Week 7 Art in culture

I would venture to guess that the artists were telling a story about animals and how important they were to the artists. I might venture further and say the artists were attempting to show us how important these animals could be to everyone.

It would seem that the artists worshipped these animals and portrayed them as special entities which should be respected, the story they drew was more about the animals. Therefore they did not draw many people, because that would have redirected the importance to the humans.

I could perhaps say that with all this art work they may have had a lot of time on their hands, but I can’t be sure some of their art may have taken hours, days even or it could have taken only a few moments, there is also the possibility the elderly who had nothing but time, made the art. If I’m being honest there are many different directions into their life that the art could show me, but I could never say for certain just what the art was intended to say about them. My best guess would be that their life revolved around the animals they depicted, for food and possibly for worship.

Well the area where the paintings are located is a problem in itself, the majority of the paintings are either high on the cave walls or on the ceiling of the cave. I don’t believe that logically any of these early humans were tall enough to reach such places, they would have had to find a way to reach. I would speculate the possibility of one member riding on another members shoulders in order to reach such heights. Then there is the more basic matter of finding a mixture to use as paint and then changing the color for different animals, I would assume plant life was used, possibly mixed with dirt, clay, or even perhaps animal blood.

I might speculate the possible reasoning for this art to be storytelling, possibly a way to record historic events, or it might also be simply art for the eyes of their tribe and future tribes, like us, to enjoy.

Like the art in Lascaux caves, we still today sometimes make art that tells a story, some may even argue that all art tells a story. Also like the prehistoric art, we have art that depicts large portions of our history a prime example might be paintings made that show the death and gore of the civil war. Early humans may have used art much in the same way as we use it today, to tell stories and to show a visual depiction of historic events. We have developed over time things to actually draw on, rather than using the land or buildings for art, in most cases. For early humans the land was all they had to show us pieces of their world and their lifestyle. We still paint as they did, we just have a different sort of canvas.

An American Painting of the Civil War.

I find that after watching my very first acapella movie, Pitch perfect and Pitch perfect 2, that I am addicted to acapella, it is amazing to me to see what just a few people can do with only their voices to use for sound. Before reading these instructions I will admit I had spaced out music as a form of art, not sure how I could forget as much as I enjoy music, but all the same.

First Link is a video of the Pentatonix: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P95_pCbCPZw

Second Link is from Pitch Perfect 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3U2ew2-LOQ

In the second link you can actually see a contest between 

multiple acapella groups known as a "Riff Off."

Acapella Groups such as the well-known Pentatonix, use their voices to create or re-create music. It is a form of entertainment for most, but there are even events where groups compete to see who is the very best, such an event was depicted in the Pitch Perfect movies. They attempt to communicate just how powerful voices can be, they can replace instruments along with the well-known ability to sing.

Acapella is pretty universal culture wise, there is not one specific culture that does it, however it may have originated in one specific culture before it spread world-wide. Generally the singers dress according to what they are singing or where they are, there is no specific form of dress. I have only heard acapella done in English, but I am sure it is done in other languages as well. As for behavior, not really although sometimes and especially during competitions they must choreograph a dance set to go with their singing.

 I might get a bit of negative feedback for this, but honestly I believe that Acapella is very beneficial to newer generations, because it gives some of them something constructive and beneficial to them to look forward too. Instead of another Justin Bieber or Miley Cyrus, pop stars who can get away with almost anything are not very good role models. However Acapella gives viewers not only something to watch, but if they decide to try it. It will help them become active with dance moves as I mentioned before and it will help them learn how to exercise their vocal cords to different things such as mimicking instruments and other sounds. Kids get to see people who worked very hard to be able to do what they do and the hard work doesn’t end, they are constantly improving and learning new techniques to compete with. I would love to see a lot more kids doing this than playing video games, shooting up neighborhoods, doing drugs, dropping out of school, etc. I think they just need something constructive to become interested in and to help them see a different way to go. Other benefits are a form of entertainment and a healthy outlet for people interested in dance and music. I can’t really think of any detrimental effects of it, other than gaining a new way to use your voice for more than just talking or singing.

The Yanomamo Indians

The Yanomamo rules against killing differ from that of Western cultures by allowing revenge killings. For most Western cultures killing is only completely okay in war or if a person is sentenced to the death penalty. It also sounds like even if the Yanomamo cannot find the culprit guilty of the killing, but know his tribe, then they are more than willing to take it out on his tribesmen if he cannot be found. Here it is only legal to kill a criminal who has been convicted and sentenced to the death penalty, even if sometimes the wrong person is convicted, generally in western cultures, the killing ends there and is not considered revenge killing. Sometimes even a death of natural causes, although this was believed to be almost non-existent because there was always someone or something to blame, can start a streak of violence, killing, and carnage.

Revenge killing for the Yanomamo’s is the ability to go after a tribe when one of its members has killed a member of your clan. When a family member is killed, this may lead to revenge killing for the tribe guilty of committing the crime, woman might also be abducted in return for what was lost. To put it bluntly for the Yanomamo vengeance killing is completely legal and seen as normal.

Once you have the status of being an unokais, you are feared by non-unokais and can become rather wealthy, but can be sought after by other unokais who are looking to become more feared. The benefits of not being a unokais is that you would not be as sought after to be killed as a unokais. A man might choose the unokais path to become stronger and more feared, also wealthier rather than living the normal non-unokais lifestyle.

Revenge killing helps shape political structure by placing the more successful killers known as “Headman,” at the top of the social pyramid, able to run their village and make beneficial rules for their own gain, whereas lesser men must bow before him and do his bidding. This allows for stronger leaders, because of how much work and strength they need to make their way to the top.

Revenge killings help shape social status and social groups, a tribe who has better killers will be more high standing and powerful than that of a tribe full of cowardly warriors. One way revenge killings help social status specifically is when one tribe houses a very strong leader or unokais because people from other tribes will hear this and fear the leader and therefore hesitate to mess with his tribe. The more well known a warrior is puts him in more danger, but can also make his village safer for those who fear him.

Revenge killing generally begins with kinship, when a kin member is killed the chain of revenge begins. Personally from my understanding, I believe that without kinship or the care for one’s family, there would be no need for revenge killings at all because they would have no reason. Revenge killing could not exist in theory without kinship.

 A wealthier man, who has killed more than most men has a better chance of attracting or capturing wives and reproducing more frequently than a poorer or lesser man.

We have laws because while most of us may not want to do it, some of us might and those few people can continue to multiply and create a larger generation raised with the same beliefs that they share. Sometimes even having a law against it doesn’t necessarily prevent it. We also have to protect our population, the Yanomamo population fluctuates and gets lower because of all the killing they are allowed to do and then the non-ending cycle of revenge killing that follows their path.

Family Kinship

            I chose my mother to interview. I chose her because she is the only blood family member I live with currently other than my little sister and because she knows a lot about our families’ history. My mother was born in Rockford Illinois, during the 1970’s. She was raised in the bad side of a bad town, her father’s family came from the richer side and her mother from the poorer side. Both my mother parents were white, but from different social backgrounds.

I found my interviewing to be full of questions and sometimes I repeated myself. I did have a bit of trouble not inputting my own knowledge when it came to locations of relatives, I found I knew a few that my mother did not. I did not experience any discomfort or awkwardness, so therefore my interview was not affected. I think it would be easier to interview someone unrelated to me as it may prevent bias as well as making asking questions easier because I know nothing and am staring off with a blank slate.

I would describe my families kinship pattern as fission because as new generations have been born the family has seemed to split up into close knit groups and mostly only interact within those groups. I have found unsurprisingly that most of my family is not close and especially not close to my EGO, in fact I find I am closer to my Step mother’s family than my own. When we’re discussing socialization for my family it is hit or miss some of us are very social and others are not. There is not a strong emphasis towards either side in my family. The attitudes between generations seem to be slightly more aggressive when it comes to younger generations, the older clans seem to push the younger to be better and to do more. The trend for my family seems to be smaller clans with around 3 children it is rare for a woman in my family to have more than that. There did not used to be ethnic differences in my family, until my mother (Ego) got married to my step mother. It had a huge social impact because most of the older generations in my family were racist to an extent and did not like the idea of having another race brought into their family, especially another woman. When my mother made her decision many of my family cut her out and stopped speaking with her, slowly some are working around their beliefs to have a relationship with my mother. For me personally it has helped make my relationship with my mother stronger and I accept my step mother with open arms, she is one of my idols that I look up to.

I know the relatives on my mother’s side very well, but not my fathers as I did not meet him until a few years ago. I socialize with my mom frequently as we live together, since my father and I do not live together we do not speak much. In the past for me personally my maternal grandfather seemed to have the most pull and authority in the family, he raised me for the first 8 years of my life and that authority kind of stuck with me until he passed away, then the biggest authority figure became my mother. Today my mother is still the most influential for me towards our family, our family is not a close one so I could not honestly speak for everyone else as I am sure all their answers would differ.

To my knowledge whether people married in to our family or were born into our family by blood, they are both treated the same there are no different levels of equality based on blood or gender.  None of my family members have shown a different attitude other than a lesser punishment for females when they do wrong. For example when my brother would get into trouble he may be given corner time or a spanking, but a female would either get shorter corner time or be grounded to their room for a period of time. Through this process I don’t really feel I have learned anything new or different about my family other than just how much we lack closeness which I already had a general idea about. I was surprised to realize just how racist and against LGBT some of my family was, I knew how they felt about it, but not quite how deep their hatred went. I can honestly say were I not already distant to those certain family members then I would have been less interested in being close to them after knowing this.

Interview:

Generations:

·         Maternal Grandparents: Grandfather-Jesse and Grandmother-Mary Smith (both Deceased) talked a lot with grandmother and was close to her.

·         Parents: Mother-Debbie (Smith) Lives in Decatur Illinois and Father-William Sanden Buried in Durand Illinois.(Father Deceased) Closer to father and communicated frequently until he died.

·         Ego and Siblings: Cindie Sanden (Ego), Sister-Leslie Duncan (Sanden) lives in Illinois, Brother-William Sanden Jr. lives in Pennsylvania. Speaks to sister often and is somewhat close to her, is not on speaking terms with brother.

·         Maternal Uncles and Aunts: Dewey living unknown (not close and does not speak frequently), Frank lives in Rockford Illinois (not close and does not speak often), Theresa lives in Rockford Illinois behind frank (not close and does not speak often), and Jesse lives in Mississippi (somewhat close, speaks off and on through a third party).

·         Paternal Uncles and Aunts: Sharon Pickett lives in Rockford Illinois (Close and speaks regularly), Susan Meldrum lives in Rockford Illinois (not close, barely talk to each other), Jeri-Ann Kernz lives in Wisconsin (very close, talk together often), and Craig Sanden lives in Winnebago Illinois (not close and talks rarely through social media).

·         Maternal Cousins: (Franks kids live in Rockford Illinois with father, not close and not on speaking terms) Nichole Smith , Megan Smith, (Theresa’s Kids living unknown, not close and not speaking) Mary, Jessica, Dawn, (Jesse’s kids living unknown, not close and not speaking) Christie Smith, Jesse Jr.

·         Paternal Cousins: (Jeri’s Kids) Luke Knutowski lives in
Wisconsin he and ego are very close and speak often, Kara location unknown (somewhat close and they speak occasionally), (Sharon’s Kids live with her, somewhat close and speak occasionally) Kevin, Kyle, (Susan’s Kids location unknown, not close and not speaking currently) Craig, Katelyn, (Craig’s Kids location unknown, not close and not speaking currently) Ryan, and Patrick.

·         Siblings Children: Nephew-Christopher living with Leslie, Niece-Macey living in Rockton Illinois, and Niece-Alicia living with Leslie (Children to Leslie, not close but speak occasionally), and William Jr. has no children.

·         Children (close to all children and speaks to them often): Daughter-Zoey White living with mother (me), Son-Zackary White living in Kansas with father, and Daughter-Samantha White living with mother.

·         Paternal Grandparents: Grandmother-Beverly and Grandfather-Gerald Sanden living together in Rockford Illinois, not close and not speaking currently.

She talks to her mother the most, but spends her holidays with her two daughters and her loving wife. If she needed help or a place to stay she would turn to her mother. She will not communicate with her brother and the reason is private. My subject does not know much about a majority of her cousins, but she remembers their names very well. My subject’s family is geographically spread out from her and I, but most live in the Illinois/Wisconsin area, so not quite geographically diverse. To my subjects knowledge none of our family members have migrated to another country. She believes the family has decided to stay close together in case someone needs help or in case of another death in the family as her grandparents are very old.

Hunting/ Gathering or Agriculture?

Part 1: Agriculture or Hunting/Gathering

The benefits of hunter gatherers is, lots of necessary nutrients found only in meat such as protein.

The benefit of agriculture is, its’ somewhat easy and you can grow enough to feed an entire community, during a good year.

The disadvantage of hunter gatherers is, lack of game or animals to hunt, if all a group is eating is meat it would be very easy to end up taking out your entire food source over a long or short amount of time, given the size of your population.

The disadvantage of agriculture is issues with our jaw structure and dental structure as well as a large lack in nutrients which has been proven to cause deteriorating health and a rise in infectious disease. There are also, bad crop years where growing is very difficult or impossible because of weather conditions.

I believe hunter gatherer’s provide a healthier diet, even though the food source for them is not guaranteed, it contains more nutrients and a lot less health problems than agriculture poses. It reminds of the saying that the easiest or fastest way is not always the best. Hunter Gatherer’s not only get meat from protein, but can also get nutrients from wild plants and berries as well. Where as in agriculture it is only planted crops, which lack nutrients found only in meat. Although this is up for debate if anyone cares to comment I would love input if someone disagrees or agrees and has more to say to that effect.

I believe earlier human populations may have been pushed by nature into agriculture because, game became scarce and they could not depend on fickle wild crops to feed a growing population. I believe natural selection pressured them unknowingly to find an easier and more efficient way to provide food for their people. Those who adapted to this new necessity survived and those who could not handle it died. If you think about it the more humans taking up space and growing the less room there is for animals not domesticated and even sometimes then there is little to no land for them. They also could not have known the potential risks of this diet until later on.

Part 2: Economics and Trade:

There is a direct relationship between the availability of surplus and the ability to trade. This statement roughly means you can’t trade what you don’t have. First you must have things of interest before you can hope to trade for something you are lacking, from someone else.

Two social benefits of trade are building relationships as well as gaining access to things we are unable to obtain by any other means. By building relationships I am referring to how we have become close to other countries such as China, through trade of goods and services, because we have a long history of trading together it has helped us build a somewhat steady and trust worthy relationship, which I believe otherwise would have been hard if not impossible to achieve. An example of gaining things we could not obtain by other means, there is an exotic fruit known as a Mangosteen, not to be confused with mangos, which only grows in Tropical areas and cannot be grown here our only access to it is to have it imported from such places, so without trade we would not have access to such an interesting fruit. This fruit has been proven to help dietary function amongst other functions and is made into a popular yet expensive supplement drink called Xango, I had a relative who was a salesmen for the company.

The Mangosteen fruit and Xango Juice.

Going along with benefits a negative result could be a bad relationship being built because one or both sides was not careful with the object they were bringing to trade or even perhaps lying about what would actually be traded in the exchange. Another negative result might be one culture or group being rejected from trade because they only have access to growing common crops like corn for example, this crop is very well known and easy to acquire therefore trading it would likely be unsuccessful, making a group unable to participate well in the social practice of trade.

Agriculture benefited trade development because certain crops, such as the exotic fruit I mentioned before, can only be found in certain areas and if you do not live there or have access to that area your only chance at having some of that crop is to trade. Crops could also be traded for non-food items such as animal skin for clothing. As agriculture developed so did trade, because there was something to be gained by both parties. The more agriculture grew and increased the more crops could be grown and traded with other groups.