Journal of American Folklore, the quarterly journal of the American Folklore Society since the Society's founding in 1888, publishes scholarly articles, essays, notes, and commentaries directed to a wide audience, as well as separate sections devoted to reviews of books, exhibitions and events, sound recordings, film and videotapes, and to obituaries. The contents of the Journal reflect a wide range of professional concerns and theoretical orientations. Articles present significant research findings and theoretical analyses from folklore and related fields. Essays are interpretive, speculative, or polemic. Notes are narrower in scope and focus on a single, often provocative, issue of definition, interpretation, or amplication. Brief commentaries address these topics.
Founded in 1918, the University of Illinois Press (www.press.uillinois.edu) ranks as one of the country's larger and most distinguished university presses. The Press publishes more than 120 new books and 30 scholarly journals each year in an array of subjects including American history, labor history, sports history, folklore, food, film, American music, American religion, African American studies, women's studies, and Abraham Lincoln. The Press is a founding member of the Association of American University Presses as well as the History Cooperative, an online collection of more than 20 history journals.
Note: This article is a review of another work, such as a book, film, musical composition, etc. The original work is not included in the purchase of this review.