Feildwork, Memory, and the Impact of 9/11 on an Eastern Tennessee Klansman: A Folklorist's Reflection (2009)

There is an old proverb that I've often heard: Controversy sells. It is common folk knowledge today that more contentious a subject matter is, more intrigue it will attract. With this reality in mind, I wish to share a personal account of my first folkloristic encounter: series of events that led to my choice of a career in folklore. While many folklorists may recall their excitement and fascination with their first informants and unique narratives or artifacts that they produced, my tale involves near-accidental fieldwork in company of a less-than-savory group in American society: Ku Klux Klan (KKK). Stetson Kennedy has long been hailed as one of leading scholars on history and culture of Ku Klux Klan. In his undercover ethnographical foray into underbelly of KKK, The Klan Unmasked (1954), Kennedy infiltrated Klan society and acted as a participant-observer for more than a decade, all while collecting valuable information on Klan lore, ideology, and activities--a dangerous task, to say least. The book was originally penned under a pseudonym for his protection and wasn't released in United States until several years after its initial publication. In his reportage, Kennedy wrestled with ethical implications of publishing activities of Klan, stating that the silent is usually best treatment (285), and encouraged countermarches to offset any public display of Klan pride and an assortment of other Klan-busting activities. Kennedy raised important points. By publishing a report on a Klansman's activities or sharing insights into Klan worldviews, we become coconspirators in bringing their message of discrimination to listening world. It is a scholarly paradox: on one hand, we have power to share knowledge about a real and still-viable organization that intends to incite fear and bigotry--perhaps warning or educating public against its cause--but simultaneously, we must pause at seemingly celebrating or gawking at a sordid group's credos. With tremendous respect for Kennedy's work, however, I disagree with notion of maintaining silence on activities of Ku Klux Klan--or any group that may be involved in unwholesome activities, for that matter. I truly believe that there is good, worthy data to be found in socially deviant communities, and not just in academic avenues that have been thoroughly trodden. As folklorists, it is our responsibility to examine how humans express themselves in all of their unique manifestations and not to pass judgment upon their folkways. We are to analyze to best of our abilities and interpret worldly texts that surround us in an effort to gain a greater understanding of humankind. It is easy to wipe one's hands clean of something that is difficult to process; in some ways, I suppose it is natural to want to dodge this contentious scholastic battleground. Still, analyzing Klan provides a greater understanding of a culture that most academics are not readily able to engage. In doing so, we not only acquire information on an existing force within American society, but also neutralize mystique of group's secrecy. As Kennedy himself said: Hanging Klan's blood-stained linen on line for all world to see not only exposes its true terrorist nature but makes it abundantly clear that, far from being pillar of society it claims to be, Klan is rejected by body politic as beyond pale, criminal, and cancerous. (1954, 278) We can exert our influence on social relevancy of Ku Klux Klan in manner that Kennedy suggests by simply acknowledging Klan's crude existence, and then collectively rejecting and condemning its ideologies. The Klan will exist whether we study it or not. But to invoke another proverb, wouldn't it be best to keep our friends close, but our enemies closer? …