 1995, p. 420)
56. ^ (Sims & Stephens 2005, p. 162)
57. ^ (Glassie 1975)
58. ^ (Glassie 1972, p. 270)
59. ^ ^{a b} (Glassie 1972, p. 273)
60. ^ Jones 1975; Glassie 1975; Bronner 1986a.
61. ^ (Glassie 1972, p. 268)
62. ^ ^{a b} (Joyce 1992, p. 237)
63. ^ (Vlach 1992, p. 21)
64. ^ (Bronner 1986a, p. 203)
65. ^ ^{a b} (Congdon 1996, p. 49)
66. ^ (Bronner 1986a, pp. 192–195)
67. ^ (Wertkin 2004, p. xxvii)
68. ^ (Bronner 1986a, pp. 142–143)
69. ^ (Joyce 1992, p. 229)
70. ^ (Joyce 1992, p. 238)
71. ^ (Joyce 1992, p. 232)
72. ^ (Bronner 1986a, p. 204)
73. ^ (Vlach & Bronner 1992, p. xxii)
74. ^ (Joyce 1992, p. 239)
75. ^ (Jones 1975, p. 210)

References [edit]

• Bauman, Richard (1971). "Differential Identity and the Social Base of Folklore". The Periodical of American Folklore. 84 (331): 31–41. doi:ten.2307/539731. JSTOR 539731.
• Bronner, Simon J. (1986). "Folk Objects". In Oring, Elliott (ed.). Folk Groups And Sociology Genres: An Introduction. Logan, UT: Utah State Academy Press. pp. 199–223.
• Bronner, Simon J. (1986a). Grasping Things : Folk Material Culture and Mass Society in America. Lexington: Academy Press of Kentucky.
• Congdon, Kristin One thousand. (1996). "Art, Folk". In Brunvand, January Harald (ed.). American Folklore, an Encyclopedia. New York, London: Garland Publishing. pp. 46–53.
• Glassie, Henry (1972). "Folk Art". In Dorson, Richard (ed.). Folklore and Folklife: an Introduction . Chicago: University of Chicago Press. pp. 253–280. ISBN9780226158709.
• Dundes, Alan (1980). Interpreting Folklore. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.
• Eaton, Allen Hendershott (1932). Immigrant Gifts to American Life. Arno Press. ISBN978-0-405-00576-three.
• Gabbert, Lisa (1999). "The "Text/Context" Controversy and the Emergence of Behavioral Approaches in Sociology" (PDF). Folklore Forum. thirty (112): 119–128.
• Glassie, Henry (1975). Folk Housing in Center Virginia: Structural Analysis of Historic Artifacts. Univ of Tennessee Press. ISBN9780870491733.
• Glassie, Henry (1992). "The Thought of Folk Fine art". In Vlach, John Michael; Bronner, Simon (eds.). Folk Art and Art Worlds. Logan, Utah: Utah State University Press. pp. 269–274.
• Glassie, Henry (1999). Textile Civilization. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Printing.
• Jones, Michael Owen (1975). The Handmade Object and its Maker. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California.
• Jones, Michael Owen (1997). "Fine art, Folk". In Green, Thomas (ed.). Sociology An Encyclopedia of Beliefs, Customs, Tales, Music, and Art . Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO. pp. 56–60. ISBN9780874369861.
• Joyce, Rosemary (1992). ""Fame don't make the Dominicus any cooler": Folk artists and the Market place". In Vlach, John Michael; Bronner, Simon (eds.). Folk Art and Art Worlds. Logan, Utah: Utah Land University Press. pp. 225–241.
• Kubler, George (1980). "The Arts: Fine and Plain". In Quimby, Ian Chiliad.Thousand.; Swank, Scott T. (eds.). Perspectives on American folk fine art . New York: Winterthur. pp. 234–246.
• Kubler, George (1962). The shape of fourth dimension : Remarks on the History of Things . New Haven and London: Yale University Printing.
• Pocius, Gerald L. (1995). "Art". The Journal of American Folklore. 108 (430): 413–431. doi:10.2307/541654. JSTOR 541654.
• Rahmen, Sabrina (2007). "INDUSTRIALIZING FOLK Fine art Aesthetic Transformation in Alois Riegl's Volkskunst, Hausfleiß und Hausindustrie (1894)" (PDF). Kakanien Revisited: Emergenzen.
• Riegl, Alois (1894). Volkskunst, Hausfleiss, und Hausindustrie. Berlin.
• Roberts, Warren (1972). "Folk Crafts". In Dorson, Richard (ed.). Folklore and Folklife: an Introduction . Chicago: University of Chicago Press. pp. 233–252. ISBN9780226158709.
• Santino, Jack (1992). "Tradition and Creativity in Halloween Folk Fine art". In Vlach, John Michael; Bronner, Simon (eds.). Folk Fine art and Art Worlds. Logan, Utah: Utah Land University Press. pp. 151–169.
• Schenda, Rudolf (1970). Volk ohne Buch. Studien zur Sozialgeschichte der populaeren Lesestoffe 1770–1910. Frankfurt am Chief 1970: Klostermann. ISBN3-465-01836-2. {{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location (link)
• Sims, Martha; Stephens, Martine (2005). Living Folklore: Introduction to the Report of People and their Traditions. Logan, UT: Utah Country University Press.
• Teske, Robert (1986). "'Crafts Assistance Programs' and Traditional Crafts" (PDF). New York Folklore. 12.
• Toelken, Barre (1996). The Dynamics of Folklore. Logan, UT: Utah State University Press.
• Vlach, John Michael; Bronner, Simon (1992). "Introduction to the New Edition". In Vlach, John Michael; Bronner, Simon (eds.). Folk Art and Art Worlds. Logan, Utah: Utah Country University Press. pp. xv–xxxi.
• Vlach, John Michael (1992). "Properly Speaking: The need for Apparently Talk about Folk Art". In Vlach, John Michael; Bronner, Simon (eds.). Folk Art and Art Worlds. Logan, Utah: Utah Land University Press. pp. 13–26.
• Vlach, John Michael (1996). "Index of American Pattern". In Brunvand, Jan Harald (ed.). American Folklore, an Encyclopedia. New York, London: Garland Publishing. pp. 389–390.
• Vlach, John (1997). "Material Culture". In Light-green, Thomas (ed.). Folklore An Encyclopedia of Behavior, Community, Tales, Music, and Art . Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO. pp. 540–544. ISBN9780874369861.
• Wertkin, Gerard C. (2004). "Introduction". In Wertkin, Gerald C. (ed.). Encyclopedia of American Folk Art . New York, London: Routledge. pp. xxvii–xxxiii. ISBN9780415929868.
• Williams, Raymond (1985). Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society . USA: Oxford University Printing. ISBN978-0-nineteen-520469-8.

harnessdoccujjoinds.blogspot.com

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concepts_in_folk_art

Share this post