What Came To My Mind As I Re-Read Again 'The Tapestry of Culture'

I read the book when I was in my Master Degree years ago. I forgot what edition I was reading, but the most recent one, its ninth edition is still a good way to start into Anthropology. Being an outsider to Anthropology, well it's not my major.....but still, I think.... reading this 'colorful book' (colorful in the sense of 'hyper-content of real cases portrayed in it) really gave me a somewhat a nostalgic kind of feeling of the old times when I was still at school learning the first stages of opening up my mind into Anthropology. 

 Okay, I’d rather say that upon reading the first 13 pages of chapter one, I was compelled to think of the movies I enjoyed. That is the way how I understood the content.  First, the role of anthropologists as mentioned in the chapter reminded me of Avatar; especially about how a botanist-anthropologist played by Sigourney Weaver weaved her way seamlessly into the life of Navi people in Pandora. Even she made a book about it. <In this case, the anthropologist has somewhat succeeded to be the ‘author’ of the society he/she investigates>. And that is what an anthropologist would have done—at least that is what I think. 

Second, when the chapter talks about the cultural rules (pg. 12) we, humans, have, but other animals do not, I could not help but to think of TLOTR (The Lord of the Ring) movie. It is said that human behavior is governed primarily by cultural rules, not by the need of immediate gratification. For instance, humans do not eat the minute they become hungry, rather they cook the food first. Animals, lions for instance, eat their prey after a successful hunt. 

This is what brought me to think of a particular scene in TLOTR. In the movie, there was a used-to-be hobbit/human(?) named Smeagol who turned into a Gollum—an animal-like creature—who liked to eat raw meat. He apparently forgot the fact that he used to cook food in his previous life as hobbit/human. When Frodo, his master, cooked the fish he gave him, he cried and yelled that he rather smashed and crushed it since it would be fresh and juicy. Well, I know that it is just a movie—a science fiction—but to some extent, it does have some traits about what separate human (Hobbit in TLOTR) and animal (creatures). In a rather ironic way, Gollum and Smeagol are the same entity (person?). <Enjoying movies and seeing the cultures portrayed in them are also ways to understand the real culture. I think it is also a good way to understand the terms or concepts that sometimes I find it hard to comprehend>.

That is what came to my mind upon reading this chapter.

Now, talking about serious stuffs, I find some notions that are worth-understanding: first, about the concept of cultural universals. Although humans posses different cultures, e.g. languages, we have fundamental similarities. Take my 4 year-old daughter for instance, she came to Korea a year ago without speaking a single Korean word, let alone sentence, she now mingles with other Korean kids being a bilingual. I wonder if this is what Chomsky meant by a theory of universal grammar which enables infants to cognitively learn the complexities of grammar (pg.13).

Now, I would like to comment on a notion about some members of society disagreeing to the analysis and the publication of information about their society as portrayed by the anthropologist (pg.2). In this case, I would like to mention a book written by a famous anthropologist, Clifford Geertz, who wrote ‘The Religion of Java’. Irrespective of the wittiness and elaborate portrayals, it is—still—considered as a bit controversial for (among) Javanese people, but surely it was and is still a mysteriously amazing book for non Javanese (other Indonesians from other ethnics, westerners, students in America, Europe, and other countries). I am a Javanese myself and happened to be a Moslem, too. So, reading this book gave me somewhat a mixed feeling. Rather than complaining about his (in)famous categorization of Javanese into three categories: santri ‘religious and devout person’,abangan ‘not so-religious(?)’, and priyayi (blue-blooded royal-like or like ‘yangban’ in Korea); I would rather say that in the 21st century, Geertz’s accounts should be seen as a classic rendition of what Javanese was all about in the 1960s or up to the late 90s.

 Most Javanese ( I say most because I am sure that some would blatantly or proudly and deliberately associate themselves with one of these) would hesitate or never consider themselves into one of those categories. Of course, I do think and acknowledge that there are abangan in Java, for sure. But I find it ridiculous at times. Even now, it is hard to find priyayis any more. Or wait, they may disguise themselves with some sort of positions so as to blur the term priyayi, oh well...who knows!!  Even, I never heard (or I’ve been oblivious) that the remaining Sultan in Jogjakarta wanted to be addressed as the priyayi. Then....?

So, upon reading this chapter, I confirm myself that culture indeed evolves and keeps changing. The Javanese people as the active agents have evolved and at the same time reworked and re-created their culture up to this 21st century. 

But then again…although I somewhat disagree to Clifford Geertz, as I read the first chapter of Tapestry of Culture, <pg.13>  I come to think of it, in this way:

 “Should the Javanese thank Clifford Geertz because he has uncovered/postulated the cultural rules that even the Javanese themselves may be unaware of?”

On What & How We Were Brought Up To..

I thought I had known enough. It all starts with something as widely-known as a shared knowledge about infants/toddlers/children up to age of two’s unquestionable intelligence and capability of picking up and learning their native or mother language.

However, I guess I may have been oblivious to the fact that along with it they also learn about their own ‘culture’. Of course, I have realized that language is a part of culture per se. But, the chapter sorts of re-confirming and re-affirming something that has been part of my personality as an individual. As a Javanese who grew up in bilingual environment, Javanese language and Indonesian, like most Javanese, I have been accustomed to ‘position’ myself as to when/where/how to speak and even how to smile in front of others. In this case, Javanese language has similarities to that of Korean in term of honorific, formal, and informal forms. On the other hand, Indonesian language does not possess, much less acknowledge hierarchical forms.  But, since I live in Korea, my being Indonesian has somewhat overshadowed my being Javanese. At times, I forgot that I am a Javanese, because in Korea I tend to regard myself as an Indonesian who should act/talk/behave /and thus…think like most Indonesian would do, not what a Javanese would do. It is simply different. That is why I said earlier that I “may have been oblivious”.

I also thought that most cultures in this world would surely teach universal values of what considered to be—at least—good and acceptable to most people, but as I read the chapter further,  the examples as elaborated in the chapter perturbed me. One example: how could ‘lying’ be one of the must-learn values in a certain society? But it does exist.

So, I have learned/re-confirmed myself again that humans in diverse cultures around the world have ‘created’ unique pathways through which their children, even as earlier as infants, get exposed to their native language, culture, as well as values and gender roles—which turned out to be inseparable that come along with them. In other words,  different cultures indeed emphasize different ways in ‘conveying’, ‘injecting’, and ‘ingraining’ values to their own people; even starting from infants during child-rearing practise. Through the so-called ‘enculturation’ process, we have learned about how Chinese children learn from their early age about the high value of ‘shaming’; how the Chillibuani children in the highlands of Peru learn about the need to ‘respect’ to humans, deities, and all forms of life; and how the Tzeltal-speaking Mayan children in Mexico learn from early age about the importance of ‘lying’.

The values of shaming, respect to others, and self-reliance are not-that-hard to comprehend, but lying?  But then, I could comprehend the context within which this value is based on in that particular culture. It is because in my culture I learned ‘how to smile’ in many occasions, even during the funeral.  Most Javanese would do that. Even if a wife has to welcome the guests and relatives coming to her deceased husband, she should to some extent show ‘smile’ on her face. It may look so unthinkable to non Javanese. Even to other ethnics in Indonesia, Javanese culture of showing ‘smile’ could be misinterpreted as bizarre. Me, myself, I was brought up to always ‘smile’ in all occasions even when the time is hard and life is hard. That is one of the things of what being ‘Javanese’ is all about: having acquired the culture of mesem ‘smiling’.  But, at the same time, I am an Indonesian who has to face and come into contact with friends and people from other ethnics and nationalities. I guess that was the child-rearing and the personality that I have become. But now that I am in Korea I just cannot smile as much as I used to like when I was still back home. Other wise, people would misjudge me. By realizing this, if I would do a fieldwork in Korea, it would be interestingly challenging for me.

I think I have to agree that one’s body expression that the people in a particular culture have learned—which ‘defines’ that culture—does not necessarily have a universal meaning.  

To give a ‘real story’ that Javanese’s smiling culture almost ruined bilateral ties between Indonesia and Australia, I would like to refer to the following site. This is mainly in Indonesian language, but some English part within the article is enough to give a portrayal of a ‘smile’ perceived differently in bilateral ties.  http://tika-sinaga.blogspot.kr/2012/02/budaya-senyum-dan-senyam-senyum-kita.html  Another article that I would like share is an article from the Hofstede Center. One quote “They will keep smiling and be polite, no matter how angry they are inside.” http://geert-hofstede.com/indonesia.html