A Summation of our Folklore & Fakery Discussion

First of all, thank you to everyone for making the effort to read and understand the texts we chose. I know they can be frustrating at times (especially Chatterton's). That being said, there were some excellent points brought up about both texts.

Macpherson's Ossian texts:

• The asterisks:

*as a cop out: a way of rewriting the "original" ending (supported by the amusing footnotes)
*as a way of forcing 18th century ideas about sexuality on a text that was supposedly from a different era
*as a literary method: following the "found manuscript" concept by indicating lost or damaged portions of the text itself

• The plot:

*What exactly is the point of this story?
*Does anything significant actually happen?
*Is there a moral?
*What values is "Ossian" trying to portray in his people?

• Literariness:

*Ignoring the text's authenticity, should "Colna-Dona" be taken seriously? Or is it only studied because Macpherson was exposed as a fraud?
*Are the Harry Potter series and Lord of the Rings trilogy only acceptable because we know from the beginning that these are not real? Is there even any comparison between J.R.R. Tolkien's texts and what Macpherson attempts to do with "The Works of Ossian"?

Chatterton's "Bristowe Tragedie":

• Purpose of the text:

*instruction
*reinforcing the idea of a British literary history
*explicitly leaving out the classical

• Sir Charles as the Bristol (or English) hero:

*loyalty
*dignity
*faith
*chivalry

• Literature vs. History:

*How is "Bristowe Tragedie" different from the Ossian texts in that its characters are acutal historical figures?
*If eighteenth century ideals are infused in a supposedly middle English text can it then be considered a historical representation of the eighteenth century mindset?
*Can Chatterton's work be considered literary on its own terms?