Clifford Geertz

      Clifford Geertz made a trip to Bali with his wife for anthropological studies. When he first got there, the Balinese acted like he didn’t even exist. They weren’t mean to him they just ignored him. This continued until they were at a local cockfight, which is illegal, that got busted up by the police. All the locals scattered and ran away, so they did to. This gained the respect of the locals and the locals welcomed them into their town. 


     Geertz goes into the details of Balinese cockfighting. He talks about a man's relationship with his cock, and how intimate it is. He talks about how the fight is run as far as the participants, the match up process, the timing mechanism, the so-called referee, and even the betting process. 


    He learns through his time in Bali, that the cockfights hold more meaning than just making money. They hold deep cultural meaning to the Balinese. It helps define people's social status and gives them a chance to earn pride. It displays their loyalty as a people. Everyone bets on the cock that is owned by their kin. It is more of a social battle than a battle between the cocks. Geertz concludes that cockfighting is the center point of Balinese culture and where all anthropologists wishing to learn more about them should start. 

Geertz Quote

"Most of the time, in any case, the cocks fly almost immediately at one another in a wing-beating, head-thrusting, leg-kicking, explosion of animal fury so pure, so absolute, and in its own way so beautiful, as to be almost abstract, a platonic concept of hate."


This quote interests me because it's one I used to support my statement in class that the writer is talking to a very general audience. I chose it here because Jake explained to me that even those its directed toward the anthropological community and meant to educate it can still be entertaining. That's cool to me because in my experience with reading research papers or like things I haven't been entertained or really enjoyed reading them. This paper is definitely a good break from the beaten path of the classic, boring research paper.

OWS Summary

       In "Ask Not What Occupy Wall Street Will Do Next; Ask How We Will Change The Status Quo," the author begins by discussing how there there hasn't been much progress of late in the movement. He goes on to counter that with the idea that it has come along way from when it began. The movement has become a kind of reality television show, or a brand. He describes the two sets of people, 'the 99%' who are the have-nots, and 'the 1%' who are the elites.

     Another process similar to branding is reification. Wether you want to call it that or a brand it must me acknowledged before you can carry a conversation about politics nowadays. He says the way to revamp OWS is to resist it formation into a concrete thing rather than an idea. The explanation of Wall Street is that "we" as a person can participate in the stock market but only a select few have the power and wealth to sway the market. We have the illusion that we have an influence on the stock market. OWS called Wall Street's bluff, saying that they are pretending to be public but really it is all in the private interest. He says they were acting in the interest of the people. They were occupying for us. Today, the two parties co-exist. He concludes with the idea that we need to keep asking questions that challenge the status qou and change the thinking of Wall Street from "them" to "us".

With and Against the Grain

      I am an avid hunter. In my ENC1101 class I was asked to peer review a classmates essay. Her topic was why hunting is unnecessary and mean, or something to that nature. For the 15 minutes or however long it took me to review it I was forced to read generously and sort of assume her point of view temporarily so as to not give a biased review, definitely reading with the grain.
     I have also read against the grain. Last year, I had a friend that was writing and essay and he had finished his rough draft. He asked me to play devils advocate for the points and supports in his essay. I read it and picked out every weakness and potential counterargument I could find. Anyway i could disagree or argue the opposite I did. It was probably the most critical  i've ever been on a piece of writing.

Strong Reading

Strong reading, according to Ways of Reading, is reading that requires attention and leaves work for the reader after the actual reading. The reader doesn't have to be an expert on the subject, just willing to give it some extra thought and effort. To me, strong reading is reading deeper than just the physical words, but more what sort of emotions or reactions they evoke from the reader. As opposed to so called easy reading, the reader must give thought after reading instead of just skimming through.