Advertisement

Digital Folklore

  • Gabriele de Seta
Living reference work entry

Abstract

Internet researchers recurrently encounter kinds of online content and communicational genres that appear as trivial and mundane as they are entangled with the everyday use of new media: online jargons, emoticons, copy-pasted jokes, Internet memes and many other repertoires of digital folklore. Over the last four decades, this sort of semiotic resources and user practices have been approached from multiple angles: as forms of textual play or poaching, as examples of visual or linguistic creativity, as a material culture resulting from networked communications, as vernacular resources for identity-making, and as the folk art of new media. After revisiting the convergence of folklore studies and computer-mediated communication, this chapter presents four perspectives through which various authors have approached digital folklore: Internet folkloristics, vernacular creativity, digital folk art aesthetics, and memetics.

Keywords

Creativity Digital folklore E-mail Folk art Folklore GIFs Humor Jokes Material culture Memes Memetics Playfulness Practices Users Vernacular Web 

References

  1. Arcangel C (2009) Everybody else. In: Lialina O, Espenschied D (eds) Digital folklore. Merz & Solitude, Stuttgart, pp 7–8Google Scholar
  2. Bakhtin MM (1984) Rabelais and his world (trans: Iswolsky H). Indiana University Press, BloomingtonGoogle Scholar
  3. Bascom WR (1953) Folklore and anthropology. J Am Folk 66(262):283–290.  https://doi.org/10.2307/536722CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baym NK (1994) From practice to culture on Usenet. Sociol Rev 42(S1):29–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baym NK (1995) The performance of humor in computer-mediated communication. J Comput-Mediat Commun 1(2):1.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.1995.tb00327.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Becker HS (2008) Art worlds, 25th anniversary edn. University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  7. Berland J (2008) Cat and mouse: iconographics of nature and desire. Cult Stud 22(3–4):431–454.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09502380802012559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Blank TJ (2009) Toward a conceptual framework for the study of folklore and the Internet. In: Blank TJ (ed) Folklore and the Internet: vernacular expression in a digital world. Utah State University Press, Logan, pp 1–20Google Scholar
  9. Brideau K, Berret C (2014) A brief introduction to impact: ‘The meme font’. J Vis Cult 13(3): 307–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bronner SJ (2009) Digitizing and virtualizing folklore. In: Blank TJ (ed) Folklore and the Internet: vernacular expression in a digital world. Utah State University Press, Logan, pp 21–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Burgess J (2006) Hearing ordinary voices: cultural studies, vernacular creativity and digital storytelling. Continuum J Media Cult Stud 20(2):201–214.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10304310600641737CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Burgess J (2007) Vernacular creativity and new media. PhD thesis, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane. Retrieved from https://eprints.qut.edu.au/16378/1/Jean_Burgess_Thesis.pdf
  13. Burman JT (2012) The misunderstanding of memes: biography of an unscientific object, 1976–1999. Perspect Sci 20(1):75–104.  https://doi.org/10.1162/POSC_a_00057CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Correll S (1995) The ethnography of an electronic bar: the Lesbian Cafe. J Contemp Ethnogr 24(3):270–298.  https://doi.org/10.1177/089124195024003002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dams H (2009) I think you got cats on your Internet. In: Lialina O, Espenschied D (eds) Digital folklore. Merz & Solitude, Stuttgart, pp 106–131Google Scholar
  16. Danet B (2001) Cyberpl@y: communicating online. Berg, Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
  17. Dawkins R (2006) The selfish gene, 30th anniversary edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
  18. de Certeau M (1984) The practice of everyday life (trans: Rendall S). University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  19. Dobler R (2009) Ghosts in the machine: mourning the MySpace dead. In: Blank TJ (ed) Folklore and the Internet: vernacular expression in a digital world. Utah State University Press, Logan, pp 175–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dorson RM (1970) Is there a folk in the city? J Am Folk 83(328):185–216.  https://doi.org/10.2307/539108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dorst J (1990) Tags and burners, cycles and networks: folklore in the telectronic age. J Folk Res 27(3):179–190Google Scholar
  22. Douglas N (2014) It’s supposed to look like shit: the Internet ugly aesthetic. J Vis Cult 13(3): 314–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dundes A, Pagter CR (1975) Work hard and you shall be rewarded: urban folklore from the paperwork empire. Wayne State University Press, DetroitGoogle Scholar
  24. Foote M (2007) Userpicks: cyber folk art in the early 21st century. Folk Forum 37(1):27–38Google Scholar
  25. Foster GM (1953) What is folk culture? Am Anthropol 55:159–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Frank R (2009) The forward as folklore: studying e-mailed humor. In: Blank TJ (ed) Folklore and the Internet: vernacular expression in a digital world. Utah State University Press, Logan, pp 98–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gorny E (2009) More than humor: jokes from Russia as a mirror of Russian life. In: Goggin G, McLelland M (eds) Internationalizing Internet studies: beyond Anglophone paradigms. Routledge, New York, pp 79–95Google Scholar
  28. Grimes W (1992) Computer as a cultural tool: chatter mounts on every topic. The New York Times, December 1. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/1992/12/01/arts/computer-as-a-cultural-tool-chatter-mounts-on-every-topic.html
  29. Howard RG (2008a) Electronic hybridity: the persistent processes of the vernacular web. J Am Folk 121(480):192–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Howard RG (2008b) The vernacular web of participatory media. Crit Stud Media Commun 25(5):490–513.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15295030802468065CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Howard RG (2009) Crusading on the vernacular web: the folk beliefs and practices of online spiritual warfare. In: Blank TJ (ed) Folklore and the Internet: vernacular expression in a digital world. Utah State University Press, Logan, pp 159–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jenkins H (1992) Textual poachers: television fans & participatory culture. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  33. Jenkins H (2006) Convergence culture: where old and new media collide. New York University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  34. Jenkins H, Ford S, Green J (2013) Spreadable media: creating value and meaning in a networked culture. New York University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  35. Kirschenblatt-Gimblett B (1996) The electronic vernacular. In: Marcus GE (ed) Connected: engagements with media. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 21–65Google Scholar
  36. Kirschenblatt-Gimblett B (1998) Folklore’s crisis. J Am Folk 111(441):281–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Knobel M, Lankshear C (2007) Online memes, affinities, and cultural production. In: Knobel M, Lankshear C (eds) A new literacies sampler. Peter Lang, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  38. Kõiva M, Vesik L (2009) Contemporary folklore, Internet and communities at the beginning of the 21st century. In: Media & folklore. Contemporary folklore IV. ELM Scholarly Press, Tartu, pp 97–117Google Scholar
  39. Kozar S (1995) Enduring traditions, ethereal transmissions: recreating Chinese New Year celebrations on the Internet. J Comput-Mediat Commun 1(2):1.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.1995.tb00329.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lantis M (1960) Vernacular culture. Am Anthropol 62(2):202–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lialina O, Espenschied D (eds) (2009) Digital folklore. Merz & Solitude, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  42. Literat I, van den Berg S (2017) Buy memes low, sell memes high: vernacular criticism and collective negotiations of value on Reddit’s MemeEconomy. Inf Commun Soc 1–18.  https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2017.1366540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. McNeill LS (2009) The end of the Internet: a folk response to the provision of infinite choice. In: Blank TJ (ed) Folklore and the Internet: vernacular expression in a digital world. Utah State University Press, Logan, pp 80–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Metahaven (2013) Can jokes bring down governments? Memes, design and politics. Strelka Press, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  45. Miller D, Slater D (2000) The Internet: an ethnographic approach. Berg, Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
  46. Milner RM (2013) Pop polyvocality: Internet memes, public participation, and the Occupy Wall Street movement. Int J Commun 7:2357–2390Google Scholar
  47. Nickerson BE (1974) Is there a folk in the factory? J Am Folk 87(344):133–139.  https://doi.org/10.2307/539473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Oring E (1987) Jokes and the discourse on disaster. J Am Folk 100(397):276–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Oring E (2003) Engaging humor. University of Illinois Press, UrbanaGoogle Scholar
  50. Pettinato I (2009) Viral candy. In: Lialina O, Espenschied D (eds) Digital folklore. Merz & Solitude, Stuttgart, pp 178–209Google Scholar
  51. Phillips W, Milner RM (2017) The ambivalent Internet: mischief, oddity, and antagonism online. Polity, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  52. Preston MJ (1974) Xerox-lore. Keyst Folk 19(1):11–26Google Scholar
  53. Rintel S (2013) Crisis memes: the importance of templatability to Internet culture and freedom of expression. Australas J Pop Cult 2(2):253–271.  https://doi.org/10.1386/ajpc.2.2.253_1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sharbaugh PE, Nguyen D (2014) Make lulz, not war: how online remix and meme culture are empowering civic engagement in the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. Asiascape: Digital Asia 1(3):133–168.  https://doi.org/10.1163/22142312-12340010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Shifman L (2007) Humor in the age of digital reproduction: continuity and change in Internet-based comic texts. Int J Commun 1(1):187–209Google Scholar
  56. Shifman L (2014a) Memes in digital culture. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  57. Shifman L (2014b) The cultural logic of photo-based meme genres. J Vis Cult 13(3):340–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Shifman L, Blondheim M (2010) The medium is the joke: online humor about and by networked computers. New Media Soc 12(8):1348–1367.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810365311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Shifman L, Levy H, Thelwall M (2014) Internet jokes: the secret agents of globalization? J Comput-Mediat Commun 19(4):727–743.  https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12082CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Stewart S (1980) Nonsense: aspects of intertextuality in folklore and literature. Johns Hopkins University Press, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  61. Steyerl H (2012) The wretched of the screen. Sternberg Press, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  62. Steyerl H (2013, November) Too much world: is the Internet dead? E-Flux J 49. Retrieved from http://www.e-flux.com/journal/too-much-world-is-the-internet-dead/
  63. Vesik S (2009) Folklore on the Internet: about the Internet (and a bit about computers). In: Media & folklore. Contemporary folklore IV. ELM Scholarly Press, Tartu, pp 152–161Google Scholar
  64. Westerman W (2009) Epistemology, the sociology of knowledge, and the Wikipedia userbox controversy. In: Blank TJ (ed) Folklore and the Internet: vernacular expression in a digital world. Utah State University Press, Logan, pp 123–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Ethnology, Academia SinicaTaipeiTaiwan

Personalised recommendations