Etnološka branja Gregorja Kreka

Abstract

Zgoščena oznaka Krekovega znanstvenega dela in recepcija njegove filologije v izbranih delih o zgodovini slovenske etnologije in folkloristike opozarjata na presojnost disciplinarne zgodovine in ostrita poglede na nastajanje narodopisja v drugi polovici 19. stoletja. O Krekovem delu ponujata nekoliko ambivalentne sklepe: je začetnik slavistike v Gradcu in tudi začetnik filološkega, romantiško motiviranega, vendar tudi znanstvenega narodopisja; angažiral se je, čeprav neuspešno, ob načrtu izdaje zbirke slovenskih ljudskih pesmi in zanjo pripravil uredniška izhodišča; kritiki sta bila podvržena njegov mitološki nazor in posredno tudi t. i. mitološka šola 19. stoletja. Zaradi delovanja v nemškem znanstvenem prostoru in nemškem jeziku je razumljivo tudi, da so mu bili med njegovimi sodobniki tuji kritiki naklonjenejši od domačih. Prispevek ne kanonizira Kreka, temveč kontekstualno opozarja na stranpoti, ki so ob splošno priznanih dosežkih enakovreden fenomen disciplinarne zgodovine. *** A condensed review of Krek’s scholarly production and of the reception of his philological work in select texts on the history of Slovenian ethnology and folklore studies attempts to clarify the beginnings of ethnography in the second half of the 19th century. As a scholar, Gregor Krek is viewed in a somewhat ambivalent manner: the founder of Slavic studies in Graz and the editor engaged – albeit unsuccessfully - in the preparations for the publication of an extensive collection of Slovenian folk songs for which he had devised his own editorial concept; and a follower of the mythological orientation and of, although indirectly, the so-called mythological school of the 19th century. Since he was active within German academia and wrote in the German language, foreign scholars were more benevolent to his work than domestic critics. Rather than canonizing Krek the article merely tries to draw attention to digressions that, along with the generally acknowledged achievements in ethnology, represent an equally interesting phenomenon of disciplinary history