지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
The purpose of this article is to chronicle the history of Soviet and Russian folklore and folklore scholarship during the October Revolution of 1917 to contemporary Russia, specifically ranging from the early 20th century to the right before the appearance of Mikhail Gorbachev and his epoch-making policies. There are clear transitions and steps in folklore study, most of which was devoted to the creation of socialist ideals and communist patriotism to manage to the given regime, depending on different times of the political leaders, such as Lenin, Stalin, Krushchev, and Brezhnev. These steps might be categorized into three stages: interest in collecting true, authentic folklore, collecting and distorting folkloric materials and stylization of folklore, that is, fakelore, and finally discovering archival materials and the massive digitization of them, the last theme of which, however, is not examined at this moment.
Until the Soviet Socialist Revolution, both nationalistic feelings and self-awareness of Russia’s past folklore, including history in a broader sense, are the fundamental forces that served the establishment of state-building through the 19th-early 20th centuries. Russia influenced the folklore of the peoples under its control, sometimes quite intentionally, as during the Soviet period when folklorists were charged with creating and promulgating new Soviet folklore. In short, collecting folklore and numerous folkloric and literary expeditions were typical ways to hang on to a culture and more often than not the language in which they were expressed. Through the NEP and the Socialist Realism periods, Soviet folklore scholarship had drastically changed its basic credo and political attitudes toward folklore, so that much attention to it was made in the hope that “folklore was a legitimate pursuit.” In fact this new motto was established by M. Gorky and his keynote speech at the First Conference of the Union of the Soviet Writers (1934). Since then on, the Soviet folklore scholarship began to recognize folklore as useful and effective tool to deliver the Communist Party’s political message: utopian future and the mobilization of the proletarian masses for the Soviet society. As a consequence, the Soviet folklore changes its basic feature from descriptivist to prescriptist one, and the creation of this type of Soviet or psudeofolklore continues until the death of Stalin in 1953; thus the conventional line between authentic and true folklore and politically driven stylized folklore had been blurred until the middle of the 1980s. This new style of folklore, which usually be termed as “folklorism” (politicized folk adaption or industrialized folklore materials), became a major industry in the Stalin’s era and continued even into the contemporary Russia an a variety of folklore festivals, folklore fare, carnivals, folk games, etc. The Soviet fakelore, thus, proof of folklore’s role not in reflecting culture, but in forming it; this creation of new folklore was highly encouraged and even assisted by the government. The task of the Soviet government was not only to form folklore into propaganda for socialist ideology, but they needed to distribute it among the masses. Nowadays, we witness to the so-called folklore revival in all genres of folklore, but in performance art, in particular. This new folkloric landscape represents a total new make-shift, discarding the hackneyed communist remnants, ideological backdrops, and patriotism-driven agitprop, etc.
Until the Soviet Socialist Revolution, both nationalistic feelings and self-awareness of Russia’s past folklore, including history in a broader sense, are the fundamental forces that served the establishment of state-building through the 19th-early 20th centuries. Russia influenced the folklore of the peoples under its control, sometimes quite intentionally, as during the Soviet period when folklorists were charged with creating and promulgating new Soviet folklore. In short, collecting folklore and numerous folkloric and literary expeditions were typical ways to hang on to a culture and more often than not the language in which they were expressed. Through the NEP and the Socialist Realism periods, Soviet folklore scholarship had drastically changed its basic credo and political attitudes toward folklore, so that much attention to it was made in the hope that “folklore was a legitimate pursuit.” In fact this new motto was established by M. Gorky and his keynote speech at the First Conference of the Union of the Soviet Writers (1934). Since then on, the Soviet folklore scholarship began to recognize folklore as useful and effective tool to deliver the Communist Party’s political message: utopian future and the mobilization of the proletarian masses for the Soviet society. As a consequence, the Soviet folklore changes its basic feature from descriptivist to prescriptist one, and the creation of this type of Soviet or psudeofolklore continues until the death of Stalin in 1953; thus the conventional line between authentic and true folklore and politically driven stylized folklore had been blurred until the middle of the 1980s. This new style of folklore, which usually be termed as “folklorism” (politicized folk adaption or industrialized folklore materials), became a major industry in the Stalin’s era and continued even into the contemporary Russia an a variety of folklore festivals, folklore fare, carnivals, folk games, etc. The Soviet fakelore, thus, proof of folklore’s role not in reflecting culture, but in forming it; this creation of new folklore was highly encouraged and even assisted by the government. The task of the Soviet government was not only to form folklore into propaganda for socialist ideology, but they needed to distribute it among the masses. Nowadays, we witness to the so-called folklore revival in all genres of folklore, but in performance art, in particular. This new folkloric landscape represents a total new make-shift, discarding the hackneyed communist remnants, ideological backdrops, and patriotism-driven agitprop, etc.
목차
Ⅰ. 서론 및 문제제기
Ⅱ. 1917년 혁명을 전후로 한 사회주의 관제민속 연구 경향과 정치 포스터
Ⅴ. 사회주의 리얼리즘과 소비에트 민속
Ⅵ. 스탈린 사후 소비에트 민속 연구의 새 경향: 흐루시쵸프 시기의 해빙과 브레쥐네프 시기의 침체
Ⅶ. 결론
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
Folklore and Thought
Korea Journal
1976 .06
-
鍾敬文과 중국민속학
비교민속학
1998 .05
-
중국 현대민속학 개론서의 기본 사상과 그 영향
비교민속학
2016 .04
-
정치적 수단으로서의 민속학: 소련의 스탈린 시기를 중심으로
동유럽발칸연구
2012 .01
-
現代 民俗學의 對象과 課題 : 構造變化와 階層에 대한 獨語圈의 展開
한국민속학
1971 .06
-
러시아 민속(학) 강좌의 필요성과 효과적인 강의 방법론 연구
슬라브학보
2008 .09
-
Korean Folklore Reader
Korea Journal
1965 .05
-
중국민속학계의 동향과 한국 민속학의 설 자리 모색
한국민속학
2010 .05
-
도시마을 현대민속의 역동성과 진정성
민속연구
2013 .08
-
옛이야기 변용 교육의 가능역(可能域) 연구
문학교육학
2009 .01
-
야나기타(柳田國男) 민속학과 식민주의 : ‘조선민속학’에의 관여 문제와 관련하여
지방사와 지방문화
2006 .11
-
중국의 민속학개론서를 통해 본 민속학
비교민속학
2016 .08
-
2000년 이후 민속연구의 양상과 향후 민속연구의 보완 과제 모색
한국민속학
2020 .05
-
비교민속학의 방법론 재고
실천민속학연구
2012 .02
-
웹툰에 나타난 젠더 재현과 여성민속적 함의 - <며느라기>를 중심으로
한국학연구
2019 .06
-
민속자료의 진위 문제와 레닌 숭배 현상
노어노문학
2008 .06
-
민속학의 존립 기반을 다시 묻다 : ‘깔때기’ 독일 민속학사론을 중심으로
실천민속학연구
2017 .08
-
불교 민속의 형성과 전개
비교민속학
2003 .02
-
공공민속학 담론의 현황과 과제 : 미국 민속학계의 논의를 통해 본 한국 민속학계의 과제설정을 중심으로
한국민속학
2018 .05
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-309-018824487