Антропологија и фолклористика: проблем тумачењa фоклорног дела и теорија Алфреда Гела

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2298/GEI1802303S УДК 398:572.028 Оригинални научни рад

  • Marina Simić (Serbia) Факултет политичких наука, Универзитет у Београду
    marina.simic@fpn.bg.ac.rs
  • Danica Jović (Serbia) Филолошки факултет, Универзитет у Београду
    danicajjovic@gmail.com

Сажетак

This paper investigates the relationship between anthropology and folkloristics. We are
interested in theoretical and methodological similarities and differences between these disciplines, rather than in institutional (political) solutions that differenced the two and
produced certain forms of knowledge. It seems that the main difference between folkloristics
and anthropology lays in anthropological focus on social and cultural context and processes,
while traditional folkloristics focus on folklore forms as such. Contemporary folklore studies
remake anthropological idea that “folklore” is a form of communication that has to be
understood in its social and cultural context. However, we believe that anthropology has still
to expand its view of folklore in order to go beyond its traditional paradigms of social
contextualisation that basically interpret all social phenomena in structural functionalist
paradigm. In that sense, we suggest Alfred Gell’s theory of art as an experimental attempt
for building of a new theoretical foundation for both disciplines.



Key words: anthropology, folkloristics, social and cultural contexts, Alfred Gell’s theory

Reference

Adonyeva, Svetlana, and Laura J. Olson. 2011.”Interpreting the Past, Postulating
the Future: Memorate as Plot and Script among Rural Russian Women.”
Journal of Folklore Research 48 (2): 133–166.
Antonijević, Dragana. 1991. Značenje srpskih bajki. Beograd: Etnografski institut
SANU.
Antonijević, Dragana. 2010. Ogledi iz antropologije i semiologije folklora. Beograd:
Srpski geneаloški centar.
Arnaut, Karel. 2001. “A pragmatic impulse in the anthropology of art? Gell and
semiotics.” Journal des africanistes 71 (2): 191–208.
Bascom, William R. 1953. “Folklore and Anthropology.” The Journal of American
Folklore 66 (62): 283–290.
Bascom, William. 1983. “Malinowski's Contributions to the Study of Folklore.”
Folklore 94 (2): 163–172.
Ben-Amos, Dan. 1971. “Toward a Definition of Folklore in Context.” The Journal
of American Folklore 84 (331): 3–15.
Ben-Amos, Dan. 1993. “’Context’ in Context.” Western Folklore 52 (2/4): 209–
226.
Bennett, Gillian. 1997. “Review Essay: Folklorists and Anthropologists.” Folklore
108 (1–2): 120–123.
Biti, Vladimir. 1981. Bajka i predaja, povijest i pripovedanje. Zagreb: Zavod za
znanost o književnosti.
Bošković Stulli, Maja. 1983. „Od usmenog pripovijedanja do objavljene
pripovijetke.” U Usmena književnost nekad i danas, ur. Ivan Čolović, 134–
150. Beograd: Prosveta - Biblioteka XX vek.
Chua, Liana and Mark Elliot. Eds. 2013. Distributed Objects: Meaning and Mattering
after Alfred Gell. London & New York: Berghahn Books.
DeBernardi, Jean. 2003. “Social Aspects of Language Use.” In Companion Encyclopedia
of Anthropology, ed. Tim Ingold, 861–890. London and New
York: Routledge.
Douglas, Mary. 1995. “Red Riding Hood: An Interpretation from Anthropology.”
Folklore 106: 1–7.
Dundes, Alan. 2010. [1980] „Tekstura, tekst i kontekst”. U Folkloristička čitanka,
ur. Marijana Hameršak i Suzana Marjanić, 91–107. Zagreb: Institut za
etnologiju i folkloristiku – AGM.
Dundes, Alan. 2005. “Folkloristics in the Twenty-First Century (AFS Invited Presidential
Plenary Address, 2004).” The Journal of American Folklore 118
(470): 385–408.
Đorđević, Smiljana. 2010. „Figura pevača/ guslara: Kodiranje teksta socijalne
uloge”. U Likovi usmene književnosti, ur. Snežana Samardžija,
147–205. Beograd: Institut za književnost i umetnost.
Đorđević Belić, Smiljana. 2017. Figura guslara. Heroizirana biografija i nevidljiva
tradicija. Biblioteka Srpsko usmeno stvaralaštvo, ur. Boško Suvajdžić, knj.
11, Beograd: Institut za književnost i umetnost.
Gell, Alfred. 1998. Art and Agency: An Anthropological Theory. Oxford: Clarendon
Press.
Huggan, Graham. 1998. “(Post)Colonialism, Anthropology, and the Magic of Mimesis.”
Cultural Critique 38 (Winter 1997–1998): 91–106.
Hymes, Dell. 1972. “Models of the interaction of language and social life”. In Directions
in sociolinguistics: The ethnography of Communication, eds. John
Gumperz and Dell Hymes, 35–71. New York: Holt, Rhinehart & Winston.
Jović, Danica. 2018. „Priče i pričanja o porodičnim prokletstvima.” Savremena
srpska folkloristika IV. U štampi.
Knappett, Carl. 2002. “Photographs, Skeuomorphs and Marionettes: Some
Thoughts on Mind, Agency and Object.” Journal of Material Culture 7 (1):
97–117.
Kopytoff, Igor. 1986. “The Cultural Biography of Things: Commoditisation as Process.”
In The Social Life of Things, ed. Arjun Appadurai, 64–91. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Kovačević, Ivan. 2009. Urbane legende: Ogledi iz američkog folklora. Beograd:
Srpski geneološki centar.
Layton, Robert H. 2003. “Art and agency: a reassessment”. Journal of the Royal
Anthropological Institute 9 (3): 447–463.
Lozica, Ivan. 2010. „Metateorija u folkloristici i istoriji umetnosti”. U
Folkloristička čitanka, ur. Marijana Hameršak i Suzana Marjanić, 159–
181. Zagreb: Institut za etnologiju i folkloristiku – AGM.
Milošević Đorđević, Nada. 1988. „O kontinuitetu i promenama oblika usmene
proze leskovačkog kraja (Pogovor).“ U Srpske narodne pripovetke i
predanja iz leskovačke oblasti, Dragutin Đorđević, 557–598. Beograd:
SANU.
Milošević Đorđević, Nada. 2000. Od bajke do izreke. Beograd: Društvo za srpski
jezik i književnost Srbije.
Osborne, Robin and Jeremy Tanner, eds. 2007a. Art’s Agency and Art History.
Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Osborne, Robin and Jeremy Tanner. 2007b. „Introduction: Art and Agency and Art
History.” In Art’s Agency and Art History, eds. Robin Osborne and Jeremy
Tanner, 1–28. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Samardžija, Snežana. 1987. „Usmeno predanje između verovanja i umetnosti reči
(blagovijest pripovijest).” Polja 340: 243–248.
Sayce, R. U. 1956. „Folk-Lore, Folk-Life, Ethnology.” Folklore 67 (2): 66–83.
Schmidt-Gleim, Meike. 2012. “The Readability of the World as Mimesis”. Anthropological
Materialism.
http://anthropologicalmaterialism.hypotheses.org/1702
Simić, Marina. 2010. „Studije kulture posle kulture.” Godišnjak Fakulteta političkih
nauka 4: 481-487.
Spasić, Ivana. 2007. „Bruno Latur, akteri-mreže i kritika kritičke sociologije.”
Filozofija i društvo 18/2 (33): 43–72.
Strathern, Marilyn. 1988. The Gender of the gift: Problems with Women and Problems
with Society in Melanesia. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Takafumi, Kato. 2013. “A Provoking Approach to the 'Anthropology of Art', in reference
to C. S. Peirce.” Aesthetics 64 (1): 47–58.
Taylor, Edward Burnett. 1871. Primitive Cultures: Researches into the Development
of Mythology, Philosophy, Religion, Art and Customs. Vol 1. London:
John Murray.
Thomas, Nicolas. 1998. “Foreword.” In Art and Agency: An Anthropological Theory,
Alfred Gell, i-xiii. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Wood, Juliette. 2015. “Folklore and Anthropology.” Folklore Special On-line Issue.
http://explore.tandfonline.com/page/ah/rfol-vsi-2015-folkore-andanthropology/
rfol-vsi-2015-folkore-and-anthropology-introduction
Van Eck, Caroline. 2015. Art, Agency and Living Presence. From the Animated Image
to the Excessive Object. Munich and Leiden: Walter De Gruyter -
Leiden University Press.
Weiner, James F. 2003. “Myth and metaphor.” In Companion Encyclopedia of Anthropology,
ed. Tim Ingold, 591–613. London and New York: Routledge.

Примљено / Received: 05. 02. 2018.
Прихваћено / Accepted: 03. 05. 2018.
Објављено
30.09.2018.
Како цитирати
SIMIĆ (SERBIA), Marina; JOVIĆ (SERBIA), Danica. Антропологија и фолклористика: проблем тумачењa фоклорног дела и теорија Алфреда Гела. Гласник Етнографског института САНУ, [S.l.], v. 66, n. 2, p. 303-318, sep. 2018. ISSN 2334-8259. Доступно на:
<http://www.ei.sanu.ac.rs/index.php/gei/article/view/581>.
Датум приступа: 15 dec. 2018