Classification of folktales is a conundrum that has not yet been solved. The most commonly used three-way classification of “myths/legends/fairy tales” or the Aarne-Thompson classification system still raise questions and debates. The situation is the same in China and Korea. In both countries, a coherent method of classification has not been established and varied systems of classification coexist or contend with one another. Also, though the discussions of folktale classification in China and Korea are on quite a high level, a mutual understanding is lacking between them.
In this paper, I will focus on and examine The Collections of Chinese Folktales (『中國民間故事集成』) and The Collection of Korean Oral Literature (『韓國口碑文學大系』), which are the biggest and most representative achievements in the history of Korean and Chinese folklore studies respectively. The Collections of Chinese Folktales respect the existing classification systems mentioned above, while choosing to resolve the numerous variables that occur in the process of collection through the manner of “comprehensive consideration.” This method presents the limitation of allowing the arbitrariness of the collector to intervene. However, Jo Dong-il who devised the classification method for folktales in The Collection of Korean Oral Literature thought that the “motif-index” or “tale type index” were either too complicated or unfit for Korean folktales and, created a highly unique system of classification of his own. He classified the folktales by, ones with unique subject and ones with unique situation, and by applying the strict binary system of subdividing them again through the standards of deduction/induction, beginning/ending, etc. This method of classification may seem quite revolutionary and logical in its structure, but displayed the problem that it was not easily applicable to actual situations of the folktales.
When a particular system of classification has been used for a long period of time by enough number of people, even though it might contain some chronic problems, its familiarity overshadow those problems. The reason that the three-way classification of “myths/legends/fairy tales” or Aarne-Thompson system, with all its obvious problems and limitations, has not been discarded is that it is too “familiar.” However, such familiarity can, at times, be poisonous in studies and academics. If the classification system conceived in Europe is unsuitable for the reality of Korean and Chinese folktales, we should necessarily try to devise a classification system that is both fit to our reality and may maintain universality. What is required at this point is the communicative and cooperative effort between the scholars of folktales in Korea, China and even the world.