Blog #2: The Value of Two Stories, Borders, and Ceremonies
Write a summary of three significant points that you find most interesting in the final chapter of If This is Your Land, Where are Your Stories?
1. The Value of Two Stories
One possible answer to the overlying question of “If this is your land, where are your stories?” is as follows: one story regards a “chronicle of events, how we came to be here” and another points to a “ceremony of belief, why we belong here” (Chamberlin 227).
By mentioning these stories that often exist in a dichotomy, Chamberlin is expressing that neither of these are wrong! Both are true, and should be used in collaboration in order to understand the world, rather than comparing them to each other and inevitably having to dismiss one. In other words, these so-called “contradictory truths” (Chamberlin 221) do not need to be viewed as such, and can simply be seen as two stories.
While reading this particular section, the first thought that came to my mind was about the notion of faith and reason articulated by St. Thomas Aquinas. He talks about how reason is our knowledge through rationale and experience, whereas faith is our knowledge through God’s divine revelation; both of these should be harmonious with each other as they are both ways of knowing the truth. In a way, Aquinas was arguing that reason and faith are both two stories that should work together in understanding the world, just like how Chamberlin stated.
2. The Value of Borders
Chamberlin also emphasizes that we should recognize the border and cherish the strangeness and contradiction that essentially comes along with it. Both crossing the border and not getting to it, are wrong; the former attacks strangeness, whereas the latter is avoiding it (223). Staying at the border is a good place to be and is the “beginning of moving beyond Them and Us” (223).
Chamberlin has so eloquently explained that humans should accept and celebrate the differences that others have. As humans of one particular society or sub-culture(s), we often look at outsiders and note that they are weird, inferior, and that their way of life and all that it encompasses, contradicts our own. To get rid of Us vs Them categories, it is crucial for humans to value cultural diversity and to be at the border (or as Dr. Paterson prefers, intersection) where people from all walks of life can meet and appreciate one another.
3. The Value of Ceremonies
Chamberlin mentions how the most significant ceremonies are our mutual contracts with one another, that all basically determine “how each of Us will be engaged with Them” (226). Using the metaphor of table manners, Chamberlin explains how although such parties may not agree with each other and thus do not want to have dinner together, they still “have table manners” and once they do inevitably come to the table, they are bound to the ceremony in belief (226-227). In other words, ceremonies are valuable because they put everyone on common ground – people may not accept or believe particular things, but once they are in the ceremony, they are respectful and recognize the importance of it on people’s hearts and minds.
I immediately thought of the Paris Agreement, where approximately 194 states signed an agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in order to keep a global temperature below 2 degrees Celsius. All of these 194 states and its leaders do not all get along with each other, nor do they want to “have dinner together.” Despite this, they all agreed to combat climate change and were bound to the ceremony of the Paris Agreement, putting them all on the common, global ground that we call earth.
Clearly, multiple stories, borders, and ceremonies are seen to be valuable in a variety of contexts across time. My question for my readers then, is: if you were to summarize the main points from Chamberlin’s last chapter, would you also group them in this way? I would love to have your insight!
Works Cited
Chamberlin, J. Edward. If This is Your Land, Where are Your Stories? Finding Common Ground. Toronto: Vintage Canada, 2004. Print.
Floyd, Shawn. “Aquinas: Philosophical Theology.” Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, https://www.iep.utm.edu/aq-ph-th/#SH3c. Accessed 17 January 2019.
Image of people holding hands around the earth. From “Benefits of Diversity: Why is it important to respect other cultures.” http://mavcc.org/importance-of-respecting-other-cultures-and-beliefs/. Accessed 17 January 2019.
United Nations Climate Change. “The Paris Agreement.” United Nations Climate Change, https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement. Accessed 17 January 2019.
Hi Simran,
Choosing the three points—The Value of Two Stories, The Value of Borders, and The Value of Ceremonies—are a perfect combination because they are interrelated. In The Value of Two Stories, Chamberline also talks about how one can believe something is true and untrue simultaneously. During this section, I couldn’t help but reflect on Orwellian Doublethink. “The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them…To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed,” (George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four). The ideas stay the same, but with a slightly negative undertone.
This brings me to the next point about the value of borders or intersections. While the idea is positive and inherently unprejudiced, do you think it might be too utopian and unrealistic? The documentary, Flight From Death, showcases the conflicts that arise from different beliefs. While it is a nice idea to think that we can accept everyone’s beliefs, what happens when those beliefs challenge how you cope with life? Many humans suffer from existential dread, anxiety that causes one to seek ways to cope with death. Of course, one of these ways is through religion. When people dismantle and contradict belief systems than it inevitably causes conflict.
Chamberline seems to believe that one solution to this is through ceremonies. As you say, “In other words, ceremonies are valuable because they put everyone on common ground – people may not accept or believe particular things, but once they are in the ceremony, they are respectful and recognize the importance of it on people’s hearts and minds. You go on to use the great example of the Paris Agreement. And while it is true that many different countries and cultures came to an agreement, the actual terms agreed upon have not been followed, and some were rather elusive. It seems that the ceremony brings people together, but it is soon forgotten.
http://changingminds.org/explanations/belief/doublethink.htm
Hi Nolan,
Thanks for the wonderful comment! It is great to see other pieces of literature that reflect and have their own insights about a broader underlying notion.
Regarding your comment on borders/intersections, I definitely agree with you that, while the idea is great in theory, in practicality, it is unrealistic. I will have to watch that documentary soon – it sounds very insightful and interesting! At my workplace, one of the questions that we ask potential volunteers during their interviews is for them to tell us about an experience that they have had where their belief system has been challenged or contradicted. With the responses that I have seen, there is always a sense of anxiety and discomfort in tolerating distinct belief systems, to the point where it can even serve as an existential crisis. However, living in the world that we are in today, I am a strong believer that over time, people have the capability to overcome these challenges and to tolerate (maybe even accept) the existence of differing belief systems.
I agree with you regarding the Paris Agreement – it is another example of how things sound great in theory, but in reality, do not work as planned.
Hello Simran,
I thoroughly enjoyed reading your blog this week. In the first section of your post in which you discuss the value of two stories, you highlight the connection between St. Thomas Aquinas and Chamberlin and how they both acknowledge the fact that reason and faith are two stories that work together cohesively to help us to better understand the world around us. In your opinion, how do reason and faith work together? For me, the most thought provoking statement that you made was the fact that borders have the power to bring us together, although it may seem as though they push us further apart. I believe that if we aim to look at the world with a curious lens, then we will greatly benefit from learning from other people’s stories. In addition to stories, as you mentioned, ceremonies allow us to be put on an equal playing field because we are experiencing the same cultural event and putting our differences and or beliefs aside in the process. Having table manners is a great way to look at putting our differences aside, the Paris Agreement being a great example of this. Other examples that I can think of include the G-7 Summits. I am curious to know your thoughts – what other ways do you think that we can learn from one another other than through storytelling?
Hi Alexandra,
Thank you for your comment! I immediately thought of the reason and faith example because although not being Catholic myself, I have been in a Catholic school for 12 years of my life. In what I have learned in specific classes, there are ways to see reason and faith go hand in hand together. For example, Galileo Galilei, a prominent Italian engineer, astronomer, and physicist who is most famously known for his theory on heliocentrism, was quite obviously, very dedicated to the sciences. Simultaneously, he was a devout Roman Catholic. In many of his works, he incorporated science and religion (aka reason and faith) to explain the same concepts.
The G-7 Summit is another great example of Chamberlain’s theory of the ceremony!
Although storytelling is a great method, as an anthropology student, one way to learn from one another is through observing others’ cultures. Our cultures are so diverse and rich, and while it is necessary to have an associated commentary to ensure that you aren’t misinterpreting the culture and its practices, things like cultural artifacts and customs tell us a great deal about others.
Hi Simran,
Great points and examples in your blog! Your 3rd point got me thinking. You mention the Paris Agreement as an example of a “ceremony” – a social contract that parties mutually agree too. With the Trump administration and the US in the process of leaving the Paris agreement now from his denial of climate change and his own political motives, it makes the contract broken. Like the Paris Agreement, ceremonies are not legally binding and are therefore not subject to legal discipline. If a party is okay with the social backlash from not following ceremony rules, then they are free to do so technically. I think table manners is a great way to look at the situation but people often have their own agendas so the respect for ceremonies is not always there. As Nolan mentioned earlier, maybe the belief of mutual respect is too utopian from Chamberlin’s definition? I do agree with the basis of the definition with the “table manners” metaphor, I just think there are larger political motives and issues which can make this metaphor weak. Do you have any thoughts about this? agree or disagree with my thinking?
Cheers,
Kynan
I agree with you and, personally, find it very generous to refer to the signing of the Paris agreement as ceremony (or perhaps I find it insulting to the ceremonies I take part in).
What is ceremony if it doesn’t transcend the walls of ceremony itself? If we are not participating with the intention of remaining in remembrance of that which we celebrate? It’s hard for me to believe that many of the nations signing onto the Paris agreement had the full intention of respecting it- very much because many of the nations, Canada included, are failing to do so.
Ceremony, to me, is an opportunity for embodiment of all that we know and all that we are. To live in ceremony is to live in remembrance. To live in embodiment of our beliefs, stories, ideas, faith.
Hi Georgia,
Thank you for your comment! I agree with you, in that intention is also something that we need to consider in relation to the category of ceremony. The reason why I thought of the Paris Agreement is because Chamberlain gives a similar example in his book, but I appreciate your line of thinking – it has broadened my perspective on this topic and has made me aware of the more socially significant side and value of the ceremony, so thank you!
Hi Kynan,
Thanks for your kind words and for your comment!
I completely agree with you. As I mentioned above in my response to Nolan’s comment, the Paris Agreement, although a great example of a ceremony in terms of theory, is not the best example in terms of reality. I think this just goes to show that there are further complications and both internal and external forces that can easily break the so-called covenant of the theory. To answer your question, the metaphor is definitely weak when seen in relation to practicality, but in an utopian sense, definitely works.
Hey there! great blog post. I really appreciate how you discussed the section about ceremony, and that common humanity that is shared with people of diverse backgrounds. This concept is really exciting to talk about because the concept of “ceremony” can be transposed in so many different ways. I found your example of the Paris agreement really instrumental in portraying this. It makes me think beyond my own small scale understanding of ceremony. Thanks for sharing!
Lexi
Hi Lexi,
Thanks so much for your comment and for all that you articulated! I am glad that my thoughts have impacted you in that way 🙂
Hello Simran
This is a beautifully written blog post.
The third section, like the other commenters also had me thinking.
The Paris Agreement is quite a romantic example to make and it was an example of countries of the world coming together. However, I find it difficult to want to use the same analogy simply due to the politics of such a large ceremony. Much of what the agreement entails is in my opinion quite hollow. Political leaders used the ceremony to posture themselves on the world stage, to meet with other diplomats in a self serving manner. As Kynan pointed out, leaders could chose to follow the guidelines or not which makes it a difficult ceremony to mirror. For fear of sounding too cynical, I would hope that a ceremony that involves the indigenous people would be one that is far more binding, cooperative, less political and more sympathetic.
thanks
MM
Hi Maxwell,
Thank you so much! I think that using the Paris Agreement as an example of a ceremony is romantic as you have so greatly articulated. Romantic would probably be the best word for it, and adds to the further discussion that I have contributed to in the comments above. I agree that it is important to note how the ceremony itself is used to elevate positions or to expand one’s global presence. Perhaps the ceremony can be seen as a tool in certain contexts then?
I would definitely also hope for a ceremony involving Indigenous people to be as close as possible to Chamberlain’s initial definition.