This document is an academic book chapter from the volume "Authenticity Whose Tradition?" edited by László Felföldi and Theresa J. Buckland, published by the European Folklore Institute in 2002. It is intended for scholars, ethnochoreologists, and folk dance practitioners interested in debates about authenticity, revival, and tradition. The chapter, written by Egil Bakka, examines who controls…
This is an academic book chapter from the 2002 volume "Authenticity Whose Tradition?" edited by László Felföldi and Theresa J. Buckland, published by the European Folklore Institute. It is written for scholars, ethnochoreologists, and folk dance practitioners. The chapter, by Egil Bakka, examines who controls folk dances in revival contexts and whether the concept of authenticity is a weapon in that struggle or a neutral standard.
Bakka introduces a distinction between dances that survive through popular tradition and those consciously cultivated by revival movements. He draws on concepts like Felix Hoerburger's "first existence" and "second existence" and Nordic terminology. The chapter focuses on the Norwegian folk dance scene, asking who is in control and what strategies are used.
Bakka describes the key contexts where folk dances are adapted: contests, organized teaching, specialized clubs, and research. He notes how each context shapes the dances differently, often standardizing or enhancing them. He also discusses the early revival movement's influence from ballet, gymnastics, and military drill.
The author presents three attitudes toward revival: the heir, the user, and the researcher. He reflects on his own background as a farm-born dancer who became an outsider through university education. He recounts his work establishing the Rff Centre, where he documented dances and brought them back to their regions of origin through courses and instruction.
Case studies illustrate local control struggles. In Tovdal, dancers demanded payment for filming and guarded their springar dances from outsiders. In Telemark, heirs resisted documentation and research. In Nordfjord, internal rivalry shaped the dance scene. Bakka shows how fieldworkers and researchers become entangled in these power dynamics.
The chapter concludes by questioning the role of ethnochoreologists as field workers, researchers, writers, activists, and teachers. It argues that authenticity is not a neutral measure but a contested concept in battles over authority and ownership of dance heritage.