Theory, Culture, and Representation II
Phoebe G. Lifton
Theory, Culture, and Representation
Response Paper
History is not objective
Those in power dictate history so when looking at what has been recorded from the past you have to look at that piece of knowledge objectively. Traditionally, history in India was recorded orally, through stories told by the elders in the family and by traditions that were passed down. Today, we hold written history to the esteem of being fact, and sometimes this is blind belief without question.
After studying South Indian history in my University, and talking to others in Bangalore I have come to find that even those who grew up in South India have learned very little about their native places history in comparison to what they know about the North. In my studies, I went to a historical site in South India to observe a living example of how change happened slowly to a temple without people even being aware of it. The architecture, the depiction of gods, how color is used, these are all indications of the slow transformation that has happened to the temple.
I visited the Sri Someshwara Swamy Temple in Bangalore, a living monument from the Chola period. There I saw how a historical site could be affected by those most powerful, in India that is either the politicians, policemen, or wealthy. Cement walls surround the temple; they were built by the following power, the Vijayanagara Empire, to protect it from Northern invaders. We can only know hints about this history from the Sangam literature, stories, texts, poems that recorded history about wars and kings of South India. But this is not the way people are taught about the past anymore. In the past the English colonizers who had particular interest in the history of where they were occupied, in the North, focused there. The area’s recorded past was detailed and is now more well known because of its history through the written methods developed by the English. Colonization brought a new way of recording history and their rule and development specifically in West Bengal lead to a more detailed version of what happened in the area through lasting ....[continued below]
Theory, Culture, and Representation
Response Paper
History is not objective
Those in power dictate history so when looking at what has been recorded from the past you have to look at that piece of knowledge objectively. Traditionally, history in India was recorded orally, through stories told by the elders in the family and by traditions that were passed down. Today, we hold written history to the esteem of being fact, and sometimes this is blind belief without question.
After studying South Indian history in my University, and talking to others in Bangalore I have come to find that even those who grew up in South India have learned very little about their native places history in comparison to what they know about the North. In my studies, I went to a historical site in South India to observe a living example of how change happened slowly to a temple without people even being aware of it. The architecture, the depiction of gods, how color is used, these are all indications of the slow transformation that has happened to the temple.
I visited the Sri Someshwara Swamy Temple in Bangalore, a living monument from the Chola period. There I saw how a historical site could be affected by those most powerful, in India that is either the politicians, policemen, or wealthy. Cement walls surround the temple; they were built by the following power, the Vijayanagara Empire, to protect it from Northern invaders. We can only know hints about this history from the Sangam literature, stories, texts, poems that recorded history about wars and kings of South India. But this is not the way people are taught about the past anymore. In the past the English colonizers who had particular interest in the history of where they were occupied, in the North, focused there. The area’s recorded past was detailed and is now more well known because of its history through the written methods developed by the English. Colonization brought a new way of recording history and their rule and development specifically in West Bengal lead to a more detailed version of what happened in the area through lasting ....[continued below]
belonged to the upper-middle class by Bangalore standards, so they must have all had a good education. So why isn’t there more emphasis on learning South Indian history in the education system here? Is it due to colonization and the switch to the western system of education? Or is it the fault of those who are in control of the content?
In India some of those in power are reported to be tampering with written history. In a conference about ‘The Rewriting of History: Intellectual Freedom and Contemporary Politics in South Asia', organized as a part of the International Conference of North African and Asian Scholars (ICANAS) recently held in Montreal, they discussed at length how some political authorities in India would like to protect a certain view of Hinduism in history. They talked about how in 1977 the political party Rashtriya Swyamsevak Sangh (RSS) the government of the Janata Party tried to withdraw the history books published by the National Council for Educational Research and Training (NCERT) because it did not agree with their view of Hinduism historically. They point out in the conference’s document recording that Sangh Parivar is said to have made initiatives in changing, “the content of education, the organization of a parallel school system and the control over cultural institutions.” These efforts have come slowly throughout time in India and that could be why they have been understandably un-questioned by its citizens. Historians however have noticed and meet such editing with strong resistance. An article published in 2006 in Frontline magazine, reports of the RSS attempting to rewrite school textbooks on Indian History and Hinduism in California. This shows how broad these efforts are to spread a certain view of history in the minds of the public.
History is not objective. So when looking at a historical record, we need to look at the source and then decipher what biases that source has to accurately interpretate it. Today we can see how some even written historical records are manipulated, how they may slowly change (or in the case of South Indian history be given less importance). This is noteworthy because the reader is then only given a one-sided account of what happened.
In India some of those in power are reported to be tampering with written history. In a conference about ‘The Rewriting of History: Intellectual Freedom and Contemporary Politics in South Asia', organized as a part of the International Conference of North African and Asian Scholars (ICANAS) recently held in Montreal, they discussed at length how some political authorities in India would like to protect a certain view of Hinduism in history. They talked about how in 1977 the political party Rashtriya Swyamsevak Sangh (RSS) the government of the Janata Party tried to withdraw the history books published by the National Council for Educational Research and Training (NCERT) because it did not agree with their view of Hinduism historically. They point out in the conference’s document recording that Sangh Parivar is said to have made initiatives in changing, “the content of education, the organization of a parallel school system and the control over cultural institutions.” These efforts have come slowly throughout time in India and that could be why they have been understandably un-questioned by its citizens. Historians however have noticed and meet such editing with strong resistance. An article published in 2006 in Frontline magazine, reports of the RSS attempting to rewrite school textbooks on Indian History and Hinduism in California. This shows how broad these efforts are to spread a certain view of history in the minds of the public.
History is not objective. So when looking at a historical record, we need to look at the source and then decipher what biases that source has to accurately interpretate it. Today we can see how some even written historical records are manipulated, how they may slowly change (or in the case of South Indian history be given less importance). This is noteworthy because the reader is then only given a one-sided account of what happened.
Phoebe G. Lifton
Theory, Culture, and Representation
Response paper to the movie Monsoon Wedding
Aditi and I
The movie Monsoon Wedding was produced in 2001. It’s a story of a family arranging the marriage of their daughter. It shows how these two families interact using characters that have certain representation of the time. It is a good example of the changing values of an urban middle class Indian family in the modern globalizing era. The movie shows an Indian family wrestling with the influence of western culture on the newer generation and how it sometimes clashes with traditional Indian values and the family structure. I will discuss the importance of certain values I see within Indian culture that appear in this film in comparison to my own western ones.
Out of 15 values: Individuality, Love, Loyalty, Success, Justice, Work Ethic, Honesty, Education/Knowledge, Freedom, Peace, Prosperity, Cooperation, Interpersonal Harmony, Devotion to Family, Social Acceptance, I have listed my top 5 in order of importance to me:
1. Freedom
2. Love
3. Individuality
4. Education/Knowledge
5. Justice
My top 5 have so much to do with how and where I grew up. Everyone attributes individuality with western culture but as well as my dominant culture my schooling and education had a lot to do with my answers. I went to a Waldorf school from Pre-Kindergarten to 12th grade. I spent 5 years of my life out of the influence of this school. The founder of the Waldorf School, Rudolph Steiner defines his mission as to create free individuals. My values come from here as well as from my family and my exceptionally liberal state and city I grew up in Portland, Oregon.
The character of Aditi Verma, bride to be, has a set of top 5 values that are different then mine. I have guessed them based on the indications from the movie:
1. Devotion to family
2. Interpersonal Harmony
3. Love
4. Social Acceptance
5. Cooperation
I picked these 5 because I saw how Aditi struggled with pleasing her family by getting married to the man they had chosen for her. She was cooperating with the decision because of her family and because this was what women are supposed to do in this society if she didn’t she wouldn’t be socially accepted. How she had a lot of personal turmoil due to her affair and her love for this man. And how in the end she fell in love with man she was arranged to marry.
I think being abroad there is a compromise of your values that happens if you want to be culturally sensitive and respectful. I don’t have all of the freedoms I have in my country to dress the way I want or say what I want. Especially as a woman, like Aditi, I am critiqued more by Indian society because of my sex. Aditi didn’t have the choice not to marry the man her family chose for her. While being abroad I am seen as many different things not associated with who I am as a person, compromising my individuality, but where I come from.
Another way that I compromise is in justice. The system is completely different here, something that my country would see and act as an injustice is handled differently in this country. I will take an example from the movie, when the cousin of the bride confesses to have been sexually abused by her uncle the family reacts without involving any authorities, which would be an important reaction to the situation in the US. Instead the father embarrasses the uncle in front of the entire family and shames him in doing it. This was harsh punishment enough for the uncle to learn his lesson and to sufficient reconciliation for the cousin.
Theory, Culture, and Representation
Response paper to the movie Monsoon Wedding
Aditi and I
The movie Monsoon Wedding was produced in 2001. It’s a story of a family arranging the marriage of their daughter. It shows how these two families interact using characters that have certain representation of the time. It is a good example of the changing values of an urban middle class Indian family in the modern globalizing era. The movie shows an Indian family wrestling with the influence of western culture on the newer generation and how it sometimes clashes with traditional Indian values and the family structure. I will discuss the importance of certain values I see within Indian culture that appear in this film in comparison to my own western ones.
Out of 15 values: Individuality, Love, Loyalty, Success, Justice, Work Ethic, Honesty, Education/Knowledge, Freedom, Peace, Prosperity, Cooperation, Interpersonal Harmony, Devotion to Family, Social Acceptance, I have listed my top 5 in order of importance to me:
1. Freedom
2. Love
3. Individuality
4. Education/Knowledge
5. Justice
My top 5 have so much to do with how and where I grew up. Everyone attributes individuality with western culture but as well as my dominant culture my schooling and education had a lot to do with my answers. I went to a Waldorf school from Pre-Kindergarten to 12th grade. I spent 5 years of my life out of the influence of this school. The founder of the Waldorf School, Rudolph Steiner defines his mission as to create free individuals. My values come from here as well as from my family and my exceptionally liberal state and city I grew up in Portland, Oregon.
The character of Aditi Verma, bride to be, has a set of top 5 values that are different then mine. I have guessed them based on the indications from the movie:
1. Devotion to family
2. Interpersonal Harmony
3. Love
4. Social Acceptance
5. Cooperation
I picked these 5 because I saw how Aditi struggled with pleasing her family by getting married to the man they had chosen for her. She was cooperating with the decision because of her family and because this was what women are supposed to do in this society if she didn’t she wouldn’t be socially accepted. How she had a lot of personal turmoil due to her affair and her love for this man. And how in the end she fell in love with man she was arranged to marry.
I think being abroad there is a compromise of your values that happens if you want to be culturally sensitive and respectful. I don’t have all of the freedoms I have in my country to dress the way I want or say what I want. Especially as a woman, like Aditi, I am critiqued more by Indian society because of my sex. Aditi didn’t have the choice not to marry the man her family chose for her. While being abroad I am seen as many different things not associated with who I am as a person, compromising my individuality, but where I come from.
Another way that I compromise is in justice. The system is completely different here, something that my country would see and act as an injustice is handled differently in this country. I will take an example from the movie, when the cousin of the bride confesses to have been sexually abused by her uncle the family reacts without involving any authorities, which would be an important reaction to the situation in the US. Instead the father embarrasses the uncle in front of the entire family and shames him in doing it. This was harsh punishment enough for the uncle to learn his lesson and to sufficient reconciliation for the cousin.
Phoebe G. Lifton
LFT to Kerala
Response paper
Stereotypes for Americans and Keralites
The Sunday Times picked 5 stereotypes of different women in India to analyze. I examine what the paper writes about the Nair women of Kerala and compare that to what I have experienced and noticed as an outsider to the culture. In doing this I would like to first announce my western feminist bias to show that my observations are not objective in their origin. I will focus mainly on the women from Kerala as I experienced them in my host family in Pallakad and others I encountered on my two-week visit there. I will also look at the image the media portrays of women. I will start with analyzing how I felt the stereotype of how an American should be determined how my family liked the other student and I.
Humans stereotype so that they can say they ‘understand’ and be at peace with each other. But what happens when you don’t fit into a stereotype? In my host family experience in Palakkad, Kerala I stayed with another student from my school. She defined everything that my host family knew as to what a foreigner should be like. She’s fair, tall, with light colored long hair, skinny, and is outgoing. I have heard people stereotype Americans saying they talk too loud and of course are wealthy. Our family could tell she was wealthy by the way she dressed; it showed in her expensive Indian jewelry and clothes. After getting to know her I found that she was wealthier then I and it showed in the way we both dressed.
This image of the westerner is commonly found in the English movies that our host family might have watched on TV or in ads in the newspapers, media perpetuates a similar image everywhere. It is generally the image portrayed by the media in the US also. I do not fit into this general stereotype because I am not skinny, I don’t have very fair skin, and at their house I was shy and not very loud or talkative. Small things added to my estranged-ness, like how my parents are divorced, I have a different nose piercing then the traditional Indian one that the other student has and there were no real signs of my wealth.
My family had a particular liking for her rather than me. It could be because she fulfilled that stereotype for them in their minds. That she was easy to figure out, not different and therefore likable. They were able to be ‘at peace with who she was’ (or looked to be) because that is what they expected. I had expectations myself of who the women of Kerala were supposed to be like from what I was told from other Indians in Bangalore. I expected Kerala women to be strong, from my perspective that means independent and to somehow defied patriarchy.
In the Newspaper article on “Kerala’s Nairs, League of extraordinary women”, they describe a similar stereotype saying that the common perception is that these women are strong-willed and independent. Historically this may be true but like the article points out and my experience in a home stay in Pallakad I found the women to be confined to the house, practicing dowry, and even the tradition of giving the property to the wife fading. In a meeting with a woman author in Kerala I saw how educated women are becoming journalists, working in organizations, and sometimes owning their businesses. But what I was disappointed with was how the culture of treating a women and the patriarchal system was present and moving farther from the space where the Nair women prospered.
Everyone in Kerala I found likes to argue and discuss, especially about politics. And unfortunately as the article in the Times points out that “sociologists say the Nair women failed to take advantage of her historical rights by using high literacy levels and traditional authority to translate into political participation.” Maybe as modernization reaches outside of the urban spaces in Bangalore the women of Kerala will return back to their natural matriarchal ancestors.
LFT to Kerala
Response paper
Stereotypes for Americans and Keralites
The Sunday Times picked 5 stereotypes of different women in India to analyze. I examine what the paper writes about the Nair women of Kerala and compare that to what I have experienced and noticed as an outsider to the culture. In doing this I would like to first announce my western feminist bias to show that my observations are not objective in their origin. I will focus mainly on the women from Kerala as I experienced them in my host family in Pallakad and others I encountered on my two-week visit there. I will also look at the image the media portrays of women. I will start with analyzing how I felt the stereotype of how an American should be determined how my family liked the other student and I.
Humans stereotype so that they can say they ‘understand’ and be at peace with each other. But what happens when you don’t fit into a stereotype? In my host family experience in Palakkad, Kerala I stayed with another student from my school. She defined everything that my host family knew as to what a foreigner should be like. She’s fair, tall, with light colored long hair, skinny, and is outgoing. I have heard people stereotype Americans saying they talk too loud and of course are wealthy. Our family could tell she was wealthy by the way she dressed; it showed in her expensive Indian jewelry and clothes. After getting to know her I found that she was wealthier then I and it showed in the way we both dressed.
This image of the westerner is commonly found in the English movies that our host family might have watched on TV or in ads in the newspapers, media perpetuates a similar image everywhere. It is generally the image portrayed by the media in the US also. I do not fit into this general stereotype because I am not skinny, I don’t have very fair skin, and at their house I was shy and not very loud or talkative. Small things added to my estranged-ness, like how my parents are divorced, I have a different nose piercing then the traditional Indian one that the other student has and there were no real signs of my wealth.
My family had a particular liking for her rather than me. It could be because she fulfilled that stereotype for them in their minds. That she was easy to figure out, not different and therefore likable. They were able to be ‘at peace with who she was’ (or looked to be) because that is what they expected. I had expectations myself of who the women of Kerala were supposed to be like from what I was told from other Indians in Bangalore. I expected Kerala women to be strong, from my perspective that means independent and to somehow defied patriarchy.
In the Newspaper article on “Kerala’s Nairs, League of extraordinary women”, they describe a similar stereotype saying that the common perception is that these women are strong-willed and independent. Historically this may be true but like the article points out and my experience in a home stay in Pallakad I found the women to be confined to the house, practicing dowry, and even the tradition of giving the property to the wife fading. In a meeting with a woman author in Kerala I saw how educated women are becoming journalists, working in organizations, and sometimes owning their businesses. But what I was disappointed with was how the culture of treating a women and the patriarchal system was present and moving farther from the space where the Nair women prospered.
Everyone in Kerala I found likes to argue and discuss, especially about politics. And unfortunately as the article in the Times points out that “sociologists say the Nair women failed to take advantage of her historical rights by using high literacy levels and traditional authority to translate into political participation.” Maybe as modernization reaches outside of the urban spaces in Bangalore the women of Kerala will return back to their natural matriarchal ancestors.
Phoebe G. Lifton
Theory, Culture and Representation
Response Paper
Vedanta
When talking about Vedanta with Dr. R. Ganesh he explains the philosophy as the answer to our questions of existence but not as an organized religion does. The subject of our discussion was non-dualistic Vedanta and its relevance. The difference between organized religion and Vedanta is that religion defines your existence and Vedanta is the conclusive and terminal aspect of it. There are 3 aspects to Vedanta; one is that the world and the universe at large are relative, that the world in reality is many folded, and everything is one in spirit.
Dr. R. Ganesh is an unassuming, modestly dressed man with quiet posture and funny, curly hair that sticks out in all directions. He talked with a bit of amusement in his voice about how our highest value is the forgetfulness of everything. He lead our discourse on Vedanta as little sayings and stories when explaining consciousness and how it has always been there but it is only recognized when it is named he says, “even in the dark we can see the sky when the lights are all turned off”, or about how we do not question our existence like, “when the sun rises in the east do we recognize the direction or that it rose”.
Our discussion never came to Hinduism and the Vedas in which Hinduism is said to be born from. Dr. R. Ganesh’s emphasis was that Vedanta can be for everyone but historically the Vedas were only accessible to the Brahmins or highly educated people. The Vedas were written as a text for everyone but with the appropriation of the caste system this has excluded the very people it was intended for.
Theory, Culture and Representation
Response Paper
Vedanta
When talking about Vedanta with Dr. R. Ganesh he explains the philosophy as the answer to our questions of existence but not as an organized religion does. The subject of our discussion was non-dualistic Vedanta and its relevance. The difference between organized religion and Vedanta is that religion defines your existence and Vedanta is the conclusive and terminal aspect of it. There are 3 aspects to Vedanta; one is that the world and the universe at large are relative, that the world in reality is many folded, and everything is one in spirit.
Dr. R. Ganesh is an unassuming, modestly dressed man with quiet posture and funny, curly hair that sticks out in all directions. He talked with a bit of amusement in his voice about how our highest value is the forgetfulness of everything. He lead our discourse on Vedanta as little sayings and stories when explaining consciousness and how it has always been there but it is only recognized when it is named he says, “even in the dark we can see the sky when the lights are all turned off”, or about how we do not question our existence like, “when the sun rises in the east do we recognize the direction or that it rose”.
Our discussion never came to Hinduism and the Vedas in which Hinduism is said to be born from. Dr. R. Ganesh’s emphasis was that Vedanta can be for everyone but historically the Vedas were only accessible to the Brahmins or highly educated people. The Vedas were written as a text for everyone but with the appropriation of the caste system this has excluded the very people it was intended for.
Phoebe G. Lifton
Theory, Culture, and Representation
Negotiating the Culture from within
Home Stay Experience in Palakkad district, Kerala
I remember a moment while eating a meal at my host family’s house that I think best ethnographically and periodically describes where they are with negotiating traditional Indian culture and the influence of modernity.
Only two people in the nine or so member joint family I lived with spoke English. Those two were studying in University, the girl Nimisha was in medical school and the boy Akesh for computer technology. Nimisha sat across from us in the small rectangle room attached to the house that the mother, Nimasha’s aunt would cook in. they watched us eat making sure to serve more or everything whenever we had made any sort of progress on our plates of food. We went over all the Malayalams words we had learned Nani (thank you), Chut (hot) and the one I never pronounced right Nanaytundu (tastes great). We got used to using the word ‘super’ for describing good tasting things. This was the main English word the mother used, she had probably learned it from TV. Chewing and chatting I mentioned we wouldn’t be home for lunch the next day but for dinner, which led me to ask the word for lunch in Malayalam. Nimisha couldn’t remember the word even though it was her native tongue and asked her mother for the answer. But they never found an answer, not being able to remember what it was. They replied after a while that they call it, “lunch”. I wondered how many words have been replaced by English one’s and where the forgotten ones went, or if those old words would ever have a chance of being introduced back into common use. I questioned whether this meant that maybe they never ate lunch and therefore never had a word for it in their language. I think 3 meals a day in India is something that comes with wealth so maybe traditionally a meal in the middle of the day was not taken and therefore had no name. Or was it globalization that influenced my family. Through the tv they learn about American culture and the English vocabulary. I have been told that language is the carrier of culture so this family
Notes on individuals in the family
Mother
- Is in her 30’s, when I asked what she does while we are gone my host brother said she stays at home all day and watches tv, does laundry, cooks, and cleans. She never went to University and from my outside observations she is at least 10 years younger then her husband.
Father
- I didn’t see him most of the days and when I did he didn’t speak very much. I didn’t notice a lot of interaction happening with him and his wife, he was never home when we came home at night. When he did speak to us he asked if we liked King Fisher beer. He works in finance and eats non-veg.
Theory, Culture, and Representation
Negotiating the Culture from within
Home Stay Experience in Palakkad district, Kerala
I remember a moment while eating a meal at my host family’s house that I think best ethnographically and periodically describes where they are with negotiating traditional Indian culture and the influence of modernity.
Only two people in the nine or so member joint family I lived with spoke English. Those two were studying in University, the girl Nimisha was in medical school and the boy Akesh for computer technology. Nimisha sat across from us in the small rectangle room attached to the house that the mother, Nimasha’s aunt would cook in. they watched us eat making sure to serve more or everything whenever we had made any sort of progress on our plates of food. We went over all the Malayalams words we had learned Nani (thank you), Chut (hot) and the one I never pronounced right Nanaytundu (tastes great). We got used to using the word ‘super’ for describing good tasting things. This was the main English word the mother used, she had probably learned it from TV. Chewing and chatting I mentioned we wouldn’t be home for lunch the next day but for dinner, which led me to ask the word for lunch in Malayalam. Nimisha couldn’t remember the word even though it was her native tongue and asked her mother for the answer. But they never found an answer, not being able to remember what it was. They replied after a while that they call it, “lunch”. I wondered how many words have been replaced by English one’s and where the forgotten ones went, or if those old words would ever have a chance of being introduced back into common use. I questioned whether this meant that maybe they never ate lunch and therefore never had a word for it in their language. I think 3 meals a day in India is something that comes with wealth so maybe traditionally a meal in the middle of the day was not taken and therefore had no name. Or was it globalization that influenced my family. Through the tv they learn about American culture and the English vocabulary. I have been told that language is the carrier of culture so this family
Notes on individuals in the family
Mother
- Is in her 30’s, when I asked what she does while we are gone my host brother said she stays at home all day and watches tv, does laundry, cooks, and cleans. She never went to University and from my outside observations she is at least 10 years younger then her husband.
Father
- I didn’t see him most of the days and when I did he didn’t speak very much. I didn’t notice a lot of interaction happening with him and his wife, he was never home when we came home at night. When he did speak to us he asked if we liked King Fisher beer. He works in finance and eats non-veg.
Our family has more women then men and besides the son who translated most of the time we were only interacting with the females. They mentioned that we should dress up in saree’s one time for them. Siena had bought a sari already even though this was her second month in India. I had been in India a lot longer than she had and owned only one salwar that’s not even part of an outfit. This is not because I don’t think Indian clothes are beautiful or that I don’t like the way they look; it’s more of a complex about my appearance when I wear them. It’s about who I am and what it represents to me. So while all the women in the family huddled in our room, dressing Siena up her saree, I watched and thought about all the reasons why that wasn’t me. I wrote a poem addressing the issues I had with how it would compromise my identity. My family enjoyed how my roommate talked about her boyfriend and how they were going to get married. She showed them pictures of the two of them dressed up together. This was different for me because not only do I not have a boyfriend but also I am opposed to ever getting married. The experience contributed to a better understanding of my host family, the importance of the tradition of marriage and how much they value their culture. But I think host family experiences are so delicate because I am not just learning about them but they learn a lot from me. In this way it’s an exchange and my roommate is one mainstream representative of American culture and I think, I represent a very alternative one that can also be learned from.
