Folklore Studies 1945-1970

(1)

Ryszard Górski

Folklore Studies 1945-1970

Literary Studies in Poland 8, 173-203

(2)

Les In form ation s 173

W h o e v e r follow ed the d ev e lo p m e n t o f folklore studies in P o la n d in the last q u a r t e r o f the c e n tu ry h as to ack n o w le d g e the results a c h iev ed in this field to be in m a n y respects im posing. If o n ly for this r e a s o n th e p re s e n ta tio n o f w h a t h as been achieved in this a r e a o f sc h o la rsh ip is n o t an easy task. T h e difficulty arises n o t o n ly fro m the necessity o f covering q u a n tita tiv e ly rich a c h ie v e m en t b u t also from its variety, since it en c o m p a sse s all th a t has b een acc o m p lish e d in the collecting a n d re c o rd in g o f folklore, its d isse m in a tio n a n d p u b lic a tio n , as well as stu d ies o f this sphere o f creative activity o f the people.

T h e s itu a tio n is m a d e even m o re c o m p lic a te d by the fact th at re p re se n ta tiv es o f vario u s disciplines, a n d n o t only folklorists, have been c o n c e r n e d with folklore. O bv io u sly , this h a d its consequences, since e th n o g r a p h e r s , linguists a n d literary critics dealt w ith folklore from the p o in t o f view o f their o w n interests a n d needs, they differed in the a p p r o a c h to folklore a n d c o n c e p tio n s o f the p r o b le m s involved in its study. A l t h o u g h their achievem ents were n o t alw ays fo u n d satis fa c to ry by folklorists, they u n d o u b te d ly deserve their place in th e gen eral s u m m in g u p o f the p o st-w a r s itu a tio n in this field o f study, for only by t a k in g in to a c c o u n t all th a t has b een d o n e by those c o n c e r ned w ith fo lk lo re is it possible to d e te rm in e w h a t really h as been acco m p lish ed .

T h e p re se n t s tu d y aim s n o t o n ly a t b rie f p re se n ta tio n o f the a c h ie v e m en ts o f folklore studies in the last q u a r t e r o f the c e n tu ry b u t also at o u tlin in g b o th the tendencies a n d directio n s o f the d e v e lo p m e n t in the field a n d the c o n d itio n s in which the studies were u n d e r ta k e n a n d c a rrie d o u t. It is q u ite im possible, how ever, to e x h a u st all the p ro b le m s , n o r is it possible to m e n tio n , even in notes, all p u b lic a tio n s dealin g with folklore.

1

It is to be o b se rv e d th a t the term “fo lk lo r e ” has recently b e c o m e f a s h i o n a b l e . 1 It is very often used, a n d so m etim es even m isused.

F o lk lo re S tu d ies 1945— 1970

1 CT. J. B u r s z t a . lo lk lo r y z m u P o lsce ( F olklorism in P olam i), | i n :] lo l k l o r n życiu w sp ó łc zesn y m i I-o!które in M odern L ife), P o zn a ń 1970, p. 9 — 11.

(3)

174 fin Information

which results in extending its m e a n in g a n d co n se q u e n tly , th ro u g h the usage not alw ays justified o r necessary a n d t h r o u g h referring it to v ario u s p h e n o m e n a , leads to c e rta in am biguities a n d abusage. T h e c a re e r o f the term sta rte d no t so long ago, for o n ly after the war, a n d was m a d e possible by the i m p o r t a n t c h a n g e s a n d t r a n s f o r m a tio n s in the social a ttitu d e to the creative w o rk o f the folk. It is no t insignificant th a t w h a t a ro u se s the liveliest social in terest in the folk c u ltu re in general is the c o m p lex o f p h e n o m e n a c o v ered by the term “ fo lk lo re .” T o so m e extent this is also c o n d i tio n e d by the fact th a t these p h e n o m e n a have been e x p lo red at a g re a te r pace a n d m o re vig orously th a n o th e r spheres o f folk a rt an d activity. T h e p o p u la rity o f folklore (b o th the term a n d the referent) is c o n n e c te d with the wider social p h e n o m e n o n th a t c a n be called “ folklore sn o b b e ry ,” o b se rv a b le f o r som e time a m o n g the in h a b ita n ts o f cities as well as with general social rise a n d n o b ilita tio n o f folk c u ltu re, which has b eco m e an i m p o r t a n t a n d generally accessible e lem en t o f the n a tio n a l cu ltu re as a whole.

As we know , the creative w o rk a n d activity o f the c o u n try folk were ta k e n an interest in r a th e r early. F o r a long tim e the a tte n tio n was cen tred o n those m a n ife s ta tio n s which later o n c a m e to be k n o w n u n d e r the n a m e o f f o lk lo re .2 A keen interest in th ose p h e n o m e n a was ta k e n n o t o n ly in the R o m a n tic period. A lth o u g h the very te rm “fo lk lo re ” was in tro d u c e d as early as in the m id d le o f the 19th c e n tu ry a n d ra th e r quickly assim ilated in the E u r o p e a n sc h o la r ship, in P o la n d it a p p e a r e d m u c h la ter a n d its p o p u la rity was by no m e a n s i m m e d ia te .3

T h is can be explained by the fact th a t a t the tim e w hen the term e n te re d the E u r o p e a n s ch o larsh ip , in P o la n d the interest in the folk a n d folk a rt subsided a n d e x u lta tio n s a b o u t the values o f folklore were replaced after 1846 by the slogans o f the im m a tu r ity a n d lack o f creative abilities o f the folk a n d by e x h o r ta tio n s to the w ork at the f o u n d a tio n s . C o n s e q u e n tly , the focus o f interest shifted fro m the folk cu ltu re a n d creativity to the p r o g r a m m e o f e d u c a tio n

: C f. sta tem en ts o n the subject in D zie je f o lk lo r y s ty k i p o ls k ie j 1 8 0 0 — 1863.

E poka p r z e d k o lb e r g o w s k a ( H isto ry o f Polish F olklore S tu d y 1 8 0 0 — 1863. B efore K o l b e rg ), ed . H . K a p ełu ś, J. K rzy ża n o w sk i, W roclaw 1970.

' See J. K r z y ż a n o w s k i, “ F o lk lo r e ,” [in:] S ło w n ik fo lk lo ru p o lsk ie g o (D ic tio n a r y

(4)

Les In form ation s 175 o f th e folk, o f p r e p a r in g th em for a n active p a r t in the social life in the c h a n g e d , p o st-e n fra n c h ise m en t co n d itio n s. T h is fact u n d o u b te d ly left its m a r k o n c o n te m p o r a r y studies o n the folk a n d fo lk lo r e .4 P r e s u m a b ly a certain role was played by o th e r fa c to rs as well. In th e m id -1 9 th c e n tu ry there a p p e a r e d in the E u r o p e a n s tu d y o f fo lk lo re n ew tendencies o f basin g it o n a different, scientific f o u n d a t i o n , o f b re a k in g with w h a t h a d b een professed in the R o m a n tic p e rio d , as m a n ifested by the em ergence o f new c o n c e p ts a n d tre n d s in s c h o la rsh ip , such as folklore a n d study o f folklore. T hese were n o t a ssim ila te d in P o la n d because the a tm o s p h e r e was n o t co n d u c iv e to th e m , c o n t e m p o r a r y scholars being either a d h e re n ts o f the R o m a n t i c s ch o o l o r its follow ers a n d in c a p a b le o f a p p re c ia tin g the perspectives these c o n c e p ts a n d tre n d s o p e n e d befo re the s tu d y o f folk c u ltu re. T h a t this was the case is p ro v e d by the resp o n se to the d a r in g b o o k o f R y sz a rd B erw iń sk i.5

A lso foreign w o rk s o n folklore a n d e t h n o g r a p h y p u b lish e d a t the tim e failed to call fo rth an y lively response. In vain w o u ld we lo o k fo r “ fo lk lo r e ” in c o n t e m p o r a r y en c y c lo p a ed ia s; no such entry is to be f o u n d in S. O r g e l b r a n d ’s E n cyklo p ed ia pow szechna ( U niversal E n cyclo 

paedia) o f 18626 o r in its later, 1878 edition, o r in E n cyklo p ed ia ogólnej w iedzy lu d zk iej ( Encyclopaedia o f G eneral H um an Know led g e) 7

w h ic h a p p e a r e d u n d e r the auspices o f “T y g o d n ik Ilu s tr o w a n y ” a n d “ W ę d r o w ie c ” (jo u rn als o f the time).

I t is u n d e r s t a n d a b l e th a t the o n e to in tro d u c e a n d p o p u la r iz e it w as to be a re p re se n ta tiv e o f the new g e n e ra tio n o f folklorists, an a d h e r e n t a n d p r o p a g a t o r o f new scientific m e th o d s in the s tu d y o f folklore, th e a u t h o r o f p io n e e r studies o n tra d itio n s , tales a n d songs, J a n K a r ło w ic z .8 H e in tro d u c e d the term in vol. II o f “ W is ła ,” a p erio d ic a l in w hich he c o n s ta n tly p re se n te d a n d p o p u la riz e d novel tre n d s, m e th o d s a n d achievem ents in the field. R e c o m m e n d e d by K arłow icz, the term m et, h ow ever, with o b je c tio n s a n d d o u b t s o n

4 Cf. R. G ó r s k i . L w o w sk ie . [in:] D zie je f o lk lo r y s ty k i p o lsk ie j, p. 3 5 4 — 357. T. B r z o z o w s k a . B erw iń ski ja k o f o lk lo r y s ta (B e rw iń sk i a s a F o lk lo rist), [in:]

M ie d z y d a w n ym i a n o w y m i l a t y . .. (B etw een the O ld D ays a n d T o d a y . . .), ed. R. G ó r sk i,

J. K rzy ża n o w sk i, W ro cla w 1970, p. 98, 101 — 103, Stu d ia F o lk lo ry sty c zn e. 6 W arszaw a 1862.

7 W arszaw a 1877.

(5)

176 The Inform ation

th e p a r t o f venerable a n d m e rito r io u s O s k a r K o lb e rg . H is o p in io n is w o r t h q u o tin g , since it seem s to b e typical o f a c e r ta in circle o f tra d itio n a lis ts :

I m ust c o n fe ss that the (n e o -E n g lish ) w ord “fo lk lo r e ” ( “W isła ,” II, p. 84), d e n o t ing in fact P o lish lu d o g a d a ctw o [fo lk -ta lk in g ], lu d o w ied ztw o [folk k n ow led g e], th ou gh a ccep ted in m any co u n tr ies, is rather rep ellen t to m e, if o n ly b e c a u se it c a n n o t be e a sily a d o p ted to the o rg a n ism o f o u r to n g u e, and ev en u sed b y the F rench, Ita lia n s, Spaniards, e tc ., it strik es u s as so m e u n p le a sa n t c a c o p h o n y , so m e v io len ce. In stead , I w o u ld w illin g ly v o te for the w ord “d e m o tic s ,” p r o p o se d b y the P ortu gu ese a u th o r B rag.9

T o som e extent K a rło w ic z s h a re d the o b jectio n s o f th e a u t h o r o f

L u d ( The F olk), as s h o w n by the follow ing f r a g m e n t f r o m his letter

to K o lb e r g :

I d o agree w ith y o u r o p in io n a b o u t certain h o rn y n ess, so to sa y , o f the w ord “fo lk lo r e ” ; w e accep ted it as a n ecessary evil an d fo llo w in g th e ex a m p le o f oth er literatures w hich have g iv en it the right o f citizen sh ip . O f the term s p ro p o sed by you,

lu d o w ie d ztw o and “d e m o tic s ,” the form er seem s to be q u ite a d e q u a te an d I shall try

to p o p u la rize it; the latter has the a d v a n ta g e o f b ein g sh ort a n d a d a p ta b le, but it strik es o n e as fo r e ig n .10

Y e t the te rm m u s t h av e quickly s to p p e d strik in g h im as “h o r n y , ” fo r he f o u n d it c o n v e n ie n t a n d a t the sam e tim e in d isp e n sa b le for d e sig n a tin g a d istin ct c o m p le x o f p h e n o m e n a , m a r k e d w ith specific c h a ra c teristic s a n d features a n d distin g u ish ed f ro m th e fo lk c u ltu re in general as the subject o f the n ew discipline. A n d as he w a s especially in terested in th o se m atters, h e e x h o rte d to c a rry o u t fo lk lo re studies o n a b r o a d scale, a n d set a m b itio u s a n d serious ta s k s b efore those c o n c e rn e d w ith folklore. All this f o u n d its ex p ressio n in th e p a p e r he delivered a t the C o n g re ss o f Polish M e n o f L etters a n d J o u rn a lis ts in L v o v . 11

Sim ilar subjects were freq u en tly ta k e n up by h im in “ W is ła ,” the p e rio d ical w hich u n d o u b t e d l y p a tr o n iz e d the in c ip ie n t folklorist m o v e m e n t b a s e d o n scientific f o u n d a tio n s . H e n o t o n ly p r o p a g a te d new te rm in o lo g y a n d n ew scholarly ideas b u t, w h a t is even m o r e

9 O . K o lb e r g ’s letter o f 2 .0 9 .1 8 8 8 , D W O K , vol. 66, p. 530. 10 J. K a r lo w ic z ’s letter o f 8 .0 9 .1 8 8 8 , ibidem , p. 536.

II J. K a r ł o w i c z , N a ro d o w y f o lk lo r p o ls k i ( P olish N a tio n a l F olklore), [in:]

P a m ię tn ik Z ja zd u L ite r a tó w i D z ie n n ik a r zy P o lsk ich (Journal o f the C on gress o f Polish M en o f L e tte rs a n d J o u rn a lists), L vov 1894.

(6)

L es In form ation s 177 i m p o r t a n t , tried to im p la n t in P o la n d new c o n c e p tio n s a n d m e th o d s to be used a n d developed in scholarly activity.

A clo ser lo o k at the very process o f p o p u la r iz a tio n o f th e new te rm in o lo g y is r a th e r in structive o f a ttitu d e s to w a r d s novelties a m o n g th o se c o n c e r n e d w ith folklore a n d the study o f it. Even a c u rso ry re a d in g o f a n n u a l sets o f “ W is la ” a n d “ L u d , ” tw o j o u r n a l s d ealin g with the p r o b le m s o f folklore a n d folklore study, allows us to see the difference in their a p p r o a c h . It is by far m o re difficult to find any reflections o f those novelties in the trad itio n a lly o rie n te d —especially in the m a t t e r s o f m e th o d o lo g y —“ L u d .” O bv io u sly , those p ro b lem s, co u ld n o t be entirely ig nored, c o n sid e rin g the pro g ress a n d results o b t a i n e d in folkloric studies in E u ro p e . T hese deserved at least to be in fo rm e d o f an d , to be sure, the e d ito rs o f “ L u d ” did p ro v id e such i n f o r m a t i o n . 12 In 1901 there a p p e a re d , fin anced by T o w a rz y s tw o Lu- d o z n a w c z e (F o lk lo r e Society), G . L. G o m m e ’s F olklore, while a n o t h e r b o o k by this a u t h o r was p u b lish ed in the sam e y ear in W a r s a w . 14 D espite this, an y influence o f the then fo r m u la te d folkloric ideas o n the w o rk o f the m e m b e rs o f T o w a rz y s tw o L u d o z n a w c z e a n d th ose c o n t r i b u t i n g to L u d is h a rd ly noticeable. T o a c o n sid e ra b le n u m b e r o f th em we c o u ld a p p ly L. K rzy w ic k i’s r e m a r k th a t “ in the field o f fo lk lo re [...] there were m a n y eager w o r k e r s ” w hose “ theoretical b a c k g r o u n d d id n o t equal their g o o d intentions, [...] a n d som etim es was n o n e a t a ll” ; 15 they were en th u siastic am a te u r-co lle c to rs, w ith o u t scientific a m b itio n s , a n d did n o t re s p o n d to m o d e r n c o n c e p tio n s a b o u t fo lk lo re a n d m e th o d o lo g y o f folkloric s tu d y w hich often sh o o k c u r r e n t o p i n i o n s o n the subject. It was n o t only the term inology, elsew here a c c e p te d a n d in general use for so m e time, which was fo u n d o b je c tio n a b le ; it was also the very expansiveness o f the new discip line b r e a k in g loose fro m e th n o g r a p h y a n d c o n s e q u e n t specialization

12 See for in sta n ce H. K a s p e r o w i c z . F o lk lo r y sty k a u R osji ( F olklore S tu d y

in R ussia), “ L u d ,” 1898, vol. IV.

14 G . L. G o m m e , F olklor. P o d ręczn ik dla za jm u ją cyi li się lu d o zn a w stw em , transl. from the E n g lish by W . S zu k iew icz, ed. with an in tr o d u ctio n by S. E iia sz-R a - d z ik o w sk i, K r a k ó w 1901.

14 G . L. G o m m e , F olklor w etn o lo g ii, transl. from the English by A. B qkow ska, W arszaw a 1901.

15 L. K r z y w i c k i , N au ki a n tro p o lo g iczn e (A n th ro p o lo g ica l Science). “ K su jżk a ,” 1903, N o 13, p. 504.

(7)

in the study o f folk cultu re, as well as the e m p h a s is p u t by folklorists on the scientific a p p r o a c h to folklore a n d o n n ew m e th o d s o f in vestigation, which did n o t a ro u s e e n th u sia sm .

It is u n d e r s ta n d a b le then th a t in the s h a r p p olem ics betw een E d w a rd P o ręb o w icz a n d M ak sy m ilia n K a w c z y ń s k i 16 c o n c e rn in g the vital p r o b le m : folklore a n d literary history, a n d th u s r a t h e r basic p ro b le m s fro m the p o in t o f view o f every s tu d e n t o f folklore, c o n te m p o r a r y folklorists did n o t really p a rticip ate. A n d yet the m a tte r s disp u ted were not o n ly details o r p a rtic u la r is s u e s ,17 for a n u m b e r o f m o re general q u estio n s were involved as well, such as usefulness o f folkloric studies in h is to rio lite ra ry w orks, in te rre la tio n betw een folklore a n d literature, a n d the q u estio n if a n d to w h a t ex ten t the folk could be c o n sid ered the c r e a to r o f c u ltu ra l c o n te n ts t h a t f u n c tioned in th a t social g ro u p . A r b itr a r y s ta te m e n ts a n d a rg u m e n ts used in the q u a rre l o ften m o v e d it fro m the level o f the scholarly p olem ics to that o f an ideological o n e . 18

It tu rn e d o u t th a t m a n y o f the folkloric p r o b le m s were o f a c o n troversial c h a ra c ter, t h a t the new discipline did n o t confine itself to collecting folklore a n d d isse m in a tin g it in p rin t, th a t is to w h a t m ost folklorists o f the time c o n sid e re d their task, b u t t h a t it a t te m p te d at studying folklore in the h istorical aspect a n d ag ain st the b r o a d c o m p a ra tiv e b a c k g r o u n d , arriv in g at c o n c lu sio n s w hich were “o u t r a g e o u s" in their divergency fro m w h at h a d been h ith e rto ascertained. O bviously, all this did no t win m a n y a d h e r e n ts fo r the new tren d , an d after K a rlo w ic z ’s d e a th a n d with “ W isła " su sp e n d e d , it lost its s u p p o rt an d for som e time there was silence o n the folkloric fro n t. T h e process o f folklore studies gro w in g se p a ra te fr o m the study o f folk cu ltu re in general b ecam e su ppressed, research w as c a rrie d o u t a t a m uch slower pace a n d professional press only s e ld o m used the te rm i nology a n d c o n c e p ts which sh o u ld by th a t tim e h av e been generally accepted for g o o d . T h ey were not, how ever, fo r the new te n d e n cies met with indifference a n d resistance o f the m a jo rity o f folklorists

10 M. K a w c z y ń s k i , F olklor a h istoria lite ra tu ry . P ism o p o le m ic zn e ( F olklore a n d

L ite ra ry H isto ry. A P o le m ic a l E ssa y), K rak ów 1903.

*' See J. K r z y ż a n o w s k i , “A m o r i P sy c h e ,” [in:] S ło w n ik fo lk lo ru p o lsk ie g o , p. Hi — 17. T he reader w ill also find there a b ib liograp h y o f the p o lem ic s.

(8)

Les Inform ations 179 w h o r a t h e r d is a p p r o v e d of. the division o f roles in investigating life a n d c u ltu r e o f the folk.

H e n c e a s y m p to m a tic non-existence o f the very ñ a m e a n d c o n c ep t “f o lk lo r e ” in the w o rk s o f the time, w hich in fact dealt with fo lk lo re . O d d ly en o u g h , even such a m b itio u s b o o k s as A d a m F is c h e r’s

L u d p o ls k i ( The Polish F o lk ) 19 o r J a n S tan isław B y s tr o ñ ’s W stęp do ludoznaw stw a p o lsk ie g o (Introduction to Polish F olklore S tu d ie s )20 only

generally t o u c h u p o n the p r o b le m o r o m it it a lto g eth er. If the p ro b le m s o f m o d e r n fo lk lo re stu d y are p resen t a t all, it is in the w o rk s o f p r o m i n e n t sociologists o f the period, such as L u d w ik K r z y w i c k i 21 a n d S tefan C z a r n o w s k i .22

A n a d d itio n a l im pulse to developing folkloric studies was so o n to c o m e fro m literary criticism, o w in g to Ju lian K rz y ż a n o w s k i w h o arg u ed ind isp en sab ility o f referring m a n y q u estio n s c o n c e rn in g b o th old an d new literatu re to results o f folklore studies. W ith his b o o k s a n d essays he s h o w e d h o w folkloric d a t a help ed to explain a n u m b e r o f essential literary p ro b le m s . In c o n tr a s t w ith the sta n d in g tr a d itio n th e a u t h o r o f P o lska b a jka ludowa w u kła d zie sy ste m a ty c zn y m

( The S y ste m a tic C atalogue o f the Polish F olk Tale) did n o t limit h i m 

self to s tu d y in g o n ly the influence folklore exerted o n literature, fo r he recognized the in terrelatio n s o f these tw o spheres o f cu ltu re a n d th u s a d v a n c e d the h ith e rto neglected study o f the effect o f folklore o n literature. All this f o u n d expression in such w o rk s o f his, as

R o m a n s p o ls k i w ieku X V I (Polish 16th-C entury R o m a n c e )2* a n d P aralele (P arallels) 24 w h ere he c o n ta in e d n o t o n ly interesting o b s e r 

v a tio n s c o n c e rn in g in te rre la tio n o f literatu re a n d f o lk lo re as well as revisions o f a c c e p ted views o n certain w riters, b u t also sta te m e n ts

L vov 1926.

20 L vov 1926. 2nd e d itio n appeared in 1939.

21 C f. the b ib lio g r a p h y o f L. K r z y w i c k i ’s w ritin gs in clu d ed in his S tu dia

so c jo lo g ic zn e (S o c io lo g ic a l S tu d ie s). W arszaw a 1924, pp. 299 — 340; K . Z a w i s t o w i c z , D z ia ła ln o ść p ro f. L u d w ik a K r zy w ic k ie g o na polu lu d o zn a w stw a p o lsk ie g o (P ro fesso r L. K r z y w ic k i’s W ork in the F ield o f F olklore S tu d y), “ W iedza i Ż y c ie ,” 1936,

N o 1 0 - 1 2 .

22 J. K r z y ż a n o w s k i , “C za rn o w sk i Stefan Z y g m u n t,” [in:] S ło w n ik fo lk lo ru

p o lsk ie g o , p. 7 1 —72.

24 Lublin 1934.

24 J. K r z y ż a n o w s k i . P aralele. S tu dia p o ró w n a w c ze z p o g ra n ic za lite ra tu r y i fo l

(9)

180

The Informal ion

which threw a new light o n b o th the past o f fo lk lo re a n d fo lk lo re itself. T h u s he d e m o n s tr a te d usefulness o f the discipline, especially in elucidating those areas w h ere literatu re a n d fo lk lo re meet. T h e o r e tical justification o f such studies a n d their perspectives Ju lia n K r z y żanow ski presen ted in his article L itera tu ra a fo lk lo r (L itera tu re a n d

fo lk lo r e )

.2-2

T h e previous section has dealt r a th e r extensively with the b eg in n in g s o f m o d e rn folklore studies in P o la n d , for these c o n d itio n s, difficul ties an d o bstacles in the d e v e lo p m e n t o f the discipline are to be r e m e m bered if we w ant to see clearly the p o s t-w a r s itu a tio n o f folkloric study. Even in the last q u a r t e r o f the cen tu ry th e re were voices r e m i niscent o f these o ld positions, u n d e r m in in g o r q u e stio n in g p u r p o s e fulness o f folkloric study as a se p a ra te a n d in d e p e n d e n t discipline. T o be sure, the ra n g e a n d subject o f investigation as well as the m e t h o dology are still a m a tte r o f d isp u te n o t only betw een e t h n o g r a p h e r s an d folklorists, b u t also a m o n g folklorists them selves.26 U n d o u b tedly, how ever, all this takes place in the s itu a tio n by far m o re fa v o u rab le a n d c o n d u civ e to folklore studies.

T h e official policy o f the state a u th o ritie s a n d new social a n d p o li tical c o n d itio n s b r o u g h t a b o u t essential c h a n g e s in the a t titu d e o f the society to b o th c o u n try people a n d folk artists. A keen interest is taken in folk arts, songs a n d music, fo lk lo re is in vogue a n d it has becom e an i m p o r ta n t elem ent o f n a tio n a l festivities (e.g. the national harvest festival) a n d local c u sto m s (e.g. tra d itio n a l floating o f w reath s d o w n the Vistula o n J u n e 24). It h as been a c k n o w le d g e d as deserving official s u p p o rt a n d cu ltiv atio n , as m anifested by the so-called folklore days, org an ized a n d kept in v a rio u s places o f P o la n d . N u m e ro u s a m a t e u r g ro u p s c h o o s e either exclusively o r m ain ly folk songs a n d d ances as their reperto ire, no t to m e n tio n such p r o f e s sional ensem bles as “ M a z o w sz e ” a n d “ Ś lą sk ” w hich for years h ave p o p u la riz e d Polish folklore b o t h in P o la n d a n d a b r o a d . C o n s e q u e n tly , folklore has ceased to be a p ro p e rty o f the definite social e n v i r o n

-1' "Pam iętnik L iteracki," 1936, fasc. 2.

(10)

L es Inform ation s 181 m e n t a n d o n e social g roup, n o t easily .accessible o u tsid e it, a n d has g a in e d w ider influence, m eeting the needs o f a w ider public bey o n d the collective w hich created its form s.

W ith this b ro a d e n in g o f the sp h ere o f influence the co n n e c tio n b e tw e e n the c r e a to r an d the p e r f o r m e r o f folklore a n d folklore itself, h ith e rto very close, h as lo o se n e d ; folklore begins to function in different ways a n d frequently quite o u ts id e the e n v iro n m e n t which p r o d u c e d it, th u s beco m in g an a u t o n o m o u s c u ltu ra l value.

T h e process b egan with collecting fo lk lo re a n d dissem inating it in p rin t, in effect o f which it entered w ithin the m o re general range th a n w hen it h a d existed in o ra l tr a d itio n only. F u r th e r a d v an ce c a m e with m ass m edia, o w in g to w hich fo lk lo re w on a still larger a u d ie n c e a n d was p o p u la riz e d o n a n u n p a ra lle le d scale. T h e nobilita- tio n a n d a p p re c ia tio n o f values in h eren t in fo lk lo re resulted in great d e m a n d for this k in d o f art.

T h is is testified by the n u m b e r o f a m a t e u r g r o u p s 27 for w h o m fo l k lo re is b o th a n in sp ira tio n a n d s u b sta n c e o f their activity, a n d —even m o re clearly —by the size o f p o st-w a r ed itio n s o f collections o f folk songs a n d tales. F o r instance, 2 e ditions o f Ju lia n P rz y b o s ’s Ja b loneezka

(A n A pple Tree) r a n up to 10,000 copies, in as m a n y copies A d o l f

D y g a c z a n d J ó z e f Ligęza’s P ieśni ludowe Ś lą sk a O polskiego ( Folk

S o n g s o f Silesia) were available, a n d e d itio n s o f successive volum es

o f K o lb e rg ra n g e d fro m 4,200 to 6,200 c o p i e s .28 A s a rule, collec tions o f tales h a d larger editions, e.g. P o lskie baśnie ludowe ( Polish

Folk Tales) edited by T o m a s z Jo d e łk o (50,000) o r W oda żyw a. Baśnie p isa rzy p o lskich (L ive Water. Tales b y Polish W riters) edited by Ste

f an ia W o r t m a n (30,000).29

A d m itted ly , f ro m the m id -5 0 ’s ed itio n s o f collections o f folk songs have gro w n c o n sid e ra b ly sm aller, in c o n t r a s t with the editions o f folk tales.

27 See C z. K a ł u ż n y , F olklor i je g o u pow szech n ien ie w d zia ła ln o ści kulturalno-

-o św ia to w e j >r P o lsce L u d o w ej ( F olklore a n d Its P o p u la riza tio n in C u ltu ra l a n d E du ca tio n a l A c tiv itie s in Polish P eo p le's R epublic), “ Literatura L u d o w a ,” 1966, N o . 4 — 6,

p. 7 5 - 9 1 .

28 M an y m ore such ex a m p les co u ld be given.

29 A lso other c o lle c tio n s had large e d itio n s, .for in sta n ce: N o w y k ie rm a sz bajek (W arszaw a 1965) —2 0 ,0 0 0 ; M . O k ę c k a - B r o m k o w a , N a d je z io r e m b a jk a śp i (O lsztyn 1962) — 5 ,000; B. L e ś m i a n , K lech d y p o ls k ie (W arszaw a 1959) —20,000.

(11)

In presen tin g the s itu a tio n o f folklore stu d y in the last few decades we sh o u ld n o t o v e rlo o k the fact t h a t they h ave h a d ins titu tio n al s u p p o r t o f the k in d o f w hich o ld e r stu d e n ts o f folklore c o u ld have o n ly d re a m e d . M a n u s c r ip ts o f O s k a r K o lb e r g ’s w o rk s m a y serve h ere as a sufficient exam ple. D u r i n g the 20 years after his d e a th o n ly 5 v o lu m es o f his w o rk s were p u b lish e d , n o t followed by any fu rth e r v olum es for m a n y years. It was o n ly after the reso lu tion o f the P e o p le ’s State C o u n cil o f 1960 th a t th e w hole o f K o lb e r g ’s o u t p u t began to be published, first the series o f w o rk s he h a d pub lish ed in his lifetime, th e n 11 v o lu m es o f his p o s t h u m o u s writings a n d 3 v o lu mes o f letters. T h e re are also o t h e r exam ples, th o u g h n o t so im pressive as t h a t o f the ed itio n o f K o lb e rg , o f m a k in g u p f o r the p a st negligences.

As it h as b een alre a d y said it was n o t o n ly folklorists w h o dealt with folklore, a lth o u g h fo r th e m it was the m a in subject o f investi gation. A lso rep resen tativ es o f o t h e r disciplines t o o k it into c o n s id e ra tio n a n d stu d ied in c e rta in aspects, f r o m the p o i n t o f view o f a given b r a n c h o f stu dy. M u c h a tte n tio n was p a id to folklore by e th n o g ra p h e rs , musicologists, literary critics a n d linguists, especially dialectologists. T h is o f course is tru e n o t only o f the p o s t- w a r period.

W h a t is to be tre a te d as a real novum o f the p e r io d is the e m a n  c ip a tio n o f folklore studies, the fact t h a t they h ave b e c o m e . i n d e p e n d e n t fro m e th n o g r a p h y . T h is e m a n c ip a tio n is o f c o u rse in a c c o r d an ce with the general ten d en cy in the d e v e lo p m e n t o f science, its r a p id a n d eventful pro g ress a c c o m p a n ie d by n a r r o w specializations, b u t it is also a result o f reco g n itio n o f the fact t h a t study o f folk culture, like o f cu ltu re in general, req u ires m a n y tech n iq u es a n d m eth o d s, fo r it deals w ith so m e th in g w hich is h etero g e n e o u s, m a d e u p by v arious elements.

Yet this e m a n c ip a tio n o f fo lk lo re studies is o fte n re g a rd e d in term s o f a lm o s t coup d ’e ta t a g a in st e th n o g r a p h y , o f dim in ish in g e th n o g ra p h ic a l p r o p e rty . T h u s the s tu d y o f fo lk lo re a n d e t h n o g r a p h y are set in no t alw ays justified o p p o s itio n , a n d v a rio u s m u tu a l claim s a n d grievances are m anifest even in different ideas a b o u t w h a t the w o rd “fo lk lo re ” d e n o te s a n d w h a t its ra n g e is. N o t infrequently the folklorist is seen as a n in tr u d e r in w h a t has h ith e rto been e th n o g ra p h ic a l realm , as a rival w h o a p p r o p r i a t e d m o r e interesting research th em es a n d subjects. Such a n a t titu d e seems groundless,

(12)

L es Inform ation s

183

fo r it is o b v io u s t h a t b o th the subjects a n d the range o f these disciplines do n o t overlap , a n d even if they s o m etim es do, the sam e p h e n o m e n o n is c o n sid e re d fro m two different p o in ts o f view an d stu d ie d by u sing different m e th o d s (cf. the role o f textual a n d aesthetic analysis o f folklore, o r philological m e th o d in folklore studies). It d o es n o t necessarily follow th a t they are to be set in o p p o s itio n , o r t h a t in o v e r-e m p h a siz in g the differences we are to f i>et tlie p r o b lems a so lu tio n to w hich c a n be fo u n d only in co o ition.

F o r the sake o f clarity it m u st be said th a t it was a tte m p ts at defining the m e a n in g a n d ra n g e o f the w o rd “fo lk lo r e ” , an d ^ ;ci- fically its second elem ent, which b r o u g h t a b o u t the m o s t heated d is c ussions a n d d isputes. A s to the first —“f o lk ” —it was generally in ter p r e te d u n a n im o u s ly , th o u g h som etim es the te rm was u n d e r s to o d in a n ah isto rical way, w ith o u t p r o p e r a tte n tio n p a id to the fact th at h istorically it co v ers different social classes, a n d ap p lied to the feudal e p o c h it m e a n s s o m e th in g else th a n w h en ap p lied to th a t o f c a p i talism . It is o n ly t h r o u g h historical analysis th a t we can d ete rm in e w h ich social g r o u p s in a given p e rio d are to be treated as the

“ f o lk .”

R e c o g n itio n o f this is crucial for the w ay in which folklore is conceived. It d e m a n d s t h a t we sh o u ld see in folklore a historical p r o d u c t , vario u sly c o n d itio n e d a n d fo rm e d in the c o u rse o f history in different c irc u m s ta n c e s a n d by different g r o u p s deem ed as folk in a given p erio d . A t the sam e tim e it p revents us fro m tre a tin g folklore as a p r o d u c t o f creative activity o f o n e social e n v iro n m e n t only, fo r ex a m p le o f c o u n t r y folk, which was a c o m m o n e r r o r o f o ld er fo lk lo re studies, w h ere r e m a r k s a n d o b s e rv a tio n s p ertin e n t to the fe u d a l e p o c h were ex te n d e d o n the fo lk lo re o f capitalism . T h u s c h a n g e s a n d n ew p h e n o m e n a in folklore, such as folklore o f the w o rk in g class, were o v e rlo o k e d .

A s we h ave a lre a d y m e n tio n e d , the m a in c o n tro v ersy betw een folklorists a n d e t h n o g r a p h e r s c o n c e rn e d the in te rp re ta tio n o f the s e c o n d elem ent o f the te rm , “ lo r e ,” as this was to d e te rm in e the m e a n in g a n d ra n g e o f the co n c e p t, a n d th ereb y the very subject o f

30 A co m p r e h e n siv e treatm ent o f the subject the reader will find in I'olklor

i etn ografiya, L enin grad 1970, esp e cia lly in K. C h i s t o v ’s essay under the sam e title

(13)

184 The Information

folklore study. T h e scope o f this article does n o t allow us to q u o te definitions o f folklore as fo rm u la te d by representatives o f b o th e t h n o g ra p h y a n d folklorists. 31 It h as to be stated, ho w ev er, th at differ ences in u n d e rs ta n d in g the c o n c e p t are co n sid erab le, a n d no t only betw een e th n o g r a p h e r s a n d folklorists, b u t also a m o n g folklorists themselves. To confine ourselves to P o la n d , the m e a n in g o f the w ord “ f o lk lo re ” is m uch wider for e th n o g r a p h e r s th a n it is for folklorists, as for the form er it covers also w h at used to be called social an d spiritual cu ltu re o f the p e o p le ,32 a n d in fact it is o n ly m aterial c u ltu re that it does not cover.

T h is c o n c e p tio n seems to have a n u m b e r o f d r a w b a c k s . If folk lorists were to u n d e r s ta n d folklore in this way, it w ould m e a n serious d im in u tio n o f the e th n o g r a p h ic a l d o m a i n ; do u b tless, ho w ev er, too wide a sense ascribed to folklore leads to o b lite r a tio n o f differences betw een e t h n o g r a p h y a n d folklore study, b o t h disciplines dealing with the p h e n o m e n a co v ered by the term.

H a v in g indicated v a rio u s possibilities o f in te r p r e ta tio n o f “ fo lk lo re ,” we sh o u ld define now in w h a t m e a n in g it is practically used in the f o lk lo ris t’s w ork. H ere it d e n o te s a m u c h n a r r o w e r sp h ere th a n for e th n o g r a p h e r s , since it signifies a c e rta in co m p le x o f p h e n o m e n a in which the m e a n s o f expression is the w o rd , certain a rt which m ay be described as a specific a rt o f the w o r d . 33 Its peculiarity consists in the fact th at the w o rd does no t a p p e a r here in the p u re form , b u t o th e r m e a n s o f e xpression are involved as well, such as music, dance, a n d d r a m a tic a n d theatrical elem ents (e.g. folklore co n n e c te d with rituals o f v a rio u s kinds). T h is syncretic c h a r a c te r o f folklore is w hat differentiates it from lite ra tu re ; lite ra tu re rests on the w ritten o r p rin te d w o rd , while folklore m a k e s use o f the “ live” w ord, th at is, the w o rd th a t is sp o k e n , told, sung o r similarly p e rfo rm e d .

O f course, this is no t the o n ly featu re th a t differentiates it

;| Cf. G u s e v , op. cit., p. 57 — 79.

- C l B. t i n e t t e . P ro b le m a ty k a fo lk lo r u w sp ó łcze sn eg o na tle r z e c z y w is to śc i

ku ltu ro w ej Z ie m i L u bu skiej ( P ro b lem s o f M odern F olklore again st the C u ltu ra l B ackgrou n d o f Z ie m ia L ubu ska), [in:] M ię d z y d a w n ym i a n o w y m i l a t y . . . . p. 1 5 6 — 157.

W o rth -m en tio n in g on this o c c a sio n are a lso the w ork s o f the fo lk lo rists from M o sc o w U n iv ersity p u b lish ed in tw o v o lu m e s under the title F o lk lo r k a k

(14)

Les Inform ations 185 fro m literature. T h e r e are m a n y o thers, all o f them resu ltin g from different th a n in literary a rt origin, fu n c tio n a n d m e d iu n . A literary w o rk is a w o rk o f an individual artist striving to convey the in te n d e d m essage in his o w n , original w ay a n d it generally fu n c tio n s in the s h a p e o n ce given to it by the a u t h o r , a n d in the p rin te d form , while a folkloric w o rk is subject to m a n y ch an g es in the c o u rse o f its existence, a d ju stin g itself to the d e m a n d s o f the a u d ie n c e before w hich it is p e r f o r m e d a n d w hich can affect b o th its c o n te n ts a n d fo rm , its chances o f success being the g reater, the b e tte r it c a n ad ju st itself to the accep ted c o n v e n tio n s. It usually fu n c tio n s as a n a n o n y m o u s w o rk , o ra lly tr a n s m itte d . It is evident then th a t th o se w ho e q u a te the f o l k l o r i c ‘w o rk with the lite ia ry o n e fail to recognize the d istin ct a n d specific c h a r a c te r o f the former.-34

W ith this b rie f e x p la n a tio n let us pass to the d e v e lo p m e n t o f fo lk lo re studies in the last few decades. A s it h as been alread y m e n tio n e d , the discipline f o u n d s u p p o r t in in s titu tio n s established especially fo r this k in d o f research. In 1947 the S tate In stitu te o f F o lk A r t S tudy w as c reated , w ith 3 se p a ra te sections: o f F o lk Music, F o lk L ite ra tu re a n d F o lk D a n c e . 35 In 1950 it was c h a n g e d in to the S tate In stitu te o f A r t w hich included the D e p a r t m e n t o f S tu d y o f F o lk T exts, deserving the c re d it o f o rg a n iz in g a n d fulfilling in the years 1950— 1954 the A c tio n o f C o llectin g M usical F o lk lo re . T h e result o f the a c tio n were im p o sin g m aterials which later, in th e years 1955—1963 were to be replenished by m e m b e rs o f in tercollegiate fo lk lo re c a m p s . 36

In 1953 in the In stitu te o f L iterary Studies o f the Polish A c a d e m y o f Sciences the D e p a r t m e n t o f Folk L ite ra tu re was c r e a t e d . 37

u C f. G u s e v , op. cit.. p. 73 — 96.

'5 A . M i o d u c h o w s k a . P racow nia badań n a d p o lsk im fo lk lo rem m u zy c zn y m

In stytu tu S z tu k i P A N {T h e S tu d y of M u sica l F olklore in the In stitu te of tr t of the

Polish A c a d e m y of S cien ces). "Literatura L u d ow a." 1964. N o 4 6. p. 161.

',(1 Ibidem , p. 16 2 — 165. C f also S. Ś w i r k o , B adania teren ow e n ad w sp ó łc ze s

nym fo lk lo re m p o lsk im ir latach 1 9 4 5 — 1965 ( F ield W ork in the In vestigation of M odern Polish F olklore in the Y ears 1 9 4 5 — 1965). "Literatura L u d ow a." 1966. N o

4 - 6 . p. 37. 4 0 - 4 3 .

,7 H . K a p e ł u ś , P ra co w n ia L ite r a tu ry L u d o w ej IB L P A N [T h e D e p a rtm e n t o f

Folk L ite ra tu re o f the In stitu te o f ¡L itera ry S tu d ies o f the Polish A c a d e m y o f S cien ces).

(15)

I n 1957 “ L i te r a tu r a L u d o w a ” ( F o lk L ite ra tu re ), a j o u r n a l d ev o ted exclusively to fo lk lo re p ro b le m s , b e g a n to be p u b lis h e d .

A n i m p o r t a n t role in the p o s t- w a r folk lo rist m o v e m e n t w as played by c o n fe re n ce s a n d congresses, insp irin g new r e se a rc h in v a rio u s in s titu tio n s a n d ce n tre s a n d p re se n tin g the re su lts a lre a d y o b t a i n e d in the field. A m o n g m a n y m eetings o f this k in d especially w o r t h - m e n tio n in g a re p a ro e m io lo g ic a l c o n feren ces in C ieszyn (1955) 38 a n d Z a k o p a n e (1956) a n d congresses o f the P olish F o l k l o r e Society in Jelenia G o r a (1954), Z a k o p a n e (1956) a n d Cieszyn (1958).39 In 1966 the D e p a r t m e n t o f F o lk L ite ra tu re o f the In s titu te o f L ite ra ry Studies o r g a n iz e d the C o n fe re n c e o f Slavic F o lk lo r e Studies, the first o f this k in d n o t o n ly in P o l a n d b u t in the w h o le Slav p a r t o f the w o r l d . 40

T h e g ro w in g relevance a n d p o s itio n o f fo lk lo re studies in t h a t tim e is also p r o v e d by c o u rse s o n fo lk lo re o r folk lite ra tu re o r g a n iz e d in m a n y univ ersities a n d high schools. C h a ra c te ris tic a lly e n o u g h , fol k lo re c o u rs e h a s b een recently o rg a n iz e d in th e E t h n o g r a p h ic a l D e p a r tm e n ts , b o t h in the W a r s a w U n iv ersity a n d A. Mickiewicz U n iv e rsity in P o z n a n . T h is is p a rtic u la rly i m p o r t a n t c o n s id e rin g the fact t h a t folklorists still d o n o t h av e a single d e p a r t m e n t o f folklore in a n y university, w hich w o u ld p ro v id e the discipline w ith p ro fe s sionally p re p a r e d s tu d e n ts o f folklore, w hose inflow is n o w r a t h e r accidental.

T h e review o f the situ a tio n o f fo lk lo re s tu d y in P o l a n d in the last few d ecad es offers so m e c onclusions, w h ic h m a y be briefly s u m m a r iz e d as follow s:

A . F o lk lo ric studies h av e e m a n c ip a te d . B. T h e y h ave f o u n d in s titu tio n a l su p p o rt.

C. Successful fo rm s o f t e a m - w o r k h av e b e e n w o rk e d o u t, as c o n c e rn s b o t h collecting fo lk lo re a n d research, as well as e d ito rial w o rk . R e su lts o f th ese c o m b in e d efforts c a n be seen in m a n y p u b l i c a tions.

38 See S. Ś w i r k o , Z k o n fe ren cji p a re m io lo g ic zn e j w C ie szy n ie 21 — 2 2 X 1955

(O n the P a ro e m io lo g ic a l C on ference in C ie s z y n ...) , “ L u d ,” v o l. X L III, p. 4 4 7 — 451.

39 R ep o rts from th o se and o th e r co n feren ces are to be fo u n d in “L u d .” 40 P ro ceed in g s o f this c o n feren ce w ere p u b lish ed in “ Literatura L u d o w a ,” 1966, N o 4 - 6 , 1967, N o 1 - 3 .

(16)

Les In form ation s 187

3

In p re s e n tin g P olish p o s t-w a r folklore study we s h o u ld sta rt w ith w h a t h a s b een achieved in the sphere o f collecting a n d r e c o r d ing folklore. It m u s t be stressed th a t all th a t w as d o n e in this re sp e c t is the result o f the c o m b in e d efforts o f m a n y in s titu tio n s a n d a g reat h o s t o f scholars re p re se n tin g v a rio u s disciplines, for in the p e rio d in q u estio n folklore was collected b o t h by individual s tu d e n ts a n d by te a m s especially a p p o in te d to fulfil definite tasks.

U n lik e the literary critic, w ho c o n c e rn s h im self w ith a literary w o r k existing in the s h ap e given to it by its a u t h o r eith er in the m a n u s c r i p t o r in the p r in te d form , the folklorist deals w ith w o rk s t h a t h a v e to be f o u n d a n d re c o rd e d —in w riting o r o n the ta p e — b e fo re they c a n be studied. T h e re fo re he m u s t g a th e r his m a te ria l a n d th is c a n be d o n e only t h r o u g h direct c o n ta c t w ith the c r e a to r o r p e r f o r m e r o f folklore, th r o u g h re a c h in g the e n v ir o n m e n t in w hich it exists. This refers, o f course, to folklore t h a t exists a n d develops t o d a y , for fo lk lo re o f the p a s t was r e c o rd e d in this o r o th e r way a n d th e re fo re is accessible. It is the very fact o f o r a l tra n s m itta n c e o f fo lk lo re w h ich m a k e s c o n s t a n t a n d system atic collecting necessary.

C o llectin g o f fo lk lo re m e a n s n o t o n ly a u g m e n t a t i o n o f g a th e re d m a te ria ls a n d fo lk lo re w o rk s, it also offers a n excellent o p p o r t u n i t y fo r g a th e rin g o b s e r v a tio n s a n d d a t a as to the fu n c tio n s a n d roles o f f o lk lo re in p a r tic u la r social g ro u p s. T h e se m a tte r s are n o t irrele v a n t since th e m o d e r n folklorist is interested n o t only in the fol- , kloric w o rk in itself (in the text itself, as it is so often suggested), b u t also in the c o n te x t, in c irc u m sta n c es o f its p r e s e n ta tio n in a given e n v iro n m e n t, t h a t is, in things o f w hich n o t m u c h in fo rm a tio n is to be f o u n d in o ld e r collections.

T h e collecting o f folklore m a te ria ls was s ta rte d a lm o s t im m e d ia tely a fter the w ar, for in 1945, by J a d w ig a a n d M a r ia n S o b ie sk i.41 In Ju ly 1946 E th n o g r a p h ic a l C o m m itte e o f the Silesian In stitu te in itia te d the field w o rk , to be c o n tin u e d also in the follow ing year. L a te r o n in d iv id u al m e m b e rs o f the C o m m itte e c a rrie d o u t the research o n their o w n , to m e n tio n o n ly Stanisław Wallis, A d o l f D y g acz a n d J ó z e f L igęza.42

41 M i o d u c h o w s k a , op. c it., p. 160. 42 Ś w ir k o , B adan ia te r e n o w e . . . , p. 35 — 36.

(17)

In 1950 the State Institute o f A rt o rg a n iz e d the A c tio n o f C o l lecting Musical F o l k l o r e 45 which, carried o u t till 1954, p rovided folklorists with 45,000 reco rd ed songs a n d in s tr u m e n ta l pieces. T he n u m b e r o f people engaged in the a c tio n ra n g e d fro m 60 to 100, and m a te ria ls g a th e re d by th em were fu rth e r s u p p le m e n te d with w h a t was collected d u rin g the a b o v e -m e n tio n e d folkloric c a m p s o r g a n iz e d in the years 1955— 1963. All these w o rk s were supervised by M. Sobieski. T h e ir final effect was th a t in 1964 the g a th e re d m aterial consisted o f c. 65,000 reco rd ed songs a n d in s tru m e n ta l pieces.

In o r d e r to a p p re c ia te the scale o f this a c h ie v e m en t we can c o m p a r e it with th a t o f O s k a r K o lb erg , in w hose Luci o n ly a b o u t 12,500 songs are to be fo u n d . It sh o u ld also be a d d e d th a t the w o rk was d o n e by professionally tra in e d research w o rk e rs w h o m ade use o f m o d e r n m e a n s a n d m e th o d s o f recording, a n d th a t the re s earch covered m o st o f the c o u n t r y ’s districts.

F o lk lo re was a n d still is collected, a lth o u g h o n a m o r e m odest scale, also by o th e r in stitu tio n s: by e th n o g ra p h ic a l d e p a r t m e n t s o f univ ersities in Ł ódź, T o r u ń , P o z n a ń , W a rsz a w a a n d Lublin, by e t h n o g rap h ical m u se u m s, to m e n tio n only the quite interesting folklore a rch iv e o f the T o r u ń m u s e u m , 44 by the D e p a r t m e n t o f Linguistics in the Polish A c a d e m y o f Sciences,45 by the e d ito rs o f “ L ite ra tu ra L u d o w a ” 451 a n d by the Polish R a d io which th ro u g h c o m p e titio n s it o rg a n iz e d as well as th r o u g h a c tu al research carried o u t in the field has g ath ered in its archives rich m aterial, o f which pro fessio n al stu d e n ts o f folklore avail them selves little o r n o t at all. C o n te s ts in collecting folklore have also been o rg a n iz e d by o th e r jo u r n a ls .

S im u ltan eo u sly , individual collecting o f folklore d ev elo p ed . T h e fact that folklore has been collected by rep resen tativ es o f several disciplines (e th n o g ra p h e rs, musicologists, linguists an d folklorists) has its c onsequences. First o f all, the choice o f the m aterial reco rd ed

41 Sec n otes 35 — 36.

44 h. A r s z v i i s k a . A rchiw um fo lk lo r y s ty c z n e M uzeum E tn ograficzn ego ir Toruniu

( F olklore A rchive of the E thn ograph ical M useum in Toruń). "Literatura L u d ow a."

1964. N o 4 — 6; R. L a n g e . D zia ła ln o ść o śro d k a to ru ń sk ieg o ir za k r e s ie fo lk lo ru

tan eczn ego i m u zy c zn e g o (In vestig a tio n o f M u sica l F olklore in Toruń), ibidem .

4' W. P o m i a n o w s k a. Z a g a d n ien ia fo lk lo r y s ty c zn e w p racach Z a k ła d u J ę z y k o 

zn a w stw a T A N u W a rsza w ie ( F olklore P ro b lem s in the W ork o f the L in gu iste

D ep a rtm en t o f the Polish A c a d e m y o f S cien ces in W arsaw ), ibidem .

(18)

Les Inform ations 189 d e p e n d e d o n needs a n d interests o f the collectors a n d their b ranches. S econdly, the m e th o d s a n d fo rm s o f re c o rd differed, again a cco rd in g to the collectors a n d needs o f the disciplines they represented. T h ird ly , the research has been carried o u t in those a re a s which for so m e r e a so n s were o f in terest to the given specialities, a n d th ere fore s o m e regions were subject o f th o r o u g h e x a m in a tio n , while in o th e r s the research was only superficial, a n d o th e rs still did not d ra w an y a t t e n t i o n at all. T h is was the effect o f lack o f any c o o r d in a tio n in these enterprises, o f a general p lan o f research. Finally, there is a strik in g d is p r o p o r tio n in genres o f folklore ta k e n in to c o n s id e r a tion. T h e m o s t privileged o n e was song, less a tte n tio n was p aid to tale, legend, tra d itio n a n d pro v erb .

T h e pictu re w o u ld be in co m p lete if we o m itte d in o u r p re s e n ta tio n the discovering o f o ld e r collections, the existence o f which had n o t b een even suspected. T h e se were included in C zeslaw H e r n a s ’

W k a lin o w ym lesie (In the G uelder-rose W ood).41 Also o th e r valuable

m a te ria ls h ave been regained, like song collections o f H e r m a n M arcin G izew iusz, J ó z e f L o m p a , 48 F ran ciszek W a w r o w s k i 49 a n d J ó z e f G ąsio - r o w s k i .50 A n i m p o r t a n t link in histo ry o f folklore is the 16th-cen tu ry relic o f folk literatu re, L u d ycje wiesne, u n e a r th e d a n d edited by A le k s a n d e r R o m b o w s k i . - 1

All this m a k e s us highly estim a te the a c h iev em en ts in collecting a n d r e c o rd in g folklore, a lth o u g h it has to be said th a t intensity o f the research h as d ecreased in the last decade.

4

N o t all, how ever, collected o r even discovered m aterials have been p u b lish ed , which is not surprising, for folklore is collected not only

4~ V o l. 1: V źró d e ł f o lk lo r y s ty k i p o ls k ie j i Beginnings o f Polish fo lk lo r e S tu dies). vol. 2: A n to lo g ia p o ls k ie j p ieśn i lu dow ej ze zb io ró w p o lsk ii tt M LII wieku ( A n th ology

o f Polish Folk Song from IS tli-C en tu ry C o llectio n s). W arszaw a 1965

4S B. Z a k r z e w s k i . J ó z e f L om pa ja k o zb ie ra c z p ieśn i i ./. L om pa as a C o llecto r

o f Folk Songs). “ Literatura L u d o w a ,” 1964, N o 4 6.

44 T. B r z o z o w s k a , Franciszek W a w ro w sk i i jeg o zb ió r t / . W u w row ski a n d His

C o llectio n ). | i n :] W św ieeie p ieśn i i b a jk i tin the W o rld o f Song a n d Id le ), ed.

R. G ó r sk i. J. K rzy ża n o w sk i, W roclaw 1969, p. 9 - 19. S tudia L olk lorystyczne. 50 S. S w i r k o . Z b ió r p ieśn i m a zu rsk ich J ó ze fa G ą sio ro w sk ieg o i ./. G ą s io r o w s k is

C o llectio n o f M asurian Songs), p. 2 6 7 —279. ibidem .

?l A . R o m b bw s k i. L u d y cje wiesne. Z a b y te k lite ra tu ry lu dow ej z p o ło w y X I I wieku i S prin g R evels. A M id- 1 6 th -C en tu ry R elie o f Folk L itera tu re). W roclaw 1953.

(19)

w ith the in ten tio n o f d isse m in a tin g it in print. It is c o llected because o n ly re c o rd e d a n d p reserved in w ritte n f o rm o r o n th e t a p e it is p ro te c te d ag ain st the destructive w o r k o f time, saved fo r f u t u r e gen e ra tio n s, a n d does n o t d i s a p p e a r to g e th e r w ith its a u t h o r o r p e rfo rm e r. O n ly then c a n it be a subject o f investigation o r stu d y . T h e re fo re it is collected a n d g a th e re d fo r d o c u m e n ta r y p u rp o s e s , a n d it is to special archives t h a t it sh o u ld find its way, regardless o f p u r p o s e s it will serve in the future.

T h a t p a r t o f those m a te ria ls is p u b lis h e d d e p e n d s o n v a rio u s c o n  s i d e r a tio n s —aesthetic, scholarly o r social ones. N o t a n insignificant fa c to r are the needs o f p o p u la r iz a tio n , the desire to m a k e it k n o w n a n d p o p u la r. Social d e m a n d fo r this k in d o f a r t is also n o t to be ignored. In the p o s t-w a r p e rio d th e w id en in g o f the a u d ie n c e o f folklore is n o tic e a b le ; it is b y no m e a n s confined to th o se p r o f e s s io n ally co n c e rn e d with fo lk c u ltu re : th e re is, for instance, the revival o f folk tale, w hich h a s b e c o m e the fa v o u rite genre o f c h ild re n a n d y o u th . F o lk song as o n e o f the p rin c ip a l elem ents in the r e p e rto ire o f n u m e r o u s song a n d d a n c e g r o u p s is sure to be o f interest for th o se e ngaged in the a m a t e u r m o v e m e n t. All this h as affected b o t h the choice a n d the f o rm o f w h a t h as b een published.

Even a c u rs o ry e x a m in a tio n o f the p u b lish in g o u t p u t will sh o w t h a t a c o n sid e ra b le p a r t o f it c o n s titu te p o p u l a r ed itio n s o f fo lk tales a n d songs. M o re o v e r, it is evident t h a t especially p o p u l a r were e d i tions o f tales in literary f o rm e la b o r a te d by w ell-k n o w n w riters. T h e se were either collections o f tales in a u n if o r m s h ap e given to th e m by a given a u t h o r , e.g. by R. Z m o r s k i, J. I. K raszew ski, T . S tępow ski, G . M o rc in e k a n d B. L e ś m ia n ,52 o r a n th o lo g ie s o f ta les by different a u th o rs , like P o lskie baśnie ludow e ed. by T. J o d e łk o o r W oda żyw a ed. by S. W o r t m a n . Also e d itio n s o f foreign folk tales were o f the p o p u l a r c h a ra c te r, to m e n tio n such e x am p les as B a jk i ludów nad

b a łtyckich ( Tales o f B altic P eoples) o r A. A f a n a s e v ’s R ussian Tales.

52 Cf. 2 e d itio n s o f R. Z m o r s k i ’s P odania i baśn ie ludu (F olk T ales a n d

Tradition s): J. I. K r a s z e w s k i , B a jk i i b a je c z k i ( T ales a n d S to rie s), W arszaw a 1960;

T. S t ę p o w s k i , G a w ę d y m inionego czasu (T a le s o f the O ld D a y s), W arszaw a 1961; G . M o r c i n e k , J a k g ó rn ik B ulandra d iabla o szu k a ł. B aśn ie ślą sk ie (H o w B ulandra the

M in er C h e a te d the D evil. S ilesian T ales), W arszaw a 1958; B. L e ś m i a n , K le c h d y p o lsk ie (P olish F olk S to rie s), W arszaw a 1959.

(20)

Les Inform ation s 191 In the g en eral register o f the p u b lish e d collections o f tales these ed i tio n s m u s t n o t be o m itte d , b u t d o u b tle ss thqy are n o t the m o st v a lu a b le in the p o s t- w a r o u t p u t , fo r as a rule they p o p u la riz e o l d texts, k n o w n to the folklorist, in a f o rm w hich is far fro m w h a t h e w o u ld desire it to be. T h e r e a p p e a r also collections p r e p a r e d by linguists w hich, t h o u g h o ften in a d e q u a te f ro m the scholarly p o in t o f view, c o n t a i n interesting texts a n d are usually b a se d o n p o st-w a r r e c o r d s .53

A s to the song, the collections w ere in general b ased o n the m a te ria l g a th e re d in the last few decades, first o f all o n this collected in the A c tio n o f C o llectin g M usical F o lk lo r e a n d later records. T h e a b u n d a n t m a te ria l m a d e it possible to p u b lish m a n y collections o f m o r e o r less p o p u l a r c h a r a c te r fro m v a rio u s regions o f P o la n d .

W o r t h y o f notice is also the fact t h a t the p u b lic a tio n s were in te n d e d to p re se n t fo lk lo re f r o m th o se districts o f the c o u n tr y w hich h a d n o t b een sufficiently investigated a n d e x p lo re d ; especially western a n d n o r t h e r n ones, a n d n o t fro m th o se trad itio n a lly , as it were, o f interest for folklorists. T h is was i m p o r t a n t n|ot o n ly f ro m the cognitive o r artistic p o i n t o f view b u t also h a d its spcial a n d n a tio n a l significance; w h a t these ed itio n s p re se n te d was fo lk lo re w hich h a d su r v i v e d —a n d helped to survive the i n h a b ita n ts o f those districts —the tim e o f s e p a ra tio n a n d o p p re ssio n . A t the sam e tim e o t h e r interesting m a te ria ls were p rin te d , illu stratin g ch a n g e s a n d t r a n s f o r m a tio n s ta k in g place in folklore as the effect o f m ig ra tio n o f p o p u l a t i o n a n d the clash o f local folklore w ith c u ltu ra l c o n te n ts t h a t h a d o rig in a te d in o th e r p a r ts o f the c o u n try , o r as a result o f c o n f o r m in g to Jhe new post- -w ar c o n d itio n s.

O n e m o re th in g deserves to be m e n tio n e d h e re : the p o st-w a r p u b lic a tio n s o f songs p re se n te d — a lo n g with the tra d itio n a lly “ f o lk ” songs —also those o rig in a te d in o t h e r social g ro u p s. In c o m p a ris o n w ith earlier p u b lic a tio n s o f this k in d they p re s e n te d o n a m u c h larger scale fo lk lo re o f th e w o rk in g class, w here the song —th o u g h by no m e a n s the only k in d —was u n d o u b te d ly o n e o f the m o st vital ones.

See for in stan ce K . N i t s c h , W y b ó r p o lsk ic h te k s tó w g w a ro w yc h (A Selection

o f P olish D ia le c ta l T e x ts), W arszaw a 1960; M . K a r a ś , A . Z a r ę b a , O ra w sk ie te k s ty g w a ro w e z o b sza ru P o lsk i, K ra k ó w 1964.

(21)

It b ecam e even m o re p o p u l a r o w in g to E. A jnenkiel, S. Wallis, A. D ygacz a n d J. L ig ę z a .54

G enerally, collections p u b lish e d in the two a n d a h a lf decades a fter the w ar have seriously a u g m e n te d n a tio n a l c u ltu ra l p ro p e rty , giving m a n y new pieces as well as m a n y new v arian ts o f those already k n o w n .

A m o n g the m a n y p u b lic a tio n s o f the perio d som e at least deserve a s e p a ra te m en tio n . O n e o f those is P ieśni P odhala

, 55

the collection w hose merits are n o t confined to p rese n tin g interesting songs, for it is also p ro v id e d with exceptionally rich edito rial c o m m e n t a n d in fo r m a tio n c o n c e rn in g b o t h textual a n d musical aspect. At the sam e tim e the m aterial c o n ta in e d in the collection served to illustrate an a t te m p t at a system atics o f the songs, w o rk e d o u t t h ro u g h a n a lysis o f their c o n te n ts . T h e p re se n te d system atics was m e a n t as a p r o p o sitio n a n d a stim u lu s to the e la b o r a tio n o f the principles a cco rd in g to which the folk song c o u ld be classified a n d system atized. Yet in professional circles it did n o t meet with the resp o n se o f the kind that c o u ld have been expected.

O th e r tw o a tte m p ts w o r th y o f d ra w in g the r e a d e r ’s a tte n tio n to are J. P rz y b o s's J a h lo n eczka a n d S. C z e r n ik ’s P o lska ep ika ludowa

( Polish Folk E p ic).-b Ja h lo n ec zka w as so far the only a n th o lo g y o f

Polish folk song a n d the two ed itio n s o f it, in te n d e d to acq u a in t the re a d e r with nice songs th at were not devoid o f a literary value, gave a representative selection o f the genre. T h e a u t h o r o m itte d , h o w ever, the tunes a n d tre a te d th e texts ra th e r freely, which met with criticism a n d d is a p p r o v a l.57

E. A j n e n k i e l , P o lsk a rew olu cyjn a p ieśń ro b o tn icza z lat 1875 — ¡915 I Polish

R e vo lu tio n a ry Song I S 7 5 — 1915). “ Prace P o lo n isty c z o e ." 1948: S. W a l l i s . Pieśni

g ó rn ic z e G órnego Ś lą sk a ( M in ers' S on gs o f S ilesia ). K raków 1954; A. D y g a ć / :

Śpiew n ik p ieśn i g ó rn iczych ( M in ers' S o n g -B o o k ). K a to w ice 1956; P ieśni g ó rn icze

( M in e r s ’ Songs). K a to w ice I960; J. L i g ę z a . L udow a litera tu ra g ó rn icza ( M in e r s’

fo lk lo r e ) . K a to w ice 1958.

- P ieśn i P odhala. A n to lo g ia i S on gs o f the Tatra H ighlands. An A n th ology). J. S a d o w n ik , K raków 1957.

J a h lo n eczk a had 2 e d itio n s (1953. 1957). P o lsk a e p ik a ludow a appeared in

1958 in T h e N a tio n a l Library Series.

^ See M. B l o n s k a ' s critiq ue Nu m argin esie J a h lo n e c zk i Juliana P rzy b o sia i On the M argin o f J. P rzybo.i's J a h lo n eczk a ). “ P olsk a Sztuk a L u d ow a." 1955. N o 3.