Definitions of folklore are as many and varied as the versions of a well-known tale. Both semantic and theoretical differences have contributed to this proliferation. The German Volkskunde, the Swedish folkminne, and the Indian lok sahitya all imply slightly different meanings that the English term "folklore" cannot syncretize completely. 1 Similarly, anthropologists and students of literature have projected their own bias into their definitions of folklore. In fact, for each of them folklore became the exotic topic, the green grass on the other side of the fence, to which they were attracted but which, alas, was not in their own domain. Thus, while anthropologists regarded folklore as literature, scholars of literature defined it as culture. 2 Folklorists themselves resorted to enumerative, 3 intuitive,5 definitions; yet, while all these certainly contributed to the clarification of the nature of folklore, at the same time they circumvented the main issue, namely, the isolation of the unifying thread that joins jokes and myths, gestures and legends, costumes and music into a single category of knowledge. Disciplines

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

In Fairy Godfather: Straparola, Venice, and the Fairy Tale Tradition Ruth Bottingheimer proposes to correct the historical narrative of the emergence of the fairy tale in Europe and to recognize "Straparola's role as an originator in the history of modern fairy tale" (Bottingheimer 2002:3). Giovanni Francesco Straparola (c. 1480-c. 1557) is not exactly an unknown figure in folktale history. 1 His book, Le piacevoli notti (Pleasant nights), which appeared in English as The Nights of Straparola (Straparola [1551-1553] 1894), was long recognized as a predecessor of Giambattista Basile's Lo cunto de li cunti (The tale of tales; published 1634-1636; also known in its 1674 edition as Il Pentamerone) and Charles Perrault's Contes de ma mere l'Oye (Tales of Mother Goose; Perrault [1695-1697] 1956). As Bottingheimer (2002:2) points out, the Grimm brothers considered Straparola as their precursor, admiring him as an author who conscientiously drew upon oral tradition. Selections from Straparola's tales appeared in volumes published in Vienna in 1791, which included twenty-four tales, and in Berlin in 1817, which included eighteen tales and was accompanied by the copious notes of the editor and translator Friedrich Wilhelm Valentine Schmidt. In the mid-nineteenth century, Theodor Benfey found in the case of Straparola implicit support for his theory of the Indian origin of folktales. For him, the availability of Straparola's tales was felicitous evidence for the possible historical interdependence of oral and literature tales. Since the idea that oral tradition alone could sustain a global diffusion of tales was unfathomable in his days, he relied on the migration and translation of the Panchatantra, a classic Indian tale collection, as a support for his Indian origin hypothesis (Benfey 1859). The availability of a European tale collection that demonstrated the possibility of such historical interdependence provided him with further support for his theory.