Introduction: The Trickster’s Methodological Potential
The trickster figure exists across various cultural contexts, emerging as an archetype that utilizes the methodologies of play and “craft” to illuminate authority and destabilize authorized boundaries. As “the epitome of binary oppositions” the trickster figure rejects social borders, boundaries, categorization, and identification. Often a shape-shifter, the trickster embodies an ongoing state of liminality—they are always on the cusp of becoming another. Though the trickster is often designated the title of “the fool,” it is, in fact, his “foolish” methods that render them the opposite—a divine entity embodying serious potential. The foolish tactics of the trickster are what illuminate society’s authoritative constructions, ultimately allowing them to overturn even the most uncompromising ideologies. Today, the trickster figure endures as a methodological hero. As a cultural figure often associated with “non-literate” mythology, engaging with trickster narratives in and of itself mirrors the boundary-breaking methods of the trickster. Since realms coded as “academic” tend to privilege the written word—historically obscuring oral indigenous and colonized knowledges—engaging seriously with trickster tales centers information traditionally produced from marginalized knowledge production practices (i.e. folklore and storytelling). Because the Western positivist lens perceives these practices as lacking “objectivity” and “evidence” citing the trickster figure and their tales interrupts the Western Positivist project of coding what knowledge counts as “truth.” The mere ubiquity of trickster tales across space and time illustrates the monumental value in exploring this character and the potency of his methods. By citing the trickster, we open the door to becoming the trickster—a cultural transformer wielding considerable critical power. Embodying the trickster figure becomes a powerful methodological tool when we understand that historically it is not only the academic word that produces change but also ultimately the trickster’s utilization of both “craft” and play. In the following Sections, I will continue my discussion by examining the ways in which trickster methodologies have and can be adopted. …show more content…
In Section I, I will discuss the ways in which feminist artists of the 1970s have reclaimed craft to illuminate and destabilize the fictitious art/craft divide. I will continue by explaining how these artists not only privileged craft but embodied craft. In other words, I will explore the ways in which a legacy of feminist artists has performed the role of the trickster, embodying “the crafty self” to gain recognition. After concluding this section, I will follow in Section III by exploring twins as a case study for trickster embodiment. I will utilize the mode of storytelling to honor this marginalized knowledge form of the trickster, and ultimately argue that through narratives of twinship, we can come to understand twins, like feminist artists, as living embodiments of the trickster trade. Section II: The …show more content…
It was only in the mid-1500s when a binary was constructed between the two terms. The term “art” was designated to the upper-echelon mediums of painting and sculpture, designating them to the public realm of the museum. Art forms traditionally associated with lower classes, racial minorities, and women—such as textiles, sewing, quilting, and woodwork—was in contrast, coded as “craft” and designated to private (and sometimes domestic) realms. This binary production was ultimately a knowledge production project, eliciting ideologies about “whose art should be seen (public)” and “whose art is of cultural significance.” This meaning-making project ultimately reinforced class, race, and gender boundaries, further marginalizing minority populations by forcing their cultural contributions to the private
The trickster figure exists across various cultural contexts, emerging as an archetype that utilizes the methodologies of play and “craft” to illuminate authority and destabilize authorized boundaries. As “the epitome of binary oppositions” the trickster figure rejects social borders, boundaries, categorization, and identification. Often a shape-shifter, the trickster embodies an ongoing state of liminality—they are always on the cusp of becoming another. Though the trickster is often designated the title of “the fool,” it is, in fact, his “foolish” methods that render them the opposite—a divine entity embodying serious potential. The foolish tactics of the trickster are what illuminate society’s authoritative constructions, ultimately allowing them to overturn even the most uncompromising ideologies. Today, the trickster figure endures as a methodological hero. As a cultural figure often associated with “non-literate” mythology, engaging with trickster narratives in and of itself mirrors the boundary-breaking methods of the trickster. Since realms coded as “academic” tend to privilege the written word—historically obscuring oral indigenous and colonized knowledges—engaging seriously with trickster tales centers information traditionally produced from marginalized knowledge production practices (i.e. folklore and storytelling). Because the Western positivist lens perceives these practices as lacking “objectivity” and “evidence” citing the trickster figure and their tales interrupts the Western Positivist project of coding what knowledge counts as “truth.” The mere ubiquity of trickster tales across space and time illustrates the monumental value in exploring this character and the potency of his methods. By citing the trickster, we open the door to becoming the trickster—a cultural transformer wielding considerable critical power. Embodying the trickster figure becomes a powerful methodological tool when we understand that historically it is not only the academic word that produces change but also ultimately the trickster’s utilization of both “craft” and play. In the following Sections, I will continue my discussion by examining the ways in which trickster methodologies have and can be adopted. …show more content…
In Section I, I will discuss the ways in which feminist artists of the 1970s have reclaimed craft to illuminate and destabilize the fictitious art/craft divide. I will continue by explaining how these artists not only privileged craft but embodied craft. In other words, I will explore the ways in which a legacy of feminist artists has performed the role of the trickster, embodying “the crafty self” to gain recognition. After concluding this section, I will follow in Section III by exploring twins as a case study for trickster embodiment. I will utilize the mode of storytelling to honor this marginalized knowledge form of the trickster, and ultimately argue that through narratives of twinship, we can come to understand twins, like feminist artists, as living embodiments of the trickster trade. Section II: The …show more content…
It was only in the mid-1500s when a binary was constructed between the two terms. The term “art” was designated to the upper-echelon mediums of painting and sculpture, designating them to the public realm of the museum. Art forms traditionally associated with lower classes, racial minorities, and women—such as textiles, sewing, quilting, and woodwork—was in contrast, coded as “craft” and designated to private (and sometimes domestic) realms. This binary production was ultimately a knowledge production project, eliciting ideologies about “whose art should be seen (public)” and “whose art is of cultural significance.” This meaning-making project ultimately reinforced class, race, and gender boundaries, further marginalizing minority populations by forcing their cultural contributions to the private