The 1998 Bad Homburg symposium revealed incommensurabilities in the ways that American folklorists and German Volkskundler understand their roles in public life. So different are the histories of American folklore and German Volkskunde that it is virtually impossible to translate the term public folklore into German. The closest approximation, öffentliche Folklore, refers to public (mis) uses of Volkskunde in the absence of Volkskundler, not the profession of public folklore, as American folklorists understand it. Whereas American public folklorists see themselves as cultural activists, German Volkskundler see themselves as cultural critics. Mindful of the abuses of Volkskunde during the Third Reich, the Volkskundler are particularly sensitive to the popular misuses of Volkskunde, understood not only as folklore but also as folkloristics. Though Volkskundler have historically worked in museums, not only as researchers but also as curators of exhibitions, they are more likely to analyze public folklore than to produce it. Volkskundler have long argued that the very act of studying what we call folklore contributes to a process of folklorization that brings the taken-for-granted into public view. While some folklorists argue that such visibility is empowering, the Volkskundler, as well as some folklorists, are wary of such instrumentalizations of the habitus. They note how cultural celebration can be used against the best interests of those represented. This essay, a response to the published Bad Homburg symposium proceedings, explores these incommensurabilities in relation to entanglement of our professional knowledge and popular uses of it in the public sphere, the academy, and the museum.