[An Deming] Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage: A Dilemma for Folklore
Abstract: Intangible cultural heritage protection is the result of exchanges, interactions, consultations or compromises among multiple forces from different nations, different countries, different regions and different fields under the situation of increasing degree, expanding scope and increasing rhythm of international cooperation.
Due to the strengthening of national consciousness and the deepening of understanding of the cohesion function of national culture, the conflict of interest brought about by cultural industrialization and the development of tourism, and the profound reflection of contemporary people on the negative consequences of modernity (modernization), this movement finally emerged.
The work carried out by folklore scholars from different countries around the world over the years has laid the theoretical foundation for the formation and development of this work.
But as the work unfolds, it increasingly reflects bureaucracy, discourse hegemony and issues that spark conflicts between different countries, groups or individuals.
In the new situation, folklore scholars still have a long way to go in how to coordinate various relationships to protect cultural diversity and respect and protect the wishes and rights of cultural inheritors, so as to promote the healthy development of protection work.
2.
The disaster of modernity: the origin of the protection of intangible cultural heritage 2.
3.
Folklore-the disciplinary basis of the protection of intangible cultural heritage.
It is worth noting that in the title and specific content of the English version of UNESCO's "Recommendations", the protection objects are All expressed as folklore, and the corresponding translation of this concept in Chinese is the well-known "folk custom" or "folk literature." Whether it is English folklore or Chinese folklore or folk literature, it has long been the basic terms constituting the discipline of folkloristics.
However, the Chinese version of the "Proposal" did not use terms that were long known to people in Chinese, but invented "folk creation" to refer to folk traditional culture.
Such a translation may be to highlight the copyright-related meanings contained in the "Proposal", but it greatly obscures the rich connotations of "folk customs" or "folk literature" that have long become a common word in Chinese.
In particular, the meanings of "collective","inherited" and "anonymous" contained therein are simply beyond the specious term "folk creation".
This newly created translation can even be easily understood as a "work created immediately by non-professionals", thus creating more obstacles to the promotion and popularization of the "Recommendation" initiative.
In addition, this translation method also intentionally or unintentionally ignores the efforts of workers in the field of China folklore (including folk literature research) for nearly a century-of course, to a certain extent, this may also reflect the weakness of the discipline construction of China folklore.
In short, such translation actually brings unnecessary difficulties to the Chinese society to correctly understand UNESCO's original intention on related issues.
4.
Confusion in prosperity-a dilemma in folklore Theoretically speaking, the vitality of folk culture lies in the interaction between groups.
Take China for example, we have had countless examples over the years: for a certain folk event, many places often claim ownership (or invention rights) of it.
Where exactly is Liang Zhu from? Where is the Fuxi Temple more realistic? Where was Zhuge Liang born? Such disputes between different places, while expressing their respective demands for relevant cultural rights, objectively contribute to the acceptance, inheritance and strengthening of a cultural phenomenon on a wider scale.
It is precisely because of this constant debate that culture has been continuously passed down and strengthened.
However, today's representative works directory system often allows the ownership of a culture to be institutionalized and standardized officially recognized, which actually plays a role in restricting or even stifling the inheritance and continuation of culture.
References: