Folk...life and architecture

The text appears to place “folklore” as the universal term, while “folklife” is more specific and points to the tangible components of folklore. Although material culture is one of the three modes, or genres, of folklore, I interpret “folklife” as merely the term that folklorists use in place of “material culture.” I’d say the use of “folklife” serves as a sort of separation from “folklore” to make it more distinct (such as me being an American but I’m also a Texan). To be honest, before attending this course, I always assumed folklore to be just legends and myths and never would have considered that crafts, costume, architecture, festival, etc., are grouped under folklore.

To be or not to be...folk architecture:
It seems as though, according to the text, my house here in Virginia should be considered folk architecture, but mainly because the form is colonial. The layout of the home is traditional and is a reproduction of the type of home used by European settlers (I refer to it as just boxes within a box, which is typical of colonials). My home in Florida, however, is a contemporary style with brick and hardie board and therefore has no true traditional identity. But I’m confused as to whether my Florida home would still be folk architecture because the style and materials used are consistent with that area. The text indicates that this term is applied to “that which is common or native in a given area” (524), so my understanding of “folk architecture” is that it refers to a regional consistency in form and usage.