3. Documentation
As is the case with all human behaviours and phenomena, examples of folklore can be documented in a variety of ways. The oldest and most fundamental documentation technique, of course, is simply remembering what one perceives. Aware that proverbial expressions may be employed during virtually any first-hand interaction, for instance, folklorists can condition themselves to make 'mental note' of examples of proverbial speech and of specific occasions on which they are utilized as integral aspects of ordinary discourse. Traditional jokes, riddles, jargon terms, gestures, rhymes, and simple songs or melodies can be readily committed to memory; and when later recollected, these examples of folklore can be characterized and analyzed, either orally or in writing.
A second documentation technique entails making written records. The words a singer sings or a storyteller speaks can be represented fairly accurately in writing, and drawings or written descriptions can characterize adequately such tangible objects as buildings or cooking utensils. Whether they are verbatim transcriptions of riddles or myths, summaries of stories communicated by epics or ballads, or graphic depictions of house floorplans or body decorations, written records have a greater permanence than do human recollections; and they have served as folklorists' primary documents since the inception of their field.
Mechanical recording devices have been employed increasingly in recent years as substitutes for, or supplements to, the more conventional documentation techniques mentioned above. Still pictures and photographic slides can record the shape, colour, and design of such tangible objects as traditional items of clothing or pieces of pottery; and they can freeze for all time a moment in a dance or a movement pattern of people at play. Motion picture and videotape cameras enable one to document the dynamic nature of narrator-audience interactions, the finger, hand, and body movements of musicians, and the actions and reactions of participants in rituals. Whether presented alone or in conjunction with oral or written descriptions, photographic records of examples of folklore capture on film visual images which could otherwise only be documented by the human eye.
Of all the available mechanical recording devices, the tape recorder is the one that folklorists have used most extensively and the one that has had the greatest impact on their work. There are several reasons why this is so. First, among the traditional communicative processes and forms which have received the greatest amount of scholarly attention are storytelling and stories, singing and songs, musicmaking and tunes, riddling and riddles, healing and curing chants and incantations, and speaking and such speech forms as proverbs and statements which express beliefs, the aural aspects of all of which can be easily and accurately recorded on magnetic tape. Second, while folklorists gather their data by participating, observing, and interviewing, it is the last of these three that always has been, and continues to be, the principal means of eliciting information about, and examples of, traditional communicative processes and forms. Since interviewing entails questioning and answering and hence relies heavily upon speech or sound as the medium of communication, tape recording is a particularly efficient and effective way of documenting interviews. Finally, while the act of recording mechanically what people say, do, or make is often distracting, if not threatening, to those whose words, actions, or possessions are the phenomena being documented, the tape recorder has proved to be the least intrusive and the least objectionable mechanical recording device available. Most modern-day tape recorders are small, battery powered, and technologically reliable and efficient, making it possible for the folklorist to use a tape recorder with a minimum amount of time required for equipment set-up and operation and a lesser likelihood that the individuals recording or being recorded will be inconvenienced, distracted, or intimidated. For the above reasons, folklorists have come to regard the tape recorder as a very useful, if not essential, piece of equipment for their work; and sound recordings have taken their place alongside written records as primary documents in folkloristic research.
The documentation techniques which the folklorist chooses to utilize will depend, of course, upon a number of factors. First, and most obviously, the choice will be determined by the nature and number of options available. Individuals who do not possess mechanical recording devices such as tape recorders or cameras will have to rely upon memory and notetaking, while those who do have access to such devices will be able to select from an optimal number of alternatives. But availability alone does not necessarily make any preferred documentation technique employable or acceptable. A folklorist who is permitted to observe an esoteric ritual, for example, might be forbidden or judge it unwise to tape record the proceedings or to take notes, even though he or she feels that a taped or written documentation of the event might be more comprehensive or reliable than a mere memorytrace record of what he or she perceives. Similarly, photographing might be taboo to some individuals or groups, making it impossible or socially reprehensible for a folklorist to document on film a phenomenon which is the focus of study. Conversely, a researcher might be reluctant to use a camera or tape recorder while interviewing a particular individual, only to discover in the course of the interview that the informant would actually prefer or find it flattering to be tape recorded or filmed. Hence, availability, appropriateness, local custom or belief, and personal preference must all be considered as the folklorist attempts to determine which documentation techniques he or she can or should employ.
In addition to the above, the choice of documentation techniques also depends upon the kinds of information the folklorist seeks in order to test some specific hypothesis or to illustrate some particular phenomenon. An investigator interested in opening and closing formulas or modes of character portrayal in folktales, for instance, could document these phenomena in memory, in writing, or on magnetic tape; but it would be both inappropriate and unnecessarily cumbersome and expensive for him or her to film multiple storytellings in order to obtain the data needed to pursue these research interests. On the other hand, the folklorist wishing to document and analyze the nonverbal aspects of narrators' performances or of listeners' responses could not capture such information on tape and would miss much of it while trying to take notes; but his or her task would be greatly facilitated if he or she could film the narrators in performance or the narrator-listener interactions. Though some might recommend that folklorists record as much information as possible from or about the individuals who serve as their research subjects, it is neither practical nor necessary for them always to utilize the most comprehensive documentation techniques (such as motion picture or videotape cameras with sound) or to make multiple kinds of records (such as memory-trace, written, taped and filmed records) simply because the opportunity or equipment exists to enable one to do so. Inquiry is, by definition, always selective and focused; and there is nothing particularly commendable about gathering as much information as is humanly possible simply because it is available or about making multiple kinds of records merely because the means to do so are at one's disposal.
While the various kinds of documentation techniques described above facilitate the folklorist's work in particular ways, each also has obvious limitations. Human perception and memory are, by their very nature, selective, for human beings are neither aware of, nor can they remember, all the audible and visual stimuli that are generated during a given interaction or event. Therefore, we not only cannot remember everything we experience, but we also cannot experience all the sensory phenomena present in our environments. Making written records is a selective process, too, for we can only document in writing what we experience and what we can represent satisfactorily in that medium. Since writing is word oriented, we tend, in making written records, to record speech or that which can be characterized best through language; but many aspects of human behaviour -such as the tempo, stress patterns, and junctures integral to speech, grimaces, gestures, and other bodily movements, and emotional states and reactions - are either unrepresentable or poorly approximated on paper. Mechanical recording devices seem, on first thought, to be more all-encompassing and less selective means of making records than are mental or written notes; but they, too, have built-in and user limitations. Tape recorders document all sounds indiscriminately, not just those that are most relevant to an inquiry; they can pick up only audible, and not visual, stimuli; they must be used in preselected places to document sounds from predetermined sources; and they must be turned on and off at particular times by individual human beings. Cameras can record visible phenomena and sometimes a combination of the visible and audible, but they transform three-dimensional objects to two dimensions; and they must be focused and operated by human beings, acts which require their users to make prior judgments as to what will, and what will not, be recorded on film. These limitations of documentation techniques must be taken into consideration and compensated for in any description or analysis of the human phenomena of which they are merely partial and selective records.