Michelle Newcomb
Un-Assigned Readings #1
November 29, 2007
Do we use plants or do plants use us?
A few years ago I read a book called the Naked Ape that discussed the evolution of mankind and there was a section that reminded me of what we talked about in class the other day. We were discussing how it takes life to make life and there was one comment about how we use plants for food but at the same time – they use us. There’s part of this book that talks about the plant life that has had the most significant effect on mankind – and one of them is marijuana. It does this really in dept historically back track of mans first experience with the plant up until present day but at the end it hits on a really interesting theory. The plants, like all other life, have the one main goal of procreation /survival. They ‘want’ to be spread around and want the species to survive. Marijuana has taken on the unique characteristic of giving humans and interesting experience when they smoke it. If you think about it like this – marijuana’s tactics were not only genius but very successful. Today, there are very few societies that have no knowledge of marijuana and more importantly, there are very few that don’t grow it. I just really loved this point of view that sees plants as living, growing things that have goals and tactics, just like all other life. I think as a human, I tend to see plants as more docile and slow moving but they’re actually, from this perspective, really ingenious.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Initial Reaction to Bruchko
Michelle Newcomb
Assigned Readings #2
November 29, 2007
Initial Reaction to Bruchko
When I first started reading Bruchko I was concerned that it was going to be some kind of autobiography by a religious zealot who set out to convert a group of ‘pagans’ but I was glad to find that it was much different. I found Bruce’s sincerity and determination touching, especially for such a young person. It’s obvious to see that these characteristics don’t come with age – judging by the reactions of his parents, church leaders and fellow missionaries in Venezuela.
I’m not so sure this is a good thing – but this is the first firsthand account I’ve ever heard of a truly Christian nature – loving and giving with a sense of brotherhood among mankind. I’ve met my fair share of religious people but none with the conviction and sense of faith in God and mankind. I think this is a really excellent commentary on what Christianity has really turned into - rather than a brotherhood it’s an exclusive, members-only club. I really enjoyed Bruce’s reaction to the structure and restrictions of modern day Christianity – does he really need their permission to be a Christian? I love how he challenges the norms of modern day Christianity, how he questions the ways that the religion can be observed and questions the cultural of Christianity and implies that there isn’t one: “Is that what Christianity is all about? What does the good news of Jesus Christ have to do with North American culture?”
Assigned Readings #2
November 29, 2007
Initial Reaction to Bruchko
When I first started reading Bruchko I was concerned that it was going to be some kind of autobiography by a religious zealot who set out to convert a group of ‘pagans’ but I was glad to find that it was much different. I found Bruce’s sincerity and determination touching, especially for such a young person. It’s obvious to see that these characteristics don’t come with age – judging by the reactions of his parents, church leaders and fellow missionaries in Venezuela.
I’m not so sure this is a good thing – but this is the first firsthand account I’ve ever heard of a truly Christian nature – loving and giving with a sense of brotherhood among mankind. I’ve met my fair share of religious people but none with the conviction and sense of faith in God and mankind. I think this is a really excellent commentary on what Christianity has really turned into - rather than a brotherhood it’s an exclusive, members-only club. I really enjoyed Bruce’s reaction to the structure and restrictions of modern day Christianity – does he really need their permission to be a Christian? I love how he challenges the norms of modern day Christianity, how he questions the ways that the religion can be observed and questions the cultural of Christianity and implies that there isn’t one: “Is that what Christianity is all about? What does the good news of Jesus Christ have to do with North American culture?”
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
South Beach and Food as a Religion
Religious Studies 335
Michelle Newcomb
South Beach and Food with Religion
Since I’m at CNU and live away from home I communicate with my parents via phone and email but only get to see them in person over the holidays. I’d heard from them for a few months now about this new diet that they’re trying called South Beach and going home for thanksgiving I got to see how serious they actually are. My family has never really been one of unhealthy eaters but we’ve never really done strict diets before now either. When I arrived home after a few months of being away the first thing I noticed was the churned soil that took up most of our already small backyard and after questioning what was going on – I found out that my parents had decided to stop buying vegetables form the store, they were going to grow them themselves when this spring rolls around. Our thanksgiving this year was anything but traditional – we all had to follow south beach rules and that meant no carbs and no sugars. So instead of mashed potatoes we had mashed cauliflower, instead of turkey we had pot roast and for desert, we had a sugar-free, carb-free pumpkin pie. (It was just as bad as it sounds).
The diet itself is extremely difficult to stick to – simply because your cutting all good foods out of your life, that means keeping them out of the house and out of their temptation as well. Foods that were allowed could be located in the all-encompassing South Beach Diet book that soon became a pseudo-bible in our household. After living with it for a few days it was nice to come back to school and eat the food that was disallowed at home during the break. Once I got home I noticed something that I didn’t when I had time off – that I now spent much more time thinking about what food I was going to eat and its effect on my body. I can see now what kind of a lifestyle change this diet became (even though the food wasn’t too great) the focus shifted from indulging whatever craves I had to what my body needed and how it would effect me in the next few days.
This just reminded me of our discussion in class the other day about food as a religious or a ritual and I feel like that definitely applied to me, food wasn’t necessarily a religion but it is a ritual and was shifting into a big priority after spending that long weekend at home.
Michelle Newcomb
South Beach and Food with Religion
Since I’m at CNU and live away from home I communicate with my parents via phone and email but only get to see them in person over the holidays. I’d heard from them for a few months now about this new diet that they’re trying called South Beach and going home for thanksgiving I got to see how serious they actually are. My family has never really been one of unhealthy eaters but we’ve never really done strict diets before now either. When I arrived home after a few months of being away the first thing I noticed was the churned soil that took up most of our already small backyard and after questioning what was going on – I found out that my parents had decided to stop buying vegetables form the store, they were going to grow them themselves when this spring rolls around. Our thanksgiving this year was anything but traditional – we all had to follow south beach rules and that meant no carbs and no sugars. So instead of mashed potatoes we had mashed cauliflower, instead of turkey we had pot roast and for desert, we had a sugar-free, carb-free pumpkin pie. (It was just as bad as it sounds).
The diet itself is extremely difficult to stick to – simply because your cutting all good foods out of your life, that means keeping them out of the house and out of their temptation as well. Foods that were allowed could be located in the all-encompassing South Beach Diet book that soon became a pseudo-bible in our household. After living with it for a few days it was nice to come back to school and eat the food that was disallowed at home during the break. Once I got home I noticed something that I didn’t when I had time off – that I now spent much more time thinking about what food I was going to eat and its effect on my body. I can see now what kind of a lifestyle change this diet became (even though the food wasn’t too great) the focus shifted from indulging whatever craves I had to what my body needed and how it would effect me in the next few days.
This just reminded me of our discussion in class the other day about food as a religious or a ritual and I feel like that definitely applied to me, food wasn’t necessarily a religion but it is a ritual and was shifting into a big priority after spending that long weekend at home.
Bryan Trumble's Posts
I made all my posts at once because I had written them throughout the semester and saved them on a jump drive that for various reasons (at times I had no internet and when I did I didn't have the drive etc..) I was unable to post onto the blog. These posts have been written throughout the entire semester, sorry for the inconvenience.
Bryan
Bryan
Dance of Divine Love: Ritual Dances and the Circle - Bryan Trumble
Dance of Divine Love is a translation of the sacred Hindu text, Rasa Lila. The main pretext of this ancient Hindi story is that Krishna beings to play his flute in the woods, drawing out women from all around. They dance, sing and rejoice in Krishna’s presence. Soon however Krishna detects arrogance among them and leaves them. He later returns to show them that he loves them all equally and that he has always been with them all, making none of them better than the others or those that are not there. When Krishna returns he manifests himself in numerous ways so that he can dance with each of them at the same time, and then begin to form a circle with Krishna dancing with his most beloved Gopi Radha.
This circle allows all of the Gopis to see and experience Krishna at the same time. It is very similar to the use of circle in the ritual performances of tribal cultures, especially as we saw in class through the movie The Bounty. We saw how the ritual was being performed inside the circle. And that the shape of the circle was conducive to letting even those on the outside become a part of the ritual. Even as Mel Gibson’s crew watched the ritual dancers, unbeknownst to them, they were becoming part of the ritual the natives were enacting. They all were at the outer edge of the ritual and no one was pushed back into any kind of corner, allowing everyone an equal view of the dance, and equal ability to hear the music, singing, and chanting. In this way just like all the Gopis were able to experience Krishna at once both through his divine powers and through the use of circle so were the bystanders of the native’s ritual in The Bounty. Although, Krishna did use divine power to help all the Gopis feel connected to him, the circle is a symbol of the all pervading use of this divine power and further emphasizes the point.
It is also symbolic of the derived use of them semi-circle in theater, as originated by the Greeks. The ancient Greeks altered the tribal circle slightly by changing it into a semi-circle. This concept was used in theater to: better center the attention on the main act, and create better vocals, while still keeping the same involvement the tribal ritual method used. This is resonated in the Rasa Lila by Krishna focusing himself with Radha at the center of the circle, showing an attempt to center the attention on the middle of the circle. Also as the other divinities gather around in the sky they form a semicircle to watch the events. This event is very much like the Greek orchestra.
In both instances the people around the circle or semicircle are participating vicariously in both the tribal ritual and the Rasa Lila.
This circle allows all of the Gopis to see and experience Krishna at the same time. It is very similar to the use of circle in the ritual performances of tribal cultures, especially as we saw in class through the movie The Bounty. We saw how the ritual was being performed inside the circle. And that the shape of the circle was conducive to letting even those on the outside become a part of the ritual. Even as Mel Gibson’s crew watched the ritual dancers, unbeknownst to them, they were becoming part of the ritual the natives were enacting. They all were at the outer edge of the ritual and no one was pushed back into any kind of corner, allowing everyone an equal view of the dance, and equal ability to hear the music, singing, and chanting. In this way just like all the Gopis were able to experience Krishna at once both through his divine powers and through the use of circle so were the bystanders of the native’s ritual in The Bounty. Although, Krishna did use divine power to help all the Gopis feel connected to him, the circle is a symbol of the all pervading use of this divine power and further emphasizes the point.
It is also symbolic of the derived use of them semi-circle in theater, as originated by the Greeks. The ancient Greeks altered the tribal circle slightly by changing it into a semi-circle. This concept was used in theater to: better center the attention on the main act, and create better vocals, while still keeping the same involvement the tribal ritual method used. This is resonated in the Rasa Lila by Krishna focusing himself with Radha at the center of the circle, showing an attempt to center the attention on the middle of the circle. Also as the other divinities gather around in the sky they form a semicircle to watch the events. This event is very much like the Greek orchestra.
In both instances the people around the circle or semicircle are participating vicariously in both the tribal ritual and the Rasa Lila.
The Life of Hinduism: Ritual Food Preparation- Bryan Trumble
The Life of Hinduism by Stratton Hawley and Vasudha Narayanan is a compilation of real life accounts of modern day Hindu lifestyles. In the first account of the book the author gives an account of Ramachandran’s ( a modern Hindu) day. The part of his day that I found most interesting and related most to the class dealt with prashad. Prashad is the blessed food that:
“fills them [Hindus] with divine energy fo the deity to whom they have prayed, in the same way that Christians believe that by partaking of the bread and wine in Holy Communion they accept the spirit of Christ into their bodies”
The idea of divine or scared presence in food relates back very strongly to tribal cultures.
Many tribal cultures we have looked at have demonstrated the idea that food, both plant and animal, is given to them by the gods. Therefore they are extremely grateful for the food which they receive and have many rituals surrounding the eating and using of the food. The native of Papa New Guinea for instance only allow wounded soldiers, children, and lactating women to eat pork, or any kind of meat for that instance. In the video we watched in class, Seasons of the Navaho, it showed how they go through certain rituals moving from location to location so that they can get the food they need throughout the year to survive.
It was interesting to note how similar these concepts of food are when the cultures are so different. The use of food however is just as different as the cultures. In certain religious very strict eating habits are kept. Hindu’s will not eat beef, Jews will not eat un-kosher food, and Christians tend to always say grace before they eat. However, as much as these rituals resemble the practices of tribal cultures there is one main difference. Modern culture greatly waists food.
In a pastoral or tribal society there would be extremely little if any un-wasted food. That which could not be eaten such as the bones, would be used for tools or ritual rights. Other parts of the animal/ plant that could not be eaten would be used for countless other things such as ritual right, feed for animals, or soil fertilizer. I think it is sad that with all the technology thriving in ‘modern’ culture we make a less efficient use of our materials than other cultures who have less than half of the technological advancement we posses.
“fills them [Hindus] with divine energy fo the deity to whom they have prayed, in the same way that Christians believe that by partaking of the bread and wine in Holy Communion they accept the spirit of Christ into their bodies”
The idea of divine or scared presence in food relates back very strongly to tribal cultures.
Many tribal cultures we have looked at have demonstrated the idea that food, both plant and animal, is given to them by the gods. Therefore they are extremely grateful for the food which they receive and have many rituals surrounding the eating and using of the food. The native of Papa New Guinea for instance only allow wounded soldiers, children, and lactating women to eat pork, or any kind of meat for that instance. In the video we watched in class, Seasons of the Navaho, it showed how they go through certain rituals moving from location to location so that they can get the food they need throughout the year to survive.
It was interesting to note how similar these concepts of food are when the cultures are so different. The use of food however is just as different as the cultures. In certain religious very strict eating habits are kept. Hindu’s will not eat beef, Jews will not eat un-kosher food, and Christians tend to always say grace before they eat. However, as much as these rituals resemble the practices of tribal cultures there is one main difference. Modern culture greatly waists food.
In a pastoral or tribal society there would be extremely little if any un-wasted food. That which could not be eaten such as the bones, would be used for tools or ritual rights. Other parts of the animal/ plant that could not be eaten would be used for countless other things such as ritual right, feed for animals, or soil fertilizer. I think it is sad that with all the technology thriving in ‘modern’ culture we make a less efficient use of our materials than other cultures who have less than half of the technological advancement we posses.
Ishmael: Idea of Leisure and a Cultural Prison – Bryan Trumble
A very interesting idea I saw illuminated between primal and technological culture is the idea of leisure and imprisonment in the book Ishmael by Nathaniel Quinn. Quinn claims that even though primal culture has a great deal of leisure time, the technological culture views their culture as struggling to get by. He also claims that technological culture has less leisure time and is trapped by their struggle for survival.
The primal culture according to Quinn, only works about 20 hours a week to take care of life sustaining necessities. Compared to the technological minimum 40 hour work week it seems evident that the primal culture has much more leisure time. This is especially prevalent in our modern society where the workweek has far surpassed 40 hours and is now approaching 60-90 hours. This is hardly leisure when we look at the 168 hours a given week offers (almost half are spent just working).
The technological culture sees the primal culture as struggling to survive because they can’t easily go to the store to get what they need. However, they do have a store: nature. So although they have to work immediately for what they want they (in general) have more free time.
Looking at the hours we now work, it seems understandable that our culture is ‘trapped’. We seem to feel forced to succeed at our job. To do this we must put in more effort than ‘the other guy’ and this leads to longer work hours and shorter leisure hours. This forms a hidden entrapment that our culture imposes on itself, yet this culture prison is not found in most primal societies.
The primal culture according to Quinn, only works about 20 hours a week to take care of life sustaining necessities. Compared to the technological minimum 40 hour work week it seems evident that the primal culture has much more leisure time. This is especially prevalent in our modern society where the workweek has far surpassed 40 hours and is now approaching 60-90 hours. This is hardly leisure when we look at the 168 hours a given week offers (almost half are spent just working).
The technological culture sees the primal culture as struggling to survive because they can’t easily go to the store to get what they need. However, they do have a store: nature. So although they have to work immediately for what they want they (in general) have more free time.
Looking at the hours we now work, it seems understandable that our culture is ‘trapped’. We seem to feel forced to succeed at our job. To do this we must put in more effort than ‘the other guy’ and this leads to longer work hours and shorter leisure hours. This forms a hidden entrapment that our culture imposes on itself, yet this culture prison is not found in most primal societies.
Ishmael: Concept of Understanding Divine Knowledge –
The book Ishmael starkly contrasts two different ideas of knowledge in culture. The two concepts of knowledge can be seen today, one in technological society and the other in primal culture. The main difference between the two cultures is the limit a society sees in their ability to have/obtain knowledge and wisdom.
The technological culture, claims the author Nathaniel Quinn, thinks they have all the knowledge that is possibly available, secular and divine. The technological society believes they are the rulers of the world. The technological society claims to have the right to rule the world because they have all the knowledge and therefore were destined to rule the world. The technological culture has a sense of arrogance in that they feel they know better than the god(s) how to rule. In claiming this they claim to be wiser and more knowledgeable than the god(s).
The primal culture, as asserted by Nathaniel Quinn, admit that they in fact do not have all the knowledge and wisdom of the secular type, much less the divine. In admitting this they refrain from acting as world rulers and dominators. They readily allow the god(s) to rule the world as the god(s) see fit. They believe that the god(s) have knowledge and wisdom beyond the humans and are therefore better suited to know how to rule the world.
This idea of the limits of knowledge and wisdom was very interesting to think about. It gave a new twist to how each culture tends to view the problem of god(s) and evil in the world if god(s) are omniscient, omnipresent, and all powerful, as many people believe. I also thought it explained very well the pursuit of knowledge in technological culture and the not so enthusiastic search of knowledge in primal culture. This search for knowledge can also be drawn back to the idea of literacy and how literacy allows for the readily easy search of knowledge, through printed recollection.
The technological culture, claims the author Nathaniel Quinn, thinks they have all the knowledge that is possibly available, secular and divine. The technological society believes they are the rulers of the world. The technological society claims to have the right to rule the world because they have all the knowledge and therefore were destined to rule the world. The technological culture has a sense of arrogance in that they feel they know better than the god(s) how to rule. In claiming this they claim to be wiser and more knowledgeable than the god(s).
The primal culture, as asserted by Nathaniel Quinn, admit that they in fact do not have all the knowledge and wisdom of the secular type, much less the divine. In admitting this they refrain from acting as world rulers and dominators. They readily allow the god(s) to rule the world as the god(s) see fit. They believe that the god(s) have knowledge and wisdom beyond the humans and are therefore better suited to know how to rule the world.
This idea of the limits of knowledge and wisdom was very interesting to think about. It gave a new twist to how each culture tends to view the problem of god(s) and evil in the world if god(s) are omniscient, omnipresent, and all powerful, as many people believe. I also thought it explained very well the pursuit of knowledge in technological culture and the not so enthusiastic search of knowledge in primal culture. This search for knowledge can also be drawn back to the idea of literacy and how literacy allows for the readily easy search of knowledge, through printed recollection.
Ishmael: Source Distribution-Takers and Leaver –
The difference in culture between primal and technological societies is vast. A generalization of these differences is illuminated in Ishmael through source distribution between the Takers (technological society) and the Leavers (primal society). The Takers are primarily symbolic of literate culture, while the Leavers are primarily symbolic of oral culture.
The main difference the book notes between the two cultures is their use of source distribution. It claims that more sources are used by the Takers. This is because they take everything they possibly can and leave nothing behind, hence the name. The Takers not only obtain what they need but, they also take surplus that at many times is unnecessary. In this way they leave nothing for the other plants or animals, and express a very self-centered point of view. This desire for surplus leads the Takers to dismantle as much of their competition as possible. This creates destruction of nature around them killing of competitive species, plants as well as animals.
The Leavers on the other hand can not understand the idea/concept of surplus. They see no point or purpose to having a surplus supply, and can not fathom how this could be of any assistance to them at all. They take just what they need form nature at a given time and leave the rest; having faith that the supply will be there next time it is needed. This modest use of sources allows for a much more harmonious relationship with nature. In leaving resources for other species the leavers do not snuff out any animals or plants. By not practicing the technique of surplus they are able to let other organisms flourish alongside themselves in peace.
The book does not specifically declare Leavers as only oral or Takers as only literate cultures. However, it can be noted that in looking at oral and literate cultures they primarily symbolize the terms Leavers and Takers (respectively) as they relate to the culture practices of these two forms of society. In looking at this it raises the question: Is the mode of communication in a society determinant of how that society views nature (i.e. views the taking and using of supplies)?
The main difference the book notes between the two cultures is their use of source distribution. It claims that more sources are used by the Takers. This is because they take everything they possibly can and leave nothing behind, hence the name. The Takers not only obtain what they need but, they also take surplus that at many times is unnecessary. In this way they leave nothing for the other plants or animals, and express a very self-centered point of view. This desire for surplus leads the Takers to dismantle as much of their competition as possible. This creates destruction of nature around them killing of competitive species, plants as well as animals.
The Leavers on the other hand can not understand the idea/concept of surplus. They see no point or purpose to having a surplus supply, and can not fathom how this could be of any assistance to them at all. They take just what they need form nature at a given time and leave the rest; having faith that the supply will be there next time it is needed. This modest use of sources allows for a much more harmonious relationship with nature. In leaving resources for other species the leavers do not snuff out any animals or plants. By not practicing the technique of surplus they are able to let other organisms flourish alongside themselves in peace.
The book does not specifically declare Leavers as only oral or Takers as only literate cultures. However, it can be noted that in looking at oral and literate cultures they primarily symbolize the terms Leavers and Takers (respectively) as they relate to the culture practices of these two forms of society. In looking at this it raises the question: Is the mode of communication in a society determinant of how that society views nature (i.e. views the taking and using of supplies)?
The Ritual Process: Liminality - Bryan Trumble
Liminality is a very confusing concept, because at times there is not exact beginning nor an exact end for a person, and in addition to that it is not always the same for all people. Taking for instance the idea of a pilgrimage, once could say that the liminal stage is while you were on the journey, and they would be right. However when exactly did that journey start? Was it when it when the journey physically started for a person, and was this physical start when the person physically began preparing and packing, or was it when they entered the trail? Or was the beginning a mental start, and if so did this come when the voyager began thinking about the trip, mentally preparing for the trip, or once they were on the journey and had some sort of revelatory experience?
The liminal stage in a right of passage is one of the most important stages, even though at times its concept can be vary vague. The liminal stage is one in which the voyager is separated from the community which they came from. This stage of separation is where they are used to living. This stage is extremely unstable and really tests the individual. In this stage the individual is placed at the same level with all the other individuals on the journey, or right of passage. Normally they are all given the same uniform (if any) and treated the same way, such as in boot camp in American society. This commonality among the people dispels any hierarchal tendencies allowing the individuals to focus on the tasks at hand, their voyage. This gives the members sense of comradery that allows them to endure this rigorous liminal stage.
The Liminal stage also includes a creation, through the destruction of hierarchy, of ‘comitatus’. This is different from community or as Turner calls it ‘communitas’, in which there is a structure. The comitatus is a social group in which everyone is equal, unlike the caste like systems that can be seen in communitas. This creation of ‘comitatus’ creates a somewhat unpleasant situation for the voyagers; but as Turner claims “the high could not be high unless the low existed, and he who is high must experience what it is like to be low”. In this sense the creation of the comitatus has two functions, served at the same time. In creating an unpleasant state of affairs it allows the group members to bond and also allows them to experience the lows of life. In experiencing the lows they will be better suited to tackle life’s obstacles.
I recall experiencing this on the Appalachian Trail this summer. The liminal stage of being on the trail allowed the group to form a tighter bond through the tough times we experienced, especially on the first grueling day. Afterwards there was an evident increase in the comradery among the group, and it was also clear that people were learning the ways of the trail by experiencing the “lows” of the hiking trip. I recall learning the value of food by accidentally spilling my dinner in the fire the first night of the trip.
The liminal stage in a right of passage is one of the most important stages, even though at times its concept can be vary vague. The liminal stage is one in which the voyager is separated from the community which they came from. This stage of separation is where they are used to living. This stage is extremely unstable and really tests the individual. In this stage the individual is placed at the same level with all the other individuals on the journey, or right of passage. Normally they are all given the same uniform (if any) and treated the same way, such as in boot camp in American society. This commonality among the people dispels any hierarchal tendencies allowing the individuals to focus on the tasks at hand, their voyage. This gives the members sense of comradery that allows them to endure this rigorous liminal stage.
The Liminal stage also includes a creation, through the destruction of hierarchy, of ‘comitatus’. This is different from community or as Turner calls it ‘communitas’, in which there is a structure. The comitatus is a social group in which everyone is equal, unlike the caste like systems that can be seen in communitas. This creation of ‘comitatus’ creates a somewhat unpleasant situation for the voyagers; but as Turner claims “the high could not be high unless the low existed, and he who is high must experience what it is like to be low”. In this sense the creation of the comitatus has two functions, served at the same time. In creating an unpleasant state of affairs it allows the group members to bond and also allows them to experience the lows of life. In experiencing the lows they will be better suited to tackle life’s obstacles.
I recall experiencing this on the Appalachian Trail this summer. The liminal stage of being on the trail allowed the group to form a tighter bond through the tough times we experienced, especially on the first grueling day. Afterwards there was an evident increase in the comradery among the group, and it was also clear that people were learning the ways of the trail by experiencing the “lows” of the hiking trip. I recall learning the value of food by accidentally spilling my dinner in the fire the first night of the trip.
Orality and Literacy: Secondary Orality - Bryan Trumble
“The electronic as is also an age of ‘secondary orality’, the orality of telephones, radio, and television, which depends on writing and print for its existence”
This quote from Walter Ong’s book Orality and Literacy poses the idea of technology as being dependent on the very orality which it eradicated by its evolution. This is an interesting juxtaposition of concepts. The ideas of orality and technology are almost direct opposites. Technology had its beginnings back with the dawn of writing which slowly began to rid cultures of their oral nature. The invention of writing allowed people to more easily keep track of records and information, laws and religion and therefore began to oust orality as a way of preserving culture and identity.
The concept of ‘secondary orality’ is very ambiguous for the above mentioned reasons. But it is interesting to note how the increased use of writing has done an about face and in turn lead to orality. However this orality is based upon a prewritten script and for this reason one could argue it’s not really a type of orality at all but more of a vocalized literacy. The words are already written out so there is no changing the story to suite the audience in most cases. Yet on the flip side the authors have already catered the script to the viewing/listening audience. So in these ways while this ‘secondary orality’ is very different from ‘primary orality’ it is also noticed at times that the two types of orality almost mirror each other.
An interesting mixture of the two oralities would be the constant use of improv on radio and TV. In this case the actors/broadcasters would be embracing a ‘primary orality’ that was used to communicate to people through highly technological means. This would certainly change the people who were on radio and TV making them much more like the Homeric bards of ancient Greece. The connotation of the communication however would be completely different than that of the ancient bards. The quote hints at this concept in mentioning the telephone among TV and radio.
The use of the telephone, while very oral in nature still removes people greatly from the words of conversation. The listener can not hear voice in flections as well, and both parties can not see the expressions of the other’s body language to gauge how the message is being sent and received. This shows how the use of technology has created an orality that is much more distanced from the original oral culture. This is also seen in the radio and TV scene because the broadcasters/actors can not see the audience to gauge their reaction or interact with them directly at any level at all.
This quote from Walter Ong’s book Orality and Literacy poses the idea of technology as being dependent on the very orality which it eradicated by its evolution. This is an interesting juxtaposition of concepts. The ideas of orality and technology are almost direct opposites. Technology had its beginnings back with the dawn of writing which slowly began to rid cultures of their oral nature. The invention of writing allowed people to more easily keep track of records and information, laws and religion and therefore began to oust orality as a way of preserving culture and identity.
The concept of ‘secondary orality’ is very ambiguous for the above mentioned reasons. But it is interesting to note how the increased use of writing has done an about face and in turn lead to orality. However this orality is based upon a prewritten script and for this reason one could argue it’s not really a type of orality at all but more of a vocalized literacy. The words are already written out so there is no changing the story to suite the audience in most cases. Yet on the flip side the authors have already catered the script to the viewing/listening audience. So in these ways while this ‘secondary orality’ is very different from ‘primary orality’ it is also noticed at times that the two types of orality almost mirror each other.
An interesting mixture of the two oralities would be the constant use of improv on radio and TV. In this case the actors/broadcasters would be embracing a ‘primary orality’ that was used to communicate to people through highly technological means. This would certainly change the people who were on radio and TV making them much more like the Homeric bards of ancient Greece. The connotation of the communication however would be completely different than that of the ancient bards. The quote hints at this concept in mentioning the telephone among TV and radio.
The use of the telephone, while very oral in nature still removes people greatly from the words of conversation. The listener can not hear voice in flections as well, and both parties can not see the expressions of the other’s body language to gauge how the message is being sent and received. This shows how the use of technology has created an orality that is much more distanced from the original oral culture. This is also seen in the radio and TV scene because the broadcasters/actors can not see the audience to gauge their reaction or interact with them directly at any level at all.
Orality and Literacy: Origins of Faith – Bryan Trumble
Luke 4:16 “Jesus, the word of God, left nothing in writing, though he could read and write.”
Letters to Romans 10:17 “Faith comes through hearing.”
Corinthians 3:6 “the letter kills, the spirit gives life.”
The ideas of faith coming through hearing and writing killing the spirit are very interesting taken by themselves. The statements promote an extremely oral culture. I believe there is some truth in the claim that faith comes through hearing. A student can gain knowledge and wisdom through reading. However, to reach a level of faith in something requiring faith a person must be able to gauge inflection so that they can feel the compassion of the words. This is very hard to convey through writing.
I can also see how writing can kill the spirit in the same sense. Writing has a lack of passion that can only be conveyed through a voice. This passion is necessary for a spirit to live and thrive. If there is a loss of spirit, humans may still live, yet the world becomes and empty place.
Most ironic, I found, was the context in which these excerpts were found. The claims are found in the New Testament, a holy scripture to the Christian religion. I find these statements, in a way, contradictory to the Christian faith. Christians revere their sacred texts, for a period in history, more than the preachers reading of them. The Christian faith has had many schisms over the meaning of the written words of the Bible. In this sense these claims seem ambiguous with even the creation of the Bible, much less the amount of emphasis placed upon it. Its also interesting to note that, in converting tribal peoples, early Christians saw them as primitive because they were illiterate; even though they were closer to following the above quoted biblical passages.
Letters to Romans 10:17 “Faith comes through hearing.”
Corinthians 3:6 “the letter kills, the spirit gives life.”
The ideas of faith coming through hearing and writing killing the spirit are very interesting taken by themselves. The statements promote an extremely oral culture. I believe there is some truth in the claim that faith comes through hearing. A student can gain knowledge and wisdom through reading. However, to reach a level of faith in something requiring faith a person must be able to gauge inflection so that they can feel the compassion of the words. This is very hard to convey through writing.
I can also see how writing can kill the spirit in the same sense. Writing has a lack of passion that can only be conveyed through a voice. This passion is necessary for a spirit to live and thrive. If there is a loss of spirit, humans may still live, yet the world becomes and empty place.
Most ironic, I found, was the context in which these excerpts were found. The claims are found in the New Testament, a holy scripture to the Christian religion. I find these statements, in a way, contradictory to the Christian faith. Christians revere their sacred texts, for a period in history, more than the preachers reading of them. The Christian faith has had many schisms over the meaning of the written words of the Bible. In this sense these claims seem ambiguous with even the creation of the Bible, much less the amount of emphasis placed upon it. Its also interesting to note that, in converting tribal peoples, early Christians saw them as primitive because they were illiterate; even though they were closer to following the above quoted biblical passages.
Bruchko: Call to Work – Bryan Trumble
An interesting idea in Bruchko for me was his understanding of what God wanted him to do. At times it seemed as though the reasons were in his head and created by him, such as when he kept trying to leave the jungle and was physically unable to (his donkey kept throwing him off of his back), or when he was locked out of his house. However, at other times Bruchko seems to be communicated to by God beyond a shadow of a doubt. Examples of these instances are: when Bruchko escapes the natives (and later finds out that was to be killed the day after he escaped), and when he was spared his life be the revolutionaries.
Whichever viewpoint one takes in examining and evaluating the events, the idea of God’s communication and the validity of this require much contemplation. It is obviously impossible to tell with any degree of certainty which view is correct. However much the skeptic wants to doubt, he cannot prove it was not God’s voice. At the same time the believer can not prove beyond a doubt that God did contact Bruchko. Finally even Bruchko himself can not necessarily claim he was certain that God was talking to him. This controversy of divine communication provides an interesting complication.
In conclusion it seems to boil down to the idea of belief and non-belief. Each subscriber will hold their views and in their eyes may be most fully justified in their convictions. Bruchko’s balanced examples of his divine intervention, where some examples seemed evidently sacred, and others not so much, really made me think about this issue.
Whichever viewpoint one takes in examining and evaluating the events, the idea of God’s communication and the validity of this require much contemplation. It is obviously impossible to tell with any degree of certainty which view is correct. However much the skeptic wants to doubt, he cannot prove it was not God’s voice. At the same time the believer can not prove beyond a doubt that God did contact Bruchko. Finally even Bruchko himself can not necessarily claim he was certain that God was talking to him. This controversy of divine communication provides an interesting complication.
In conclusion it seems to boil down to the idea of belief and non-belief. Each subscriber will hold their views and in their eyes may be most fully justified in their convictions. Bruchko’s balanced examples of his divine intervention, where some examples seemed evidently sacred, and others not so much, really made me think about this issue.
Bruchko: Relating the Bible to the Motilones – Bryan Trumble
The struggles Bruchko encountered in attempting to relate and translate the Bible into Motilone language and understanding were very interesting. The course of events that take place in these tasks forced me to look at how religions hold things sacred, what they hold scared and how this idea of sacredness is influenced by a people’s culture. I found it very interesting that when Bruchko attempted to translate the Bible with his life brother he got offended. He thought it was borderline blasphemous to translate ‘faith’ as being assured of not being hungry. At first Bruchko thought there was no correlation between the two ideas. However, upon re-evaluating the meaning of culture to the people, he was able to understand how an assurance of non-hunger was able to relate directly to faith. Since they were hunter gatherers, an assurance of not being hungry was an idea showing that a god was looking out for their wellbeing, and for that reason they could have faith in him to provide them with food.
Another interesting part of the Bible translation I noticed was the emphasis Bruchko placed on the scripture and words themselves. This was intriguing because at the beginning of his life he had quarrels with his father and church over their strictly literal translation of the Bible, and closed mindedness to other possible translations, or interpretations. In this part of his life, Bruchko was the revolutionary in terms of new interpretations. However, in the jungle he took the same, stick to my own interpretation ideals that his father has exemplified earlier. This was of course, only until he really looked deep into the difference in culture. It was interesting to see how at points he seemed to mirror the exact people that drove him away from his sect of Christianity.
The process of translating religion not only between languages but also between cultures is extremely in depth. It involves a great depth of understanding of both cultures’ and societies’ belief systems and ways of living. Looking at Bruchko’s difficulties helped me to notice more of the cultural implications that can be found with in religious texts and scriptures.
Another interesting part of the Bible translation I noticed was the emphasis Bruchko placed on the scripture and words themselves. This was intriguing because at the beginning of his life he had quarrels with his father and church over their strictly literal translation of the Bible, and closed mindedness to other possible translations, or interpretations. In this part of his life, Bruchko was the revolutionary in terms of new interpretations. However, in the jungle he took the same, stick to my own interpretation ideals that his father has exemplified earlier. This was of course, only until he really looked deep into the difference in culture. It was interesting to see how at points he seemed to mirror the exact people that drove him away from his sect of Christianity.
The process of translating religion not only between languages but also between cultures is extremely in depth. It involves a great depth of understanding of both cultures’ and societies’ belief systems and ways of living. Looking at Bruchko’s difficulties helped me to notice more of the cultural implications that can be found with in religious texts and scriptures.
Into the Wild: Reflection - Bryan Trumble
I went to see the movie Into the Wild. The movie was very moving. I found one quote very interesting. This occurred when Alexander Supertramp explained the purpose of his journey by summarizing Thoreau: “More than love, peace, money, power, friendship, or compassion…give me truth”. This desire for truth was the motivation behind him setting out on his pilgrimage. Although he could not find a specific religion, he believed in a God of sorts. Chris McCandless was looking for spiritual enlightenment in a manner of speaking. He essentially went on a religious pilgrimage, not to a place; but to truth.
This is interesting in comparison with tribal society and culture. The tribal societies generally use pilgrimage in rights of passage or for religious reasons, such as truth or enlightenment. These pilgrimages are much different than that of Supertramp’s. Supertramp’s pilgrimage was strictly personal voyage that had little to do with the culture in which he lived, except escaping it to find the true meaning of life.
The pilgrimage made by Supertramp was in actuality McCandless running from problems, primarily familial. The main problem, as portrayed by the movie, was the fake life he grew up in because of his parents’ lies. This drove his search for truth, which he unfortunately thought was a journey to be taken alone. He learned at the end of the movie that true happiness can not be found in truth alone.
Supertramp was, in looking for truth, searching for something that would complete him and make him happy. It was unfortunate that he did not realize until his death that the true reason he lacked happiness was because he was lacking any human compassion. It was interesting to see the role that compassion and love did not play in his pilgrimage in contrast to the compassion in tribal pilgrimages. Normally after coming back from a pilgrimage, especially that of coming to age, a tribal person has proven themselves to be fit for marriage. In this way the tribal person receives the compassion after they have achieved their enlightenment; perhaps had Chris McCandless made it back out of Alaska he would have found compassion and love in people as strongly as he had found it in nature.
This is interesting in comparison with tribal society and culture. The tribal societies generally use pilgrimage in rights of passage or for religious reasons, such as truth or enlightenment. These pilgrimages are much different than that of Supertramp’s. Supertramp’s pilgrimage was strictly personal voyage that had little to do with the culture in which he lived, except escaping it to find the true meaning of life.
The pilgrimage made by Supertramp was in actuality McCandless running from problems, primarily familial. The main problem, as portrayed by the movie, was the fake life he grew up in because of his parents’ lies. This drove his search for truth, which he unfortunately thought was a journey to be taken alone. He learned at the end of the movie that true happiness can not be found in truth alone.
Supertramp was, in looking for truth, searching for something that would complete him and make him happy. It was unfortunate that he did not realize until his death that the true reason he lacked happiness was because he was lacking any human compassion. It was interesting to see the role that compassion and love did not play in his pilgrimage in contrast to the compassion in tribal pilgrimages. Normally after coming back from a pilgrimage, especially that of coming to age, a tribal person has proven themselves to be fit for marriage. In this way the tribal person receives the compassion after they have achieved their enlightenment; perhaps had Chris McCandless made it back out of Alaska he would have found compassion and love in people as strongly as he had found it in nature.
Drum Circle – Bryan Trumble
The drum circle was an interesting experience. It was my first attendance at any type of drum circle. The drum circle definitely struck me as a ritual process because we had certain regulations to abide by and followed a certain course of action/set of procedures. The feelings this evoked were those of sacred passion. The drum circle although not religiously based, definitely had sacred tones.
One of the experiences while in the drum circle was the growing sense of community and comradery. I noticed that throughout the progression fo the drum circle the participants began to reach the same level of comfort. At the beginning, I, as I’m sure many others, were/was uncomfortable. However, the longer I stayed in the circle and focused on the sounds the more comfortable I became and also began to feel more attached to others in the circle.
I definitely felt a great deal of connectedness with the group and the music. Part of this was due to my direct involvement in the circle. Another part was my contribution to the music which allowed me to feel like I was a part of the ritual. The sharing of the instruments also helped me to feel a sense of community with the group. The sharing helped create a closer bond among the circle.
The role of nature in the circle was very interesting. The idea of the instruments and bare feet connecting to the earth really helped me connect to nature through the circle. In trying to understand how the instruments came from the earth it helped me to understand the sacred nature of the circle. And it also aided me in understanding the earthly sounds and nature of the noise made by the circle. The bare feet showed me how I, myself, connected to nature and then to the instruments. By coming closer to nature the circle became more sacred, it was quite an experience.
One of the experiences while in the drum circle was the growing sense of community and comradery. I noticed that throughout the progression fo the drum circle the participants began to reach the same level of comfort. At the beginning, I, as I’m sure many others, were/was uncomfortable. However, the longer I stayed in the circle and focused on the sounds the more comfortable I became and also began to feel more attached to others in the circle.
I definitely felt a great deal of connectedness with the group and the music. Part of this was due to my direct involvement in the circle. Another part was my contribution to the music which allowed me to feel like I was a part of the ritual. The sharing of the instruments also helped me to feel a sense of community with the group. The sharing helped create a closer bond among the circle.
The role of nature in the circle was very interesting. The idea of the instruments and bare feet connecting to the earth really helped me connect to nature through the circle. In trying to understand how the instruments came from the earth it helped me to understand the sacred nature of the circle. And it also aided me in understanding the earthly sounds and nature of the noise made by the circle. The bare feet showed me how I, myself, connected to nature and then to the instruments. By coming closer to nature the circle became more sacred, it was quite an experience.
Did the Indians Colonize the Settlers?- Bryan Trumble
In the movie Black Robes there was the concept mentioned that perhaps the Algonquin Indians were colonizing the French settlers as opposed to the settlers colonizing the Indians. This idea is interesting when one thinks about cultural differences among peoples. When considering the idea of colonizing it seems that it has a negative connotation, I say this in that it automatically assumes one culture is better than the other, a fairly ethnocentric point of view, as opposed to a holistic point of view. When viewing the concept of colonizing it seems necessary to assess both the view point of those acting and being acted on. A person with a holistic view, such as an anthropologist, would likely see neither group as wholly acting or wholly being acted on. The anthropologist would see colonizing more or most like a fairly equal exchange of culture. I believe this viewpoint is most effective when trying to understand any aspect of a people.
Looking at the movie Black Robes one can see easily how the Algonquin were “colonized” or influenced by the French: they were exposed to technologically advanced tools and methods, and were introduced to Christianity. At the same time one can see the views of the French Missionaries changing not only as the attempt to relate the Bible to the Algonquin, but also as they consider these ideas for themselves. The assistant missionary serves as a direct example of this as he was drastically changed. In closing, the idea of the French colonizing the Algonquin is just as valid as the notion of the Algonquin colonizing the French.
Looking at the movie Black Robes one can see easily how the Algonquin were “colonized” or influenced by the French: they were exposed to technologically advanced tools and methods, and were introduced to Christianity. At the same time one can see the views of the French Missionaries changing not only as the attempt to relate the Bible to the Algonquin, but also as they consider these ideas for themselves. The assistant missionary serves as a direct example of this as he was drastically changed. In closing, the idea of the French colonizing the Algonquin is just as valid as the notion of the Algonquin colonizing the French.
Night of homelessness - Bryan Trumble
I lay there, only cardboard between me and the moist soil, the grass pressed down into the earth. I starred up at the sky, feeling a connection through my body and mind. I felt as though I was one with nature and in being so I was linking the earthen nature to the starry celestial heavens through my experience and thoughts. Everyone around me sleeping and silent, I felt in tune and in touch with nature, as one of her own, not a person but a human. The more I lay in nature’s arms the smaller I felt. Mother Nature seemed to be nurturing me, allowing me to realize that while I still mattered I was no more special and no less special that the rest of life on earth. The clouds began to move and the stars appeared to flicker in the sky. Soon the wind sped up and the breeze smoothly shuffled the stars out of the sky covering them with the plum colored clouds. I soon fell back asleep after pulling my arms into my shirt for warmth. As I dozed off the second time I began to dream. I have no strong recollection of the dreamed events, but I’m certain it was a dream. I can not say whether this dream was a wandering of my mind or whether I was being imbibed by the heavens and nature as the Algonquin believe. I have to lean towards the Algonquin concept of dreams being given rather than created. I say this because the last thing I remember is the stars disappearing in the sky and I have to wonder what the winds ushered in their place.
Ong- Suzuki Music correlation
Dr.Redick
Religious Studies 335
Michelle Newcomb
I know this is probably back tracking a bit, but I had an experience the other day that I wanted to tie into some readings we had a few weeks ago. I just started playing in a small flute choir with some girls from CNU and one of the girls has learned music through a style called ‘Suzuki’ (not the motorcycle, hahaha). A lot of people don’t know what that is anymore (including myself, up until I met her) and students who have learned under this style are few and far between. As far as my understanding goes (and if you want more info, just ‘google’ it and there is plenty of literature on it) the theory behind the style of training is that children pick up languages and dialects easily when they are young, so why not music as well? Children are started out with an instrument, they get to know it – become friends with it. After some time they are taught to play – but only by ear. There is no reading involved; their learning is based solely on their ear and aural perception of the music.
What I found most interesting about this player-friend of mine is how she struggled to keep up with a mediocre level flute choir, some of the girls have years less experience than she does but move at a much faster pace. I could almost see the analogy right in front of me – the difference between an oral/aural society and a literate one. All the other players are fast paced, they pick up the music quickly, they want precision and accuracy. The Suzuki player though, adds a different element – she wants to make sure that all the notes sound good when played together, she wants everyone to be on the same pitch (its much easier for her to tell when anyone is off, because that’s how she’s learned) but when it comes to precision and accuracy of the music, she lacks the experience. She can hardly read music as it is (because she didn’t learn music by reading) and so she can never tell when shes off beat or in a different place than everyone else – and the most interesting part is that she doesn’t care! Its such an interesting correlation, that there is a modern day American who might as well be a member of an oral society (as far as music is concerned anyways) and I was really shocked to see all the discussions we had about oral societies and how they differ from literate ones played out right in front of me in flute choir.
Religious Studies 335
Michelle Newcomb
I know this is probably back tracking a bit, but I had an experience the other day that I wanted to tie into some readings we had a few weeks ago. I just started playing in a small flute choir with some girls from CNU and one of the girls has learned music through a style called ‘Suzuki’ (not the motorcycle, hahaha). A lot of people don’t know what that is anymore (including myself, up until I met her) and students who have learned under this style are few and far between. As far as my understanding goes (and if you want more info, just ‘google’ it and there is plenty of literature on it) the theory behind the style of training is that children pick up languages and dialects easily when they are young, so why not music as well? Children are started out with an instrument, they get to know it – become friends with it. After some time they are taught to play – but only by ear. There is no reading involved; their learning is based solely on their ear and aural perception of the music.
What I found most interesting about this player-friend of mine is how she struggled to keep up with a mediocre level flute choir, some of the girls have years less experience than she does but move at a much faster pace. I could almost see the analogy right in front of me – the difference between an oral/aural society and a literate one. All the other players are fast paced, they pick up the music quickly, they want precision and accuracy. The Suzuki player though, adds a different element – she wants to make sure that all the notes sound good when played together, she wants everyone to be on the same pitch (its much easier for her to tell when anyone is off, because that’s how she’s learned) but when it comes to precision and accuracy of the music, she lacks the experience. She can hardly read music as it is (because she didn’t learn music by reading) and so she can never tell when shes off beat or in a different place than everyone else – and the most interesting part is that she doesn’t care! Its such an interesting correlation, that there is a modern day American who might as well be a member of an oral society (as far as music is concerned anyways) and I was really shocked to see all the discussions we had about oral societies and how they differ from literate ones played out right in front of me in flute choir.
Monday, November 26, 2007
DRUM CIRCLE
Dr. Kip Redick
Joanna Andrusko
Primal Religions
I had no expectations going into the drum circle. I have visited my great-grandfather once at a Lakota reservation in Minnesota but it was when I was six. I am ashamed that despite having a heritage rooted in primal religions I know very little about any. I consider myself open-minded and I feel that I can connect on a primal level with the earth by myself, but I become skeptical when I am in a group. Even in my Christianity I have a very hard time experiencing the same level of intimacy with the divine when I am at church than when I am by myself. I cannot say why. I am sad to say that the drum circle was a similar experience for me. I certainly appreciated the mysticism of what was going on there but it is just too difficult for me to achieve any level of intimacy with people I do not know. I do not consider myself to be especially self-conscious, so I really do not know what it is. I observe more, I think, when I am in a group, than I do experience. I noticed the guy next to me get extremely upset when we had to switch instruments because I could tell he felt a strong connection with the instrument he had picked out. I noticed the group of three experienced drummers across me gently attempt to lead the group in some sort of collective rhythm. I felt the sun setting behind me as it got colder and colder. But I did not participate and I feel awful because it was not my intention to be merely an observer. But I just did not feel the connection although I was aware of its presence.
Joanna Andrusko
Primal Religions
I had no expectations going into the drum circle. I have visited my great-grandfather once at a Lakota reservation in Minnesota but it was when I was six. I am ashamed that despite having a heritage rooted in primal religions I know very little about any. I consider myself open-minded and I feel that I can connect on a primal level with the earth by myself, but I become skeptical when I am in a group. Even in my Christianity I have a very hard time experiencing the same level of intimacy with the divine when I am at church than when I am by myself. I cannot say why. I am sad to say that the drum circle was a similar experience for me. I certainly appreciated the mysticism of what was going on there but it is just too difficult for me to achieve any level of intimacy with people I do not know. I do not consider myself to be especially self-conscious, so I really do not know what it is. I observe more, I think, when I am in a group, than I do experience. I noticed the guy next to me get extremely upset when we had to switch instruments because I could tell he felt a strong connection with the instrument he had picked out. I noticed the group of three experienced drummers across me gently attempt to lead the group in some sort of collective rhythm. I felt the sun setting behind me as it got colder and colder. But I did not participate and I feel awful because it was not my intention to be merely an observer. But I just did not feel the connection although I was aware of its presence.
Sunday, November 25, 2007
Orality in Indian Music
by Kelly Moody
I’m in the Indian Music Ensemble here at CNU, and while taking this class and that one in unison, it has made me analyze Indian Music in light of the orality/literacy dichotomy. I took band all throughout middle and high school so I have knowledge of Western music coming into this class, a highly literate, writing based music for the most past. Indian music is just the opposite. I had trouble 1st, I wanted to see the notes in front of me, be able to read, recite, memorize, like I had learned before. But Indian Music is highly improvisional and highly listening based. When learning instruments in Indian Music, you learn to sing 1st. You learn pitch and harmony, its all in your head. The way this music originated, was not literate based, it coorelated with religion, sacred sounds, uncommunicable feelings and emotions, the cycles of day and night and moods, it was all a kind of intuitive insyncness—ability to connect with the mood and sounds of the raag (like the scales, or key) and portray it in a passionate exuberant manner. I feel like Western music and Indian music work on two different spectrums. Western music is highly structured and objective, only on occasion does one improv, it is mostly reading sheet music, and practicing the unision of all of the instruments, and the large voice that it creates together, the focus is the sheet, the writing. I’m not trying to give Western music a bad rap by any means, it is just done in a different way, connection comes from objectivity, this kind of music is like how art is experienced for literate people. In Indian music, a person is given a raag which is a set of notes, each raag is played a specific way, symbolized a certain mood, and a certain time of day. It also has rules on how the notes flow from one to the other, like characteristics of that raag. When ones plays it, they can stir it up, manipulate it, open up a world with it, in any way they want, but still adhering to the mood of the raag, creating within a flexible malleable structure. You also have taals, which are the beats or rhythms that the tablas (a kind of drum) play while the other instruments (sitar, voice, others) play the raag. Certain taals coorealate with certain raags(though they can change around), and they usually stick to a certain beat, but add their own creative spurts according to the mood that is created by the relationship between the beat and the raag. No two Indian performances are alike. You also never know how long they will be, sometimes the mood sends them into another creative world, and the musicians can play back and forth between the notes and each other for long periods of time.
I’m in the Indian Music Ensemble here at CNU, and while taking this class and that one in unison, it has made me analyze Indian Music in light of the orality/literacy dichotomy. I took band all throughout middle and high school so I have knowledge of Western music coming into this class, a highly literate, writing based music for the most past. Indian music is just the opposite. I had trouble 1st, I wanted to see the notes in front of me, be able to read, recite, memorize, like I had learned before. But Indian Music is highly improvisional and highly listening based. When learning instruments in Indian Music, you learn to sing 1st. You learn pitch and harmony, its all in your head. The way this music originated, was not literate based, it coorelated with religion, sacred sounds, uncommunicable feelings and emotions, the cycles of day and night and moods, it was all a kind of intuitive insyncness—ability to connect with the mood and sounds of the raag (like the scales, or key) and portray it in a passionate exuberant manner. I feel like Western music and Indian music work on two different spectrums. Western music is highly structured and objective, only on occasion does one improv, it is mostly reading sheet music, and practicing the unision of all of the instruments, and the large voice that it creates together, the focus is the sheet, the writing. I’m not trying to give Western music a bad rap by any means, it is just done in a different way, connection comes from objectivity, this kind of music is like how art is experienced for literate people. In Indian music, a person is given a raag which is a set of notes, each raag is played a specific way, symbolized a certain mood, and a certain time of day. It also has rules on how the notes flow from one to the other, like characteristics of that raag. When ones plays it, they can stir it up, manipulate it, open up a world with it, in any way they want, but still adhering to the mood of the raag, creating within a flexible malleable structure. You also have taals, which are the beats or rhythms that the tablas (a kind of drum) play while the other instruments (sitar, voice, others) play the raag. Certain taals coorealate with certain raags(though they can change around), and they usually stick to a certain beat, but add their own creative spurts according to the mood that is created by the relationship between the beat and the raag. No two Indian performances are alike. You also never know how long they will be, sometimes the mood sends them into another creative world, and the musicians can play back and forth between the notes and each other for long periods of time.
control over nature
by Kelly Moody
...
He makes a point to say that,
‘nature is better with my help’ …
I do these things to help nature along, without the human, without my imposition on the land, without my shaping, pruning, ordering, beautifying the ugly chaotic state that it somehow puts itself in—nature is just seemingly inadequate. Technology isn’t just efficient, it is necessary, if you don’t use it, you are making bad decisions; even though this technology may not have been used millennia ago. Efficiency, utility, order, those are the things that matter to me—values he intertwines in the thoughts about his job, his duty as a horticulturist. A kind of job you wouldn’t think right off as utility-based. But it is---in disguise.
It just simply can’t exist any other way, he says.
He can’t take apart his actions.
Maybe it is too late.
Maybe this illusion is something to settle in, this constant imposition on the land gives him a purpose, while what he thinks he is doing is natural and absolutely necessary.
Those briars are ‘bad’
They are only bad to you, but what about to the ecosystem? Who are you to say what is of value for the whole of the ecosystem when only your value, the values of a thing only looking at the ecosystem not participating in it, judges the good or badness of a particular species? How can you judge the value of something that participates in a system separate from yourself? How can you impose yourself on that system like you have the right?
I make the land beautiful, and I take pride in that.
What is beauty? Subliminal selective idealized order? Putting circles and lines around the trees, creating curves where there were jagged edges, pulling up soft tall grasses to replant soft taller grasses perfectly spaced 4 feet a part, around the curve that once was a jagged edge..slow geometrics..
How is this different that putting roads, lines, curves, ugly cement onto chaotic uneven land? Are the imposed lines of one system any different than another? Do we even fool ourselves on the deepest level? We want to go back to nature for sure, but we only want it to serve us perfectly. This is something we discussed a lot in Dr. Redicks Religion and Ecology class last year. Hence the mass movement from urban to suburbia—we all want some grass, some plants, some ‘ordered’ nature, but this isn’t really nature at all, we just can’t afford to put faith in chaos. I feel like, nature is simply the beauty that comes from chaos, you go to the remotest places unaltered by man, and what is present, this intricate LIFE, the intermingling of land, rock, plant, animal, water, creating it’s own world, something that controls us, rather than us controlling it. The awe of this can be seen as true beauty. What happens when we don't interfere. It makes us view ourselves differently. Sometimes it is overwhelming for us, because we are out of that comfort zone we have created, that hierarchy of ‘us on top’, ‘it needs us to be beautiful’, ‘mixing nature and efficiency’. So because it is overwhelming, we ignore it, and then loathe it, and then urn to conquer it even more. We conquer because we want what is easiest, simplest; we want a way to forget.
...
He makes a point to say that,
‘nature is better with my help’ …
I do these things to help nature along, without the human, without my imposition on the land, without my shaping, pruning, ordering, beautifying the ugly chaotic state that it somehow puts itself in—nature is just seemingly inadequate. Technology isn’t just efficient, it is necessary, if you don’t use it, you are making bad decisions; even though this technology may not have been used millennia ago. Efficiency, utility, order, those are the things that matter to me—values he intertwines in the thoughts about his job, his duty as a horticulturist. A kind of job you wouldn’t think right off as utility-based. But it is---in disguise.
It just simply can’t exist any other way, he says.
He can’t take apart his actions.
Maybe it is too late.
Maybe this illusion is something to settle in, this constant imposition on the land gives him a purpose, while what he thinks he is doing is natural and absolutely necessary.
Those briars are ‘bad’
They are only bad to you, but what about to the ecosystem? Who are you to say what is of value for the whole of the ecosystem when only your value, the values of a thing only looking at the ecosystem not participating in it, judges the good or badness of a particular species? How can you judge the value of something that participates in a system separate from yourself? How can you impose yourself on that system like you have the right?
I make the land beautiful, and I take pride in that.
What is beauty? Subliminal selective idealized order? Putting circles and lines around the trees, creating curves where there were jagged edges, pulling up soft tall grasses to replant soft taller grasses perfectly spaced 4 feet a part, around the curve that once was a jagged edge..slow geometrics..
How is this different that putting roads, lines, curves, ugly cement onto chaotic uneven land? Are the imposed lines of one system any different than another? Do we even fool ourselves on the deepest level? We want to go back to nature for sure, but we only want it to serve us perfectly. This is something we discussed a lot in Dr. Redicks Religion and Ecology class last year. Hence the mass movement from urban to suburbia—we all want some grass, some plants, some ‘ordered’ nature, but this isn’t really nature at all, we just can’t afford to put faith in chaos. I feel like, nature is simply the beauty that comes from chaos, you go to the remotest places unaltered by man, and what is present, this intricate LIFE, the intermingling of land, rock, plant, animal, water, creating it’s own world, something that controls us, rather than us controlling it. The awe of this can be seen as true beauty. What happens when we don't interfere. It makes us view ourselves differently. Sometimes it is overwhelming for us, because we are out of that comfort zone we have created, that hierarchy of ‘us on top’, ‘it needs us to be beautiful’, ‘mixing nature and efficiency’. So because it is overwhelming, we ignore it, and then loathe it, and then urn to conquer it even more. We conquer because we want what is easiest, simplest; we want a way to forget.
Monday, November 19, 2007
Sarah Nuber- The Native American Church
For the research paper in this class, I am writing about how mind-altering drugs are important in the religious lives of oral cultures and Native Americans cultures. I am reading a book by Huston Smith called, Cleansing the Doors of Perception: The Religious Significance of Entheogenic Plants and Chemicals. The Native American Church exists today and its roots go back before Christianity and before the other historical religions came about. Chapter 9 is about the Native American Church that exists today and it gives accounts from different Native Americans about how they use Peyote religiously. There is one account from a Native American named Hochunk and he basically says that everything they do in their religion is to honor the Creator and to find their place in his Creation (pg 116). He says that they always try to honor one another and to be respectful of each other and this comes from a sacred herb, and that this herb is actually divine. They call Peyote their Medicine because God filled it with love and compassion and when they eat it, they can feel the love that God is. (pg 116). They believe that eating Peyote physically puts God inside of them and this makes them treat others with love, joy, respect and compassion. There is another account from a Native American named A. Kiowa and it talks about how in the first creation God spoke directly to the people and told them what to do, and then Christ came and told the white people to do and then that God gave the Indians Peyote and that’s how they found God. (p 118) Other Native Americans in this chapter talk about how they get holy feelings when they eat Peyote and that they feel the presence of the Great Spirit. Peyote is their sacrament and is very important to the Native American religion, it has a lot of Christianity incorporated into it which I was not aware of. I thought this quote from Quannah Parker (creator of the peyote religion who is also mentioned in the Gill text pg 125) was interesting, “The White Man goes into his church and talks about Jesus. The Indian goes into his Tipi and talks with Jesus.”
Sunday, November 18, 2007
a friend's sweat lodge experience
by Kelly Moody
he was scared that he would pass out. his heart was beating fast, and he wouldn't sweat. he wouldn't let go. his ego was forming this solid boundary all around him, and the heat, the chanting, the darkness, was eating at that wall, slowly. it was over 200 degrees in that hut, he said. it was more intense than i could have ever imagined. i had such empathy for everyone around me. suddenly we were in this rebirth together. i couldn't have done it alone. this sweat lodge was in canada, where my friend john journeyed a couple of weeks ago.
---"there was a shaman who took us, sacred tobacco smoke, crawling into the hole of the pitch black entrance. the blanket i was sitting was absolutely completely soaked when i got out, he noted. so he lost his ego for a bit. when he started sweating, finally "it was as if suddenly i took on the whole world's pain, the whole world's sorrow, tears just streamed down my face, my body, teared, my eyes teared, the wall was down" he was in a sudden trance-- another world, he saw a hawk fly through the sky, in the sky of his mind, and later he found out the significance of this spirit animal, 'sitting hawk' appropriately labeled to him. some people pass out, he says. some have to leave, that can't deal with the extreme heat anymore. hot rocks sat in a big towering pile in the middle of the hut. when someone was let out, for a brief moment, i could see the steam rising off of my skin. the toxins flowing out, the good energy staying in, the bad flowing, flowing..the oxygen was so low, i could not even speak, when it was my turn to speak about my purpose. the only thing i could do was let out a brief noise, a sign of life. a pityful puff of voice. some things are beyond words, many things are beyond words, and in a moment like this, the physical inability to speak may be the best handicap. it may not be a handicap at all. when we finally left, he said, we went into 20 degree air, and it was so overwhelming, i couldn't stand, my head turned in on itself, it felt as though i had suddenly gained a massive hangover, the frigid air felt amazing on my skin but terrible in my lungs, the oxygen was overwhelming. i felt like some other person. like just being born.
he was scared that he would pass out. his heart was beating fast, and he wouldn't sweat. he wouldn't let go. his ego was forming this solid boundary all around him, and the heat, the chanting, the darkness, was eating at that wall, slowly. it was over 200 degrees in that hut, he said. it was more intense than i could have ever imagined. i had such empathy for everyone around me. suddenly we were in this rebirth together. i couldn't have done it alone. this sweat lodge was in canada, where my friend john journeyed a couple of weeks ago.
---"there was a shaman who took us, sacred tobacco smoke, crawling into the hole of the pitch black entrance. the blanket i was sitting was absolutely completely soaked when i got out, he noted. so he lost his ego for a bit. when he started sweating, finally "it was as if suddenly i took on the whole world's pain, the whole world's sorrow, tears just streamed down my face, my body, teared, my eyes teared, the wall was down" he was in a sudden trance-- another world, he saw a hawk fly through the sky, in the sky of his mind, and later he found out the significance of this spirit animal, 'sitting hawk' appropriately labeled to him. some people pass out, he says. some have to leave, that can't deal with the extreme heat anymore. hot rocks sat in a big towering pile in the middle of the hut. when someone was let out, for a brief moment, i could see the steam rising off of my skin. the toxins flowing out, the good energy staying in, the bad flowing, flowing..the oxygen was so low, i could not even speak, when it was my turn to speak about my purpose. the only thing i could do was let out a brief noise, a sign of life. a pityful puff of voice. some things are beyond words, many things are beyond words, and in a moment like this, the physical inability to speak may be the best handicap. it may not be a handicap at all. when we finally left, he said, we went into 20 degree air, and it was so overwhelming, i couldn't stand, my head turned in on itself, it felt as though i had suddenly gained a massive hangover, the frigid air felt amazing on my skin but terrible in my lungs, the oxygen was overwhelming. i felt like some other person. like just being born.
Saturday, November 17, 2007
Nietzsche, Heidegger-- the changing face of technology and ourselves
By Kelly Moody
Can we go 'back to nature'? What exactly is a harmonic relationship with nature? Can we possible exist in our world without harming it in any way? Don't we need to destroy a part of nature to a degree in order to survive? Where is the line drawn between neccessity and surplus? Or is it something about our state of consciousness? Why do we neccessarily consider indigenous culture 'closer' to nature, and yet we have nature all around us just the same? The idea of being a part of everything kind of haunts us sometimes, i mean, it can be comforting, to know you are intertwined with a whole, but it also can challenge our notion of individuality by demphasizing our seperation from that whole. Closeness to nature, can really mean, closer to the whole, less space, less distraction between us, and the realization that 'us' is really one. Several things sparked me thinking about this, one being Nietzsche's "The Birth of Tragedy", which we are discussing in another one of my classes. Another being Martin Heidegger's "The Turning". The transformation of technology is also what i'm interested in, from 'techne' to 'technology' and what each of those terms mean for our consciousness and state in history. Or even for history itself. Simply, the Birth of Tragedy discusses as emphasis on the need of tragedy in our society again, a need to balance the play between the individual and the whole (Apollonian vs. Dionysian) and with that is a constant reaffirmation of life, tragedy is the realization of the illusion of the individual, but something we also cannot escape. In our society today, the Apollonian reigns, the overemphasis of the individual or the ego, and Nietzsche feels that we don't need a return to nature but a return to tragedy, a return to balance. This can be compared to notions of techne and technology. Techne, being an emhasis on the 'process of' producing, the act of, the quality of, the knowledge of producing. Technology, in the modern sense emphasizes a still, stable, product, not the process. Technology has turned into one dominating entity, one force, with the object being 'the product' and how that product overpowers nature.
This also seems to me, to parallel the way oral versus literate societies function. Techne, focusing on a process, oral, focusing on a experience of not result of. Technology, focusing on a product, literate, focusing on objectifying. You can connect this to Nietzsche's idea of the Apollonian dominating over society currently, the Apollonian symbolizing the city, structure, the individual, boundaries, laws, rules, is a symbol of modern technology in one sense. The Apolloninan is a drift from that connection, the process, the experience being that connection. Oral connects us, literate disconnects us. You can see that techne, changed into technology, it changed our relationship with nature as well. And with "The Turning", you can't take technology away, something i have grappled with in the past, when there is humanity there is technology. According to Heidegger, it 'enframes' us, it creates a boundary for us to see through, a window to create reality, it is simply "Being". But that enframing also always changes, like techne changes into technology, and then our reality within that emframing changes. Our relationship with nature changes. The Apollonian dominated. The individual dominates. SO does this then mean that techne is 'closer to nature'? In the Dionysian sense, yes, being that it symbolizes unity, freedom, nature, connection. So then do we all exist in seperate enframings? Because obviously, oral people relate to their world through different technology than the literate do. You can see that with writing itself. That writing enframes us, it creates a reality for us. So is writing a product of that imbalance that Nietzsche talks about? Does a return to tragedy require more than a "turning" of mind? Does it require a rewiring of our technology? How can we rewire it if it emframes us, makes us? Can we be synomous with technology to some degree?
An article i am reading, discusses this same dillema:
"[Heidegger] argues that because technology 'enframes' the planet and everything on it we become cut off from an awareness of tragedy: the originary strife, the enigma of suffering, the transience or 'movedness' of all nature including our own" (Tabachnick)
"It is not so much that technology eliminates tragedy but the fact is that we are unaware that tragedy is a defining characteristic of human existance even in the technological age" (Tabachnick)
"...Heidegger argues that, because it is connected to the tragic, a return to ancient techne might serve as a response to the enframing essence of technology" (Tabachnick)
A striking, omnipresent thought:
"Dudley Shapere, from a philosophy and history of technology perspective, tries to apply an evolution theory normally associated with biology to the development of technology and declares that technology is as old as humankind." (Tabachnick)
Tabachnick, David E. "Techne, Technology and Tragedy." Techne: Research in Philosophy and Technology. Spring 2004, Vol. 7, Number 3..
Can we go 'back to nature'? What exactly is a harmonic relationship with nature? Can we possible exist in our world without harming it in any way? Don't we need to destroy a part of nature to a degree in order to survive? Where is the line drawn between neccessity and surplus? Or is it something about our state of consciousness? Why do we neccessarily consider indigenous culture 'closer' to nature, and yet we have nature all around us just the same? The idea of being a part of everything kind of haunts us sometimes, i mean, it can be comforting, to know you are intertwined with a whole, but it also can challenge our notion of individuality by demphasizing our seperation from that whole. Closeness to nature, can really mean, closer to the whole, less space, less distraction between us, and the realization that 'us' is really one. Several things sparked me thinking about this, one being Nietzsche's "The Birth of Tragedy", which we are discussing in another one of my classes. Another being Martin Heidegger's "The Turning". The transformation of technology is also what i'm interested in, from 'techne' to 'technology' and what each of those terms mean for our consciousness and state in history. Or even for history itself. Simply, the Birth of Tragedy discusses as emphasis on the need of tragedy in our society again, a need to balance the play between the individual and the whole (Apollonian vs. Dionysian) and with that is a constant reaffirmation of life, tragedy is the realization of the illusion of the individual, but something we also cannot escape. In our society today, the Apollonian reigns, the overemphasis of the individual or the ego, and Nietzsche feels that we don't need a return to nature but a return to tragedy, a return to balance. This can be compared to notions of techne and technology. Techne, being an emhasis on the 'process of' producing, the act of, the quality of, the knowledge of producing. Technology, in the modern sense emphasizes a still, stable, product, not the process. Technology has turned into one dominating entity, one force, with the object being 'the product' and how that product overpowers nature.
This also seems to me, to parallel the way oral versus literate societies function. Techne, focusing on a process, oral, focusing on a experience of not result of. Technology, focusing on a product, literate, focusing on objectifying. You can connect this to Nietzsche's idea of the Apollonian dominating over society currently, the Apollonian symbolizing the city, structure, the individual, boundaries, laws, rules, is a symbol of modern technology in one sense. The Apolloninan is a drift from that connection, the process, the experience being that connection. Oral connects us, literate disconnects us. You can see that techne, changed into technology, it changed our relationship with nature as well. And with "The Turning", you can't take technology away, something i have grappled with in the past, when there is humanity there is technology. According to Heidegger, it 'enframes' us, it creates a boundary for us to see through, a window to create reality, it is simply "Being". But that enframing also always changes, like techne changes into technology, and then our reality within that emframing changes. Our relationship with nature changes. The Apollonian dominated. The individual dominates. SO does this then mean that techne is 'closer to nature'? In the Dionysian sense, yes, being that it symbolizes unity, freedom, nature, connection. So then do we all exist in seperate enframings? Because obviously, oral people relate to their world through different technology than the literate do. You can see that with writing itself. That writing enframes us, it creates a reality for us. So is writing a product of that imbalance that Nietzsche talks about? Does a return to tragedy require more than a "turning" of mind? Does it require a rewiring of our technology? How can we rewire it if it emframes us, makes us? Can we be synomous with technology to some degree?
An article i am reading, discusses this same dillema:
"[Heidegger] argues that because technology 'enframes' the planet and everything on it we become cut off from an awareness of tragedy: the originary strife, the enigma of suffering, the transience or 'movedness' of all nature including our own" (Tabachnick)
"It is not so much that technology eliminates tragedy but the fact is that we are unaware that tragedy is a defining characteristic of human existance even in the technological age" (Tabachnick)
"...Heidegger argues that, because it is connected to the tragic, a return to ancient techne might serve as a response to the enframing essence of technology" (Tabachnick)
A striking, omnipresent thought:
"Dudley Shapere, from a philosophy and history of technology perspective, tries to apply an evolution theory normally associated with biology to the development of technology and declares that technology is as old as humankind." (Tabachnick)
Tabachnick, David E. "Techne, Technology and Tragedy." Techne: Research in Philosophy and Technology. Spring 2004, Vol. 7, Number 3.
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Discussion of the drum circle in class-Sarah Nuber
What drew you into the experience? What drew you away from the experience?
This is in response to Kelly’s question that was asked in class today because I did not respond. The sound of the bigger drums really drew me in and kept me focused, and I just really like that sound. The sounds of the pots and pans were distracting to me because they were so loud and noticeable. Another thing that drew me away from experience was paying attention to what other people were doing and thinking I was out of rhythm. Switching instruments also threw me off because the guy next to me was really good at play the drum he had. When he passed it to me, I felt like the circle was missing that sound because I cannot play a big drum like that very well at all. When I hit the drum, it sounded much different then when the guy before had played it and the whole time I wanted to ask him how to hold it and how to hit it so I could play it better. I really like being in the circle and listening to everyone else play. Maybe one day I will learn how to keep rhythm better because the whole experience was relaxing for me and I can see it as being an even better experience if I got fully into it.
This is in response to Kelly’s question that was asked in class today because I did not respond. The sound of the bigger drums really drew me in and kept me focused, and I just really like that sound. The sounds of the pots and pans were distracting to me because they were so loud and noticeable. Another thing that drew me away from experience was paying attention to what other people were doing and thinking I was out of rhythm. Switching instruments also threw me off because the guy next to me was really good at play the drum he had. When he passed it to me, I felt like the circle was missing that sound because I cannot play a big drum like that very well at all. When I hit the drum, it sounded much different then when the guy before had played it and the whole time I wanted to ask him how to hold it and how to hit it so I could play it better. I really like being in the circle and listening to everyone else play. Maybe one day I will learn how to keep rhythm better because the whole experience was relaxing for me and I can see it as being an even better experience if I got fully into it.
Chrissy Jaeger- Brucko reading
This book was a fabulous book. It was truly fascinating to follow the life experience of one, bold young boy. It is incredible to me that at such a young age and even young spiritually this boy had the confidence in God that he did. It was seems like his faith was not really fed by others, even the church, but scripture was his real place of growth.
I was completely inspired by this book, mainly because I have a huge desire to do something similar to what he did. Working with a tribe to share the gospel with them and watch what the Lord does in the process. It was awesome to read how faithful the Lord was to Bruchko. Even though for men before him they were murdered, this time God had a purpose for him to live among this tribe. The Lord blessed him with a friendship and finances whenever he needed it. One of my favorite parts was when he had just run away from the tribe and was starving and as he lay by the river bananas came down the water. What a neat testimony to the faithfulness of God.
I also loved that Bruchko has a struggle with how the gospel was shared with the tribe. It was done within their own cultural understanding. This is exactly how it should be shared, but it is not easy because like Bruchko we all have a bias and believe we are right. We often believe that our way is the only right way. The truth is that there is only one truth but it can be understood through different cultural lenses.
I was completely inspired by this book, mainly because I have a huge desire to do something similar to what he did. Working with a tribe to share the gospel with them and watch what the Lord does in the process. It was awesome to read how faithful the Lord was to Bruchko. Even though for men before him they were murdered, this time God had a purpose for him to live among this tribe. The Lord blessed him with a friendship and finances whenever he needed it. One of my favorite parts was when he had just run away from the tribe and was starving and as he lay by the river bananas came down the water. What a neat testimony to the faithfulness of God.
I also loved that Bruchko has a struggle with how the gospel was shared with the tribe. It was done within their own cultural understanding. This is exactly how it should be shared, but it is not easy because like Bruchko we all have a bias and believe we are right. We often believe that our way is the only right way. The truth is that there is only one truth but it can be understood through different cultural lenses.
Monday, November 12, 2007
Summary of The film "Seasons of Navajo" - Mrs. LE
Dr. KIP REDICK
RSTD 335
LE, KIM-CHI
Date: September 27, 2007
SUMMARY of
The film “Seasons of the Navajo”
The film “Seasons of the Navajo” was built from 20th century as rituals of the family story. Their lives were very simple.
The family has to work together and have to have the rule and divide the function for each person such as: Lady works in the house, man work outside, and children go to school then can help to parent, brother and sister some light jobs. They focus in the health, if they have a good heath, they can do many things and enjoy life together. The film describe as a family who live on the vast Navajo Reservation. They grew corns along the riverbank. They guided their sheep down sheer rock cliffs. They were quite patience and a touching love for animals. They have a kinship, descent systems, gender and age roles, ecology, philosophy, religions domestic space, child life, and economics. There are Non-Navajo people surround the area. Young people don’t wake up at dawn like tradition dictated. For example of transhumance:
Traditional shifting of herbs that come with the changing seasons and shifting between the urban and reservation life that comes with kinship obligations and economic necessities.
Navajo pray in the sweat lodge, which is believed to be the place of creation. Navajo live in a harmony with the spirit world. Rituals and prayers using sacred substances, such as pollen, are essential to social and spiritual well-being.
Navajo family tie together very strong and tradition bring a sense of great heart. The grandparents teach children, and impart the ancient “blessings of kindness,” they are preserving a unique culture.
RSTD 335
LE, KIM-CHI
Date: September 27, 2007
SUMMARY of
The film “Seasons of the Navajo”
The film “Seasons of the Navajo” was built from 20th century as rituals of the family story. Their lives were very simple.
The family has to work together and have to have the rule and divide the function for each person such as: Lady works in the house, man work outside, and children go to school then can help to parent, brother and sister some light jobs. They focus in the health, if they have a good heath, they can do many things and enjoy life together. The film describe as a family who live on the vast Navajo Reservation. They grew corns along the riverbank. They guided their sheep down sheer rock cliffs. They were quite patience and a touching love for animals. They have a kinship, descent systems, gender and age roles, ecology, philosophy, religions domestic space, child life, and economics. There are Non-Navajo people surround the area. Young people don’t wake up at dawn like tradition dictated. For example of transhumance:
Traditional shifting of herbs that come with the changing seasons and shifting between the urban and reservation life that comes with kinship obligations and economic necessities.
Navajo pray in the sweat lodge, which is believed to be the place of creation. Navajo live in a harmony with the spirit world. Rituals and prayers using sacred substances, such as pollen, are essential to social and spiritual well-being.
Navajo family tie together very strong and tradition bring a sense of great heart. The grandparents teach children, and impart the ancient “blessings of kindness,” they are preserving a unique culture.
NATURE - Mrs. LE
Dr. KIP REDICK
RSTD 335
LE, KIM-CHI
Date: September 27, 2007
NATURE
I read some books including “The Religions of Oral Peoples”. Then I am very interested in “the nature”. Nature is the thing we can live on and develop. Nature is a very complex aspect of our world and it is very important and necessary for our life.
In nature, we find many interesting things for our life. Many things are significant. Many people speak a different language, but they are not all at an agreement with one another with the conception of nature. They can be different. Nature is the symbol of spirit too.
Nature can be described in many ways. Nature can be described as something
like of the tree, of the god, or of the man. Nature can be described as every object that always
and eternally presupposes a subject, and remains. Nature is internal and transcendent.
There are many theories on how nature was created. There is no law that says how nature was created, though. Even though there is no concrete proof.
Nature gives to us the oxygen to breath, the food to eat, the water to drink. etc...
In conclusion nature contains all kinds of pretty things and dangerous things, but we must need nature to live.
.
RSTD 335
LE, KIM-CHI
Date: September 27, 2007
NATURE
I read some books including “The Religions of Oral Peoples”. Then I am very interested in “the nature”. Nature is the thing we can live on and develop. Nature is a very complex aspect of our world and it is very important and necessary for our life.
In nature, we find many interesting things for our life. Many things are significant. Many people speak a different language, but they are not all at an agreement with one another with the conception of nature. They can be different. Nature is the symbol of spirit too.
Nature can be described in many ways. Nature can be described as something
like of the tree, of the god, or of the man. Nature can be described as every object that always
and eternally presupposes a subject, and remains. Nature is internal and transcendent.
There are many theories on how nature was created. There is no law that says how nature was created, though. Even though there is no concrete proof.
Nature gives to us the oxygen to breath, the food to eat, the water to drink. etc...
In conclusion nature contains all kinds of pretty things and dangerous things, but we must need nature to live.
.
MIRACLE - Mrs. LE
Dr. KIP REDICK
RSTD 335
LE, KIM-CHI
Date: September 27, 2007
MIRACLE
A person’s cancer suddenly goes into remission and no one can explain why? Is that a miracle? Almost all of the people are concerned about miracles including myself, because many times in my life a miracle happened in my true life.
This story I have heard many times. One time it happened to my friend, who is a nun. The Doctor told her, “You have a cancer that needs to be removed promptly. If not you will die in 2 years”. She is a nun, so she did not have money. Then she prays to her Buddha: “If you want me to go in 2 years I will be ready for that event. In case someone still needs me alive to help him or her to learn some thing from me, I am satisfied any way. I promise I will help them with every thing I have learned, especially Buddhism teachings (religious).” Hence, she drinks 2 liters of water daily and eats normal. She doesn’t need any medicine. Now it has been more than 5 years since then and she is still alive.
No one can explain this case. Someone believes Buddha blessed this nun, so they tried to learn and pay time to help people like her (this nun). Any time this nun has a project to do to help people in society, many volunteers follow her.
RSTD 335
LE, KIM-CHI
Date: September 27, 2007
MIRACLE
A person’s cancer suddenly goes into remission and no one can explain why? Is that a miracle? Almost all of the people are concerned about miracles including myself, because many times in my life a miracle happened in my true life.
This story I have heard many times. One time it happened to my friend, who is a nun. The Doctor told her, “You have a cancer that needs to be removed promptly. If not you will die in 2 years”. She is a nun, so she did not have money. Then she prays to her Buddha: “If you want me to go in 2 years I will be ready for that event. In case someone still needs me alive to help him or her to learn some thing from me, I am satisfied any way. I promise I will help them with every thing I have learned, especially Buddhism teachings (religious).” Hence, she drinks 2 liters of water daily and eats normal. She doesn’t need any medicine. Now it has been more than 5 years since then and she is still alive.
No one can explain this case. Someone believes Buddha blessed this nun, so they tried to learn and pay time to help people like her (this nun). Any time this nun has a project to do to help people in society, many volunteers follow her.
Summary of The film "Seasons of the Navajo"
Dr. KIP REDICK
RSTD 335
LE, KIM-CHI
Date: September 27, 2007
SUMMARY of
The film “Seasons of the Navajo”
The film “Seasons of the Navajo” was built from 20th century as rituals of the family story. Their lives were very simple.
The family has to work together and have to have the rule and divide the function for each person such as: Lady works in the house, man work outside, and children go to school then can help to parent, brother and sister some light jobs. They focus in the health, if they have a good heath, they can do many things and enjoy life together. The film describe as a family who live on the vast Navajo Reservation. They grew corns along the riverbank. They guided their sheep down sheer rock cliffs. They were quite patience and a touching love for animals. They have a kinship, descent systems, gender and age roles, ecology, philosophy, religions domestic space, child life, and economics. There are Non-Navajo people surround the area. Young people don’t wake up at dawn like tradition dictated. For example of transhumance:
Traditional shifting of herbs that come with the changing seasons and shifting between the urban and reservation life that comes with kinship obligations and economic necessities.
Navajo pray in the sweat lodge, which is believed to be the place of creation. Navajo live in a harmony with the spirit world. Rituals and prayers using sacred substances, such as pollen, are essential to social and spiritual well-being.
Navajo family tie together very strong and tradition bring a sense of great heart. The grandparents teach children, and impart the ancient “blessings of kindness,” they are preserving a unique culture.
RSTD 335
LE, KIM-CHI
Date: September 27, 2007
SUMMARY of
The film “Seasons of the Navajo”
The film “Seasons of the Navajo” was built from 20th century as rituals of the family story. Their lives were very simple.
The family has to work together and have to have the rule and divide the function for each person such as: Lady works in the house, man work outside, and children go to school then can help to parent, brother and sister some light jobs. They focus in the health, if they have a good heath, they can do many things and enjoy life together. The film describe as a family who live on the vast Navajo Reservation. They grew corns along the riverbank. They guided their sheep down sheer rock cliffs. They were quite patience and a touching love for animals. They have a kinship, descent systems, gender and age roles, ecology, philosophy, religions domestic space, child life, and economics. There are Non-Navajo people surround the area. Young people don’t wake up at dawn like tradition dictated. For example of transhumance:
Traditional shifting of herbs that come with the changing seasons and shifting between the urban and reservation life that comes with kinship obligations and economic necessities.
Navajo pray in the sweat lodge, which is believed to be the place of creation. Navajo live in a harmony with the spirit world. Rituals and prayers using sacred substances, such as pollen, are essential to social and spiritual well-being.
Navajo family tie together very strong and tradition bring a sense of great heart. The grandparents teach children, and impart the ancient “blessings of kindness,” they are preserving a unique culture.
AFRICAN MYTHS - Mrs. LE
Dr. KIP REDICK
RSTD 337
LE, KIM-CHI
Date: September 27, 2007
AFRICAN MYTHS
According to “Original Visions The Religions of Oral People.” African theology, philosophy, cytology, political science and medicine have all been embedded stories.
Many stories are significant and they can cause people to think about the world such as:” The anthropologist Marcel Griaule discovered the complexity of the Dogon thought-world when he was accepted as an initiate by the blind Dogon elder Ogetemmeli. Ogetemmeli was revered in his neighborhood as a wise man.”(64).
Ogetemmeli describes how the world and the solar systems were created. He told of the “fourteen solar systems were formed from flat circular slabs of earth one on top of the other.” (64). He said that the women brought down the stars for their children. “The stars came from pellets of earth flung out into space by God Amma, the one God, “said Ogotemmeli.”
The Africans were interested in the sun, because the sun is the ancestor of African people. Africans believe people were the first conceived by God. The essences of signs were inscribed in the initial placenta, or “womb” of God. Africans believed in the religious systems of peoples the world over and through out time, attesting to the human fascination with origins.
RSTD 337
LE, KIM-CHI
Date: September 27, 2007
AFRICAN MYTHS
According to “Original Visions The Religions of Oral People.” African theology, philosophy, cytology, political science and medicine have all been embedded stories.
Many stories are significant and they can cause people to think about the world such as:” The anthropologist Marcel Griaule discovered the complexity of the Dogon thought-world when he was accepted as an initiate by the blind Dogon elder Ogetemmeli. Ogetemmeli was revered in his neighborhood as a wise man.”(64).
Ogetemmeli describes how the world and the solar systems were created. He told of the “fourteen solar systems were formed from flat circular slabs of earth one on top of the other.” (64). He said that the women brought down the stars for their children. “The stars came from pellets of earth flung out into space by God Amma, the one God, “said Ogotemmeli.”
The Africans were interested in the sun, because the sun is the ancestor of African people. Africans believe people were the first conceived by God. The essences of signs were inscribed in the initial placenta, or “womb” of God. Africans believed in the religious systems of peoples the world over and through out time, attesting to the human fascination with origins.
AFRICAN RITUAL - Mrs. LE
Dr. KIP REDICK
RSTD 337
LE, KIM-CHI
Date: September 27, 2007
AFRICAN RITUAL
According to “Original Visions The Religions of Oral People,” the BaMbuti people live in the forest because to take the special poignant at time of death.
They like to do every thing in the forest such as: sing, pray, etc… They feel happy all the time even at death they still remained optimistic. They celebrated a ritual called the “Elima” for the girl when she first began to be “blessed by the moon.” The Elima learns how to live like an adult and learn how to sing the songs of adult women. For the Pygmies, the Elima is the most joyful and happiest time in their life.
This seems to be a coming of age ritual that is forced on the girls by the tribe when they reach the age of puberty. They are taught how to be an adult by an old and respected relative. “It is a time of gladness and happiness, not for the women alone but for the whole people.” (62).
African peoples appreciate the way we do and what we want to do. African peoples hate evil, but they respect the good. If one person in their group did some things wrong, the whole group suffers.
African people’s rituals respect their foundation of holistic thinking.
.
RSTD 337
LE, KIM-CHI
Date: September 27, 2007
AFRICAN RITUAL
According to “Original Visions The Religions of Oral People,” the BaMbuti people live in the forest because to take the special poignant at time of death.
They like to do every thing in the forest such as: sing, pray, etc… They feel happy all the time even at death they still remained optimistic. They celebrated a ritual called the “Elima” for the girl when she first began to be “blessed by the moon.” The Elima learns how to live like an adult and learn how to sing the songs of adult women. For the Pygmies, the Elima is the most joyful and happiest time in their life.
This seems to be a coming of age ritual that is forced on the girls by the tribe when they reach the age of puberty. They are taught how to be an adult by an old and respected relative. “It is a time of gladness and happiness, not for the women alone but for the whole people.” (62).
African peoples appreciate the way we do and what we want to do. African peoples hate evil, but they respect the good. If one person in their group did some things wrong, the whole group suffers.
African people’s rituals respect their foundation of holistic thinking.
.
Thursday, November 8, 2007
Chrissy Jaeger- Drum Circle, Personal Reflection
I have never been to a drum circle before. I was late which actually turned out to be really neat because the circle was already formed and I could hear the drums going, and as I walked around I could “enter” by experiencing the music.
I really enjoyed the experience, it was interesting to observe as well as participate. When I was just watching I could see some people really engaging in the music while others sort of kept a distance from the music. When I was participating I was able to feel more a part of the process.
The thing I loved most about the experience was the sun setting. I had a perfect view right in between two trees. The colors were brilliant! As we were drumming I really got the sense that we were participating in the sun setting. It was like we were encouraging and celebrating the setting of the sun. We didn’t stop until the sun had gone bellow the horizon which only affirmed the idea that we were participating in the process.
I also enjoyed closing my eyes and drumming while listening. I could really feel a sense of community when I closed my eyes. I think it made me forget slightly who was there specifically, but more so realize we were all united. Overall, it
I really enjoyed the experience, it was interesting to observe as well as participate. When I was just watching I could see some people really engaging in the music while others sort of kept a distance from the music. When I was participating I was able to feel more a part of the process.
The thing I loved most about the experience was the sun setting. I had a perfect view right in between two trees. The colors were brilliant! As we were drumming I really got the sense that we were participating in the sun setting. It was like we were encouraging and celebrating the setting of the sun. We didn’t stop until the sun had gone bellow the horizon which only affirmed the idea that we were participating in the process.
I also enjoyed closing my eyes and drumming while listening. I could really feel a sense of community when I closed my eyes. I think it made me forget slightly who was there specifically, but more so realize we were all united. Overall, it
Sarah Nuber-Drum Circle
I would just like to comment about the drum circle that our class attended on Wednesday. I thought it was interesting how the leader of the circle told us to feel the instruments and to become connected with the earth through our feet. We really are connected to the earth, more so than we might think through what we eat and wear. It was cool how some people would play off other rhythms and how that connected them to other people. I have been to a few of the drum circles that the members of the PESO organization attend, and I also thought that those were really cool. Those drum circles are cool because everyone has drums (rather than pots and other noise making devices) and the rhythm is completely awesome and people just get up and dance. Drum circles bring people together and these experiences can transcend all barriers, such as cultural and language differences. In the drum circle for class, you could tell who had played in a drum circle before and who was somewhat uncomfortable (like me) with the whole concept, but there was a connection between everyone through the rhythm and the whole experience made me feel less stressed. I was reading an article about drumming and came across a line that I agree with. It is from an interview with Robert Drake who is the author of, The Shamanic Drum: A Guide to Sacred Drumming, “Feelings of peacefulness and spiritual well-being are common, along with a oneness of feeling and purpose with the rhythms of the universe. When we drum, we become one with what we are made of; we become one with the voice of creation, that primal rhythm that pulses within all that exists. Drumming stops the chatter of the mind and frees us from the cage of our doubts, fears, and habits…” I think that this is true and overall the drum circle was a good experience for me.
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Chrissy Jaeger - Forest People, Outside reading
The Forest people is a book about an anthropologist who goes into the Congo to study a group of people called the Pygmy people or the Forest people. These people live in the bush, out in the forests of the Congo. They have adapted to society outside the bush and they now make exchanges with those communities but majority of their time and their love is for the forest.
The Forest people are an oral people, which is really is interesting considering how they view spirituality and reality. Even though they are oral they have a more literate perspective. And oral culture tends to fully believe and accept the traditions they have grown up with. But these people have traditions that htye have kept orally, but they don’t even necessarily believe to be real – atleast to the extend the traditions suggest.
The tradition is called ‘calling on the Forest God’ with the ‘molimo.’ The Molimo is supposed to be a sacred instrument that only the men of the tribe can see, this instrument sings to the Forest God. But the instrument is really a tube of plastic that the men make to be something supernatural. So, the meaning isn’t in the sacredness of the object but of the desire to communicate with their God. So, the men know their ritual isn’t sacred by the supernaturalness of the Molimo, but it is sacred because the tradition considers it as sacred, and because it is tradition they continue it.
The Forest people are an oral people, which is really is interesting considering how they view spirituality and reality. Even though they are oral they have a more literate perspective. And oral culture tends to fully believe and accept the traditions they have grown up with. But these people have traditions that htye have kept orally, but they don’t even necessarily believe to be real – atleast to the extend the traditions suggest.
The tradition is called ‘calling on the Forest God’ with the ‘molimo.’ The Molimo is supposed to be a sacred instrument that only the men of the tribe can see, this instrument sings to the Forest God. But the instrument is really a tube of plastic that the men make to be something supernatural. So, the meaning isn’t in the sacredness of the object but of the desire to communicate with their God. So, the men know their ritual isn’t sacred by the supernaturalness of the Molimo, but it is sacred because the tradition considers it as sacred, and because it is tradition they continue it.
Monday, November 5, 2007
modernity as uniting or dislodging?
By Kelly Moody
I am currently writing an essay on a book i have had to read for my Women, Gender and Culture class entitled "Thai Women in the Global Labor Force". (anyone else in that class?) In the beginning it addresses the meaning of modernity for the traditional Thai way of life. I find this significant for our class because modernization affects a group of peoples' foundation for reality, whether it be traditional culture, gender norms, religious beliefs etc. Though i have previously considered this 'dislodging' a bad thing, i wonder now, once dislodged, what happens? conglomeration? syncreticism? unionization? Is traditional dislodging a way to bring people together? It's such an intricate thing to think about, you have to understand the benefits of tradition for a group of people in a particular place(and the system of a 'place' is loaded with dynamics in itself), and bringing people together somehow in a global culture or global religion is unionizing yes, but does it degrade as it unionizes? Part of the quote that caught my attention as i was going back through the book:
"To be modern is to find ourselves in an environment that promises us adventure, power, joy, growth, transformation of ourselves and the world--and, at the same time, that threatens to destroy everything we have, everything we know, everything we are. Modern environments and experiences cut across all boundaries of geography and ethnicity, of class and nationality, of religion and ideology: in this sense, modernity can be said to unite all mankind. But it is a paradoxical unity, a unity of disunity: it pours us all into a maelstrom of perpetual disintegration and renewal, a struggle and contradiction, of ambiguity and anguish. To be modern is to be part of a universe in which, as Marx said, "all that is solid melts into air." (Mills quoting Marshall Berman)
Is this unification a way to make us all the same mechanisms in a bigger systematic whole? Is this a good thing or a bad thing? Is Marx right--are we being transformed into mere tools--eat to work, work to eat, at the expense of tradition, religious individuality and culture? Our are we progressing, transcending what previously separated us, grounding tradition, religion and culture, to come together? This is very relevant to our class given what it means. We are studying a kind of culture, primal/oral/traditional culture that is diminishing because of this entropy, because of this unification involved in modernization. So is the knowledge they have valuable? More valuable than the unification? More valuable than the ideals and motives behind the force that is modernization?
cited:
Mills, Mary Beth. Thai Women in the Global Labor Force. Rutgers University Press. Piscataway, NJ: 1999. pg 13.
I am currently writing an essay on a book i have had to read for my Women, Gender and Culture class entitled "Thai Women in the Global Labor Force". (anyone else in that class?) In the beginning it addresses the meaning of modernity for the traditional Thai way of life. I find this significant for our class because modernization affects a group of peoples' foundation for reality, whether it be traditional culture, gender norms, religious beliefs etc. Though i have previously considered this 'dislodging' a bad thing, i wonder now, once dislodged, what happens? conglomeration? syncreticism? unionization? Is traditional dislodging a way to bring people together? It's such an intricate thing to think about, you have to understand the benefits of tradition for a group of people in a particular place(and the system of a 'place' is loaded with dynamics in itself), and bringing people together somehow in a global culture or global religion is unionizing yes, but does it degrade as it unionizes? Part of the quote that caught my attention as i was going back through the book:
"To be modern is to find ourselves in an environment that promises us adventure, power, joy, growth, transformation of ourselves and the world--and, at the same time, that threatens to destroy everything we have, everything we know, everything we are. Modern environments and experiences cut across all boundaries of geography and ethnicity, of class and nationality, of religion and ideology: in this sense, modernity can be said to unite all mankind. But it is a paradoxical unity, a unity of disunity: it pours us all into a maelstrom of perpetual disintegration and renewal, a struggle and contradiction, of ambiguity and anguish. To be modern is to be part of a universe in which, as Marx said, "all that is solid melts into air." (Mills quoting Marshall Berman)
Is this unification a way to make us all the same mechanisms in a bigger systematic whole? Is this a good thing or a bad thing? Is Marx right--are we being transformed into mere tools--eat to work, work to eat, at the expense of tradition, religious individuality and culture? Our are we progressing, transcending what previously separated us, grounding tradition, religion and culture, to come together? This is very relevant to our class given what it means. We are studying a kind of culture, primal/oral/traditional culture that is diminishing because of this entropy, because of this unification involved in modernization. So is the knowledge they have valuable? More valuable than the unification? More valuable than the ideals and motives behind the force that is modernization?
cited:
Mills, Mary Beth. Thai Women in the Global Labor Force. Rutgers University Press. Piscataway, NJ: 1999. pg 13.
Sunday, November 4, 2007
Chrissy Jaeger - Outside Source "Bakongo"
In African primal religion there is a lot of emphasis on ancestry. The belief is often that the ancestors play a part in the living’s experience, and influence life regularly. I wonder if this is not because of a need to remain connected with the family and remain a community even after death, or if it has more to do with the spiritual aspect of their culture.
In regards to the need for family and community, there is a certain degree of shared lives between generations. As one generation weans the next is built up to guide and protect the tribes. But, as these generations pass on, they still have significant influence because they are still intimately connected with their families. In fact, they are specifically connected to their families of which they came from. Many times when women do not have fertility they look to the deceased ancestors and believe they have a part in the infertility of that woman. This would be caused by the ancestor being angry that they have not been remembered properly. So, there are rituals that have to take place in order to fix the problem that has occurred between the living family and the dead.
This is different though from the idea of ghosts, ancestors are still very much alive, but just in a different realm. Ghosts are considered actually dead, but the ancestors still have applied to them a very real identity. I am not sure why there is such a distinction; again perhaps it is due to the need to remain connected to the family. But spiritually, these ancestors take on a sort of supernatural role. Much like those of witches or diviners, except that witches and diviners are alive, while these ancestors are not. But, the way that the ancestors interact with life is similar. I am still left with the question as to why they are such a vital part of the culture; the only sufficient explanation is that it helps to explain some inexplicable occurrences such as infertility.
In regards to the need for family and community, there is a certain degree of shared lives between generations. As one generation weans the next is built up to guide and protect the tribes. But, as these generations pass on, they still have significant influence because they are still intimately connected with their families. In fact, they are specifically connected to their families of which they came from. Many times when women do not have fertility they look to the deceased ancestors and believe they have a part in the infertility of that woman. This would be caused by the ancestor being angry that they have not been remembered properly. So, there are rituals that have to take place in order to fix the problem that has occurred between the living family and the dead.
This is different though from the idea of ghosts, ancestors are still very much alive, but just in a different realm. Ghosts are considered actually dead, but the ancestors still have applied to them a very real identity. I am not sure why there is such a distinction; again perhaps it is due to the need to remain connected to the family. But spiritually, these ancestors take on a sort of supernatural role. Much like those of witches or diviners, except that witches and diviners are alive, while these ancestors are not. But, the way that the ancestors interact with life is similar. I am still left with the question as to why they are such a vital part of the culture; the only sufficient explanation is that it helps to explain some inexplicable occurrences such as infertility.
the autonomy of technology and language
By Kelly Moody
After reading much of Ong's text, "Orality and Literacy", i cannot help but to keep thinking about the future of literacy, the future of our communication or reflection on the world. In his book, he discusses the transformation that occurs in our consciousness when the way our language is mediated changes from an oral form to a written form because of the way our relationship to it changes. When our relationship to our language changes, our relationship to our world changes, our language is a reflection of how we see the world, and how we place ourselves in the world. So changing our communication/expression from a primarily oral-based foundation to a primarily literate-based foundation has profound implication for how we see ourselves in the world, how we see and understand the world itself.
So what about the autonomy of technology (Ellul)? If technology allowed us to transform language thus far, to transform consciousness thus far, what does this mean for the future of our consciousness? The autonomy of technology as explained by Jacques Ellul, is a discussion of the infinitude of technology, that it dominates our reality to such a great degree that it will perpetuate itself forever in the future and we will be dragged along in the process. It is obvious that it has changed us thus far, a pen and paper is completely technology. Imagine how much those insturments have transformed how we understand ourselves, our world, each other. Now we have computers. Now we write less, and type more. We talk to our friends online because it is easier, we respond to each other more and more on this objective literate level. Our psychic energy flowing between each other when we talk orally face to face is being pushed out, we would rather objectify our words to each other. When we type what we think or feel, we can eliminate something that would inhibit us if we spoke in person, though we lose something vital, something human in the process. We've become to find it efficient to have a delayed kind of communication. Emails, text messages, instant messaging, facebook or myspace wall messages, chat rooms, etc.
Aside from transforming our communication from oral to virtual, what about the difference between written and typed language? Teachers prefer typed papers, yet getting a typed birthday note is not quite the same as getting a written birthday note. Some of that personal energy is still there,and when it is typed, it feels so cold and computerized. Is typing all of our papers computerizing us? Depersonalizing us? Objectifying our minds? Even the virtual language is changing from the handwritten language. An article i saw today, sparked my thoughts on this evolution-- It discusses how vital handwritting is to learning, the actual act or experience of writing letter, forming words, versus typing, where the act of creating one letter over another is the same. Schools are emphasizing handwriting less and less, and many experts are saying this should change.
"Predictions of handwriting's demise didn't begin with the computer; they date back to the introduction of the Remington typewriter in 1873. But for at least a generation, penmanship has seemed a quaint and, well … schoolmarmish subject to be emphasizing. Now, backed by new research, educators are trying to wedge it back into the curriculum. After all, no one has suggested that the invention of the calculator means we don't have to teach kids how to add, and spelling is still a prized skill in the era of spell check. If we stop teaching penmanship, it will not only hasten the dreaded day when brides acknowledge wedding gifts by e-mail; the bigger danger is, they'll be composed even more poorly than they already are."
After reading much of Ong's text, "Orality and Literacy", i cannot help but to keep thinking about the future of literacy, the future of our communication or reflection on the world. In his book, he discusses the transformation that occurs in our consciousness when the way our language is mediated changes from an oral form to a written form because of the way our relationship to it changes. When our relationship to our language changes, our relationship to our world changes, our language is a reflection of how we see the world, and how we place ourselves in the world. So changing our communication/expression from a primarily oral-based foundation to a primarily literate-based foundation has profound implication for how we see ourselves in the world, how we see and understand the world itself.
So what about the autonomy of technology (Ellul)? If technology allowed us to transform language thus far, to transform consciousness thus far, what does this mean for the future of our consciousness? The autonomy of technology as explained by Jacques Ellul, is a discussion of the infinitude of technology, that it dominates our reality to such a great degree that it will perpetuate itself forever in the future and we will be dragged along in the process. It is obvious that it has changed us thus far, a pen and paper is completely technology. Imagine how much those insturments have transformed how we understand ourselves, our world, each other. Now we have computers. Now we write less, and type more. We talk to our friends online because it is easier, we respond to each other more and more on this objective literate level. Our psychic energy flowing between each other when we talk orally face to face is being pushed out, we would rather objectify our words to each other. When we type what we think or feel, we can eliminate something that would inhibit us if we spoke in person, though we lose something vital, something human in the process. We've become to find it efficient to have a delayed kind of communication. Emails, text messages, instant messaging, facebook or myspace wall messages, chat rooms, etc.
Aside from transforming our communication from oral to virtual, what about the difference between written and typed language? Teachers prefer typed papers, yet getting a typed birthday note is not quite the same as getting a written birthday note. Some of that personal energy is still there,and when it is typed, it feels so cold and computerized. Is typing all of our papers computerizing us? Depersonalizing us? Objectifying our minds? Even the virtual language is changing from the handwritten language. An article i saw today, sparked my thoughts on this evolution-- It discusses how vital handwritting is to learning, the actual act or experience of writing letter, forming words, versus typing, where the act of creating one letter over another is the same. Schools are emphasizing handwriting less and less, and many experts are saying this should change.
"Predictions of handwriting's demise didn't begin with the computer; they date back to the introduction of the Remington typewriter in 1873. But for at least a generation, penmanship has seemed a quaint and, well … schoolmarmish subject to be emphasizing. Now, backed by new research, educators are trying to wedge it back into the curriculum. After all, no one has suggested that the invention of the calculator means we don't have to teach kids how to add, and spelling is still a prized skill in the era of spell check. If we stop teaching penmanship, it will not only hasten the dreaded day when brides acknowledge wedding gifts by e-mail; the bigger danger is, they'll be composed even more poorly than they already are."
The study of Ishi
By Kelly Moody
I recently acquired some materials on the last surviving Yahi Indian, Ishi, of whom we studied and watched a documentary on in class a couple of weeks ago. After the first mention of Ishi in class awhile ago, it was a much talked about subject with me and a few of my friends. It turned out that one of my friends had a copy of "Ishi, In Two Worlds" by Theodora Kroeber(the wife of the famous anthropologist that worked with Ishi when he came out of seclusion in the woods) I also found a book entitled "Ishi's Brain" by Orin Starn totally by chance in a thrift book store. One of the books is original commentary on the events that occurred involving Ishi's family and tribal history, his initial exposure to 'civilization' and a lot of data and accounts of his time in San Francisco, as well as original quotes and letters from Ishi's doctor and Alfred Kroeber himself around the time of Ishi's death. The other book is interesting, because it is from a modern standpoint looking back at the collection of information written and collected about Ishi including "Ishi, In Two Worlds", questioning the validity of some things, questioning the meaning drawn from the study of Ishi---what it means to put him as a standard for all Yahi Indians (this could be a wrong generalization to make), assuming that he was the last of the Indians; it also analyzes the mysterious circumstances surrounding his death, that is what happened to his body after he died and why. There is some speculation that Ishi's brain is still preserved in a laboratory somewhere and noone knows where it is. The best thing about the book is the positive light that is portrayed onto Alfred Kroeber. Because of the way Ishi was treated compared to today's standards we automatically look at him in a negative light, but apparently he was a very open-minded man of his day. What anthropology was turning into, what he contributed a large part of, was redefining it with a lack of bias, forming more genuine opinions about the similarities and differences in human beings. Kroeber viewed Ishi as an equal even if he was living in a museum, putting his 'culture on display', it was all an attempt to make the world understand that this man was not a mere 'animal'.
I recently acquired some materials on the last surviving Yahi Indian, Ishi, of whom we studied and watched a documentary on in class a couple of weeks ago. After the first mention of Ishi in class awhile ago, it was a much talked about subject with me and a few of my friends. It turned out that one of my friends had a copy of "Ishi, In Two Worlds" by Theodora Kroeber(the wife of the famous anthropologist that worked with Ishi when he came out of seclusion in the woods) I also found a book entitled "Ishi's Brain" by Orin Starn totally by chance in a thrift book store. One of the books is original commentary on the events that occurred involving Ishi's family and tribal history, his initial exposure to 'civilization' and a lot of data and accounts of his time in San Francisco, as well as original quotes and letters from Ishi's doctor and Alfred Kroeber himself around the time of Ishi's death. The other book is interesting, because it is from a modern standpoint looking back at the collection of information written and collected about Ishi including "Ishi, In Two Worlds", questioning the validity of some things, questioning the meaning drawn from the study of Ishi---what it means to put him as a standard for all Yahi Indians (this could be a wrong generalization to make), assuming that he was the last of the Indians; it also analyzes the mysterious circumstances surrounding his death, that is what happened to his body after he died and why. There is some speculation that Ishi's brain is still preserved in a laboratory somewhere and noone knows where it is. The best thing about the book is the positive light that is portrayed onto Alfred Kroeber. Because of the way Ishi was treated compared to today's standards we automatically look at him in a negative light, but apparently he was a very open-minded man of his day. What anthropology was turning into, what he contributed a large part of, was redefining it with a lack of bias, forming more genuine opinions about the similarities and differences in human beings. Kroeber viewed Ishi as an equal even if he was living in a museum, putting his 'culture on display', it was all an attempt to make the world understand that this man was not a mere 'animal'.
Sarah Nuber- Ong Text
I was reading the Ong text and I would just like to comment on some of what I have been reading. The text points out that, today, when we think of an oral culture, we tend to think of a primitive group of people that are less intelligent than we are. It is hard to think of an oral culture as being anything but primitive because in our culture literacy has lead to much advancement since it came into existence. This is not the case at all, oral cultures had to rely on other methods of thinking in order to recall their thoughts, and they did not have it easy by being able to write what they were thinking. Ong states that in order to recall memorable thoughts without any knowledge of writing one must do their thinking in mnemonic patterns, and this makes it easier to recall thoughts orally. Ong states, “your thoughts must come into being in heavily rhythmic, balanced patterns, in repetitions or antitheses, in alliterations and assonances, in epithetic and other formulary expressions, in standard thematic settings, in proverbs which are constantly heard by everyone so that they come to mind readily and which themselves are patterned for retention and ready recall, or in other mnemonic forms” (p 34). It seems that these oral cultures should get more credit for the way that they recall thoughts because it is much harder than being able to write it down. Being able to write down thoughts allows you to look back over whatever you want, whenever you want and these oral cultures did not have this convenience. It’s crazy to think of a culture that has no concept of writing and words, but that they have to remember and be able to recall what they want to repeat. These cultures are not as primitive in their thinking as I once thought and they deserve credit for this because I can't even imagine not having written words, I think life would be much harder.
Thursday, November 1, 2007
Chrissy Jaeger- Native American Religions
I was reading the explanation of the Zuni faith in the seven golden cities and how that was understood so much differently when told to Spaniards. You can see that the cultural influences both peoples perspectives and their desires. The seven golden cities had meaning to both the Spaniards and the Zuni, but different meanings.
The Zuni saw it as a place of meaning symbolically. It was seven villages that may have had a golden hue, but they "also embodied meanings fully as precious as was gold to the Spanish." For the Spanish it was simply about the gold, about the money. This could be because of the cultural influences. The difference primal religions have is with the meaning of things being deeper than what they appear.
This difference also could be due to the difference in oral and literate cultures. The oral culture would focus more on the why, and importance underlying through stories and such. Whereas the literate would focus more on the what, and importance of what they see. A literate society might emphasize sight more than an oral society which would emphasize hearing. The sight would bring the focus on "what" and the materialistic view. The hearing would bring a focus on the "why" or whats implied, what's important not what is on the surface.
The Zuni saw it as a place of meaning symbolically. It was seven villages that may have had a golden hue, but they "also embodied meanings fully as precious as was gold to the Spanish." For the Spanish it was simply about the gold, about the money. This could be because of the cultural influences. The difference primal religions have is with the meaning of things being deeper than what they appear.
This difference also could be due to the difference in oral and literate cultures. The oral culture would focus more on the why, and importance underlying through stories and such. Whereas the literate would focus more on the what, and importance of what they see. A literate society might emphasize sight more than an oral society which would emphasize hearing. The sight would bring the focus on "what" and the materialistic view. The hearing would bring a focus on the "why" or whats implied, what's important not what is on the surface.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
