Critique of Essentialist Conceptions of Culture

Lisää tämän kaltaisia

Success criteria for feedback to be effective and promote student understanding

luonut Janice Leung

English video

luonut Diego Soutto

HOW DOES DIALOGUE EMPOWER US TO LIVE BY THE GOLDEN RULE

luonut Emily Ferreira

THE MANAGEMENT AND ISSUES OF CULTURAL DIVERSITY IN TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY INDUSTRY

luonut wannur nazihah

Critique of Essentialist Conceptions of Culture

hooks' mentions the idea of "struggle of memory against forgetting" while Said quotes Gramsci and speaks of history leaving an infinite number of marks or traces. They both seem to speak in terms of moving forward transformatively as the past informs the present. Said explains this "task of interpretation" as we seek to understand our own history in terms of other people's history. So, in order to truly understand ourselves, we must understand those around us collectively. Said's idea of writing an inventory of one's history in terms of understanding yourself in relation to others and vice versa stood out most to me. Recently I have found myself continuously trying to make changes within myself in order to effectively lead the teachers I worked with. But, I think at some point adjustments I made were not necessarily transformative for the better. I became someone I'm not. My actions may have been in line with the expectations of my immediate supervisors, however, they were just acts or performances that were expected of someone in that leadership position. When Butler speaks of repeated performative acts, is it possible to continue to repeat the acts without believing in them? Without the belief in the act, then are those actions really part of your identity? ~Eloise

Jahanbagaloo's interview on Marginality refers to the phenomenon of the marginal person becoming the mainstream person. bell hooks rails against this process, at least as the way it is usually currently understood. Edward Said embodies the marginal person who becomes mainstream. Yes, he is from Palestine, however, he attended elite English schools and eventually moved to America. He represents his experiences as an "oriental"; however, he is most definitely in the margins due to his other experiences. This being in the margin allows the "other" to transcend into the dominant culture and leave a mark on it. This is most definitely a position of power, but it is also a position of great discomfort for the marginal person, as bell hooks describes. I think we see a lot of that cultural friction as the margins rub together and individuals decide how much to integrate without subsuming. Integration could be considered a dirty word by some in this context, however, if you believe in the reflexivity of cultural interactions, it is impossible for the cultures not to change each other through their interaction. I will offer one criticism of Edward Said. He remarks with disbelief upon journalists contacting him after Oklahoma City to get his comments on Muslim terrorists. While, of course, he is absolutely right about the jumping to conclusions that occurred there, I don't find it unbelievable or out of line that journalists would contact a well respected writer on Islamic culture for a comment. Wouldn't it be more disconcerting if they didn't? Sarah

My big takeaway is the idea that intercultural attitudes are based on cross marginal dialogue. Being in the margin is a way of viewing the “self”, however you are continually negotiating with the center, or “other, including those from other marginal positions. By being aware of the margins and shared human experience, we create a space of understanding and pluralism that involves a merging of cultures. “The recognition of the truth of pluralism necessitates that recognition of the need for diversity”. (Jahanbegloo, 2012, p.740) Cultural pluralism opens the door and makes room for empathy while pushing out judgments based in old fashioned thinking. Our empathy translates as being responsive to, or having a responsibility for, the “other” in society. “True freedom is not merely the freedom to do what one desires, but the ability to ensure that what one chooses is the result of a sense of duty and human solidarity”. (Jahanbegloo, 2012, p.742) As we partake in conversations and dialogue beyond our boundaries, we unselfishly begin to see the world in a more holistic light that include diverse ideas of culture. bel hooks argues that while we are taking on the common shared human experiences of “other”, we do not have to let go of “self”. I related her view of leaving home and venturing out into the world as leaving “self” and venturing into “other”. She calls radical openness (hooks, p.148) the spaces we create by embracing “other” yet holding on to “self”. As we understand the importance of living in both the margin and the center, there is a sense of power for those who are able to navigate in both cultures. However, maintaining marginality is difficult because it is not the widely popular option. It is easier to cast away the “other” and just live with “self”, but this goes against radical possibilities and openness. As the “self” expands to include “other”, it involves political and social structures that subject us to gender roles legitimized through ritual. Gender norms originate within the family and are enforced through certain familial modes of punishment and reward (Butler, 1988). So then, gender roles and norms are further based in the cultural margins or in the cultural center. - Nichelle

I love the concept of “constructive marginalization, an effort to overcome the traditional dichotomy between center and margin”(Jahanbegloo, p.733), which is rejecting the essentialist view of ‘marginality’; moreover, “Choosing the margin”(hooks) and “living as a marginal and celebrating marginality”(Jahanbegloo, p.736) are possible because of “value-pluralism” (Jahanbegloo, p.738). I have always thought about “seemingly good” and “authentically good”, and I think these are related to value-pluralism. We are always affected the “public opinion” (p.738), I would call it “seemingly good”, so Arendt says “No man can be sovereign”. However, we still have room for freedom(Arendt’s) to construct our own marginalities, I would call it “authentically good”; for example, living life having no other goal than living among others”, like Jahanbegloo says (p.737). Q) Is it possible to embrace the concept of ‘constructive marginalization’ in schooling? -Soojeong

Elisabeth Pope - I found this week’s articles to be interesting both from my own perspective but also considering the philosopher I have chosen: Katherine Hayles. I would like to think that my philosopher would agree with me that we are subject to our internal programming first and foremost-including the facet of our physiology/psychology we call gender. I don’t doubt for a minute that society and culture thrusts gender expectations on us but I can help but find that fact secondary to the biomolecules (hormones and neurotransmitters) that ultimately direct everything through the motherboard that is the brain. I think the key to the sexuality issues that Butler discusses are likely rooted in early embryological development, we just don’t know it and instead point to what we can see. And the performances of gender, the stereotypes, and the expectations are easily seen. The ideas discussed regarding marginality in the Jahanabegloo and Hook articles made me think of the viewpoint of marginalized persons as being very broad by necessity. I remember last weeks reading discussing the “double vision” of the immigrant. When one is on the margin, one can see the content as well as the edges so to speak. Marginalized people are perhaps better positioned to view both their own as well as someone else’s reality. I draw on my own feeling of being marginalized as a woman. Does that make me better able to see the male perspective? I can guess but I doubt that I could ever be sure. I can’t imagine how to collect empirical evidence for myself for something so abstract yet so concrete in my experiences. My questions are: how do we quantify marginalization and how can we ever hope to truly see from someone else’s viewpoint in a sincere and meaningful way?

The term “Constructive Marginality” resonates with my background because I am from a multicultural environment with over 160 million people with more than 450 languages. The multilingual nature of Nigeria constitutes several challenges which Jahanbelogoo et al recognizes and discusses in the article. Some minority ethnic groups in Nigeria are always suspicious of any move to promote or introduce any policy promoting a language or culture that is not theirs because of the fear of domination. This set of people fails to realize that almost all nations of the world are either bilingual or multilingual. With one language or culture dominating or is the preferred. The thrust of this matter is- how can multilingual nature be seen as an advantage and maximize to the fullest. A view shared by Agbedo (2013) when he argues that all nations are multilingual. However, the deciding factor and essential differences of multilingualism lies in the “disposition of these intrinsically multilingual nations to manage these centrifugal and centripetal forces in a manner that douses the flaming embers of centrifugal force on one hand and entrench the centripetal force that make for national identity on the other”. Jahanbelogoo et al suggest that learning to gain access to another culture afford the opportunity to gain access to a richer and more refined sense of self. This implies that self-awareness and self-definition can undergo a recursive process which promotes better understanding and development. I believe this represents one of the essences of living a “desirable life” As suggested by the author, overcoming “Constructive Marginality represents striking the balance between two entities which are although different but are interwoven. Consequently, the act of balancing these differing approaches needs a hermeneutical understanding of certain traditions and an open mindedness that acknowledges learning from another culture as an asset and not a liability. This leads to the question of the day, how receptiveness to differing culture can be taught without the fear of dominance or relegation of the minority group. Adepeju

I’ve participated in discussions about marginalization, but in those discussions it was only seen as a negative. As I read Jahanbegloo’s comments about Park’s concept of marginalization I could see that it is this conceptualization that I have discussed. I agree with Jahanbegloo that there is more to this state than Park includes. Jahanbegloo’s constructive marginalism takes the state of in-between in which the marginalized live and presents it as a positive position. He seems to say that being able to live in multiple cultures without being permanently fixed to one allows for freedom and should be celebrated. He hinted that the intercultural marginal could one day become the norm. I like the way he presented this thought later in the article, ‘‘many marginalities, one humanity” (p734). Our society is becoming more multicultural. People move to new countries, bringing their culture with them. The internet, phones, and the ease of international travel all facilitate the sharing of cultures. I believe those who are part of more than one culture have an advantage in that they can operate successfully in two different worlds. How can those living in the margins move to a place of constructive marginalism? Can the path to constructive marginalism be taught? I noticed that bell hooks also finds positive elements related to living in the margins, and her perspective seems to be similar to that of Jahanbegloo. She too advocates celebrating your culture even if you are an Other who is not a member of the dominant culture. This reminds me of many of my students who are either immigrants or are being raised by immigrants. These students are not a part of the dominant culture, and even their language differs from what is dominant in this country. They are asked to learn the dominant language and assimilate to the dominate way of doing things, so they can be successful in their education. Yet they must retain their own language and culture or risk not being able to communicate with some members of their family who cannot speak English. Sadly many of these students lose their home language over time. Students in this situation seem to exemplify what Bhabha describes as unhomed. They do not fit in the mainstream and they no longer fit at home. I think hooks has felt like this, a

I don't think that Butler speaks so clearly about margins as hooks does, but I do think it is interesting that they both come from a deeply personal space, and they both well articulate how dangerous it is to not conform to public expectations. I appreciate that hooks speaks about the deep experience of coming into academia from her own segregated background. In this article, Butler doesn't voice her own experiences, but she does speak to the dangers for those who don't conform to gender norms. - Fran I am also interested in the metaphor of the theatre that Butler uses. When describing the essence of theatre in introductory classes, it is often said that theatre consists of at least one person performing, and at least one person watching. In the sense that Butler speaks about gender as performance, I think we all shift in the role of actor and audience member. - Fran

After watching video “Said on Orientalism”, an unbiased opinion on past and current events of Israeli/Palestinian crisis is not possible. Palestinians have a legitimate claim to sovereignty of their homeland and western intervention has continued perpetuate the oppression of the indigenous. For over half of a century, the imposition of the Israeli State with the support of the western powers continues to exercise the illegal occupation of Palestine through violence and tyranny. This form of neo-colonialism as portrayed by many western media outlets provides non participants with a very different interpretation of the atrocities and horrors faced by Palestinians within and outside the boarders of the heavily disputed territory. While the plausibility of racism or religious discrimination could serve as a guise for many to view “Arabs” with contempt and disdain, a deeper investigation of this crisis may provide a different insight. This dispute is neither racism nor religious discrimination, colonialism the culprit that has taken the lives of so many. Ironically, as the Israeli State plays the role of the oppressor they may have learned to become the protagonist from being the oppressed. Perhaps the lessons learned from the Holocaust or in this case not learned, could provide the Israeli State with a shred of empathy for those who they unremittingly torture, murder and terrorize with impunity. The United States has intervened in many conflicts without the support of the American public at-large, however the defenders of free world remain silent during this five decade crisis. There are some who refer to the crisis in the Middle East as “Israeli Apartheid” (Orlowsky, 2009). Comparison of Israeli/Palestinian to Apartheid in South Africa is giving to much credit to the Israeli State. -EL

Jahanbegloo writes that “empathy is necessarily a matter of sharing life with others. It is the recognition of the fact that in the context of human life certain others are similar to us as humans though different from us as members of another tradition of thought.” He also writes that being in the margin or a member of the peripheral could be an advantage because members are flexible in their multicultural relations although not fully belonging to one. He suggests using marginality constructively by turning it into a cultural asset that helps us understand new universes and explore new horizons. Being open to others is true freedom because it is not busy protecting personal interests but is concerned with life as a moral project fueled by a sense of duty and human solidarity. The celebration of cultural diversity and philosophical border-crossing are the very prerequisites of a global civil society. The main aim of this global civil society is not a common search for truth, but the search for the basic human values that are shared by all cultures. hooks writes that the margin is a site of radical openness, possibility and resistance. What are the similarities and differences of these two perspectives? Should our aim as educators be to teach to use the margin constructively, as a site of resistance or to erase it? -Amy

I enjoyed reading Judith Butler’s article on Phenomonology and Feminist Theory mostly in part to the deep discussion on gender being viewed as historical, rather than natural. While reading this article, it made me wonder two things: In a gender sense, am I only the way I am because I do things differently (and the same) as others in my life? Also, if we are always “embodying possibilities”, do we ever become our true selves…or should we accept our true selves as works in progress? Even though I understand the fact that I’m always changing as a person, it is difficult to grasp the concept of continuously changing as a female. Once I thought about the person that I am and the female I have become, it does make sense that I am the way that I am due to outside comparisons. Whether I realize it or not, I choose to do things the same way and differently as others in my life, both male and female. Does that mean none of us are truly original? Is “originality” negated? The idea of margins was well-introduced by Jahanbegloo’s conversation, but I was truly able to understand the concept on a personal level after reading the text by Hooks. I could connect to Jahanbegloo and his colleagues as they discussed the notion of “constructive marginality” possessing both power and weakness at the same time. Although I am not an ethnic minority, I did leave a sheltered life in a one-race community in order to pursue knowledge and experience in a multicultural environment. I feel the sense of weakness and power at the same time throughout this new life. This connection became stronger once I read about Hooks’ spaces of radical openness: “Those of us who live, who ‘make it’, passionately holding on to aspects of that ‘downhome’ life we do not intend to lose while simultaneously seeking new knowledge and experience.” Is it wrong for me to feel that I am worthy of this connection? I do not come from a long line of suffering ancestors, and the ethnic struggle in my life is miniscule. However, I have always felt and continue to feel trapped in between two cultures: my family and society. Hooks said that she is located in the margin between imposed oppressive structures and a site of resistance with radical openness. Is it possible for privileged white people to be located in the margin? Do they deserve to place themselves in the same spot as people like Hooks? - Jessica Edwards

Chrystal Woodard – For this week’s reflection, I have chosen to focus in on the Hooks reading. I particularly agree with Hooks’ point about needing different types of language for specific situations. A wise woman once told me that to lead, you first have to be able to connect. In essence, you must learn to be a chameleon. It is important to understand the audience to whom you are speaking, and to be able to use language necessary for the situation. For example, when speaking at a convention, it is important to use proper English and enunciate your words. However, if you find yourself amongst uneducated individuals, you might use different wording, slang, and the like. Language serves to define who we are and where we fit in at any particular moment in time. In each situation, individuals must adapt their language and behavior to blend in and gain the trust of those around them. If the language used in a particular situation is deemed inappropriate, it can create distance and distrust.