Annual Interdisciplinary Graduate Symposium presented by the Anthropology Graduate Student Association
Download 0.8 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Universal Reason
- (Universal) Reason /Rationality
- 5.0 Unpacking the Metaphors in Scripture
3.0 God and the Omni Properties God is often described as having certain properties. Conceived literally, God is an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, and omnibenevolent (O4 for short) being, consciousness, deity or personality. When O4 is interpreted in a causal, spatio-temporal, and normative or moral sense, we have a metaphor at play. Consider the O4—with their symbolic understanding to the right—as a reflection of the previously discussed ideas, of the aspects of the universe and the divine human potential.
4.0 The Trinity These interrelated ideas are also seen in the Trinity. Its profound symbolism can be described in the following manner. There is a mutual relationship between the Father and the Son, a relationship that is willfully recreated by humanity, by fathers and their sons, mothers and daughters, neighbors, and so on to the global community. We see this in the idea that the world was created in an unfinished state. We see a beautiful and loving metaphor: God giving His creation to His children mirrors parents and grandparents desiring a better future for their children by empowering them to build on what they have, to offer them better opportunities in mind and body.
Similarly, heaven and hell are at least symbolic for the conditions of life we are capable of producing. Humanity is capable of creating a mind-internal or mind-external state of heaven (or hell) wherever we dwell. Being self-aware moral agents, we occupy a special place in the universe (Vernadsky 1997) as potential and willful designers, as co-creators in the development of ourselves and the world. The ability to discover principles of nature derive from our ability to reason which in turn is a reflection (or extension) of the rational character of the universe. These ideas are metaphorically expressed in the Holy Bible (and elsewhere). They are not isolable, but like the Trinity, must be considered in their interconnected and interdependent union. A reductive approach is therefore not applicable. Faith, if it takes its symbols literally, becomes idolatrous! . . . Faith, conscious of the symbolic character of its symbols gives God the honor which is due him (Tillich 389). Consider the following Biblical excerpts understood using the aforementioned notions.
In “Yet not one of them falls to the ground without your Father’s knowledge. Even all the hairs on your head are counted” (Matthew 10:30, New International Version). Jesus is communicating the presence of a lawful, not random, reality, as well as the inherent and inalienable value of each person. It is often said that God or the Holy Spirit is in us. Let us consider the following passage. It is the father, living in me, who is doing his work. I am in the Father and the Father is in me…believe it on the evidence of these works. …whoever believes in me will perform the same works as I do myself, and will perform even greater works. (John 14: 9-13, NIV) Jesus is not saying that there literally exists a ghostly or spatio-temporal possessor of some kind in the human body, controlling its actions like a homunculus. Rather, He is saying that we have an inherent capacity to act divinely: to be rational, moral and loving, to perform and create positive deeds and works34. Each of us is able to “become a Christ…putting yourself in the place of a son of God” (Lewis 2001). Jesus, as a human being, actualized what we all should endeavor to do in life, in some form and at whatever scale, namely rationally uplift the human spirit—that of our children, our neighbors, ourselves—individually or collectively and contribute to the betterment of mankind. In order to do this our inner life must be examined as well as the socio-psychological states of our social and global environments. Jesus understood the importance of being cognizant of psychology. He was well aware of the psychological neuroses and mental states of his fellow human beings (albeit not in modern psychological terms). He understood that we often inherit the sins—the psychological neuroses or distortions—of our fathers (our family members and extended social environments) and that our psychological states can prevent the (self)actualization of our potential, our divinity. He understood the harmful (sub)conscious conditioning that occurs in the human community at all social granularities, conditioning that is often but not always subtle, taking root in youth. Christ was not insensitive to these facts and, therefore, spoke in parables35 to account for varying psychological states among the population. He, as others have before and after Him, spoke in these terms very likely to reach a population whose psyche could not handle (was blind to) direct or literal communication of the ideas, one being that they, like us, are not sheep but have a wonderful potential and power of living and contributing to a life (and world) of more than mere subsistence, fleeting pleasures and many frivolous and harmful pursuits. Direct and literal communication of the Good, the True, would not be effective for all. The aim was to positively elevate individual minds such that their inherent cognitive abilities to reason, love, and be creative are brought forth—true inspiration. Suffice is to say that when our minds are freed from the shackles of psychological slavery, the individual human mind is capable of magnificent beauty, love, and enterprises. The person is better capable of contributing to the betterment of their fellows. Truth becomes more easily knowable by the mind, and falsity recognizable. Living as He did—fighting for humanity in accordance with reason for a necessary (and natural) purpose—is, in one manner, externalizing one’s divinity.36 Christ saw the wrong and pointed it out (Tolstoy 1884). His resurrection, as a metaphor, represents the immortality of humanity and the eternity of the Good and the True. In His death, the body perished, but His message, his ideas did not. What He (and others like Him) communicated persists; this is one mode the individual person achieves immortality. In transferring and perpetuating ideas through generations, we attain immortality. The noetic aspect (HB2 & HB3) of the human being affords immortality in both this non-physical manner and in an indirect physical fashion through biological and artifactual offspring—our children and artifacts—through generations. The resurrection also represents the symbolic psychological rebirth of the individual person. At every moment each of us can change and abandon harmful behaviors and thought processes—sometimes only with the help of others and with particular environments. The changing present presents us with opportunity to change for the better, for the future but in the present. In this way, the individual achieves (positive) immortality by contributing to humanity through their ideas, works, or actions. These are acts of rational creation and change, of morality and love. In so doing, the individual helps shape the evolution of the world. This is the manifestation of the divinity of each human being. Spreading the word, then, is perhaps tantamount to spreading the means to achieve human self- and situational-awareness, an awareness that encompasses the nature of the self, humanity, and their relation to the world. Its end or telos is one of personal, local and global unity and progress, that is, the actualization of the Kingdom of Heaven37. In this way, “The kingdom of God is within you” (Luke 17:21, KJV) tells us that the formation of heaven depends on us. All persons have this potential for contribution to future generations. All are as the Son by nature, but only few have manifested that nature. Finally, consider this passage. In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well. (Mark 16:19-20, NIV)
God in Christianity, if not entirely symbolic for reason, Truth and love helps anchor the human mind to the waters of selflessness, compassion, love and reason (and therefore scientific creativity), the opposites of which—selfishness, indifference, hate, ignorance and irrationality—cause the mind to become lost and muddled. God points to the path back to our divine human nature, a nature realized by many figures in the history of humanity from Socrates to Jesus Christ to the founders of our nation. We gain some insight into humanity’s place in the universe by unlocking the metaphors of Scripture (and elsewhere). These symbolisms reflect the truth of the human being as a self-aware, willful, dynamic, creative, good and reasoning being in a universe that is itself is a rational, dynamic and creative totality. Morality, then, has a home in metaphor.
Prometheus, the mythological Ancient Greek figure, as a metaphor for the (divine) free human being, was not bound by the Greek gods38, but bound by human non-beings. As a representation of the human being, Prometheus was the individual manifesting their godly potential in the world in order to change it for the better39. Our place in reality is to positively contribute to the development of humanity and the rest of the universe. The human being (v.), is the individual living, engaging in a process to positively develop themselves and others. Perhaps it is the human becoming, rather than the human being. In this communication I have (I) broadly discussed the human being, reality, creativity, morality, the relations between them, and (II) presented these ideas as being communicated in Biblical metaphors and symbolisms. While further explanations of key terms and ideas would be worthwhile, I have held that morality, God, reason, reality, truth, and love are all interrelated. In understanding the nature of the human being we understand these, and vice versa. It is my hope that the reader comes away with some positive uplifting ideas on humanity, and therefore something good.
Many thanks to family, friends and colleagues for discussing and introducing a number of the ideas communicated here. REFERENCES Balestra, D. 2002 In-Between Science and Religion. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science 225: 423-428.
Clarke. 2002 The Creative Imagination. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science 225: 423-428. Einstein, Albert 1982 Ideas and Opinions. Crown Publishers Inc., New York. Frankl, Victor 2006 Man’s Search For Meaning. Beacon Press, Boston, Mass. Kelly-Gangi, Carol, ed. 2009 Jesus: His Essential Wisdom. Fall River Press, New York. Leibniz, G.W. 1996 Theodicy. Open Court, Illinois. Lewis, C.S. 2001 Mere Christianity. HarperCollins, New York. Little, Paul E. 2003 Know What You Believe: Connecting Faith and Truth. Victor, Colorado Springs, CO. Martin and Bernard 2003 God Matters: Readings in the Philosophy of Religion. Longman, New York. Peters, P.E. 1967 Greek Philosophical Terms: A Historical Lexicon. New York University Press, New York. Tillich.
1993 Symbols of Faith. In Religion from Tolstoy to Camus, edited by Walter Kaufmann, New Brunswick, Transaction Publishers: 383-389. Tolstoy, Leo 1884 My Religion. In Religion from Tolstoy to Camus, edited by Walter Kaufmann, New Brunswick, Transaction Publishers: 45-66. Vernadsky, Vladimir Ivanovich 1945 The Biosphere and The Noosphere. American Scientist 33(1):1-12. 1997 Scientific Thought as a Planetary Phenomenon. Nongovernmental Ecological V.I. Vernadsky Foundation, Moscow. Wojtyla, Karol. (Pope John Paul II) 1993 Love and Responsibility. Ignatius Press, San Francisco. 1994 Crossi Chapter 8
Anthropology Prostheses take many forms and range from practical to iconic. However, in most cases they become an accepted part of the human to whom they are attached, despite the inorganic nature of their construction. No matter the form, they represent an extension of their wearer, for the most part deemed necessary to the undertaking of daily activities. In the same vein, there are professions which find their practitioners utilizing particular tools or weapons for the great majority of their waking hours, objects which would also be deemed necessary to these individuals’ daily routines. To take this one step further, within many cosmologies these objects are not only associated with professions but with the divine. It is the intention of this presentation to discuss the possibility that objects, whether prosthetic or otherwise, represent an extension of their user. Examples ranging from archaeological (as in the case of Celtic and Scandinavian groups) to modern (such as with medical prostheses) will be used in this pursuit, and justifications will range from cosmological to practical. The concept of being human is one that not surprisingly falls squarely within the purview of Anthropology, even at the most basic level of the meaning of the name of the discipline itself. As Whitten and Hunter argue for anthropology: “Perhaps the end of anthropology is not far off. But we doubt it ... of all the social sciences anthropology is best equipped to explore the fundamental questions of what it means to be human and what the study of human beings can contribute to solving the problems of our species and the world we inhabit” (1993: 13). Objects ranging from prostheses to tools and weapons can become an extension of their bearers, representing a recursive element of identity. While the objects may be defined by their bearers, the objects can also come to define their bearers as well. For the Germanic tribes, Tacitus discusses how men of a certain age earned the right to bear weapons and were then given sword and shield (Watt 2003). Outside academia, if the Germanic tribes are known at all, it is usually for the part they played in the fall of Rome, and they are rarely portrayed without weapons. More than simple tools for war, these objects are widely believed to have functioned as signifiers of identity - while burial goods are notorious for all manners of use and misuse by archaeologists, there are certainly situations, like with the great majority of weapons found in Anglo-Saxon burial contexts, that appear to be applicable identifiers. The work of Gabriel Sopeña discusses the roles of weapons but focuses mainly on Celtiberians, Bronze and Iron Age groups which stretched across the Iberian Peninsula. For the Celtiberians as discussed by Sopena (and certainly within many other groups) weapons hold great social importance even during times of peace, with weapons becoming an extension of their bearers (a meaning which was far more than simply the symbols of prestige attested to in the contemporary work of Almagro-Gorbea & Lorrio regarding the Celtiberians). For Almagro-Gorbea & Lorrio, a rise in the number of swords versus spears in the later periods of a society known for the possession of weapons was not for warlike reasons, but instead due to the perception of the sword as a symbol of prestige and elevated social status (2004). Sopeña summarizes with the statement: “To hand over one's weapon implied the loss of one's self; without weapons life was not worth anything,” a viewpoint echoed by a variety of Roman writers who encountered the Celtiberians (Sopeña 2005: 366). Of more immediate importance to archaeologists is the bond between weapons and their bearers after death: this is the bond most visible in burial assemblages and the like. Sopeña mentions several different researchers who explore the sacrifice of objects; the 2011 IEMA conference also included a number of speakers discussing such a topic. This is not simply the deposition of objects alongside their owners, but the intentional alteration or even the creation of objects solely for the sake of inhumation, in both funerary and non-funerary contexts. Shetelig (1937) discusses a number of objects that seem to have produced for the express purpose of deposition: axes or swords presumably too big to be wielded practically, or objects so frail that they would have no practical use (e.g. pairs of large, elaborate axes that were only given a thin layer of bronze over a clay core, one pair found at Brøndsted in Jutland and another at Skogtorp near Eskilstuna in Sweden). Many arms were rendered unusable (they were said to have been “ritually killed”), a complex and likely ceremonial task which would require the attentions of a weapon-smith. This was presumably a way of ensuring that the weapons would no longer be used by anyone besides their original owner (Sopeña 2005: 367-368), but could also represent a process which moved the weapon from the plane of the living to another one. There are a number of theories regarding the reasons for deposition of objects in watery contexts; of paramount importance here is the connection between the deposited objects and their previous owners. There are countless historical accounts of the dedication of opposing armies to deities. While the sacrifice of such an army is certainly important, it is the practice of the sacrifice of their gear that is most applicable with regard to the topic. Thomas Grane cites a number of Roman ethnographic sources relating to the matter. Tacitus describes in his Annales how one Germanic army had dedicated the entirety of the enemy force to the gods in the event of victory. Over a century before that, Orosius wrote on the scene of a Roman defeat at the hands of the Cimbri: “... clothing was torn apart and thrown away, gold and silver were thrown in the river, the men’s armour was cut to pieces, the breastplates of the horses were sunk in the waters, the people were hanged with a rope around their necks, such that there was neither any booty for the visitors nor mercy for the vanquished.” Caesar spoke of torture being the punishment for those who took from the consecrated piles of war booty that had been dedicated to the gods (Grane 2003: 145-46). Sites of continuous deposition like Illerup Adal in east-central Denmark, among others, show evidence of the practice of ritual killing of objects. Swords were bent through reforging, shields were dismantled, and spear-shafts were broken with their tips bent. At this point there can be seen the connection between Sopena’s statement and the ideas of Tacitus: for the Celtiberians and the Germanic tribes, and many other groups, the tools of their most famous trade, that being warring, were crucially representative of their selves. The objects were not only ritually killed by a smith, but were often placed within watery contexts, raising another question: Does the deposition within a watery context represent a form of ritual drowning, yet another means of killing the object? Certainly the watery context, be it a bog, stream, river, or lake, or even larger, saltier bodies, can be argued as a conduit to the supernatural, but the question remains if the second function is also viable (though this question remains difficult to answer within the bounds of the archaeological record). What if those objects which were ritually “killed” came from owners who survived the battle? Or possibly their owners did not survive the battle and hence there weapons were also killed? This would be an almost impossible question to answer, especially in the case of non-funerary deposits. The weapons in question would have to be linked to a specific wielder, whose death in the battle which preceded the deposition would also have to be confirmed. Only in the case of particularly noteworthy individuals would this be remotely possible, and only then if their weapons were identifiable. Nevertheless, even if an individual did not feel the same connection to his or her weapon that Sopeña speaks about with regard to the Celtiberians, the ritually killed (or simply deposited) weapons can still be seen as representative of human sacrifice. Just as wine often represented blood sacrifice, it would seem that a farming implement could represent a farmer; a sword, axe, or defensive equipment like shields (more common) or armor (less common) could represent a warrior; or metallurgical tools could represent a smith, such as those seen at the Copper Age complex of Varna in Bulgaria or buried alongside the Amesbury Archer. Compellingly, it is exceptionally rare to find human remains in conjunction with the aforementioned deposits in watery contexts. It may be possible that the losers of such battles which were followed by large deposits were still sacrificed to the deity or deities they were promised to prior to the battle. However, there is also the possibility that the ritual killing and deposition of the war-gear of the defeated was tantamount to their sacrifice, while the bearers of such sacrificed objects represented far greater worth as slaves or otherwise (alive, that is). The latter would represent a far stronger case for the war-gear functioning as an extension of its wielders. Continuing forward, many are familiar with the stereotypical depiction of the swashbuckler with a peg-leg and eye patch. Pirates are portrayed with any number of prostheses, and while losing extremities to naval warfare (à la Admiral Lord Horatio Nelson) is probably far more likely than to marine reptiles (Hook, or more informally Chubbs from Happy Gilmore). In the modern day, most people perceive prostheses in the form of legs, arms, or hands. While an individual may face a conflict of identity upon losing an extremity, he or she faces an interesting predicament upon receiving a prosthetic replacement. On one hand, the prosthesis may never represent an adequate replacement and the recipient may always consider himself or herself as incomplete, leading to a new and potentially undesirable identity. On the other hand, the recipient may embrace the prosthesis, incorporating it into his or her identity as it existed before. It is also possible that in the latter case that a new identity could be created, but this would still represent a different case than the former. A prosthesis may even represent an improvement: at least in the case of the Olympic governing bodies, prosthetic limbs represent an unfair advantage, but would the owner of such limbs feel the same way when viewing the situation from a perspective that incorporated more than simply athletic performance? To expand the discussion of prostheses, one need look no further than the origin of the word, coming from Ancient Greek for “addition, application, attachment”. The term could potentially be broadened to apply to more common beneficial devices: contacts, glasses, and hearing aids. Since contacts are often invisible, their importance as part of one’s identity may not extend further than the wearer. This is not always the case, however: colored contacts are an exception (e.g., Michael Jackson from Thriller). In the case of glasses, there are many who are defined by the glasses they wear, from Buddy Holly to John Lennon and Harry Caray to Drew Carey. While the glasses may benefit them in a practical way, such wearers also embrace the glasses as an integral part of their identity. A continuation of this logic can be seen with the example of hearing aids, an often controversial device. Many adults who have the sort of hearing loss that would require a hearing aid refuse to wear one, or dislike the device because it does not perfectly replicate normal hearing, despite the potential benefits (there are countless studies on the injurious effects, both physical and social, of hearing loss). However, the opposite side of the coin is in the case of small children. Upon their hearing aids being deactivated, some children will ask for their “ears”; in this particular case, the idea of hearing aids as an extension of humanity is perfectly understandable. This comes back to the necessity of embracing the object in order for it to function as an extension. In the last case, the hearing aids are all they have ever known, so when they are not active they demand their “ears”. However, for adults who had once heard without the support of hearing aids, many feel that the device is only a sub-par replacement. Nevertheless, many adults embrace their devices as well, recognizing that their hearing has been improved beyond previous levels with the help of the device, now an extension of their being rather than a hindrance (Miller 2011). So far the concept of extension has mainly touched on weapons and prosthetics, but the possibility of extension is certainly not so limited. Many artists consider their implement as an extension of their hand. In the case of art, but also in other forms, it is a high compliment to state that the bearer uses an implement as though it is an extension of his or her person. Visual artists, musicians, and athletes can all fit under this aegis, but they are not the only ones. Craftsmen of all forms, their crafts which often reach the heights of high art, bear the tools of their trade as much if not more as the aforementioned groups. And while discussions of extension may not be so common, the same can be said of farmers or those practitioners of other trades. What is important here is the question of whether they consider their primary implements as an extension of their being (or presumably just as importantly, whether observers consider them as such). And while modern farmers may in this way be closer to tractor trailer drivers, with harvesters and combines as their primary tool, would it be a stretch to ask if one farmer or another in the past considered his or her scythe as an extension of their being? For the observer, the only instance which springs to mind where a scythe is more emblematic is in the example of Death; only a skeleton or skull itself is a stronger symbol in this case. Discussion following the presentation of these ideas during the symposium led to a number of more contemporary examples more prominent in American society. The first was with regard to a form of Southern identity (certainly associated with weapons), the learning and carrying of weapons, often by both sexes, from a very early age. This identifier is not limited to the American South, it was simply the discussed context, one which applied to a number of attendees of the symposium. Another example was with regard to sports: while athletes were briefly mentioned in the body of the presentation in the specific instance of the implements used by such athletes, identity often is also derived from team association. Many athletes are associated with particular teams or institutions: Michael Jordan is indelibly linked to the Chicago Bulls just as Mickey Mantle is unquestionably tied to the New York Yankees. A jersey, a color, even a number may come to identify an athlete. This has reached such an extreme that a player changes their legal name to match their number, i.e. Chad Johnson becomes Chad Ochocinco. But what happens when such a player ends up changing teams? Identity changes of almost illogically epic proportions are often the result, at least for diehard fans (e.g., Brett Favre moving from a team that was defined by his presence to that team’s hated rival); in some cases, such moves end up tarnishing a player’s reputation as well, even leading to widespread hatred on one end and love/stardom on the receiving end (e.g., Lebron James and the Decision to take his talents from Cleveland to South Beach). While such ideas of identity appear as a stark departure from those of the archaeological contexts discussed earlier, if they are viewed from an academic perspective rather than from that of a sports fan, they prove to be equally compelling. One potential form of extension of humanity that has yet to be discussed is that which results from the virtual realm: examples range from social media as an outward expression of personality to the full recreation of an individual via artificial intelligence. Social media outlets ranging from Facebook to Twitter represent means to convey (or potentially even modify) one’s identity in a format that is entirely remote. Certainly this is not the only example where an individual can create a new identity: both artists and athletes have the potential to create new identities through the forms of expression discussed here. Even in the small example of eyewear could a person tweak their identity as they pleased. In these cases, identity is created based on those ideas that the person embraces and outwardly conveys (or conversely, identities are created as the individuals are viewed by observers). Similarly, artificial intelligence represents a possibility to almost fully create a human being, with almost being the key word. This opens up an entirely new line of questioning regarding what constitutes being human, but with regard to identity, entities with highly complex AIs often possess some degree of personality (and in fact are often created with some degree of thought directed toward such a purpose). A potential blend of the two is seen in massively multiplayer online roleplaying games. Players of such games create characters which often incorporate elements of their own personalities, while also incorporating elements of artificial intelligences created by others. A potential outcome in such programs is some sort of hybrid identity, incorporating identities from a number of individuals and possibly resulting in the extension of a number of humans (Yee 2006). It is important to note that the association of a particular object with one identity or another does not preclude it from meaning something entirely different in a different context or culture. A famous example is that of Ian Hodder’s work at Lake Baringo: in this instance the spears borne by young men served no purpose with regard to warfare or hunting. They were entirely symbolic, representative of virility, meant as an insult to the older, presumably less virile men who held power in the society (Hodder 1977). And such examples of unexpected identity are certainly not isolated incidents: on a broader scale, the possession of objects can represent wealth in one context while the destruction of objects could equally convey wealth in a different context. Just as symbols have been co-opted by one group or another and have come to represent something completely different (the Swastika, for example), objects which constitute an element of one identity may represent the opposite in another. Ultimately, it is possible that humanity extends beyond the bounds of the human body. Whether such an extension comes in the form of a tool or implement or even futuristic technology like artificial intelligence, the act of extension comes as a result of the intent of the individual or of the perceptions of observers. For example, the identity of Anglo-Saxons according to weapons in graves currently comes as a result of the latter. An expert swordsman, on the other hand, could hold his blade as an extension of his own identity, though it would be equally possible for a less talented swordsman to feel the same and as such the weapon would be equally vital within that individual’s identity. As such, the idea of what it means to be human and to what extent humanity reaches can derive from a number of quarters and cover a multitude of examples. And while continued work on this topic will likely focus on fieldwork from Scandinavia, the inspiration for this paper and the presentation which preceded it came most directly from an early reading of Gabriel Sopeña and his ideas of Celtiberian weapons as extensions of their bearers. REFERENCES Almagro-Gorbea, Martin & Alberto J. Lorrio. 2004 War and Society in the Celtiberian World. E-keltoi: Journal of Interdisciplinary
Grane, Thomas. 2003 Roman sources for the geography and ethnography of Germania. In: The Spoils of
and Lone Gebauer Thomsen, eds. Gylling, Narayana Press: 126-47. Hodder, I. 1977 The Distribution of Material Culture Items in the Baringo District, Western Kenya. Man, New Series 12(2): 239-269. Miller, Karah. 2011 Unpublished Paper. Louisville, University of Louisville. Shetelig, Haakon and H. Falk 1937 Scandinavian Archaeology. Clarendon Press, Oxford. Sopeña, Gabriel. 2005 Celtiberian Ideologies and Religion. E-keltoi: Journal of Interdisciplinary Celtic
Watt, Margrethe. 2003 Weapon graves and regional groupings of weapon types and burial customs in Denmark, 100BC-400AD. In: The Spoils of Victory: The North in the shadow of the Roman Empire, Lars Jorgenson, Birger Storgaard, and Lone Gebauer Thomsen, eds. Gylling, Narayana Press: 180-93. Whitten, Phillip and Hunter, David (eds) 1993 Anthropology: Contemporary Perspectives, New York, Harper Collins College Publishers. Yee, Nick. 2006 Motivations for Play in Online Games. CyberPsychology and Behavior 9(6): 772-775. Chapter 9 Catastrophic Change in the Lives of Indigenous Children As Seen through Their Eyes Tasiwoopa àpi Educational Fundamentals Art has long been an accepted and normative form of research into the thoughts and psyche of individuals and societies in historical contexts. Using the collected art of Indigenous Children during the Reservation Period of forced internment in the mid-1800s will shed light on their thought process and how their lifestyles had changed suddenly, violently, and catastrophically for them and their families. Using a number of original children’s drawings gleaned from the Archives of the Newberry Library, I propose to interpret these fundamental changes and the damaging psychological effect these changes had on their daily lives. Inheritance When he was a small boy he tried to summon the spirits with a flute That his father threw out the window while promptly beating his face in On the bus to the big school the white kids called him timber nigger and the only good indian is a dead one unless he plays ball So he learned to run and tackle to cheer the onlookers Til his father stabbed a hole in the pigskin while promptly breaking the foot that he kicked with He started to drink his Blue Ribbon smashed his head through windshields numbing the pain of an existence too aching to bear
somewhere between two and nineteen he turned hollow and dried up inside his spirit f1ew off to the West His body a shell left behind to carry out revenge for five hundred years of genocide that he ate from an empty government hand-out can When he put the rif1e to his wife’s head and raped his two babies he never even felt it because he was already dead Lisa M. Poupart Used with permission of the Author Sadly, this is how the Indigenous peoples of this continent and this country, in particular, are now viewed by mainstream America. Gone are the images of the Noble Savage, the iconic Warrior astride a faithful mount with a lance in his painfully weary hands, head bent forward, shoulders slouched forward, and yet an air of defiance about him in resistance to the inevitable end of a lifestyle as depicted in the varies versions of the so-called “End of the Trail” bronze art pieces. This was the heartbreak of a collection of Indigenous images I was allowed to use as a presentation to a group of academics for the Symposium on Being Human this past spring for the University at Buffalo Anthropology Graduate Student Association. My thanks to them for their interest in the presentation and their patience in allowing me opportunity to present this paper on the images we saw, yet without the necessary permission to clearly identify the artwork in this article. The images are original artwork commissioned in the early 1900s have painfully little explanatory documentation with them, however, they are quite graphic in the depiction of violent activities toward other Indigenous peoples, the United States Cavalry, and a few cowboys in a general sense. The generational issues of the artists are of interest given the length of time since the cessation of open hostilities between Indigenous peoples and the American government and the actual date of the artwork, yet the obviousness and openness of the imagery is quite clear in that violence was the theme of the collection and the finished product possibly required by the commissioner. What is also fascinating from a psychological aspect is the age variances in conjunction with the levels of expertise of the artists’ abilities to convey their quite obvious message. There is work clearly of a refined nature from a number of the drawings of individuals with advanced artistic skills and at the other end of the spectrum there are clearly a number of very crude and simplistic pieces of art that are from children or from persons of little or no artistic background who were yet willing to proffer something to the commissioner of the artwork for the price offered the artists. The historical time context of the artwork is 24 years after the massacre of the Hunkpapa and Miniconjou in 1890 in retaliation for the catastrophic blunder by Custer and the 7th Cavalry those surin the Battle of the Greasy Grass in 1876 by a vastly superior force of Oglala and Cheyenne warriors (Vinding, p. 113). This presents a time reference gap of 38 years for the older artists and a 24-year gap for the youngest artists. This translates for the older group a minimum of two generations after the events noted above and with regard to personal memory having a direct effect on the artwork. For the younger group some may have retained the personal knowledge of both events, however, this possibility is seriously threatened given the number of mitigating factors supporting this younger groups’ ability to have witnessed even the event of 1890, given that Big Foot’s Band of approximately 420 at Wounded Knee on 28 December, 1890, was comprised of mostly old women and men and children who were exhausted, starving, and freezing to death under the very menacing guns of the 7th Cavalry. Less than ten of Big Foot’s Band survived (Gonzales, p. 138) the massacre, only to die in a horse barn that was pressed into service as a hospital for those suffering from exposure and their wounds. There were several survivors Wasee Maza (Iron Tail or Dewey Beard), James Red Fish, and Zintkala Nuni (Lost Bird). She was found by an Indigenous doctor looking for survivors (probably Charles Eastman, however, he is not named specifically) and she was one of the very few infants to have survived the massacre. While it is possible that one or more pieces of the entire collection might be from one of these survivors, the fact that in the post-massacre years these individuals and their bands and tribes were subjected to the worst possible conditions imaginable to include genocide (Card, 2003), being reduced to refugees in their own land, overtly lied to by the U.S. government about the treaty promises made, and violated in an effort to assimilate or eradicate these nameless and faceless Indigenous peoples. Directory: anthro anthro -> Curriculum vitae february 2015 anthro -> Patrick vinton kirch anthro -> Children’s Culture Steven Mintz anthro -> Francie R. Chassen-López anthro -> Anthro k 1nc Shells Policy anthro -> Gavin r. Davies, msc, rpa anthro -> The Hierarchies: Nine Classes of Angelic Beings in Three Groups Man as the Tenth (becoming) Hierachy anthro -> A chapter from occult history: the rishis anthro -> Brandon T. Ritchison anthro -> Nabone codes 8th edition January 2002 Download 0.8 Mb. Share with your friends:
|