Why do we never hear of suburban legends, exurban legends, rural legends, etc.? Surely they exist, but why aren’t these terms used?
Because the urban descriptor is meant to delineate these stories from more traditional folklore. It’s a rather ungainly choice, I agree. Modern or contemporary would be a better choice, I should think.
bibliophage’s column on “What’s So Urban about Urban Legends?” is perhaps helpful here (though I’ve suggested a few minor changes before).
Although the terms you mention, panache45, aren’t considered by folklorists as standard descriptors of “contemporary legends,” “urban legends,” and “modern legends,” folklorists do recognize that they’re used by the public to designate specific kinds of contemporary legends. So, you do find “suburban legend” and “rural legend” loosely (and sometimes humorously) applied to types of contemporary legends that seem to be placed in suburban or rural areas. For example, rumors that various state Divisions of Wildlife Resources (and similar) parachute in rattlesnakes to control the local turkey population are often branded as “rural legends” or “rural myths.” Again, these aren’t considered standard nomenclature, but they’re definitely in use by the general public.
(As a little experiment in folklore, I have a Twitter account in which I retweet interesting things Twitter users say about contemporary legends. “Suburban legend/myth” and “rural legend/myth” are search terms that often bring up such tweets.)
“Urban” distinguishes the type/content from
Local/regional Legends - stories about predators, minor heroes and their deeds, minor criminals and their deeds, et cetera.
Baseball/Hockey/Whatever Sports - Legends, usually particular people of notable achievement.
Military Legends - Stories about particular people (D’Artagnan) or deeds in war, battle, or espionage (delivery of the ENIGMA machine)
Industrial legends - Stories about particular incidents or discoveries within a field (Newton & the Apple, Galileo dropping balls from the leaning tower of Pisa, etc).
–G!
Grestarian sich Eristan: Not just a legend, but a legend in his own mind!
It’s interesting that you talk about D’Artagnan as a legend.
Way back when I was in school a myth was about someone who never existed and a legend was about someone who did exist. I suppose after all this time it’s become idiomatic.
Legend is correct. Dumas based his character on the life of the real D’Artagnan, although much of it was heavily fictionalized for the novels.