Class Notes (809,271)
Canada (493,607)
Anthropology (1,637)
ANT204H1 (157)


5 Pages
Unlock Document

University of Toronto St. George
Leslie Jermyn

Tuesday June 2 , 2009 Noble Savages Outline 1. “Primitives and Savages” in European History (Monogenism and Polygenism) 2. “Greening” the Stereotype: Ecologically Noble Savage (History, Agency) 3. The politics of indigeneity 4. Conclusion Last lecture Conclusion - Cultural relativism – a philosophical position that states that if you want to understand how other people do things, you need to philosophically suspend your value judgements and attempt to try and understand the other way of doing things from the point of view of people who do it like that (exact opposite of ethnocentrism or culture centeredness) - Example from article – some Muslim women like to veil o If you take a culturally relative position, you can begin to undersand how for some Muslim women, veiling is a choice, not an imposition. They choose to do it because it reflects to the world their sense of status and morality etc o Do not view it from Western view that it is oppression, need to look at it from their perspective - One of the pitfalls of cultural relativism is that when we stand in that place, we run the risk that we may deny any responsibility for how other people live their lives - It is valuable in so much that it allows us to put aside our judgements to see why people do what they do, but it should NOT be used to justify culture talk, i.e “its just their culture” - The position should not encourage us to be apathetic in the face of justice - If we accept that all cultural ideas are the product of historical interconnections and relationships, then it turns out we are all mutually responsible for how we all think and live - Ex. Some people may find fundamentalism attractive, o Canada would not be the place it is today if it were not for the brutal subjugation of First Nation people o If we look at First Nations people, and their drug and suicide rates, we cant take evidence of their behaviour and put them in a container that says, their culture and their container, their high drug and suicide rates are because of what Europeans (i.e. Canadians) did to them o Need to say – is there anything I have done to contribute to what has happened? Don’t put them in boxes, see them as common humanity, see how our decisions are connected to their decisions and attitudes o There are interconnections and therefore mutual responsibility - Does that mean we should go help/save people who are experiencing justice? o Abu-Lughod: She asks us to recognize the inherent claim to superiority in the idea that “we” should save “them” o This is a claim to superiority. Saying that we KNOW how to make it better or have the power to make it better – i.e. we are politically or intellectually superior o If you look at attempts to change other people’s history/lives, so many colossal errors are made, that we should never do it again.  USA support of Afghan resistance to the Soviet, and what it created (Taliban problem today)  Impulse to say that we know better, we know you shouldn’t live communist. This idea created a chaotic situation where, after Soviets left, Taliban were able to rise to power. Thousands died, millions forced to leave, and the extreme domination of women th  Ex. Iran/Afghanistan in 20 century. Western backed governments forced their own people to adopt Western dress in the name of modernization - Another way to imagine why we shouldn’t take this stance, is to imagine how WE would react in the same situation o Ex. If Saudi came here and imposed Muslim schools, or if people came here and bombed Wal-Marts in the because consumerism is bad. o In 10 years, would we be wearing modest dress or avoiding Wal-Mart? No, it would never work the way it was intended. o This is what happens when you take a stance of saving from an external party - The answer is not for one group to change another, it is to change our OWN position and dealing with the globe - Abu-Lugod – Western feminists would be better if they worked more at home to reduce economic disparity (i.e. work at home to ensure fair trade and equal terms of trade), rather than if they just tried to eradicate the veil. - Going to look at how indigenous people are portrayed, and also how they portray themselves to achieve political goals - Going to think critically about the politics of indigeneity (claim to indigenous identity) Primitives and Savages in European History (Monogenism and Polygenism) - Time of the Renaissance – 13 to 14 century Europe  “rebirth” - At this time, an interest in classical learning was “reborn” – i.e. Art, philosophy, etc. It was a time where people were coming out of Medieval Europe where the dominant philosophical thinking was Catholicism, there was no Protestantism yet. In that period of time, you were brought up to understand the world via church teachings. - With the Renaissance, people stared to question this structure of knowing, “is that the only way to know the world”? They were not anti-religious, but they were thinking that maybe there is another way that we can construct knowledge. They said that the other way was to have curiosity about the wolrd and finding out for yourself. Not just relying on church and Bible. Go out and seek your own answers. Promote idea of curiosity. - 1500s – - 1492 – Columbus arrives in Hispaneola (?) and discovers the New World or Americas - Late 1400s, Portuguese explorers were seeking a sea route around Africa to get to India and China. Columbus was sponsored by the Spanish. - Spain and Portugal were major naval powers, and both were seeking to get to the East. The reason was because there were a lot of spices, perfumes, drugs, silks, and fancy goods that, if you got access to them you could make a fortune. - Goal – find access to rich East - Once they reach Americas and see that it is a whole new world, people see that there are whole new possibilities. They discovered people they didn’t even know existed. - 1500s – Europeans come to terms with the new possibilities of new people around the world - Debates and ideas circulating at the time Monogenists vs. Polygenists  i.e. one birth of humankind, or many types of people are born - Monogenic explanation that there is a single genesis, single type of people, this is from the Bible. The bible was seen as a history book about how the world came to be. They had a hard time proving monogenism - Until 1800s, people believed that Earth had a finite history of 6000 or 7000 years (added up the average life span of all characters in Bible) - Catholics thought they had only 6000 to 7000 years to change the entire world’s people to become the same, make them look and live the same - Polygenists: Had an easier time logically, they could say people were different because they are a whole different origin. They are still made by God but are different. But they were suggesting that the Bible was not the complete truth, so they risked being accused of Heresy, which is denying the truth of the Bible. - Polygenist theories started gaining more ground as church control started to loosen in the 1500s o A wealth of literature that confined non-European people to inferior things – i.e. savages, etc (esp Natives and Africans) o These characterizations focused on how these people lived. They were savage because they didn’t have (a list of things that followed, like laws, writing systems, Kings, customs, arts, occupations, traffic, agriculture, money, riches, weapons, morals, marriage, and clothes) o Based their accounts on travel reports, they had never seen savages before o - Ideas of polygenists often underlie contemporary White supremacist today - Thomas Hobbes (Died 1679): He said that without state and civilization, the life of savage was solitary, poor, nasty, short, and brutish. o With this argument that savages lacked what Europeans had, it came to form a justification for any cruelties made to the peoples in Africa and Indigenous areas during the same time - Oppositional view: - Golden Age – A time when all things were perfect, and an example is the Garden of Eden, idea was that before the fall from Grace, it was a time of perfect human life with no problems or concerns (no famines, conflicts, etc) - If you think about how that Golden age was characterized, it has a striking resemblance to how savages are characterized o Ex. Adam and Eve were naked, they lacked government, family, laws, writing systems, etc o I.e. take that list of what savages are missing, but Adam and Eve had the same stuff missing, but their time was seen to be a Golden Age of perfection o This stuff is see
More Less

Related notes for ANT204H1

Log In


Don't have an account?

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.