tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5242982939065064024.post6877247100985436816..comments2023-10-26T08:24:01.826-07:00Comments on Storytelling + Research = LoiS: Jacobs - Hudden and Dudden and Donald O'Neary - Keeping the Public in Public DomainLois Sprengnether Keelhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15520980510609672339noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5242982939065064024.post-76909258471622356572015-03-17T09:30:11.501-07:002015-03-17T09:30:11.501-07:00Now, I'm new to this, being from a thetre back...Now, I'm new to this, being from a thetre background, and I have thesame feelings as you. Richard M's point gave me a thought or two though: <br /><br />I'd introduce the other farmer' as another character earlier in the story, possibly as a constable who refuses to help Donald when he finds Daisy was killed by the two Englishmen, who then reels out of the pub drunk off duty. I'd also let him escape after being dumped in the lake.Andy in Germanyhttp://www.workbike.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5242982939065064024.post-6981668955487044082015-03-15T16:31:36.616-07:002015-03-15T16:31:36.616-07:00I'd hesitate to tell this in schools for fear ...I'd hesitate to tell this in schools for fear that the teacher would ruin it afterwards with a lecture about Donal tricking the inoffensive though greedy innkeeper and farmer. The innkeeper paid for the hide, and the farmer gave his herd in exchange for the sack, so Donal was a thief and a murderer. Killing Hudden and Dudden could be justified as self-defense: they'd find a way to kill him eventually if he just escaped from the sack.Richard Marshhttp://www.richardmarsh.ienoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5242982939065064024.post-16416544762139864402015-03-15T00:05:12.634-07:002015-03-15T00:05:12.634-07:00I agree with Papa Joe's comment. We should not...I agree with Papa Joe's comment. We should not shy away from the stereotypical nature of a folk tale, often showing those stereotypes against the backdrop of a pretty vicious society. If it were not so vicious, why would we respond to Donald's triumphing against the odds?<br /><br />For me, the names are the key pointer. I have not told the tale for over a decade. But when I did, I always introduced it as tale reflecting the forcible expropriation of much of the land by successive English colonising settlement. As names, Hudden and Dudden could not be more English, whereas O'Neary is as Irish as you can get. Against that background, Donald has long been the victim and his trickery is an act of independence against all the colonial elite, including the other farmer and the landlord.Richard Martinhttp://www.tellatale.eunoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5242982939065064024.post-23286687443632534862015-03-14T14:38:45.287-07:002015-03-14T14:38:45.287-07:00A couple of points. We (especially storytellers) a...A couple of points. We (especially storytellers) are being trained to be sensitive towards stereotyping. Yet are folktales are populated with archetypes, the mother of stereotype. Little wonder your gut tightens. While I am all for adapting a tale to maintain cultural relevance, we can do our listeners a disservice in the attempt to be inoffensive. Part of the function of the folktale is to support the exploration of deviant behaviors, without the fear of actual consequence. None of this, of course, excuses us from knowing the needs of our audience. No simple answer. Just more to consider. Pax & Amicitia. Papa JoePapaJoe Gaudethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11681570310036579498noreply@blogger.com