Grief and a Headhunter's Rage, Rosaldo
The familiar setting is that of an ethnographer studying a culture's beliefs and rituals. This essay focuses on the ritual of headhunting.
Rosaldo makes a strong point against traditional ways that ethnographers typically study a culture.
"Many studies focus on visibly bounded arenas where one can observe formal and repetitive events, such as ceremonies, rituals, and games." (595)
On grieving..."Note that all the instances Wilson witnesses or hears about happen outside the circubscribed sphere of romal ritual...The work of grieving, probably universally, occurs both within obligatory ritual acts and in more everyday setting where people find themselves alone or with close kin." (596)
Rosaldo feels that in only looking at the ritual surrounding an event, such as death, one loses the chance for deeper understanding.
"In attempting to grasp the clutural force of rage and other powerful emotional states, both formal ritual and the informal practices of everday life provide crucial insight. Thus cultural descriptions shouls seek out force as well as thickness, and they should extend fro well-definedrituals to myriad less circumscribed practices." (597)
Rosaldo, as an ethnographer, attempted to approach the understanding of the ritual ofheadhunting using classical anthropological techniques. However, it was only through his own personal experiences of grief, that he was able to comprehend the headhunting. Although ethnographers are typically knowledgable and fluent in the culture they are attempting to understand, that they are limited by perspective and experience.
It is not typical for an ethnographer to resort to personal experience to bring about understanding. In anthropological circles, Rosaldo has not remained the unattached observer. He has now drawn on personal experience, and thus risks ridicule from those he seeks to influence.
"My use of personal experience serves as a vehicle for making the quality and intensity of the rage in Ilongot grief more readily accessible to readers than certain more detached modes of compostition. At the sames, time, by invoking personal experience as an analytical category one risks easy dismissal." (594)
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
Sunday, November 4, 2007
Haylee: Seq 7 Assn 5
What is the author saying that is experimental?
Anzaldua speaks of her cultural heritage mixing history and mythology. She makes bold statements about violence, feminity, religion.
"My family, like most Chicanos, did not practice Roman Catholicism but a folk Catholicism with many pagan elements." (p.65)
"The male-dominated Azteca-Mexica culture drove the powerful female deities undergound by giving them monstorous attributes and by substituting male deities in their place, thus splitting the female Self and the female deities." (p.65)
"Thus the Aztec nation fell not because malinali (la Chingada) interpreted for and slept with Cortes, but because the ruling elite had subverted the solidarity between men and women and between noble and commoner." (71)
"The Catholic and protestant religions encourage fear and distrust of life and of the body; they encourage a split between the body and the spirit and totally ignore the soul; they encourage us to kill off parts of ourselves." (p.74)
Anzaldua says "The whole thing has had a mind of its own, escaping me and insisting on puttion together the pieces of its own puzzle with minimal direction from my will."
She approaches is as if it took her by surprise. She is writing about being in a cultural purgatory; not American, not Mexican, or Spanish; being separated from her language. She combines poetry with history with personal story. She is angry and the audience is not necessarily her friend. While many authors tend to try to connect with the audience, Anzaldua writes wholly from her own perspective, many times alienating a reader; but nevertheless, needing to tell her story her way. It can be uncomfortable to read and try to relate to her. It can be offensive or aggressive. She is a wisewoman, a confused girl, an angry feminist. She writes many times in a different language, without interpreting; combining English with Chicano Spanish.
I think this essay is a very effective as far as it shows the weaving of history and myth. The tough truths to tell. The first time I read through this essay, I felt like I was being insulted. The more and more I turned back to it, I found elements of myself rising to the top.
Anzaldua speaks of her cultural heritage mixing history and mythology. She makes bold statements about violence, feminity, religion.
"My family, like most Chicanos, did not practice Roman Catholicism but a folk Catholicism with many pagan elements." (p.65)
"The male-dominated Azteca-Mexica culture drove the powerful female deities undergound by giving them monstorous attributes and by substituting male deities in their place, thus splitting the female Self and the female deities." (p.65)
"Thus the Aztec nation fell not because malinali (la Chingada) interpreted for and slept with Cortes, but because the ruling elite had subverted the solidarity between men and women and between noble and commoner." (71)
"The Catholic and protestant religions encourage fear and distrust of life and of the body; they encourage a split between the body and the spirit and totally ignore the soul; they encourage us to kill off parts of ourselves." (p.74)
Anzaldua says "The whole thing has had a mind of its own, escaping me and insisting on puttion together the pieces of its own puzzle with minimal direction from my will."
She approaches is as if it took her by surprise. She is writing about being in a cultural purgatory; not American, not Mexican, or Spanish; being separated from her language. She combines poetry with history with personal story. She is angry and the audience is not necessarily her friend. While many authors tend to try to connect with the audience, Anzaldua writes wholly from her own perspective, many times alienating a reader; but nevertheless, needing to tell her story her way. It can be uncomfortable to read and try to relate to her. It can be offensive or aggressive. She is a wisewoman, a confused girl, an angry feminist. She writes many times in a different language, without interpreting; combining English with Chicano Spanish.
I think this essay is a very effective as far as it shows the weaving of history and myth. The tough truths to tell. The first time I read through this essay, I felt like I was being insulted. The more and more I turned back to it, I found elements of myself rising to the top.
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Sequence 7 Assignment 6
Baudrillard's Utopia Achieved
Is he serious? Yes, his style is “defiant” and “fanciful” at times, but I think he firmly believes what he is saying. The biography uses the phrase “childlike glee” to describe how he feels about his discoveries.
Why would a writer write like this? The shock factor and the reversal of his role make it so that he can avoid many of the roadblocks that would appear from going at this straight forward.
What is being explored or rejected? Well America is explored, physically and theoretically. He tends to make radical statements that reject our history and any depth that we may have.
What does this writing do? If you let it his writing will anger you. He is very confrontational and contrarian he goes against what should be said.
What barriers are overcome? I think he overcomes the barrier of the audience, we are the topic and yet not the audience and the audience is not the topic and yet not the victor either. Though we are left out of the ‘we’ we are still held on a pedestal, tainted though it may be, for those who read this.
What are the advantages? It offers a different perspective than what I’m certain most Americans can see. He has the advantage of distance.
What are the pleasures? Its kind of fun to hear the French attitude directed at the French and the rest of Europe, in that part we do kind of get to sneak into the audience for a moment and say “yeah take that”. It is also pleasurable to be taken along on the journey of how we may appear to others, what there is to envy. I would have thought that Europe with all of its history, cuisine, wines, and heaven only knows what all would be far above envy especially of the barbarian bastard offspring of their own country.
What are the problems? He uses such radical generalizations that he not only alienates his target audience, but he subjects his specimen to a not only the barrage of tiny slings and arrows, but occasionally a slap in the face.
“The Indians’ territory is today marked off in reservations, the equivalent of the galleries in which America stocks its Rembrandts and Renoirs.” Pg 110
“Octavio Paz is right when he says that America was created in the hope of escaping from history” pg 113
“And we shall never enjoy the same freedom--not the formal freedom we take for granted, but the concrete, flexible functional, active freedom we see at work in American institutions and in the head of each citizen.” Pg113
"The freedom of bodily movement which this possession of space gives them easily compensates for the blandness of their features and character. Vulgar but ‘easy’.” Pg 122
“We merely imitate them, parody them with a fifty year time lag, and we are not even successful at that.” Pg 111
“You only have to see a French family settling in on a California beach to feel the abominable weight of our culture.” Pg 121
Is he serious? Yes, his style is “defiant” and “fanciful” at times, but I think he firmly believes what he is saying. The biography uses the phrase “childlike glee” to describe how he feels about his discoveries.
Why would a writer write like this? The shock factor and the reversal of his role make it so that he can avoid many of the roadblocks that would appear from going at this straight forward.
What is being explored or rejected? Well America is explored, physically and theoretically. He tends to make radical statements that reject our history and any depth that we may have.
What does this writing do? If you let it his writing will anger you. He is very confrontational and contrarian he goes against what should be said.
What barriers are overcome? I think he overcomes the barrier of the audience, we are the topic and yet not the audience and the audience is not the topic and yet not the victor either. Though we are left out of the ‘we’ we are still held on a pedestal, tainted though it may be, for those who read this.
What are the advantages? It offers a different perspective than what I’m certain most Americans can see. He has the advantage of distance.
What are the pleasures? Its kind of fun to hear the French attitude directed at the French and the rest of Europe, in that part we do kind of get to sneak into the audience for a moment and say “yeah take that”. It is also pleasurable to be taken along on the journey of how we may appear to others, what there is to envy. I would have thought that Europe with all of its history, cuisine, wines, and heaven only knows what all would be far above envy especially of the barbarian bastard offspring of their own country.
What are the problems? He uses such radical generalizations that he not only alienates his target audience, but he subjects his specimen to a not only the barrage of tiny slings and arrows, but occasionally a slap in the face.
“The Indians’ territory is today marked off in reservations, the equivalent of the galleries in which America stocks its Rembrandts and Renoirs.” Pg 110
“Octavio Paz is right when he says that America was created in the hope of escaping from history” pg 113
“And we shall never enjoy the same freedom--not the formal freedom we take for granted, but the concrete, flexible functional, active freedom we see at work in American institutions and in the head of each citizen.” Pg113
"The freedom of bodily movement which this possession of space gives them easily compensates for the blandness of their features and character. Vulgar but ‘easy’.” Pg 122
“We merely imitate them, parody them with a fifty year time lag, and we are not even successful at that.” Pg 111
“You only have to see a French family settling in on a California beach to feel the abominable weight of our culture.” Pg 121
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Haylee: Sequence 7 Assn. 1:Answers
Our Secret by Susan Griffin
In this essay, Susan Griffin takes a look at a person that most people would label immediately as evil. In her research of Heinrich Himmler, she searches for answers to the question as to how he developed into the kind of person who could commit atrocities. She looks at what influenced him, and how in turn, he influenced the lives of others. She reflects on her own life, and how it has been influenced by these events, and other people who lived before and after them. She looks for similarities and common themes. Throughout her essay, she switches themes; whether it's cells, rockets, artists, her own family, or historical data about HH. She doesn't specifically state her reasoning for structuring her essay this way, and, as readers, we are forced to find the connection in these topics. However, she does supply statements that let us know what journey she is on, and what her purpose for writing is. But none of it seems blatantly pursuasive, other than in her own feelings about what her research has led her to believe.
Griffin asks us to look deeper at something ugly and uncomfortable. She asks us to think about influence; how it affected one person, and many people.
Here, Susan Griffin tell us that she is not going to simply transmit information to us; that there is more to reading and writing than to simply state an idea or theory or story, and use arguments and facts to support this story or idea.
Griffin's style is experimental for a couple of reasons. Firstly, she does not just state a thesis or argument and then use facts to support it. She begins her essay with a short piece of information about cells. She then gives us a fragment of a memory from someone. Her next sentence is regarding missiles. This patterns continues for awhile, including introducing Heinrich Himmler; historical facts and personal wonderings; leaving the reader to ponder how all of these things are related. In this way, we as readers, are taken on the journey of finding answers with her. We are forced to find, through her varied themes, our own interpretation of how things influence one another. We are sort of forced into the process with her. There are times when she speaks in first person, and times when she writes in third person.
I feel that Griffin is very successful not only in using these different themes, that do seem interconnected, but using them in a way that forces the reader to engage in the search with her. The essay is not jumbled or unreadable; the themes, however different, have a pattern and flow that work toward a gathering of information, and they seem to symbolize a journey to tell a story that is complicated.
In this essay, Susan Griffin takes a look at a person that most people would label immediately as evil. In her research of Heinrich Himmler, she searches for answers to the question as to how he developed into the kind of person who could commit atrocities. She looks at what influenced him, and how in turn, he influenced the lives of others. She reflects on her own life, and how it has been influenced by these events, and other people who lived before and after them. She looks for similarities and common themes. Throughout her essay, she switches themes; whether it's cells, rockets, artists, her own family, or historical data about HH. She doesn't specifically state her reasoning for structuring her essay this way, and, as readers, we are forced to find the connection in these topics. However, she does supply statements that let us know what journey she is on, and what her purpose for writing is. But none of it seems blatantly pursuasive, other than in her own feelings about what her research has led her to believe.
Griffin asks us to look deeper at something ugly and uncomfortable. She asks us to think about influence; how it affected one person, and many people.
- "I have come to believe that every life bears in some way on every other." (p332)
- "...is one ever really free of the fate of others? I was born in 1943, in the midst of this war. And I sense now that my life is still bound up with the lives of those who lived and died in this time." (p. 314)
- "....hoping to find a door into the mind of this man, even as his character first forms so that I might learn how it is he becomes himself." (p. 315)
- "...she traces the origins of this violence to childhood. of course there cannot be one answer to such a monumental riddle, nor does any event in history have a single cause. Rather a field exists...Each life is influenced and it in turn becomes an influence...Childhood experience is just one element in the determining field." (317)
- "What then occurs if the soul in its small beginnings is forced to take on a secret life?...He harbors his secrets in fear and guilt, confessing them to no one until in time the voice of his father chastising him becomes his own." (319)
Here, Susan Griffin tell us that she is not going to simply transmit information to us; that there is more to reading and writing than to simply state an idea or theory or story, and use arguments and facts to support this story or idea.
Griffin's style is experimental for a couple of reasons. Firstly, she does not just state a thesis or argument and then use facts to support it. She begins her essay with a short piece of information about cells. She then gives us a fragment of a memory from someone. Her next sentence is regarding missiles. This patterns continues for awhile, including introducing Heinrich Himmler; historical facts and personal wonderings; leaving the reader to ponder how all of these things are related. In this way, we as readers, are taken on the journey of finding answers with her. We are forced to find, through her varied themes, our own interpretation of how things influence one another. We are sort of forced into the process with her. There are times when she speaks in first person, and times when she writes in third person.
I feel that Griffin is very successful not only in using these different themes, that do seem interconnected, but using them in a way that forces the reader to engage in the search with her. The essay is not jumbled or unreadable; the themes, however different, have a pattern and flow that work toward a gathering of information, and they seem to symbolize a journey to tell a story that is complicated.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Hey Guys
Below are the notes and plan, as I understood, from class tonight. Please review and let me know if I got it all down correctly, and make adjustments as needed.
Thanks! I'm glad I get to work with you!
Haylee
Thanks! I'm glad I get to work with you!
Haylee
Notes from Class Thursday: Game Plan
Nov. 15th we will turn in our assignments in a group portfolio.
Nov. 8th
Sequence 7: "This sequence offers you opportunities to work with selections that are striking both for what they have to say, and for the ways they use writing. In each case the writer is experiementing, pushing against or stepping outside of conventional ways of writing and thinking."
Nov. 8th
- We will bring all of our assignments (Essays and notes from both Seq. 7 & 8)
- Haylee & Melissa will bring hole punchers and binder options.
- We will finalize our notes, and form our presentation based off of our notes and answers from the questions below, from each assignment.
- We will go to the library and create a power point presentation, highlighting important quotes or ideas (Jordan will instruct how we do this technologically)
Assignments:
Haylee: Seq. 7, Assn. 5 & Seq. 8, Assn. 3
DaLynn: Seq. 8, Assn. 2 & 4
Melissa: Seq. 7, Assn. 6 & Seq. 8 Assn. 5
Jordan: Seq. 7, Assn. 7 & Seq. 8 Assn. 1
Focus for presentation:Sequence 7: "This sequence offers you opportunities to work with selections that are striking both for what they have to say, and for the ways they use writing. In each case the writer is experiementing, pushing against or stepping outside of conventional ways of writing and thinking."
For your assignments in both sections, answer the questions thorougly, using quotes or specific examples when possible:
- What is the author saying that is unconventional, or striking?
- How is their style or form of writing experiemental or unconventional? (What is the style or format they use, and how is it different from the norm?)
- Was it convincing? Was it effective?
Sequence 8: "...think about familiar settings or experiences through the work of writers who have had a significant effect on contemporary thought....draw some conclusions about the potential and consequences of this kind of intellectual apprenticeship."
- What is the familiar setting (topic)?
- What is the significant effect on contemporary thought?
- What are the pros and cons of being an expert in the field? (What is the field?)
Monday, October 22, 2007
Sequence 7 Assignment 4
"Our Time"
First I have to say that I did really like this essay, but this assignment is mentally hard for me. I am supposed to be studying in hopes of writing an essay in the same style. The problem I am having is that, in all actuality, I could write it in exactly the same way. Let me explain that a little. It says to use his topic ( Brother, neighborhoods) as an example you are free to use these but you can choose whatever topic you want. Well while reading this I think of my brother and while reading this assignment that is the first and so far only thing to come to mind. My Brother has a past, he is not in jail, but has been and my mother has told me things about him at different times in my life. I mean really I could write something really close to this and just as true. So my dilemma is: Do I stick with the same idea and the first thought or do I risk over analyzing to make it something more?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)