Editor's Column

Abstract

Editor's Column John Zemke With this volume, "Parallelism in Verbal Art and Performance," prepared under the direction of guest editors Frog and Lotte Tarkka, Oral Tradition accommodates a baker's dozen plus one explorations into a technique for holding in poetic consciousness two or more complementaries of several different orders. The standard modus operandi of this column is to introduce by way of brief summaries, specific articles and how they stand in relation to one another. Frog and Lotte Tarkka's nearly exhaustive "Introduction," however, relieves me of the task, and affords me the opportunity to reflect on one aspect of the poetic experience that parallelism conjures: the apperceptive stilling of the successive advance of time, or in the words of Octavio Paz, the perception of "the present, the source of presences." How metering suspends the three dimensional fracturing of time and returns us to the experience of its elasticity, when: "the doors of perception open slightly and the other time appears, the real one we were searching for without knowing it: the present, the presence." For the full text of Octavio Paz's 1990 Nobel Prize acceptance speech, "La búsqueda del presente" ("In Search of the Present"), see https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/laureates/1990/paz-lecture-s.html. Now, poaching Frog's correspondence about the volume, the organization of these fourteen essays concerning different orders of parallelism reflects five touchstones, arranged by emphasis and approach: Meaning (Fox, Tarkka, Hull); Relation to verse (Kaartinen—repetition; Kallio—melody; Fabb—cognitive processes); Formal Typology (of verses—Holm and Saarinen, beyond verse—Frog I); Specific Traditions and Types (Stepanova, Cruz, Turpin); and, finally, Theorizing Parallelism and Embodied Performance (Lindfors, Frog II). It is, nonetheless, useful to review the scope of the languages of the poetic traditions reviewed: San Juan Quiahje Chatino, an Oto-Manguean language spoken in the highlands of Oaxaca, Mexico (Cruz); Western Sumatran Minangkabau, Ipili, Mongolian, Toraja, and Asmat (Fabb); Rotense, Tetun, and Atoni, (Fox); Finno-Karelian languages (Frog I); as well as Danish, English, Khanty, Lithuanian, and Old High German (Frog II); Zhuang, a form of Tai-Kadai spoken in the highlands of Western Guangxi, Southern China (Holm); Ch'orti', a Mayan language spoken in sourthern Guatelmala (Hull); Bandanese (tur wandan), spoken in two villages in the Kei Islands (Kaartinen); British and American English (Lindfors); the Ingrian dialect of Finnish, and the closely related Finnic languages Izhorian and Karelian (Kallio); Karelian (Stepanova); Arandic, a Pama-Nyugan language spoken in Central Australia (Turpin); and, finally, Karelian (Tarkka). This issue of Oral Tradition appears in virtual space thanks to the combined efforts of the staff of the Center for Studies in Oral Tradition—Mark Jarvis, Hannah Lenon, Lauren Anderson, Vida Bonney, Elise Broaddus, Katy Chenoweth, Emily Horn, Jennifer Spitulnik, Evelyn Yamoah, and Professor Sean Gurd. 2017 witnessed a profound reshaping of the human resources that manage the affairs of the Center for Studies in Oral Tradition. A new fiscal regime entailed the separation of Mark Jarvis, Hannah Lenon, and Jennifer Spitulnik from the Center on the last day of the month of June. Their absence, the loss of their intellectual contributions and collegiality profoundly affect accomplishing the work of the Center. I wish them continued success in all of their endeavors. Research Assistants Lauren Anderson, Vida Bonney, and Emily Horn have taken on new challenges that augur much success. Professor Sean Gurd's ambitious research agenda now requires his full attention. The absence of his advice and good work is sorely felt, yet I feel certain that the loss incurred by the Center will be amply compensated by the questions his research poses to Classical Studies and the rewards to be had in answering them. Finally, as is customary, I want to recognize the colleagues who referee submissions for Oral Tradition—they deserve special recognition and kudos, even in their anonymity. Their expertise and judgment informs every editorial decision and I am deeply appreciative of having their guidance. With their invaluable counsel all of us working on the journal can continue aspiring to the standards of scholarship established by the founding editor, John Miles Foley. Professor Foley worked tirelessly to ensure that Oral Tradition offer a venue for...