This paper summarizes the discussion of ethnology in Slovenia between ‘narodopisje’ and anthropology from the point of view of its theoretical and methodological issues. At the same time it delineates some characteristics of ethnology and folklore studies in Slovenia in the 20th century, whereby the discussion on the wider social implications is omitted. Considerations put forward here are limited to those disciplinary issues which are the fruit of self-reflexive and critical insights in ethnology, which enable to highlight the origins, the formation and changes of research patterns from predominant philological and cultural-historical roots of ‘narodopisje’ to anthropologically oriented contemporary research. Some general observations, a retrospective view of the status of theory and methodology, the tradition of ‘narodopisje’, the ‘farewell to folk life’, the new methodological horizons, the predicament of the ‘two-headed ethnology’ and recent anthropologization are considered. and Článek shrnuje debaty o etnologii ve Slovinsku, její vývoj od „národopisu“ {narodopisje) k antropologii, se zvláštním zřetelem k teoretickým a metodologickým problémům. Nastiňuje některé charakteristiky etnologie a folkloristiky ve Slovinsku ve 20. století, vyhýbá se ale diskusi o širších sociálních souvislostech. Omezuje se pouze na ty problémy disciplíny, které jsou produktem sebereflexe a kritického přístupu k etnologii, což umožňuje zdůraznit její počátky, formování a změny stylu výzkum, od převážně filologických a kulturně-historických kořenů „národopisu“ k antropologický orientovanému výzkumu v současnosti. Připojeny jsouněkteré obecné postřehy, a také retrospektivní pohled na status teorie a metodologie, úvahy o tradici „národopisu“, „rozloučení s lidovým životem“, o nových metodologických horizontech, dilematu „dvouhlavé etnologie" a aktuální antropologizaci.
The study focuses in particular to the institutional development of Czechoslovak ethnography in the period between the end of the World War II and the year 1953. The establishing of the Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences in the years 1951/1952-1953 made an impact upon many scientific disciplines. Ethnography belonged to the 6th section, but for a long time it had been unclear how the State Institute for Folk Song, whose tradition reached to the year 1905, and the newly established Cabinet for Ethnography were to by connected. The present study tries to capture this effort for preserving the independent study of folklore, even though in close connection with ethnographic research, as well as the problem of the institutional embedding, that is, the gradual hiring of scientific workers, the composition of scientific committee and the editorial boards of important periodicals.
Dopisy Karla Vetterla (1898-1979), muzikologa a hudebního folkloristy (od roku 1965 vedoucí brněnské pobočky Ústavu pro etnografii a folkloristiku), Jiřímu Horákovi (1884-1975), českému literárnímu vědci, slavistovi a folkloristovi (do roku 1963 ředitel Ústavu pro etnografii a folkloristiku ČSAV), se nacházejí v osobním fondu Jiřího Horáka a pokrývají období 1955-1968. Většinu korespondence tvoří dopisy Karla Vetterla. Odrážejí rovinu privátní i odbornou, najdeme mezi nimi osobní přání a pozdravy jak Jiřímu Horákovi, tak jeho manželce. Většina korespondence má však pracovní charakter. Karel Vetterl se na Jiřího Horáka obracel s prosbami o radu nebo se svěřoval s potížemi na pracovišti. Řešili spolu například problematiku domácích etnografických institucí, spolupráci se zahraničím (možnost výjezdů na konference, výzkumné pobyty v cizině), kontakty pražského a brněnského pracoviště., Letters between Karel Vetterl (1898-1979), musicologist and musical folklorist (and from 1965 the Director of the Brno branch of the Institute for Ethnography and Folklore Studies) and Jiří Horák (1884-1975), Czech literary scholar, Slav studies scholar and folklorist (who was Director of the CSAS Institute for Ethnography and Folklore Studies), can be found in Jiří Horák’s personal papers covering the 1955-1968 period. Most of this correspondence is made up of Karel Vetterl’s letters, reflecting both the private and professional spheres and including personal greetings and good wishes to Jiří Horák and his wife. However, most of the correspondence is of a working nature. Karel Vetterl turned to Jiří Horák for advice or confided his workplace difficulties to him. For example, together they dealt with the issue of domestic ethnographic institutions, collaboration abroad (including conference trips and research tours abroad) and liaison between the Prague and Brno branches. Translated by Melvyn Clarke, and Překlad resumé: Melvyn Clarke
The aim of the following text was to intermediate the personal reflection of migrants of preponderantly Czech origin who were in the years 1991-1993 resettled from the former Soviet Union to the Czech Republic. Better to say, the article focuses on one specific group of these displaced persons who came in the year 1993 and have lived since then in the locality Kopidlno. The main aim of the text is to reflect the way how the refugees themselves at present assess the motivation for their leaving of the land of their forefathers, how they evaluate their adaptation and integration with respect to the locality in which they live, how did they cope with the „resettlement shock“ and how did they succeed in the „competition“ with the majority society, for example at work. The final part of the text presents the differences in assessment of the return migration process and in evaluation of the locality between the first and second generation of the return migrants. The text was based on repeated guided interviews and observations realized in the locality of Kopidlno during the years 2008-2010.