This history considers the many interpretations of the word “goblin” and its variations since the Middle Ages. It does not classify goblins as creatures of a singular appearance, behavior, or geography. Instead, the lexeme itself is the object of this history, which thus encompasses Anglophone folklore, Christian demonology, literary fiction, political discourse, theater, natural topography, modern paganism, tabletop games, and other forms of media. Embedded throughout this history is the intertwining of folkloric and folkloresque goblins, which evolved in a hazy dialectic of oral, written, and artistic traditions. The goblin has taken countless forms across these hundreds of years, and finding a single unifying thread to connect all of them is an impossibility. Perhaps the most fitting through line, though, is the characterization of the goblin as a life form or object of atypical appearance and/or behavior, which could range from horrifying to ugly to confusing to racist to villainous to heroic depending on the context. It is only in the twenty-first century that these abnormalities have been widely reframed as positive attributes. Goblins remain atypical and ugly—but so is everyone.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Introduction to A History of Goblins

  • Matt King

摘要

This history considers the many interpretations of the word “goblin” and its variations since the Middle Ages. It does not classify goblins as creatures of a singular appearance, behavior, or geography. Instead, the lexeme itself is the object of this history, which thus encompasses Anglophone folklore, Christian demonology, literary fiction, political discourse, theater, natural topography, modern paganism, tabletop games, and other forms of media. Embedded throughout this history is the intertwining of folkloric and folkloresque goblins, which evolved in a hazy dialectic of oral, written, and artistic traditions. The goblin has taken countless forms across these hundreds of years, and finding a single unifying thread to connect all of them is an impossibility. Perhaps the most fitting through line, though, is the characterization of the goblin as a life form or object of atypical appearance and/or behavior, which could range from horrifying to ugly to confusing to racist to villainous to heroic depending on the context. It is only in the twenty-first century that these abnormalities have been widely reframed as positive attributes. Goblins remain atypical and ugly—but so is everyone.