China has one of the richest, if not the richest holdings of traditional live, narrative performance on earth. Since the May Fourth Movement (and even earlier in some cases) and especially in the early 1950s and again since the late 1970s, massive amounts of material has been collected from oral and oral-connected sources from all 55 ethnic minority groups and many Han local cultures. Many in this gathering have contributed greatly to these efforts. The basic method behind these collections is that of preserving versions of texts as artistic legacies of the various ethnic groups concerned and for China as a whole. In some cases versions have been combined to create “ideal” versions, often targeted at a general, educated audience. In a few cases some of these narratives that have been given wide exposure in print and other mediums have gained national or even international reputations. A prime example is “Ashima” of the Sani people. The best known of the oral narratives (with written correlate) is, of course, versions of the Tibetan/Mongol epic of Gesar (Geser).

Main Theories and Methodologies

In recent decades, studies of oral narrative in the fields of folklore/anthropology, literature, and even psychology have advanced in several parts of the world – not always on parallel tracks, but at times with significant cross-over. In most cases all of the new directions tend to move beyond the text – the collected performances – and devote at least some attention to the social context, dynamics of performance, and the process of production and transmission. Among these (but not limited to) are:

•  the body of works on style, form, and performance that have grown from the Parry-Lord theory, recently employed in part by Chao Gejin in his study of Mongol epic singing;

•  the “performance” approach developed in the 1970s by scholars such as Richard Bauman and Robert Abrahams that stresses the context of narrative events and the process of performance;

•  the Ethnopoetics approach of Dennis Tedlock and Jerome Rothenberg (an approach that attracted many poets as well as folklorists and ethnologists) that stresses attention to the artistic merits of the oral literature of native peoples (usually 4 th world minority groups) as a way of giving them voice and recognition;

•  recent developments in the Finnish folklore school, especially the works of the late Lauri Honko on the process of textualization of oral epic – a process in which the creation, performance, and reception of oral and oral-connected epics are charted, beginning with the cultural milieu and moving through the epic singers learning process, through performance, to communities of reception, that include scholarly and general print (or multimedia) mediums—an end point for a tiny fraction of the world's oral literature resources;

•  “cultural studies” theories of narrative that concerns economics, gender, power, etc. as in the works of Pierre Bourdieau 布迪厄 of France and others;

•  literary theories of narrative such as the structuralism of Levi-Strauss and theories of narratology of Bahktin (whose work has also influenced scholars in many of the approaches listed above);

•  syncretic approaches -- utilized in particular by John Miles Foley in recent works such as Singer of Tales as Performance and How to Read an Oral Poem – in which aspects of Parry-Lord, Performance Studies, Ethnopoetics, and to some extent Lauri Honko are combined into a multifaceted tool kit. I have termed his approach a kind of “oral pragmatics” – in the sense that the approach combines useful aspects of several theories that can be combined and recombined to deal with specific fieldwork situations to allow for the collection of a range of ethnographic background data that will be useful in the interpretation and representation of the material by scholars.

In such an approach, the goal is to create a multidimensional record that demonstrates the dynamics of the native social context in relation to that of community based performance traditions. In the act of recording, not only are texts collected, but contexts as well. At present, in China there are some of the largest collections of texts ever made in history—millions and millions. In each case, there was someone in the local community who knew the traditions, background, social context, community of listeners, etc. well enough to produce the song or story and doubtless offer much more information. In many cases, however, researchers may have assumed that such knowledge was widely enough known not to warrant recording, or recording context was not part of the collecting agenda. Thus, many texts, relatively little context—a situation that has parallels in many places all over the earth. In recent years, more published texts, however, have appeared in publication. In her recent dissertation, Bamo Qubumo has drawn on several of these theories, to create a multifaceted theory for approaching oral narrative in China .

For my own part, I believe that given the wealth of theories generated globally in the last several decades, researchers are now at a point where with practical tailoring, highly useful approaches can be developed into a multifaceted, context AND performance-based approach that will aid in creating unparalled records of endangered oral traditions. As theory has developed, technology has evolved to the point where, given adequate funding, researchers can target and collect select oral traditions in China and rigorously apply syncretic approaches involving a combination or theory, technology, and local opportunity to make unparalleled records that could be made available as resources for scholars on nation al and international levels, as well as for local communities. At the local level, such records would ideally be kept in concert with other aspects of traditional local culture that are losing ground to the swift dynamics of change in China , but are worthy parts of local heritage and identity as well as part of the national legacy.

Outline of Approach

The following outline is already used in many projects, and is in ways similar to the “performance approach” of Richard Bauman, the “folklore process” suggested by Lauri Honko, and some aspects of Ethnopoetics and Foley's syncretic approach. But for the sake of review and discussion, let us look at a possible research overview in terms of participants, roles, and outcomes. The research would involve a coordinated effort between:

•  local performers: actually maintain and transmit the oral lore within themselves

•  local knowledge community: understand and live the cultural background of the oral lore – on varying levels in accord to their standing in the community and tradition –a number of these people may be included in the interview process

•  local translators (when needed) – especially talented locals who ideally understand the local tradition and language, as well as the language of the researchers

•  local government: help coordinate research efforts

•  scholars and researchers: with relevant backgrounds in the target cultures, including customs, social structure, material culture, economy, oral traditions, etc.

•  competent technicians (may overlap with above categories) : for documentation word: video, photography, digital music recording, computer, and so forth.

•  archivists and museum specialists : for storing material and making it available in display form

•  print and other media personnel: editors, publishing houses, CD producers, etc.

Process

I dentification :

•  compiling general ethnographic overview involving information on history, economy, social structure, social roles (gender, age, class, etc.), live cycle customs, beliefs, recent social transition, etc.

•  identification of all oral performance genres in the community in terms of remembered and present oral performance traditions (secular and religious)

•  identification of target genres (long oral narratives/epics)

•  identification of tradition-bearers of target genres and related people; rapport building with the tradition-bearers and related people

•  identification of traditional audiences and present audiences (if any)

II. Performance Context:

•  performance context: understanding of past and present social context of the target tradition: who, what, where, when, how

•  performer (and related people – helpers, etc.): detailed background on who they are, training, skills, personal insights, range of knowledge, etc.

•  audience: relation to the performer and the performance—how are they a part of the performance? Exposure to and knowledge of tradition?

•  performance context (arena of performance)—where does it happen (details on the physical setting—outside/inside, props, costumes, mats, foods, wine, etc.)—is there a range of contexts in which performances occur? (home, village park, tourist shop, etc.)

III. Dynamics of Performance:

•  Framing (beginning, ending, other things that “frame” what is going on—includes the speech and song registers)

•  How does the event unfold (step by step): who does what, when and how –

•  Means of performance: what sort of singing and speaking registers do they employ? Music? Instruments? Gestures? Other stylistic features or markers of the genre?

•  What are the strategies for “opening oral territory” (my term, adopted from Greg Sarris): how are components (in league with the registers of performance) of the performance ordered – plots, subplots, multiforms, alternation between song and speech, asides, inserted anecdotes, inserted jokes, proverbs, similes, rhyme schemes, tone schemes, etc – for rhetorical and artistic effect?

•  What is the situated meaning of the performances? I.e. –what do the performances mean to the listeners on THAT occasion? If it is not a “normal” context (i.e. you pay someone to sing the song in the lobby of the local hotel), then researchers must be prepared to fill in the details of their effect on the performance situation and attempt to supply information on a more “normal” context.

IV. Digital Documentation :

•  At the present time it is now possible and desirable – where economically feasible to make full use of the digital recording technology in the recording and preservation of oral literature performance—combining audio-visual technology with print mediums for delivery in combination book/CD format, online computer formats, by CD, or in museum exhibits -- as is now occurring worldwide.

•  Ideally, performances filmed in digital video format, digital sound-recorder, and digital cameras—if possible in the “natural” setting, or the normal types of settings (some might be more traditional, some might be more recent – as in tourist settings—it is best to get examples off ALL contexts – not just the most “authentic”). Make sure formats are compatible with computer formats to be utilized. Wide angle lenses are useful for closer shots – allow more “context” in the picture frame. Apt digital storage an archiving in systematic filing system overseen by trained archivists. In some cases, it might also be possible to log dance movements and gestures in digital format using motion-capture systems (such as the OSU project with Sani traditional dance) or other digital possibilities.

•  Translation and Final Stage Textualization: select portions (large or small) of the gathered data is translated. In recent years there has been a decided trend away form making “ideal” versions except in the cases where a highly readable “literary quality text is desired). Therefore, each recording of data should be dealt with as individual cases and analyzed as such. Researchers will have a variety of needs as to data, but an accurate data base should be maintained so that researchers can access the actual recorded footage in order to understand the context and process of tradition from multiple points of entry. It is desirable to have many versions to examine, rather than only one or a few “ideal” ones. In the video editing process, it is best to create a tape with an introduction, followed by long portions of tape with as little cutting as possible. For more popular audiences, more highly edited taped are needed, but should be made under the guidance of the relevant scholarly authorities. Written supporting material should include target language and translation (in the format of target language romanization, word for word Chinese [and or English] and IPA, if possible). Texts for scholarly use should be presented as accurately as possible and not edited for offensive content or aesthetic reasons. In the process of putting data into other formats, strategies must be developed to keep the “process of performance” in mind—as it is that process which is the fountain of “real” oral literature.

These are just a few basic thoughts – I would be glad to hear suggestions for improvement.