Second Essay Thoughts

Students:

For those of you who are still somewhat confused about the essay, please consider Professor Biernacki's comment yesterday about how fundamentalist Islam has emerged out of connection with the West. I think we can specifically look to Sayyid Qutb's case--the man in the film who went to Colorado and was so disaffected by western "decadence"--as evidence of this, for example. The most important point on this issue is that contemporary changes in Islam are NOT an attempt to return to the past--instead they are modern and can be considered invented traditions because they obsessively focus on some element of an idealized past in order to create a new form of Islam. This form of Islam can also be considered western, modern, and invented because it purports to be universal--that is decoupled or separated from local, ethnic cultures that used to intertwined with it as a religious practice. Again, Roy and Eickelman go through MANY reasons for and examples of these changes.

What I want to see out of a quality essay is the effective, accurate application of Gellner and/or Marx to the contemporary changes in Islam. This requires first knowing and using the theory, secondly identifying changes in Islam, and thirdly justifying why they constitute an invented tradition in the way that Gellner laid out for nationalism as a false construction of the national community.

Also NO cover pages and NO works cited please--try to conserve a little paper. Also feel free to turn in single-spaced papers, which should be in the 2.5 page range. And remember, 1 inch margins, 12 point font, and NO paragraphs over an entire page!

Good luck and I'm looking forward to reading your work.
AC

Happy SunGod...or A quick read related to the essay

Students:

I hope everyone has a lot of fun today. It's always good to relax and enjoy oneself

Well when your hangover wears off and you're wondering what to write for the second essay, here's a link to a short article discussing many of the class ideas about why Islamic fundamentalism differs from the religion. It's still up to you to make the call about invented tradition, but I hope this helps orient you toward thinking about this tricky subject.

http://groups.colgate.edu/aarislam/msells.htm

AC

Howard Zinn on Imperialism and the American Nation

Students:

I think this video, might help you all think through the issue of nationalism as an invented tradition. I know the essay is about Islam, but certainly the issue of nationalism is also related to this idea, as we saw in Gellner.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/mpd/permalink/m9T96ZU74R9W3:mX73OBPBP8OE1

Questions on the Islam Introduction Book

Students:

Here are the questions that Jeff developed--

 Ruthven.  Islam: A Very Short Introduction

1. What does the word “Islam” mean?  What word is it
closely related to?  According to the author, what
three Western categories does Islam fall into?

2. What do the terms “cultural” or “nominal Muslim”
mean?

3. Why does the author find the term “fundamentalist”
problematic when describing Muslims?

4. Explain the distinction between islam and iman.

5. Explain “social imaginary” in relation to the
legal modernization of Islamic countries.

6. Does the author believe there is a religious
awakening in the Muslim world?  Give evidence to
support your answer, and explain why the author
believes it is or is not happening. Note: To answer
this question you need to pull information from both
the first and last chapter of the book.

7. What is Shari’a law?  Explain why the author talks
about individualism in relation to it.

8. What is the history of veils for female Muslims?
How does the author describe this tradition?

9. What are the two Jihads?

10. Contrast reformists and modernists.  Is there a
clear cut line between them?  Why or why not?

11. Who is Sayyid Qutb? Note: The reader for this
course has an excerpt from one of his books.

12. What happened in Iran in 1979?  What does the
author say about universalist appeal in relation to
the Iran-Iraq war?  What connections can you draw
between the late 70s and early 80s and the current
situation in the region?

13. Who was Ali Shari’ati?  How does he represent a
contemporary blurring of reformist and modernist
approaches?

14. What predictions does the author make about the
political future of Islamism?  What year was the book
written?  Do you think these predictions have held
true?

Extra Credit Opportunity

Students:

I will not be able to make it to my office hours tomorrow, and they are cancelled. If anyone has questions about the readings or 2nd essay assignment, please email me.

I also want to alert everyone that there is an extra credit opportunity this Wednesday at 7pm, in room 101 of the Social Sciences Building.

I have been organizing a roundtable on the San Diego Wildfires Crises of last October. There will be 4 short presentations by local activists--the ACLU, Border Angels, the American Friends Service Committee--and an area city planner, who will all address the fires and their impact on the county. We will be especially concerned with 2 issues: media distortion of the fires [i.e. a lot of the coverage was about Rancho Santa Fe and Rancho Bernardo, while much of the Harris Fire was not discussed; or the inappropriate comparisons to New Orleans after Katrina] and the role of suburbanization and urban sprawl and the fires.

The discussion will be really interesting on its own, but if you come and write a one-page, double-spaced essay about the experience you can earn 2 extra credit points toward your participation grade. Given how uneven participation in section has been, this is an excellent opportunity to learn, and improve your grade for the course.

I hope to see many of you there--below is the full flyer, which you are hopefully seeing if you go by the SSB building.
AC

Wed. May 14th, 7pm-9pm
The San Diego Wildfires Crisis: Hidden Consequences of Urban Sprawl and
Unequal Media Representation
A Roundtable follow up to the 2008 Culture Conference: Crisis, Emergency, Global Processes

Join us for this special roundtable on the SD Wildfires that will bring together a distinguished and diverse panel of speakers ranging from urban planners, researchers, lawyers to journalists.

Refreshments will be provided | RSVP or questions: wildfire_roundtable@gmail.com

It was only last fall that San Diego County experienced its own crisis, the county-wide fires. The wildfires were truly emphasized for their out-of-control "wildness," while the real reasons of urban sprawl were downplayed or flat-out ignored. This crisis, like many others crisis around the world, such as famines, was framed as a case of "natural disaster," instead of a case of mismanaged urban planning, ill-led concepts of fire "prevention." Therefore the causes fell on to nature, instead of socio-political reasons.

For many around the world who watched the news coverage of our local crisis, it appeared that only middle- to upper-class, Causcasian home-owners were affected by this disaster.
Newscasters biasedly compared the state-of-emergency disaster to New Orlean’s Hurricane Katrina in a fashion that portrayed San Diegans as wealthy, coordinated, charitable and peaceful in contrast to New Orleaneans who were portrayed as poor, disorganized, and violent. Essentially, San Diego "citizens" were framed as united, while New Orlean "refugees" were portrayed as lacking in unity. Just like Hurricane Katrina, the media coverage and the treatment of the San Diego fires were embedded in long-standing issues of class, race and ethnicity.

This roundtable aims to bring out many the socio-political reasons that contributed to the fire and the politics of who's stories were represented in the media and which ones remained untold. For example, many of the fires’ human victims were migrant workers living in canyons who, largely because of their extreme marginalization, were not able to be reached and informed about the fires. In stark contrast to the mainstream coverage of property owners (like the TV reporter standing outside his own house for hours of coverage). The human toll of the fires was largely ignored, or even blamed on these victims for consuming UCSD Regional Burn Center resources for instance.


We hope you will join us for this special roundtable that will follow up on the global and theoretical themes of the 2008 Culture Conference.

Sncerely,

Andrew Cheyne, Geoffrey Fojtasek, Raquel Jacob-Almeida, Tricia Wang, and the Culture Conference Committee

Debunking Myths about Islam, and Muslims

Students:

As I've said in section, we will be learning together when reading and discussing the history of Islam, and attempts to transform it into an invented tradition on behalf of political interests [this would fall into the state, although there may be other examples of the market trying to appropriate Islam as well].

Here's an article in today's' NY Times about one Muslim filmmaker's response to these attempts. Check out the video--he directly takes on the idea of nationalism and the Islamic faith. Also consider how his critique of Hollywood representation of Muslims might expose how the film industry is making Islam compatible with the movie-going market.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/08/us/08video.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1210263571-ymn9U1ZJR0G+3jKVS2gJMQ

Second Essay

For anyone who needs access to the prompt, here it is.

Please note that the phrasing of this essay in part 1 clearly calls for your own thesis, which again is what I am expecting from everyone. Good luck, and email me with any questions.

Second Essay, Sociology 20. Invented Tradition?
Due May 23

Your assignment is to apply the concept of an “invented tradition” to recent changes in Islam to evaluate the usefulness of the concept. To guide you in building an argument, please address the following three issues:

1. Identify and describe what you consider to be some of the most significant changes in Islamic belief and popular Islamic religious attitudes since the Second World War.
2. How did social, economic, and/or technological causes contribute to these changes in Islamic belief and attitude toward religion? For this part of the question, you may want to consider the guidelines that Marx, Gellner, Eickelmann, Roy, and others offer for how society influences religion.
3. Do you think that some of the religious movements in contemporary Islam now bear the traits of an “invented tradition”? Explain why or why not [or why both]. Please justify your evaluation with examples.

Note that you may decide to emphasize some of the religious changes over others to make your point. There is no comprehensive correct answer to #1 above, but you must support your focus from the readings. Do not write more than five pages, double-spaced. Wherever possible, back up assertions in your essay with page references to the readings or to historical facts from lecture. You are not expected to do research, but if you happen to know of evidence apart from course assignments, you are free to cite it in your essay. You may cite lecture ONLY for historical evidence -- plain facts -- not found in the readings.

In evaluating your essays, we will be looking at three dimensions: [1] the quality and consistency of the analysis, [2] the range and aptness of source citations that you use to back up your analysis, and [3] grammar and clarity of expression.

Essays are due at the start of lecture, May 23th. To discuss your own essay answer, come to Prof. B.’s office hours Mondays or Fridays, 9 to 10.

Tomorrow's Section

Greetings:

First of all I expect everyone to have read and be prepared to discuss tomorrow's readings on Kente cloth and the Ernest Gellner piece on nations and nationalism. Even though the Gellner is difficult [I seriously don't know why he chose to write that allegory instead of actually going through a real historical example of a nation in formation] please use Professor Biernacki's guideline as that's a great resource. These pieces are short and there is no excuse for not being prepared. Remember, there is more readings in the upcoming weeks so do your best to stay up even though I know it's tough with midterms [and SunGod coming up].

In short, Gellner is telling us that nations are not inevitable, they are not natural in any way. Instead, they are the recent [only about 250 years] product of the bourgeois class' efforts. And there is a particular historical pattern to the invention of nations: industrialization [or the rise of machinery/factories in the capitalist mode of production] drew the peasantry from the countryside into cities, required skilled labor and thus mass education was enacted, and this education produced "high culture". I feel he could have laid out that process more, but pay attention to how he argues low and high culture are related to the formation of nationalism, and finally the nation.

Also, we will be discussing the ideas of invented traditions more generally tomorrow. Please think of any invented traditions in your families or your lives at UCSD. As a person of Scottish ancestry, I know that my family has a 'traditional' crest and kilt pattern [tartan] for our clan. Here's the image of the crest for the Sutherland clan, of which Cheyne is a part-

http://www.scotclans.com/scottish_clans/clan_sutherland/crest.html

And here's a link to the tartan patterns if anyone's interested:
http://www.scotchcorner.com/mill/tartans-s/sutherland.html

Anyway, I know we have a lot of ethnicities represented in our class so I'm interested to hear your experiences with traditions real and invented.

I'd also like you to think about the appropriation of traditions by the market or the state. Have you experienced any of you traditions being used to advertise or market a product, or justify a government? And how do you feel about the traditions you create with your family or friends--don't they feel real and important? I know I go to Chicago every spring to visit friends and I'm not sure how that resonates with the capitalist system [I guess I buy a plane ticket and we have an expensive meal together, but still].

Finally, think about the process of state formation and how that very much involves the extinguishing of local or regional cultures. I think there are some clear and extremely worrisome examples of how this is happening right now--think about the world right now and come to class with some ideas on this topic.

See you tomorrow,
AC

Sections, and an Interesting Piece on the History of Communism

Students:

Thank you for your feedback yesterday. Most students were fairly satisfied with how section is being run. I, however, am not satisfied with the level of participation. To be clear, most students are earning a C or less for their participation grade. I feel this is appropriate especially because many students do not appear to have read the class materials before class, and it is not a matter of folks simply not wanting to speak up. For that matter, there have been many opportunities for group work, which have at times not inspired much enthusiasm.

And keep in mind that the quarter is only half over, there is plenty of reading left but there are many opportunities for you to make a solid contribution in section.

With that said, spend some time with the Manifesto-pay attention to Marx' predictions about what capitalism does to culture, identity, and traditions. It is a theme taken up by Gellner and some of our upcoming authors.

And here is a fun, short piece about the work that even "open" capitalist societies will take to make sure their version of events win out. Of course this could never compare to Stalin's actions, but it does suggest the ideological nature of our own society's need to justify itself, I would argue, in the face of horrendous global inequalities that the theory of communism deeply rejects.

Communism may be dead, but clearly not dead enough

The battle over history reflects a determination to prove that no political alternative can challenge the new global capitalism

Seumas Milne
Thursday February 16, 2006
The Guardian

Fifteen years after communism was officially pronounced dead, its spectre seems once again to be haunting Europe. Last month, the Council of Europe's parliamentary assembly voted to condemn the "crimes of totalitarian communist regimes", linking them with Nazism and complaining that communist parties are still "legal and active in some countries". Now Göran Lindblad, the conservative Swedish MP behind the resolution, wants to go further. Demands that European ministers launch a continent-wide anti-communist campaign - including school textbook revisions, official memorial days and museums - only narrowly missed the necessary two-thirds majority. Yesterday, declaring himself delighted at the first international condemnation of this "evil ideology", Lindblad pledged to bring the wider plans back to the Council of Europe in the coming months.

Article continues

---

---

He has chosen a good year for his ideological offensive: this is the 50th anniversary of Khrushchev's denunciation of Stalin and the subsequent Hungarian uprising, which will doubtless be the cue for further excoriation of the communist record. The ground has been well laid by a determined rewriting of history since the collapse of the Soviet Union that has sought to portray 20thcentury communist leaders as monsters equal to or surpassing Hitler in their depravity - and communism and fascism as the two greatest evils of history's bloodiest era. The latest contribution was last year's bestselling biography of Mao by Jung Chang and Jon Halliday, keenly endorsed by George Bush and dismissed by China specialists as "bad history" and "misleading".

Paradoxically, given that there is no communist government left in Europe outside Moldova, the attacks have if anything become more extreme as time has gone on. A clue as to why that might be can be found in the rambling report by Lindblad that led to the Council of Europe declaration. Blaming class struggle and public ownership, he explained that "different elements of communist ideology such as equality or social justice still seduce many" and "a sort of nostalgia for communism is still alive". Perhaps the real problem for Lindblad and his rightwing allies in eastern Europe is that communism is not dead enough - and they will only be content when they have driven a stake through its heart and buried it at the crossroads at midnight.

The fashionable attempt to equate communism and Nazism is in reality a moral and historical nonsense. Despite the cruelties of the Stalin terror, there was no Soviet Treblinka or Sobibor, no extermination camps built to murder millions. Nor did the Soviet Union launch the most devastating war in history at a cost of more than 50 million lives - in fact it played the decisive role in the defeat of the German war machine. Lindblad and the Council of Europe adopt as fact the wildest estimates of those "killed by communist regimes" (mostly in famines) from the fiercely contested Black Book of Communism, which also underplays the number of deaths attributable to Hitler. The real records of repression now available from the Soviet archives are horrific enough (799,455 people were recorded as executed between 1921 and 1953 and the labour camp population reached 2.5 million at its peak) without engaging in an ideologically-fuelled inflation game.

But in any case, none of this explains why anyone might be nostalgic in former communist states, now enjoying the delights of capitalist restoration. The dominant account gives no sense of how communist regimes renewed themselves after 1956 or why western leaders feared they might overtake the capitalist world well into the 1960s. For all its brutalities and failures, communism in the Soviet Union, eastern Europe and elsewhere delivered rapid industrialisation, mass education, job security and huge advances in social and gender equality. It encompassed genuine idealism and commitment, captured even by critical films and books of the post-Stalin era such as Wajda's Man of Marble and Rybakov's Children of the Arbat. Its existence helped to drive up welfare standards in the west, boosted the anticolonial movement and provided a powerful counterweight to western global domination.

It would be easier to take the Council of Europe's condemnation of communist state crimes seriously if it had also seen fit to denounce the far bloodier record of European colonialism - which only finally came to an end in the 1970s. This was a system of racist despotism, which dominated the globe in Stalin's time. And while there is precious little connection between the ideas of fascism and communism, there is an intimate link between colonialism and Nazism. The terms lebensraum and konzentrationslager were both first used by the German colonial regime in south-west Africa (now Namibia), which committed genocide against the Herero and Nama peoples and bequeathed its ideas and personnel directly to the Nazi party.

Around 10 million Congolese died as a result of Belgian forced labour and mass murder in the early 20th century; tens of millions perished in avoidable or enforced famines in British-ruled India; up to a million Algerians died in their war for independence, while controversy now rages in France about a new law requiring teachers to put a positive spin on colonial history. Comparable atrocities were carried out by all European colonialists, but not a word of condemnation from the Council of Europe - nor over the impact of European intervention in the third world since decolonisation. Presumably, European lives count for more.

No major 20th-century political tradition is without blood on its hands, but battles over history are more about the future than the past. Part of the current enthusiasm in official western circles for dancing on the grave of communism is no doubt about relations with today's Russia and China. But it also reflects a determination to prove there is no alternative to the new global capitalist order - and that any attempt to find one is bound to lead to suffering and bloodshed. With the new imperialism now being resisted in both the Muslim world and Latin America, growing international demands for social justice and ever greater doubts about whether the environmental crisis can be solved within the existing economic system, the pressure for political and social alternatives will increase. The particular form of society created by 20th-century communist parties will never be replicated. But there are lessons to be learned from its successes as well as its failures

Respecting the Flag

Students:

Overall the essays are good and I'm happy with people's understanding of Durkheim. I want to address an issue that has often come up. Many of you wrote something like "everyone" or "people around the world" respect the US flag "because it represents freedom/justice/liberty..." for all. This statement is oversimplified: we are taught these things are true in school, and the flag certainly represents these ideals for many Americans, probably the vast majority.

But consider the next image, one of the most iconic of all US flag photos.

http://www.iwojima.com/raising/lflaga2.gif

Remember, this is during WW2 on the island of Iwo Jima, representing our forces having taken that island during combat. I think for many Americans this is one of the most meaningful images we have of the flag, which is why there is a bronze memorial of this in Washington D.C. But try to think about this from another perspective: many people around the globe do not see the US flag as bringing liberty and freedom but have only experienced it through war and occupation. The Iraqi crowd in the following video clearly does not have the same intent when burning the US flag does than a patriotic protester:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-390469035965280618&q=us+flag+burn&ei=D6gQSM7QK6LQ4ALEk627BA

This does NOT mean that the flag is not the US totem, however. It just means that we have to be specific when discussion who the 'clan' is that has a special relationship with the flag. Precisely because it is such a potent symbol of desecration for those critical of the US reaffirms its status as totem. But it is impossible to defend the statement that 'everyone' loves the flag or believes it represents the ideals it is supposed to.

Response to Proposals

Students:

In general I have seen a lot of great comments and ideas flowing in your proposals and outlines. My first overall comment is that many of you need to be more systematic in your treatment of the essay, and you can do this in a number of ways. What I mean by systematic is that you need to deal with Durkheim's theory--which has multiple concepts that relate to each other--in an effective manner.
The most straightforward way to do this is to answer each question in order. This is absolutely acceptable. If you do this, remember that you still need to offer an OVERALL thesis up front. I've seen many of you put this in your outlines, which is good to see.

Alternatively, as you look over your notes and develop your answers, I encourage you to think about dealing with the totality of Durkheim's theory [as presented in readings and in lecture] and present your answers to part 1 without going through each question in order. This will be more complicated, but I think you have the tools to do so. For example, the first 5 essay questions themselves are designed to prompt you to think through all of the elements of Durkheim's ideas.

Either way, what I'm looking for is an introductory paragraph with an original, strong thesis in regards to the overall prompt. DO NOT REPEAT THE QUOTE IN YOUR ESSAYS:

“In the United States, the totem emblem is the flag.” -- Marvin and Ingle, Course Reader, p. 71.
Your job is to explain what this claim means and to select evidence that you think best illustrates how the flag functions like a totem.

Following this is where I expect you to have 2 or 3 sections. First, deal with the first 5 questions which are exclusively about Durkheim. Following this you need to deal with the final 2 questions, which you can do in 1 or 2 sections. This will probably depend on your thesis.


Now, in terms of specific issues, here are some comments that apply to many of the proposals I received.
Part 1

• "Practical causes" are really society--don't confuse the two
• What are the differences between the spiritual and material dimensions of a totem? Why must they have both elements?
  
• Why must totems/symbols be external? How is that externality related to the totem's status as a group object?
  
• Remember that Durkheim's theory is dynamic. So in addition to thinking how totems emerge in society, think about two other processes:
  
• Why must totems be reinvigorated, and how is this done?
• How do symbols continue to affect societies/clans after they are chosen?
  

Part 2
Keep in mind the following issues:

• What are potential differences--or similarities--between the clan vs. nation, and totem vs. flag? Are these groups equivalent, analagous, etc--or are they significantly different? Either way you answer this affects the flag's role as a totem. Many of you offer your personal opinions without defending them with examples and evidence.
  
• For example, many of you listed ways in which the flag is respected/revered in American society. You need to go further and show how these examples relate to the flag as totem, not just tell me how the flag is displayed or cared for.
  
• Many of you called the U.S. a religious community or patriotism as a religion. If you make this argument, you need to offer evidence of why this is true. Just as if you disagree with this, you need to offer evidence of why its' not true.
  

In both sections I've seen evidence that you've started to work through Durkheim's theory, and have good ideas about the flag/nation, but now more work needs to be done to make your arguments more specific.

Essay Format

Students:

Let me explain what I expect in terms of the format of your essay as the prompt says to follow my directions.

First, and most importantly, I expect a thesis statement. This means you need to offer me an actual answer to the opening question of the essay prompt. In other words, even though you have to answer all the little questions, you also have to offer me an argument--your words laying out your thoughts. This should occur in the opening paragraph, and serve as an introduction to the subsequent points you are going to make.

Secondly, as for answering the 3 parts of the essay, I strongly suggest you have an initial section that works through the questions relating to Durkheim. You do not need to answer each question in a row, but I will be looking to see that you have indeed answered each and every question. I think a hint here is to look at Professor Biernacki's model of the cycle present in Durkheim's theory, which we recreated in part in section this week.
After that section THEN deal with the flag issues raised in the final two questions. I leave it up to you to answer these questions together or separately, but again you must deal with both.

Essentially, my main requirements are that you have a clear, strong thesis, and that you address Durkheim's theory first, and separately, from considering the flag as totem. Also keep in mind the three elements on which you will be evaluated. And remember you are not to rely on the argument made in Martin's article on the flag but use your own examples and analysis, per the prompt.

Best of luck, and we will work through any final issues on Tuesday.

Proposals

Students:

I sincerely apologize but I am not able to return your proposals today since I am not done providing feedback to all students. I will email you all individually over the weekend with my thoughts and I may post some collective pointers here as well.

Obama vs the Flag as Patriotism

Students:

If any of you watched the Democratic debate in Pennsylvania last night [I have to admit I only watched a little--I mean it is something like the 20th debate...] you might have seen this highly relevant question about Obama's relationship to the flag and patriotism more generally. And listen to how he, as Professor Biernacki suggested yesterday, offers himself as a new/reinvigorated symbol of America:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PuKgW6YToU

And if nothing else, check out the wood paneling in that woman's house! Those of you who have never been to the Northern states are really missing out...

Nazis, Rituals, and the Olympics

Lest anyone think the current protests over the Olympic torch for the Beijing Olympics is desecrating the sacred nature of sport, consider the origins of the torch relay.

This article not only touches on the role of ritual and myth-making in the Nazi era [and again Riefenstahl is crucial to their production] but our own: one of the key reasons why protestors have challenged the torch across its journey is its extreme totemic significance to this day...

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/14/arts/14conn.html

If you want to know how the Olympic torch really began its “Journey of Harmony,” as the Chinese call its current relay, if you want to see why the torch has had to pass through a human obstacle course composed of protesters, SWAT teams and police in San Francisco, Paris and London, then do not look to Tibet’s grievances against China. Look to the opening of Leni Riefenstahl’s 1938 film, “Olympia.”

Bettmann/Corbis

Arrival in Berlin: The final relay runner brings the Olympic flame to the 1936 games.

In that homage to Berlin’s 1936 Olympic Games the origins of this ritual are revealed. Never before had a lighted torch been relayed from a Greek temple in Olympia to an athletic competition, let alone by thousands of runners trying to keep it from being extinguished.

So Riefenstahl creates the myth the Greeks never got around to telling, creating a filmic counterpart to the opening of Wagner’s “Ring,” in which an entire world gradually emerges from elemental fragments. The camera begins by surveying a misty landscape of ruins, of shattered pillars and overgrown grasses. Restless and circling, the camera reveals a Greek temple standing amid the stones. Heads and the bodies of Greek statues appear in an eerie erotic landscape. Under the sensuous caresses of Riefenstahl’s lens, a naked discus thrower comes to life, polished stone becoming muscular flesh. Another athlete prepares to throw a javelin, its trajectory leading toward a bowl of fire. Lighting the Olympic torch, another nude acolyte triumphantly raises it aloft like Wagner’s Siegfried displaying his sword...

Tomorrow's Section

Students:

I hope the extra readings have helped clarify Durkheim's ideas. I think Professor Biernacki has done us all a favor by making explicit Durkheim's theories over the past few lectures.

Some things to consider from the packet:

• Why are animals chosen as totemic emblems?
• What is the purpose of tattoos, and what is not?
• What is an example of these "mysterious forces"?
  
• How are they both external and within us?
• How is their externality related to the choice of material objects as symbols?
  
• Are there differences between how 'primitives' and contemporary members of societies experience rituals and collective representations? Why or why not?
  
• Is our relationship to the flag different than a clan's relationship to an animal or flower? Either way, why or why not?

Tomorrow please remember to bring your 1 page, double-spaced proposal for your essay. We will use these to discuss Durkheim as well as this week's reading on the flag as totem.

Essay Prompt

Students:

For those of you who still do not have the prompt or prefer electronic format, here it is. Again remember that it is due at the beginning of class two Wednesdays from now, April 23rd.

Sociology 20 -- Prof. R. Biernacki
First Essay, Spring 2008

“In the United States, the totem emblem is the flag.” -- Marvin and Ingle, Course Reader, p. 71.

Your job is to explain what this claim means and to select evidence that you think best illustrates how the flag functions like a totem. Follow these steps:

1. How did Durkheim define a totem and why did he think totems emerged in societies? What are the objective forces that lend a totem its sacredness? What shows a totem is sacred? How does a totem help a society function?

2. What evidence is there that the U.S. flag is our totem? You may cite your own first-hand experiences, news reports on how Americans use the flag, and the Course Reader.

3. Do you think there are important differences between a totem and the U.S. flag? Why or why not?

Wherever possible, try to back up assertions in your essay with page references to the readings (or historical facts from lectures). You are not expected to do research, but if you happen to know of evidence apart from course assignments, you are free to cite it in your essay. You may cite lecture ONLY for historical evidence not found in the readings.

There is no single correct answer, as long as you show you can illustrate Durkheim’s theory of the totem in reasonable ways. In evaluating your essays, we will be looking at three dimensions: [1] the quality and consistency of the analysis, [2] the range and aptness of evidence that you use to back up your analysis, and [3] grammar and clarity of expression.

Your essay is due at the start of lecture, Wednesday, April 23rd. Please, do not write more than five double-spaced pages. Be sure to follow the format and style suggested by your T.A.

SOCL20: Social Change in the Modern World

Greetings:

I'm Andrew Cheyne, one of the TAs for SOC20 this spring. I'll be using this space to post important class information, announcements, etc to cut down on email and hopefully paper throughout the quarter. For example, this will definitely include information I get about the 2 take home essays, once I receive any.

I also welcome submissions from anyone in the class, anything from your own thoughts to links to media items or research on the web would be great additions to the class dialogue.

For your information:

• Email: acheyne@ucsd.edu
• Office Hours: Tuesday 4-5pm at Porter's Pub or by appointment