Posts by Brian:
Jan
12
What is culture?
Comments Off on What is culture?
A fairly standard definition of culture is something along the lines of ‘a system of symbols and meanings that lack fixed boundaries, are constantly in flux, and interact and compete with one another.’ When the majority of people use the term ‘culture’, they are referring to a way of life; this includes language, manners, fashion, behavior, morality, ethics, religion, and art.
The readings deal with several possible meanings of ‘culture’. The two which are most favoured are a) a way of life; b) arts and education. However, another idea of culture is introduced, namely that which is ruled by a group of elites who consider themselves sophisticated and ‘cultured’ to the extent that they are separate (and of course better) than everyone else. To me, the belief that you are better than others because of the places you dine at or the people that you are seen with is ignorant in the extreme.
Upon finishing the assigned readings, I was left with several questions regarding culture and our perception of it; some of which were brought up by the readings, and some of which were my own. What, exactly, is culture? How do cultures differ around the world? And are the differences significant enough to truly divide them, or are they merely superficial?
It seems to me that the author of the second article is saying that cultures are in effect the same, and that the ‘exoticness’ that we think of when we think of foreign lands is a “culturally constructed ‘other’” that fills the “savage slot.” Now I have to say that I didn’t really understand what this article was getting at, and I got kind of confused by all the various theories and post-whatevers (I couldn’t for the life of me figure out what “cleavages of class” are); but I think the gist of it is that we are more similar than we think, and that we purposely seek out and exaggerate the differences between ourselves and others. Why do we do this? The author seems to think that we are searching for “radical otherness”, and we find this otherness in the primitive tribes living in the Amazon.
Jan
12
Week 1
Comments Off on Week 1
Of the two readings for thias week, I have to say I prefer the earlier one by Raymond Williams. The basic idea that “culture is ordinary” is nothing new to me by itself, but Williams presents some arguments along the way that I found very interesting. It seems obvious to me that, to start out, he describes exactly what we were talking about last class. That is, the difference between high culture and popular culture. I agree with his distinctions and opinion that, while different, each is important in it’s own way. And it is true and unfortunate that some people, like in the teashop, devalue anything that isn’t high culture. Bebop,the primal form of jazz music, is considered an “art” music and is very sophisticated, certainly high culture, but would never have existed if it weren’t for various musical traditions of folk and popular culture–blues, ragtime, swing, among others. Had elitists of high culture been powerful enough back in the beginning of the 20th century to subvert those “lesser” traditions, their eventual product would never have existed!
Later on, Williams discusses the effects economics has on culture. He says that, even though more and more bad culture is being made and is more easily distributed, more good culture is also being made. This I can agree with. But he also seems to believe that this proliferation of bad/commercial culture is not a harmful thing. I personally think that commercial culture eats away at the minds of its consumers and participants. But aside from that, it is undeniable that it erodes good culture, by pushing the purveyors of good culture aside. I don’t, however, see bad culture as a necessary evil in an economic society, mainly because you can travel and witness bustling economic cities, even in the U.S. and Canada, with varying degrees (some high, many low) of quality, unique culture relative to commercially infected culture.
The second reading, by Keesing, was interesting, but a little confusing for me having never taken an anthropology or cultural studies class. But generally, I get the idea that culture is very, very hard to define because it is complex, constantly evolving, without bounds, and shapes the perceptions of even those attempting to understand it.
Jan
12
Introduction
Comments Off on Introduction
Hi my name is Jean Sebastien Pourcelot and I’m a second year archaeology and Latin American studies major. I come from Panama and I’m interested in learning and understanding more about the culture of the region.
Jan
12
LAST 201
Comments Off on LAST 201
What is Culture?
01/12/09
Throughout the readings, Williams and Keesing provide insight into the definition of culture and how scholars perceive its function in society. Williams’ title “Culture is Ordinary” reflects his viewpoint of culture as a universal and innate phenomenon. He describes culture as the arts and learning implemented to expresses the beliefs of every human society. Williams suggests that culture serves two distinct functions: 1) the “common purpose” of the society, and 2) the “deep personal meaning” of the individuals. He criticizes “teashop culture” as well as those who utilize esoteric argot in describing culture to illustrate his belief that all individuals create and share this structure, not merely the well-educated. Williams additionally examines Marxist cultural theory, which states “culture must be finally interpreted in relations to its underlying system of production.” He denounces the Marxist notion “we live in a dying culture and the masses are ignorant,” and likens this reference of the masses to cultural othering. However, Williams does find merit in three aspects of Marxist cultural theory: 1) the relationship between culture and production, 2) the observation of restricted education, and 3) a different system of production would serve as a cultural directive. He condones Leavis’ theory that industrialization has tainted, or cheapened, British culture, and suggests that education is the only method of retaining classic art and literature. Finally, Williams opposes the theory that the decline of culture in the industrial era resembles “a kind of Gresham’s law,” enumerating examples of how “bad culture” does not replace “good culture” in any definitive correlation.
In “Theories of Culture Revisited,” Keesing focuses on radical alterity, defined as “a culturally constructed Other radically different from Us.” He describes some classic binaries associated with othering, including “civilized verses primitive,” “rational verses irrational,” and “Occident verses Orient.” Keesing criticizes common anthropological approaches to culture, accusing them of essentialism and reification. He means scholars typically study and describe culture in a manner that portrays this elusive concept as concrete and tangible. Keesing elaborates on how the reification of culture results in its becoming a commodity with potential for appropriation, thus, further allowing for othering.
Jan
12
CONCEPTION OF CULTURE
Comments Off on CONCEPTION OF CULTURE
Jan
12
Hello world!
Comments Off on Hello world!
Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!
Jan
12
L.A.S.T 201 (Week One- What is Culture?)
Comments Off on L.A.S.T 201 (Week One- What is Culture?)
This weeks reading topic of what is culture? has opened my eyes to different perspectives on culture and the ways and styles of which they are formed and lived through. I found the readings both by Raymond Williams and Roger Kessing to be very intriguing and informative. I felt Williams opened my eyes to new perspectives and ways of thinking on culture of which I had not considered before. From the beginning of Williams paper I appreciated his courage in the labialization of such an extensive, complex topic, as culture and classify it as ‘ordinary’. I think, however, a dictionary definition of what exactly culture and ordinary ‘means’ would be a good technique for his use of exploring culture. I felt as though Williams brought in a bit more excitement and fun into his paper through the structure and use of words and expressions over Kessing’s. For example Williams brings rhyming into his paper through word ‘culture of which he compares to vulture and sepulture. This comparison adds to his overarching thesis but was defiantly not necessary and felt he thought it was advantageous to add some humor and lighten up the topic. Another aspect of Williams paper I enjoyed was his expulsion of Marxists theorists who say that we are living in a dying culture. This belief is extremely popular at moment and I feel it was adventurous of him to “stand on the other side of the room’ , so to speak. One of the things of which I did not necessary agree with on Williams paper was the classification of culture in terms of good or bad. I feel as though a classification such as this, into black and white categories should of been refrained. When reading through Keesing’s article I enjoyed how he brought in quotes by other people. I felt as though this brought another perspective to his argument. I also like how through the reading of Keesing’s piece I was able to learn a new word and concept known as radical alterity. Some questions I have for both of these papers are: firstly for Williams paper I wonder how his paper would have changed if he focused on a certain aspect of culture such as religion? For Keesing’s paper I wonder what his paper would evolve if he had brought in more prespectives on top of “post-Marxist’ and feminist approaches. I feel as though both papers explored past theories and analogies of culture well and feel as though they have set forth a steeping stone for the continuing growth and study of culture as the world itself evolves.
Jan
12
What is Culture?
Comments Off on What is Culture?
After reading both Williams’ and Keesing’s articles on “culture”, I know have a better understanding of the ways we define, understand, and portray culture in the public realm.
The first article by Raymond Williams was rather hard to follow. The main points that I understood from the article are these. First, Williams stresses the importance of making a clear distinction between a person’s culture, and the notion of a person being “cultured”. Having a culture does not mean that one is “cultured” with access to and appreciation for the “finer things in life”, such as art and literature. Rather, as the author repeatedly reminds us, “culture is ordinary”. People all over the world, in all walks of life, have some form of culture. In other words, culture is accessible to all.
Williams also stresses the importance of education in carrying on a culture, which I agree with. Not only does education teach the various aspects of the culture, but it also provides individuals with the tools needed to question the culture, and create one’s own meanings and interpretations of it.
Another point the author makes is that one cannot describe a so-called “mass-culture”, as the notion of the “masses” does not exist. By describing a group of others as the “masses”, we are perpetuating the “us vs. them” dichotomy. This idea is further developed in the article by Roger Keesing, which I found much easier to follow.
After reading Keesing’s article, I’m reminded of a few major themes covered in my introductory course to Latin American Studies. First off, anthropologists as well as society in general seem obsessed with the need to define the “other”. In defining what the “other” is, we create a definition of ourselves. We define ourselves by what we are not. This is dangerous, as we tend to perceive ourselves as better than the others, and see our ways of doing things as more sophisticated than theirs. However, more and more cultures are intermingling, and it is becoming more difficult to find this radical “other”, that is so different from ourselves.
In studying other cultures, we must consider who gets to decide what is portrayed as the overall “culture” of whatever society or group of people we are studying. I’ve learned that there are certain people, usually those in power, and often anthropologists, who have the resources and power to shape the way the culture is portrayed. In the case of anthropologists, their portrayal of the culture of whichever society they are studying is often shaped by their search for that “radical alterity”, as Keesing puts it. They therefore portray certain aspects of the culture, and may hide others, in order to show the most radically different culture they can.
In considering who exactly gets to decide what is portrayed as the culture of a society, consider Canada. Often, Canadian culture is linked with all things First Nations, like art, dance, ceremonies and rituals. However, do the First Nations people really get a say in how they are portrayed to the rest of the world? As well, who is portraying Canadian culture this way? Usually, it is not the First Nations people. I find it ironic that the culture portrayed as Canadian national culture is of the people who are most oppressed in Canada. I believe that there are many similarities between the portrayals of Canadian national culture with the cultural portrayals of many Latin American countries.
Jan
12
annamarieke 2009-01-13 03:19:30
Comments Off on annamarieke 2009-01-13 03:19:30
The first article describes culture as ordinary, in every society and in every mind. I found that the descriptions of social constructions and classes were similar in some ways to my own views. On page 16 the author, Raymond Williams describes how the community supported his dying father. I believe this exemplifies what he calls “the old society”, one where you know who your neighbors are and watch out for them. The way many people live today in western culture seems to be drifting away from this close knit community. People now however live even closer together in apartment buildings but yet most never know the names of their neighbors. This leads into another point that I noted regarding the assumptions people make about the “masses”. Judgments are made on those same neighbors based the television programs they watch, or the magazines they read, as well as the movies they rent and so on. People judge the “others” as being the ignorant, uneducated side of society without even meeting them or knowing anything about them. Williams goes on to say that his own father who read the Daily Herald gained much knowledge regardless of his level of training. One thing I noted in this part of the article was that unfortunately newspapers today are under no obligation to tell the truth. Many people don’t know that and take everything they read for the truth. People are misinformed and go on to misinform others. Williams describes how culture is created and changes and explains how it is not only for the elite group of people within the walls of a tea room.
The second article written by Roger Keesing defines radical alterity and cultural otherness. Anthropologist have a history of searching for the “other”, exotic, different, radical, culture that is not their own. There is a constant over stating of difference that can be extremely harmful to the very group of people that is being studied. Binaries like old vs. new are used in describing “our” culture and “their” culture. This makes them seem very far away from us as well as very exotic and captivating. Unfortunately for the “them” in this situation, their culture is being exploited and if they were to evolve and change as most every culture does they in turn loose their so called “authenticity”. Keesling states and I believe that these borders and boundaries that define different cultures and peoples are dissolving. As people become more aware of the unstable definitions of “Culture” itself, one begins to question more and more the studies that have been done, and the assumptions that are made regarding cultures different from their own. A person really has to think about the hidden agendas behind the articles they read. National Geographic for example is a popular magazine that often has two page spreads of men and women in tribal dress and articles regarding the most exotic and fascinating aspects of their lives, history and culture. Magazines like this want to catch the attention of their readers and ultimately make more money. In this way cultures are described to the world in exaggerated and exploitative ways.
Both of these articles examine the concept of “culture” and how a person is not born with it, for it is socially created and learned.
Jan
12
Test
Comments Off on Test
Hi everyone!
My name is Maite Fernandez. I am a French student in exchange here for one year. I study political and social sciences in France and i am especially interested in sociology and anthropology. Generally speaking I like the Latin American area and i would like to know more about it. I am also learning Spanish.
See you all soon!!
Jan
12
Latin American Studies 201 2009-01-13 03:03:00
Comments Off on Latin American Studies 201 2009-01-13 03:03:00
Hello, my name is Jonah Erickson and I am a first year Arts student at the University of British Columbia. This blog will be written in order to keep track with reading material, while enabling myself to express reactions, questions and understandings of weekly readings for my Latin American Studies 201 class.
Jan
12
Culture…
Comments Off on Culture…
In the first article the author establishes something from the very beginning and is that culture is ordinary, and he also relates culture to society, how they are made of common meanings and directions. He also seems disappointed about the path that society is taking, how it is getting worse and worse everyday. Culture is always changing, and those changes are the things that mold it into what is becoming, and the way people adapt to those changes is the only way to survive in this world. This has a lot to do with how people were raised, so that they can accept these changes and get use to them and take the best of them also. He makes a really clear and strong statement saying that culture is expanding and all the elements on it are too, because as time changes, people changes which means culture is changing, our culture is not the same as 50 years ago, due to a lot of things, for example technology and education. Culture is a reflect of people, and people are a reflect of their education, so culture is a reflect of education and changes with it. On the second text, culture is seen like the consequence of the past, a mix of the old and new, there they use the word collage or coral reefs, because culture comes from a lot of different things and places that have “deposit”, and in most of the nations of the modern world that were conquered is a mixture of appropriations, resistance and accommodations, as the text says.
The term culture has also been misused and twisted in a wrong way, since now is applied to ways of life and as a thing, that can be steal, manipulated or sell. There has been a lot of moments in history that have changed the way culture is developed, also not every culture is the same, since there are ones that believe in magic and others that do not believe in magic or things related to it. Some things such as dances, typical dresses, that people think defines their culture, sometimes is not more than heritages from the colonial processes and are not really part of their true roots. Culture is the consequence of many things and the recompilation of a lot of history and events that occurred, but sometimes those things that made us really proud of our culture, are not what we really think, and sometimes what we think and referred as culture is not really it.
Jan
12
Introduction
Comments Off on Introduction
Hi!
My name is Anna Marieke Voorhoeve. Im taking Last 201 and this is my test blog entry!
Hope it works!
Jan
12
What’s culture?
Comments Off on What’s culture?
Culture is a system of meaning shared between people. Culture is not inborn. People have to learn the values and norms of the society in which they are living. Sometimes we associate culture with “being cultivated” but as Williams asserts in his article, “culture is ordinary”. Culture is both high and popular culture but there is also many sub or counter cultures inside one particular culture. The culture of one particular country is not learnt only in museums but also in the street. Culture is shaped and negotiated among and between people. Keesing emphasizes this point in his article: people often want to naturalize, reify culture but culture is above all shaped by people. Culture is produced by people, that is why culture is “ordinary”. However, there is an important link between culture and power. Williams emphasizes this point speaking about the mass culture financed by advertising. The financing of culture is a burning issue and there are many other questions around this issue like: profitability or spirit independence. These two texts both emphasize the production of culture. Culture is a system of beliefs which conditions people’s behavior so it could be a way to manipulate or control people.
The two articles focus on the construction of “the other” who is excluded from the dominant culture. Most of the time, each human society defines its culture in opposition with the other ones. However, it is worth noticing that each culture appropriates elements of other cultures. Culture is a process and it is not fixed but it evolves. For instance tea is Chinese but it is viewed as a part of English culture. Western cultures define other cultures as exotic, they shape an “exotic other” but they also shape this other in their own culture, calling it “the mass”. The other is constructed as different. Williams’ article is very interesting because he speaks about the people access to culture. I agree with him and I do not think that we could assert that some people, “the mass”, are excluded from culture. It is true that it is more difficult for what we called “the mass”, the non-dominant class, to have a good education, to go to the university but they shape their own sub-culture, their own codes which is also culture. I do not think there is one dominant culture and then no other culture or people excluded from this dominant culture. I do believe in sub-cultures.
Jan
12
HI!
Comments Off on HI!
Hey! My name is Andrea, and I’m a first year Arts student. I’m looking forward to this class! 🙂
Jan
12
hi!
Comments Off on hi!
Jan
11
Introduction
Comments Off on Introduction
Hello All!
Allow me to introduce myself. My name is Kayo Homma-Komori and I’m a fourth year Marketing/International Business student. Last year I took LAST 100 Introduction to Latin American Studies and absolutely fell in love with all things Latin American. I’ve just returned from studying abroad in Barcelona, Spain where I learned many things about Spanish culture. I am now looking forward to learning more about Latin American culture. Looking forward to a great class with you all!
Jan
11
What is Culture?
Comments Off on What is Culture?
I was thrown off by the concept of radical alterity according to Keesing’s article. I do believe that in the past and frequently nowadays, anthropologists have tried to label other people living in different regions of the world as “others”, specially if they act differently and have different beliefs. However, in past years, anthropologists have begun to play a much more active role in their line of work: aiding communities that are oppressed or helping people and communities take action against the oppressor, whatever form it may take.
Jan
11
Hi!
Comments Off on Hi!
Hi everyone,
I’m Florence. I’m a french student in exchange at UBC for one year. I study political sciences in Paris. Last semester I attended the class “Introduction to Latin America studies”. I like this area and I’ve planned to spend some months in Mexico and Chile before returning to France.
Jan
11
What is culture?
Comments Off on What is culture?
What is Culture?
Honestly I found the first reading “Culture is Ordinary” by Raymond Williams difficult to understand and to follow. The only part that really drew me in was when he started to use his personal anecdotes of his life before becoming an academic. He does however make some points that allowed me to delve into some critical thought. If what he was trying to convey in this article was that the commonly used rhetoric of the “masses” often presents the notion that those outside of London, I presume, are a large homogenous group of people that all share the same mentality and way of life, i.e. culture, is unfair and untruthful assumption to make, I agree. This in a sense ties into what Roger Keesing was, I think, referring to when he suggests that anthropologists and other scholarly members of society try and paint an “otherness” towards different groups that can contrast to Western society, when doing research and other academic works around the world. ( What I found interesting is that as this has actually backfired on anthropologists and other academics, as they have distanced themselves to a level where the people to whom they are referring to as the “others” claim that in fact these anthropologists are presenting a skewed portrayal of their culture, consequently and unfortunately for the anthropologists discrediting their entire work). But going back to the term the “masses”, presented in the first article, I see it as a parallel to the equally exaggerated alterity of the radical “otherness”, presented in the second article. Both allow for generalizations and assumptions to easily manifest in our minds and perpetuate the falsity that those included in these broad terms (the masses and the others,) have a distinct and uniform culture. This is completely untrue everywhere. This is apparent even in our classroom when we did the first exercise regarding popular culture in Canada. How difficult was it to really pin-point what popular culture existed in Canada. What I am trying to get to is that perhaps there is a dominant culture, but within a dominant culture exists sub-culture. And this is true in every sense. Think of a work place where there is a strong culture on the whole, but within each specialized department, the people working in each department have their own culture defined by their tasks and interests. I believe this is true for a society. A nation like Canada may have its general hockey, molson beer, liberal, non-american culture, yet for me personally I don’t relate to this national culture as much. I relate much more to the culture of my specific community and home. I feel this is the same with many people in Vancouver especially as our city is full of immigrants who bring their culture to the culture of the community. This gets me quite confused when I try and define what these people’s culture truly. This is becomes their culture becomes a sort of hybrid mixing infusion of different cultures from heritage to new settlement.
Ok I now realize that I have written too much but that’s what happens when I start relating it to context of my life. I didn’t even go into globalization which has an enormous impact on culture…
Jan
11
tithflo 2009-01-11 22:12:04
Comments Off on tithflo 2009-01-11 22:12:04
Opening ceremony of my blog!
Jan
10
Intro
Comments Off on Intro
Hi,
My name is Rhiannon Latimer and I had to make a blog for my class at UBC. I am a 4th year Arts student majoring in Psychology but really enjoy taking courses outside of my Major, which is the reason I’m taking Pop Culture in Latin America. I’m excited about this blog thing, we’ll see how it goes!
Jan
10
whats culture?
Comments Off on whats culture?
What is culture?
The first article in my opinion was difficult to understand. I am not sure but I think that for the author education is an important aspect of a culture, and in this article for the case of London. I think that the author says that if people develop their skills the society as a whole will be better. I agree with this point because I think everybody should have access to education.
I liked the second article better. I think that the author makes some good points when talking about the creation of the concept of “culture”. I understood that because nowadays because of the global world boundaries are disappearing and we as the people of the society are creating mental schemas to separate the self and the other. I think that years ago when people did not travel as they do now there was not a necessity to define all the aspects that make a culture unique. Nowadays, this has changed because now people need to feel identify to others by sharing practices and believes. When differencing between the self and the other some other issues get involved such as the binaries of what is “normal” and what is “different”. For example, when one compares his/her culture with a different one he or she will see his/her customs as “normal” and the others as “different” or “exotic”.
I think that even though each society shares values and costumes it has also special aspects within it that is why it is not good to generalize all the different cultures. I think that the author in one part of the article explains that it is easier for people to talk about another society by using the word culture because it simplifies that society to general aspects of it.
I liked the second article because the author explains that we should critically see other cultures and to understand that each culture has different aspects and that might seem very simple or different but that is not a reason to see those aspects as less important.
Jan
10
Introduction
Comments Off on Introduction
Hello!
My name is Emily and I am a third year student at UBC and am from the San Francisco bay area. I am studying sociology and anthropology, and am regionally very interested in learning more about Latin America. I took a class with Jon last semester and really enjoyed it and his funny banter, of for that, I am back for more. I look forward to getting to know everyone! See you in class.
Emily
Jan
10
Hello classmates
Comments Off on Hello classmates
Hello classmates!
