About a year ago, a group of forward-thinking graduate students at Indiana University hatched a plan for a conference. They wanted to bring folklorists at all stages of their careers* together to discuss the future of the discipline. Shortly after, the planning for FOAF began. This week, one hundred plus folklorists converged on Bloomington. From the start is was clear something historic was happening.
The conference had a distinct dynamic. Most panels were headed by women, and the audience members were engaged, enthusiastic, and positive. Ideas where shared. Friendships were forged. The future looks brighter today than it did when I arrived in Bloomington four days ago.
What did this conference accomplish?
The graduate student organizers asked their peers and elders to seriously consider an important issue: where are we going? Amazingly, there was almost none of the customary kvetching that we come to expect when folklorists get together to discuss the field. The kvetching that did come up was mostly in the Twitter feed. I think we all recognized that there will always be folklorists who are envious, discontented and jaundiced. That’s a personal choice that some will always hang onto. At the same time, it was clear that the participants recognized that kvetching doesn’t solve problems. Identifying problems doesn’t either. It might make the kvetcher feel better, but the problems will still be there.
What’s the alternative? In-depth discussions of what folklorists CAN ACTUALLY DO to strengthen the field. Some of the things we discussed included:
- Strategies for selling our programs and events to university deans, provosts and presidents directly
- How to lobby congress and local representatives (drawing on the efforts of the National Humanities Alliance)
- Using the fantastic AFS Advocacy Toolkit
- Creating new positions and programs in folklore
- Developing folklore leaders to be better prepared to shape the organizations where we work.
We also discussed the realistic limitations of our power. Some problems are structural and not of our making. We can and should work to reshape our workplaces, but we’re not going to be able to fix every injustice.
Finally, I think we also broke through folklore’s 4th wall: moving from a community of problem-identifiers to problem-solvers. We have started to see where our agency, however limited, can be utilized. I expect we’ll have more conversations about how each folklorist can shape our discipline and workplaces for a new future.
*I have purposely not made a distinction between different types of folklorists: applied, public, independent, or academic. We’re ALL folklorists.