Tradice. Zase jsem teď narazil na to, že se v nějakém plkacím klubu na nyxu řeší tradice. Co je a není tradiční, jaké masky by se měly nosit na karneval, co je tradiční rodina...
Před 40 lety vyšel sborník prací renomovaných britských historiků The Invention of Tradition, který (jistě ne jako první, ale AFAIK měl z těchto prací největší ohlas) uvedl přemýšlení o tradicích a "tradicích" do reálného kontextu.
Spousta tradic je mnohem méně tradiční (ve smyslu předávaná z generace na generaci a sahající hluboko do minulosti), než se na první pohled zdá. Což neznamená, že jsou nějak zásadně méně platné nebo funkční. Podstatné pro jejich zavedení a udržení je, zda lidi něčím oslovují.
https://is.muni.cz/el/fss/podzim2018/SOC291/um/2_Hobsbawm_ch1.pdfInvented tradition - Wikipediahttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invented_traditionKdo nemá náladu a trpělivost na suchou faktičnost vědeckých statí, postnu sem recenzi z Goodreads:
Own up, all of you who watched even an excerpt from the TV coverage of the recent wedding of the future King and Queen of UK and thought, well, yes, sure the
Brits are good at this kind of thing, after all they've had hundreds of years of practice at it. Ummm, no actually. As by far the most readable of the essays in this volume claims, it was not until the very late nineteenth century that the monarchy was aggrandized through elaborate public ritual: William IV's coronation was mockingly known as the Half-Crownation, and at the beginning of her reign, Victoria was obstinate and obstructive, and those responsible for devising ceremonies were incompetent. Did you know, for example, that Victoria's coronation was completely unrehearsed? The clergy lost their place in the order of service, two trainbearers talked throughout the entire ceremony, and the choir was 'inadequate'. Indeed, the function of these ceremonies is as old as the monarchy itself, but the form that the ceremony should take is a reflection of how the role of the monarch is conceived, and that is different in different ages. In his essay, David Cannadine sees a correlation between the waning of royal influence and the growth of enhanced ceremonial - the beginning of what he calls the 'cavalcade of impotence'. He analyses the theatrical performances of royalty between 1820 and 1977, taking in the first show that I remember watching on TV, the investiture of the Prince of Wales - which, as I clearly recall, struck me at the time as a load of humbug.
Another highlight in this volume is Hugh Trevor-Roper taking delight in riling the 'Scotch' as he insisted on calling them, to the annoyance of Scotsmen and women everywhere who normally like to be kept distinct from the stuff sold in bottles. He takes every possible opportunity to remind the reader that
it was an Englishman who invented the kilt in the early eighteenth century. With enormous gusto he describes how the idea of a separate tartan for each clan was a 'hallucination' sustained by economic interest, and is surprisingly indulgent and forgiving of the (English) Allen brothers who styled themselves the Sobieski Stuarts and were virtually single-handedly responsible for the creation of the mythology around the 'ancient' Highland dress as a vestige of an early rich civilization - as represented by Ossian. Those clever Englishmen, forging a Scottish national identity and duping the Scots into believing in their own cultural superiority.
Equally informative, if a tad drier, is the piece on Wales by Prys Morgan.
Welsh national costume? Invented by the wonderfully named Augusta Waddington."In 1834 she was not even clear as to what a national costume was, but she was sure there ought to be a costume that would be distinctive and picturesque for artists and tourists to look at." Eisteddfods, druids, bards, national heroes? All in the interest of creating a romantic concept of nationhood through cultural history.